> The government demanded that government employees get approval for any direct communications with media, etc.
FUCK that.
If my tax money is going to pay for your research work, and you want to speak to the public, I'm part of the public and I have a right to hear it. I will be the judge of whether your work is my money well spent, and I will be the judge of whether your public communications are time well spent, not some dipshit party hack.
I think it's debatable whether the government actually needs to classify everything it classifies in the name of national security. See this story for example:
That said, most folks would agree that there is some national security information that should remain classified.
But this science was not classified at all! It was just being forced through a political PR filter. It was public science done on the public's dime, which is just not analogous to nuclear weapons.
No, I don't. But I feel very strongly that when my tax money goes to scientists to get them to do science, their results should be presented to the public regardless of whether they support the platform of the party in charge, and that no policy be put in place that might hinder that.
If some government egghead is working to asses whether there's lead in the water in Flint, for example, I don't want a GOP party hack to have a yea or nay on whether he talks to the press.
FUCK that.
If my tax money is going to pay for your research work, and you want to speak to the public, I'm part of the public and I have a right to hear it. I will be the judge of whether your work is my money well spent, and I will be the judge of whether your public communications are time well spent, not some dipshit party hack.