Originally Posted by Tgo01
What is the point of this post? Are you really comparing him to the totally batshit insane Republican candidates your party seriously considered last election?
Weiner was a one-term House member, and put in an unsuccessful candidacy for Democratic nominee for NYC mayor, who lost out miserably to de Blasio, the candidate and eventual Democratic winner. The only reason he's known at all are for his asinine sexual escapades--he never had any particularly interesting political positions.
And again, these aren't outlier positions. Nearly all the major players--Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, hold the very same opinions.
Boehner: "... the idea that carbon dioxide is a carcinogen that is harmful to our environment is almost comical. Every time we exhale, we exhale carbon dioxide. Every cow in the world, you know, when they do what they do, you’ve got more carbon dioxide.."
McConnell: As recently as 30-35 years ago we were worried about the globe getting too cold,” McConnell said. “I suppose over decades and maybe centuries weíll figure this out."
Cantor: "If there’s been any constant in human history, it’s been climate change. The real question is the severity of that and the involvement of human causes in all of that."
There's either scientific denialism or embrace of pseudo-scientific (or even religious) statements on record for almost every contemporary Republican. Again, these aren't outlier positions of a few isolated whack-jobs. They're almost all whackjobs. There's no false equivalency here. One party is clearly anti-science, anti-empiricism, on the issue of global warming, and it's very clearly due to the corrupting influence of the oil industry lobby.
Reply With Quote
