At least the Democrats haven’t carried it into government policy, at least judging by the examples in the linked article.
Only because they haven’t been in power long enough.
Have you noticed, Rand, that much of your criticism of Obama boils down to “he hasn’t revealed his true evil self yet, but just you wait!”? I suspect we’ll be waiting a long time.
Obama has real scientists (like Chu and Holdren) at the top of his administration. They’re the last people I can see having much patience for the sort of new age anti-science beliefs described in that article.
Well, the adminstration recently classified all data on atmospheric explosions, which had up until now had been of great value to scientists studying meteor impacts.
One example right from the get-go. Bush, and other moderate Republicans and center-right politicians want ethical restraints on science. Democrats want science to say what they want, and if it doesn’t, then it must be changed to fit the politics.
What, exactly, is political (much less Democratic) about the military classifying atmospheric explosions? Does the Democratic party have a position on meteor impacts?
The GOP, on the other hand, definitely has a position on anthropogenic climate change, and they used their executive power to influence science in that area. “Ethical restraint” had nothing to do with it.
The GOP, on the other hand, definitely has a position on anthropogenic climate change, and they used their executive power to influence science in that area.
They did? How and when was that?
The only efforts I’ve ever seen trying to influence science re AGW/ACC have been by the Gullible Warmeningists trying to drive skeptics out of their jobs for daring to doubt.
Jim,
By the way you write I would say that you are an intelligent and educated person. Please, please tell me that you are paid to write the drivel you do so often on this site (or that you are just trying to antagonize Rand).
They did? How and when was that?
Click my name for some examples.
Steven Andrew’s article is far too soft on the left.
From the left, we have gotten hysterical opposition to nuclear power, fearmongering about genetically engineered crops, complaints that space exploration takes money away from the children, and vicious opposition to for-profit pharmaceutical research.
All of these horrendous ideas have influenced public policy; some have dominated it. And all of them are inescapably associated with the Democratic Party. Republican doubts about anthropogenic global warming are utterly trivial by comparison, and Republican opposition to stem-cell research has been obviated by new developments.
At least the Democrats haven’t carried it into government policy, at least judging by the examples in the linked article.
Only because they haven’t been in power long enough.
Have you noticed, Rand, that much of your criticism of Obama boils down to “he hasn’t revealed his true evil self yet, but just you wait!”? I suspect we’ll be waiting a long time.
Obama has real scientists (like Chu and Holdren) at the top of his administration. They’re the last people I can see having much patience for the sort of new age anti-science beliefs described in that article.
Well, the adminstration recently classified all data on atmospheric explosions, which had up until now had been of great value to scientists studying meteor impacts.
One example right from the get-go. Bush, and other moderate Republicans and center-right politicians want ethical restraints on science. Democrats want science to say what they want, and if it doesn’t, then it must be changed to fit the politics.
What, exactly, is political (much less Democratic) about the military classifying atmospheric explosions? Does the Democratic party have a position on meteor impacts?
The GOP, on the other hand, definitely has a position on anthropogenic climate change, and they used their executive power to influence science in that area. “Ethical restraint” had nothing to do with it.
The GOP, on the other hand, definitely has a position on anthropogenic climate change, and they used their executive power to influence science in that area.
They did? How and when was that?
The only efforts I’ve ever seen trying to influence science re AGW/ACC have been by the Gullible Warmeningists trying to drive skeptics out of their jobs for daring to doubt.
Jim,
By the way you write I would say that you are an intelligent and educated person. Please, please tell me that you are paid to write the drivel you do so often on this site (or that you are just trying to antagonize Rand).
They did? How and when was that?
Click my name for some examples.
Steven Andrew’s article is far too soft on the left.
From the left, we have gotten hysterical opposition to nuclear power, fearmongering about genetically engineered crops, complaints that space exploration takes money away from the children, and vicious opposition to for-profit pharmaceutical research.
All of these horrendous ideas have influenced public policy; some have dominated it. And all of them are inescapably associated with the Democratic Party. Republican doubts about anthropogenic global warming are utterly trivial by comparison, and Republican opposition to stem-cell research has been obviated by new developments.