double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs vietnamese seafood double-skinned crabs mud crab exporter double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs crabs crab exporter soft shell crab crab meat crab roe mud crab sea crab vietnamese crabs seafood food vietnamese sea food double-skinned crab double-skinned crab soft-shell crabs meat crabs roe crabs
Opinion

OH, NO! POLITICS – IN WASHINGTON!

This just in: The Bush administration has a political agenda.

Such is the latest discovery of Rep. Henry Waxman’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which has spent the last several months holding hearing after hearing with the purpose of embarrassing the White House.

On Tuesday, the committee entertained Richard Carmona, President Bush’s former surgeon general, who accused the administration of hindering his research and screening his public speaking for political and ideological reasons, particularly on issues like sex education and stem-cell research.

Democrats on the committee played their part perfectly. Yet another instance, they cried, of the president letting “politics” trump “science.”

Well, what did they expect?

Bush has strong convictions on all sorts of issues where public morality intersects with scientific inquiry. Surely Carmona knew that. And if he really felt that restricted, he was free to quit.

Instead, he joined with two other former surgeons general to argue for more power for the office.

But let’s back up for a moment. The truth is, politics does have a role in public science. Should a surgeon general devote his or her energy (and budget) to studying the dangers of trans-fats, for example, or the spread of infectious diseases? The answer depends on a prudential judgment as to which issue is more important – and what the policy implications might be.

You know, the kind of decision politicans are elected to make.

You can agree or disagree with Bush on policy.

But, at best, Waxman has presented anecdotes as evidence that the Bush administration is heavy-handed. Wow.

Doesn’t he have better things to do?