Senate confirms a homophobic climate change denier with no scientific credentials to lead NASA

Flake is a doubletalking dirtbag. For all of his public statements about being an “Anti-Trump” Republican, he falls in line just like the rest of them.

Forget trying to save the GOP, let the motherfucker burn and take as many of these people down with it.

10 Likes

Bannon may not be IN the WH (sfarsweknow) but ohh his influence lives on.

Yes, it’s not Opposite Day. See:

4 Likes

I found it a bit baffling when people were shocked and horrified by the early appointees to the Cabinet, all of whom seemed like the exact worst person to hire for that job. Given that the official Chief Strategist of the White House literally said, after the election, that they were hiring people specifically to “deconstruct” the agencies they were hired for in order to destroy the established state, I’m assuming people weren’t paying attention.

13 Likes

Same reaction. And I’m still baffled more Americans were/are not more alarmed. People either think the concerned citizens are alarmists and don’t believe Trump et al REALLY aim to deconstruct OR more people support that than I care to imagine OR people don’t give a fuck. Or enough of a fuck. I don’t know what to do except vote and participate as much as I can in potentially persuasive/effective actions and events. Which can sometimes be hard to spot cuz every Thing seems so segregated, polarized. There’s nobody to persuade at most events cuz there is not much…cross pollination…those hellbent on destruction are obviously NOT gonna be influenced by a damn picket sign.

Trying to think positive but…it’s a challenge, eh

8 Likes

There was a time when this sort of news would have affected me in some way.

I’d have been sad, or angry, or … something.

I think they might have won, because now I just see stuff like this happen and think, “That figures.” And then I go play Fallout 4 some more.

All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to say screw it and go play video games, I guess.

5 Likes

Hmmm, the article cites ‘Idiocracy’ (understandable in these times) but the President in that movie was a well meaning, if intellectually-limited, wrestler. Trump seems to be missing the whole ‘well meaning’ thang…

9 Likes

And that sabotage of humanity’s prospects for survival has been going on for a long time. Bush Jr took an axe to NASA’s climate monitoring capabilities.

5 Likes

That last bit clinches it though doesn’t it? Scientifically inept? Check. Homophobic? Check. Corrupt as fuck, with a history of stealing from non- profits for personal benefit? Dingdingding! Perfect Republican!

6 Likes

Toe. Toe the party line.

/Soapbox

2 Likes

Let me guess, he’s white? AMIRITE? GUYZ?

Since GOP overall policy is to shrink government by crippling it, obviously gross unqualification is a positive.
No thinks the administration was looking competence??

1 Like

Another doughy, pasty faced white guy dumber than a box of rocks. How many of these ass wipes does Amerika have? Hey, we’re number one in something.

1 Like

I read some report somewhere that many folks who play video games stay in the game longer than in real life. What is real life anymore? I suppose at least you have some control over what happens to you in your video world. Here in Amerika we’re at the whims of the most ignorant, stupid and cold hearted sub-humans one could only imagine in their nightmares.

1 Like

Trump & company are doing a great job of appearing to disprove evolution. No A list intellects need apply; administration appointments are reserved for Caucasoid Ground Monkeys only.

Best hope here is if a hippo exits the allegedly drained swamp and eats 'em all.

1 Like

As the owner of a storage building I’m pretty sure I could do the job better than this clown. Only because he sets the bar so very low, and I am not actively focused on making the world a worse place.

8 Likes

IIRC, the Dear Leader has already stripped most of the funding from NASA that might be applicable to climate change research.

You Do Not Recall Correctly.

If you want to argue facts. best become familiar with them. You’re not.

Hair Furor submitted a much-reduced science and education budget request, but Congress wasn’t having it, and undid those cuts, giving NASA a substantially larger budget than requested.

And while Bridenstine is a climate-change skeptic (NOT a “denialist”, a bit of nuance apparently lost on most people), he has repeatedly made it clear that he believes the proper response to skepticism is MORE science, not less. He firmly supports NASA’s climate-monitoring mission, noting, fr’ex, that even his own current constituents are threatened by tornadoes, so it’s very important to know what’s REALLY going on; to get answers from science, not ideology.

NB: I could easily name a dozen better candidates for the post, but as Trump nominees go, he’s really not all that bad.

He’s certainly NOT the complete horrorshow that this particular bit of hyperbolic character assassination is trying to paint him as.

1 Like

I can’t stand these people who deny the reality of homophobic climate change.

4 Likes

Thanks for pointing that out. I realized McCain’s been out after the fact.

As a side about McCain, the state GOP here in AZ is trying to change the rules so that we don’t get to vote on McCain’s replacement if he should retire or leave office early. They want a replacement appointed by the Gov, I believe, that will stay in office until 2020 - all due to the high-risks of the senate fipping. There is quite a lot of opposition along party lines as can be imagined.

Arizona Senate Moves to Change Rules

3 Likes

The difference between a skeptic and a denier:

A skeptic has some threshold of data and evidence which upon being delivered, can be persuaded or convince to some point of view.

A denier nearly always presents themselves as a skeptic, but upon receiving exactly the data/evidence they’ve demanded, they reliably

  • Move the goal posts
  • Change the argument
  • Attempt to discount the evidence using an informal fallacy (e.g. No True Scotsman)
  • Make an ad hominem attack on the person who delivered or discovered the data.
  • Pull any other shenanigan they can think of to be NOT convinced.

With regard to climate change, I’ve never met an actual skeptic in the wild.

“The Science Isn’t Settled” is one of the more pernicious arguments used by deniers, because it presents exactly like someone asking for more Science.

But it’s just a delay tactic.

3 Likes