FFS, who cares what his pastor does!

Where's Mike Gravel? He should be ripping into all this media shit about "hmmm is Obama a true Christian, hmmm, maybe he's a Muslim".

The day an atheist runs for president and gets equal air-time is when the US will finally get some sense knocked into it's inflated head.

Thanks for the video Jeff. I sifted it here http://www.videosift.com/video/From-Mike-Gravel-with-Love-Interview-on-Russian-TV

Couldn't think of a better title or I wouldn't have bitten yours. That makes 2 videos I've gladly accepted as freebies. So thanks <kicks ground awkwardly> and stuff.

>> ^Johnald_Chaffinch:
he'd have been good. what would it take for people to vote for a candidate not based on how they look?


Clinton and Obama have done much more in the area of stones lying beside a lake.

>> ^Johnald_Chaffinch:
he'd have been good. what would it take for people to vote for a candidate not based on how they look?


...or how they talk, or what they say, or what they stand for?

>> ^Johnald_Chaffinch:
he'd have been good. what would it take for people to vote for a candidate not based on how they look?


You said it! Elections are pageantry.

>> ^Johnald_Chaffinch:
he'd have been good. what would it take for people to vote for a candidate not based on how they look?


You think it's about how candidates LOOK? You think Clinton & Obama are frontrunners because of their LOOKS? You need to get out of high school, Johnald -- these candidates are popular because of MONEY, special interests, kickbacks and corporate involvements. It has NOTHING to do with how they look.

Geez.

i left a reply to, and ^voted, this comment by BicycleRepairMan:
Mike Gravel <-- released the Pentagon Papers, pissed of Nixon badly, now that, ladies and gentlemen, is cojones

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
Mike Gravel <-- released the Pentagon Papers, pissed of Nixon badly, now that, ladies and gentlemen, is cojones

heh. if you had pointed that out, up until 3 days ago, i'd have pointed out that my sift bio opened with the sentence:
"That's the day The Pentagon Papers were published."

my date of birth.
so yeah, i'm very aware and grateful, for Mike's vital work in getting it on the record. and dealing with Alaska's other Senator, Intertubez Stevens himself.
my only beef with Mike, is that (imho) he seemed to run this campaign, on a platform of...
uhh. everyone else on this stage sucks. that's why i preferred Kucinich and Obama this time. their positivity.

^ aye. top 10 cojones, among politicians, imho.

my personal top 5? hmm.

probably Paul, Kucinich, Pat Leahy, Russ Feingold, and Obama.


Mike Gravel <-- released the Pentagon Papers, pissed of Nixon badly, now that, ladies and gentlemen, is cojones

>> ^jonny:

Really? So, you'd be ok with local school boards deciding that their basic science curriculum should include the alternate theory of the sun revolving around the earth?

Yes. Teachers and communities should be able to choose what they want to focus on. My experience is that if you hand a teacher a curriculum he doesn't believe in, he'll just do a half-assed job and skip to what he thinks is important.

Also, the market has ways of regulating quality and correcting bad decisions. One is criticism from outsiders. If that fails, low standardized test scores, rejection letters from colleges and job applications will make parents get the message and demand better quality.

>> ^rembar:
If you want to follow a strict constitutional viewpoint, carry it to its logical conclusion: NO state and NO government under the United States Constitution whatsoever has the right to use its power to deny teaching scientifically-accurate material to students in public schools. Decisions about teaching scientific curricula, or any other public school curricula for that matter, should be left up to the only people qualified to make such decisions, and we happen to have already hired those folks. Those people are teaching our children in public schools every day. Decisions over teaching evolution are not for the federal OR local governments to make, it's for the teachers and school officials, the people who are required to be educated on the topics they teach, to decide.

You've just made the case for the libertarian platform of limited government. Libertarians defend that the government should be shrunk down to the bare essentials because politicians are completely incapable of making competent technical decisions.

When Ron Paul says that the federal government should stay away of education, he's not implying that "states rights" will fix the problem. If you watch the New Hampshire Town Hall Q&A session (which aired along with that Fox debate RP wasn't invited to), you'll see him making the point that parents and teachers should be responsible for each child's education. Just like the federal government should delegate functions to the states, the states are expected to further delegate and keep regulation to a minimum.

I'm an engineer who took an interest in education, so after I got my pure mathmatics degree I also became a licensed math teacher. I'm completely opposed to government interference in education. To me, Brazil (my country) represents a textbook example of education central planning gone wrong. 9th grade public school kids read and write at 5th grade levels, consistently finish last in international benchmarks and each government decision actually makes things worse by providing cosmetic solutions and more regulation.

>> ^rembar:
local government officials happen to often be extraordinarily uneducated and massively unintelligent, it's folly to think dropping issues from the federal to state level will all of a sudden solve the US's national problem of idiotic politicians.


George Carlin :
"Where do politicians come from? They come from American homes, American families, American schools, American churches and American businesses. And they're elected by American voters. That is what our system produces. That is the best we can do - garbage in, garbage out."

Also, *science because it is an issue of teaching science properly. Mike Gravel has and always will be my valentine, I would vote for him if I knew he had more than a snowball's chance in hell of winning.

But for me, its not that the president should have the last word in science or education, its more that he/she understands the concept of science, and recognizes its importance. Its also about living in the real world, as opposed to FantasyLand, which I think should be a requirement as a president.

That too.

>> ^flavioribeiro:
The president shouldn't be in charge of choosing between teaching evolution or creationism, or string theory or anything else. That's for the local governments to decide, ....

Really? So, you'd be ok with local school boards deciding that their basic science curriculum should include the alternate theory of the sun revolving around the earth?

I support Ron Paul, and I agree with what Mike Gravel said. I'm also a Christian, and I believe church and state should be kept separate.

What I don't understand is the focus that some people have on evolution. The president shouldn't be in charge of choosing between teaching evolution or creationism, or string theory or anything else. That's for the local governments to decide, so this is a moot point.

Evolution should only be a make or break issue to people who believe the president should act like a king. The US Constitution is responsible for limiting the federal government's powers, and if followed strictly, it turns the evolution debate into a non-issue.

Also notable is that this video by Mike Gravel (Youtube user gravel2008, the official campaign thingy) is actually a response to a video by zakieChan named "Atheist" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdVucvo-kDU !!!

A presidential candidate that agrees with an atheist video!!! In the eternal words of Arwen: There is still hope.

Too bad he doesnt actually have any chance of getting elected.. Obama's vice perhaps ?