“I’d like to hear President Obama and Mitt Romney talk about the future of the planet. What about you?” writes Eugene Robinson in his column today. It’s about global warming — evidence of which is finally observable to non-scientists and people who don’t even like science. It’s observable to everyone who goes outside or pays for air conditioning or buys groceries. It’s “a long-term trend that is obvious to all except those who stubbornly close their eyes: Of the 10 hottest years on record, nine have occurred since 2000,” Robinson writes.

Amazingly, this is a political issue. Really! It’s part of people’s identities as liberal or conservative! So even now that “no, it’s not,” has stopped being so convincing, we get the argument that even if global warming is happening, the first action we should take is taking no action forever. And not debating it, either. Because once you’ve decided you’re a liberal or conservative, there’s nothing to think about.

So let’s all be glad that neither of the presidential candidates is talking about taking action against climate change — because it makes movement on the issue even less possible. Minds yet unchanged by scientific evidence are probably going to stay that way.

PaidShill, for example, says it’s not about science but capitalism:

There is no relation between carbon emissions and the earth warming. The climate has changed since the beginning of time. Ending capitalism will not change the weather.

Chad32 doesn’t want to talk about it until we’ve solved the problem:

Let me know of your plans of stopping progress in China, India, Africa and South America and then we can discuss the minimal effect the US actually has on global warming. If you can show that taking drastic action in the name of global warming won’t harm and [will] actually help the economy, then we can talk. Otherwise, you hurt the US economy while making no impact on Global Warming because it is a GLOBAL, not a US-centered problem. Please tell those other countries they are not entitled to seek 21st century conveniences. When they accept that, we can begin a discussion.

Benson has figured out how global warming is a pro-or-anti-Obama issue:

I guess Robinson figures that if there is a demographic that they haven’t bribed yet, maybe they can scare them into voting for Obama.

skin2002 has his or her mind made up:

Humans cannot control the weather. Alarmist nonsense from ERob yet again.

flyover22 says okay, maybe the science is real, but we still shouldn’t do anything about it

Of all the real and immediate problems in US and the world that we can do something about this wouldn’t make the top 50. May be somewhere above catastrophic meteor strike.

A Liberal chicken little issue, with use big tax and big government strategies and a useful election-year gimmick.

And AnIndependentVoter similarly thinks with his or her gut the same way the Pope knew the sun revolved around Earth. Feels right:

Driving my car and running my A/C caused the DC earthquake? HAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAA!

PostScript officially believes that we have conclusively proved that everyone not accepting human-caused global warming has staked his or her political identity on it and is never going to be convinced by anything, because humans can’t control the weather. But good news: This essentially negates it as a political issue, since no one is changing anyone else’s mind. So let’s get on with our lives and let people think what they like. But it’s the duty of any government to deal with this problem, no matter which party is in power.

Pander if you must to get elected, then do the right thing.