Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman took a startling position in the GOP debates last night — he suggested that the party not “run from science.” After candidates have lined up to reject everything from global warming to evolution, Huntsman is a standout in his Galileo moment in the GOP.
Huntsman stated:
“Listen, when you make comments that fly in the face of what 98 out of 100 climate scientists have said, when you call into question the science of evolution, all I’m saying is that, in order for the Republican Party to win, we can’t run from science. We can’t run from mainstream conservative philosophy. We’ve got to win voters.”
Wow.
I have long admired Jon Huntsman after we testified together before a House Committee when he was still governor of Utah. We then by coincidence flew back to Utah on the same plane. I found him very bright and engaging. I have little doubt that, if the GOP nominated Huntsman, they would win the White House — with many independent and Democratic votes going to Huntsman. He is moderate on many issues and exceptionally knowledgable about business issues. He also believes in science — a promising factor for a president. It is remarkable that such a position would make Huntsman a standout, but that is a measure of the times in which we are living. Of course, he lost the Pope Urban VIII vote.
With Obama at record lows in the polls, the Democrats are hanging their hopes on the GOP selecting an extremist and rejecting Huntsman. It has been pretty clear for months that Democrats are not going to be given a choice in their own party despite the desire of some to dump Obama. The problem is that Obama is now so unpopular that even some of the more extreme candidates might be able beat him.
Last night, Ron Paul won the straw polling after the debate.
Source: CBS
Anonymously Yours
1, September 8, 2011 at 6:03 pm
BTW, I did not see abortion as one of the key agenda items of the NCSL…here is the site…http://www.ncsl.org/?tabid=21929
But what do I know….
—
The last few years have been banner years for the compulsive pregnancy crowd, srsly, and they’re moving toward restricting contraception into the mainstream now too. Same tactics as with abortion, make it difficult to get e.g. defund Planned Parenthood, abolish insurance payments, any govt. medical aid payments etc.
I don’t put much stake in political platforms and mission statements, they lie and are designed to be the least objectionable to the most readers.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/reproductive_rights/
Anon to Elaine: ”
“Anyway, I think you do all women and humanity a disservice when you cast women as some historical victim in society. Didn’t they teach you anything useful in your women’s studies classes about women leaders, women soldiers, women scientists, women researchers, women lawyers?”
—————
What are you talking about- I can’t find a statement by Elaine that casts women as historical victims, please point it out. Otherwise you’re just carping at female posters to be carping at female posters to be carping at females- something I’m beginning to suspect.
Also, in America women have historically been victimized by disparate treatment, legal treatment, across the entire spectrum of social activities. So have people of color. You’re on a blawg where you’re talking to people, many of them current or prior political activists, that are (many of them) in their 60’s. We were turned into activists because we couldn’t get served at a restaurant if we weren’t in a skirt or dress or get a credit card in our name without having our husband or father co-sign for it, not our mothers or sisters- a male relative. Mothers and big sisters told us how they couldn’t get birth control even in the 50’s because it was illegal and you were stuck with rhythm, abstinence, pregnancy or illegal abortions. When I started work it was legal to discriminate against women and management did and told you up-front they would. There were no women in most technical fields and women physicians, if you could find one was probably a Gynecologist. That’s a fact. That’s history.
For you to virtually sneer at the reality of American history while using another dog-whistle- the elitist, women’s-study trained, budding femnazi- on Elaine is offensive and there are words to describe your sub-text. I know what misandry means, and I know what misogynist means.
Just how old are you? Don’t you know anybody old enough to tell you what the country was like and a large number of people in this country want to take it back to?
And frankly, I’m tired of hearing a certain kind of men whine about how put upon they are by the concept of equality, economic and cultural, of women. Of course it doesn’t stop with that though it may go unspoken; it’s all those low caliber folks, females, brown people, black people, who have gotten ahead only by virtue of some affirmative action. A presumption that builds in to it that a white man is so obviously superior to anybody else that any non-white male that gets ahead only can do so by virtue of a set aside.
BTW, I did not see abortion as one of the key agenda items of the NCSL…here is the site…http://www.ncsl.org/?tabid=21929
But what do I know….
correction:
Being intellectually dishonest are we? You “KNEW” damn well it was personal. Your “YOU’RE as bad as Republicans that say we won’t raise taxes and then turn around and pass a use fee…just figuring a different way to make your point and balance the budget….
Swarthmore mom
1, September 8, 2011 at 5:32 pm
AY Huntsman’s anti-abortion and right to work views were the target. Posted early about that before you were even on so don’t take it personally.
*************
Being intellectually dishonest are we? You damn well it was personal. Your as bad as Republicans that say we won’t raise taxes and then turn around and pass a use fee…just figuring a different way to make your point and balance the budget….
