tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post8253873952558145067..comments2024-03-28T13:46:15.865-04:00Comments on the daily howler: Two tribes, becoming more tribal!<b>bob somerby</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/02963464534685954436noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-79564005848109524672014-01-05T19:06:21.635-05:002014-01-05T19:06:21.635-05:00We have met the enemy and he is us.We have met the enemy and he is us.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-78943700377021654032014-01-05T16:03:01.413-05:002014-01-05T16:03:01.413-05:00Oh, really? Who are the "liberal spokespeopl...Oh, really? Who are the "liberal spokespeople" and who elected them? The owners of MSNBC? And who is "we", sd in "stop being tribal"? You? The commenters on select websites, selectively selected? Anyone who makes an argument Somerby doesn't like? Or points to the racial resentment underlying tea-party politics?<br /><br />And address the issues clearly? Really? That's how you persuade a country of 300 million, the vast majority of whom are not listening to you? Where has that strategy worked before, exactly, in a corporate-controlled media state? On for-profit TV, where left-wing arguments are banned as a matter of course?<br /><br />One would never guess, listening to guys like you, how successful the vert strategy you claim to condemn is and was for the over side.<br /><br />Of course, if your hero is Bill Clinton, it hardly matters who gets elected, so there will be no compelling interest in the outcome of electoral politics in the U.S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-10766939452339618152014-01-04T22:17:44.301-05:002014-01-04T22:17:44.301-05:00Representative of the problem he describes in his ...Representative of the problem he describes in his post. Did you not read it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-24802396705785968692014-01-04T22:16:00.929-05:002014-01-04T22:16:00.929-05:00He proposes we stop being tribal. That means stop ...He proposes we stop being tribal. That means stop calling everyone racist and demand that liberal spokespeople address the issues clearly and factually so that people will support liberal causes. He wants the left to persuade not propagandize.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-41944020811110922642014-01-03T16:04:51.245-05:002014-01-03T16:04:51.245-05:00Representative of what? But of course, don't l...Representative of what? But of course, don't look up the comments for yourself. Bob has already told you that they are "representative".<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-85437175163550745042014-01-03T13:54:13.995-05:002014-01-03T13:54:13.995-05:00Even granting Mr. Bob's dubious assessment of ...Even granting Mr. Bob's dubious assessment of the matter -- that "libruls" (whoever the hell he has in mind this week) are just as stupid and tribal as Repubs, one might ask what he expects "libruls" to do about it, in the current climate? Does he propose that libruls triumph by being, say, nice? <br /><br />Respect an opposition which despises liberals and whose hatred precedes, by decades, liberal fight-back? Turn the other cheek? Compromise principle even more than, say, Somerby heroes Clinton & Gore, in the interest of brotherly love? Pretend that these differences are not fundamental -- indeed eschatological -- and can be tolerated (say, half our science funding goes to evolutionary biology; the other to creationism? same with global warming?)<br /><br />Apparently, the real problem, according to Bob, is not that liberals have been too accommodating, but not accommodating enough! Besides, libruls are mean! And I've got comments to prove it! This must stop immediately! Or is this just what "politics" means?<br /><br />Of course there's another possibility. Mr. Bob doesn't actually care about any of these questions, any more than (according to him) libruls care about the educational achievements of black children. Because, you see, it's all about Mr. Bob being right....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-79637080530461654882014-01-03T13:46:49.575-05:002014-01-03T13:46:49.575-05:00I second that. Also, many of us do consider oursel...I second that. Also, many of us do consider ourselves liberal rather than the more commonly used "progressive" because there is a real distinction in meaning between the two terms, as well as a historical difference. I don't spend much time on the red side of the media, so I don't know or care how they use the word. I don't think I am revealing myself to be a conservative when I call myself a liberal (and proud of it). And I am not auditioning for Fox any more than Somerby is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-21088131410364498342014-01-03T13:31:51.706-05:002014-01-03T13:31:51.706-05:00Assuming you are the same anon who habitually deno...Assuming you are the same anon who habitually denominated TDH as "bone gnawer" and even viler, "shit sucker", I want to thank you for forsaking that practice. But, at the risk of asking too much, the constant reference to "Libruls" and "librul bashing" ain't in the least amusing (it's the opposite) so could you just spell it correctly from now own? Thanks.AC /MAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-78547572986898846772014-01-03T12:51:40.142-05:002014-01-03T12:51:40.142-05:00AnonymousJanuary 3, 2014 at 12:19 PM
"If one...AnonymousJanuary 3, 2014 at 12:19 PM<br /><br />"If one were to venture into the mind of Somerby,"<br /><br />I think "we liberals" is a dead giveaway. Practically no liberal calls him/herself a liberal in today's USA. "Liberal" is always a cuss-word used by wingers.<br /><br />The blogger's librul-bashing is a running job-application to FOX. Unfortunately, they prefer leggy blondes (bottle OK) as their attack bots.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-12193183894941329782014-01-03T12:42:37.028-05:002014-01-03T12:42:37.028-05:00Two representative comments.Two representative comments.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-23167398030249409592014-01-03T12:42:05.895-05:002014-01-03T12:42:05.895-05:00TrollTrollAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-57451748324686090262014-01-03T12:35:22.361-05:002014-01-03T12:35:22.361-05:00They do in their survey of African American religi...They do in their survey of African American religion. Just not in their survey of Religion. That is because their focus is different and it is too difficult to main such finegrain distinctions in the broader survey, which does not focus just on African Americans but on the broader population. Did you even look at the links I posted above?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-50515411549891941732014-01-03T12:32:05.406-05:002014-01-03T12:32:05.406-05:00Pew uses the term "black Protestant."
