Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Media

Paul Krugman on the GOP’s ‘ignorance caucus’

Feb. 11, 2013 9:03am

In the New York Times today, liberal columnist Paul Krugman says the difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the GOP has its own “ignorance caucus.”

He writes on Rep. Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) speech from last week:

Mr. Cantor tried to sound interested in serious policy discussion. But he didn’t succeed — and that was no accident. For these days his party dislikes the whole idea of applying critical thinking and evidence to policy questions. And no, that’s not a caricature: Last year the Texas G.O.P. explicitly condemned efforts to teach “critical thinking skills,” because, it said, such efforts “have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.”

And such is the influence of what we might call the ignorance caucus that even when giving a speech intended to demonstrate his openness to new ideas, Mr. Cantor felt obliged to give that caucus a shout-out, calling for a complete end to federal funding of social science research. …

The truth is that America’s partisan divide runs much deeper than even pessimists are usually willing to admit; the parties aren’t just divided on values and policy views, they’re divided over epistemology. One side believes, at least in principle, in letting its policy views be shaped by facts; the other believes in suppressing the facts if they contradict its fixed beliefs.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Comments (2)

  • bonesiii
    Posted on February 11, 2013 at 10:54am

    “One side believes, at least in principle, in letting its policy views be shaped by facts; the other believes in suppressing the facts if they contradict its fixed beliefs.”
    A classic flub, since he failed to specify which side is which. Overall, conservatives are the ones best described as “at least in principle, letting its policy views be shaped by facts” (real facts, not fallacious popular ideas based in emotion as liberals fall prey to). And we all know it. Do liberals suppress facts that contradict their fixed beliefs? Even to pose the question is silly because we all have experienced this from them, especially if you go to public schools.

    Are there exceptions? Sure. But even if Slugbrain’s implied lie (that it’s the other way around) was true in general, he is well aware there are plenty of liberals (usually his biggest fans) that would be exceptions. Conservatism is built -in principle- on logic, truthseeking, and proven facts. Liberals form their opinions for emotional reasons first, and then optionally try to sometimes construct arguments to support it later, sometimes with actual (though partial) evidence.

    Report this comment

    bonesiii  
  • NigelTufnel
    Posted on February 11, 2013 at 9:42am

    If Paul is so worried about the suppression of facts then why isn’t he railing about Benghazi? This is just another rediculous claim that those on the right do not believe in math and science yet it is the left that aggregates the majority of those weak in these fields. Hey Paul. The economy contracted last month yet you somehow say it was good. Unemployment still rediculously high yet you say that is good. Geoffry Imelt said last month that 8% growth like China would be bad. 3% is much better. Last time I checked 8 was higher and better than 3. It is the silly defense of the real numbers that troubles the right. Of course the aggregates weak in Math and Science all belong to the left so they are easily duped.

    Report this comment

    NigelTufnel  

Comments are closed.

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love