What a McCain win could mean for technology and science
By Leslie Poston
McCain has less of a technology policy than a “hands off” policy to the way the internet works. Believing in a free and self directed market, the McCain doctrine is one of letting the market direct the need. Is this a true policy, or just a reflection of a man who doesn’t understand technology? Only the McCain camp knows for sure.
Whereas Obama’s technology and science policies lend themselves to clarity and a simple structure, McCain’s are a bit more murky. McCain tends to take a hand’s off stance on technology. This worked for politicians who did not quit grasp the complexities of technology and science and their ramifications for society in the past, but it is no longer sufficient to say you have a “hands off” or “free market” technology policy.
Reliance on Tried and True
McCain and his camp seem to be relying on tried and true methods of campaigning: robo calls, smear tactics, rallies, stump speeches and more. There isn’t anything wrong with tradition, but keeping things old school doesn’t reflect a grasp of his opponent’s campaign strategy. Toss in the under-informed and lightly experienced Governor from Alaska and you have some serious mucking up of the works. If you as a candidate can’t innovate in your campaign to win something as large as the Presidency, how can we trust you to innovate while in office?
Candidate in the Pocket of Telcos
McCain’s lack of overall understanding of the core issues of technology and science, coupled with his inability to rely on key support staff (witness his suspension of his campaign for a simple economic crisis vote instead of leaving it in the hands of his vice presidential nominee) leads to his siding in favor of big telecommunications monopolies and against consumers on many issues under the disguise of a “free market”.
In a better economy this would not be such a big deal. In the face of a severe recession; however, it behooves a candidate to innovate and encourage technology as a way out of a national crisis. A candidate who does not “get” technology or how it impacts daily life and information dissemination is operating at a severe handicap that could potentially cause the nation grave harm if elected.
Science vs Religion
McCain’s tied to the far right, especially as evidenced by his undereducated and willfully obtuse running mate Sarah Palin, call into question his future contribution to advancements in science, research and development. In the pockets of big oil and pharmaceuticals, McCain does not inspire hope for change or improvement on this front. It is highly likely that science programs would suffer under a McCain presidency.
Partially this is caused by too much “hands off” and not enough “all hands on deck” as far as technology and science policies go. McCain does no believe in enforcing network neutrality, nor does he believe that innovative research like that dealing with stem cells and cancer deserve our national attention, support or encouragement. At time it seems he would rather see us floundering in the dark ages instead of on the cusp of a new ideal for technology and science to do actual social good.
Perspective
“The next president, with his power of appointment to the Federal Communications Commission and other agencies which bear on our media, will wield tremendous influence over its trajectory at a time of incredibly rapid and formative change,” PhD candidate Russell Newman said. Keep in mind that even six years ago McCain’s inability to listen to advisors on technology and his ignorance would not have raised the same red flags it does today. In today’s politics, where citizen journalism and extreme user participation have become the norm, a candidate simply can’t get away with that level of ignorance, much less with not really having a solid plan for technology and science. This means that under McCain the future of technology would be less certain.
Related:
Entry was posted
on Saturday, November 1st, 2008 at 5:17 am
under
Read more entries by Leslie Poston.
Stumble It!
November 1st, 2008
Pretty clear the leftist leanings here at Blorge. Can any of you write an OBJECTIVE article?
Its clearly not any chief executive’s (or President’s) role to make tech policy. Their job is to provide leadership, something your darling has shown absolutely NONE of in his political life.
November 2nd, 2008
One of the biggest piles of crap I have read in years. First election? If not, I fear for our country.
One Carter in a lifetime is enough. Take away the illogical “Eight years” and all the Mcsame stuff is Political Science for 2 year olds. If Gore had won I guess 9/11, the dotbomb crash, Katerina wouldn’t have happened. Of course President Gore would have no doubt tightened the criteria for low income home loans.
Suddenly, making an inhospitable environment for business and closing “loopholes” is a good environment for job creation. Raise capital gains tax so the people with money to invest do it elsewhere.
Funny how when Bush was running on tax breaks it was going to drop us into a Depression. Remember, he was going to be the first President to lose net jobs since Hoover? Strange coincidence he was also the last President to raise taxes and impose a surcharge during a poor economy.
Believe that the $500 or $1000 Obama plans to hand out to people earned from someone elses work is going “Save their homes, send their child to college and ensure a comfortable retirement.”
I propose a contest to test the candidates on areas they are weak in. McCain has knowledge in flying Military Aircraft, while Obama is better versed in computer use. Let’s put them to the test by letting Obama land a jet and McCain do a web search. Obama first.
I can’t wait to see an Obama administration with a Reid-Polosi Congress. Do yourself a favor and do a search for speeches by Presidential candidates from the non-incumbent Party. You are going to see the same basic points. Change the culture in Washington. Take it back from special interests. Cut waste. Be bipartisan. Blah..Blah. It’s only new if your have a poor understanding of what historically common themes are universally spouted by out of power Partys. All Obama knows how to do is inflame his base when he is criticized.
Getting crap about not knowing the situation on the ground in Iraq because you haven’t been there for two years? People are saying you’re too inexperienced in foreign affairs?
Spend ten minutes with the troops, like it was busy work, and play head of state in an incredibly egotistical JFK imitation to throngs of delirious Europeans. Never mind they can’t vote. Or consider what your action does to inflame anti-US sentiment if you should lose the election. I’m watching him bash Fox in a many of his speeches and trying to imagine what he could possibly be thinking. His base shake in ecstasy when he does it , just like his Euro-tour.
The problem is, Senator you already have those votes. It’s the millions of people in that you need you are ridiculing.
You computer is generating a reality distortion field. As far as I can tell, Bush didn’t sign NAFTA or the DMCA. Or let Microsoft off easy. Gore/Clinton had no energy policy or anything on climate change. Clinton treated terrorism as a law enforcement event. Bin Laden figured a few missile lobs and posturing was all that would happen, speaking of failed policies.
Stop mindlessly spitting out Presidential Idol campaign rubbish. If you take all the stupid McCain=Bush stuff and the impossible “prove a negative” about failed policies, he has nothing. Ignorance of economics and a public that reads less than a book a year, who have no idea who the speaker of the house is, and who think cotton candy, rehashed class warfare slogans are new and fresh.
November 4th, 2008
Ken, DavidB, you two are idiots. Get your heads out of your @sses before I use my plunger to do it for you.