Yale Prof. offers a revealing glimpse into the Ivy League’s epistemic closure

A lot of sites have been linking to a blog post from Daniel Kahan, a law professor at Yale because it contains a very surprising confession.  To appreciate both what Kahan said (which was good) and what he refused to do (which was very, very bad), you need to know a little more about Kahan’s specialty.  According to the Wikipedia entry about Kahan, he’s a “leading scholar in the fields of criminal law and evidence and is known for his theory of Cultural cognition.”  (Emphasis mine.)

For the Luddites among us (and I proudly include myself in that number), “cultural cognition” is defined as follows:

The Cultural Cognition Project is a group of scholars interested in studying how cultural values shape public risk perceptions and related policy beliefs. Cultural cognition refers to the tendency of individuals to conform their beliefs about disputed matters of fact (e.g., whether global warming is a serious threat; whether the death penalty deters murder; whether gun control makes society more safe or less) to values that define their cultural identities. Project members are using the methods of various disciplines — including social psychology, anthropology, communications, and political science — to chart the impact of this phenomenon and to identify the mechanisms through which it operates. The Project also has an explicit normative objective: to identify processes of democratic decisionmaking [sic] by which society can resolve culturally grounded differences in belief in a manner that is both congenial to persons of diverse cultural outlooks and consistent with sound public policymaking [sic].

In English:  the good professor thinks that people use their preexisting values and data to analyze new information.  If you can get people to think the right way (I believe the Chinese communists called it “reeducation”), then you can get them to agree to Progressive policies.  (If you read on, you’ll understand why I translate “sound public policymaking” to mean “Leftist policies.”)

As an aside, shouldn’t Yale professors know that “policy making” and “decision making” are two words, rather than each being one portmanteau word?  Yeah, yeah.  Just call me fussy.

For those wondering about the value of a modern Ivy League education that little paragraph pretty much tells you what you need to know:  The Ivy League needs a guy with an expensive Harvard J.D. (and you know how highly I value those pieces of paper) and an even more valuable Yale job to figure out that people operate from their biases, both in collecting and analyzing data.

And speaking of people operating from their biases, Kahan has now confessed that his biases just received a stunning blow.  In the next few paragraphs, I’ll give him some credit for being honest about his recent discovery, but I’ll then explain why he only gets a small nod from me, not a big one.  For the most part, his post leaves me both disdainful and depressed.

Oh, I didn’t tell you what his discovery is.  It turns out that Tea Partiers, the ones who think that AlBore is a scam artist; that humans can pollute but that they lack the power to change the climate, something the sun has been doing fine on its own for several billion years; and that a country that insists on spending money it doesn’t have will soon go broke, are actually more scientifically knowledgeable than the Progressives who worship at the altars of global warming and Keynesian economicsYes, really.  Buried in a sea  of really awesomely impressive statistical jargon, that’s exactly what Kahan says:

In this dataset, I found that there is a small correlation (r = -0.05, p = 0.03) between the science comprehension measure and a left-right political outlook measure, Conservrepub, which aggregates liberal-conservative ideology and party self-identification. The sign of the correlation indicates that science comprehension decreases as political outlooks move in the rightward direction–i.e., the more “liberal” and “Democrat,” the more science comprehending.

Do you think this helps explain conflicts over climate change or other forms of decision-relevant science? I don’t.

But if you do, then maybe you’ll find this interesting.  The dataset happened to have an item in it that asked respondents if they considered themselves “part of the Tea Party movement.” Nineteen percent said yes.

It turns out that there is about as strong a correlation between scores on the science comprehension scale and identifying with the Tea Party as there is between scores on the science comprehension scale and Conservrepub.

Except that it has the opposite sign: that is, identifying with the Tea Party correlates positively (r = 0.05, p = 0.05) with scores on the science comprehension measure:

Again, the relationship is trivially small, and can’t possibly be contributing in any way to the ferocious conflicts over decision-relevant science that we are experiencing.

(I must confess that reading the above made me just ecstatically happy that I no longer practice law.  Think how much academic writing that spares me.)

