theatlantic:

What Do Republican Voters See in Rick Santorum?

Rick Santorum is back. After his stunning three-state sweep in Tuesday’s Republican balloting, the former Pennsylvania senator has single-handedly revived a GOP race that seemed to be on the verge of wrapping up. How seriously has his new wave of successes reordered the landscape? A forthcoming national poll will show him in first place, the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling tweeted Thursday night.
To those who had written him off as a social-conservative niche candidate or a one-hit wonder after his Iowa surprise, this is a bit jarring, if not plain laughable. The guy who once equated homosexuality to “man on dog,” prompting a sex columnist to turn his name into an obscenity? The guy who lost his last race for reelection by 18 percentage points? The dweeb in the sweater vest? Why is this guy being taken seriously by Republican voters?
His latest resurgence may be as much about Mitt Romney as it is about Santorum. But there are three key attributes that endear Santorum to conservatives — and they’re all things Romney lacks: an appealing personal story, a refusal to back down and a set of impeccable culture-war credentials. Read more.
[Image: Whitney Curtis/Getty]


I am not a fan of Rick Santorum, as I have previously mentioned. I dislike him more than Gingrich, which is saying quite a lot.

theatlantic:

What Do Republican Voters See in Rick Santorum?

Rick Santorum is back. After his stunning three-state sweep in Tuesday’s Republican balloting, the former Pennsylvania senator has single-handedly revived a GOP race that seemed to be on the verge of wrapping up. How seriously has his new wave of successes reordered the landscape? A forthcoming national poll will show him in first place, the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling tweeted Thursday night.

To those who had written him off as a social-conservative niche candidate or a one-hit wonder after his Iowa surprise, this is a bit jarring, if not plain laughable. The guy who once equated homosexuality to “man on dog,” prompting a sex columnist to turn his name into an obscenity? The guy who lost his last race for reelection by 18 percentage points? The dweeb in the sweater vest? Why is this guy being taken seriously by Republican voters?

His latest resurgence may be as much about Mitt Romney as it is about Santorum. But there are three key attributes that endear Santorum to conservatives — and they’re all things Romney lacks: an appealing personal story, a refusal to back down and a set of impeccable culture-war credentials. Read more.

[Image: Whitney Curtis/Getty]

I am not a fan of Rick Santorum, as I have previously mentioned. I dislike him more than Gingrich, which is saying quite a lot.

discoverynews:

Your state sucks at science

This map suggests that unless you live in California, a smattering of states out East, or a small handfull of other states sprinkled across the country, you’re looking at a very grave problem when it comes to scientific illiteracy in your community’s youth (and, presumably, its population in general). Come to think of it, this map should really concern you, no matter where you live.

from io9.com

LOOK AT THAT GLORIOUS RED STATE THAT IS VIRGINIA. And I went to a green state to study science..??No wonder I’m going back

discoverynews:

Your state sucks at science

This map suggests that unless you live in California, a smattering of states out East, or a small handfull of other states sprinkled across the country, you’re looking at a very grave problem when it comes to scientific illiteracy in your community’s youth (and, presumably, its population in general). Come to think of it, this map should really concern you, no matter where you live.

from io9.com

LOOK AT THAT GLORIOUS RED STATE THAT IS VIRGINIA.
And I went to a green state to study science..??
No wonder I’m going back

U.S State Science Standards Are Mediocre to Awful
I’m going to use direct quotations on this one, because I’m so opinionated on this matter that if I was to write about this topic, it would turn into something of a raging manifesto.

A new report from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute paints a grim picture of state science standards across the United States. But it also reveals some intriguing details about exactly what’s going wrong with the way many American students are learning science.
While each state is free to formulate its own standards, numerous studies have found that high standards are a first step on the road to high student achievement. “A majority of the states’ standards remain mediocre to awful,” write the authors of the report. Only one state, California, plus the District of Columbia, earned straight A’s. Indiana, Massachusetts, South Carolina and Virginia each scored an A-, and a band of states in and around the northwest, including Oregon, Idaho, Montana and Nebraska, scored F’s.
What exactly is going wrong? The study’s lead authors identified four main factors: an undermining of evolution, vague goals, not enough guidance for teachers on how to integrate the history of science and the concept of scientific inquiry into their lessons, and not enough math instruction.

