Sunday, November 25, 2012

Jack Kelly today - his version of reality

This is a copy of a comment I made on the PG for today's Jack Kelly "The right will rise: Conservatives first must take the culture back from liberals"

This is simply the extension of Jack Kelly's world view, presumably the exact Tea Part line. Kelly treads a twisted, cognitively dissonant path, suggesting (for example) that "young people today" are i"so massively ignorant of history, civics, economics, geography, physics and basic math", yet his choice for Republican candidate in 2016 calls the age of the earth one of life's great mysteries, essentially (as I understand it) equating science and religion.

But the really insulting thing is the contempt Kelly has for the voters and really all the citizens of this country. Simply because the President won, Kelly assumes that voters were persuaded by lies. Instead of advocating for truth, Kelly tells us that Republicans need to spend money the way liberals do, in co-opting the young. Kelly doesn't advocate for truth because when some 97% of climate scientists all feel one way about climate change, you can't (credibly) say it is another, or even just suggest the issue is not resolved.

Simply saying that newspapers and colleges/universities are "technologically obsolescent" does not make it true. Newspapers have had issues responding to the 24 hour news cycle, but comment sections like this one are one innovation, and newspapers/magazines (like Mother Jones) can do the in depth stories, with lots more facts (sometimes only words) than TV can provide. But conservatives are threatened by the in depth knowledge provided both newspapers and Universities. Conservatives would like to make the case that both groups lie and spread propaganda (I guess because conservatives lie so reflexively), but newspapers are the oldest popular information source and Universities are the oldest learning institutions around. Both have long standing procedures ad mechanisms for being truthful, and I guess that annoys conservatives.


Nine-El said...

OT FWIW a beatdown of your idol P Krugman

EdHeath said...

I don't find the Daily Caller piece very compelling. By the way, one reason for lower real tax rates as opposed to nominal raters is that the wealthy used to donate heavily to the arts. Now tax rates are low and the arts are disappearing. What a benefit for society.

Nine-El said...

What you disagree with... is not compelling.... ok it factually accurate? So the wealthy shud not be able to control their support for the arts..or not, right? Would the same treatment apply to you? Take every nickel from the Forbes 400 ...approx 1.7 tril ...BHO debt for a year...who is next for a close clip of their excessive or modest wealth? You THAT'S NOT FAIR !!!!!! Wa..Wa. WA