on Nisbet saying we should stop calling (some) Republicans "anti-science"

[acroyear]

in spite of the in-your-face comments of genuine stupidity they make...

The Questionable Authority : If I shouldn't say they're anti-science, what should I call it?:

It's not even like we're digging for opportunities to criticize Republicans [take RFK Jr's anti-vaccination for example] - all of the examples I just cited came from highly publicized public remarks. The Republicans are getting criticized more, because they're doing it more publicly, more vocally, more egregiously, and more often.

I suppose we could just ignore it. But there's something that I'd like to suggest to the communications expert [Nisbet]:

Ignoring blatantly anti-science remarks - even if we're just ignoring them because we're afraid of alienating allies of the people making them - sends its own message. It says that these are unimportant issues. That they're issues that we don't really care about. It says that the misrepresentation of science in public policy debates is something that we can live with. It says we're fine with it.

That's not a message I'm willing to send. I'm not fine with it.

I was making the same comment about George Will yesterday - yes, it attracts a lot of attention to Will by having the blogosophere attack him. But the alternative is that by not challenging his stupidity on this matter, we foster the impression he's right.