Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AndyJackson
No administration could have been more ineffectual on the scientific front than the Bush administration.

I'm not trying to be a wiseguy, but in what ways was the Bush Administration ineffectual on the scientifc front?
51 posted on 12/24/2008 3:22:01 PM PST by Bishop_Malachi (Liberal Socialism - A philosophy which advocates spreading a low standard of living equally.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: Bishop_Malachi

A useless science advisor. A secretary of energy [DOE is mostly an R&D outfit for those who don’t know] who was the epitome of a do nothing Bush appointee. We agreed to dump zillions into ITER, as a sop to the French and Japanese in return for support on Iraq [sic], even though technically it is a bad idea. Bush adopted a reasonable policy on expanding nuclear energy but let his f-all useless minions drive it into the dirt because he was to far above the fray to kick some tail and fire folks who were unwilling to execute his programs. His science appointees have been about as useless and inept as his FEMA appointee in Katrina who didn’t even know what was on the news on CNN.


53 posted on 12/24/2008 5:13:37 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: Bishop_Malachi

PS On the global warming front, the approach was entirely ideological, to the point that a lot of the nonsense could have been put to rest had Bush insisted that we fund high quality research to try to understand whether it is an issue or not. Instead his administration fueled the flames by suppressing research activities as much as possible.


54 posted on 12/24/2008 5:15:57 PM PST by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson