Monkeys need coke too!

I wondered what would happen to New Coke…..

Antiscience reporting that tosses figures around and tries to find the most foolish possible ways to describe studies like this always ‘grind my gears.’ To reuse a few of your examples, the monkey study was “examining the effects of cocaine on a particular neurotransmitter among monkeys who have had a long-term addiction to cocaine … [and] could lead to better treatment for recovering cocaine addicts.” [source] The elderly-video game study is about combatting Alzheimer’s and dementia. [source].

Not going to go through all 100, so i’ll grant the possibility that some of these studies are weak, but politicizing basic research and trying to somehow make it about Obama is foolish.

Too bad our politicians don’t spend our money like it was money they earned. Maybe we would see alot less of this kind of crap.

Robert Quigley said:
Not going to go through all 100, so i’ll grant the possibility that some of these studies are weak, but politicizing basic research and trying to somehow make it about Obama is foolish.

The argument isn’t about the studies per-say, it’s about the disgusting waste of money via our federal government. I know most of the authors here at Mediaite are big time Obama supporters, but the list is just a good example of how the government waste our tax dollars.

Oh and it’s not only liberals. Republicans love to waste money as well.

Robert Quigley said:
Antiscience reporting that tosses figures around and tries to find the most foolish possible ways to describe studies like this always ‘grind my gears.’ To reuse a few of your examples, the monkey study was “examining the effects of cocaine on a particular neurotransmitter among monkeys who have had a long-term addiction to cocaine … [and] could lead to better treatment for recovering cocaine addicts.” [source] The elderly-video game study is about combatting Alzheimer’s and dementia. [source]. Not going to go through all 100, so i’ll grant the possibility that some of these studies are weak, but politicizing basic research and trying to somehow make it about Obama is foolish.

I would love to be able to spend gobs and gobs of money on all kinds of research and assistance for the needy. Wouldn’t it be great — IF WE ONLY HAD THE MONEY!!!!!.

When we are faced with $13 trillion debt (most of it Obama’s) and my kids, grandkids, and great grandkids will be paying for it, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about cocaine research on addiction. Got a problem with cocaine addiction? Here’s your solution: stop using it. You make the bad choices, that’s your problem. Why do I and my kids have to pay for it?

It’s a question of priorities when we’re in the grips of a historic financial crisis.

Robert Quigley said:
Antiscience reporting that tosses figures around and tries to find the most foolish possible ways to describe studies like this always ‘grind my gears.’ To reuse a few of your examples, the monkey study was “examining the effects of cocaine on a particular neurotransmitter among monkeys who have had a long-term addiction to cocaine … [and] could lead to better treatment for recovering cocaine addicts.” [source] The elderly-video game study is about combatting Alzheimer’s and dementia. [source]. Not going to go through all 100, so i’ll grant the possibility that some of these studies are weak, but politicizing basic research and trying to somehow make it about Obama is foolish.

Is there any thought that if you don’t have the money…it may not be a good idea at this time?

I can think of lots of things to spend money on, especially if it is your money!

So yes, your examples were foolish, wasteful and should not have been in the bill…especially at this time!

The stimulus was an expensive — very expensive — joke. Can’t someone explain to the Democrats the difference between productive labor that creates real economic value and non-productive labor? This is pretty basic stuff, right out of the Economics 101 textbook. If Pelosi-Reid-Obama had any real understanding of how economies operate, they would give tax breaks and incentives to businesses and business owners — allowing them to hire and expand. Instead they will allow the tax rates to skyrocket on January 1, and we will get even more retrenching, layoffs and belt-tightening next year.

The irony here is that the Democrats want to give away free stuff paid for by the rich, yet every policy move they make leaves us with fewer and fewer rich folks. Who’s gonna pay the bill for all the giveaways? The Left claims to want to eliminate poverty, but really the only end result of their agenda is to eliminate wealth.

Robert Quigley said:
politicizing basic research and trying to somehow make it about Obama is foolish.

Thank you, Dr. Quigley.
I have to tell you that your sourcing was rather weak. The important part of your first link stressed jobs for the people giving cocaine to the monkeys as opposed to the actual medical results. There was no sourcing that verified any of this is actually true. Perhaps you can furnish us with more comprehensive sourcing. I would look it up myself, but I am due back at the lab….Cheetah and I are gonna get soooooooooooooo wasted….

Andrea Bibby said:

When we are faced with $13 trillion debt (most of it Obama’s) and my kids, grandkids, and great grandkids will be paying for it, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about cocaine research on addiction

When will the Democrats learn only the Republicans are allowed to spend out childrens and grandchildren’s money.

Robert Quigley said:
Antiscience reporting that tosses figures around and tries to find the most foolish possible ways to describe studies like this always ‘grind my gears.’ To reuse a few of your examples, the monkey study was “examining the effects of cocaine on a particular neurotransmitter among monkeys who have had a long-term addiction to cocaine … [and] could lead to better treatment for recovering cocaine addicts.” [source] The elderly-video game study is about combatting Alzheimer’s and dementia. [source].

Not going to go through all 100, so i’ll grant the possibility that some of these studies are weak, but politicizing basic research and trying to somehow make it about Obama is foolish.

Robert, I agree completely. Unfortunately, as foolish and dishonest as it is to politicize basic research, it will probably work its way into the media cycle.

More Liberty said:
The argument isn’t about the studies per-say, it’s about the disgusting waste of money via our federal government. I know most of the authors here at Mediaite are big time Obama supporters, but the list is just a good example of how the government waste our tax dollars.

Oh and it’s not only liberals. Republicans love to waste money as well.

But the list is not a good example of a waste of tax dollars. These are, for the most part, legitimate scientific studies that we could see some serious benefits. Basic research is easy to trivialize, as this list does, but without basic research, many of our great technological and scientific feats would not be possible.

