He's Such A Loser Candidate There's Only One Explanation
Yes, Mike Huckabee has an Imaginary Friend working hard on his behalf! Here's Hucky, in response to a student's question about his apparent surge in polls:
HUCKABEE: There's only one explanation for it and it's not a human one. The same power that helped a little boy with two loaves and five fish feed a crowd of 5,000 people and that's the only way that our campaign could be doing what it's doing. And I'm not being facetious nor am I trying to be trite. There are literally thousands of people across this country who are praying that a little will become much and it has, it defies all explanation. It has confounded the pundits and I'm enjoying every minute of their trying to figure it out. And until they look at it from a just experience beyond human they'll never figure it out. And that's probably just as well. That's honestly why it's happening."
Not surprisingly, Hucky wants "schools to acknowledge that there are views that are different than evolution." Yes, but none that are based in science. Perhaps that chick from The View can run as his V.P.
And maybe they can ride together to the inauguration on one of those dinosaurs the early Christians were saddling up.
Cheap sarcasm aside, let's not let "the science gap" start at the top. (Again.) Physics and astronomy prof Lawrence M. Krauss writes in The Wall Street Journal:
Almost all of the major challenges we will face as a nation in this new century, from the environment, national security and economic competitiveness to energy strategies, have a scientific or technological basis. Can a president who is not comfortable thinking about science hope to lead instead of follow? Earlier Republican debates underscored this problem. In May, when candidates were asked if they believed in the theory of evolution, three candidates said no. In the next debate Mike Huckabee explained that he was running for president of the U.S., not writing the curriculum for an eighth-grade science book, and therefore the issue was unimportant.Apparently many Americans agreed with him, according to polls taken shortly after the debate. But lack of interest in the scientific literacy of our next president does not mean that the issue is irrelevant. Popular ambivalence may rather reflect the fact that most Americans are scientifically illiterate. A 2006 National Science Foundation survey found that 25% of Americans did not know the earth goes around the sun.
...This coming week another group I am a part of, ScienceDebate2008, is issuing a public call for a U.S. presidential debate devoted to science and technology. Eight Nobel Laureates, the heads of several major scientific societies, several university presidents, the chairman emeritus of Lockheed Martin and several congresspeople have already signed on to call for the debate, which would cover three broad categories: the environment, health and medicine, and science and technology policy.
Even if the American public is not currently focused on these concerns, decisions made by the next U.S. president on issues such as climate change, energy research, stem cells and nuclear proliferation will have a global impact. We owe it to the next generation to take ownership of these issues now. In spite of the ambivalence reflected in some polls, there is a popular understanding that science and technology will be essential to meet the challenges we face as a society. When reports began to surface warning that the avian flu might become a threat to humans, for example, everyone from the president down called for studies to determine how quickly the virus might mutate from birds to human beings. No one suggested that "intelligent design," for example, could provide answers.
We as a nation desperately need a more scientifically literate electorate and leadership, and a presidential debate on these subjects would be a good first step in this direction.
Krauss' most recent book is Hiding in the Mirror: The Mysterious Allure of Extra Dimensions, from Plato to String Theory and Beyond.
I'm with you here, Amy, but even some well educated people advocate creationism.
Part of the thicket here is our god-like search for all knowing, all encompassing laws and regulations from courts and congress, so the Left is pushing their politically correct agenda that tells us what to believe, and the Right gets on the same train with mandated creationism in the curriculum.
doombuggy at December 7, 2007 6:30 AM
Not surprisingly, Hucky wants "schools to acknowledge that there are views that are different than evolution."
When did evolution become a view? Maybe if we stopped calling it science and started calling it history some of these "well-educated" people could come around to, oh I don't know, thinking for themselves?
dena at December 7, 2007 7:01 AM
The idea of someone with that much power believing in mythology to the exclusion of science is a deal breaker, no question.
But so is someone who believes that it's all relative, that we can just go with whatever feels right at any given moment and who finds discussions of right and wrong tiresome and judgemental.
Some substantial portion of the electorate needs to believe that their leader has a moral compass as well as a grasp of the importance and value of scientific advance.
Just another way of looking at it.
martin at December 7, 2007 7:15 AM
I'm with you here, Amy, but even some well educated people advocate creationism.
Our president went to Yale. That doesn't make him well-educated. My friend Pierre, who is a 70-something cabinetmaker who never went to college, and was reading Hannah Arendt last time I was there, is well-educated. And it was a do-it-yourself deal.
Amy Alkon at December 7, 2007 7:17 AM
I consider myself fortunate to have grown up in an era when science education was a national priority (remember, we had to beat the Russians to the moon!).
deja pseu at December 7, 2007 7:17 AM
And of course Huck fails to acknowledge the real cause for his rise - Christian conservatives have figured out that (no matter how much Hewitt and others push for the Mormon) the slick-talking former governor of Arkansas (do they breed them there or what?) is the only Republican candidate who is truly one of their own.
The most reasonable thing about faith and values I've heard from a candidate comes from the one running the worst campaign:
"He said he gained his values from "sitting around the kitchen table" and said he did not plan to speak about his religious beliefs on the stump. "I know that I'm right with God and the people I love," he said, according to Bloomberg News Service. It's "just the way I am - not to talk about some of these things."
justin case at December 7, 2007 8:44 AM
"Hiding in the Mirror"?
Have some fun with this. Check these out, by Stephen R. Donaldson: Mirror of Her Dreams and A Man Rides Through. It's not science - but then, when you look at a mirror, I doubt you know how it works for real.
Radwaste at December 7, 2007 9:04 AM
As soon as these used-car salesmen produce Jesus for a news conference, I'll believe.
Until then my vote goes to the rationalist.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 7, 2007 9:08 AM
"my vote goes to the rationalist"
Unfortunately, that leaves out anyone who really thinks they deserve or are qualified for that much responsibility and are willing to go through the ordeal of getting elected.
How 'bout we just do it like jury duty? You get notice by post card and unless you have a qualifying conflict, you are stuck in the oval office for 4 years.
martin at December 7, 2007 10:33 AM
Is it not this type of crap that could be the beginning of trying to turn this country into a backwards bunch or religious nutjobs like the Middle east?
Morbideus at December 7, 2007 1:45 PM
I find it embarrassing for our country. I wish more people did.
Amy Alkon at December 7, 2007 1:56 PM
Aint it the truth...
Morbideus at December 7, 2007 5:01 PM
We clearly need to promote science education, but Krause is off base in his criticism. Asking Huckabee if he believes in evolution is the wrong question. I want to know if he recognizes that students need to understand the theory regardless of what they believe.
A student learns a lot about evolution by studying the arguments for and against the intelligent design (ID) concept of irreducible complexity. Most ID advocates accept evolution as an essential process of nature though not the full answer. ID recognizes billions of years in the process of creation.
A key purpose of studying science is to see how we can intelligently design a better world. If we can improve the world by what we learn from science, then we reasonably conclude intelligence has intervened in the past.
Chris at December 12, 2007 8:50 PM
Leave a comment