It's hard to imagine a lower point for an American political party. At last night's Republican presidential debate, one of the moderators asked John McCain if he believed in evolution.
"Yes," said McCain.
Then came the follow up – a jaw-dropping moment that should make all thinking Americans flee from the Republican party like Dirk Nowitzki from a big shot. "I'm curious," said the moderator, "is there anybody on this stage who does not believe in evolution?"
Three – THREE – of the ten Republicans running for President of the United States of America raised their hands. Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas and former Governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas don't believe in evolution. Just like that. As if they'd been asked if the earth were round. (Watch it here).
And it's not just those three, it's the entire party – because at a Republican presidential debate, the question isn't considered ridiculous. It's actually a matter of some debate. Remember, the leader of the party, the "commander guy", President George W. Bush, believes the jury is still out on evolution.
No, Mr. President, the jury has reached a verdict and it is unanimous. Evolution is – what's the word here – fact. It's not an issue where thoughtful people can disagree. You either believe in scientific certainty or you don't.
This certainly does not mean there is no God, or even that God didn't create the universe. That is all possible, all believable. But if you want to be president of the greatest country in the world, of the most powerful nation in history, accepting evolution as scientific fact is a must. But among the Republicans now leading their party off a cliff, this remains an open question.
With that in mind, here are some other suggested questions for upcoming Republican debates:
● "Do you believe in the Tooth Fairy?
● "Do you think professional wrestling is real?
● "Do you doubt the theory of gravity?
● "Do you watch Fox News?"
If you answered "yes," to any of these questions, you're either a member of Bill O'Reilly's family, a sixth grader, or a Republican presidential candidate.
The Young Turks
Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...
Mo's Blog Roll
Resources
Evolution Is Not Up For Debate -- Except at Republican Debates
Posted May 4th 2007 10:42AM by Ben Mankiewicz
Filed under: Politics, Elections, Young Turks, Republicans
Mo's Video
The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...
Most Popular Stories
- Don't Like Goodbyes...
- Pittsburgh Steelers: Is it Time to get some Cheerleaders?
- How NOT to give an Oscar Acceptance Speech
- Could Jim Belushi Win the Nobel Peace Prize?
- Spring Break Sexy T-Shirt Removal Training!
- Quest for the Crown 5: Plastic Wrap to Make you Less Fat!
- Quest for the Crown 4: Work Those Heels!
Most Commented On
-
Coming Soon
Recent Comments
- Rob Abdul on Admit It: You Google Yourself
- andreawalker419 on Breastfeeding an Eight-Year-Old?
- FL Chick on Jesus Statue Stolen By Dog Haters?
- Roert Dean on General Clark is Absolutely Right!
- JefFlyingV on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
Mo's Bio
Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.
Top News Headlines
Political Machine Blog
- A Day at the Stadium: It's One, Two, Three Strikes You're Out of Money
- Will Benedict XVI's New Encyclical Matter?
- Weymouth Apologizes to WaPo Readers -- But Still Doesn't Explain Pay-for-Play Dinners
- Sarah Palin's Higher Calling
- What Was She Thinking? Sarah's Scenarios...
- Why Mitt Romney's Star is Rising
- What the Sarah Palin Bombshell Means
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 3)
1. Doesn't it make sense that these guys who don't believe in evolution, might not be fully evolved yet? So no wonder they don't get it!
FranniM
Fran at 11:15AM on May 4th 2007
2. Im glad they spoke up. At least they have the brains and courage to stick to what they believe and not "go with the flow". Of course scientists want everyone to believe in evolution, other wise they might start believing in creation and the laws of the Bible...then how can they get away with all the corruption! Abortions make billions of dollars so dont want to make those sound like murder. Take a look at the drug/medical industry ... no one is looking for cures (or preventions), just a pill to lower the symptoms (there will always be another pill for the side effects!) all about money and power, not truth.
Dani at 12:40PM on May 4th 2007
3. Evolutiion is a theory. Nothing more nothing less. It is a theory that I personally think makes sense, but to compare it to gravity is absurd. Gravity we know. We know it so well that we can measure it, duplicate it, and we even calculated it for the moon before we even got there. Spend 30 min reading a few scientific journals and you will find at least, 3 headlines that read something like, "New Discovery Changes Everything We thought we Knew about Evolution," or "New Finding Suggest That the Earth May Actually be older than we thought." You know give or take a MILLION YEARS or so. The moron who wrote this article is just looking to jab republicans b/c democrats,(you know the ones who filibustered blacks getting to vote and have a KKK member in the Senate) are so "enlightened"
Kristina at 12:42PM on May 4th 2007
4. I agree with that evolution is not a topic for debate and last nights debate was a joke not a debate. I would love to see a good debate where the candidates just go at it now thats a debate not this high school crap they are doing...
http://todaypolitics.blogspot.com/
http://politicians2008.blogspot.com/
bloggershaven at 1:04PM on May 4th 2007
5. Anyone who discounts Evolution either tries to separate it from other science, or somehow compare it to evolution. Nevertheless, Evolution is no different from any other scientific fields. Data is collected and used, whether from genetic information, fossils, or the like, to explain natural processes. Experimental evidence is helpful, but not necessary. Science, unlike religion, starts with data and then generates the explanations. Religion starts with explanations, and then attempts to support it with evidence.
