Well I remimber when Bush actually extended the DST. That probably showed best that he has no interrest or mental ability in doing things right. You cannot justify DST at all. It was just a stupid idea.

Actually there is an even more stupid idea. The leap hour. Currently from time to time a leap second is inserted into the year. This causes mild distress among people who want to keep the time very accurately, however they all are prepared for this, and it only happens once every few years. Now there is a proposal to abolish the leap-seconds in favour of a leap hour, sending the world into chaos, a few hundred years from now.

Bush "extending" the DST depends on how you look at it. If you get rid of the time change, you're either going to be permanently in DST or permanently not in DST, take your pick. Given that we now spend all except November-March in DST, roughly 2/3 of the year, if you made DST the default time then you're actually inching closer to getting rid of this.

But the point of the study was to see if there was any point to DST. By extending it, how did things change? And nothing changed, of course, because it's also pseudo-scientific nonsense. The "It saves energy!" chestnut proponents have used for years was completely debunked. The only thing the study proved was something we already knew from anecdotal evidence - that car and workplace accidents increase the Monday after because people are disoriented. Likewise, the sudden darkness brought on by the change in November is linked to an increase in depression. Both break circadian rhythms for sleeping, leading to insomnia as well.

Any one of those, to me, is reason enough to ditch this dumb idea. Whatever lame excuse was used by the con artists to get it passed in the first place, its need is long gone. I mean, we didn't even have it in the US until 1918. A lot of people were tilling the fields before then and couldn't care less.