Blinding Opposition with … SCIENCE!!

Posted: August 8, 2013 in Republicans / GOP, science
Tags: , , , , , , ,

I’m starting to wonder what a “WND EXCLUSIVE” means because I keep seeing their “exclusive” stories posted elsewhere, or at least reporting of the issue posted elsewhere. This one has no named author and is headlined, “How Obama Blinded Romney with Science.”

Allow me a brief interlude: I am definitely of the mind that there is a clear trend of a “Republican War on Science.” As in, conservatives are far more likely to reject global climate change, reject evolution in favor of creationism, reject medical avenues of research based on their religion, and so on. That’s not to say that liberals have their own pet things that they fudge numbers on, but in general, I think there’s a pretty clear divide. So I thought this headline fairly ironic when I read it.

Keeping in mind, of course, that this is referring to soft political science and statistics rather than more a hard physical applied science. (“Hard” and “soft” don’t refer to their difficulty, but more how “fundamental” the science is or the firmness of observations, such as particle physics versus human psychology.)

Anyway, the article is lengthy but is an advertisement for “Birther in Chief” (I think that’s the Joe.My.God blog term) Dr. Jermoe Corsi’s new book, “What Went Wrong?” which is his analysis of the 2012 election. BTW, Corsi is a real Ph.D., earning it in political science at Harvard. He’s no dummy when it comes to that, but he’s one of the more obtuse conspiracy theorists I’ve seen in the political science field. But that’s incidental. This was supposed to be a short post.

The article could be summarized by these three paragraphs, or at least the main point shown:

Corsi noted, in contrast to the Republican’s old-school approach, the Democrats had “highly effective computer scientists, political scientists, communications scientists and psychologists” working for them. The Obama campaign even had physicists crunching numbers and doing statistical mapping.

“For the political scientists running the Obama campaign, it wasn’t about winning all of the country, it came down to eight states. And in those eight states it came down the cities and Cuyahoga County in Ohio,” explained the author to the Eagle Forum.

Corsi described how the Democrats narrowed their targets even further to just 50,000 voters in Ohio and another 50,000 in Florida, and the necessity of getting the African-American and Hispanic communities actively involved.

I really wanted to post about this not for the article, but for the responses. In that the voting makes no sense based on what I’m used to. Yes, the top-rated vote (5 up, 0 down) is a short rant about Obama. And so is the second. But the third, with 7 up and 2 down votes is from “this2shallpass” who states the following:

It is simple for the republicans to win in 2016. If science is what caused Romney to snatch defeat from the jaw of victory, then we should outlaw science. Science is for the elitist liberals, not true American. It may take a while to do it at the country level, but we can pursue it at the state level, especially those states who have been successful in passing laws to keep the undesirables from voting, and enacting other conservative principles..

Based on “this2shallpass”‘s previous comments (you can click his name on the thread and see ’em), this is as tongue-in-cheek as it sounds, especially given the second paragraph of my post. Yet it has 7 up-votes and only 2 down-votes.

Then there’s this reply to “John” (who wrote, “Obama won both elections simply because of the low-information (stupid) voter.”) by “Joe Cogan:” “Don’t FOX News and talk radio listeners usually vote GOP?” Joe’s comment has two up-votes and only one down. The snarky me wants to say that’s because the “stupid” voters on this site don’t understand Joe’s implication.

I’m surprised about these two comments being as highly rated as they are, especially that first one. I give him or her props for posting this kind of stuff to WND — I’ve sometimes considered making a fake account and being as conservative as possible and seeing how the readers vote me. Maybe I will at some future time…

To close out this longer than expected post, here’s a doozy from “Lamar Carnes”:

This is all true outside of the real decider of the election of any human being to an office. By the way that is God Himself, HE is the absolute decider of the elections because HE creates the various things which place people in office. He is in control of the nations and places kings, dictators, Presidents, Monarchs, etc., on the thrones or in the chairs of Government. He decides the outcome for HIS purposes and that is the final point! If you dn’t believe HIM – He really states this in His word, then you have to deal with that. But it doesn’t change one thing if you don’t believe it! It happens! He judges nations, or He blesses nations.. Currently most are being judged on planet earth! You must have enough sense to know that these things don’t happen by chance, since chance is actually NOTHING! And nothing is nothing because when it is consider nothing it becomes something! So drop nothing and chance form you vocabulary. God is in charge and HE is the CAUSE of all things either directly or indirectly.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s