Is this how Huckabee is to apologize?
(whistling)
What if I offended Bruce? Seriously. If I were to be accepted by Bruce, I would have to recant what I believe is essential to Christianity and the Christ.
And by the way, does anybody know if Marty is keeping track of “hate-speech” (an increasingly popular term in America for those pushing tolerance for everything) toward Christians holding to fundamental doctrine in America? Usually, I hear just crickets in this department (meaning no acknowledgment).
Todd, do you believe that Huckabee was speaking in ignorance when he posed that code question to the New York Times magazine?
You are, I presume, familiar with what Baptist preachers typically know about Mormonism — the Godmakers, some anti-Mormon texts from the nineteenth century, some hysterical anti-Mormon tracts from the last quarter of the twentieth century, and perhaps some minimal “anti-cult” preparation in seminary studies about how to deconvert Mormons away from their cult.
Would you concede that Huckabee very likely knew this much? Would you at least concede that, if all Huckabee knows about Mormons is what he has undoubtedly seen in the Godmakers (do you think — be honest — that as a Baptist preacher he has not seen the Godmakers?)? We can presume he knows a lot more than that, though, given that he participated in and preached at the 1998 Convention meetings in Salt Lake City at which he vowed to take back the area — full of people who have devoted and even consecrated their entire lives to Jesus Christ — for Jesus.
Given his background as a Baptist preacher and the usefulness of the religion issue for his campaign in persuading Evangelicals who might otherwise have wanted to vote for Romney to vote for Huckabee, it is easy to infer that when Huckabee said “Don’t Mormons believe that Jesus and Satan are brothers” he was speaking a code easily understood coming from the mouth of a Baptist preacher and which translates as “Gee, are you going to vote for a member of a cult?”
All of this aside, however, it is nice to see Huckabee say that he was “misunderstood” (this, by the way, is a way of blaming the person who is the butt or object of such a remark rather than take responsibility — it is their fault for misunderstanding him, and not his fault for what he actually said) and that he would be concerned if Mormons were “estranged”. This is enough for me as I am a firm believer in accepting apologies and in theory reject holding grudges although it is a very human thing to do, one to which I am by far not immune.
Analyzing this apology reveals at least two other things: (1) Huckabee does not believe that Mormons are actually estranged. This could be read as meaning that he would be concerned if Mormons were estranged but as they aren’t estranged, he’s not concerned. Following on to that, (2) if Huckabee really doesn’t believe that Mormons are estranged by such a low tactic of calling himself the Christian candidate when all the Republican contenders were Christians (the only conceivable reason for taking this approach was to distinguish himself from Romney who, as a Mormon, his Evangelical constituencies would agree is a cultist not a Christian), then this might reveal that the Republican Party simply takes Mormons entirely for granted, not respecting them enough to value their high number among the conservative element of the Party but still happy to take their money for agendas that Evangelicals in the Party find acceptable.
Yeah, it’s a common tactic of schoolyard bullies to claim that the victim needs to “lighten up” or “he’s just overreacting” or “that’s not what I really meant.” Huckabee is a schoolyard bully speaking from a majority American religious tradition, throwing rocks at the less popular kid on the schoolyard.
That said, I think the demand he call us “Christian” before apology-accepted is a little unreasonable.
But Huckabee knew exactly what he was doing when he made that remark. It was calculated and deliberate. The guy is a playground bully and the sooner he leaves my TV screen the better.
Apparently Romney wasn’t impressed either, seeing as how he endorsed McCain today. That should put a nail in Huckabee’s political coffin.
I think some want to actually put him in a coffin.
(chuckling)
While it is possible that Romney will be McCain’s running mate, my money at this point is on Huckabee. Others have been mentioned as well, governors mainly, including Mark Sanford here in South Carolina.
Only with a stake of particle board through his heart Todd.
I doubt McCain would pick Romney. Huckabee is positioning for the nod and he’ll get it because McCain needs the Evangelical voters. It is purely religious.
Do you really think this will happen, John f.? If he does this, I owe you a lunch. If he doesn’t, you owe me a lunch.
