OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

Too Political

Entry 555, on 2007-06-15 at 19:22:19 (Rating 4, Politics)

Does it make any sense to accuse a politician of being too political? Would we chastise a scientist for being too scientific, or a poet for being too poetic? Well the question answers itself really, because of the use of the word "too". As soon as I use that word I immediately imply something taken to the extent of being negative so the answer will always be yes. Maybe the question should be what is a reasonable limit of political behaviour for a politician.

This rather confusing introduction leads me to the main topic of this blog entry. It has been a while since I dissed President Bush, so its time I remedied that situation.

Recently I have been listening to a lot of science podcasts, and environmental issues - especially global warming - have been prominent. The programs are careful not to specifically criticise the American administration, and the Republicans and the president aren't mentioned specifically, but its surprising (or maybe its not) how often there is an implication of blame.

For example, there are many comments like "this has been a problem for the last 6 years", or "this has improved since the last elections", or "this might get better with the next administration change". The message is strong that the two terms of the Bush presidency have been disastrous for science, some medical research, ecology, and global warming in particular.

Even the responses which superficially seem good are often questionable. For example, supporting the use of ethanol from corn as an alternative to petrol (gasoline) is not necessarily such a great idea because some studies indicate ethanol produces worse pollution than petrol, and it also forces up the global price of corn as a food. If he was more interested in following real science and less interested in boosting the fortunes of a right-wing lobby group (the farmers) the president's emphasis might have been different.

Of course, we can't blame Bush for all of this because he is really just a figurehead for the forces which are working behind the scenes. It would be giving him away too much credit to suggest that he is personally responsible for the recent policies. But he is the president and doesn't mind accepting the kudos when things go well. He must also accept the criticism from those of us who think he's too political.

There are no comments for this entry.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.