McCain Hates Bears

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I'm sure most have heard McCain's rantings:

The federal government, he declares with horror and astonishment, has spent $3 million to study grizzly bear DNA. "I don't know if it was a paternity issue or criminal," he jokes, "but it was a waste of money."

McCain, who has railed against government pork for two decades, cites three beneficiaries of what he calls wasteful spending in his TV ad "Outrageous." One is the infamous "bridge to nowhere," a project in Alaska, pushed by the Republican congressional delegation, that would link a sparsely populated island with the mainland. Another is a museum at the site of the 1969 Woodstock music festival, which would be supported with a million-dollar earmark co-sponsored by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).

And the third is the grizzly project. McCain has been jabbing rhetorically at Kendall's study since it began in 2003, including from the floor of the Senate:

Linky. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/09/AR2008030902152.html?nav=rss_email/components)

But I mean, really, is it so hard to find pork barrel projects that he had to pull this out of his ass? The study wasn't about studying their DNA, it was about counting them:

Grizzly bears in northwest Montana are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. But Kendall's project -- the results of which will be published soon in a scientific journal -- revealed that there are more grizzlies than anyone had realized. That suggests that three decades of conservation efforts, costing tens of millions of dollars, have paid off.

This could have long-term implications for the Northern Divide grizzlies, possibly including their removal someday from the threatened list. Delisting them would restore management of the bears to state control after decades of federal oversight.

"It was extremely well executed and well worth the money," said Sterling Miller, a bear researcher working for the National Wildlife Federation. "Someone like McCain should be delighted, in fact. The Endangered Species Act works."

So this bill would give us the results of a federal project, and may lead to the federal government backing out of something, and McCain is against it?

Now, I'm not bothered by the details of this specific project; what concerns me is that this was the best evidence of pork he could find besides the bridge to nowhere and a Woodstock museum.

[fuelair]

McCain halted honor and sense between 2000 and 2004. He now has no space in what passes for his brain for anything beyond "Muuuust bee prezadint!!!!!!"

[Drudgewire]

Bears suck, always stealing honey and hanging out with undesireables like hyperactive tigers and lazy donkeys.

Stupid bears. :mad:

[Upchurch]

Expect a Stephen Colbert reference to this shortly.

[TragicMonkey]

He's just annoyed because one of them stole his picnic basket.

[BPSCG]

But I mean, really, is it so hard to find pork barrel projects that he had to pull this out of his ass? And is this such a major campaign issue that it demands front page coverage in the Washington Post? :boggled:

[UserGoogol]

Expect a Stephen Colbert reference to this shortly.

If by shortly, you mean he did it last week, then yeah. It was part of his ThreatDown last Wednesday (five minutes into this video (http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=156646)) and he argued that it was a necessary program in order to face the bear threat.

[Brainster]

Wait a minute! You mean that the people who actually asked for the money defended their project? Well, that settles it then.

$4.8 million to count bears.

[ZenFountain]

I watched every single debate (unfortunately...) and noticed that McCain used the line about pork spending and studying bear DNA in at least five of them. I'm not sure if it's a criminal or paternity issue! Sorry John, wasn't even funny the first time.

[UserGoogol]

Wait a minute! You mean that the people who actually asked for the money defended their project? Well, that settles it then.

$4.8 million to count bears.

Maybe it's a waste of money and maybe it's not, and I definitely think there needs to be reform to prevent pork (I'm not entirely sure if I'm entirely opposed to earmarks in principle, but at least make it more difficult to sneak them into bills under cover of darkness) but there's just something profoundly antiscientific and unreasonable about just saying "lol, Bear DNA." Scientific research is something which benefits everyone, so it is an entirely reasonable thing for the Federal government to fund. Science, even bear DNA science, drives our society and it seems rather ignorant to just push some program aside and say "who the hell gives a damn about bear DNA?" In principle it might have been better if it had been funded through the executive branch instead of earmarking, though.

[WildCat]

But was the age-old question of where bears defecate ever answered?

[timhau]

He's obviously pandering to the anti-bear vote in preparation for November.

OmWlrtpqp40

[Brainster]

Maybe it's a waste of money and maybe it's not, and I definitely think there needs to be reform to prevent pork (I'm not entirely sure if I'm entirely opposed to earmarks in principle, but at least make it more difficult to sneak them into bills under cover of darkness) but there's just something profoundly antiscientific and unreasonable about just saying "lol, Bear DNA." Scientific research is something which benefits everyone, so it is an entirely reasonable thing for the Federal government to fund. Science, even bear DNA science, drives our society and it seems rather ignorant to just push some program aside and say "who the hell gives a damn about bear DNA?" In principle it might have been better if it had been funded through the executive branch instead of earmarking, though.

