If you can't traffic in reason, character assassination always works

As a veteran, I believe that any veteran lending their name, to promote the leftist propaganda of global warming and climate change, in an effort to control more of the wealth created in our economy, through cap and tax type policies, all in the name of national security, is a traitor to the oath he or she took to defend the Constitution of our great nation!" Mr. Metcalfe's email reads. "Remember Benedict Arnold before giving credibility to a veteran who uses their service as a means to promote a leftist agenda. Drill Baby Drill!!!".... Rep. Metcalfe, who served in the U.S. Army from 1980-84, today defended the remarks, saying that "if the type of policies that an individual promotes undermines the Constitution and the law of the land in our country, then they are not patriots."

Regardless of where you happen to fall on the debate over global climate change, I can't help but think you'd have to be pretty desperate (and pretty mean-spirited) to resort to calling veterans who have fought for their country "traitors". Even if you happen to question the validity of the science, calling the patriotism of veterans into question because you happen to disagree with them only reveals you to be a scoundrel of the first order. Metcalfe, who from what I can tell doesn't have an argument beyond cheap insults and character assassination, seems willing to cavalierly toss around insults that would result in him getting his @$$ kick by said veterans if he had the balls to say it to their faces. To call Metcalfe a coward wouldn't begin to do him justice.

Never mind that referring to discussing the science behind global climate change is "promoting a leftist agenda". I'm not about to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. Nonetheless, how stupid do you have to be to engage in this sort of lunacy and character assassination? Well, how about "Daryl Metcalfe stupid"? Calling someone a traitor is no small thing, and certainly and epithet that should be carefully considered and evaluated before tossing it in someone's direction. To call someone a traitor simply because they happen to hold a different viewpoint- one supported by a majority of credible scientists and academics- is beyond reprehensible.

The reality is that global climate change does present a national security issue, one that promises to evolve and grow over time as people like Metcalfe ignore reality. There's broad agreement that as climates change worldwide, some areas will become more arid. This may well lead to potential conflict as unstable nations vie with one another for increasingly scarce water supplies. Metcalfe can soft-pedal this idea if he chooses, but it doesn't change reality. Recognition of reality hardly represents "promoting a leftist agenda". More like trying to change course before we're past the point of no return.

Ignorance of reality doesn't negate that reality. All it does is push the inevitable day of reckoning farther down the road...until perhaps we reach the point where we no longer have the ability to change what we can in time to actually make a difference.

Stupid is as stupid does. In Metcalfe's case, 'tis better to be thought a fool than gratuitously insult veterans and remove all doubt.

WE DESERVE BETTER.