Christie and Paul prove they are unfit to hold public office

I see that two of the fools supposedly running for president, Chris Christie and Rand Paul say vaccines should be “voluntary”. Both are apparently too stupid to realize that every child who is not vaccinated, besides being at risk to him or herself, puts other children at risk–in the case of measles, any that are younger than 12 months, or who have a compromised immune system and all who are the unfortunate children of anti-vaxxers. And measles can be deadly. But these morons presumably think that it should be “voluntary”.
If they can’t see that it shows that both are too stupid to be president and this proves it–in case anyone had any doubt.
LL

No, they aren’t unfit because of that.
The president doesn’t need to be a pathologist, or head Immunologist at a major hospital (like barack is) to be qualified for office.

Since when has being smart, or even coming close, had anything to do with being POTUS? W and Reagan were a couple of the dumbest nuts in the jar. If anyone has taken my advice in other threads to read Confessions of an Economic Hitman, you’d see that really, the dumber the better. Reagan was the perfect person to continue and ramp up the program after 4 years of someone like Carter who didn’t fit the mold (i.e. wouldn’t just go along).

No, they aren't unfit because of that. The president doesn't need to be a pathologist, or head Immunologist at a major hospital (like barack is) to be qualified for office.
It's an excellent indication of their intellect--or in this case, their lack of intellect. If they are stupid on this issue there is good reason to expect then to be equally stupid on more complicated issues. Lois

Rand Paul is a physician which makes this comment "“I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines,” unconscionable. He should have his medical license revoked.

If anyone has considered in voting for either, and now stll does, I pity them.

Rand Paul is a physician which makes this comment ""I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," unconscionable. He should have his medical license revoked.
Sounds like someone who has real problems with identifying correlation, causation and the lacks thereof.
Since when has being smart, or even coming close, had anything to do with being POTUS? W and Reagan were a couple of the dumbest nuts in the jar. If anyone has taken my advice in other threads to read Confessions of an Economic Hitman, you'd see that really, the dumber the better. Reagan was the perfect person to continue and ramp up the program after 4 years of someone like Carter who didn't fit the mold (i.e. wouldn't just go along).
I don't know about Reagan, but I remember reading somewhere that W has an IQ of about 110. So, not the sharpest tack, but not unintelligent either. But, he also was at the low end of the spectrum of personality types which seek out new experiences, which seems to be a stronger indicator of people's maintaining ideas closer to reality than IQ.

Rand updated his stance on the above statement that he made. And this is technically true: He said that he only said, in that statement that vaccines were sometimes “temporally” related to problems, and that he did not say that vaccines caused the problems. He went on to say that he supports vaccines, and got a picture of himself being vaccinated.
This, for Rand Paul, is about being electable. He wants to be a libertarian, as that is his primary base. But, for overall electability, he made a severe technical error by appearing to support what is considered to be a fringe idea. Appearing to be a fringe candidate, could be death to Rand Paul’s chances of actually being elected President, as one of his main obstacles is to overcome the association with his father’s ideas that were too far out of the mainstream.

Rand updated his stance on the above statement that he made. And this is technically true: He said that he only said, in that statement that vaccines were sometimes "temporally" related to problems, and that he did not say that vaccines caused the problems. He went on to say that he supports vaccines, and got a picture of himself being vaccinated. .
Rand is a hypocrite. If you listen not only to what he said but how he said it, he was not laying out a simple temporal association. He was not saying "Oh by the way this happened and then that happened but I don't believe there is any connection". He knew damn well that the average person would interpret this statement as support for a connection between vaccines and seizures or other brain disorders. Post hoc ergo propter hoc. He knew that this could push some people who are on the fence against vaccines and as a physician he knew that this could result in illness and death. He knew all of that and he made a conscious choice to put his own ambitions ahead of the best interest of the public. There is no justification for what he did. Its a complete violation of the Hippocratic oath and if the world were a just place he would have his license revoked.

I imagine it is all the more outrageous from your perspective, when someone in your own professional field does something that you believe to be so unethical.
Rand, I think, is, now, primarily a politician. From this perspective, his biggest mistake was identifying with a fringe belief rather than a mainstream belief. This is particularly problematic for him as it can easily associate him with his father’s biggest political handicap of being viewed as a fringe candidate.
If I were an M.D., wanting the best medical considerations for the most people, I would probably want his license, at least, brought up for review on ethics violation.

Rand Paul is a physician which makes this comment ""I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," unconscionable. He should have his medical license revoked.
He WAS, not is, an eye doctor, as in lasik surgery, cataracts, etc. Moreover, after his original licensing ran out, he was re-certified by the National Board of Ophthalmology, which he founded, and was president of, his wife vice pres, etc. Strictly smoke and mirrors.
Rand Paul is a physician which makes this comment ""I have heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines," unconscionable. He should have his medical license revoked.
He WAS, not is, an eye doctor, as in lasik surgery, cataracts, etc. Moreover, after his original licensing ran out, he was re-certified by the National Board of Ophthalmology, which he founded, and was president of, his wife vice pres, etc. Strictly smoke and mirrors. Thats true that he was an ophthalmologist ( not and optometrist or optician). An ophthalmologist is an MD. They go to Medical School like every other doctor. Everything he learned in med school about vaccines didn't suddenly get erased form his brain because he decided not to pay to renew his license nor did he become exempt from the oath he took simply because he doesn't practice medicine anymore. The oath follows you for life. He knew exactly what he was doing when he made those comments and made a conscious choice to put his own ambitions ahead of the best interests of the people of this country (especially the children). Hopefully he never practices medicine again but it would be better if he was not given a public stage to speak from since he seems to do even more harm there.

(CNN)Sen. Rand Paul may be blaming the “liberal media” for the recent controversy over his comments about vaccinations, but the right-leaning editorial board of the Wall Street Journal published a blistering opinion piece published in Wednesday’s edition on the Kentucky Republican’s skepticism.
“He will have to avoid these libertarian dormitory passions if he wants to be a credible candidate,” the editorial says, adding that government requirements for vaccinating school children is “a legitimate use of state ‘police powers’ under the Constitution.”
http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/04/politics/rand-wsj/
I am amazed at the Wall atreet Journal.
Lois