Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama admin skewers GOP attack on stimulus cocaine monkeys

Are your stimulus dollars really being wasted on getting monkeys high on crack and cocaine?

In recent days, select Republicans and conservatives have taken to bashing the Obama administration over this claim. Sharron Angle has blasted Dems for giving money to "coked-up stimulus monkeys," and many others on the right have taken a similar tack.

Turns out, however, that this money is actually being spent on research into how to treat drug addiction in humans. And the Obama administration is going on record forcefully defending the project, sending over a statement pointing out that drug addiction is a rather serious problem and wondering whether GOP critics would prefer that we experiment on humans instead.

In case you missed it, senators John McCain and Tom Coburn got a lot of attention the other day when they issued a report alleging all kinds of ludicrous stimulus waste.

One bullet point in the report that got a ton of attention: "Monkeys Getting High for Science."

The McCain/Coburn report claimed this was a reference to a Federal grant of $71,623 to the Winston-Salem college to "study how monkeys react under cocaine."

And that's true. But the report didn't tell you why the monkeys' reaction to cocaine is being studied: To develop our understanding of how the brain chemistry of addiction works, in order to better combat drug addiction.

Administration officials say this grant was part of the roughly $8 billion in stimulus grants that the National Institutes of Health has doled out for scientific research, with the goal of creating jobs while advancing scientific knowledge. This particular grant is based on recent studies showing that drug users may get addicted because of a chemical in the brain called glutamate.

This research on cocaine monkeys is meant to determine how the parts of the brain that use glutamate change during and after exposure to cocaine. The idea is that knowing this will help develop more effective treatments for cocaine addiction -- in people, not in monkeys.

All such grants are reviewed by NIH scientists to establish the scientific validity of the studies receiving funding.

"Clearly, drug addiction is a serious problem facing our country, and finding new medical treatments is a high priority," NIH director Francis Collins tells me. "I don't know if the critics want us to experiment with humans, or just give up on the problem of drug addiction, but we aren't going to do either."

And indeed, it does appear that critics of this grant money either think we shouldn't be studying drug addiction at all or would prefer that we carry out such experiments on humans.

UPDATE, 11:23 a.m.: Here's another point to consider: Orrin Hatch recently called for the drug testing of recipients of unemployment benefits, on the theory that it would get people off drugs, turn them into productive members of society, and combat the debt. So you'd think these folks would embrace studies designed to reduce drug addiction -- for the sake of our economic well being.

UPDATE, 3:13 p.m.: John Hart, a spokesman for Senator Coburn, responds:

This post misses the most important question. How many jobs did this project create? According to our estimate, which was reported by CBS, .4 percent of a job (salary) was created at a cost of $144,000. The stimulus was supposed stimulate economic activity and this project has failed in that regard.

On the less important question. Was it unfair to not do more to emphasize the good intentions of the researchers? Absolutely not. Americans are intelligent and they implicitly understand that all research is conducted for the purpose of benefitting humanity, however tangential, circuitous and duplicative the approach may be. The administration is being characteristically thin-skinned to expect us to lavish praise on the researchers' good intentions. Could giving monkeys cocaine lead to groundbreaking treatments for humans? Perhaps. Could the money have been better spent elsewhere in order to stimulate the economy? Absolutely.

By Greg Sargent  |  August 5, 2010; 11:05 AM ET
Categories:  Senate Republicans , economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: Is Obama's position on gay marriage sustainable?

Comments

The GOP hates science. Shocking.

It would be funny to see Reid go up with an ad claiming the Angle is pro-human experimentation. Considering how extreme a candidate she already is...I bet that the voters of NV would believe it.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | August 5, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Considering that the GOP is currently led by a junkie (Rush Limbaugh) I'm wondering if their dislike of this program has more to do with wanting the drugs for themselves than being fiscally conservative. snark/

Posted by: nisleib | August 5, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Someone should tell the GOP that drug makers will make tons of $$$ if a drug is developed to treat addiction.