You’ve probably seen the above quotation everywhere over the last two days.  It certainly makes sense to conservatives, because people who pay attention to actual facts are more likely to conclude that Anthropogenic Global Warming is a hoax.  (If you’re a data junkie, I recommend Watts Up With That.)  It’s the believers who are stuck in the epistemic closure loop.  Climate warmer?  AGW!!  Climate cooler?  AGW!!  No climate movement at all?  AGW.  Models wrong?  Still AGW!  That’s faith, my friends, not science.

But getting back to Professor Kahan.  What’s really fascinating is what comes after his confession regarding what is, to him, a counter-intuitive statistical anomaly.

May I take a moment here to remind you what Professor Kahan’s specialty is?  It’s “cultural cognition,” an expensive sounding theory that posits what your grandmother could have told you for free:  Our biases predispose us to interpret information in certain ways.  This obviously includes as a subset the fact that people look to certain authorities for information.  I can guarantee you that Obama reads the New York Times, and not National Review.  In this way, of course, he is distinct from conservatives, who read both.

Kahan believes that, if he can render cultural cognition into set data points, he can drag people into “sound public policymaking.”  (I believe George Orwell called it “groupthink.”)  Lift their blinders, and they will see the light.

But what about Kahan’s own blinders?  And that’s where his little post gets really interesting.  If you want to see a closed intellectual universe, Kahan invites you right into his:

I’ve got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, I fully expected I’d be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension.

But then again, I don’t know a single person who identifies with the Tea Party.  All my impressions come from watching cable tv — & I don’t watch Fox News very often — and reading the “paper” (New York Times daily, plus a variety of politics-focused internet sites like Huffington Post & Politico).

I’m a little embarrassed, but mainly I’m just glad that I no longer hold this particular mistaken view.

Of course, I still subscribe to my various political and moral assessments–all very negative– of what I understand the “Tea Party movement” to stand for. I just no longer assume that the people who happen to hold those values are less likely than people who share my political outlooks to have acquired the sorts of knowledge and dispositions that a decent science comprehension scale measures.

I’ll now be much less surprised, too, if it turns out that someone I meet at, say, the Museum of Science in Boston, or the Chabot Space and Science Museum in Oakland, or the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago is part of the 20% (geez– I must know some of them) who would answer “yes” when asked if he or she identifies with the Tea Party.  If the person is there, then it will almost certainly be the case that that he or she & I will agree on how cool the stuff is at the museum, even if we don’t agree about many other matters of consequence.

What a charming confession.  It even includes an embarrassed moue, along the lines of “I’m so embarrassed that I assumed Tea Partiers were dumb.”  That almost hides a rather spectacular omission.  Kahan fails to include the logical follow-up that any intelligent person invested in cultural cognition should make.  What he should say after his little confession is “Maybe I should check out what these surprisingly intelligent people believe and argue.”

Instead, what Kahan says after admitting to his intellectual bubble is that he’s just fine with it.  He has no interest in actual data.  Instead, based solely on his predefined values, he will continue “to subscribe to [his] various political and moral assessments — all very negative — of what I understand the ‘Tea Party movement’ to stand for.”  Or as I translate that, “Please, people!  I’m a Yale genius who’s looking for ways to re-educate you.  Don’t bother me with facts and, to the extent that I inadvertently stumbled onto some facts myself, be assured that I will assiduously ignore them.”

I have said for years that, while I’ve never met a post-1984 Harvard Law grad who wasn’t arrogant and ill-informed,* I’ve been impressed with Yale grads.  After my little insight into the thought process of a current Yale professor, I fear that, should any recent Yale grads pop up on my legal radar, I’m going to discover that Yale has gone all Harvard.  Clearly, you’re getting what you pay for at the premier law schools only if you desire social and professional cachet layered upon close-mindedness, chronic epistemic closure, arrogance, and ignorance.

We can all guess, of course, why the Ivy League crowd is so incurious.  They’re afraid that, if they look beyond the narrow confines of their own Progressive cultural cognition, they might follow David Mamet’s path.  Next thing you know, they’ll be cranking up the air conditioner, using excess amounts of toilet paper, and listening to Rush Limbaugh, while muttering “Ditto!”

