I don't know why anyone considers John McCain to be anything but a cranky out-of-touch windbag. He has shown awful judgement in every decision of consequence in the last decade. Below the fold I go over three of the most egregious examples of John McCain's out-of-touch and anti-science attitude. From associating vaccines with autism, to not knowing that condoms prevent AIDs to randomly mocking sound scientific research John McCain has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is not fit to lead.
Back in February McCain had this to say about vaccines and autism.
At a town hall meeting Friday in Texas, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., declared that "there’s strong evidence" that thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative that was once in many childhood vaccines, is responsible for the increased diagnoses of autism in the U.S. -- a position in stark contrast with the view of the medical establishment.
What an out-of-touch jackass!
Repeat after me:
There is no link between autism and vaccines.
The Centers for Disease Control says "There is no convincing scientific evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines, except for minor reactions like redness and swelling at the injection site."
The American Academy of Pediatrics says"No scientific data link thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines with any pediatric neurologic disorder, including autism."
The Food and Drug Administration conducted a review in 1999 -- the year thimerosal was ordered to be removed from most vaccines -- and said that it "found no evidence of harm from the use of thimerosal as a vaccine preservative, other than local hypersensitivity reactions."
I guess McMaverick has inside information on the vaccine-autism connection. It's probably like his inside info that that condoms may not prevent AIDs.
Reporter: "Should U.S. taxpayer money go to places like Africa to fund contraception to prevent AIDS?"
Mr. McCain: "Well I think it’s a combination. The guy I really respect on this is Dr. Coburn. He believes – and I was just reading the thing he wrote– that you should do what you can to encourage abstinence where there is going to be sexual activity. Where that doesn’t succeed, than he thinks that we should employ contraceptives as well. But I agree with him that the first priority is on abstinence. I look to people like Dr. Coburn. I’m not very wise on it."
(Mr. McCain turns to take a question on Iraq, but a moment later looks back to the reporter who asked him about AIDS.)
Mr. McCain: "I haven’t thought about it. Before I give you an answer, let me think about. Let me think about it a little bit because I never got a question about it before. I don’t know if I would use taxpayers’ money for it."
Q: "What about grants for sex education in the United States? Should they include instructions about using contraceptives? Or should it be Bush’s policy, which is just abstinence?"
Mr. McCain: (Long pause) "Ahhh. I think I support the president’s policy."
Q: "So no contraception, no counseling on contraception. Just abstinence. Do you think contraceptives help stop the spread of HIV?"
Mr. McCain: (Long pause) "You’ve stumped me."
Q: "I mean, I think you’d probably agree it probably does help stop it?"
Mr. McCain: (Laughs) "Are we on the Straight Talk express? I’m not informed enough on it. Let me find out. You know, I’m sure I’ve taken a position on it on the past. I have to find out what my position was. Brian, would you find out what my position is on contraception – I’m sure I’m opposed to government spending on it, I’m sure I support the president’s policies on it."
Q: "But you would agree that condoms do stop the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Would you say: ‘No, we’re not going to distribute them,’ knowing that?"
Mr. McCain: (Twelve-second pause) "Get me Coburn’s thing, ask Weaver to get me Coburn’s paper that he just gave me in the last couple of days. I’ve never gotten into these issues before."
What a Maverick!
Go get that paper, so I can figure out my position on something that has been obvious for decades.
Lastly, the John McCain has started insulting successful scientific research because he is too out-of-touch to understand it.
"We're spending three million dollars to study bear DNA. I don't know if it was a paternity issue or criminal, but it was a waste of money."
Actually, they are using DNA samples to count an endangered species. Since, we spend a lot money trying to protect endangered species it's probably a good idea to have some idea if we are succeeding. But, those elitist scientists are going off wasting our tax dollars.
As a scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey, she set out to get the first head count of grizzlies in the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem. She and her co-workers at the USGS have used DNA primarily as a bear-identifying tool. Her project also employed barbed wire and homemade bear bait brewed up from rotten fish and cattle blood.
"There's never been any information about the status of this population. We didn't know what was going on -- until this study," Kendall said.
This was an astonishingly ambitious research project involving 207 paid workers, hundreds of volunteers, 7.8 million acres and 2,560 bear sampling sites.
I'm sorry, but this guy is complaining about $5 million for scientific research, while we are looking to spend $1-3 trillion in Iraq. John McCain has been one of the staunchest supporters of this war, and would be fine if it went on for another 100 years. Is this someone you trust to make sound fiscal decisions?
UPDATE: dogheaven in the comments reminded me of the importance of pushing Sciencedebate 2008. The US can't afford to have a president who is willfully ignorant of the science that supports policy.
Hat tip Respectful Insolence
Cross posted at Emerging Design.