Wow. Our experiment is off to a great start—let's see if we can finish it off sooner than expected.
The problem with Twitter is that it's so full of snark and jocular banter that it's often hard to tell when something is serious. Then again, maybe this is actually a problem with real life, not with Twitter. Maybe real life has gotten so Onion-esque that it's hard to tell it apart from a Steven Wright standup routine.
To wit: Yesterday I saw a tweet roll across my screen about the Koch brothers insisting that conservatives fight any climate legislation unless it contained an equivalent tax cut. Hah hah. That's a laff riot.
But no. It's real. Of course it is. But here's what I don't get: what's the point? The pledge binds signers to "oppose any legislation relating to climate change that includes a net increase in government revenue." But every Republican in Congress has already signed Grover Norquist's pledge that binds them to oppose any legislation at all that includes a net increase in government revenue. So does this mean we're going to get a flood of sub-pledges from every wingnut group out there? Republicans must now pledge to oppose any legislation relating to abortion that includes a net increase in government revenue. Ditto for gun control legislation. And healthcare legislation. And environmental legislation. And mass transit legislation. And homeland security legislation. And food stamp legislation. Etc.
Well, why not? They don't have much else to do, do they?