Thursday, February 9, 2012

Marshmallow cannon at the White House

Wow! I need one of these! And from Barack Obama's reaction, he's thinking the same thing, I suspect.

(photo from Reuters via Laughing Squid)

I can just see our spy drones outfitted with marshmallow cannons. And they might be pretty effective, too. If you're a terrorist and suddenly, out of the blue, get hit in the face with a U.S. marshmallow, it might make you think, don't you suppose?

Besides, it would eliminate embarrassing mistakes like this:
Do you ever have one of those days when you mean to invite the world's most-wanted terrorist over to the White House for a beer summit but instead order a SEAL team to shoot him dead?

I hate it when that happens. As Fox News's Sean Hannity explained — shortly after breaking into Rush Limbaugh's drug stash apparently – Barack Obama had exactly that kind of experience, as the raid against bin Laden "wouldn't have happened if [Obama] had his way, and that can be proven, as well, on tape." ...

As for what really transpired, Hannity is obviously the first person the president confides in, so who are we to doubt his contention that Obama can't do anything right? Even when his policy-goal is a relatively modest of one "don't hunt down an infamous mass murderer who has evaded detection for a decade," he still manages to screw it up and kill the guy.

You see, if our SEALs teams were armed with marshmallow cannons, we wouldn't have embarrassing screw-ups like that. Then, President Obama wouldn't have to worry about them accidentally killing terrorists. (And Jeebus, there have been a lot of these accidents lately, haven't there?)

Then, Vice-President Joe Biden wouldn't have to commiserate with America that "Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive."

Seriously, it thrills me that we finally have a president who celebrates science:
A few months after his inauguration, President Obama was showing so much passion for science and scientific integrity that one observer characterized him as "almost strident" on the issue. I've always thought that was the wrong phrase.

The description put a negative spin on what I consider to be one of the president's more endearing qualities -- I can't think of a modern president who speaks as often and as enthusiastically about science as Obama.

Indeed, a couple of years ago, the president announced that, from now on, there will be an annual White House Science Fair. Obama explained at the time, "If you win the NCAA championship, you come to the White House. Well, if you're a young person and you've produced the best experiment or design, the best hardware or software, you ought to be recognized for that achievement, too. Scientists and engineers ought to stand side by side with athletes and entertainers as role models, and here at the White House we're going to lead by example. We're going to show young people how cool science can be."

Of course, this will just confirm right-wing views that science is a liberal plot, but we can't help that. This is a choice between one political party standing up for science and no political party standing up for science.

Not to say that there isn't plenty of pseudoscience in left-leaning constituencies, but there's really no comparison these days. Republicans have become entirely faith-based, while science is entirely evidence-based. That's a conflict which won't go away.

1 comment:

Jim Harris said...

The expression on Obama's face is just like a little kid with a new toy.