Conservative Shouldn't Mean Irrational

Today, according to Rush Limbaugh, Mitt Romney gave up all hope of receiving the Republican nomination for President in 2012. His crime - he stated that he believed that the world was undergoing global warming and that human beings were partially responsible. Rick Santorum, on the other hand, followed the "conservative" party line and called global warming "junk science" and "liberal hogwash". I put conservative in quotes in the last sentence because not believing in global warming is in no way a conservative position. I always assumed this started when George W. Bush's people required that the Grand Canyon gift shop start selling literature that showed why the Grand Canyon was created 4000 years ago during Noah's flood.  Or maybe the shift happened earlier and I missed it, but it is inconceivable to me that the defense of concepts that are widely held by the scientific community is considered a liberal position. And I don't understand why irrationality should be considered conservative. At a debate in Iowa in 2007 leading up to the 2008 Presidential caucuses, Romney was also one of the few who didn't raise his hand when the large group of contenders was asked, "Raise your hand if you don't believe in evolution." Is not believing in evolution a "conservative" position? No! Not in any way, shape, or form! And it is not a religious position either.  As a member of our local school board, I have participated in a few discussions over the last 14 years in which the teaching of evolution was questioned. In each case (thankfully) our board has shot down the idea of teaching creationism (now packaged as intelligent design). In preparation for the next round I always carry in my Board folder a letter stating that the undersigned believe that evolution does not conflict with the religious teachings of the church and that science and religion can exist together. It is signed by more than 13,000  church leaders from all over the United States: including significant leaders of Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish faiths. Read that again; 13000 is not a misprint. But we are told by Rush and his posse that evolution makes a mockery of religion and therefore cannot be a part of a "conservative's" political stance. That's just stupid.   

The American Association for the Advancement of Science is not a fringe organization. It is the most widely respected organization of scientists in the United States. According to their website:  

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has reaffirmed the position of its Board of Directors and the leaders of 18 respected organizations, who concluded based on multiple lines of scientific evidence that global climate change caused by human activities is now underway, and it is a growing threat to society.   
“The vast preponderance of evidence, based on years of research conducted by a wide array of different investigators at many institutions, clearly indicates that global climate change is real, it is caused largely by human activities, and the need to take action is urgent,” said Alan I. Leshner, chief executive officer of AAAS and executive publisher of the journal Science.   


But I still hear and read comments from "conservative" talking heads that global warming is not a stance held by most reputable scientists. That is simply a lie. Now as a lifelong Democrat, I understand that my party is pretty messed up. We can be given every opportunity to do well and still mess it up. And we have some pretty bizarre elements to the party as well. But, come on, Republicans. Can't you take back your party from these nutjobs that call themselves "conservatives"? It doesn't surprise me at all that the shift from what I would consider rational conservative thought to what is now crazy as a bedbug irrational conservative thought occurred when a Texan took over in the White House. That state scares the hell out of me. I'm just saying.