Irrational pissed off scientists

Science Debate 2008, which had sought to bring attention to science issues by hosting a Presidential debate, is discussed here [and a certain libertarian commentator linked in agreement to this]:
Some experts warn that the effort to inject scientific issues into the Presidential race could backfire. "Anything that gets elevated on the political agenda has risks," explains Lane. It might be better to work quietly behind the scenes, suggests David Goldston, visiting lecturer at Harvard and former staff director of the House Science Committee. Scientists may feel slighted if their concerns are not in the limelight, but a high profile is not always the road to success, he argues. A case in point: Doubling of the National Institutes of Health's budget became a top political cause. But it happened too quickly and with too little care, leading to severe strains now that the budget has leveled off.
The problem isn't that the NIH budget was expanded too rapidly, it's that since the doubling, the budget was effectively cut. It takes only a very short amount of time to hire a graduate student or postdoc to do the work outlined in a grant. But all of those people who were hired during that period of time have spent years acquiring highly specialized skills that are relatively useless in the greater job market.
There's also the danger that scientists will be seen as just another interest group with its hand out. "The research community needs a more compelling message than 'give us 7% more money than last year,'" says Tom Kalil, special assistant to the chancellor for science and technology at the University of California at Berkeley and former deputy director of the National Economic Council during the Clinton Administration.
Shouldn't it be those so-called fiscal conservative legislators who ought to justify an effective NIH budget cut? The Biomedical Research and Development Price Index [PDF] is about 1 or 2% higher than the overall inflation rate, which currently hovers at about 2 or 3%. Each year of 0% NIH budget increases is like pissing away the NIH budget doubling initiated under Clinton. If ever there was government waste, it's not in labs wanting to retain the best qualified researchers around by asking for slight budget increases to cover wage and price increases, it's in spending a decade training people to do that work and then losing it to shortsighted budget constraints.