Via un-climate-related readings, I came across this gem (from the victim article of the link):
My job is to assess not the rightness of each argument but to deal in the real world of campaign politics in which perception often (if not always) trumps reality. I deal in the world as voters believe it is, not as I (or anyone else) thinks it should be. And, I’m far from the only one.
This is from the mouth of one of the Washington Post’s political mouthpieces, Chris Cillizza. Readers here will be more than familiar with the fundamental problems with this attitude. I just wanted to note that the only two worlds he sees that he could be dealing with are “the world as voters believe it is” and what he “thinks [the world] should be”.
What the world actually is, does not even make the list of possibilities.
It is laughable except that many of the issues being decided and discussed through that lens are a matter of life and death for thousands, millions and even 100’s of millions.