An “Idiot” Responds
Outraged Huckabee supporter Chad Haynie sent the following missive yesterday. I respond after each relevant section, and would—as always—appreciate your thoughts.
As a long time supporter of Mike Huckabee, who is not an “evangelical” I take serious offense to your over all assertion that supporters of Mike Huckabee are idiots. Even though you have already in a sense called me a idiot, I will try to stay to your “email guidelines” in my breakdown and response to your article.
First of all in your opening sentence you say Gov. Huckabee is not qualified for public office. What qualifications do you suggest a candidate have?
I suggested, in this week’s column, that clarity of thought is a major qualification. In particular, someone who does not believe in evolution is not qualified to hold public office—not because it really matters that we’re descended from apes, but because anyone who doesn’t understand that is too stupid to hold power over other citizens.
Huckabee was a Republican Governor in a Democratic state for over 10 years and he was also a Lieutenant Governor for over 3 years before his term as Governor.
No other candidate in either party, running for President has such an extensive resume running a government.
I refer to the above. Though it is surprising that Huckabee managed to govern Arkansas without accidentally burning it down, his resume doesn’t refute my assertion that he is either an idiot, or pretending to be an idiot, and either way should not be president.
And how exactly is Huckabee a “crazy Christian” as you put it? Is it that you consider all Christians who believe in the Bible, the basic principles of Christianity? It is not really clear in your article if you believe Christians in general are crazy or just Christians who have specific beliefs that differ from your own. I would appreciate you clarifying that, if you do not mind.
I think it was clear enough, but I’ll restate my belief that Huckabee is a crazy Christian because he thinks the earth is 6000 years old. Many—nay, most—Christians don’t believe the mythology of Genesis to be literally true. Thank God!
I was in Iowa last week sir and I can assure you that it was not hate from crazy Christians that beat Mitt Romney and all his money. It was a true hope in this country. An optimism from voters for an optimistic candidate.
Uh-huh. And if Romney were a Baptist, where would Huckabee be?
My second large question to you: Have you ever met Mike Huckabee? After reading your article it seems like you have no idea who Mike Huckabee or what he really believes in. You say he believes in many things that he does not and are incorrect in many of your obvious assumptions of his beliefs.
You say Huckabee could be a radical Islamist terrorist, the same people who murder thousands each year.
You say he “denied separation of church and state”. Yet, in reality, Huckabee ran a secular government for over 10 years. There is no evidence what so ever that he tried to incorporate Christianity as an official religion in Arkansas or establish religion into government as you imply.
This last point is not true. He believes that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in public schools, as if they were two sides of an issue. There’s actually one side, and there is no issue—evolution is a fact. Feigning evenhandedness by “allowing” evolution to be taught alongside the patent lie of creationism is a clever ruse to mainstream a lie.
You try to paint him out to be a nut job, quoting him from when he was talking at a Baptist convention. How dare someone say “…government didn’t have the real answers, that the real answers lie in accepting Jesus Christ into our lives.” at a CHRISTIAN convention.
The fact that he was pandering to Baptists at a Baptist convention is hardly an excuse. It’s just an unsurprising detail. I was taking him to task for the pandering, after all. His statement, though within the bounds of free speech, is anathema to those of us who believe that America is best served by preserving the constitutional separation of church and state. Huckabee is running for public office, a secular office, of a secular state. He should not advocate Christianity or state that government doesn’t have answers. If it doesn’t, why is he running for president?
Do you have a personal vendetta against Huckabee or Christianity?
No.
Everything you state in your article trying to paint Huckabee out wacko, are basic fundamentals of Christianity, not some far out radical belief as you try to imply.
There is nothing “extreme” about the beliefs, they are basic beliefs of Christianity.
Not true. His beliefs are extreme, radical and ridiculous. Anyone who shares them ought to be mocked.
Traditional, yes, but they are not “extreme”.
Homosexuality is sinful in Christianity, again this is not a single radical belief of Huckabee, but a simple belief in Christianity. I am originally from Atlanta and have a handful of gay and lesbian friends. My best friend in high school, a Christian, came out of the closet in his senior year. He acknowledge that being gay was a sin. Mike Huckabee does not try to persecute homosexuals, he simply stated his belief that it is a sin. Having sex out of wedlock is a sin as well, just as a number of things are sins. He didn’t say that homosexuals will burn in hell or they should be arrested. He said it was a sin.
Calling someone’s behavior sinful is the first chapter in a story we’ve read before, one that ends with ovens and gas chambers. Homosexuality is not sinful, not according to mainstream Christianity and not according to common sense. Sin is only committed when someone is harmed as a result. Sin is only committed when free will is involved. Sexual orientation isn’t a choice. Sexual behavior is a personal matter.