GOP doesnt like to fund prevention bcause all the money is in treatment, Corburn should know this, or at least be aware of it since he's a trained physician.

Posted by: vmrg1974 | August 5, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Why do Republicans HATE SCIENCE?

Oh right, they don't understand that the modern world is a result of literally thousands of years of development from stone tools to agriculture to modern medicine.

They think God created the Earth and human beings 4 weeks ago.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 5, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

They know their base relies on one book alone for guidance on everything.

If it's not written in that book, it's a target for jokes.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 5, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

I can't decide if the entire Republican party resembles more accurately Nelson from the Simpsons or Biff in Back to the Future.

Bullies who can only make fun of smart people, and take advantage of them, because they don't have any ideas or brains.

God, it's so boring.

Posted by: BGinCHI | August 5, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

See, the problem with R's on this issue, and on most of their dog whistle issues (marriage equality, carbon reform, taxes, defense, immigration, Palin, etc) is that even discussing them in an intelligent way is impossible.

Debating with the conservatives is akin to wrestling with a pig; you get dirty and the pig likes it.

Posted by: raincntry | August 5, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

raincntry, FTW.

I'd also guess the right thinks Orwell's Animal Farm is about an actual farm.

Posted by: BGinCHI | August 5, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

The republicans are grabbing at anything they can to promote their negativity. Keep in mind they also do not support stem cell research.
Their irresponsible, unAmerican behavior, undying support for Wall St and the rich over our welfare are taking them down the path of becoming our country's most dangerous domestic terrorists.

Posted by: kathlenec | August 5, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

@TheBBQChickenMadness: "The GOP hates science. Shocking."

I think that may be an oversimplification. It's just that "coked-up stimulus monkeys" is such a great phrase. And you've got to admit it's a great phrase.

@Ethan2010: "They think God created the Earth and human beings 4 weeks ago."

Yeah, that's exactly what we believe. We're all Creationists. And, of course, we all HATE SCIENCE because it involves NUMBERS and SCIENTIFIC STUFF that we find confusing because we're all stupid.

*Please note, the above was sarcasm. All Republicans do not, in fact, believe that the Earth and human beings were created 4 weeks ago, and my agreement with the absurd proposition was meant to gently lampoon, rather than actually agree with the content, which I find cliched and shallow.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 5, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

@BGinCHI

"I'd also guess the right thinks Orwell's Animal Farm is about an actual farm."

...they also think '1984' was a how-to guide.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | August 5, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Monkeys need not become addicted.

The treatment of cocaine addiction has been available for more than a decade. NIDA's Richard Rothman has been writing about the basic theory, the dual deficit model of addiction. http://xrl.in/611i

A simple protocol that utilizes the precursors of dopamine and serotonin stops cocaine craving close to universally and in minutes. http://preview.xrl.in/611j. This PURSOR protocol also manages depression and anxiety.

My approach hit a brick wall when the Federal government sent me to jail because my first protocol used non-addictive diet pills to manage drug addiction.

PHARMA does not appreciate ideas that could threaten their $10B market for anxiolytics and antidepressants.

BTW, I introduced Rothman to this novel paradigm close to 20 years ago.

Pietr Hitzig

Posted by: phitz | August 5, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

American taxpayers, how are your tax dollars being squandered by President Obama in the name of “Stimulus?” Would you believe that they have found Stimulus money being used to study the effects of how monkeys react under the influence of cocaine? No way. How ’bout $1.9 million of your tax dollars to listen to foreign Ants? Sound real? What about $296,385 of your tax dollars being used to study dog domestication? Too crazy to believe? Right wing fear mongering? Would you believe $141,002 to study “dinosaur eggs and other fossils” in China?

Guess how many jobs this one created according to the President’s own web site recovery.gov? ZERO.

Obama = Moron-In-Thief

Posted by: NO-bama | August 5, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Love the comment about palinista conservatives thinking Animal Farm was an actual farm......

Angle is making palin look like a genius. Hard to do for anyone who can actually read and has made it passed 3rd grade.

