Bobby Jindal: “Obama Is a Science Denier”

Buffoon Award

We haven’t had much to say lately about Louisiana’s creationist governor Bobby Jindal, also known as Bobby Jindal, the Exorcist. As you may recall, Jindal’s gyrations made him our sixth Buffoon Award Winner.

The last time we wrote about him was after he flat-out admitted that the Louisiana Science Education Act permits teaching creationism, and the Discovery Institute totally abandoned him (see Discoveroids: “Bobby Jindal? Who’s He?”).

Jindal has now earned his way back into our humble blog. In the Daily Reporter of Greenfield, Indiana, we found this: Louisiana governor says Obama administration hasn’t done enough to harness energy potential.

It’s not the headline that drew us to this story. It’s understandable that Jindal is a spokesman for the energy industry, because that’s a major factor in Louisiana, and of course the Obama administration is in bed with the environmentalists. We won’t bother with those issues. But take a look at the story’s opening paragraph. The bold font was added by us:

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said Tuesday that President Barack Obama’s administration has become “science deniers,” failing to do enough to harness the nation’s energy potential.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Can anything else in the article even come close to that? Well, somewhat. Jindal is quoted as saying this:

The reality is right now we’ve got an administration, the Obama administration, that are science deniers when it comes to harnessing America’s energy resources and potential to create good paying jobs.”

Not surprising. Jindal is a politician, so he’s as much a pawn of the energy industry as he is of the creationists. The amazing thing is that he seems unaware of the inconsistencies. Here’s one more excerpt, to give you something else to think about:

The 43-year-old governor and former congressman has sought to carve out a role as a leading policy mind as he considers a presidential campaign in 2016. Jindal told reporters at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor that there was “no reason to be coy” and he would make a decision on whether to seek the White House after the November midterm elections.

By the way, there are crazed science deniers in the leadership of both parties, but they deny different aspects of science in order to advance their political goals. See Is Your Political Party Really Pro-Science? It’s easy for your Curmudgeon to say that, because our viewpoint is cosmic. But from a provincial, partisan viewpoint (which, alas, is not uncommon among scientists), each party insults the other with the label of science-denier. In truth, both parties are run and supported by fools.

Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

18 responses to “Bobby Jindal: “Obama Is a Science Denier”

  1. Please, Bobby, run for President in 2016!

    Bobby bobbing for votes would guarantee much mirth!

  2. IT’s the old Karl Rove adage – accuse your opponent of your greatest weakness. Unfortunately for Jindal, et al, that tactic’s really starting to fray at the edges.

  3. In the same league as Jindal’s accusation: Count Dracula accuses the Transylvania tax collector of being a blood-sucker.

  4. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said Tuesday that President Barack Obama’s administration has become “science deniers,” failing to do enough to harness the nation’s energy potential.

    So you’re against science if you oppose fracking and/or drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Who knew?

    And Jindal is notorious for pandering to creationists in his home state, notably by signing into law a measure designed to allow creationists texts to be be introduced into public-school science classes as “supplemental materials.” Pot, kettle, black?

  5. Jindal is a joke. Unfortunately the joke is on us here in Louisiana. He seems to be unaware that we are drilling now more than ever in the US. Oil and gas production in the US is at an all time high. I also think he’s already forgotton the big problem with BP oil. Louisiana took a huge hit from their blowout and it will be decades before we will recover. Don’t hear much about that do we? In addition Jindal has left higher education in La La Land bleeding and battered. 240,000 people in Louisiana are without health coverage because he did not sign on to the new medicade rules under the ACA. So our tax money is leaving Louisiana to pay for other peoples health care in other states. How cold is that? Yeah, Jindal can run for president, but he will be crushed by other candidates much like he has crushed Louisiana.

  6. Charles Deetz ;)

    I wondered what Jindal would have to say about the science of climate change recently. In the same chunk of news I googled and found this quote from him:

    “And we need to guard against those who would…hide behind climate change as an excuse to slow down our economy.”

    So Jindal is just a science dodger,one who likes science when it can improve the economy, and hate it when it does the opposite (or he thinks does). Energy is almost by definition a boost to the economy, it is really simple politics to point to the benefits of more energy.

  7. waldteufel: “Please, Bobby, run for President in 2016!”

    Oh, God, no! Seriously, we need both parties to field the best candidates possible, regardless of how badly you might want one party to win over the other.

  8. Yes, seriously, one needs opposition parties with at least worth-while candidates, no matter how strongly one supports a particular party. One never knows what will happen to make a particular person unelectable. (Please don’t vote in your opposition party’s primary to vote for the weaker candidate.)

  9. In truth, both parties are run and supported by fools.

    Magical balance fairy seems to have entered the room.
    No. That won’t do.

    Science denial is the domain of only one political party in the US. Only in one political party does the entire leadership across the board deny science on a range of issues.
    There is not a single sitting Republican leader who is willing to embrace reality and stand with NASA and every single scientific community on the planet on the issue of climate change for example. Not one.
    There are nutters in any party.
    Yet only the Republican party has the science nutters controlling their team at the very top.

    GOP is an anti-science party of nuts (sorry, Atlantic!)

  10. Yes, there is no equivalence between the GOP and the Democrats on the topic of antiscience. This cowardly South Parkian flattening argument is like standing in Germany in 1924 and saying that both the Nazis and the anti-Nazis are equally intolerant.

