It's understandable when someone who has been genuinely skeptical but open-minded about the reality of human-caused climate change finally gets the message and comes around. It's cause for pondering cognitive dissonance when someone who previously believed that climate change is neither hoax nor bad science switches to the other side.
In the case of presidential hopeful Tim Pawlenty, however, it's hard to believe it's anything other than a monstrous case of pandering. The former Minnesota governor has known since he started making the switch in 2008 that establishing his denier credentials would be essential to getting the presidential nomination in a party where Rush Limbaugh's pronouncements are taken more seriously than 98 percent of climate scientists'.
Pawlenty is no scientific dumbo. His time touring the state discussing climage change in tandem with famed environmentalist, educator and adventurer Will Steger, as noted by Tim Murphy, makes it clear he had at least some grasp of the impact of climate change and the need to do something about it. That he chose instead to ignore the fruits of extensive peer-reviewed research shows he is also no political dumbo. Just another politician willing to ignore what he knows to be true and take the dead-end approach regarding the most crucial issue of our era. Ignoring the world that will be left to his children and grandchildren—all for short-term gain. That's worse than pandering. And the fact that he says other Republicans also are doing this just reinforces my view that we should call what he's doing Pawlentying.
In 2010, on Meet the Press, as Brad Johnson pointed out at the time, Pawlentying made itself bold during an interview with David Gregory:
Pawlenty: The climate is obviously changing, David. The more interesting question is how much of it is man-made and how much is as a result of natural causes and patterns. Of course, we have seen data manipulation and controversy, or at least debate within the scientific community. . . . And the way you address it is we should all be in favor of reducing pollution. We need to do it in ways that don’t burden the economy. Cap and trade, I think, would be a disaster in that regard.
Just last month, in an interview with Laura Ingraham, he cranked it up a notch, calling his previous views about climate change, and especially cap-and-trade proposals, "stupid." Steger says he has not spoken to Pawlenty since the governor switched into denier mode four years ago. But, in his Mother Jones interview, he seemed genuinely surprised by those remarks:
"I'm baffled by that—did he actually say that?" says Steger, when asked about Pawlenty's recent statements. "I'm baffled by that. But I think he's getting information from the wrong source and it's really too bad for our children. It's reckless."
Things were different when Steger met Pawlenty in 2006:
"It was a real heart to heart," he recalls. "I really believed that morally we were on the same level. We saw the moral imperative. And he understood, and back then, he chose to veer in another direction [from his party], which took a lot of guts. I have to respect that."
Unaccountably, Will Steger still respects Tim Pawlenty. He just thinks he's getting information from bad sources. Proving, I suppose, what a merciful guy Steger is. Nobody can tell for certain what's in another person's heart. We can only judge them by what they say and what they do. By that measure, on climate change, Pawlenty deserves no respect whatsoever.