Posted by: John1263 | August 5, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Oh wait Kevin_Willis.

I left out an asterisk indicating that I was being sarcastic.

You are not serious in your comments and I wish you would stop pretending that you want to have a meaningful discussion.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 5, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Debating republicons is like wrestling a pig

or arguing with a drunk

or trying to explain physics to a 5 year old

or tying to argue someone into believing a religious faith

or talking to a wall and waiting for a response

The problem is that these trolls think they should be running the greatest nation on earth when they can't even tell the difference between a human being and a monkey......

Posted by: John1263 | August 5, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I find it sad that funding for drug dependency takes a back seat to the usual political grand-standing. How far back in time do we have to go for them to be satisfied? The lack of funding for scientific research is almost criminal considering all the health and environmental dangers facing our society.

Anecdotally, some of you know my youngest is off to grad school Monday. She has two bachelors, one in chemistry and one in geology and has worked for three years in water related issues. She was accepted at two colleges back east to do state of the art research in ground water but their funding dried up because of the recession. So she's doing her research in oil instead, plenty of funding there. It's pertinent to water as well but not where her interest or talent lies, or remotely as important.

It's time for America to wake up and join the 21st. Century, but I guess we'll have to bring Republicans along kicking and screaming.

Posted by: lmsinca | August 5, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse

NO-bama, you don't have any idea how scientific inquiry works, do you?

How many crops are destroyed each year by invasive insect species? Any idea?

No, you don't.

Go sit at the kids' table until you can act like a grown-up.

Posted by: BGinCHI | August 5, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

John1263, I can tell the difference between a human being and a monkey. Did YOU read these two sentences from above: "The McCain/Coburn report claimed this was a reference to a Federal grant of $71,623 to the Winston-Salem college to 'study how monkeys react under cocaine.' And that's true."?

Posted by: clawrence12 | August 5, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

The world isn't 4 weeks old, it's 6,000 years old. All those multimillion year old fossils and old hominid or man-made stone tools we keep finding are a conspiracy by atheists to discredit the Bible and Christianity.
I believe the atheists get together at night and go out and dig deep holes to bury these things in, then wait a week or two to notify scientists of where to look for them.
Well, time for my psychiatrist appointment, then off to church for the twenty-seventh time this week, then I spend the rest of the day watching Fox News in between hits off my crack pipe.

Posted by: meand2 | August 5, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

ALMOST criminal, lmsinca, especially when you ignore that the Constitution does not give the federal government the power to tax for this purpose at all.

Posted by: clawrence12 | August 5, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

I heard there was government money being spent to study mold! Seriously, the exact same kind of mold you get when you forget about something and leave it in the refrigerator too long. Disgusting mold slime.

They're calling it "penicillin." And supposedly this mold slime will save millions of lives.

What a waste!

Posted by: theorajones1 | August 5, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Kinda sounds like desperation on the part of McLame and Co. They really have no sense of shame anymore. Congrats, y'all- the party of "morality" has chucked it all for a few pieces of silver. Well done.

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | August 5, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

How about this latest GOP smear:

Fox News, for example, ran a piece from University of Notre Dame law professor Gerard Bradley, who expressed concern about the lack of attention paid "to one very troubling aspect of the case." (via A.L.)

This is the question of the judge's bias due to his possible interest in which side wins the case. [...]

Battalions of commentators have wondered about his bizarre handling of the case, and many have attributed it to Walker's belief that it is unjust for the law to limit marriage to opposite-sex couples.

Nor is the neglected bias related to the fact that (as several newspapers have reported) the judge is openly gay.

Of course, Walker's opinions about marriage and sexual preference could be related to his own homosexuality.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_08/025059.php

Absolutely SHAMELESS.

These are your people Kevin Willis.

For that matter, where is sbj?

Posted by: cmccauley60 | August 5, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Ya know...

Something about this GOP line of attack just struck me.

Monkeys. Cocaine/crack.

Is this another subtle racial attack?

Is it a response to a reduction in mandatory crack sentencing guidelines?

