Should an ideological purity test be applied to federal employees?

I think the answer is government employees, like all citizens have the right to their personal beliefs. However they do NOT have the right to apply their personal beliefs in the execution of their government jobs, or take actions that interfere with the intent of the law.

 

Heh, yes indeed.

 

But was found not guilty of having any political reasons.
This stuff isn't hard. I don't know why you have such a hard time with facts.

 

Found not guilty? You think she went to court?

 

No, I don't. I didn't say she did. What I did say was the investigation didn't find her guilty.

 

I'm not sure what you are talking about. The IRS IG said that Tea Party groups were being targeted, and Lois Lerner was held in contempt of Congress for refusing a subpoena. What investigation found her not guilty?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lois_Lerner

 

No employee should be fired for holding some view. They should be fired if they execute their job in support of their view if it differs from policy.

 

Responding with a link that I've already seen seems to mean that you can't answer the question.

 

No test needed. Just fire people who dont do their job properly.

 

The answer is right there in the link. Do I have to hold your hand and walk you through it word by word or do you think on the third look you might grasp the answer to your question.

 

If you could have proven that she was found not guilty you would have already posted it.

 

There is absolutely no point in discussing this with you any longer.
You lost. I know it, you know and anyone following knows it.

 

You made a statement that you couldn't factually back up, but you think I "lost."

I find myself find with that. That speaks for itself.

 

I gave you the answer. I backed it up. You don't accept it. Your problem.

 

Bored now.

 

And if the well being of the people and environmental activism clash then what.

 

So you didn't read it. Got it.

 

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The bulk of the nation's people should not have to suffer for the interests of the few.

 

And the few are almost always the enviro activist. A government that thinks it know best always slides rapidly toward tyranny. That is why the democrats got munched this election season. They got full of themselves and stated doing all the very things they accused Trump of doing and in their arrogance and hubris set themselves up for a butt kicking which they richly deserved. The only way to manage the greatest good for the greatest number is to let people work out their own destinies trying to dictate those destinies to them is never going to be received well no matter how well intended it may be.

 

No. The few are always private interests. The health of our environment is essential to the health of the people. The private sector doesn't care about either. A cancer patient doesn't need an environmental activist to tell them their drinking water, the air, their food, their home, or their work environment is contaminated/unsafe when it becomes obvious. But it is the activist that is there to do something about it and prevent further harm.

Not when corporations/private interests get so big & powerful they begin dictating politics & domestic policy. That's when socially minded govt officials need to step in.