Science Is Dumb, Conservatives Know Best

[Phil1111 1,149]

“Donald Trump is the most anti-science and anti-environment president we’ve ever had,” said Douglas Brinkley, a presidential historian at Rice University. The president’s actions, he said, have eroded one of the United States’s most enviable assets: the government’s deep scientific expertise, built over decades. “It’s extraordinarily crazy and reckless,” he said....

“Scientists tell them inconvenient things,” said Jerry Taylor, president of the Niskanen Center, a centrist research organization, and former climate change denialist who now advocates for the acceptance of climate science. “Whether we’re talking about the E.P.A. or we’re talking about climate change broadly speaking, or we’re talking about the coronavirus, his administration is constantly engaged in magical thinking.”

Politics outweigh science and fact. Same old story.

[airdvr 210]

2 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

 said Jerry Taylor, president of the Niskanen Center, a centrist research organization, 

 

Hehe...centrist.  That's funny.  Their agenda reads so far left it's not even funny.  They even say their target audience is Washington insiders.

[jakee 1,489]

Just now, airdvr said:

Hehe...centrist.  That's funny.  Their agenda reads so far left it's not even funny.  They even say their target audience is Washington insiders.

Why on earth would that make them leftist?

[airdvr 210]

I looked back as far as 1963 and didn't see a single Republican in any position of power other than a couple of useless seats on council.

[billvon 2,991]

24 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I looked back as far as 1963 and didn't see a single Republican in any position of power other than a couple of useless seats on council.

You are generally invited to leave the Republican party if you take a pro-science stance, which would be sort of required for a science based organization.  At best you are labeled a RINO and marginalized.

[jakee 1,489]

27 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I looked back as far as 1963 and didn't see a single Republican in any position of power other than a couple of useless seats on council.

I'm sorry, are you under the impression that the term "Washington insider" refers to people involved with the local politics and running of the city of Washington DC?

[airdvr 210]

Your definition?

[jakee 1,489]

8 minutes ago, airdvr said:

Your definition?

People who operate in or around the various branches of the Federal government in Washington DC. And if you have read far enough into their conspectus to see the reference to Washington insiders you would know this meaning (while also being the normal one that the vast majority of people would use) is glaringly obvious by the context.

 

So again, why does aiming at Washington insiders make the leftist?

[airdvr 210]

I'd venture a guess to say most of the people you are describing live, at least part time, inside the beltway.  

My contention is that Phil needs a better source for his post if he's going to believe everything they say.

[jakee 1,489]

17 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I'd venture a guess to say most of the people you are describing live, at least part time, inside the beltway.  

I'm sorry, are you under the impression that the majority of Washington DC residents are "Washington insiders" and that the makeup of the Washington DC city council therefore reflects the political makeup of "Washington insiders"?

 

Quote

My contention is that Phil needs a better source for his post if he's going to believe everything they say.

You haven't yet come up with a credible reason why they're not a good source. Did you see that both the president and senior vice president of the think tank came over from the Cato Institute, formerly known as the Koch Foundation? I've heard that's an absolute hotbed of socialism.

 

Besides, the statement attributed to them is so obviously supported by current events that it's practically axiomatic. Right now the former chief of the federal governments medical research agency is alleging that he was fired in the middle of the biggest medical research push in history because he pushed back against the President's touting of unproven medication.

 

It's not limited to Trump (check out "why is congress so dumb" on WaPo) but he is certainly accelerating the process.

Edited April 28, 2020 by jakee

[Phil1111 1,149]

57 minutes ago, jakee said:

I'm sorry, are you under the impression that the majority of Washington DC residents are "Washington insiders" ...

It's not limited to Trump (check out "why is congress so dumb" on WaPo) but he is certainly accelerating the process.

I was going to respond but you appear to have the bases covered. airdvr has bought the trump/FOX talking points hook, line and sinker. That Mitch McConnell, trump and republicans are going to look after the little guy. That they are not insiders.

Its most likely that the ideas of free market economics combined with science is an anathema to him. As it is for trump. That climate change ... Well Wikipedia has it covered:

The Niskanen Center has sought to differentiate itself from other think tanks on the political right by espousing a position of strategic compromise, including on issue areas that break from doctrinaire noninterventionist and free-market positions. In addition to taking an aggressive stance in favor of climate change action and carbon taxes, the center generally supports the maintenance of a more robust welfare state safety net in exchange for other market reforms. Vice President for Policy Will Wilkinson advocates a social democracy-style system that incorporates the position of liberal political philosopher John Rawls. This ideal mirrors European states such as Denmark that pair free trade liberalism and labor market reform with heavy unemployment benefits and a public healthcare system.^[43]

Edited April 28, 2020 by Phil1111

[airdvr 210]

That's what you'll never understand.  I'm not interested in being "looked after".  I've realized for years that the only person looking after me is me.  Meanwhile, Washington has sold the US out to interests foreign and domestic.  I see you're still operating under the failed dichotomy that the government will take care of you.

[olofscience 480]

6 minutes ago, airdvr said:

That's what you'll never understand.  I'm not interested in being "looked after".  I've realized for years that the only person looking after me is me.  Meanwhile, Washington has sold the US out to interests foreign and domestic.  I see you're still operating under the failed dichotomy that the government will take care of you.

