What makes you think they even disapprove of him?
“Hi, I’m Charles Manson. Back in 1969 I ran a cult in the desert and I commanded my followers to kill a bunch of people in order to start a race war. Or maybe I was upset over a record deal. I’m not really sure. The point is I’m one stone cold crazy motherfucker. But even I’m not crazy enough to deny global warming. C’mon the evidence is overwhelming and every informed scientist on earth is in agreement. You’d have to be really nuts to deny global warming is real. Like the fine folks at Heartland Institute. Take it from me, Charles Manson, those guys are crazy and I know crazy.”
My name is wolf kabob Roth vantage, and I approve of this message. Do you feel blame ?
GIGO, thanks for including the link to that page with links to companies funding the Heartland Institute. I started off the morning with emails to a couple of them, explaining why I would be doing my level best to minimize my future business with them.
Switching to Linux, then, are we? 
Ah, The Heartland Institute. Nice rational argument y’all have on that there billboard. Just keep diggin’ that hole, now.
What would you have them say?
I think it’s important to distinguish between their position, which is insane, and their selves, who are not so much “insane” as “willing to kill and displace others for money.” They have to realize their position will eventually result in death and misery, but right now they themselves are getting paid to espouse it, and they don’t expect to be around when the resulting crisis peaks. It’s more a ruthless selfishness than it is inability to comprehend the science – the difference between “evil” and “dumb or insane.”
Now, in all fairness, some are probably all three.
Evil = what they actually are
Insane = what they’re acting like
Dumb = their target audience
As is mentioned in the comments on that page, there’s a difference between supporting and supporting.
Microsoft offers free software licenses to non-profit organizations. Heartland requested them. Microsoft granted them. That appears to be the sum total of their “support.”
Kind of the like the Rush Limbaugh advertiser list, I wonder if there’s a few errors on that list. It’s good to see companies rushing to disavow Heartland, in any case.
It would appear, then, that the demographic of people likely to be angry at a company that promotes pusbuckets like Heartland is big enough to tighten the sphincters of the Marketing Department. Which is an interesting development just by itself.
That, or the PR departments of large companies are staffed by gigantic pussies whose entire job it is to withdraw out at the slightest hint of any controversy whatsoever with a quickness.
And then they find a new group to support that isn’t as notorious yet, and repeat the process a few years down the road.
MAYOR QUINBY: Not now, Lisa! I’m in a meeting here with representatives of corporate sponsors to plan the Jedediah Springfield Day festivities!
LISA: Do you realize you’re honoring a murderous pirate?!
SUIT: A pirate! Well, that’s hardly the image we want for Long John Silver’s! [leaves]
OTOH, there are some corporations who have a bottom-line reason to support the Heartland Institute or something like it, no matter how unpopular it gets, because any action taken to stop global warming would hurt their bottom lines even worse.
I don’t blame them. Inductive reasoning is tricky.
Science is tricky.
I used to do computer support for a group of scientists that included some climate scientists. The climate scientists had a reputation for not being very nice, and for being the users you didn’t want to deal with. There was some speculation that this was because their results made them depressed and angry.
Of course, whether they’re nice or not doesn’t really have much to do with whether their results are accurate. We’d have to throw out all of Newtonian physics if we were using that standard.
Meh. They’re no sillier than PETA’s billboards equating meat-eating with the Holocaust. In any case, the billboard ads have been pulled.