We normally think of scientific reports as objective discourse. The idea of peer review is to keep ideology at bay. Of course, that is not entirely possible in as much as science has its biases, but the effort is made to avoid egregious errors and bias. That is important in a modernist, democratic society that makes significant social policy decisions based on scientific evidence. However, with the Bush Administration, it appears that ideology rules and the effects of social policy ignored.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is a lawyer specializing in environmental law. In his recent article in The Nation, Kennedy documents the White House's intrusion into research and its effects on the environment. It is a classic example of newspeak (Wspeak) wherein good is bad and bad is good. In case after case Kennedy shows how the government has literally rewritten the science to benefit industry--particularly those industries that contribute to the Republican/Bush war chest.

Kennedy concludes, in part, with these thoughts:

The very leaders who so often condemn the trend toward moral relativism are fostering and encouraging the trend toward scientific relativism. The very ideologues who derided Bill Clinton as a liar have now institutionalized dishonesty and made it the reigning culture of America's federal agencies. . . . Says Princeton University scientist Michael Oppenheimer, "If you believe in a rational universe, in enlightenment, in knowledge and in a search for the truth, this White House is an absolute disaster."

Read the entire article at
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040308&s=kennedy