He's Such A Loser Candidate There's Only One Explanation

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.

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.