"...a bad night for the GOP"

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by woot

Yep he was one of the 3 guys who denied evolution at an earlier debate. I think that a Biblical literalist is the very last thing we need right now as a country.

Oddly enough, though, he responded to a question about if he believed every word in the Bible to be true, and he responded that much of the Bible is allegorical and not literal.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Oddly enough, though, he responded to a question about if he believed every word in the Bible to be true, and he responded that much of the Bible is allegorical and not literal.

But he has a degree in theology and NONE OF THE OTHER GUYS DO! I applauded from home when I heard that.


Actually when he finished that response my wife announced she had heard enough and wanted to watch something else (you will have to forgive her, however, as she trends democrat).

[woot]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Oddly enough, though, he responded to a question about if he believed every word in the Bible to be true, and he responded that much of the Bible is allegorical and not literal.

A token concession on a meaningless issue doesn't make him less of a literalist. Believing the creation story is literal despite all of the evidence against it makes one a literalist.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

He's one of those morons who believes the earth is 6,000 years old...Oops, sorry. Never mind. Didn't mean to offend you.

Originally Posted by woot

Yep he was one of the 3 guys who denied evolution at an earlier debate. I think that a Biblical literalist is the very last thing we need right now as a country.

I'm not offended (nor do I necessarily believe the earth 6,000 years old), but I'd like to see this belief tied to a meaningful public policy. IOW, what does this have to do with anything concerning the Presidency?

And if you say "it speaks to his lack of judgment" I shall be sorely disappointed in you.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Tex

I'm not offended (nor do I necessarily believe the earth 6,000 years old), but I'd like to see this belief tied to a meaningful public policy. IOW, what does this have to do with anything concerning the Presidency?

And if you say "it speaks to his lack of judgment" I shall be sorely disappointed in you.

I don't want a moron for a president. Is that good enough? (I gave it a chance the past seven years and it has not been something I'd want to repeat.)

[Tex]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I don't want a moron for a president. Is that good enough? (I gave it a chance the past seven years and it has not been something I'd want to repeat.)

As I thought. Disappointing, but not surprising. I suppose even intellectuals make presidential voting decisions on non-substantive matters.

[woot]

Originally Posted by Tex

As I thought. Disappointing, but not surprising. I suppose even intellectuals make presidential voting decisions on non-substantive matters.

I think it's very substantial. Anyone who has looked at the evidence for even 5 minutes has realized that the earth is, at the very least, much older than 6000 years. Unless we are willing to assume that Huckabee is just that sheltered, his beliefs are the result of an active denial of reality. It is that very thing that played such a large role in getting us into Iraq, and it is a trait that can not need to good policy expect through dumb luck.

Or, "I don't want a moron for president" sums it up.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by woot

I think it's very substantial. Anyone who has looked at the evidence for even 5 minutes has realized that the earth is, at the very least, much older than 6000 years. Unless we are willing to assume that Huckabee is just that sheltered, his beliefs are the result of an active denial of reality. It is that very thing that played such a large role in getting us into Iraq, and it is a trait that can not need to good policy expect through dumb luck.

Or, "I don't want a moron for president" sums it up.

You both answered as unconvincingly and vacantly as I predicted.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by YOhio

I'd prefer the candidate who promises free skittles and m&m's to every citizen, which is about a hundred times more likely than abolishing the IRS.

Dangit, will you allow me to have what little hope I can muster?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Tex

I'm not offended (nor do I necessarily believe the earth 6,000 years old), but I'd like to see this belief tied to a meaningful public policy. IOW, what does this have to do with anything concerning the Presidency?

And if you say "it speaks to his lack of judgment" I shall be sorely disappointed in you.

My problem, Tex, is that it speaks to his lack of judgment.

Let me ask you this: Suppose a presidential candidate said that he/she believes that the world is flat? Would that bother you?