Because tolerance for other opinions, you know
Why Climate-Science Denialism Should Disqualify Anyone From Holding Office
….
The media’s instinct is to dismiss votes like those from last night as mere gestures in empty symbolism. Yet, while the vote did not change any policy outcomes, it ought to carry far more weight than a simple message vote. Or, rather, the message is of the highest importance. The Republican Party confidently and forthrightly rejects the firm conclusions of science on a major public-policy question. Isn’t that a completely disqualifying position? If a candidate for a managerial job at your office insists that two plus three equals seven, it wouldn’t matter how well-qualified this candidate may be at any other aspect of the job. Even if you agreed with everything else the Republicans stood for, how could a party so obviously unhinged be entrusted with power?
I may not like Obama’s policy views, but it does not disqualify him from holding office. Same with most Democrats. Cynthia McKinney was a raving nutjob. So are Sheila Jackson Lee, Hank “Guam is going to tip over” Johnson, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Lee, and Wendy Davis, among others. Joe Biden seems to like saying really dumb things, and touching women who do not want to be touched. Obama consistently denies the state of the economy, and that most citizens do not want Obamacare.
Regardless, none of that matters. People are entitled to opinions, but we should be in no way surprised that the Progressives (nice fascists) who mostly make up the Warmist cult want to restrict free speech, free expression, and free opinion. What’s next, limiting the franchise to only people who believe in the fake consensus issue of “climate change”?
If Warmists want to go down this road, I suggest that no believer in anthropogenic global warming/climate change is allowed to assume office unless they practice what they preach. Sound fair, Warmists?
Ah yes, the ever tolerant left, enforcing uniformity of thought and always trying to silence those who don’t agree with them.
Ahh yes the ever tolerant rightwing says the left wing should not say anything hat the right disagrees with
Makes perfect sense
First you transpose denialist to skeptic
Then you say that he has no right to say his views on who should be able be elected
Mr Pot meet Mr Kettle
There is nothing in the post that says this john. Once again, you show you have issues with reading and comprehension.
Hahaha, John can’t even tolerate when someone points out the lack of tolerance. Beautiful.
No john, the point is that disagreements should not eliminate or make someone ineligible to run for office.
There is nothing in the article or Hank’s comments that support your post.
When are you going to stop being a troll?
Hey, John, did you hit the “reply to” thing to reply to Hank? Just wondering, because that hasn’t seemed to work for years. Wondering if WP 4.0 fixed that.
Chait is welcome to say it. He’s not welcome to impose it. Big difference.
i say anybody who believes in global warming/climate fraud is not qualified to hold office