Now granted, granted, the best thing for the environment—okay, at least marginally better than the status quo—would be for the Senate to go blue. And one way to do that is to unseat Lincoln Chaffee and replace him with a Democrat. If Sierra Club was thinking long-term, the argument goes, it would ignore Chaffee's record and endorse his opponent, no questions asked.

But here's the thing: The Sierra Club has no assurances whatsoever that the Senate will revert to Democratic control this fall. Many people doubt it will happen. And if the Senate does stay in Republican hands, then Chaffee becomes very, very important from an environmental standpoint—he can do more to stop the Bush administration's assault on green trees, happy fish, and breathable air than any freshman Democratic replacement ever could. That's undeniable. Bush and Pombo and the rest of the crew want to do some very bad things to Mother Nature; presumably the Sierra Club feels like this is no time to screw around and risk losing a key strategic ally in the Senate.

At any rate, given that in the future Republicans, evangelicals, and conservatives out West are likely to look more favorably on environmental issues, it also probably behooves the Sierra Club to start building cross-party ties—just as the NRA has done. Despite the fact that Republican control of Congress is obviously better for gun rights, the NRA still supports gun-toting Democrats; partly as a result, it's one of the most powerful interest groups out there. Perhaps there are counterarguments, but the Sierra Club (or it's local chapter, if that's who's making this call) isn't necessarily "moronic" to support Chaffee.