Nobody has done more to weaken the US than Trump.

From handing China a trade win by abolishing the TPP, trusting Putin over the US intelligence services, alienating allies like the EU and Canada, then becoming himself a laughingstock of the world by suggesting that people inject or inhale disinfectant or bring UV light inside the body.

It's sad. I don't want China to become the world superpower, but that's what you get when the US is led by a narcissistic toddler.

[billvon 2,991]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

My contention is that Phil needs a better source for his post if he's going to believe everything they say.

Like Kori Schake, director of foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute?  (not a liberal organization, in case you were unsure.)  She notes that the US used to "represent modernity in all its advantages.  It will be a real struggle to restore the admiration for the United States that is such an important part of our power in the world."

[jakee 1,489]

27 minutes ago, airdvr said:

That's what you'll never understand.  I'm not interested in being "looked after".  I've realized for years that the only person looking after me is me.  Meanwhile, Washington has sold the US out to interests foreign and domestic. 

What does any of that have to do with whether Washington insiders are leftist?

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

37 minutes ago, airdvr said:

That's what you'll never understand.  I'm not interested in being "looked after".  I've realized for years that the only person looking after me is me.  Meanwhile, Washington has sold the US out to interests foreign and domestic.  I see you're still operating under the failed dichotomy that the government will take care of you.

It's good that you are able to 'look after' yourself. 

Many folks don't have that luxury. 
Doesn't the preamble to the Constitution say something about "provide for the general welfare"?

I am currently able to look after myself, and have been doing so for my adult life. 

But that doesn't mean that I won't need help tomorrow, next week, next month or next year. 

It would seem that the Rs are fine with me just 'going away'. Because actually taking care of people who need help is 'socialism'. 

 

Apparently large numbers of people going bankrupt or dying is preferrable to that.

It's kinda funny. The local PBS station is running Ken Burn's "The Roosevelts". The part yesterday covered FDR during the depression and the lead up to WW2. 
It noted that Social Security, unemployment insurance, minimum wage, maximum hours & overtime, the right of labor to organize and a couple other things that I can't remember at the moment were all from the "New Deal". 

That's all under the idea that 'the government will take care of you'. 
Are you willing to throw all that away?

[airdvr 210]

35 minutes ago, jakee said:

What does any of that have to do with whether Washington insiders are leftist?

nothing

[airdvr 210]

14 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

It's good that you are able to 'look after' yourself. 

Many folks don't have that luxury. 
Doesn't the preamble to the Constitution say something about "provide for the general welfare"?

I am currently able to look after myself, and have been doing so for my adult life. 

But that doesn't mean that I won't need help tomorrow, next week, next month or next year. 

It would seem that the Rs are fine with me just 'going away'. Because actually taking care of people who need help is 'socialism'. 

 

Apparently large numbers of people going bankrupt or dying is preferrable to that.

It's kinda funny. The local PBS station is running Ken Burn's "The Roosevelts". The part yesterday covered FDR during the depression and the lead up to WW2. 
It noted that Social Security, unemployment insurance, minimum wage, maximum hours & overtime, the right of labor to organize and a couple other things that I can't remember at the moment were all from the "New Deal". 

That's all under the idea that 'the government will take care of you'. 
Are you willing to throw all that away?

When did I say I wanted all that thrown away?

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

9 minutes ago, airdvr said:

When did I say I wanted all that thrown away?

When you said 'I'm not interested in being looked after'.

When you said 'operating under the false dichotomy that the government will take care of you'.

The current administration is taking huge steps to dismantle the social safety net. The alt-right rails against anything that helps the poor as evil 'Socialism'. 
While I don't put you in the 'alt-right', you certainly seem to support Trump and the current administration.

Keep in mind that all the stuff put in place by FDR was very strongly opposed by the Rs at the time. It was derided as 'Socialism', just like today.

And oh yeah - Federal protection of bank deposits and rules overseeing the stock market and insider trading. 

[jakee 1,489]

55 minutes ago, airdvr said:

nothing

Do you have any reasoning to provide as to why Washington insiders are leftist, or why the makeup of the DC council has anything to do with it?

[airdvr 210]

I said I'm not interested in being looked after.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Fair enough. 

However, as I noted, Trump and his administration are doing everything they can to dismantle the social safety net. And a lot of other programs that protect us and our environment.
All so his very wealthy donors can make bigger profits and pay less taxes.

[airdvr 210]

I happen to agree with some of it...specifically the EPA.  I don't think he has an ability to effect Social Security without congress going along.

[JerryBaumchen 1,363]

29 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I happen to agree with some of it...specifically the EPA.  I don't think he has an ability to effect Social Security without congress going along.

Hi airdvr,

And Mitch McConnell has said that he wants to reduce the federal benefits programs; and, that includes Soc. Sec.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  IMO everyone should do their homework & pay attention to just what these politicians say.  NOT that I am perfect about doing so.

 

[normiss 800]

VP Pence is genius level smart.

We should all feel safer with him leading the pandemic team.