It's been a week to remember on the Gazette editorial page.
Twice since Tuesday, in a fervor to boost Republican U.S. Senate candidate Ken Buck, editorial page editor Wayne Laugesen has reaffirmed his crazy-cred in the Our View section.
Today's column mostly defends Buck's "strong" disagreement with the separation of church and state. But my favorite excerpt has to do with another statement that came out of Buck's "freedom-loving mouth":
Buck used a bad comparison to explain that sexual orientation involves behavior and genetic predisposition, and his idea gave scandal to a media that merely reacts spasmodically with little interest in respectful dialogue. Yet it seems logical that alcoholism and sexual orientation have common traits. Each is likely connected directly to a person’s genetics, and each involves choice. An alcoholic may choose to never consume alcohol. Likewise, a heterosexual may choose to never get intimate with a person of the opposite sex.
That, and they're also both nouns. See? They're totally the same.
Tuesday's editorial, headlined "Ken Buck is Right about Global Warming," contained a few doozies. Laugesen praises Buck for advancing the theory that global warming is a hoax, and condemns Democrat Michael Bennet for questioning Buck's stance.
What threatens the economy and national security is the unscientific crusade to promote a theory that humans are warming the planet and must be stopped. Global warming fear mongers, such as Bennet, would break this country with expensive and futile efforts to control the Mother Nature with massive new carbon taxes that would cripple production and curtail our country’s ability to afford security.
(Yeah, we're all interested in "controlling the Mother Nature," not saving it.)
Laugesen goes on to brandish similar theories from "the great Harold Lewis, emeritus professor of physics at the University of California-Santa Barbara" (I'm sure the G has long admired Lewis' work on "fuzzy control") and Czech Republic President Vaclav Klaus (who was misidentified in print as Czechoslovakian president, although Czechoslovakia split into two countries nearly 20 years ago). Well, that ought to refute scientific consensus.
And though the column is about global warming, Laugesen manages to take an unexplained swipe at Bennet as someone who "cares nothing about Colorado Springs." Gee, think getting turned down for that editorial-board endorsement interview stung a little bit?
Oddly enough, in both columns, Laugesen invokes "baseball and apple pie." Must be the season, I guess.
If you dislike my comments and can offer a rational counter argument consistent with AF…
Lebotzke has now added a little "Tweets are my own views" comment in an effort…
Should such material be removed from a government office? Certainly. However, the question not answered…