Read More

U.S State Science Standards Are Mediocre to Awful

I’m going to use direct quotations on this one, because I’m so opinionated on this matter that if I was to write about this topic, it would turn into something of a raging manifesto.

A new report from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute paints a grim picture of state science standards across the United States. But it also reveals some intriguing details about exactly what’s going wrong with the way many American students are learning science.

While each state is free to formulate its own standards, numerous studies have found that high standards are a first step on the road to high student achievement. “A majority of the states’ standards remain mediocre to awful,” write the authors of the report. Only one state, California, plus the District of Columbia, earned straight A’s. Indiana, Massachusetts, South Carolina and Virginia each scored an A-, and a band of states in and around the northwest, including Oregon, Idaho, Montana and Nebraska, scored F’s.

What exactly is going wrong? The study’s lead authors identified four main factors: an undermining of evolutionvague goalsnot enough guidance for teachers on how to integrate the history of science and the concept of scientific inquiry into their lessons, and not enough math instruction.

Read More

theartofnow:

So why can’t death row inmates donate organs???

Very interesting point…

alchymista:

mohandasgandhi:

therecipe:

Rick Santorum voices support for assassination of nuclear scientists.

“…I’m hopeful that some of the things we’re seeing with respect to their [Iran] nuclear program that the U.S. is involved in. Which is, on occasion, scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that’s a wonderful thing.  …And if people say ‘well you can’t just go our and assassinate people.,’ well…tell that to Awlaki. We’ve done it for an American citizen.”

Oh man. There is so much wrong with Santorum. So much. At least he’s being honest that he sees the U.S. above the law. What an Christian he is!

There is no evidence they are developing nuclear weapons.

Covertly assassinating scientists is unethical and 100% illegal. It’s also terrorism.

Coincidental development

I won’t pretend that I am fully read on this issue but, in my opinion, if we do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons, we need to address the issue with the legislators who are giving the orders. We have the technology that they are supposedly attempting to acquire, and we say that we can be the only ones with it, or else?  Sure, killing the scientists could be “effective”, but they are simply doing what scientists do, researching, developing, and taking orders from the government. And likewise, they could say the same for us, and threaten our scientists. How would we as a nation respond to that? If they were to act on this and actually assassinate our scientists, we would certainly launch a counter attack. Thus, this dumb proposal has the potential start a vicious cycle that should be avoided.

Okay, now, because of this assassination of an Iranian scientist, and lovely comments like these, Iran is accusing us of ordering that scientist’s assassination. Honestly, I would be ashamed if our country was behind this. Like I previously stated, this is the entirely wrong way to go about this problem.

mohandasgandhi:

therecipe:

Rick Santorum voices support for assassination of nuclear scientists.

“…I’m hopeful that some of the things we’re seeing with respect to their [Iran] nuclear program that the U.S. is involved in. Which is, on occasion, scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that’s a wonderful thing.  …And if people say ‘well you can’t just go our and assassinate people.,’ well…tell that to Awlaki. We’ve done it for an American citizen.”

Oh man. There is so much wrong with Santorum. So much. At least he’s being honest that he sees the U.S. above the law. What an Christian he is!

There is no evidence they are developing nuclear weapons.

Covertly assassinating scientists is unethical and 100% illegal. It’s also terrorism.

Coincidental development

I won’t pretend that I am fully read on this issue but, in my opinion, if we do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons, we need to address the issue with the legislators who are giving the orders. We have the technology that they are supposedly attempting to acquire, and we say that we can be the only ones with it, or else?  Sure, killing the scientists could be “effective”, but they are simply doing what scientists do, researching, developing, and taking orders from the government. And likewise, they could say the same for us, and threaten our scientists. How would we as a nation respond to that? If they were to act on this and actually assassinate our scientists, we would certainly launch a counter attack. Thus, this dumb proposal has the potential start a vicious cycle that should be avoided.