No SWM,
Being dismissive about someone else viewpoint besides your own was your target and you made it personal. Reread what you posted, if you care to differ with what is stated right here, right now.
AY Huntsman’s anti-abortion and right to work views were the target. Posted early about that before you were even on so don’t take it personally.
SWM,
That is true, you did a tactical assault but somehow missed the Target. Better luck next time. As we are on the same page but with a different agenda. Askance is a very appropriate term, not surprised you know or.
Anonymously Yours
1, September 8, 2011 at 4:20 pm
Blouise,
I hear that Ohio has a Ballot issue regarding taxpayer funded abortions coming up soon….Make a difference….
——————————————————————–
I choose my battles carefully …
“There is difference and there is power. And who holds the power decides the meaning of the difference.” (June Jordan)
Anon to Elaine:
“I do look distrustfully at those that do not consider women’s rights when discussing human rights. It has absolutely nothing to do with me personally. It has to do with lack of consideration for women in general.””
Why don’t you demonstrate I lack consideration for women in general….
Your own comment demonstrates either ignorance or complicity. Time after time modern feminists explain that they are both a human rights movement as well as a movement that prioritizes women over men.
————
The fact that women had greater reproductive rights and health care rights as a matter of settled law 20 years ago and their rights are being steadily eroded with more concerted action and legislative complicity today is public knowledge. It is a matter of human rights and and does require specific attention because the medical and legislative needs of women regarding their health is different that men’s health issues. Anyone that doesn’t notice is willfully ignorant or complicit IMO.
I will not vote for someone that is not pro-choice. Nor will I vote for someone advocating a voucher plan for schooling. The words abortion and vouchers are dog-whistles, they symbolize a philosophical approach to governance that translates, if you’ve been paying attention, as the vector to recasting women to a biblical norm and to the racism of the old south and the new religious conservatism.
Jobs are a human right; being in control of your own body is a human rights issue. There are a lot of human rights issues- I don’t make trade-off regarding my list, a politician doesn’t get a check mark beside every one then s/he don’t get my vote. I’m a single issue voter and I’ve got a bunch of single issues. It’s my vote, I’ll use whatever criterion or criteria I choose.
I disagree with SM on some issues. That’s not a secret. But she posts good links and she is not rude. If you think her postings are misandry you haven’t been reading them. This thread has dealt with women’s health issues more than any thread in forever. You bet your ass the women here have strong opinions about it but to cast SM as advocating misandry as a rule and “bludgeoning” the readers here with it is absolutely incorrect. I don’t think you know what that word means.
Did not use the word askance to deceive. It was direct.
Lastly, Askance….Think twice…pause and reflect, exactly how was that not subterfuge…
Roco
1, September 8, 2011 at 3:45 pm
AY:
interesting analysis.
Which one….
Blouise,
I hear that Ohio has a Ballot issue regarding taxpayer funded abortions coming up soon….Make a difference….
Gene,
I respect your right to disagree…I will look into what Huntsman has put out in the MSM…
I will say that while I am male, I support a woman’s right of choice…With that said…. I did say I was going to more than likely vote against the other guy….therefore Obama more than likely would get my vote….How, it got turned into me being republican and a misogynist I am not sure….
That is the problem with labels….Not one person is uniform…. I am learning that not all products are the same…even though labeled as a democrat….
anon,
My…you do get carried away! I posted that emoticon with my comment in hopes that you’d realize I was trying to make a little joke.
*****
You wrote:
“Anyway, I think you do all women and humanity a disservice when you cast women as some historical victim in society. Didn’t they teach you anything useful in your women’s studies classes about women leaders, women soldiers, women scientists, women researchers, women lawyers?”
My response:
Where–in any of my comments on this thread–did I cast women as historical victims? Sorry to disappoint you but there were no women’s studies classes/courses offered at my school when I attended college in the 1960s.
LK,
I’ll get back to you on the statement regarding Abortion and the Percentage that it actually makes a difference to…I heard it on NPR months ago….I do recall it was a Saturday…
Top Issues for 2011:
Top 11 issues of 2011: Fourth consecutive year fiscal conditions will dominate legislative sessions
http://www.ncsl.org/?tabid=21929
anon,
@Elaine,
“I do look distrustfully at those that do not consider women’s rights when discussing human rights. It has absolutely nothing to do with me personally. It has to do with lack of consideration for women in general.””
Why don’t you demonstrate I lack consideration for women in general….
Your own comment demonstrates either ignorance or complicity. Time after time modern feminists explain that they are both a human rights movement as well as a movement that prioritizes women over men.
*****
I suggest you read the comments in this thread more carefully. That was not my comment. I was quoting someone else. That said, could you explain why you feel the comment that I quoted might demonstrate ignorance. Ignorance of what? And I don’t know what you mean by complicity. Complicity in what?