Midwest Chick's Place

 Scientific American lost its science cred a while back, but damn, they’ve truly jumped the shark in their propagandizing for Kamala.  Get this:

As the daughter of a cancer researcher, Kamala Harris would bring a lifelong familiarity with science to the presidency, experts say

One wonders who the experts are.

The comments regarding this article gathered up by Twitchy point out the lunacy.   Head over there and check them out.  

One good thing about the Scientific American piece is that it points out all of the reasons NOT to vote for Harris.

As senator, Harris co-sponsored efforts to improve the diversity of the science, technology, engineering and medicine (STEM) workforce. She introduced legislation to aid students from underrepresented populations to obtain jobs and work experience in STEM fields. 

…

she endorsed a universal single-payer national health insurance system

…

In 2019, Harris co-sponsored legislation that would have created an independent agency to determine appropriate drug prices.

…

Last December, she launched a nationwide reproductive freedoms tour, in which she became the first US vice-president to ever visit an abortion provider.

…

Harris is expected to maintain both the momentum and the unprecedented investments that Biden has injected into the climate movement in the United States. This includes upwards of US$1 trillion in funding for clean energy and climate change over a decade,

In addition to being the Border Czar, apparently she is also oversees the National Space Council which includes the Artemis project (did it ever get off the ground, literally?).

Regardless, I’m pretty sure that, even though Kamala’s mom was a cancer researcher, it doesn’t make Kamala more scientifically minded, especially considering that she went into criminal justice and all, no matter what Scientific American publishes.