Believe it or not, Gravity has undergone just as much "rethinking" as evolution: compare Einstein's Relativity to Newton's Gravity.
Evolution is just as strong as any other scientific explanation, like it or not.
antidense at 1:45PM on May 4th 2007
6. While pondering these fascinating comments, I concluded this: there is no empirical evidence for empiricism itself. It is an assumption. It requires one to first assume they can believe what their senses tell them. To fully believe in what one's senses say, one must be sure to have either perfect senses, (and not the fallible human type); or labor under a delusion of having perfect senses.
Mitchell TL Thompson at 2:35PM on May 4th 2007
7. Antidense writes "Believe it or not, Gravity has undergone just as much "rethinking" as evolution"
Really? You might want to read the Einstein's theories you are citing. Gravity is not "re-thought" in either theory. Gravity is a measurable known element that is used to expand upon in his theory of relativity. You comparing the ever "evolving" (pun intended) evolution theory to gravity is laughable. Evolution is a sound theory in many respects, especially as it relates to natural selection, but the leaps that it takes, using only "unknown mutations" as an explanation is not even in the same ballpark as gravity. It is not in the same league. It is not even the same sport.
Kristina at 3:15PM on May 4th 2007
8. Why are political pundits always declaring the "end of debate" for scientists? Evolution, global warming.... Politics and science don't mix, as politically motivated people only care about winning not truth.
Mel at 5:41PM on May 4th 2007
9. If you claim not to believe in evolution as observable fact, please refuse to take antibiotics or penicillin the next time you have a life-threatening illness. These drugs that have saved millions of lives are made possible by our knowledge of evolution. Obviously, they must not work, then, since evolution is just a theory.
Back to the debate: When is a moderator going to put us out of our Mittery by asking Gov. Romney this simple question: "Do you believe that the first Americans arrived on this continent via wooden submarine from the Holy Land?" If, as a Mormon, he answers "yes," we're down to two frontrunners. If he answers "no," his Mormon contributors will abandon him, with the same result.
John at 6:44PM on May 4th 2007
10. Wow, wow, wow. Scary scary.
Ok H-u-m-a-n-s, his is a lesson for you.
The Eskimos third eye (lid) had "evolved" to keep those living in the snowy north from going blind by the glare from the sun in the show. The fact that Africans have dark ski as opposed to Norewigeners is also because of sun exposer. YOUR spleen, in all our bodies is shrinking every generation because its use is becoming more and more obsolete. It use to kill germs from our food before we invented fire. Horses have a third bone in their leg that used to be the thumb when these animals had fingers and toes. You finger and toe nails are made of the same substance of hooves of all animals. The Ryno's horn is made of a single strain of hair. The dirty monarch butterfly came out of the pollution of the industrial age. The fact that people grow taller then our ancestors or the fact that we live longer then our past ancestors. Thats is all evolution. Evolution is nothing more then PHYSICALLY ADAPTING TO THE ENVIRONMENT.
WAKE UP PEOPLE, BEFORE YOU PROOVE TO US ALL THAT YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF EVOLVING OUT OF THE STONE AGE....
Jack at 7:43PM on May 4th 2007
11. These discussions about evolution do not have anything to do with the real issues facing Americans in next year's elections. It falls into the same catergory as abortion and stem cell research. They are all wedge issues which the Republicans utilize to get their voters interested in the upcoming election so that they will turn out to vote. Maybe the Republicans should have spent more time dealing with issues like the minimum wage, health care. and the war in Iraq. These are money issues which affect the pocket books of a majority of the people within the United States.
Give Me A Break! at 7:49PM on May 4th 2007
12. Kristina,
How do we "duplicate" gravity?
lil_turk at 1:20AM on May 5th 2007
13. This link will answer many questions of evolution deniers and is also fun! http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat01.html
lil_turk at 1:55AM on May 5th 2007
14. So let me get this straight. We Christians profess to believe in an all powerful all knowing God of the universe. Yet this God, according to people who take the Bible literally, takes six days to create the world. Why not six hours, or six minutes, or six seconds? Could not such a powerful God just say the word and all would come about in the blink of an eye? And to top it off this "god" is pooped at the end of it so he has to take a break.
Look, believe what you want. But why can't God work through processes like "evolution" why can't God reveal himself to us in ways that let us grow and discover new things. And since when is the belief in creationism a prerequisite for salvation? The story of creation is just that. A story. And as Christians we should not be as concerned about HOW it happened, but THAT it happened. The real point of the first few chapters of Genesis is that it shows how mankind fell away from God and the promise of a redeemer.
How does arguing creation vs evolution play a part in that? Oh and one more thing:
Robert at 4:34AM on May 5th 2007
15. Sorry, I had no follow up to oh and one more thing.
except to say there's my baseless rant. And I think the candidates should be more focused on the issues rather than their personal beliefs.
Thanks
Robert at 4:39AM on May 5th 2007