I don’t know where you were in 1992, but in the south HIV/AIDS was still a very mysterious disease and the majority of people in the south, especially pastors who spend very little time researching diseases, knew much about HIV or AIDS. He has said since that he did not know much about AIDS at the time of the comment and has stated on numerous occasions in this race that he does not believe HIV and AIDS patients should be isolated.
Absurd! It was well known by the mid-1980s that AIDS could not be spread by casual contact. The South does not have different science than the rest of the country.
Question: Have you been too Guantánamo Bay? Gov. Huckabee has on a number of occasions and for you, who I highly doubt has ever been to Guantánamo, to make statements such as you did just goes to show you are being spoon fed the liberal democrat talking points.
As has been well established, visitors to Gitmo are not allowed to meet with the prisoners at all, much less meet with them in private, where they might share their concerns free of fear of their guards. Huckabee saw the usual dog-and-pony show. What happens there is well known, and horrifying to anyone with the slightest modicum of morality.
Darwinism is not a fact as you imply, it is scientific theory. Huckabee has never claimed scientific elements of evolution did not occur and he has said that on national television.
Huckabee has stated in more than one debate on national television that he does not believe every word of the Bible in a “literal sense” and has specifically said that stories such as Jonah being eaten by a whale did not happen in a literal sense and for you to say that he believes just the opposite is journalism at an all time low. For you to write as you know someones thoughts, when that person has stated publicly that they believe something else is pathetic.
Oh? Where? He has repeatedly said that he believes every word of the Bible.
And by the way, there are tens of millions of Americans who do not believe in Darwinism, including many scientist.
All of whom are idiots. (And there are no scientists.)
Again, I remind you, Darwinism is not fact, it is a scientific theory.
“If you want to believe that you and your family came from apes, I’ll accept that,” Huckabee said. For once you actually represent him correctly. He does not want to impose his beliefs on anyone else. He doesn’t want to replace Biology textbooks with the Bible. He simply has his beliefs and has no problems with those who differ. Clearly not a stance you are too familiar with.
“I’m not sure what in the world [my view of evolution] has to do with being president of the United States,” Huckabee says.
You use that quote and then still do not give a reason of how it is relevant to being President of the United States.
Sure I do. Check out the last paragraph of my column.
If he was running for your local board of education, wanting to take evolution out of textbooks then I could see it as a viable question, but it has nothing at all to do with someone running for President.
In your article you say “Those who deny scientific fact will be wrong (or lie) about anything. Misrepresenting hard and fast truth is unacceptable.”
What scientific fact has Huckabee denied? The only thing he denies is Darwinism, which is far from being scientific fact. It is simply a theory. You have every right to believe in that theory, but just because you think it happened does not mean it is fact, nor does it give you the right to go around and persecute those who do not believe the same thing you do.
The only thing being misrepresented here is Mike Huckabee. You do nothing but misrepresent him and it is obvious you did very little research before you wrote this article, solely taking democratic talking point lies about Huckabee and sowing them into one huge misrepresentation of a honest and decent man. A man who did nothing to you.
Unlike you, Huckabee does not persecute others for their beliefs differing from his own. He doesn’t write nasty and dishonest columns about those who differ from him.
He is a honest, decent human being who quite obviously has much more dignity than yourself.
Huckabee has never tried to force any beliefs on anyone. He ran a secular Government for over a decade never coming close to establishing religion into the Arkansas government. Just because he doesn’t hide his faith like some politicians, he is somehow crazy? I just don’t get that.
I would much rather have someone who is totally honest rather than someone who believes someone, but hides those beliefs. Do you prefer politicians that are pathological liars and hide their real beliefs?
If anything we should be thanking Mike Huckabee for being honest, when almost every other politician today lies through their teeth to get elected. Huckabee clearly states his opinions and beliefs, so people like yourself will know where he really stands.
Is that a bad thing?
I would greatly appreciate a response, since after all, you did call me an idiot.
I’ll give you that: Huckabee certainly isn’t hiding his moronitude.
27 Comments.
I REALLY HATE TO REPEAT MY SELF, BUT JUST WHAT IS YOUR APPENDIX FOR???
how many times does one have to inform the idiots that:
1. A theory is not a hypothesis.
2. Evolution is both a theory and a fact.
3. If you're not well-informed on a topic, keep your opinion to yourself, or risk ridicule.
Ted,
you are so much nicer than I am. I don't disagree with anything you said, but I would add that gravity is not a fact, just a scientific theory. While there are competing "theories", they, like creationism, are not "Scientific Theories", just monkey-babble. Idiots like Chad and Huck don't even understand what a scientific theory is. They are both disqualified in this high-tech era.
