I posted this earlier in a thread where people didn't read up on their sources or information, but I thought this was worthy of it's own thread.
The claim that Republicans are anti science is a claim born of ignorance. I hope you enjoy the video, and comment.
English
#Offtopic
-
Edited by Hoggs Bison: 2/12/2013 12:11:48 AMBest I could get are these [url=http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/12/04/science/dotearth.spending1.jpg]two[/url] [url=http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/12/04/science/dotearth.spending2.jpg]charts.[/url] Funding is at a pretty steady pace under Eisenhower, then skyrockets and drops a little under Kennedy and Johnson. Nixon and Ford hold it pretty steady. It ticks up under Carter and drops steeply under Reagan. It then starts a steady climb under Bush Sr. and Clinton. Bush Jr. picks up the pace. The overall trend is upwards. In total, from 1953 - 2009, Republicans held the White house for 36 years, while Democrats held it for 20-- a difference of roughly 30%. But here's the real question: does it even matter? What about outside events? We had the Space Race in the 60's, for example. We were at war (in a cold way) with the Soviet Union, and the only way to win was to out-science them. How about the health of the economy? The first couple years of the 80's saw a severe recession. We recently experienced the worst crisis since the Great Depression. And while the president must sign the budget into law, it's Congress that even appropriates funding in the first place.