http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071211/ap_on_el_pr/huckabee_ryan_white
the guy is a little misinformed and ignorant of facts....and still stands by his statement....a little scary.
Bush gained the Republican nomination because he professed to be a born-again....the ultra-religious, right wing of the party, didn't care about his lack of intellect or lack of experience...just about his religion...now look at the mess we are in.
It appears we are heading down this same slippery slope with Huckabee.....is anyone else concerned that he may just gain the nomination because of his religion...and not because of his experience/laurels, etc...?
If it is so important to fundamentalist Christians to elect one of their own...could they at least find an intelligent, well-educated and well spoken one to represent and lead our country.
When a candidate's religion trumps his intellect where does this leave the country? Your thoughts?
2007-12-11 04:34:41 · 15 answers · asked by G.C. 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I ferverently hope and pray that Huckabee gets the Republican nominiation and is their presidential candidate next year.
The reason is that I am a Democrat and his nomination would virtually guarantee a Democratic victory in '08.
But you brought up a good point. Why can't they find an intelligent , well educated and articulate fundamentalist to represent them? For the life of me, I can't even name one.
2007-12-11 05:18:44 · answer #1 · answered by WhatsYourProblem 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Huckabee's religion is of no interest to me. Neither is Obama's, Hillary's, Giuliani's, nor anyone else's. I want to know where they stand on national defense, I want to know where they stand on government spending (which is, by the way, one prime reason I will never vote for La Clinton - if we take all of her proposals and look at the price tag, she's intending to increase Federal spending by over $7 billion in the next ten years. No, thanks.), and that's pretty much it for my hot button topics.
I am not especially concerned with something he said 15 years ago. If he said it last year, I'd be more worried about it. Frankly, I've always been a little distressed that AIDS was the first disease with a political agenda. I would rather spending decisions not be made based on who has the best sound bites on the evening news. Maybe that's just me.
Oh, and for the record - if the election were held tomorrow, I wouldn't vote for Huckabee.
2007-12-11 04:42:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Bush won because a bunch of actual idiots (aka "liberals") thought that he was the idiot. Bush knows how to play to his crowd, and he's smart enough to know that he doesn't need to impress people who would reject him, anyway. Huckabee is the same way. Huckabee is very intelligent, that much is obvious to anyone who isn't blinded by stupidity or bigotry. The thing is that the stupid and bigoted can't figure out that it is possible to be intelligent and WRONG at the same time, or even worse, to be intelligent and pretend to adopt certain beliefs merely to cater to a target audience.
Huckabee's intelligence is not rationally questionable. His ethics probably are, but not his intelligence.
I find it amusing and ironic that the faction in this country that prides itself so much on promoting "values" is the most immoral and the faction that prides itself most on "enlightenment" is the most stupid.
2007-12-11 04:47:01 · answer #3 · answered by Hoosier Daddy 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you do research into the prevailing knowledge and wisdom of the time this was a standard approach within the medical community.
Having attended international AIDS conferences in the 90s I can tell you that this was the conventional wisdom. Why? Because no one was certain exactly how contagious AIDS was. Should we disqualify all the doctors who made similar statements from any positions of authority in hospitals?
2007-12-11 04:42:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'm not concerned about his intelligence, I'm concerned that he has allowed the sin of homophobia to have such a tight grip on his mind that he cannot comprehend what he is really saying. Homophobia is immoral and I'm always concerned when we have a President trying to convince us (and himself) that it's moral. But then, one cannot win the Republican Party nomination unless he promotes the anti-gay lifestyle.
2007-12-11 23:20:30 · answer #5 · answered by Michael B - Prop. 8 Repealed! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was never planning on voting for him anyway so no I'm not concerned I just hope he's not the next president he just doesn't look good enough to do the job right without having a nervous breakdown or making terrible decisions.
2007-12-11 04:44:12 · answer #6 · answered by missgigglebunny 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
In1992 when he said it, we still didn't have alot of info about Aids and people were dying left and right from it- I might have been able to dismiss that statement if he didn't come back and say he stands by it today...
The guy is no threat though...He's not going anywhere LOL
2007-12-11 04:41:00 · answer #7 · answered by :) 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I was concerned long before those comments came to light. I saw him do a couple of stints on the Colbert Report. Very frightening.
2007-12-11 04:42:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Huckaby sounds like the return of Lyndon LaRouche.
HIV is not easily communicable.
2007-12-11 04:39:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I have long found Huckabee to be an ignorant bigot.
2007-12-11 04:39:31 · answer #10 · answered by gumby 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