Obama Hires “Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity”

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


Any day now, we’re going to beat China. And we’re going to do by abandoning all that science nonsense and working to ensure that all our scientists are coded by race, gender, sexual preference and number of imaginary people they think are chasing them around the room. We’ll put ideology above science and we’ll win just like the USSR did.

In December, I wrote about Obama’s plot to hijack 500 million dollars from the NIH’s medical research budget to promote diversity, because who needs to cure cancer, when you can have 500 million bucks worth of diversity instead?

Now that 500 million bucks comes with a whole new bureaucracy, including a Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity, a title that comes straight to you from Oceania’s Airstrip One where the clocks always ring thirteen and Crimethink against Big Brother leads to a face full of rat.

What abilities must the Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity possess, besides the ability to laugh at himself?

“I intend to appoint a nationally-renowned scientist to develop a comprehensive vision and strategy to strengthen our biomedical research enterprise through more diversified scientific applicant pools, pipelines and investigators. The chief officer will also expand recruitment methods and retention strategies, guarantee the fairness of peer review, and help promote inclusiveness and equity throughout the biomedical research community.”

There’s no question that we must being inclusive equity to our pipelines. Just imagine the horror when a team of scientists discovers a cure for cancer… and it turns out that none of them are Lesbian or Latino.

We’ll have to scrap the cancer cure, delete all their work and start all over again to create good role models for the children.

Fortunately we may already have the perfect candidate to be the Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity.

He comes from a working class family and though lacking in formal scientific training caught the eye of his progressive government bosses with his Can Do attitude. His bold new theories promised to revolutionize agriculture and feed the hungry while aiding the cause of Socialism. Ruthless when it came to “deniers” of his theories, he defended science by having many of his opponents locked up or put to death. Unfortunately the man himself is also dead, but in the name of diversity should we not also include the undead in our search?

It’s settled then. Zombie Lysenko will be Obama’s perfect Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity. If it worked for Stalin, it can work for Obama.

 

  • poetcomic1

    I'm against 'diversity'. I am for 'same'. As in same as me in rudimentary values.

  • Flicker

    Fairness in peer review? How do you introduce "fairness" into the scientific process? If this were just about insuring that research results fit your ideological dogma, I'd understand. But how do you introduce fairness into the centuries-old scientific method of reproducible experimentation and dissemination of results?

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "How do you introduce "fairness" into the scientific process? If this were just about insuring that research results fit your ideological dogma, I'd understand."

      But that IS the entire point. It's about submission to dogmas. That is the most important contribution a leftist scientist can make. You must affirm global warming, homosexuality being genetic, etc.

    • http://www.adinakutnicki.com AdinaK

      "Fairness" is a bugaboo just like racist. A word meant to evoke PC hysteria, otherwise one is tarred as a retrograde and a reprobate.
      No matter. The leftist gig is up – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/01/leftist-dogma

      Out of lemons often comes lemonade. In other words, Barack & gang overplayed their (radical left)hands!

      Adina kutnicki, Israel – http://adinakutnicki.com/about/

  • Flicker

    Fairness could mean: the same rules for everyone. Like the at the NLRB or the DoJ. Sheesh. One more sycophantic pawn under the guiding hand of our benevolent dictator.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Fairness could mean: the same rules for everyone."

      It always did mean that and still does in some circles. Forget about that definition when using Doublespeak.

  • jleinf

    So basically Barry's saying hire more stupid white guys because we all know who the smart biomedical people are these days right? These commies are out of their minds

  • Arlie

    I would like to take everything that is unfair in the world and cram it down his big fat mouth. Would that be fair enough for him? Who decides what is fair? He is NOT G-d. What 0 sees as fair is in truth: cronyism and unfair practices. He's as NUTS and UNbalanced as can be. Return to our founding documents! It was the fairest, smartest, most prosperous way for ALL to be FREE to create their own life. 0 wants us to live life like he sees it. That is not freedom.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    "The chief officer will also expand recruitment methods and retention strategies, guarantee the fairness of peer review, and help promote inclusiveness and equity throughout the biomedical research community.”

    That HAS TO BE a joke.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Socialism is a joke and the punch line is a killer.

  • Ralph

    What's next? Diversity in the NBA?

  • elkoz

    You may be interested in my article of Tuesday, October 2, 2012 – “Let Me Tell You about Trofim Denisovich Lysenko” – The parallels between the actions and mentality of the green movement, their allies in government and academia today as compared to the actions of Lysenko, Stalin and the power structure in the USSR of yesteryear are quite startling. ___ _http://paradigmsanddemographics.blogspot.com/2012/10/let-me-tell-you-about-trofim-denisovich.html__

  • JacksonPearson

    Silly question, but WTF ever happened to hiring the best and most brightest of a graduating class? Corporations that are laying investors Nickels-N-Dimes on the line, don't give a rats-butt about diversity, but about getting the best product out to sell.

    The same holds true with a person that is in need of quality medicine vs. the government's PC quota on affirmative action doctors. We can't keep burying our best minds, and settling for mediocre or the least-est!

  • EarlyBird

    Newsflash! Right wing Neanderthals suddenly believe in science! They even believe science is worth spending federal money on!

    Perhaps they'll start admitting the world is round, and the human race didn't ride around on dinosaurs 6,000 years ago. Next up, they'll be tackling global warming.

    Gee, it's amazing what they can be talked into in order to spite Obama. Woo hoo!

    Great progress, guys.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Newsflash! Right wing Neanderthals suddenly believe in science! "

      The irony. Conservatives reject your popular junk science-driven dogmas and you refer to them as "Right wing Neanderthals." This means you also believe in their lies about the origins of science.

      Icing on the cake; "neanderthal politicos." What did they argue about then? How much corn to invest in creating the perfect wheel, or pocket lighters?

      You're funny, but we're not laughing with you. I'm guessing that you don't even know that the scientific method is not guaranteed to be free of political conclusions or flawed analysis due to that and many other non-scientific factors, including just plain stupid scientists. They do exist. They're easily manipulated too. They want to fit in.

      Still, it's usually the public and politicians that misread the data and then the scientists are too scared to admit that the data doesn't say that in absolute terms, but it's already become dogma, and then it becomes fundamental assumptions for the next generation of dupes, including scientists.

  • Ghostwriter

    Is this sort of thing REALLY necessary?

  • Guest

    this man assumes that scientist "pays equal attention" to all "scientific problems" or in the case of the NIH to all diseases. This is naive and eident of everything my "enemy" does is garbage…..