Ted,
I write similar statements to yours all the time on Craigslist, and I get the nastiest emails, including death threats. I imagine you get the same. How could a person with a brain embrace mythology as absolute fact without any evidence? I am fine with people being Christian and even with people who don't believe in evolution, they just are not rational. Religious fundamentalism requires the suspension of rational thought, and our country was founded on the premise that reason (aka, rationalism) were better for liberty and law than religion. Why in the world would we elect someone to the highest office in the land who believed the opposite of what our founders did? It boggles the mind. I also would say that one cannot "believe in evolution" since it is a measurable fact. When someone says that the believe in something, they are talking about faith, which by definition does not have any metrics associated. Evolution not only can be measured, but evolutionary experiments can be repeated with measurable results.
I am absolutely sure that Huckabee is nice, honest, decent and hardworking. I am also sure he is unreasonable, delusional, irrational and demented. Those characteristics, it turns out, all can live within the same person.
Apologies for the pedantry, but we are not "descended from apes", but "apes and humans have a common ancestor". But the effect is still the same: evolution is a fact, observed in both the fossil record and real time, and much biological, medical, geographical, and historical research relies explicitly upon the existence of evolution. When you deny evolution, you do not deny just a portion of biology, you deny a seriously large part of modern science and technology.
And as for Huck being a good and decent man, please google and find out the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS of personal gifts he not only accepted, but actively solicited during his tenure(s) in Arkansas.
And as for his "good, decent man" credentials, look to his son, who at seventeen while at a youth camp, captured, tortured, and s-l-o-w-l-y killed a stray dog. If a man can't keep his son from such behaviour, what how (and why) would he restrain his subordinates and cronies?
I could go on and on and on . . .
Appeals to reason don't work with some. If it did, we wouldn't have this problem.
Better to just resort to ruthless mockery of these types.
I guess the left in the U.S. won't be happy until they eradicate religion all together and install an atheist at the Glorious Leader.
Ted,
This is why democracy, though the best we seem to have come up with, is exceptionally flawed.
It's unbelievable to me that this person would claim that the creationism issue, which he admits would be relevant if Huckleberry were running for a school board, is not relevant for a person running for President. Presidents govern the entire country, and heavily influence educational policy; just look at No Child Left Behind.
Furthermore you are way too kind toward Christianity in your article. He's right that these are mainstream Christian arguments….that doesn't mean that somehow Huckleberry is not an idiot, it means that Christianity is idiotic, as are most religions.
We're brainwashed with religious silliness and then that's used to validate the silliness itself.
Let me ask you, does it surprise you that a religious person would use a circular argument?
Well, whatever you say about Huckabee, he has some very dedicated volunteers. Either that, or HE spends a lot of time online.
And here's more proof of his idiocy:
http://video.canadiancontent.net/16321139-talking-to-americans-capitol-building-is-an-igloo.html
Damn! That line about burning Arkansas down was funny! Still, may be just a bad id— no no that would be mean.
Allow me to simplify the counterargument to Chad: Dear Chad, the expression is not: "Even though you have already in a sense called me a idiot," the expression is "Even though you have already in a sense called me *an* idiot." ….you idiot.
Do creationists have dictionaries?
For evolutionary theory, use definitions number 1 and 2. For the creation stories in the first two chapters of Genesis, use definition number 6:
http://www.bartleby.com/61/20/T0152000.html
I'll give you credit Ted, you tried. That you can argue with impenetrable religious loonies is remarkable. I personally find it exhausting. Facts never get in their way, and they never will.
All of whom are idiots. (And there are no scientists.)
Unfortunately, there are a handful of people with genuine scientific credentials, like Mike Behe, qwho have signed on to the antievolution movement. They're scientists, they're just bad scientists. The point is that there is no science behind creationism/ID, and all the science we do have confirms evolution.
I agree with everything you said except "Sin is only committed when free will is involved."
Nonsense. I've heard Nazis tried that one. Sin is committed when someone is harmed as a result. Period.
Anyone here remember November 3, 2004?
Huckabee would be a perfect president for this country.
One tiny point, but SOMEBODY on the troll side is bound to bring it up so:
Credible data on how the majority of Christians around the world view homosexuality may be lacking, but it is a fact that the majority of Christian Institutions condemn homosexual activity as a sin. Pope Prada – oops, er- Benedickt condemned it in his New Years Day sermon and it has been declared it a mortal sin by the RCC, as it is considered in the Orthodox Churches. Fundamentalist faiths all place it in that category. Of the remaining major Protestant Churches, the Anglican/ Episcopalian Church probably comes closest to having any degree of formal acceptance of homosexuality. And that is far from universal – in fact, the Anglican Churches in Africa have threatened withdrawal b/c of the ordination of openly gay clergy in the US.
