Bill Nye 'the Science Guy' Urges Letters To Obama To Restore NASA Budget Cuts 259
MarkWhittington writes "Bill Nye, once known as 'The Science Guy' for his 1990s PBS educational television show, has cut a YouTube video in his current capacity of CEO of the Planetary Society urging people to write to President Obama to restore cuts to planetary science. The budget cuts were enacted by the president last February, causing consternation in the scientific community. Nye writes, 'If that proposal continues the steep decline in funding to NASA's planetary program it will gravely endanger the unique capabilities and outstanding people that have delivered U.S. leadership in space. We will lose a capability that took decades to develop and may never be replaced.'"
Nickname predates PBS (Score:4, Interesting)
He was "Bill Nye the Science Guy" back when he was a role player on "Almost Live!", which was a Seattle-area comic sketch show in the 80s and 90s.
Most of the time he was just a stock player, but occasionally he'd do a science-comedy mashup [youtube.com]; and for each year's New Year's special episode he'd rig up some Rube Goldberg sciency contraption that'd be used to count down to the new year.
Although I think I liked him best as Speed Walker [youtube.com], who fought crime while adhering to the conventions of the International Speed Walking Association.
Re:Romney too. (Score:1, Interesting)
Still Obama. You don't seem to understand credibility vs ability. Romney's budgets in MA, and his proposed budgets for the US are full of lies that don't add up. Obama's budget - and his inability to find funding for planetary science (and fight those in both parties who oppose such funding) is an issue of ability. He's not making up numbers.
Earth calling!
Senate rejects Obama budget in 99-0 vote [thehill.com]
...
In a 99-0 vote, all of the senators present rejected the president’s blueprint.
It’s the second year in a row the Senate has voted down Obama’s budget.
Obama's 2012 budget failed 97 to 0 last May...
Two years in a row, Obama hasn't been able to get even ONE Democrat Senator to vote for his budget.
OMFG that's PATHETIC.
Re:Romney too. (Score:3, Interesting)
Tthe Race Card...now why didn't I see that coming?
Re:Romney too. (Score:0, Interesting)
Yes it is pathetic: the Republicans sponsored a bill that they called the president's budget when it of course was not, and it was unsurprisingly defeated 97-0. The 99-0 vote was a repeat of the same pathetic Republican political antics. You have to be stupid to believe that zero Democratic Senators would be willing to vote for an actual White House budget.
ROFLMAO. At you.
Yeah, right.
Harry Reid let that come to a vote, and no Republicans then voted for it?
What Earth do you live on? Does yours have a blue sky too?
Oh, yeah, get this:
Obama: If people read transcript, they’ll think I won last debate [washingtonexaminer.com]
Jeez, talk about a clueless "Hello, McFly!" moment.
Yeah, I want four more years of THAT.
Four more years of a President who has time to go on The View but doesn't have time to get intel briefs, doesn't know what's happening in Libya, Al Qaeda kills the US Ambassador, then Obumbles blames it on a tawdry video, then has to de facto admit to lying about it.
Yeah, I want four more years of THAT.
Tell me, how could a lobotomized Labrador do a worse job than THAT? You know that a lobotomized Labrador won't out-and-out LIE like that.
Re:Romney too. (Score:5, Interesting)
More accurately, the American governmental structure has failed in this age of computer generated gerrymandering and microtargeted "news" networks and sites. The voters hear only what reinforces their exiting biases and elect representatives to resist the "evil" of the other side, not compromise. The House can pass fully partisan bills with no cooperation from the minority party so it appears to function, but since the legislation passed in the House can't be passed in the Senate then the House's efforts are only for show. If the House passed more bi-partisan bills, then they may have a chance in the Senate. The Senate has its problems from arcane rules, most glaringly that a minority (and sometimes a single Senator) can block any progress at all. This is all exacerbated by the "winner take all" type of elections the US has where a winner of an election by 50.1% can govern like he got a mandate -- the poster child for this was the first term of GW Bush, who won election with fewer total votes than the loser but governed like he had got 80% of the vote -- his VP famously said, "Elections have consequences". There is no incentive for any lawmaker to compromise any more. The federal system is totally broken. Interestingly, California may have found a way out of this disaster with their new primary system which rewards centrists, we'll see...