It’s the same kind of one way relationship that you have with science and philosophy. Scientists can study politics and philosophy, but neither can have any insights back into science. Science will always be the enemy of ideologues (people with rigid beliefs about how the world is).
Shame about Obama. His acceptance speech was very unnerving – he’s already begun his power trip. And it literally only takes about 30 seconds to find his voting record using Google. Again, ideologues are deserving of our contempt. Wouldn’t call him a socialist though.
When they were first introduced, some people refused to look through microscopes, arguing that 1) God created the human eye, 2) the human eye was therefore perfect, 3) anything that showed humans something that the human eye did not was therefore necessarily deceiving them, so 4) the microscope was an invention of the Devil to fill the minds of men with delusions.
Science has no enemies in the same way that reality has no enemies. The practice of science, as the practice of acknowledging reality, has many enemies.
It’s a problem with the ambiguity of English. “Science has lots of enemies. Science has no enemies.” Both statements are correct. Both statements involve slightly different meanings of the same word.