Part #1,265,789 in the series “Your Tax Dollars At Work”. The National Science Foundation has handed $50,000 in taxpayer funds to a UCLA professor for a report labeling opponents of government-run health care racist.

For the record, 58% of the public supports repealing the health care reform law passed by Congress and signed by Barack Obama. More than 52% of the same public voted for a black presidential candidate in 2008, and at one point more than 65% approved of the job said black president was doing. Damn racists.

According to the study’s abstract, provided by the National Science Foundation, a government agency under the control of the executive branch: “This research project attempts to provide further evidence for this Obama-induced racialization by pinpointing the extent that health-care opinions are influenced by racial attitudes and determining Obama’s causal role in racializing public opinion about a policy that has no manifest racial content.”

David Sears, a professor of psychology at UCLA, was awarded $52,034 in January 2010 to make this case for the National Science Foundation. The tautology he sets forth in his abstract is rather complicated, so let’s break it down: The project will seek to provide more evidence that opponents to health care are irrational because their negative opinions of health care “are influenced by racial attitudes,” even though the health-care bill has nothing to do with race.

Basically, you can’t possibly oppose government-run health care on its merits. You must oppose it because Barack Obama is black and you’re racist. And you get to pay $50,000 for the honor of being labeled as such.

By the way, the Daily Caller notes that the Obama Administration has a history of using tax dollars to pay professors to support ObamaCare.

This isn’t the first time that an agency under Obama has paid a professor to advocate for health care. Earlier this year, progressives took MIT’s Jonathan Gruber behind the shed and gave him a sound whooping for failing to disclose that while he was acting as a source for stories and a congressional witness, he was also on the HHS’ payroll, working to justify the Senate’s version of the health-care bill, which had theretofore met with intense opposition from House Dems and grassroots progressives.

Nor is this Sears’s first foray into attacking opponents of progressive policies. In 1997, he reviewed Byron M. Roth’s “Is it really racism?: The origins of white Americans’ opposition to race-targeted policies,” for the academic journal Political Psychology. Roth, a sociologist, argued in his piece that criticisms of entitlement programs and affirmative action were often motivated by real concerns about spending run amok and social engineering, and that sociologists often falsely labeled such objections as racist in nature. In his review of Roth’s book, Sears dismissed his peer as “naive” and oblivious to the realities of racism. Sears did not return requests for comment.

Charming.