_________________________

*And yes, I know Ted Cruz is a post-1984 Harvard Law, but I haven’t had the pleasure of meeting him.  I’m just basing my “Harvard lawyers are not people I’d ever hire for myself” attitude on the people I have worked with and opposite.  And of course, if Cruz is a Harvard anomaly, Obama, serenely enveloped in his ignorance and arrogance, is a Harvard poster child.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Jose

    I’m skeptical, but since Kuhn is measuring science *comprehension*, that may simply reflect the education level of his test subjects.  I think we all know that the education system doubles as a progressive indoctrination system, so it follows that most highly educated people lean left.
     
    Just because the highly educated comprehend science doesn’t mean they are objective enough to apply the principles correctly.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com David Foster

    Cultural Cognition seems to be a hybrid of Confirmation Bias, a phenomenon that has long been known in psychology, and plain old Conformism.
     
    BTW, a correlation coefficient (r) of .05 isn’t very impressive, whether the sign is negative or positive. IIRC, the percent of the variance of the target phenomenon that is explained by the variable under study is calculated by SQUARING the correlation coefficient…and .05 squared is .0025…ie, 99.75% of the variations in scientific knowledge are NOT explained by Tea Party membership or lack of same.

  • Caped Crusader

    We are now reaping the “benefits” of the country being run by the left wing faculty lounge of the Ivy League. And what a mess! These are people who have never had a real job where they were held accountable in all respects for the success or failure of their actions, hence no practical experience in reality, rather than theory. For those who saw the interviews of self educated philosopher Eric Hoffer in the 1970’s. it was his contention that the strength of America was due to the fact that we gave intellectuals the freedom to think, but never gave them power to act for they were not rooted in reality. I think it was in the prologue to the movie REDS about an American who was deeply involved in the Russian revolution, the speaker said that those who knew how to solve all the problems of the world had usually refused to face the problems in their own lives, and had usually made a mess of their lives. And those who ran their own lives efficiently did not have time to solve the problems of the world.

  • Texan99

    Yes, I’d love to see a study of the correlation between Tea Party beliefs and the degree to which someone’s income depends on having to persuade someone else to hand over cash in a free transaction.  The ultimate bubble-head is someone who thinks “society” should judge the worth of his work and make sure that salary check keeps coming, without having to consider where the money came from and whether the people from whom it was extracted actually agree that his work has value.

  • JKB

    Well, Cruz may have matriculated at Harvard, but perhaps he never found the god of Ivy?  There have been calls that he be excommunicated for heresy and blasphemy.  
     
    And, of course, the graduates of the famous schools are incurious.  The first rule of religion is to fear questioning.  Questioning can cause you to lose your soul.  
     
    I was raised Southern Baptist.  From the time I got old enough to ask question, I questioned.  It did not make me popular with the faithful.  Many in religion fear the trek into darkness.  I’ve argued myself away from God but always found my way back.  I can see how some might fear they might become marooned if their beliefs are to dogmatic and inflexible leaving little room for the grey areas. I have often thought that in the religion of atheism, many atheists are so active in removing all references to God because while they proclaim they don’t believe in God, they fear that God may believe in them.  
     
    It is the same with the Progs, to question the dogma from on high is to risk excommunication, stigma, and having a large symbol sewn upon their clothing.  So they fear rational thought about non-Prog ideas as they risk being cut-off from the collective and must surely die.  And how lonely they will be when left to their own stunted thoughts.  
     
     
    When a student has formed the habit of collecting and valuing the ideas of others, rather than his own, the self becomes dwarfed from neglect and buried under the mass of borrowed thought.  He may then pass examinations, but he cannot think.  Distrust of self has become so deep-rooted that he instinctively looks away from himself to books and friends for ideas; and anything that he produces cannot be good, because it is not a true expression of self.
     

  • lee

    Orwell’s Newspeak made a lot of words portmanteau words. Since this “Cultural Cognition” seems kind of Orwellian, I am not surprised that they are turning “policy making” and “decisions making” into one word. It really does make it that much closer to groupthink.

