The Climate Tell Hidden in Rush Limbaugh Politicizing Water on Mars

A post from The Green Miles:
Lots of folks are LOLing today at Rush Limbaugh politicizing water on Mars, accusing NASA and the Obama administration of plotting to use it to "advance the leftist agenda," as first reported by Media Matters. But within Rush's rant is a tip-off about how and why extreme conservatives reject science on other issues such as climate change:

OK so there's flowing water on Mars. Yip yip yip yahoo. You know me, I'm science 101, big time guy, tech advance it, you know it, I'm all in. But, NASA has been corrupted by the current regime. I want to find out what they're going to tell us.

OK, flowing water on Mars. If we're even to believe that, what are they going to tell us that means? That's what I'm going to wait for. Because I guarantee, let's just wait and see, this is September 28, let's just wait and see. Don't know how long it's going to take, but this news that there is flowing water on Mars is somehow going to find its way into a technique to advance the leftist agenda. I don't know what it is, I would assume it would be something to do with global warming and you can -- maybe there was once an advanced civilization. If they say they found flowing water, next they're going to find a graveyard.

Rush is explicitly telling us his acceptance or rejection of this science will be entirely based around what it means for his political world view. Do the implications of that science threaten Rush's pre-existing political beliefs? If not, then fine, it's legitimate science. But if that science undermines Rush's ideology, whether that happens tomorrow or a year from now, it will then retroactively become leftist junk science.

Climate science deniers like Sen. Jim Inhofe admit this all the time: They only reject the climate science because the carbon-cutting government policy it prescribes is incompatible with their political ideology.

But as David Roberts writes at Vox, the Associated Press and other news organizations continue to bend over backwards to frame the climate debate around science rather than around identity protection and motivated reasoning - which is what Limbaugh himself is saying here it's really all about.
Crossposted at The Green Miles