Sarah Palin vs. Fruit Flies

Yes, Sarah Palin has again opened her mouth only to promptly insert her foot. And, yes, her supporters have continued to defend her ignorance. This is the kind of political situation that is either very funny or very scary, but we won't know which until after November 4th.

Palin's latest gaffe occured on Friday when she gave a speech urging the federal government to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). In the course of her speech, Palin ridiculed some of the projects currently funded by Congress, including fruit fly research -- which happens to have yielded valuable insights into genetic disorders such as autism.

The tone of her comment, followed by saying "I kid you not", clearly shows her contempt for the concept of fruit fly research. (see video below) Her detractors have been quick to point out the importance of fruit fly research and to mock Palin for not understanding the enormous scientific value in this research.



Palin supporters have rushed to her defense, claiming that she was refering to a particular earmark for research into controling the olive fruit fly, not on fruit fly medical research. For argument's sake, let's make that assumption. What is wrong with spending money to research stopping a pest that is devastating the US olive oil industry?

This earmark has already been criticized by the group Citizens Against Government Waste and has been publicly defended by California Rep. Mike Thompson in a formal statement:

“The Olive Fruit Fly has infested thousands of California olive groves and is the single largest threat to the U.S. olive and olive oil industries,” he said. “I secured $748,000 for olive fruit fly research and irradiation in the (fiscal year 2008) appropriations bill for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA will use some of that funding for their research facility in France. This USDA research facility is located in France because Mediterranean countries like France have dealt with the Olive Fruit Fly for decades, while California has only been exposed since the late 1990s. This is not uncommon; the USDA has several international research facilities throughout the world, including Australia, China and Argentina.”

He goes on to say that CAGW did not contact him for information on this earmark before condemning it in their annual report.

Palin's vague reference to "fruit fly research in Paris, France" skews the facts to support her attempts to be seen as "Pro-America". She conveniently leaves out the information that the USDA routinely conducts research in facilities around the world. She also fails to say that the goal of this research is to help a US agricultural crop.

Does Palin know the full story behind this research? Maybe, maybe not. Does her tone and word choice imply derision toward scientific research conducted outside of the United States? You betcha. Does Palin speak from ignorance or in a deliberate attempt to mislead and take advantage of her supporters' concerns?

The scary fact is that we just don't know.