4 ms·

Astounding to see that an MIT graduate "rejects the scientific consensus on climate change " (Wikipedia).

tialaramex 5y ago
Looking at his record, he's one of those democratic representatives who takes the broad endorsement of a fiercely Right Wing local electorate to mean that he should ignore what's politically possible and fight for whatever he and his voters believe anyway -- but only when it doesn't matter. So that means things like when there's obviously very broad support for a measure, insist on a roll call vote, wasting the time of every other member so as to underscore your opposition to say, clean water, or food for the poor. But, as with so many of these "principled" Republicans, when it's very narrow and every vote counts suddenly he's straight party line Republican... In the UK we have people like Peter Bone, Bone opposes same-sex marriage, abortion, wants to see the Death Penalty brought back, as well as mandatory conscription. He sees the NHS as dangerous example of socialism, "like Stalin's Russia". But Westminster has more experience than Washington, and so it's a little harder to be disruptive. Bone can introduce "Private Members Bills" which could become law but, lacking support from either government or the opposition, they aren't likely to go anywhere. By convention the readings of these bills are scheduled for Friday afternoon. So, almost everybody goes home, people like Bone are left in the chamber to ramble on about how it'd be a great idea if Britain's threadbare Army was made to try to turn unwilling 18 and 19 year olds into soldiers, as if a vast unskilled infantry is something you need in the 21st century; or why a foetus is a "human person" or whatever - and then eventually it comes to the point where there's supposed to be a vote. The Deputy Speaker who drew the short straw and is obliged to be there pretends to hear a controversy in the mostly empty room, "Division!" and this causes a count, which of course finds that the chamber is inquorate and thus incapable of anything, Bone wasted his time and that of a handful of the other representatives (who won't forget it) and civil servants, but most people went home early.
bell-cot 5y ago
If one is educated, sensible, and insists on telling people the truth about important or should-be important issues - how sustainable Social Security is in the face of demographs and fiscal realities, whether the war in Afghanistan is winnable, how much of a congressman's time every week must be devoted to fundraising from special interests, etc. - then one will serve zero or very little time in Congress. "In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve." - Alexis De Tocqueville
acheron 5y ago
Unlikely that anyone intelligent rejects the actual science part of it, which is not controversial. What they reject is the media-politician complex’s version, which then gets reported — by the same media — as “rejecting the science”.
SamReidHughes 5y ago
You didn't know that Wikipedia is editorialized by the left?

Looking at his record, he's one of those democratic representatives who takes the broad endorsement of a fiercely Right Wing local electorate to mean that he should ignore what's politically possible and fight for whatever he and his voters believe anyway -- but only when it doesn't matter. So that means things like when there's obviously very broad support for a measure, insist on a roll call vote, wasting the time of every other member so as to underscore your opposition to say, clean water, or food for the poor. But, as with so many of these "principled" Republicans, when it's very narrow and every vote counts suddenly he's straight party line Republican... In the UK we have people like Peter Bone, Bone opposes same-sex marriage, abortion, wants to see the Death Penalty brought back, as well as mandatory conscription. He sees the NHS as dangerous example of socialism, "like Stalin's Russia". But Westminster has more experience than Washington, and so it's a little harder to be disruptive. Bone can introduce "Private Members Bills" which could become law but, lacking support from either government or the opposition, they aren't likely to go anywhere. By convention the readings of these bills are scheduled for Friday afternoon. So, almost everybody goes home, people like Bone are left in the chamber to ramble on about how it'd be a great idea if Britain's threadbare Army was made to try to turn unwilling 18 and 19 year olds into soldiers, as if a vast unskilled infantry is something you need in the 21st century; or why a foetus is a "human person" or whatever - and then eventually it comes to the point where there's supposed to be a vote. The Deputy Speaker who drew the short straw and is obliged to be there pretends to hear a controversy in the mostly empty room, "Division!" and this causes a count, which of course finds that the chamber is inquorate and thus incapable of anything, Bone wasted his time and that of a handful of the other representatives (who won't forget it) and civil servants, but most people went home early.

bell-cot 5y ago

If one is educated, sensible, and insists on telling people the truth about important or should-be important issues - how sustainable Social Security is in the face of demographs and fiscal realities, whether the war in Afghanistan is winnable, how much of a congressman's time every week must be devoted to fundraising from special interests, etc. - then one will serve zero or very little time in Congress. "In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve." - Alexis De Tocqueville

acheron 5y ago

Unlikely that anyone intelligent rejects the actual science part of it, which is not controversial. What they reject is the media-politician complex’s version, which then gets reported — by the same media — as “rejecting the science”.

SamReidHughes 5y ago

You didn't know that Wikipedia is editorialized by the left?