  • http://www.amazon.com/Occupy-Innsmouth-ebook/dp/B009WWJ44A/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1361504109&amp raymondjelli

    Everything wrong with so-called academia wrapped in one professor who is naive enough to publish his results rather than lie about his data or withhold it until he could design a criteria that the “good guys” would win under.
    Scientific under Marx meant what it meant to German philosophers.  An idea was scientific if the consensus of German intellectuals agreed upon it. Then we wonder that the Germans declared themselves the master race.
    This professor is confusing the Marxist idea with actual knowledge of science and is shocked to find people who are scientifically literate who don’t conform to his own beliefs.  Then the genius goes ahead and says I don’t have evidence for it but somehow our beliefs are superior. They must be scientific.
    Even better he says where his own beliefs really come from but his phony academic self can only quote other academic papers which he is pretty much saying have to be falsified because all the right answers are known and we just have to fit the data to it.
    Too bad this crap doesn’t come cheap. 

  • Charles Martel

    I wish we could spread the use of “credentialed” in place of “educated” when we’re discussing many of the graduates of the Ivies. There’s such a vast difference between receiving Official Papers that attest to having shown up on time and properly digested leftist pap, and education, which leads one out onto the dangerous waters that JKB describes so well above.  
     
    Professor Kahan, poor little dear, would rather sit on his boat, moored in a cozy marina, eating bon bons. 

  • Libby

    This Cultural Cognition ties in with children being taught a very selective version of history, as well as the media’s selective retelling of history (e.g. heavy on US slavery/historical discrimination and McCarthyism, light on American exceptionalism & supporting democracy worldwide).
     
    This study pairs well with a post over on The Anchoress’ blog that includes a video of college students failing to answer basic questions about the Holocaust (such as, What is it?” and “What is genocide?”). By denying children a full historical context makes them more easily manipulated into holding the preferred policy beliefs. For example, someone who has no knowledge of the Holocaust does not comprehend the gravity of those who want to banish Christianity from all public life, persecute Christians for hate crimes, and referring to someone who does not believe in AGW a “denier.”
     
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/theanchoress/2013/10/17/what-was-auschwitz-i-dont-know/

  • JKB

    Re: charles Martel
     
    And they aren’t “elite” but rather famous universities.  Perhaps “selective” in that they carefully choose those most amenable to the conditioning.
     
     
    From 1923:
    The senior on his graduation day is not an educated man; he is an ignoramus.  However, if he has learned enough to know that he is an ignoramus, some day he will probably attain something like culture, have enough knowledge to be called educated–as education in this world goes. 
     
    If when a man graduates from college he has learned the work he is fitted for, if he has gained some ideal of beauty, if he has delved deeply enough into himself to have even a vague knowledge of his own soul, if he has learned enough of the past to understand to some small degree the present, and if he has gathered unto himself enough ideas of life to have a workable philosophy of living, he has begun at least to learn to live.  He can count his years in college well spent.  He has the rudiments of an education.  If he continues to work, to think, and to learn, he may, by the grace of God, become a man.

  • JKB

    I was just over at neo-Neocon.  She has a post up about the ’60s that has her personal story of doing just what Herr professor is doing now back in the day, seeing something but then going back to sleep.  She new the radicals were wrong but didn’t associate them with the mainstream Dem, until decades later.
     
    You might ask how I managed to remain a liberal Democrat for decades after that experience. I’d refer you to my change series for the answer, but I’ll add that I simply did not connect the radicals I saw at that meeting with most of the liberals in the Democratic Party. Also, I didn’t know much about conservativism and never thought to seek it out because what I read about it in my usual and trusted sources, the NY Times, the Boston Globe, and the New Yorker, made it seem not worth the trouble. It really took the advent of the internet to introduce me to it and get me to realize its value.
    neoneocon…remembering-the-60s-were-you-there/

  • Katja

    I’m seriously not surprised that the Tea Party people are more likely to know more about science.  After all, a lot of these people are those who are really concerned about their kids’ educations, so much so to the point of sending their kids to private schools or home-schooling.  For most of the time that my kids have been alive (and they’re still quite small), we’ve had some sort of science museum membership. and as a matter of fact, just yesterday my kids and I went with another mom (planning on homeschooling) and her little kids  on a trip to a science museum.  

