Catch of the Day

Goes to Jonathan Chait, for reading Tim Pawlenty's floundering around on climate -- what Chait calls his
"Galileo Moment." Featuring this priceless quote from the Minnesota Mediocrity (you like it? I don't, but I'm still looking for something):

There’s lots of layers to it. But at least as to any potential man-made contribution to it, it’s fair to say the science is in dispute. There’s a lot of people who say the majority of the scientists think this way. And there’s a minority that way. And you count the number of scientists versus the quality of scientists and the like. But I think it’s fair to say that, as to whether and how much – if any – is attributable to human behavior, there’s dispute and controversy over it.

That's just wonderful.

Anyway, Chait's kicker is terrific:

He is such a soulless hack. But this is the state of the Republican Party now. No doubt Pawlenty tells himself he must pretend not to believe in climate science or else the nomination may go to somebody who genuinely disbelieves climate science.

And you know what -- that's probably exactly what Pawlenty thinks. And what's more, he's right! I'd much rather have someone in the White House who has fairly sensible basic beliefs but is willing to pretend she doesn't than to have someone who honestly and sincerely believes all sorts of nonsense. Much less someone who believes all sorts of nonsense and also honestly and sincerely believes that he is on a mission from God to enact all of it.

As far as the Minnesota Meh is concerned (like that better? I'm still not there), I've continued to be optimistic about his prospects, and I suppose I still am, but it would be nice to get at least a little evidence confirming that he's still a contender. Intrade has him at 2.1% right now, so I'm still a buy -- c'mon, he's below Ron Paul and basically tied with Rudy Giuliani. After all, the logic of it is still the same: someone has to win, and there are really only two plausible candidates ahead of him, and it's not difficult to picture scenarios in which both Romney and Perry wind up losing.

(I want to balance it with a word for being acceptable to all but the choice of none that has positive connotations, but I can't think of a good one).