► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Kevin D. Williamson’

Progressives like to cloak their policy preferences in the mantle of science

by Mojambo ( 43 Comments › )
Filed under Climate, Evolution, Progressives, Science at August 20th, 2011 - 2:00 pm

Anyone catch that woman using her son to ask Rick Perry questions on how old the Earth is? If you think that  people like her (or Charles Johnson ) really care about science you are mistaken. To them science (including the whole global warming debate) is a tool in order to push their social and political agenda which includes transfer of funds from the wealthier nations to the poorer ones and  more government control and regulations. By nature, most liberals tend to shy away from math and the hard natural sciences in college because in those courses you cannot talk your way out of an answer. The answers in geometry or chemistry are either right or wrong, liberals prefer courses in which they can manipulate words and which are all about “feelings”. Liberals are never the ones who lead the way out onto the ball field, showed you how to take apart the engine on your car or use their fists in the schoolyard on  obnoxious, abusive  bullies, they prefer to write essays on what they felt like when their goldfish dies or what they did on their summer vacation. That is why so many of them go into the arts and journalism.

by Kevin D. Williamson

Gov. Rick Perry, pressed for his views on evolution, characterized it as “a theory” with “some gaps” in it. He went on to say that, in Texas, both conventional evolution and creationism are taught. He told a boy whose mother asked him about the subject: “In Texas, we teach both creationism and evolution in our public schools — because I figure you’re smart enough to figure out which one is right.”

This is the sort of thing that drives a certain kind of person nuts. Likewise, Perry’s joking about secession after being asked a question about it — and explaining that “when we came into the nation in 1845, we were a republic . . . and one of the deals was, we can leave anytime we want” — has caught on as a kind of shorthand for all of the cultural friction that is going to make Perry a tough sell to suburban moderates.

[…….]

The broader question, however, is: Why would anybody ask a politician about his views on a scientific question? Nobody ever asks what Sarah Palin thinks about dark matter, or what John Boehner thinks about quantum entanglement. (For that matter, I’ve never heard Keith Ellison pressed for his views on evolution.) There are lots of good reasons not to wonder what Rick Perry thinks about scientific questions, foremost amongst them that there are probably fewer than 10,000 people in the United States whose views on disputed questions regarding evolution are worth consulting, and they are not politicians; they are scientists. In reality, of course, the progressive types who want to know politicians’ views on evolution are not asking a scientific question; they are asking a religious and political question, demanding a profession of faith in a particular materialist-secularist worldview.

Take the question of global warming: Jon Huntsman was quick to declare his faith in the scientific consensus on global warming, and Rick Perry has been openly skeptical of it. Again keeping in mind that nobody really ought to care what either Huntsman or Perry thinks about the relevant science, both are making an error, and a grave one, in conceding that the question at hand is scientific at all. It is not; it is political. One might be convinced that anthropogenic global warming is a real and problematic phenomenon, and still not be convinced that the policies being pushed by Al Gore et al. are wise and intelligent. (Some more thoughts on that here.)

Progressives like to cloak their policy preferences in the mantle of science, but they do not in fact give a fig about science, which for them is only a vehicle to be ridden to the precise extent that it is convenient. This is why they will ask what makes Rick Perry qualified to disagree with the scientific establishment, but never ask the equally relevant question of what makes Jon Huntsman qualified to agree with it. So long as they are getting the policies they want, they don’t care. If you want to see how dedicated a progressive is to dispassionate science, spend two minutes talking about the heritability of intelligence. You’ll be up to your neck in witchcraft and superstition and evasion in no time at all. (If you want to test a progressive’s faith in rigorous scholarship more broadly, ask him about gains from trade and comparative advantage, realities that are as solid as anything social science has to offer.)

[……]

Read the rest – Rick Perry pushes their buttons

Obama needs to stop blaming Bush

by Phantom Ace ( 90 Comments › )
Filed under Democratic Party, Election 2008, Elections 2012, George W. Bush, Progressives, Republican Party at April 18th, 2011 - 2:00 pm

The Blame Bush Card 3rd World Liberation Ideologue Barack Hussein Obama uses has gotten old. I was no fan of the Bush administration and was one of it’s fiercest critics. I got labeled a Communist, a traitor and an enabler for Al-Qaeda because of my Conservative based criticism of Bush. I still have a bad in taste in my mouth from my clashes with the Bush fanatics and I’m glad that era in Conservative politics is over. Obama however can’t let go of that time period.

The Bush years were a golden age to Progressives. They were able to attack the administration without any response. Anything that went wrong including hurricanes, bridge collapses and earthquakes were blamed on Bush. He did nothing to combat these smears and it lead to his political destruction. The irony off all this was that Bush oversaw the greatest expansion of the US government since LBJ’s Great Society. These attacks lead to the Republican collapses of 2006 and 2008. Once in power the Progressives continued to blame Bush. Obama did inherit deficits from Bush. Instead of trying to balance the budget and be fiscally responsible, he greatly increased the deficit and vastly increased the debt in just 2 years. Rather than man up and admit his responsibly for our fiscal mess, Obama resorts to the Left’s favorite tactic. He continues to blame Bush.

Your average poorly informed lefty (but I repeat myself) will reliably tell you that our current fiscal straits are the result of three things: 1. Bush’s wars; 2. Bush’s tax cuts for the rich; 3. Bush’s bank bailouts.

That is not true, of course: The main bank bailouts (odious as they were) have been paid back, often at a profit. The money-losing parts (and the likely money-losing parts) are the ones insisted upon by Barack Obama and his Democratic colleagues: the foreclosure-prevention programs, the endless maintenance of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, etc.

[…]

Definitional quibbles aside, the war spending and the Bush tax cuts don’t add up to a whole lot in the context of the $1.6 trillion deficit. What does?

The Department of Health and Human Services will see more than $900 billion in outlays in FY2011. About $83 billion of that is discretionary spending on things like the Centers for Disease Control. Almost all of the rest is Medicare and Medicaid — the two programs that President Obama has vowed to shield from substantial reform of the sort envisioned by Rep. Paul Ryan. The other big driver of spending, as the president himself acknowledged yesterday, is Social Security, meaningful reform of which he also promises to resist.

Read the rest: Not Tax Cuts, Not Wars, and Not Bailouts

As someone who was no fan of Bush, Obama needs to stop blaming him for the mess he’s created. If the job is too difficult for the current President, then he should resign or not run on re-election. Instead of paying off the credit card debt Bush left him, Obama has taken out 4 additional cards and maxed them out. Clearly his Demagogue style indicates the man is in over his head. Obama needs to man up or shut up.