Although it’s a fact we’re acquainted with, now, and that’s gained acceptance as a result, start from first principles and try to work it out:
Why is fighting climate change a “liberal” position?
It makes sense if you take economic, corporate Republicans in isolation. Climate change requires regulation, and austerity measures from corporations, and therefore cuts into profits. But, as we’ve seen from some conservatives, like Rick Warren, good faith custodianship of God’s creation really ought to be an article of faith.
The social- and economic-conservative alliance has never really made sense, except as a marriage of convenience. Do we count this as another way the rich induce the poor into voting against their interest?
Relatedly, listen to this interview with Sarah Palin (or, ugh, try to). Listen for this line, describing the deficit: “It’s immoral, it’s unethical, it’s unfair to future generations to continue down the road we’re going.” Start at 3:57 —
Couldn’t the same be said, really, of climate change? Why won’t people like Palin make that leap?