41 ms·

Seems like the Pauls, father and son, have ideologies that are positive for the tech industry. I always wondered why the valley and other technologists pull the

Seems like the Pauls, father and son, have ideologies that are positive for the tech industry. I always wondered why the valley and other technologists pull the left-trigger at the polls. Is it that the right is so bad they are voting against it, or they actually think the left cares about their interests (as it is recently apparent that they are not)?

dragonwriter 13y ago
> Seems like the Pauls, father and son, have ideologies that are positive for the tech industry. Aside from ways in which it is good for the wealthy generally, I don't see how it is good for the "tech industry". > Is it that the right is so bad they are voting against it, or they actually think the left cares about their interests? I don't think those are the only two options; I can easily believe, for example, that the policies a particular party is likely to pursue in office will, in fact, be better for my interests than any of the alternatives without thinking that the politicians in that party actually care about my interests.
CamperBob2 13y ago
Seems like the Pauls, father and son, have ideologies that are positive for the tech industry. Maybe. As a "tech" kind of guy, I'm not quite ready to vote for a medical doctor who denies human evolution.
- cpursley 13y ago
  Whatever. Look at their voting records. The Pauls are often the only ones voting against the majority on a bill. Actions are more important than words, and that's what's so disappointing about President Obama.
- flyinRyan 13y ago
  A one-issue voter is bad enough, but an irrelevant non-issue voter really takes the cake. Who gives a flying fuck, are you afraid he'll outlaw evolving or something? And what does being a medical doctor have to do with evolution? Evolution has no effect on medication at that level.
  - blots 13y ago
    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/medicine_01 http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/medicine_01
    - PavlovsCat 13y ago
      Nice try. Now differentiate between a medical doctor and a medical researcher.
      - CamperBob2 13y ago
        I don't see the difference. I don't trust either of them to do their jobs properly if their mental model of reality is based on religion. If my doctor doesn't accept evolutionary theory, I have to wonder what else he doesn't accept. Can I trust him to advise on my childrens' vaccinations? Will he give me wife good advice on birth control? Did he just prescribe a homeopathic remedy for my high blood pressure? I prefer dealing with professionals who use the best available evidence to make decisions in both their professional and personal lives. That way I don't have to wonder who he/she answers to at the end of the day. And that rules out MDs who don't accept the basic tenets of modern biology.
        PavlovsCat 13y ago
        The difference is doing research and applying research. As long as they base their treatment on effectiveness rather than prayer, I don't care that they pray. If it makes them a happier and more peaceful person, it might do good. Unhappy people make for shitty doctors. I don't see the difference. I don't trust either of them to do their jobs properly if their mental model of reality is based on religion. And you consider that rational? Do I care if my car mechanic believes in ghosts? Why would it matter? Because it might mean he could have other strange ideas as well? How about I cross that bridge when I get to it and first meet the person, and maybe start caring about their beliefs once they actually do fuck up, instead of plastering my beliefs about their beliefs, and how it influences their work, all over it and calling it a day? At any rate, I would sooner look out for their office being littered with gifts from pharma salesmen and ads, if you catch my drift, and you can worry about bogeymen in the meantime.
- ensignavenger 13y ago
  When had Ron Paul publicly denied evolution? I don't really follow everything he says, but I can't ever remember him denying evolution.
  - TallGuyShort 13y ago
    I know of a few occasions when he has said it's only a theory and that our propensity for war does not bode well for how evolved we are. Although it's apparent he doesn't agree with the majority of scientists, you can't really argue with that :) He certainly doesn't vote like a typical pulpit-thumper though. His politics are typically very neutral, despite his own personal beliefs.
  - CamperBob2 13y ago
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

dragonwriter 13y ago

> Seems like the Pauls, father and son, have ideologies that are positive for the tech industry. Aside from ways in which it is good for the wealthy generally, I don't see how it is good for the "tech industry". > Is it that the right is so bad they are voting against it, or they actually think the left cares about their interests? I don't think those are the only two options; I can easily believe, for example, that the policies a particular party is likely to pursue in office will, in fact, be better for my interests than any of the alternatives without thinking that the politicians in that party actually care about my interests.

CamperBob2 13y ago

Seems like the Pauls, father and son, have ideologies that are positive for the tech industry. Maybe. As a "tech" kind of guy, I'm not quite ready to vote for a medical doctor who denies human evolution.

cpursley 13y ago
Whatever. Look at their voting records. The Pauls are often the only ones voting against the majority on a bill. Actions are more important than words, and that's what's so disappointing about President Obama.
flyinRyan 13y ago
A one-issue voter is bad enough, but an irrelevant non-issue voter really takes the cake. Who gives a flying fuck, are you afraid he'll outlaw evolving or something? And what does being a medical doctor have to do with evolution? Evolution has no effect on medication at that level.
- blots 13y ago
  http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/medicine_01 http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/medicine_01
  - PavlovsCat 13y ago
    Nice try. Now differentiate between a medical doctor and a medical researcher.
    - CamperBob2 13y ago
      I don't see the difference. I don't trust either of them to do their jobs properly if their mental model of reality is based on religion. If my doctor doesn't accept evolutionary theory, I have to wonder what else he doesn't accept. Can I trust him to advise on my childrens' vaccinations? Will he give me wife good advice on birth control? Did he just prescribe a homeopathic remedy for my high blood pressure? I prefer dealing with professionals who use the best available evidence to make decisions in both their professional and personal lives. That way I don't have to wonder who he/she answers to at the end of the day. And that rules out MDs who don't accept the basic tenets of modern biology.
      - PavlovsCat 13y ago
        The difference is doing research and applying research. As long as they base their treatment on effectiveness rather than prayer, I don't care that they pray. If it makes them a happier and more peaceful person, it might do good. Unhappy people make for shitty doctors. I don't see the difference. I don't trust either of them to do their jobs properly if their mental model of reality is based on religion. And you consider that rational? Do I care if my car mechanic believes in ghosts? Why would it matter? Because it might mean he could have other strange ideas as well? How about I cross that bridge when I get to it and first meet the person, and maybe start caring about their beliefs once they actually do fuck up, instead of plastering my beliefs about their beliefs, and how it influences their work, all over it and calling it a day? At any rate, I would sooner look out for their office being littered with gifts from pharma salesmen and ads, if you catch my drift, and you can worry about bogeymen in the meantime.
ensignavenger 13y ago
When had Ron Paul publicly denied evolution? I don't really follow everything he says, but I can't ever remember him denying evolution.
- TallGuyShort 13y ago
  I know of a few occasions when he has said it's only a theory and that our propensity for war does not bode well for how evolved we are. Although it's apparent he doesn't agree with the majority of scientists, you can't really argue with that :) He certainly doesn't vote like a typical pulpit-thumper though. His politics are typically very neutral, despite his own personal beliefs.
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]