I would rather have read a polemic. The article doesn't necessarily make a claim. It seems to be getting at something akin to: "Science is important so we shou

I would rather have read a polemic. The article doesn't necessarily make a claim. It seems to be getting at something akin to: "Science is important so we shouldn't underfund it. We shouldn't kill science funding to pay for Boomer's retirement. It's not the country's fault that the Boomers pushed for massive government deficits and plundered social security, and now they need it." I'd rather he have just come out and said it.