    The way the pathetic “Wahh, wahh, the Democrats are antiscience too mommy!” argument really works is like this:

    1. A Democrat goes to Whole Foods Market and buys gluten free muffins and a dozen free range eggs. That is “antiscience” we’re told, because maybe gluten free isn’t really better for all consumers and maybe chickens “like” to be crammed six to a cage. The Democrat does not force everyone to eat gluten free, and does not demand that gluten free baking or other crackpot ideas about food be taught in public schools.

    2. The GOP leadership puts the Republicans with the very dumbest ideas about pollution in charge of congressional committees on the environment, the Republicans with the very dumbest ideas about scientific research in charge of committees on science, etc. all down the line, no exceptions. The most educated in the GOP, their gynecologists, teach that creationism is true, that the Big Bang is a hoax, global warming is a vast conspiracy of greedy scientists, birth control causes abortions, and victims of legitimate rape can’t really get pregnant. All down the line they demand that creationism and pollutionism be taught in public schools, that kids be taught that “the jury is still out” on global warming, that money-grubbing scientists work together in vast conspiracies. And politicians seek to defund, slander, prosecute or imprison climate scientists. They insist we must not have a choice, creationism and pollutionism WILL be taught to your kids on the taxpayer’s dime, fracking will be done under your house, in your aquifer, the pipeline is going to cross your farm and eminent domain seizure if you don’t like it.

    It’s nice to say that conservatism in some form should exist, as a sort of “brake” on society, but not this form: the GOP must be destroyed.

  11. P.S. every nutty idea about science that exists anywhere on the left can be found in the leadership on the right, but with compounded paranoia. The reverse is not true. If some liberals are anti-vaxxers, an equal number of conservatives are anti-vaxxers. If some liberals worry about GMO’s or “toxins” in food, an equal number of conservatives worry about GMO’s or “toxins” in food.

    The reverse is not true. Many Republican extreme anti-science positions have no equivalent among liberals. Democrats do not put anti-vaxxers in charge of congressional committees on health and public welfare. Democrats do not put anti-GMO activists or “toxin” paranoids in charge of kids’ lunches or congressional committees on agriculture.

    Democrats do not seek to defund, slander or prosecute global warming skeptics, but conservatives demand that mainstream climate scientists be defunded, slandered and/or prosecuted.

    Democrats do not demand that organic foods or anti-GMO foods be taught in public schools. The GOP *does* demand that creationism and pollutionism he taught in public schools.

    Conservatism in some form? Fine. But not this form. Real conservatives should be Democrats. The GOP must be destroyed.

  12. Diogenes Lamp says: “The GOP must be destroyed.”

    Feel better now?

  13. The Republican party as we know it know is on the way out, evolutionary speaking. They are fighting an uphill battle against history and demographics. It’s a mater of time. Something new will replace it, what is hard to say. I still remember when there were moderate and liberal Republicans, many of which I liked and could support, but as a moderate Democrat, there’s no way I could vote for a current Republican.

  14. I wasn’t aware that “harnessing America’s energy resources and potential” was a scientific field. Please point me to their perr-reviewed literature.

    And, it was Democrats who supported the Office of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, or whatever it’s called. A ton of money spent so far, and it continues, with not one result that I’m aware of.

    Certainly, Republican science-deniers are at the forefront at this particular moment, and they do want to enforce their anti-science policies. But, the Democrats have been anti-science when it suits their book, and are still. Less than the Republicans now, but still.

  15. Tom Harkin and Orrin Hatch who says the senate couldn’t be bipartisan…..
    quackery and money – a sucker born every minute.

  16. I heard him use the phrase “science denier” in the car today listening to Medved’s show. 20 years ago I’d have crashed into the guard rail from my irony meter exploding. But I since learned the concept of projection, and how sometimes it’s faked by a slick snake oil salesman. So I remained calm, and did what I usually do – switch radio stations as soon as a commercial comes on.

    So everyone listen up, and listen up now! Don’t underestimate this shyster. He is pulling your chains from here to Andromeda. He doesn’t believe any young-earth nonsense, and he understands evolution much better than most nonscientists, if not than the average practicing biologist,

    This is the “Darwinist”‘s battle to lose. If we keep asking him basic “what happened when” questions, with no reference to “Creation” or “design,” and he keeps evading them, he’ll lose the “swing vote.” But if we don’t ask, or just let him get away one evasion, as happened with Rick Perry, he has a good shot at being your next president. Is that you want? I certainly don’t, and I’m probably to the right of him on most issues.

  17. BTW, I know the issue at hand is climate change, but please, at every opportunity, get him to talk about evolution, and more importantly, biological history, in it’s millions of facts, independently supported by every field of science. Certainly, as a radical authoritarian he will pander to both end-timers and Biblical literalists, but he will be as vague as possible not to let on that he thinks that they are as deluded as we do. Climate change is trickier than evolution, because skilled activists pandering to real deniers know when to bait-and-swtich between (1) climate change in general, (2) anthropogenic causes, and (3) what govt. ought to do about it. Let them do that at your own risk!

  18. Garnetstar: “But, the Democrats have been anti-science when it suits their book,…”

    Absolutely. They’re just not as organized as that radical fringe of authoritarians that are, as much as it pains me to say it, Republicans. And in fact, it is the combination of both, plus US science-illiteracy and “science-indifference” that are feeding each other. Of the general public the stereotype is the “liberal” who likes astrology, alternative medicine etc., and the “conservative” who likes Biblical literalism. But I have been noticing a lot of overlap, from both the far-left and far right. Growing “fringes” that never met a pseudoscience that they didn’t like.