I wouldn't put it past the Republican Tea Party and their Southern Strategy. Something to think about. Imho, it clearly is in the realm of possibility that this story is another dog whistle type comment by the GOP.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 5, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Wow, this thread is helping me make some HUGE deposits into my Sarcasm Bank.

Thanks ya'all, and keep up the snark!

Posted by: nisleib | August 5, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Glutamate overproduction is also a factor is ALS, I believe.

Posted by: CalD | August 5, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Very funny, meand2 (although there have been fossil hoaxes). No "Intelligent Design" scientist is claiming you go out at night at bury stuff. If you really want to read about some of the questions about carbon dating:

http://mrcapwebpage.com/VCSBIBLE/creationlesson8doesntcarbon14datingdisprovethebible.html

http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/topic/radiometric-dating

Posted by: clawrence12 | August 5, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Hey Kevin Willis ... you're in Tennessee, right? How do you feel about Basil Marceaux? Is he one of the GOP you can't wait to vote for?

"And yet the wonderful thing about Marceaux is that he does represent a core constituency. Aren't his views on gun-control identical to Glenn Reynolds'? Isn't his nostalgia for the Jim Crow south one strand of Southern conservatism that now dominates the GOP? Aren't his views part of what Palin calls the "real America"? It seems to me the right cannot have it both ways. If this man's views make him a joke, then why isn't the GOP as a whole a joke?"

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/08/basil-marceaux-for-governor-ctd.html

These are your people KW.

Posted by: cmccauley60 | August 5, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

cmccauley60 - Basil Marceaux has GOT to be a liberal plant or a performance artists of some kind. Nobody is that... dense.

I swear every time I see him I think he is pretending to be Officer Barbrady (from Southpark.)

But come on, the Dems have their wack-a-doodles too. Alving Greene ring a bell?

Posted by: nisleib | August 5, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

All, my take on Obama, gay marriage, and prop 8:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/08/is_obamas_position_on_gay_marr.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | August 5, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

@BBQChicken: "...they also think '1984' was a how-to guide."

Actually, most folks on the mid-to-far right thing 1984 is Orwell's prediction about the Obama administration, and that Animal Farm is an allegory for how liberals use entitlements to slowly enslave a free country.

@cmccauley60: "How do you feel about Basil Marceaux? Is he one of the GOP you can't wait to vote for?"

Basic Marceaux is a fruitcake. He is sort of appealing, for that reason, but, no, I'm not going to vote for him. In any case, he's not going to win the primary. In any case, I might vote for the Democrat. I voted for Phil Bredesen last time, though I think he's term-limited out, this time around.

"These are your people KW."

Is Lyndon LaRouche "your people", because he calls himself a Democrat? For that matter, is Zell Miller "your people"?

But an interestingly divisive choice of words.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 5, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

"But come on, the Dems have their wack-a-doodles too. Alving Greene ring a bell?"

Is that the best you can do? Alvin Greene may be simpleminded, but nothing he's said comes close to the idiocy being spewed by dozens of GOP/teabag candidates.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | August 5, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

OK clawrence12, I am aware of the questions/problems with carbon dating. I am also aware that there is not a shred of scientific evidence for intelligent design, whether some "scientists" claim to believe in it or not. Any credible scientist will tell you to check your beliefs at the door the moment you enter research.
I know something happened to create this universe and this world, but at this point scientists are still studying and theorizing. The fact is I enjoy studying both science and history as hobbies, and one cannot study human history without studying religion.
I poked fun at the idea that the Earth is only 6,000 years old because there is massive evidence that it's been here much longer and outside certain religious texts, which by the way are subject to interpretation, absolutely no evidence to the contrary. I'm not an atheist either.

Posted by: meand2 | August 5, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

@cmcaulley: "These are your people Kevin Willis."

Why so divisive, cmcaulley? Why the "them" vs. "us" mentality?

