Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FJB who wrote (98869)	1/25/2011 8:23:35 PM
From: CF Rebel	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224744

"our generation's Sputnik moment." What a joke. Our original "Sputnik moment" occurred when there was healthy respect for educated American ingenuity and the rewards of honest capitalism. Our present sput...sput...sputtering economy, awarded to us by an absolutely corrupt government and the leftists who have zero understanding of capital and no productive skills of their own, think they can wish a "Sputnik moment" on America and it will happen. It cannot happen when a sleazy President without the respect of the private sector thinks he is making it happen. It's just another exercise in Obama narcissism. CF Rebel

To: FJB who wrote (98869)	1/26/2011 8:32:32 AM
From: lorne	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224744

FUBHO..Liberals truly must have some sort of mental disorder but soros can likely get this nutter elected just as he did franken...very scary when any country has people like this with political power. Liberals trying to draft Keith Olbermann for Joe Lieberman's Senate seat By Sean J. Miller - 01/24/11 thehill.com Liberals want Keith Olbermann to run for retiring Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman's (I-Conn.) seat. The ploy to coax the former MSNBC host into the Democratic Senate primary was hatched by activists attending a conference in Pennsylvania over the weekend. Facebook and Twitter pages are already active and a website is expected to go up in the coming days. "We’re using our full set of campaign tools but they won’t go active until we get a little downtime while we’re in D.C.," a blogger by the name of Stranded Wind wrote on the liberal website Daily Kos. Olbermann left his show "Countdown" on Friday. He revealed over the weekend that he would return to his blog on MLB.com, Baseball Nerd, but has remained quiet about any other plans. Should Olbermann decide to forgo a return to television, he could be eligible to run for Lieberman's seat, Stranded Wind notes. "He used to live in Connecticut and could easily return and establish residency." Olbermann was suspended from his job for two days after the 2010 election for making donations to Arizona Democrats Reps. Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords, and to Kentucky Senate candidate Jack Conway (D). Lieberman announced last Wednesday he would not see reelection in 2012. Rep. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) has already entered the race for the Democratic nomination.

To: FJB who wrote (98869)	2/1/2011 3:07:49 PM
From: TimF	3 Recommendations Respond to of 224744

The Sputnik Fallacy False analogies can be costly. Pres. Barack Obama made the “Sputnik moment” the organizing theme of his State of the Union address, and he chose wisely. Not because the tiny Soviet satellite and the ensuing space race have any bearing on the challenges of today. They don’t, except perhaps in how the Sputnik panic of the 1950s tracks with today’s overwrought alarm over a rising China. No, the Sputnik analogy is apt in what it says about Obama and his hubristic faith in the wisdom and powers of a technocratic elite. The Apollo program put a man on the moon, creating a shining moment of national pride. It also fed liberalism’s disastrously simplistic view of how progress happens — spend a lot of federal money, put a lot of experts in a room, and wait for the wondrous results. From Lyndon Johnson on, this has been a central element in liberalism. Obama believes in it deep in his bones. His contribution in the State of the Union was to plug this vision yet again, although decked out in red, white, and blue bunting and accompanied by the joyful cacophony of a John Philip Sousa march. The patriotic rhetorical trappings don’t make it any less arrogant or foolish. “If we can put a man on the moon, we can . . . ” is one of the more tiresome tropes in American public life. What putting a man on the moon proved is that we can put a man on the moon. It was a feat of engineering. With time, resources, and expertise, it could be done. But it tells us as much about our ability to reform society, cure diseases, or manage markets as building the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam did. In the wake of the moon landing, liberalism failed to understand that society is not an enormous engineering project. As Walter McDougall documents in his Pulitzer Prize–winning The Heavens and the Earth: A Political History of the Space Age, one of the heroes of the Apollo project, NASA administrator James Webb, fed the misunderstanding. He thought the space program constituted a breakthrough in the management of large systems that could be widely replicated. McDougall writes that “the James Webbs had, by their talent and energy, made command innovation look easy — and ‘American.’” In a letter to LBJ, Webb told the president, “The space program lies in your first area of building the Great Society.” And build it he did. “A new political symbolism had arisen,” McDougall notes, “to discredit the old verities about limited government, local initiative, balanced budgets, and individualism.” LBJ himself remarked on the catalyzing effect of the space program. According to LBJ, people said, “‘Well, if you do that for space and send a man to the moon, why can’t we do something for grandma with Medicare?’ And so we passed the Medicare act, and we passed 40 other measures.” Most of this didn’t end well. “It [had] become obvious in the 1960s and 1970s that ‘planned invention for the future’ through federal mobilization of technology and brainpower was failing everywhere from Vietnam to our inner cities,” McDougall writes. Andrew J. Coulson of the Cato Institute reminds us that even the signature federal initiative of the post-Sputnik era, the National Defense Education Act, failed to improve math and science scores. Once it had achieved its important and inspiring propaganda coup against the Soviets, the space program itself sputtered into a line item in the federal budget searching for a mission. NASA’s follow-up act was the white elephant called the space shuttle. This is the history President Obama has at his back as he promises the federal government will lead the way on innovation, pick winners and losers in the energy sector, and transform education. We have seen this future, and it doesn’t work. A new cliché about the Apollo program deserves to get currency: “If we can send a man to the moon . . . we can waste lots of money based on false analogies.” It’s a Sputnik moment, indeed. nationalreview.com