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?
