8 thoughts on “Pawlenty: Running from His Past Moves on Environmental Policy”

  1. I haven’t read the references yet, but is it possible he got informed and changed his opinion? I ask b/c that is exactly what happened for me and many other logical people that I’ve helped “see the light”.

  2. What you say is true, but I have not heard him say that he got more information and changed his mind. I think he wants votes and changed his mind. Until he is clear on what made the change he out as far as I am concerned.

    P.S. If he really changed he should call on the Minnesota legislators to repeal all the laws and regulations he helped put in place.

  3. Ron Paul is no such questionable quantity. He walks the walk he talks, an I am certain energy poverty and carbon scamming are not part of his plan.

  4. Sometimes people do the right things for the wrong reasons, and sometimes they do the wrong things for the wrong reasons. But when there are guiding principles and carefully considered logic, honed in debate and tempered with empirical facts, “enlightenment” can happen.
    As a youth I knew a lot of people who were ‘liberal’- driven by their emotions. The ones who never made the transition to ‘conservatism’ that comes with experience and age are those who had precluded such a possibility with self-inflicted brain damage, usually via ‘recreational drugs.’
    I have never known a conservative to turn liberal.

  5. Pawlenty has no excuse for ever endorsing the global warming hoax. In a short time, you can get all the information you need from the internet to prove, or disprove this. I decided to do just that years ago. I quickly got to the bottom of it.

    Pawlenty does what’s politically expedient. The answer to your question is NO.

  6. Numerous states had governor-level climate commissions orchestrated by the enviro-advocacy group The Center For Climate Strategies. Both Pawlenty and Sarah Palin allowed the CCS into their midst. Paul Chesser, currently head of the institute that’s suing NASA over James Hansen’s shenanigans, wrote about the CCS’ highly questionable infiltrations into state policymaking back in early 2009, see: “Profiles in Cowardice” http://spectator.org/archives/2009/01/22/profiles-in-cowardice

  7. It seems to me that every candidate has something “wrong” in their record or positions. At least he isn’t embracing his bad past positions like Romney with Obomneycare-and of course Romney is enthusiastically a climate alarmist in the present not the past. That being said I am really unsure who in this race is the best candidate, on this issue and others. I can’t count anyone out on just one thing, even this, if it is something they aren’t even sticking to today. If he has changed his position, regardless of the reason, unless anyone thinks he’ll change it again and it will change his policies, I don’t see how a record from which he distances himself is an issue. Is a consistently skeptical person preferable? Sure. So who is it that fits the bill who meets several other criteria that go into deciding who should be nominated? Not sure…
    Honestly, I’ll bet you guys have thought about this. Who are you looking at as promising candidates? And why?

  8. Minnesota is a corn state. Pawlenty went for the ethanol vote pure and simple. I think corn ethanol is stupid, but I can understand that. However, I really disike him wanting to join in carbon indulgences, carbon taxes, etc.

    Having said that, I’d take him over Obumbles or Romney any day. How about Perry/Bachmann or Perry/Pawlenty or Perry/West or West/Bachmann…??

Comments are closed.