Here is the human republican triad as I see it. (You know I am always thinking of triads.)
McCain – the conservative military man for the Republicans
Romney – the conservative money man for the Republicans
Huckabee – the conservative social man for the Republicans
Will McCain pick Romney or Huckabee? He will probably discard them both. He could care less about religious conservatives.
We’ll see.
Either way, I think a Democrat is going to take the Presidency.
“Either way, I think a Democrat is going to take the Presidency”
I’m pretty sure at this point that Obama, if nominated, will beat McCain. However, I think that if Hillary is nominated, McCain will beat her.
(click here to view)Rob RogersPittsburgh Post-GazetteDec 23, 2007 EditorialCartoonists.com
Todd,
I think you’re right in that I don’t see McCain picking Huckabee or Romney. I think Romney would be a more likely choice now because of the importance of the economic situation at this moment, but I suspect that Governor Crist is a more likely candidate.
Todd:
Yep, I’m dead serious. If Huckabee truly wants to apologize, then call us (Latter-day Saints) Christian. Short of that, I can’t see how he could possibly expect any reconciliation or support from Latter-day Saints, which is what he appears to want.
After all, I have no problem call him Christian, just as I have no problem calling Catholics, Anglicans, Episcopalians, Greek Orthodoxes, Seventh-day Adventists, Jehovah Witnesses, and so on, Christians.
As for the ‘crickets’ on anti-Christian hate speech, that’s actually been a constant (and loud) theme in most conservative blogs and publications for many years, due to the hypocrisy on the Left regarding hate speech against anyone but Christians. Do some actual research; it’s not at all hard to find. The problem is that by playing the anti-Mormon card in this primary season, the ‘Religious Right’ has just lost all its credibility on the issue and has no one to blame but itself. ..bruce..
My dislike of Huckabee as a candidate (aside from his political views) comes from my distrust of him. I don’t care whether someone attacks my beliefs, values, etc.—that’s what debate is all about—but I want them to be truthful. Huckabee is scary because, not being ignorant himself, he used a lie to gain support from the ignorant. I’ve already forgiven him for his offense against me, but he has yet to show me that he is trustworthy. And I’m equally disturbed by those in the Republican establishment who did not call Huckabee out for his dishonesty—that makes them accomplices in my mind.
I wouldn’t really care if Huckabee had said that Mormons aren’t Christian, as long as he was honest about what that means. Using your (Todd) and Huckabee’s definition, from my perspective you are not a Christian, and from your perspective I am not a Christian. It’s just another way of saying, “I think you are wrong about some important things.” No big deal, though I think it would be more honest if you (Todd) and Huckabee were to phrase it differently.
(FWIW, I’m voting Obama either way.)
Bruce, good clarification about the conservative Christian blogs. Actually, I was thinking about the crickets in Marty’s department about defending fundamentalists. I needed to be clearer.
If you think Jehovah’s Witnesses are Christian, would you accept Muslims as Christians, too, if they desired the label? Though both groups deny Jesus is God? (I think also of the popular Jesus Seminar movement among scholars.)
Or would you make this distinction? This group is 35% Christian, this religious movement over here is 60% Christian, and yet this one is 90% Christian. Or all of the religious traditions fully Christian?
Brian, I think I had read somewhere else that you were voting for Obama. Could you explain to me briefly your reasons why? I am curious, friend.
I do think he has the best personality. He looks good in front of the camera.
Todd, only because it’s your own thread that you’re -jacking…. {smile}
I’m voting for Obama mostly on issues (in no particular order): NIH funding, Iraq, immigration, NIH funding, reforms to create more open government, technology-focused economic investments, and NIH funding. I may have hastily skipped over a few, so don’t “seal the canon” on me. {smile}
There are also some ‘intangibles’ that I think are important: his optimism, belief that he will repair the US global image, his optimism, positive role model for young black Americans as well as all Americans, and his optimism.
Brian, the owner of our local paper, the Post Register, is cheering you on in what you are saying.
He was sharing last week how the Idaho Democratic caucus was huge this year for voter turnout.
I just pulled it out of moderation.
Very funny, Tate.
You do have me chuckling again.