"I’m working on is basically creating a safe space for conservatives to pay attention to science

[pscot]

because right now it doesn’t seem safe to pay attention to the science because the ideology says no...."

This is from a Frontline interview with former conservative congressman Bob Inglis, who says he lost his job in part because he accepted the science on climate change. Inglis is smart, thoughtful and wise. The whole thing is worth reading.

Why [has] every president since Richard Nixon made the same speech about ending this dependence on foreign oil? And they are still making the same speech. Answer: We haven’t yet begun to fight, not for enterprise, because the costs are in our petroleum.

We think petroleum is high; we think gasoline is high. It didn’t begin to show the real cost of it. When we consider the supply-line protection that we pay for in defense costs, the risk that we take in national security since the blood that we have shed in protecting that supply line, it’s way more expensive than the $3.30 or $3.50, whatever it is, we are paying. If you stuck it to petroleum and said, “Listen, we want to do some honest cost accounting here,” we’d see the real price, and we’d start innovating. …

So in the case of coal-fired electricity, it sure does look cheap until you add the 23,600 people who die prematurely each year of lung diseases because of the soot out of coal-fired electrical plants and the 3 billion lost work days. You put that in the equation, and you see that gee, coal-fired electricity isn’t that cheap. …

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/environment/climate-of-doubt/bob-inglis-climate-change-and-the-republican-party/

[Scuba]

1. I know a place.

[HereSince1628]

2. The underlying problem with the war on science isn't conservatism, it's capitalism

Sure they want to complain about evolution, but that's really a carnival side-show used to feed the religious right.

The conservatives love science when it supports technology that can be used to multiply invested money.

The real issue is that the money behind resource extraction and manufacturing isn't happy with the notion of science standing with the political forces that tell industry that there ultimately is no place to dump their pollution for free.

The conservatives scream about family values and not loading up their children with a federal debt...but they think nothing of loading up everyone's grandchildrens with the costs of despoiling the planet.

[wtmusic]

3. Unfortunately capitalism is also a terrific driver of innovation

That's why the U.S. is a compromise, and will always be.

It can work when, as a society, we keep an eye on the abuses of capitalism. That hasn't been happening enough lately.

[pscot]

4. If we want to find a way forward

we have to pay attention to what Inglis is saying. He's talking about framing the argument in terms that conservatives can embrace. He's talking about a way to get them off the ideological hook. We spend a lot of time here preaching to the choir. We have to find a way to take the message out to where people live, and do it in a way that overcomes the self-protective psycological barriers that prevent them from hearing what we're saying.

[wtmusic]

5. I don't believe re-framing has ever been effective at changing minds.

Republican's minds (I won't let them co-opt the positive connotations of "conservative&quot are changed when they've been made to feel foolish. Sometimes it takes repeated doses. The more public the embarrassment, the better. The cement is when they're able to correct someone with their new-found knowledge.

That won't happen inside the Fox News/Tea Party bubble - ever. It's 100% futile.

[pscot]

7. True: some of them have minds so hardened

you couldn't cut' em with a diamond. But I believe in redemption for many of them. The problem now is that the full moon crazies have been in charge the last few years. Those folks need to be pushed back to the edge of the debate where they belong. And the money that has been fueling the train has to be curtailled.

[AverageJoe90]

6. Inglis is on to something. n/t

[hatrack]

8. Well, lotsa luck with that, Bob . . .

Let me know how your little conclave with:

Sandy Adams, Florida
Todd Akin, Missouri
Rodney Alexander, Louisiana
Michele Bachmann, Minnesota, Chair
Roscoe Bartlett, Maryland
Joe Barton, Texas
Gus Bilirakis, Florida
Rob Bishop, Utah
Diane Black, Tennessee
Michael C. Burgess, Texas
Paul Broun, Georgia
Dan Burton, Indiana
John Carter, Texas
Bill Cassidy, Louisiana
Howard Coble, North Carolina
Mike Coffman, Colorado
Ander Crenshaw, Florida
John Culberson, Texas
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Stephen Fincher, Tennessee
John Fleming, Louisiana
Trent Franks, Arizona
Phil Gingrey, Georgia
Louie Gohmert, Texas
Vicky Hartzler, Missouri
Wally Herger, California
Tim Huelskamp, Kansas
Lynn Jenkins, Kansas
Steve King, Iowa
Doug Lamborn, Colorado
Jeff Landry, Louisiana
Blaine Luetkemeyer, Missouri
Kenny Marchant, Texas
Tom McClintock, California
David McKinley, West Virginia
Gary Miller, California
Mick Mulvaney, South Carolina
Randy Neugebauer, Texas
Rich Nugent, Florida
Steven Palazzo, Mississippi
Steve Pearce, New Mexico
Mike Pence, Indiana
Ted Poe, Texas
Tom Price, Georgia
Denny Rehberg, Montana
Phil Roe, Tennessee
Dennis Ross, Florida
Ed Royce, California
Steve Scalise, Louisiana
Tim Scott, South Carolina
Pete Sessions, Texas
Adrian Smith, Nebraska
Lamar Smith, Texas
Cliff Stearns, Florida
Tim Walberg, Michigan
Joe Walsh, Illinois
Allen West, Florida
Lynn Westmoreland, Georgia
Joe Wilson, South Carolina

Goes, OK?