90 Miles From Tyranny

Wednesday, June 3, 2015

Skepticism has had an amazing impact on climate science given its size and persecution. Yet it still languishes as a social pariah in the green room of society. To grow, skeptics need to find a group of people that can be influenced.

Skeptics have benefited greatly through their association with Conservatives. Unfortunately, skepticism among the Conservative population has been maximized. Future growth has to come from the political middle.

According to 2014 survey by Pew, 61% of Americans believe

“…there is solid evidence that Earth’s average temperature has been getting warmer over the past few decades.”

What’s amazing is that 35% are willing to admit that they don’t believe the Earth has been warming in the past few decades (the remaining 4% don’t take a position). That 35% has resisted more than a decade of bellwether pushing and government campaigns. Skeptics have been out-grouped and Othered by their friends and even family members. And yet they still don’t accept CAGW or possibly even AGW. These are some stubborn people.

Are most of the 35% scientifically literate? Have they researched AGW and come to a contrary conclusion? Many scientists have...

Fresh on the heels of The Daily Signal’s two-part investigation into Covered California, the Columbia Journalism Review launched its own probe asking why more news outlets haven’t taken a critical look at the largest Obamacare state exchange.

In an article titled, “Why we need stronger coverage of Covered California,” Columbia Journalism Review reporter Trudy Lieberman writes:

[P]ress coverage has largely followed the lead set by the [Covered California] exchange. The result is coverage that has too often been reactive, short on enterprise, and with missed opportunities to ask some necessary questions. Covered California may ultimately have a success story to tell—but it will need to face some sharper skepticism before we can be sure.

Many in the news media have simply reported information from Covered California’s own press releases. They’ve paid little attention to trouble facts such as Covered California’s enrollment: It increased only...

Girls With Guns

These Blogs Provide Links To Rule 5 Sites:

What is Rule 5?

The Pirate's Cove has:

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Proof Positive has:

Best Of Web Link Around

The Woodsterman has:

Rule 5 Woodsterman Style

The Other McCain has:

Rule 5 Sunday: Hot Times In Houston

HERE ARE SOME RULE 5 LINKS FROM THIS BLOG:

The Founders’ Model of Welfare Actually Reduced Poverty

Which approach to welfare policy is better for the poor: that of the Founders or that of today’s welfare state?

The more we spend on the poor, the harder it seems for them to attain decent, productive lives in loving families. The federal government has spent $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs since the beginning of the War on Poverty in 1965, but the poverty rate is nearly the same today as in 1969, fluctuating between roughly 11 and 15 percent over that time period.

As I argue in a new essay on “Poverty and Welfare in the American Founding,” these results are bound to continue unless we rethink welfare policy from the perspective of our Founders. Neither the contemporary left nor right in America properly understands their approach.

The left often claims the Founders were indifferent to the poor—suggesting that New Deal America ended callousness and indifference. Indeed, high school and college textbooks frequently espouse this narrative. Many on the right think the Founders advocated only for ...