It's okay, if that's how you want to roll. I'm not judging you. Just curious.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 5, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

clawrence12, I think it's generally called public education. I suppose it's fine with you that our public universities are lacking in both funding and therefore scientific research. If Chevron wants to waste their money on my daughter (not their opinion, but it sounds like yours) let them. Vermont and Delaware can do without her expertise or training to provide clean water to a neighborhood near you. Feel free to revel in short-sighted ignorance.

Posted by: lmsinca | August 5, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

@nisleib: "But come on, the Dems have their wack-a-doodles too. Alving Greene ring a bell?"

Far be it for me to defend a Democrat, but Alvin Greene is awesome. Has Basil Marceaux ever suggested that the way to re-energize the economy is to make action figures of himself?

And, in all fairness, Democrats were all over Alvin Greene, giving him and his eccentricities national exposure, where as I'm pretty sure the GOP is just ignoring Basic Marceaux, in the hopes that he'll just go away, without them having to take any kind of stand on anything.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 5, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

It's hardly "ignorant" to obey the Constitution.

Posted by: clawrence12 | August 5, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Kevin - No, Basil hasn't suggested such a thing. But if you caught him on Jimmy Kimmel he did say that everybody should be required to carry a gun at all times and that he would fine anybody caught without a gun $10.

I'm conflicted about both Basil and Alvin. On the one hand I'm a firm believer that every US citizen should be able to run for office. On the other hand just listening to them makes me feel embarrassed for them.

Posted by: nisleib | August 5, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

I think Angle, McCain, Coburn, Hatch, et al. should declare themselves Amish and refuse any modern medical treatment.

Unless if they are hypocrites.

Posted by: kishorgala | August 5, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

The simple reality here is that "coked-up stimulus monkeys" has to be one of the best political turns of phrases since "walking the Appalachian trail." The White House is dumb to bicker this point because any discussion of the project, no matter how legitimate, is only going to impress "coked-up stimulus monkeys" into more people's brains. Just like with "Bridge to Nowhere," you cannot argue with a clever turn of phrase.

Coked-up stimulus monkeys...Harry Reid...coked-up stimulus monkeys...Harry Reid...coked-up stimulus monkeys...Barack Obama. There, just by repeating that mantra, Reid probably lost a percent of the vote in Nevada, and Democrats probably lost a tenth of a percent nationwide.

Posted by: blert | August 5, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

1. Congress struck down a measure that would drug test members of Congress. So it's okay to test the unemployed (with no reasonable cause for suspicion) but not members of Congress?

2. Making higher primates get addicted to cocaine and then studying them (captivity, restraints, invasive procedures) is cruel.

3. There are thousands, if not millions, of humans (for whose health the study was designed) ALREADY addicted to cocaine we could study and provide treatment to.

4. Is this really a question in need of answering? Don't we understand what this drug does well enough to provide the treatment people need? But we don't even provide drug treatment as an approach to the problem. Only a $50,000/year jail cell.

Congress should go vegetarian and give up the PORK.

Posted by: iskelton1 | August 5, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Reminds me of a conversation I had with a scientist at Wake Forest University (in Winston-Salem). The guy studies addiction in animals, basically for the same purpose. Their Congressman is Virginia Foxx, a conservative Republican.

So the scientist's department wanted Foxx to get funding for the department so that they can work on studying the disease. Foxx didn't want to, because in her professional opinion, people can just quit doing drugs any time they want and it's not a disease. So the scientists in the department gave her an hour long presentation on how drug addiction modifies brain chemistry and how it leads to physical dependence and so forth. After all that, she did not change her mind.

Then the head of the department spoke up and said that Wake Forest University is the biggest employer in the district (NC-5) and losing funding would mean the loss of jobs. She then agreed to get the earmark. Nothing to do with the validity of the science. She just wanted to bring home the pork.

Someone should ask Congressman Foxx what she thinks about the coke-monkeys.

Posted by: DDAWD | August 5, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Experiment on people FIRST. I nominate that McCain, Kyl, Cantor be first in line. Then if it's safe, experiment on monkeys!

