December 9, 2007

Not even Huckabee knows what he's going to say next

There was a time when I thought Huckabee was going to be my candidate. That time ended the first time he opened his mouth. There's just this odd sort of imperiousness to he's the second coming of Christ.
If you subtract Huckabee's religious overtones he's really just a liberal politician - his economics, health care, immigration...the whole gamut. The fact that he's attempting to use his religious credentials to get the Republican nomination, while promising to be a complete liberal where everything else is concerned just bugs the hell out of me. Even worse is the fact that social conservatives are so desperate to get their agenda some air time that they'd vote for anyone that will say Jesus regardless of their politics. Mind boggling.
Mike Huckabee was almost certainly saying that because homosexuality is the primary lifestyle carrying AIDS that we should isolate homosexuals and rid ourselves of the plague along with the plague bearers. In 1992 that concept would have been a little more casually accepted since America hadn't yet bought into homosexuality as anything other than aberrant behavior, but today saying that we should take homosexuals and isolate them so they can die off is haphazard politics at best. Frankly, I'd be a little more impressed if Huckabee were sticking to his guns and saying that homosexuality is a pervasive and dangerous lifestyle and is the primary distributor of AIDS - followed by intravenous drug use. Following that, securing the general public against this disease and the billions of dollars that would eventually be spent on searching for a cure would almost make sense. Of course there are scenarios that make this seem monstrous, but in 1992 the majority of the people that would be ostracized would more than likely be grown men - the problem lies more in it being akin to genocide of homosexuals...not exactly constitutional. So I guess what I'm saying is that I'd be impressed if Huck were at least giving me some impression that in 1992 he had actually thought about things before answering that question, and that his final answer was the result of the kind of personal convictions that wouldn't just up and change in 15 years. Instead you get pandering to the popular cultural concept of AIDS, rather than something a little closer to his ideological roots...condemnation. In the end Huckabee is nothing more than an empty suit - he is whatever you want him to be as long as he's got your vote.


westie8 said...

Personally,I sort of resent all the money being spent to cure a disease that would stop if everyone just protected themselves.Scince we know how to not get AIDS we might be better off if we just let the lackeys who don't care about themselves during their moments of desperate sexual excitement and the ones who choose to inject themselveswith illegal drugs just die off.I don't feel a responsibility to support them if they don't care about themselves.
The money would be better spent on trying to cure diseases like Cancer and diabeties and parkinsons etc. etc. diseases that we can't choose not to get.
I know this sounds harsh but there is a limmited ammount of cash to go around and I don't see the point.

Holden Caulfield said...

I agree with you - AIDS is a protected subject largely because it is directly attached to certain lifestyles. I do have the concern that there are quite a few documented cases of people either knowing they have AIDS/HIV and not telling their partner or intentionally going around spreading the disease like some twisted Johnny Appleseed. I think to a certain degree I agree that in the late 80s or maybe even a little earlier that a progressive attempt to contain AIDS and allow it to run its course would have been smart, but now there's so many innocent victims (kids and wives and such...not druggies and promiscuous homosexuals) that its past containing. I definitely don't like the extra PR it gets from Hollywood - shameful.