Sunday, September 26, 2021
HomePatriot DispatchesChris Matthews Plays "Anti-Intellectual" Card, Reince Priebus, GOP Ducks

Chris Matthews Plays “Anti-Intellectual” Card, Reince Priebus, GOP Ducks

In the Yes, We’re Still Losing Department:

Chris Matthews had this brief tete de tete with Reince Priebus, the GOP’s already lamented new chief.

What the GOP leadership is good at, always been good at,  is dodging easy questions, mistakenly believing they are hard.

When I see a GOP leader march out to meet a media inquisitor I always think of my sister the first time I ever wound up like I was going to throw a fastball, then lobbed a lollipop. She never saw it coming…for her eyes were closed tight, her head ducked.

Matthews was trying to get Priebus to agree with Gov Rick Perry, who favors creationism being taught alongside evolution in Texas schools, by labeling evolution as Science, and creationism as both Anti-science and Anti-intellectual.

Priebus once again underwhelmed, and I actually wonder if he even knows when he’s been dealt three Aces in a question? Being the best political mind the best GOP minds could find, yes, sometimes you have to ask, “Maybe Darwin was right.” In his career, you ask, has Reince Priebus ever considered that the Left, and the agenda Matthews spews daily on MSNBC, is wall-papered in anti-intellectualism? It’s what defines them. That is the cue to proper risposte for a sucker-foil attack.

Still he ducks.

Reince Priebus didn’t even have to defend creationism in order to point out that evolution, as taught in public schools and colleges, is far more anti-intellectual, for it demands no competition…although it is but a theory.

Like global warming, climate change, which I’ll get to in a moment, all the consensus in the world cannot turn a theory into a fact. Evolution is a theory, and when cubby-holed, off camera, off-mic, virtually every natural scientist who can still stand to look himself in the mirror will confess this is so, for, as Richard Dawkins (who uses evolution as the basis for his atheistic anti-religion crusades) proved, it’s an easy 3-4 step process of logic , mathematical logic, to cause a scientist to concede there are aspects of evolution they simply cannot prove. Ergo, a theory.

Creationism is also a theory, and while not only in the scientific consensus game, but in probabilities game, it is mathematically less compelling…unless you are also a person of faith. And this matters. Should matter. Interestingly, even luminaries such as Albert Einstein could not rule out “design” in the earth’s creation and ordering.

So, both are unquestionably theories, and both are arguably objects of intellectual pursuit.

So what’s anti-intellectual then? Well, one is exclusivist, allowing for no open inquiry or debate, and that would be the wonderful world of evolution theory, which will truck no competitive idea. The other, the anti-intellectual, the anti-scientific theory, simply wants to be taught alongside the other.

All Gov Perry, rightfully I might add, is suggesting is that since a majority of his constituents are in fact people of faith, they would prefer to have both theories taught side-by-side.

Which brings us to global warming, for Al Gore, the Green Bandito, has been using this anti-intellectual, exclusivist mantra to the media and government for years, asking them to shut down debate, nay-saying.

Now, no libel ever accused Gore of being a scientist. In fact, he can’t even restate science well. They could do with a better pitchman.

But as with creationism, the intellectuals want to close off any debate to what, mathematically and philosophically are even more specious than Darwin’s theory. Facts…climate change…drawn from computer models…drawn from data input…drawn from human data collection…drawn from totally objective humans is a far cry from any scientific recognition of “fact”. Science has built-in protections against all those possible faults ending up being some scientists’ “facts”, and those protections have been circumvented over and over again, by those damned “objective” humans.

Matthews also mentioned China, as a way to bait Priebus, and America’s race with them for technological superiority, i.e, how can we compete if we are anti-science and anti-intellectual?

Does Priebus also not know that China doesn’t believe in global warming climate change either? But they sure hope we continue to do so, because that is why they are catching up with us.

 

Bernard Chumm
Partner, The Sands Institute, head of the fearsome Scat Patrol, and Protector of the Innocent

4 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

4 COMMENTS

  1. Author! At the point where you said “Which bring us to…” I thought you were going to say ‘the Tenth Amendment’, but when you came to the fork in the road, as the man said, you took it, and maintained your underlying theme, which I wish would get through to more donors – we need smarter people in politics, at least ones capable of playing ….hardball.

  2. The response is right there if one will only pick it up and throw it back. The first attack out of the gate on Perry was, “all those jobs created in Texas were just minimum wage jobs.” That’s an overt lie, and one can easily break it down with Dept of Labor statistics, but the immediate, visceral, gut response before even getting to that (which was used some places, and reported here on UP)was: “a minimum wage job there still looks pretty good if you don’t have a job.” So sad but true. I don’t want to be overly optimistic but seems they’re weakening. They’re starting to throw nails, bricks and old shoes now. They’re out of .30 cal.

  3. I couldn’t make it past 2:10. First, someone tell Reince to wipe that cheesy, half-baked grin off his face when discussing serious policy.

    Second, he lost the debate when he he didn’t follow his ‘well, that’s quite an extrapolation from point A to point B Chris. So, why don’t you explain to your viewers what a candidate’s views on evolution have to do with creating jobs?’

    We *suck* at changing narratives because too many of the folks on our side, especially our leaders, are either not true believers in conservatism or deep down inside they really are embarrassed by who we are.

    • That’s it eburke. They are really embarrassed by who we are. They want to be the cool kids, but they can’t be.

      They are divided within themselves. Deep down they know the right answer, but that need to be cool is holding them back. They be drinking the kool-aid.

  1. Author! At the point where you said “Which bring us to…” I thought you were going to say ‘the Tenth Amendment’, but when you came to the fork in the road, as the man said, you took it, and maintained your underlying theme, which I wish would get through to more donors – we need smarter people in politics, at least ones capable of playing ….hardball.

  2. The response is right there if one will only pick it up and throw it back. The first attack out of the gate on Perry was, “all those jobs created in Texas were just minimum wage jobs.” That’s an overt lie, and one can easily break it down with Dept of Labor statistics, but the immediate, visceral, gut response before even getting to that (which was used some places, and reported here on UP)was: “a minimum wage job there still looks pretty good if you don’t have a job.” So sad but true. I don’t want to be overly optimistic but seems they’re weakening. They’re starting to throw nails, bricks and old shoes now. They’re out of .30 cal.

  3. I couldn’t make it past 2:10. First, someone tell Reince to wipe that cheesy, half-baked grin off his face when discussing serious policy.

    Second, he lost the debate when he he didn’t follow his ‘well, that’s quite an extrapolation from point A to point B Chris. So, why don’t you explain to your viewers what a candidate’s views on evolution have to do with creating jobs?’

    We *suck* at changing narratives because too many of the folks on our side, especially our leaders, are either not true believers in conservatism or deep down inside they really are embarrassed by who we are.

    • That’s it eburke. They are really embarrassed by who we are. They want to be the cool kids, but they can’t be.

      They are divided within themselves. Deep down they know the right answer, but that need to be cool is holding them back. They be drinking the kool-aid.

Must Read