If you read the article you know that the only reason they looked at the DNA was to eliminate duplicates They sent in 33,741 samples and they eliminated 33,178 of them as duplicates, so they learned that there are 563 bears, which was a surprisingly high number; they expected fewer bears. Now look at those numbers for a moment. To count 563 bears, they spent about $9000 per bear.

[The Painter]

If you read the article you know that the only reason they looked at the DNA was to eliminate duplicates They sent in 33,741 samples and they eliminated 33,178 of them as duplicates, so they learned that there are 563 bears, which was a surprisingly high number; they expected fewer bears. Now look at those numbers for a moment. To count 563 bears, they spent about $9000 per bear.

Not only is that $9,000 per bear, if there are only 563 bears and they sent in 33,741 samples, that means they had to capture each bear 60 times. After you get the same bear 30 times, don't you think you might recognize it?

[Dr Adequate]

Not only is that $9,000 per bear, if there are only 563 bears and they sent in 33,741 samples, that means they had to capture each bear 60 times. After you get the same bear 30 times, don't you think you might recognize it? (1) They were collecting the hair of the bears, not "capturing bears".

Your way sounds rather more expensive.

(2) This does not mean that there are only 563 bears; that's a sample from which the bear population can be estimated.

[The Painter]

Thanks Captain Obvious.

"We should do a slobber sample study for DNA next time. You can get really good DNA from spit," she said.

What's your take on this. How do they get the"slobber"?

[kosai]

Hates the animal, loves the hug:

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/5237/mills650ip3.th.jpg (http://img186.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mills650ip3.jpg)

[Tricky]

Bears are dangerous, especially since the Bill of Rights allows them to be armed. McCain is just ahead of the curve. In Republican circles, bears are the new Mexicans.

[Tiktaalik]

This study was conducted by stringing "rub trees" where bears typically rub when they pass with bits of barbed wire, and stringing small areas baited with "bear chum" with barbed wire, upon which the bears left their hair. The hair was collected, analyzed & the results collated. Like most DNA studies involving hair and/or the animal's scat, it was much less intrusive than capturing the animals, much less dangerous to bears or people, and provided a bunch of different information - not just how many bears there are, but also something about their ranges, associations, and relationships to one another. Other similar studies with coyotes, bobcats, etc., have yielded a great deal of information as well. These types of studies are well worth the money given the amount of information they yield, IMHO.

[Puppycow]

Bears are dangerous, especially since the Bill of Rights allows them to be armed. McCain is just ahead of the curve. In Republican circles, bears are the new Mexicans.

No, no, no. The bill of rights allows us to wear tank tops (bare arms), not arm bears. Sheesh. :rolleyes:

[Dorian Gray]

And is this such a major campaign issue that it demands front page coverage in the Washington Post? :boggled:
WSJ has videos of mix-ups made from "Kristen"'s MySpace songs. And people pay for that paper's web site.

[Kopji]

You are getting sleeeepy sleeeepy...
The grizzly bear spending is verrrrryyy important. Pay no attention to the billions of waste over here...

http://www.pogo.org

Or my lobbyist advisers wayyy oooovvvver there....


WASHINGTON --Sen. John McCain said Tuesday his inquiries into a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract were designed to assure evenhanded bidding and denied they were motivated by lobbyists who are close advisers to his presidential campaign.

"I had nothing to do with the contract, except to insist in writing, on several occasions, as this process went forward, that it be fair and open and transparent," he said at a meeting with voters in St. Louis. "That was my involvement in it."

His remarks came after The Associated Press reported that some of his current advisers lobbied last year for the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., the parent company of plane maker Airbus. EADS and its U.S. partner Northrop Grumman Corp. beat Boeing Co. for the lucrative aerial refueling contract.

March 11, 2008
http://www.sunherald.com/presidentialelection/story/425183.html

[brodski]

I read this thread' title and I thought to myself "Fred Phelps isn't even trying anymore, is he?".

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I read this thread' title and I thought to myself "Fred Phelps isn't even trying anymore, is he?".

:)

[corplinx]

In fairness, McCain thought they were studying the Chicago Bears and wondered why they would bother studying them since Ditka left.