T...Pew uses the term "black Protestant."<br /><br />They do not differentiate between "mainline" and "evangelical" or any other "variety" in the extremely broad spectrum of Christianity as they did for white Protestants.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-1684445090263082962014-01-03T12:29:13.037-05:002014-01-03T12:29:13.037-05:00There is a brilliant video on Upworthy.com compari...There is a brilliant video on Upworthy.com comparing side by side the bought-and-paid-for "scientists" denying global warming with the bought-and-paid-for "scientists" who once denied a link between smoking and lung cancer.<br /><br />Deja vu all over again.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-16045978276669633722014-01-03T12:19:29.945-05:002014-01-03T12:19:29.945-05:00"It was about the tendency to call the other ..."It was about the tendency to call the other tribe names, such as stupid, for holding different beliefs . . ."<br /><br />And how did Somerby go about proving this thesis? By picking two comments from a blog comment box. Weak tea, indeed.<br /><br />If one were to venture into the mind of Somerby, one might see evidence of classic projection -- condemn in others that you are most guilty of.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-522739169666783772014-01-03T11:55:41.318-05:002014-01-03T11:55:41.318-05:00David,
Your AGW stuff is embarrassingly trite and ...David,<br />Your AGW stuff is embarrassingly trite and easily refuted. Get a clue and open your mind to some quality science:<br />realclimate.org (content maybe too hard for you but this is the real shit!)<br />www.skepticalscience.com/ (easier/better for the not-so-science-ey)<br />cheers,<br />nhAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-62929491818495738212014-01-03T11:45:00.252-05:002014-01-03T11:45:00.252-05:00How effing funny. You are the honest, omniscient b...How effing funny. You are the honest, omniscient broker. Not! <br />A billion has been spent promoting climate change skepticism and denial (including attempts to ruin the careers of pioneering, top-notch climate scientists). You ignorantly buy into that thoroughly debunked anti-science crud and then fault others as being hoodwinked. Laughable.<br /><br />I will agree that it is common for people of all political stripes to not familiarize themselves with the science enough to know why they believe what they believe about things scientific including AGW/climate change. <br /><br />Read realclimate.org for a month or so and you might be "cured".<br />-nhAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-81255654429567390142014-01-03T10:48:39.014-05:002014-01-03T10:48:39.014-05:00You are responding to the troll. No one else here ...You are responding to the troll. No one else here wants to discuss warming with you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-82137376490843255162014-01-03T10:45:37.779-05:002014-01-03T10:45:37.779-05:00Trolls gotta troll.Trolls gotta troll.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-84791015041975687932014-01-03T10:25:33.831-05:002014-01-03T10:25:33.831-05:00AnonymousJanuary 3, 2014 at 9:35 AM
The issue is ...AnonymousJanuary 3, 2014 at 9:35 AM<br /><br />The issue is the multiple lies from one who nit-picks others:<br /><br />"According to Gallup, the percentage of people who say they’re Republican has dropped by a substantial amount since the end of 2009."<br /><br />(1) This suggests that GALLUP is making the assertion - whereas the blogger is making it using Gallup data.<br /><br />(2) What is "substantial"?<br /><br />(3) Why the "end of 2009"? Month-by-month data certainly disprove the "substantial" lie.<br /><br />At any rate, there has been a general trend towards independents from both parties - he comes nowhere near explaining the belief-in-evolution data with his lies.<br /><br />Even if it is true that Repugs ("we shouldn't be the stupid party" - Bobby Jindal - one of their own) drove off scientifically inclined folks after 2009 - thats nothing to write home about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-70196688515254512852014-01-03T10:23:11.828-05:002014-01-03T10:23:11.828-05:00(Some academics believe the recession helped to de...<i>(Some academics believe the recession helped to depress belief in warming, as people's worries about their immediate livelihood trumped longer-term concerns.)<br /></i><br /><br />Perhaps the fact that there's been no warming for the last 16 years helped depress belief in warming. Sadly, I'm not surprised that "some academics" would assign reasons for the drop in belief about GW without even knowing the basic scientific facts about the subject. This comment says more about "some academics" than about the people who disbelieve in warming.