Now he’s criticizing Obama for saying that sex ed should be “science-based.” Isn’t he smart enough to quit while he’s behind?
If Romney had run his business the way he pretends to want to run the country, he could run as what the press would consider an “authentic” advocate for the poor: that is, a pauper.
Not only does Romney believe in age-inappropriate sex education, Romney believes that sex ed should be unscientific as well.
Footnote In the unlikely case there are any RBC readers who are as gullible as Romney hopes they are, it should be noted that “science-based” in Obama’s comment doesn’t mean that we should be teaching kindergartners reproductive biology. (Presumably, whatever we do teach them should be as scientifically accurate as their minds can absorb.)
“Science-based” means that the curricula should be tested scientifically before they’re rolled out. What a concept!
Author: Mark Kleiman
Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out.
Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken)
When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist
Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993)
Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989)
View all posts by Mark Kleiman