The Hugh Hewitt Show

Listen 24/7 Live: Mon - Fri   6 - 9 PM Eastern
Call the Show 800-520-1234
Project Hope Advertisement


Tuesday, October 13, 2015  |  posted by John Schroeder

Back in August when it was first released, I linked to a study from the Reproduciblity Project about the lack of reproducibility in behavioral science studies and its implications for social policy making.  (That post followed-up in part a post I had done in July on authority and science.)

Come this week there is a fantastic article by Andrew Ferguson in The Weekly Standard that dives deeply into the “behavioral sciences.”  You really need to take the time to read it all.

I want to focus on this one specific paragraph from Ferguson’s excellent piece:

For even as it endows social scientists with bogus authority​—​making them the go-to guys for marketers, ideologues, policymakers, and anyone else who strives to manipulate the public​—​it dehumanizes the rest of us. The historian and humanist Jacques Barzun noticed this problem 50 years ago in his great book Science: The Glorious Entertainment. Social psychology proceeds by assuming that the objects (a revealing word) of its study lack the capacity to know and explain themselves accurately. This is the capacity that makes us uniquely human and makes self-government plausible. We should know enough to be wary of any enterprise built on its repudiation. [emphasis added]

Ferguson uses this as part of a discussion of the lack of humility among behavioral scientists.  But I see this excellent observation about what it means to be human on a different level.  This is the point at which religion and science are really at war.  It is not evolution, or the physics of creation, it is here in the so-called social and behavioral sciences where religion and science genuinely crash.  Fundamental to the Judeo/Christian world view is that humans are Imago Dei – in the image of God.  “Science” that assumes we are objects that can be manipulated is entirely and completely antithetical to such a notion.  This renders the great debates surrounding creation as merely diversions.

But what I find most troubling about Ferguson’s magnificent observation is that entirely too often we give the behavioral “scientists” reason to continue with their dehumanizing presumptions. Continue Reading

AdvertisementAdvertise With Us

Former Obama Campaign Staffer Stephanie Cutter On The DNC’s Mistake In Limiting Debates And Lack Of Depth On Their Bench

Tuesday, October 13, 2015  |  posted by Duane Patterson

The audio:


The transcript:

HH: From the MGM Grand Hotel, the Washington Post is doing a special pregame special of which I am a part tonight at the MGM Grand, as is Stephanie Cutter sitting across from me on the radio row here, which is one radio show. Of course, you know her from Crossfire. You know her from the Obama White House and the Obama campaign. You know her from the Clinton White House. She is now a partner at Precision Strategies. You can follow her on Twitter, @SefCutter, and it’s STEF, not PH, @StefCutter. Stephanie Cutter, welcome back, good to have you on the Hugh Hewitt Show.

SC: Thanks for having me.

HH: You’ve been in these rooms before. What are they doing tonight in the suites over at the Wynn, where I assume they’re all staying?

SC: Well, I would imagine they all have their own, you know, preparation moments happening right now. I know for President Obama, when we were preparing for a debate, he needed some alone time, and then to see one or two people just before he walked on stage. So I would imagine people have their rituals and they’re following them. There’s nothing more you can prep for at this point. You just have to get yourself psychologically ready to walk out on that stage. Continue Reading

If The Rumors About The Rumor Are True….

Sunday, October 11, 2015  |  posted by John Schroeder

We may never know what really happened with Kevin McCarthy’s Speaker bid, but we all know the rumor.  I will not give any of it credence by linking, but there are accusations of an affair.  Depending on the source, the rumor originated somewhere inside the Obama administration (well, one source I have seen) or from a hard line conservative operative (more than one source for that one).  On Hugh’s show Friday (Hughniverse subscription required) Fred Barnes, exceptionally well sourced on this, said that in the modern internet age the reality of such a rumor is immaterial.  Barnes thought that the mere accusation would put the rumor’s subject and his/her family through such a living nightmare as to be sufficient for blackmail material.  I think Barnes has one heck of a point.

Now comes two articles to which I will link.  One from Debra Saunders on Real Clear Politics about those leaving the so-called “Freedom Caucus.”  These are xtremely conservative and independent individuals who walked out of the caucus because as Tom McClintock is quoted, “A common theme through each of these incidents is a willingness — indeed, an eagerness — to strip the House Republican majority of its ability to set the House agenda,….”  The other is a NYTimes piece about the purported aims of the “Freedom Caucus” that closes with this quote from one of its members, “During the last two or three weeks, it’s the first time I actually felt that my vote and my voice actually matters,….”

Assume the rumors that the source of the rumor is a hard line conservative operative are true, though I certainly have no idea if they are.  Then the so-called “Freedom Caucus” is achieving its aims through blackmail.  Now recall that Tom McClintock says those aims are to overcome majoritarian rule.  So much for their name, can you imagine anything short of prison that is less free?  And yet, the Times quote indicates that they seem to be feeling pretty good about all of this.

Again, this is rumor, and rumors about rumor – but it is being discussed.  Back to Barnes’ point, in this Internet age rumors do a lot of damage.  So, regardless of what actually went down here, the “Freedom Caucus” has played loose enough with this to seriously damage the conservative and the Republican brand.  These rumors play precisely into the Democrat narratives about conservatives and Republicans.  Reality entirely withstanding, the lack of party discipline here is damaging us at extraordinary levels. Continue Reading

Carly Fiorina Remembers Steve Jobs And Talks About Technophobic Washington, D.C.

Friday, October 9, 2015  |  posted by Duane Patterson

The audio:


The transcript:

HH: One name on many people’s lips is that of Carly Fiorina, clearly the most surprising story of 2016, skyrocketing into if not frontrunner, then near-frontrunner status, and making me look bad every single day that she does because of the book that I wrote, The Queen, in which I said that really can’t be done. Carly Fiorina, welcome back, I always appreciate that you’ve forgiven me my many sins.

CF: (laughing) Hello, Hugh, how are you doing?

HH: I’m great.

CF: You don’t need any forgiveness. We all make mistakes.

HH: We all make mistakes. It’s sort of like someone writing off Thatcher in 1974. Oh, she’ll never get out of that job. I feel like, really, by the way, are you a student of Thatcher?

CF: Am I a what?

HH: A student of Margaret Thatcher?

CF: Well, she certainly is someone that I have admired greatly. I have read her autobiography, and if I had time, I would read the latest book on her. But certainly, she’s someone I admire greatly, and always have.

HH: So when I go on cable and I say Carly Fiorina is going full Thatcher, you don’t mind that?

CF: No, I don’t mind that, although, you know, I’m also not Margaret Thatcher. I’m Carly Fiorina, so I’m flattered by the comparison, but I’m also not trying to be someone else. I’m trying to be myself. Continue Reading

Page 1 of 34531 2 3 4 3,453
NSSF Advertisement
Sierra Pacific Mortgage Advertisement
Back to Top