Take the frozen rat sperm. Sounds funny, right? Well, this research would go a long way in helping provide a clean, healthy and consistent population of rats for use in cancer research, stem cell research, etc.

Puter Boi said:
The important part of your first link stressed jobs for the people giving cocaine to the monkeys as opposed to the actual medical results.

That’s probably because the research has not been completed yet.

I thought this was another Tommy racist column.

Stephen Hogan said:
That’s probably because the research has not been completed yet.

That is very true, but my point is that the people interviewed in Dr. Quigley’s source link, stressed jobs and not research. If there is a record of research, than Dr Quigley should provide that. He was lecturing on the benefits of the research, but he didn’t mention that his link concerned job creation.

Cheetah sends his regards!

Puter Boi said:
That is very true, but my point is that the people interviewed in Dr. Quigley’s source link, stressed jobs and not research. If there is a record of research, than Dr Quigley should provide that. He was lecturing on the benefits of the research, but he didn’t mention that his link concerned job creation.

Cheetah sends his regards!

Well, any good scientist won’t tout the benefits of his research until the research is complete. Potential benefits, maybe, but not definite benefits. Also, I myself have cited articles like this on news sites, mainly because most scientific reporting is done with academic journals to which most people may not have a subscription.

Is Cheetah your coke-monkey? Give him a fist-bump for me.

I really wish I had a monkey with a coke habit-that would be an awesome conversation piece.

Q. What’s up with the monkey buddy?’

A. He does tricks for cocaine! Are you “holding?”

Q You’re a bad man for giving that simian drugs.

A. Hey I rescued him from the Government where he used to score for free-on your tax dollar in fact!

Q.Why don’t you put him in rehab?

A. Do you have any idea how hard it is to get a monkey off another monkey’s back?

FORGETABOUT IT

On the flip side, on the top ten list of Republicans’ wasting American Dollars I give you – no, they gave us – the Blunder in Iraq!! To date cost = about $1.9 trillion. Heckuva job.

Andrea Bibby said:
When we are faced with $13 trillion debt (most of it Obama’s) and my kids, grandkids, and great grandkids will be paying for it, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about cocaine research on addiction. Got a problem with cocaine addiction?

Wow – you just proved the adage, “make a statement, prove yourself a dumbass” Jimmy Carter passed off to Reagan a $800 billion national debt; Reagan tripled it in his first term. When George HW Bush left office, the national debt was $4.2 trillion and when Clinton left office he had a over $100 billion surplus and a national debt on 1/20/2009 of $5.7 trilliion. Then, along came George W. Bush – now there’s a clusterfuck. He left office on 1/20/2009 with a $10.8 trillion national debt and having already accured a $1.2 trillion FY 2009 budget deficit. Do the math – about $10 trillion of the current national debt accrued under Republicans – and 65% of that amount accrued under George W. Bush. There, aren’t you just stupid?

Bill, do you have to throw insults into every post? At times, you make interesting points, but the insults take away from that.

Bill Adkins said:
$10 trillion of the current national debt accrued under Republicans

Check out the real numbers. All of the national debt borrowed when Democrats controlled the Congressional budget. When Republican controlled the Congressional budget, the government has run a surplus. Here are real numbers for your edification.

http://www.renewamerica.com/images/columns/bowyer030319.gif

So stop your bogus bragging about the fiscal responsibility of Democrats. No one believes it. And the current administration is borrowing money faster than any government in the history of the planet.

Andrea Bibby said:
Got a problem with cocaine addiction? Here’s your solution: stop using it. You make the bad choices, that’s your problem. Why do I and my kids have to pay for it?

It’s a question of priorities when we’re in the grips of a historic financial crisis.

I know this makes sense to people on the surface, but perhaps the cocaine studies would help state governments better deal with prevention and rehab, saving money in the long run, and putting some scientists to work in the meantime. Scientists are in financial crisis and need jobs too, and most research jobs in this country are at least partially publicly funded.

That’s just my initial educated guess as to one way that expenditure made sense to whoever approved it.

felixw said:
Check out the real numbers. All of the national debt borrowed when Democrats controlled the Congressional budget. When Republican controlled the Congressional budget, the government has run a surplus. Here are real numbers for your edification. http://www.renewamerica.com/images/columns/bowyer030319.gif So stop your bogus bragging about the fiscal responsibility of Democrats. No one believes it. And the current administration is borrowing money faster than any government in the history of the planet.

You’d have a point if you had a point. Bush had veto authority – used it 12 times in 8 years – only ONCE before 2007 and that was to veto a stem cell bill. Used it 11 times after 2007 when the Democrats had a one seat majority. That $6.5 trillion added to the national debt 2001 through FY 2009 is Republican branded. If you don’t believe that you’re drooling and dragging your knuckles.

Bill, it’s a joke to argue that Democrats are fiscally responsible, and spend less than Republicans. No one will buy it. Your wasting your breath. Here feast your eyes on this chart showing how fiscally responsible Democrats are.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_gcA0ZuKGkI8/SxXXFx28TZI/AAAAAAAAFBc/mwZYaYFvjJ0/s640/bush_deficit_vs_obama_deficit_in_pictures_2.jpg

..these reseaches r promises {MORE GOVERNMENT PROMISES} to help us in the future…..well we need the financial help now not in the future when it will b to late…Put those EARMARKED MONIES into the medicare or ss accounts that the government has drained THAT WERE PROMISED TO US WHEN WE PAID INTO IT…….WORK ON GET AMERICA BACK ON TRACK …NOT FROZEN RAT SPERM…..DAMNIT WAKE THE HELL UP……frozen rat sperm …people please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!