Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Jon Huntsman Broadens His Indictment Of The Anti-Science GOP
In an interview with ABC’s This Week GOP 2012 candidate Jon Huntsman took his fellow Republicans to task for becoming the anti-science party.
Here is the transcript from ABC News:
TAPPER: This was a big week for Texas Governor Rick Perry. He went out on the campaign trail and he raised a lot of eyebrows. He made some comments about evolution and he said this about climate change.
PERRY: “I think there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects. And I think we are seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change. I don’t think, from my perspective, that I want America to be engaged in spending that much money on still a scientific theory that has not been proven, and from my perspective, is more and more being put into question.”
TAPPER: These comments from Governor Perry prompted you to Tweet, quote: “To be clear, I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.” Were you just being cheeky or do you think there’s a serious problem with what Governor Perry said?
HUNTSMAN: I think there’s a serious problem. The minute that the Republican Party becomes the party – the anti-science party, we have a huge problem. We lose a whole lot of people who would otherwise allow us to win the election in 2012. When we take a position that isn’t willing to embrace evolution, when we take a position that basically runs counter to what 98 of 100 climate scientists have said, what the National Academy of Science – Sciences has said about what is causing climate change and man’s contribution to it, I think we find ourselves on the wrong side of science, and, therefore, in a losing position.
The Republican Party has to remember that we’re drawing from traditions that go back as far as Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, President Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush. And we’ve got a lot of traditions to draw upon. But I can’t remember a time in our history where we actually were willing to shun science and become a – a party that – that was antithetical to science. I’m not sure that’s good for our future and it’s not a winning formula.
Huntsman is fighting for the moderate wing of the Republican Party, but as his standing in the polls illustrates, the moderates have already been forced to evacuate the GOP. Huntsman is trying to send a warning to his party that they are out of step with the rest of America. The GOP’s has embraced the anti-science positions of the religious right to such a degree that they have become part of the party platform, but the religious right is just one side of the Republican anti-science triangle.
The second side is corporate America. Republicans have shown themselves to be more than willing to discredit the scientific proof of climate change. They do so because they have been told that taking action on climate change will hurt the bottom lines of their energy industry benefactors. This is where the Republican corporate interests and the religious right intersect. Using God as an excuse to reject the science appeals to the evangelical constituency, and also protects the corporate interests.
The final side of the triangle is anti-intellectualism. It isn’t that today’s Republican Party has no ideas, but it is that the extreme right’s distrust of science and facts has changed basis for the new GOP’s ideas. As Richard Posner wrote in May of 2009, “My theme is the intellectual decline of conservatism, and it is notable that the policies of the new conservatism are powered largely by emotion and religion and have for the most part weak intellectual groundings. That the policies are weak in conception, have largely failed in execution, and are political flops is therefore unsurprising.”
The rejection of science that Huntsman was talking about is based on ideology and religion. There isn’t a weaker policy basis out there than the one Republicans use to oppose any action on climate change. When a party is led by its religion, corporate ideology and anti-intellectualism, people like Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry become the frontrunners.
This is also how Jon Huntsman has ended up being at the bottom of the polls. Huntsman would be a great General Election candidate for the Republicans, but since he won’t pander to the Evangelicals and anti-intellectuals, he is destined for many poor finishes. Jon Huntsman, like many other moderate Republicans, is still holding on to a Republican Party that doesn’t exist anymore. There aren’t any more Rockefeller or Dole Republicans. Heck, there aren’t even any more George H.W. Bush Republicans.
There isn’t any room in the GOP anymore for a pro-science Republican, even such a person would fit into mainstream America. If the GOP nominates a scream it from the mountaintops climate change denying creationist, Obama will win reelection. Jon Huntsman knows this. Republican strategists also know this, but the people who are going to head to the polls to choose their party’s 2012 nominee don’t care.
Congratulations, Jon Huntsman on having the courage to call out the GOP’s anti-science malarkey. I hope you enjoy your future political life as Independent Just like all the other intellectual Republicans you are about to be ostracized from the party.
While many in the mainstream media have gone ballistic over Rick Perry's stances on science and Social S ...
What do Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum all have i ...
There is a sickening trend in this country of conservative Christians decrying science as fraudulent, an ...
When Hrafnkell Haraldson wrote about North Carolina's GOP desire to enshrine climate change denial into ...
In their quest to politicize everything, the Republican Party sunk to a new low today in the state of Virgin ...
Cathy
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 4:56 pm
“—the intellectual decline of conservatism–”!! I love it! You are right that Huntsman would be a great candidate, and it is a national disgrace that so many Republicans have blindly moved so far to the right on their platforms.
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
Of course, two of the guys Huntsman names – Reagan and Bush – were anti-science as well. I applaud him for standing up for science but this has been awhile coming. It’s a shame nobody bothered to stand up when there was still a chance to save the GOP from itself.