  • Spartacus

    Caped Crusader’s comment reminded me that somewhere back in Chinese history, there was an emperor who insisted on maintaining a strict census of all the people in the kingdom who made a living by talking and waving their hands.  And I think those were literally the criteria that his officials were charged with being on the lookout for!  Not sure if he bothered keeping a census of all the peasants or not, but those talkers and wavers of hands — need to keep track of them!
     
    Also, I think I’ve said this here before, but I’ll say it again: It is at least partially a blessing in disguise that all of the mainstream media institutions are controlled by The Left.  (Hey, I said “partially,” OK?)  We on The Right have no choice but to be exposed to the “information” and “thinking” of the other side, whereas they are largely able to ignore and avoid what we consider to be important facts and opinions.  We are forced to reconcile the contradictory information and interpretation, whereas they are not.  And this constant, forced exercise is the intellectual equivalent of the physical difference between being employed as a bricklayer and being employed as a member of the Kennedy clan.  Were the tables turned, I would like to think that I would still hunger, in fairness and intellectual curiosity, for all sides of the argument, but I must confess that sitting on a boat and eating bon-bons does sound rather nice.  ;)

  • http://cogitatingduck.com cogitatingduck

    I’ll posit a generational explanation of the results.  Tea Partiers usually are established in their careers, and have families.  That means they are older than the general population.  They got a sound education back in the day.  Unfortunately,  the education for the younger generation has totally failed them.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Science was pioneered and the bulk of the work done by rogues, mavericks, and anti-authoritarian individuals. But to be a Leftist or even a Democrat, means you are heels over in love with totalitarian authority and tyranny to some degree.
     
    Chaos theory does not work well with centralized planning.

  • http://OgBlog.net Earl

     
    Did anyone else catch the parallel to some leftist back in the day who said (rough paraphrase) “How could Nixon have won the Presidency…..no one *I* know voted for him!”?
     
    Do you suppose the professor remembered that, and said what he did anyhow…..?  Why?  But, if not, then he really *is* a cultural ignoramus.
     

  • Libby

    Katja – My parents have volunteered at the local science museum for 15+ years and have had noticed a significant difference between the grasp of science of the public school kids vs. private school & home schooled kids. Also, working the dinosaur exhibit, they are instructed to discuss the various scientific theories which is well-received by a lot of the religious visitors (my mom wears a cross so they often mention their appreciation of this policy to her).
    Sadly, the museum recently implemented an official statement affirming AGW that all docents must repeat when the subject arises. My father (a retired M.D.) volunteers in the space odeyssey exhibit, and almost all of his fellow docents are retired scientists and aeronautics engineers (like the guy who came up w/that little twist a shuttle does shortly after take-off). Many of them have considered quitting over this (and some already have) because they have done their own research on AGW and found it to be hogwash.

  • Texan99

    I’d be fascinated to see how the museum would respond to seeing half the docents calmly disobey that guideline. If the museum is going to insist, it should be forced to fire the docents right in front of visitors: a valuable lesson for the public.  For extra points, the docents could confine themselves to the many damaging admissions contained in the IPCC report, for anyone who looks beyond the inexplicable “95% confidence” conclusion.

  • Libby

    Yeah, they’re still working through what to do because they love the museum and think its important that the museum retains a diversity of opinions (since this is really a litmus test). However, they’re concerned that the museum will now take sides on other issues (such as evolution), further politicizing exhibits. They’re also not thrilled that the museum recently posted signs at entrances announcing that it is a gun-free building, that even security guards are unarmed (yes, they actually announce this). It’s just sad that an educational institution, which has the opportunity to expose so many people to the latest in scientific developments, has opted for intolerance. By alienating some visitors they may actually contribute to scientific ignorance (because some may choose not to visit an institution that politicizes science) when they could be educating them – creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

  • ripple

    Nothing to add except to say that this is one of your best posts.

