For some reason, the media and the pundits have been treating Jon Huntsman as if he is the “serious GOP candidate” for president.
I suppose if one is grading on a curve, then he may be the most serious. Hmmm. Did you know Moe is the most serious of the Stooges? I digress.
Huntsman’s idea of demonstrating his serious leadership qualifications is to blame his previous support for climate action on peer pressure.
As The Hill reported yesterday in its piece, “Huntsman on past cap-and-trade support: Everyone was doing it”:
Huntsman backed cap-and-trade last decade as a way to curb greenhouse gas emissions, but distanced himself from it in an interview Wednesday, casting it as a policy solution from another era.
“Every governor was talking about dealing with emissions back many, many years ago only to find that with the economic implosion, we can’t afford anything that is going to put any kind of hamper on economic growth. So cap-and-trade is not something that is viable today,” Huntsman told Fox News.
“Everybody talked about it. At least a lot of people did, consulting with CEOs, consulting with all the experts. Everyone took it seriously,” he said.
As governor, Huntsman signed on in 2007 to a program among Western states and Canadian provinces called the Western Climate Initiative aimed at cutting regional greenhouse gas emissions 15 percent by 2020.
Yes, tackling climate change is so last decade. This is almost Onionesque (see Major new report finds “Global warming issue from 2 or 3 years ago may still be problem”).
Apparently, the new GOP ploy is to suggest that there was some sort of collective error by moderate Republicans (see Pawlenty: ‘Every One Of Us’ Running For President Has Flip-Flopped On Climate Change).
But how precisely can you argue that you should be elected leader of the free world if you blame your past ‘mistakes’ on your inability to overcome peer pressure?