DFL Don’s “In the Know” segment Tuesday evening was introduced this way:
Gov. Tim Pawlenty said Tuesday he wants an aggressive new energy initiative that would lower greenhouse gas emissions and move us toward more renewable energy. Don Shelby said, here's a new breed: a conservative Republican environmentalist.
Meanwhile, Douglas (a/k/a The Goof on the Roof) weighed in on this subject Thursday in the Strib:
Governor Pawlenty, concerned about climate change and energy alternatives? I’m not surprised. The root of the word conservative: conserve. Some would say the essence of conservatism is no-spin, seeing things for what they really are with no attempt to manipulate the truth - let the chips fall where they may – forget politics, what is science telling us?
Now, the last thing I want to do here is engage in a “global warming” debate. I have no doubt that there is significant climate change. However, I have a hard time believing that it is due to human sources. We humans occupy approximately 10% of the Earth’s surface. Based on that, it seems rather arrogant to believe we could significantly damage the environment.
Again, that is an argument for another day.
My point here is what’s this “conservative governor” nonsense?
Does a “conservative” utter campaign rhetoric stating that the “era of limited government is over”?
Does a “conservative” talk about a plan for invoking some sort of
Does a “conservative” mandate increased taxes (which is inevitable given the likelihood of increased farm subsidies) for a poor fuel alternative like ethanol?
DFL Don’s commentary ended with this:
Isn't it interesting that the two most earth-friendly governors in the country are Republicans Schwarzenegger in California and Pawlenty in Minnesota?
What does that say about the modern day Democrats? Apparently, in their eyes, anyone to the right of Ted Kennedy must be a “Conservative”.