<br /><br />BTW note that the word "warming" as used by Anon 8:03 AM and by myself actually means more than it says. Most skeptics acknowledge that the earth has been warming. In this context, "Belief in warming" means something like:: "Belief that the IPCC models are reliable, that man's activity will cause catastrophic warming, and that it's possible to avert disaster by reducing the use of fossil fuels."David in Calnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-59592394261746170492014-01-03T09:35:11.010-05:002014-01-03T09:35:11.010-05:00And the point of this post was not about changes i...And the point of this post was not about changes in belief or the reasons for them. It was about the tendency to call the other tribe names, such as stupid, for holding different beliefs, and the tendency of liberals to attribute differences to racism -- a very ugly name applied to the other tribe. The evidence for that was in the comments. <br /><br />So, it is interesting speculating about the source of the gap, if there is one, but Somerby's point was that attributing it to racism and/or stupidity is tribal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-55347331747861313932014-01-03T09:02:20.722-05:002014-01-03T09:02:20.722-05:00"...though it will be hard to tell until Repu..."...though it will be hard to tell until Republicans control Washington again." <br /><br />In that case I hope to a) live to be 1,000 years old, and b) never have this theory confirmed.<br /><br />BertoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-7750286694287556382014-01-03T08:03:14.762-05:002014-01-03T08:03:14.762-05:00Folks he has flat out lied to you:
http://www.the...Folks he has flat out lied to you:<br /><br />http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/12/why-has-republican-belief-in-evolution-declined-so-much/282730/<br /> David A. Graham Dec 31 2013, 1:43 PM ET<br /><br />"<br />It's not surprising that Republicans are less likely to believe in evolution that Democrats are; while the numbers vary from survey to survey, there has been a consistent gap. Republicans are also less likely to believe that the earth's climate is warming, or, if they accept that it is, to believe that the change is caused by human activity. But belief in climate change is actually on the uptick, among both Democrats and Republicans, having reached a nadir in 2009. (Some academics believe the recession helped to depress belief in warming, as people's worries about their immediate livelihood trumped longer-term concerns.)<br /><br />What's surprising in the new Pew evolution numbers is the trend—a more than 10-point drop in belief among Republicans. What explains it?<br /><br />Pew doesn't speculate but remarks on the confusing result: <br /><br /> Differences in the racial and ethnic composition of Democrats and Republicans or differences in their levels of religious commitment do not wholly explain partisan differences in beliefs about evolution. Indeed, the partisan differences remain even when taking these other characteristics into account.<br /><br />One possibility is that respondents who identified as Republican and believed in evolution in 2009 are no longer identifying as Republicans. Fewer scientists, for example, are reportedly identifying with the GOP, and the overall trend is for fewer Americans to call themselves Republicans. But both Gallup and separate polling from Pew found approximately the same party ID in 2009 and 2013."<br /><br />Sheesh. Kool Aid drinkers - this is not a matter for judgement - HE FLAT OUT LIED TO YOU ABOUT AN EASILY VERIFIABLE FACT.<br /><br />And yes - most Repugs are so dumb and hateful that THEY DON"T KNOW if they believe in evolution - thy just know that saying that they don't is a vehicle to express librul-hatred. And librul-hatred does have its ebbs and flows.<br /><br />"What does that leave? Maybe the gap represents an emotional response by Republicans to being out of power. Among others, Chris Mooney has argued that beliefs on politically contentious topics are often more rooted in opposition to perceived attacks than anything else—an instance of "motivated reasoning." Given that Democrats have controlled the White House and Senate since 2009, this could be backlash to the political climate, though it will be hard to tell until Republicans control Washington again." Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-53013577103508882742014-01-02T23:33:09.465-05:002014-01-02T23:33:09.465-05:00Anonymous @6:59, you seem to be unable to grasp sa...Anonymous @6:59, you seem to be unable to grasp sarcasm and or irony. I hardly think that Bob is stupid. Nor do I think that he is a "liberal hater." I'm sorry that I need to explain that to you.Horace Pleighnoreply@blogger.com