Sarah Jones
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 5:22 pm
I really like this guy, and that tells me that the Republicans must hate him. No, I’m kidding- but he’s sane and has integrity and won’t pander. I keep hoping he will win the nomination, but I know that is a pipe dream. I wouldn’t be able to vote for him, because of the R next to his name and what that would mean for the administration he would have, but in another time, I certainly could see myself considering him as a candidate. Not that my vote is up for grabs in 2012. I’m pretty happy with the President we have. Still, it’s awfully nice to have at least one Republican who isn’t a crazy clown. Gives me hope.
Shiva (Moderator)
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 6:02 pm
Ever wonder if the others including palin are there to make him look good?
Sarah Jones
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 6:33 pm
Yes. I wonder that a lot actually, but even Karl Rove isn’t that crazy.
Shiva (Moderator)
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 6:35 pm
Oh sissy, Karl Rove IS crazy
Or cragy as my Korean other half says
Ingarose
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 8:44 pm
Well, I am not sure about that. I read on Huff Post that Rove totally believes that Sarah Palin is going to jump into the race. Somehow he does not like Perry. Somehow I believe that Karl Rove has lost control of all the GOP crazies. Well, good for him, noone needs him anymore.
zumpie
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 11:43 pm
Rove’s actually quite unhappy with the pool of candidates—and even HE finds most of them too far to the right!!!
Margaret
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
I’m hopeful Pres Obama will win reelection in 2012. In which case 2016 is the question mark and when I fear the country will be most vulnerable to a successful election of one of these far-right, anti-intellectual nuts. So am also hoping the far-right nuts burn themselves out of the Repub party by 2012 so the moderate Repubs can return and influence it again by 2016. Huntsman and others like him could galvanize the moderates who’ve left their party by speaking sense loudly and more often, not caving to the crazy. As an independent who mostly votes Dem, I’d prefer a healthy two-party system, not this out-of-whack mess.
zumpie
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 11:42 pm
2016 isn’t a big question mark–his name’s Andrew Cuomo. And he’ll win a landslide victory. Especially given how the Puggies can’t get themselves in gear.
That said, I kinda like Huntsman, too. Actually I even feel bad for him, cause he appears to be a pretty decent, classy guy. That said, why IS he even a Republican? He’s further left than plenty of the Blue Dogs.
Shiva (Moderator)
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 6:29 pm
I wonder how huntsman would fare were his views known nationally? I bet his name would be higher than Perry’s. Not every republican is stuck on the return of jesus to wonderland kick, or fails to see the weather around him.
And more, it doesnt matter is man is causing the weather changes. Man, as steward of this earth has the responsibility to maintain his domain. Someone forgot to tell the AFA and all the rest of the monumentally disoriented and challenged that they are stewards, not capitalists.
Follow the money I guess. Follow the money and find in time you are owned by it
GoodSpeed
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 7:31 pm
While Huntsman is coming across as a sane fella, he’s only the least worse of the right-wing wankers. A closer look at his record as governor will show he’s 100% beholden to big corperation & the worst of wall street, his singular role as Utah governor to water down the regulation of the derivatives clearing houses that mostly operates out of his state & that would have significantly limit the impact of the 2008 crash on the average working family will eventually put a full stop to any pretense prospect of him being POTUS
mikeyhatesit
Aug. 20th, 2011 at 10:40 pm
A mormon who believes in fact-based evidence? He just screwed himself out of the GOP nomination!
I wouldn’t vote for him anyway, but his religiosity seems to be held to a minimum compared to Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann (let alone the rest of the group), so that actually makes him tolerable. The science thing gives him more points with me, but this is sure to cost him everything because of the rampant anti-intellectual bias in the Right Wing. I’ve had many a person tell me, without their having any background in biology or anthropology, there is no basis to evolution. How insulted would they be if I told them little imps lived inside the computers and drew the images on the monitor; or that invisible spiders attached webs to our souls in order to keep us floating into outer space? Plenty, but they don’t seem to be able to make that connection to another person’s point of view.
That might be what the major issue with the fundamentalist take on human rights: a selfish first-grader’s ‘my way is the only way, and if you don’t agree with me, the monster under the bed will get you!’ guide to living.
rm
Aug. 21st, 2011 at 1:54 am
Alleged Palin Stalker’s Mom Speaks :
The wife and mother of Sarah Palin’s accused father-son stalker duo tells Diane Herbst about her family’s financial bind and why she believes one of the Palins was ‘sexting’ her son.
www.thedailybeast.com/art...
Anne
Aug. 21st, 2011 at 11:17 am
I wouldn’t vote for Huntsman myself, but he is too rational and sane for the GOP in its current form. That’s why his rating among them is so low. It’s truly scary to witness how a party that was once about something is engaging in self-destruction. Regardless of how dissatisfied with Obama some of us might be, it is quite clear that the alternative is infinitely worse with this bunch of losers.