“There is nothing unusual about Governor Rick Perry. Uneducated fools can be found in every country and every period of history, and they are not unknown in high office. What is unusual about today’s Republican party (I disavow the ridiculous ‘GOP’ nickname, because the party of Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt has lately forfeited all claim to be considered ‘grand’) is this: In any other party and in any other country, an individual may occasionally rise to the top in spite of being an uneducated ignoramus. In today’s Republican Party ‘in spite of’ is not the phrase we need. Ignorance and lack of education are positive qualifications, bordering on obligatory. Intellect, knowledge and linguistic mastery are mistrusted by Republican voters, who, when choosing a president, would apparently prefer someone like themselves over someone actually qualified for the job.”
“Intellect, knowledge and linguistic mastery are mistrusted by Republican voters, who, when choosing a president, would apparently prefer someone like themselves over someone actually qualified for the job.”
Oh snap!
To be fair, there is an announced Republican candidate who does embrace science, namely Huntsman. But he consistently polls at 1-2%, which I assume reflects the percentage of Republicans who do not think ignorance is bliss.
I saw Huntsman interviewed a few times recently, including on the News Hour tonight. I gotta admit…I like him.
Still voting for Obama.
The article linked in the OP is right on the money.
Do Gingrich and Paul disavow science?
Common sense, when you think about it.
The vast majority of people who provide me with goods and services, either directly and indirectly, are vastly more qualified to do their jobs than I am. My doctor has forgotten more about medicine than I will ever know. My mechanic knows more about fixing cars than I could learn between now and the day I die. I pay my lawyer good money for the very reason that she knows more about the law than I do. I purchase software made by programmers who understand programming languages I do not. I am presently drinking ginger ale made, one presumes, by people who know how to make, package, and effectively distribute soft drinks, skills I do not possess.
Logically, I derive benefit from interacting with people who are more capable than I am.
For some reason, many voters do not want that in their elected leaders.
I don’t think that Dawkins quite get the crux, though it’s a matter of judgment. I don’t think Dubya was as stupid and uneducated as he pretended to be. I don’t know much about Perry but I doubt he is either.
I think the real problem is that politicians place a high priority on just doing whatever it takes to please the lowest common denominator, no matter what stupidity or ignorance that may be built upon. It’s easier just to play along than show real leadership.
I don’t think an anti-evolution stance in a politician is likely to show ignorance or stupidity, it just shows that the politician will say anything and do anything no matter the damage if it will play well amongst the stupid and ignorant.
But you (and Dawkins) are assuming that voters for Perry or Dubya think that they (Perry and Dubya) lack intellect, knowledge and linguistic mastery. Those voters do not. Those voters think that evolution is silly and shows lack of intellect and knowledge. They think that someone who talks as they do is not evidencing any linguistic deficiency.
Those people would be wrong, of course, but you make a good point.
I think they’re probably like that Senator in Godfather II: not quite as dumb as they pretend to be, but not nearly as smart as they think they are.
Indeed, the need to pander to the lowest common denominator indicates they lack the intelligence and creativity to lead people to a better place than they currently are, but that they instead only know how to tell people what they want to hear.
No it doesn’t indicate this at all. Dubya and Perry have got to the level of POTUS and Governor respectively by using effective techniques. It’s a leap of logic to say they couldn’t use other techniques. They may just not want to.
Never call a man a liar merely so you may think better of him. If Bush and Perry wish to claim to be ignorant and foolish I will not dispute them.
I don’t think there’s a consistant creationist narrative on whether scientists are dupes or frauds, nor do creationists seem to see much difference between the two. But there’s a consistant theme in their thinking to the effect that you don’t need to know much about science in order to find fault with it. To these true believers, the only “intelligence” comes from believing what you read in a book (and how often have we seen creationists try to discredit science by maligning Darwin, as if he were just another prophet of a different flavor?), but despite that, they don’t rely on Scripture for their auto-repair technique or soda-making technology and only a few rely on it for medical and legal knowledge. Funny, that.
Agreed 100%.
Why-- WHY would anyone ever consider a mythological, fairy-pray
Agreed 100%.
Why-- WHY would anyone consider a person who claims to have faith in diabolical, sinister mythology to be a viable candidate to run a country?
Whoops! I just forgot about half of my country.
Said before, saying again. O’Donnell, Palin, Pawlenty, Romney and especially Bachmann should not be allowed to vote or take part in what they claim to be a democratic waste of money, should definitely not be allowed to vote in any election.
We’ll get to insurance claims later. 
You love your own version of a god guy-- YOUR personal god guy, then pray for it. It will come, and your illiterate savior promises it. Shit, you quote it to me enough, so why run for office??
I think what we have to show these alleged candidates is that their version of a god is certainly not the same as others perceptions. And those who believe DO NOT need to be ditctated to and told how to worship.
I used to be catholic, and in no way would Bachmann or Perry or anyone tell me how to worship. You’re a politician, not an expert on global warming, economy or constitutional law, so why should I listen to you when you pray to a similar, yet different god?
Nobody said anything about thinking any better of anyone, nor of disputing their claims to be ignorant and foolish.
However, if you fail to realise they are (not call them, but realise they are) liars you will underestimate them and fail to understand them and consequently not be in as good a position to counteract them.
^^ Exactly.
God told me to become president. So vote Locrian/Der Trihs next November!
I think it comes down to the never-ending quest for power. The intelligence and creativity are there, if not in the candidates themselves in the slate of political operatives and advisors surrounding them (some of whom are exceptionally cunning) but they know that if they exhibit it, they don’t win elections.
The Bush-Perry-Bachmann sorts talk about America becoming “better” and “stronger” but they mean that only morally (and within their own moral lens). They know full well that if they suggested that we as a nation have room for improvement intellectually, that we could be smarter, wiser, better read and better informed, they would alienate a huge portion of the right wing base.
We know exactly the sort I mean by that; it’s the sort we’ve recently seen marching around chanting “USA! USA!” like we need national cheerleaders, and talk about “taking America back” from a president who they’ve decided is simultaneously a communist, fascist, socialist and a Nazi. All at once.
These people believe in American exceptionalism like a religious doctrine, we are the best (even when statistics show we aren’t) just because… we are. If pressed to explain why we’re the best, there are no legitimate answers, just platitudes about freedom and God and blessings and occasionally something about the American Dream.
Any politician on the right who doesn’t play at that level doesn’t get votes. Jon Huntsman is a perfect example. His unwillingness to get down in the kindergarten muck, and repeat the Limbaugh and Ailes approved talking points or talk about Americans in 2011 being “afraid of the rise of the Soviet Union,” or use folksy idiom like a shibboleth or make ridiculous analogies about marriage and paper towels and beer is why he’s never going to hold higher office.
This is the current sad problem of the Republican party; its really beyond time for a party split, one for sensible, educated reasonable people like Jon Huntsman, Senators Collins and Snowe, Governors Chris Christie and Linc Chaffee, and another for the intellectual children.