Here's why we can't have nice things - actually, why we can't have reasonable discussions about government and media: because there are always two sets of facts out there muddying things up as each side links it's favorite perspective.
An illustration:
As I was traveling this week I saw a story at a "NASA-funded study" that dealt with collapse of civilizations. The study finds that civilizations like the Roman Empire (and us in the future) collapse when the "Elites" overconsume resources that the "Commoners" need resulting in strife and collapse.
Now, granted, I'm old. I'm so old that I remember when the National Aeronautics and Space Administration funded things related to aeronautics and space, and not "studies" that echo Marx and play into the Democrats' partisan campaign themes on "inequality". But, hey, if you're going to defund the shuttle program and all space exploration I guess you have to do something to justify your existence. So Marxist prognostication it is. Boo.
Predictably, NASA ducked - and issued a statement that it did not fund this university study. And, predictably, statist-friendly left media sources will carry water for that denial. You can find all of the links that you want to pooh-pooh this story as a right-wing media fantasy. Knock yourself out.
The problem is that the study itself acknowledges its funding source:
"This work was partially funded through NASA/GSFC [Goddard Space Flight Center] grant NNX12AD03A."
Show of hands, please: is a study on income/resource inequality and the collapse of civilization what you would expect for NASA to fund in 2014? Wouldn't you rather see a shuttle blast off instead?
We get what we get when you elect a president who spent his formative college years attending Socialist Scholars Conferences.
I miss the old NASA.
Go read this article about the journalistic dust up...