Posted by: AMviennaVA | August 5, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

NO-bama @ August 5, 2010 11:53 AM wrote "Would you believe that they have found Stimulus money being used to study the effects of how monkeys react under the influence of cocaine? No way. How ’bout $1.9 million of your tax dollars to listen to foreign Ants? Sound real?"

It sounds rather necessary. For example, 'Japanese Beatles' were accidentally released here. Also, the last few years where I am we are having problems with Snakeheads and with an extremely annoying little bug that is everywhere (simply because it was accidentally released away from its native environment where thee are predators that feed on it).

In short, you post only shows tremendous ignorance. Revel in it if you wish, but do not try to spread it around.

Posted by: AMviennaVA | August 5, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Why must we research addiction? Anyone who is addicted or knows someone who is addicted simply has to pray to God for them to be cured.

Every good Republican knows God answers all prayers.....

Posted by: steve-2304 | August 5, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

This research is NOT helping humans, and it needs to end. Monkeys are poor models for human drug addiction due to genetic, physiological, and anatomical differences across species.

To learn more about drug abuse, we need to study human factors of abuse more closely. Forward-thinking researchers are already conducting ethical studies of humans who are already addicted to cocaine. Human-centered studies are far more informative than studies on animals.

Posted by: allisonjc | August 5, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

"To learn more about drug abuse, we need to study human factors of abuse more closely. Forward-thinking researchers are already conducting ethical studies of humans who are already addicted to cocaine. Human-centered studies are far more informative than studies on animals."

Yes, we shold experiment on drug addicts like George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck...

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | August 5, 2010 4:08 PM | Report abuse

"http://www.answersingenesis.org"

Now there is a reputable scientific site with no bias......yes, let's get all of our most complex questions answered here.

Posted by: steve-2304 | August 5, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan2010: "You are not serious in your comments and I wish you would stop pretending that you want to have a meaningful discussion."

You're funny.

@koolkat_1960: "Yes, we shold experiment on drug addicts like George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck..."

Oooh, snap! Testify!

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 5, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

The GOP is scientifically ignorant. They see science as a leftist plot. Why are they so anti-knowledge, and anti-intellectual? What a bunch of children. They never let facts get in the way of anything.

Posted by: jckdoors | August 5, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

If one wishes to study the effects of cocaine they need to look no further than the dear leader.

Posted by: leapin | August 5, 2010 4:38 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans don't want them to experimenting on anything, it takes away from the CIA's drug profits. And don't even bother telling me I'm wrong.

Posted by: HemiHead66 | August 5, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

so the issue i have with this is how this stimulates our economy.

Posted by: matt113 | August 6, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

To respond to John Hart: sometimes things we invest money in now results in economic stimulation later. If this meager job created researching how to treat drug addiction in humans results in thousands of jobs later - R&D, drug company creating and marketing a drug to treat addiction, etc., then it more than pays for itself.

Just like our investment in the space program in the 1950's and 60's ended up producing millions and millions of jobs...and the list of inventions that were directly related to that research is very long and distinguished...including the device I'm using to post this comment.

Posted by: jetrain | August 6, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Isn't Tom Coburn an MD? He should understand that government programs are needed for scientific research that may be highly beneficial, but has no immediate "profit" benefit that a private company might underwrite. He's worried that the program didn't "stimulate" enough growth in the economy? Has he never heard of the "trickle down" effect -- the idea that other jobs might trickle down from this one as the results are followed up on?

Posted by: MinnyMa | August 6, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Nice strawman, flamers....the point being, of course, that the so-called stimulus spending was to create jobs, not fund the arts.

What a worthless piece...keep apologizing and please do a follow-up piece on how that "hope and change" is working out for the 4 million Americans who have left their job in the face of this spending.

I'll take "Yes, we can" for $1,000, Alex.

Posted by: xxTerpxx | August 6, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

What's the problem? Even monkeys need occasional stimulus. If we spend another $70 grand, we could stimulate twice as many monkeys.

Or we could use that money to put someone to work repairing our crumbling infrastructure.

Posted by: publius29 | August 6, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company