  • Caped Crusader

    Libby #9:
     
    Today’s “educated” young people are breathtakingly ignorant of even the most basic facts to live a good life. This has been escalating for over 35 years and is worse by the year. While they may be ignorant of the most basic facts, you may rest assured that they know Sponge Bob wears square pants. One thing that worries me more is the lack of curiosity, and love of lifelong learning that so few posses today. They view an “education” as a certain time, place, and event that is a one time experience to give you all you will ever need to know for the rest of your life, and once this happens to you, you are “educated”, and that it. Like a tattoo, nose job, vaccination, or high colonic– an experience, and then it’s over for the rest of your life, thank God! I believe this is the fruit of 2-3 generations that have been able to live the ‘good life”, paid for by previous generations and they have grown fat, lazy, and entitled; spurred on by politicians. My wife and I are both children of the depression and WW2 and realize the “good life” is not guaranteed, but must be earned. Today’s entitled generation is on the verge of learning this lesson, the hard way.
     
    A repeat of a comment made by me here in October 2011:
     
    “I have long said that 12 years is a long time to go to school and should be plenty of time to learn all the essential information to live a productive and rewarding life. I had a WONDERFUL public high school education, having been well prepared in earlier years. I have also often said the real education starts the day you leave school regardless of the level. I say this as a person who went to “school” until age 33 to qualify for a very special field of surgery, excepting two years on active duty practicing my craft. Most schools have been “dumbed down” to a level such that a large portion of graduates are functionally illiterate and unemployable at any level where they are able to learn, once in a job. In the 1960′s I cold hire someone with a good high school education and they spoke and wrote good English, were competent in basic math, knew a reasonable amount of history, etc. NO MORE. In the late 1970′s I received a mail brochure that proclaimed “You need the Wonderlic Personnel Test”, that will let you know what a person is capable of doing at work. I had noticed that prospective employees were not up to previous standards, so I ordered it. It is a series of 50 multiple choice questions with choice of answers and with 12 minutes to answer and calculators are allowed.. It begins very simply and is progressively harder with such questions as—- BC means before Christ (T or F), November is the 1st, 4th, 7th, or 11th month of the year. It is jaw dropping to find how many cannot answer these. And a question no one, save two, has been able to answer in 20 years —-”You go to the store to buy lemons and have determined you need 1 1/2 dozen lemons. At the lemon bin is a sign stating ‘lemons 3 for 15 cents’, how much will they cost? They have not the slightest idea how to solve this problem, I am dumbfounded, and after explaining, they look at me as if my night job is rocket scientist. In the 1950′s the slowest kid in the class could work this in his head. Many today with a college “education” type out to be suited for yard work, etc. PITIFUL. People who have a passion for a certain field of work do not need to go to college unless it is necessary to gain specific skills to make them better at their chosen field. If you have the money and a hunger for knowledge then go. Most students today have neither. If you need remedial reading in college you do not belong there.”
     

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    The Left has always thought that slaves, blacks, and other inferior races don’t need to learn reading, writing, or any of that unnecessary stuff. They only need to learn how to Obey.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    These days, you’ll learn more as an independent seeker of truth on the internet than in any college.
     
    Even the textbooks are available online, at least some of them.

  • Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Train Wreck Edition…()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Train Wreck Edition… | Liberty's Spirit()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Train Wreck Edition… | Virginia Right!()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Train Wreck Edition… | askmarion()

  • Pingback: The Razor » Blog Archive » Council Submissions: October 23, 2013()

  • Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Train Wreck Edition…()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Train Wreck Edition… | Nice Deb()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Train Wreck Edition | therightplanet.com()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Train Wreck Edition | www.independentsentinel.com()

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » Watcher’s Council submissions for October 24, 2013()

  • Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results | Liberty's Spirit()

  • Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results – 10/25/13()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results | Virginia Right!()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results | therightplanet.com()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results | Nice Deb()

  • Pingback: The Razor » Blog Archive » The Council Has Spoken: October 25, 2013()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results – 10/25/13 | NoisyRoom.net()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results – 10/25/13 | askmarion()

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • Pingback: Rhymes With Right()