None of which alters your basic premise (that Huckabee and Huckaphiles are idiots), but a stronger point would have been that the Southern Baptists believe it can be cured and eradicated by prayer and good clean living, both of which are idiotic beliefs.
Note to self:
If you're a supporter of X, and someone's said X-supporters are idiots, and you write in to contest that, don't be an idiot.
I guess the left in the U.S. won't be happy until they eradicate religion all together and install an atheist at the Glorious Leader.
Thomas Jefferson was pretty much an atheist. He was our best president. He wrote the Declaration of Independence. He basically invented the ideological basis for the United States.
Yeah, putting an atheist in charge…THAT would be really crazy.
boo–
Michael Behe "teaches" at Lehigh.
There are no scientists at Lehigh.
There are no brains at Lehigh.
Only a bassackward hillbilly institution like Lehigh would even let Behe on campus, let alone allow the man to "instruct its students."
Go 'Pards!
To quote Ernst W. Mayr :- "The basic theory of evolution has been confirmed so completely that most modern biologists consider evolution simply a fact. How else except by the word evolution can we designate the sequence of faunas and floras in precisely dated geological strata? And evolutionary change is also simply a fact owing to the changes in the content of gene pools from generation to generation"
The worst thing that ever happened was it getting tagged with the "Theory of" bit. Scientists shouldn't rise to them instead they should just call them idiots rather than justifying evolution.
I dunno, you can't argue with these people as it's a belief the blinkers come down and there's no room for reason, they're the flip side of the same coin as the radical Muslims. Good job there's nothing in the bible about triangles as they'd be going after Pythagoras.
Re: Homosexuality as sin.
A sin is an offense against a deity. A crime is an offense against humans. We are a secular republic with separation of religion and government guaranteed in the Constitution. It is government's job to be concerned with crime, but it is not the business of any government official or agency to be concerned in any way with an offense against any alleged deity. If the religious wish to condemn and shun sinners as defined by their individual sects, they have every right to do so, but they cannot expect a secular government to assist them. Nor may they attempt to criminalize an act that offends ONLY their alleged deity without harming the persons or property of humans.
Got it, Chad? When we're talking government, sin is completely irrelevant.
Jana C.H.
Seattle
Saith Napoleon Bonaparte: Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.
"I was in Iowa last week sir and I can assure you that it was not hate from crazy Christians that beat Mitt Romney and all his money. It was a true hope in this country. An optimism from voters for an optimistic candidate."
This alone indicates the extent of this guy's belief in Romney. As Ted said, if Romney were a Baptist, the results would have been different. I wonder what flavor of Kool-Aid is being served at Huckabee's campaign….
Ted thank you for writing this … my sentiments exactly !
Agreed ted. Let's have a slave owning racist who thought the French Terror a jolly good old romp for president.
Jefferson was far far FAR from the best president we've had.
The rhetoric on this site is so bad, hypocritical, and just wrong as to be sad.
And as for most of those posting here, their comments could be all be basically paraphrased as follows:
Choir to Precher: "YOU'RE RIGHT!"
"Yet, in reality, Huckabee ran a secular government for over 10 years. There is no evidence what so ever that he tried to incorporate Christianity as an official religion in Arkansas or establish religion into government as you imply."
[Ted] This last point is not true. He believes that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in public schools…
But where is the evidence that Huck pushed for this once during his 10 years as governor? Why is it not possible to have a set of beliefs AND not feel you have to impress them on the others?
My dad can't stand Huckabee! I was reading the Times today about the ridiculous pandering going on in South Carolina from the GOP on the Confederate flag.
The Republicans need to take a firm position that says they support “state’s rights” but also find the site of the flag repugnant. They need to say “I respect your RIGHT to fly such a flag, but I don’t respect your DECISION to fly it”. To simply dodge the issue and say “I support state’s rights” does not constitute as an actual position regarding the flag. Every time their asked if they support flying the Confederate flag they answer with "I support states rights", which is very sweet of them but the question was "Do you support the flag". Not "Do you support states rights".
For Gov. Huckabee (who supports the “states rights” argument), to say “…if somebody came to Arkansas and told us what to do with our flag, we’d tell them what to do with the pole” was ridiculous and not a very statesman-like thing to say. The Confederate flag is not a state flag, for starters. Secondly, yes–in the eyes of some it’s an ornamental homage to southern heritage. For the rest it remains a darkly offensive symbol of slavery, violent racism and a war that nearly destroyed the country. Why display it? What’s the difference between displaying the Confederate flag and displaying the Nazi flag? What purpose does it serve?