Creationism in Florida’s US Senate Race

WE last reported on this here: Fla Senate Race: Crist, Rubio & Creationism, in which we discussed that Charlie Crist, currently Florida’s governor, is in a primary contest with former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio for the GOP nomination, to determine which of them will run for U.S. Senate.

Ordinarily this wouldn’t attract our attention, but we pointed out that creationism might become an issue. Crist has wisely avoided the subject, but Rubio … well, Rubio has a history of supporting creationist legislation. To see his intense involvement with creationism in the 2008 Florida legislature, see: Rubio: Florida House open to legislative fix on evolution in the Florida Baptist Witness.

But to our disappointment, the “Controversy” hasn’t yet been part of the campaign. That may be changing. At the website of Time magazine we read: GOP at War With Itself in Florida Senate Race. Here are some excerpts, with bold added by us:

While his Republican party has been flailing and losing and dwindling to its base, Florida Governor Charlie Crist has remained extremely popular by governing from the middle. He’s stocked his administration with Democrats, appointed a fairly liberal African-American Democrat to the state Supreme Court, expanded voting rights for felons, crusaded against global warming, and enthusiastically supported President Obama’s stimulus package.

He’s a Republican? Okay. Let’s read on:

Over the next 14 months, as Rubio introduces himself to the state, this race is likely to evolve from David-and-Goliath into a struggle for the party’s soul, between a moderate populist who celebrated the stimulus with Obama at a Fort Myers rally and a conservative stalwart who opposes almost everything Obama has done.

Let’s skip over all the insider stuff that these articles in Time always discuss, and get right to what concerns us — oh, wait:

Crist may be the most popular politician in Florida, but not in the Florida GOP; that would be Rubio’s mentor, former Governor Jeb Bush, whose disdain for Crist’s policies is an open secret in the Sunshine State, and whose son has endorsed Rubio.

That’s interesting. Now, Curmudgeon — let’s get to the “Controversy”:

Rubio is not a chest-thumper or a fist-banger, but in talks in June to a chamber of commerce in Palm Bay and the Christian Coalition in Miami, he electrified his crowds with eloquent arguments for tea-party principles. He attacked deficits in general and the stimulus in particular as Euro-socialist assaults on his kids. He clamored for term limits, state’s rights, and the abolition of the estate tax. He attacked government-run health care, warned that cap-and-trade would leave us a “Third World economy,” and noted that the words “separation of church and state” were nowhere in our founding documents.

Neither is “limited government” or “separation of powers.” We like a lot of Rubio’s thinking, but we can’t accept this theocratic pandering. Moving along:

In an interview, he supported privatization of Social Security, a constitutional amendment to restrain spending, and the right of schools to teach intelligent design. He sees the stimulus as a defining issue, an inexcusable embrace of intergenerational theft that exposed Crist as a Specter-style Republican In Name Only. If the Republican Party is going to be indistinguishable from the Democratic Party, why bother having one?” he asked.

Well there it is — Rubio is an out-of-the-closet creationist. Now that the issue has been exposed nationally, we expect it to get more attention. This is only a GOP nomination battle, but Florida is big, and the issues are defining. This one is a race to watch.

Update: See our Open Letter to Marco Rubio.

Copyright © 2009. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

17 responses to “Creationism in Florida’s US Senate Race

  1. The Republican Party is irreversibly infected with Creationists. Since they can’t kick them out and the Democrats don’t want them back, the only answer is a New Party of people with brains that get used. Limited government – keeping government out of you bedroom – low taxes only for absolute necessities – strong defense. IOW what the Republican Party should be, but what it cannot ever be because of the infestation of Bryanites.

  2. The Gadfly says: “… the only answer is a New Party of people with brains …”

    But they’ll behave like monkeys! You need the creationists for their strong moral influence.

  3. Gabriel Hanna

    I’m not a single issue voter. I would find it very hard to vote for a typical Democrat. Even if you find one you can agree with on most things, they vote with their caucus most of the time.

    So I have to vote for creationists at least part of the time. I was a page for a creationist state senator; he and I got along very well, since we agreed on many things. I knew that creationism was never going to get into schools here.

    Washington is a funny state; Seattle is very liberal and concentrates about 3/5 of the population. The rest of the state is conservative, but it doesn’t make much difference.

    So that’s the context in which I vote; every Republican is precious. If I lived in Texas I might get to vote against creationists (and you find them in the Democratic party as well, down there).

  4. Gabriel Hanna says: “I’m not a single issue voter.”

    Florida is a special case. It’s the 4th biggest state in population, and the three bigger ones (Cal, Texas, and NY) are all rather predictable in presidential elections. Florida is the biggest swing state, so it’s of great importance in deciding who will be President. Florida’s primary is between Crist — an unprincipled pile of zero — and Rubio the theocrat. But whichever one wins the primary, it’s likely to be better than some dem who’s in bed with Obama, Barney, and Nancy. I donno, there are just too many compromises to be made.

  5. Gabriel Hanna

    I donno, there are just too many compromises to be made.

    You could always retreat into ideological purity.

    I was reading an account of life as an Objectivist in the days of Ayn Rand. I knew a lot of people like that in high school and college. Most grew up, though.

  6. Curmudgeon wrote: “Well there it is — Rubio is an out-of-the-closet creationist.”

    Maybe so, but “rube” Rubio apparently has not “read the memo” from the DI that says not to teach ID (or creationism) but only to misrepresent (aka “critically analyze”) evolution.

  7. comradebillyboy

    The Curmudgeon says: “Florida’s primary is between Crist — an unprincipled pile of zero — and Rubio the theocrat. But whichever one wins the primary, it’s likely to be better than some dem who’s in bed with Obama, Barney, and Nancy. I donno, there are just too many compromises to be made.”

    The theocrat is principled? I don’t think I would ever vote for a person in denial of observable reality and who pushes teaching junk science. Even the worst secularist is better than the best theocrat, regardless of party in my book.

  8. “So I have to vote for creationists at least part of the time.”

    Translation:

    So I have to vote for IDIOTS at least part of the time.

    Are you sure that’s a good idea?

  9. comradebillyboy says: “The theocrat is principled?”

    That depends on whether he’s committed to that, or if he’s just pandering. Can’t tell. I’m working on an “Open Letter” to him. It won’t make any difference, but I’ll feel better for having done it.

  10. comradebillyboy

    Who knows, if he gets enough grief for the creationist line, he might conclude its not a winning position.

  11. Rubio is a chicken though … remember how he conveniently ran out of time to put Wise/Storm bill to a vote?

  12. Curmudgeon wrote: “It won’t make any difference, but I’ll feel better for having done it.”

    Hardly anything makes a difference to career politicians – except knowing that they don’t have the votes. So as with any argument to creationists or other anti-science activists, the argument should be made with the audience in mind. To educate them, not criticize their beliefs of course. Your “open letters” help alert people to the antics of their politicians, and they address issues that liberal critics prefer to keep secret, so they do more than make you feel good.

    Gadfly mentions a 3rd party as our best hope, but I have to agree that it’s a nearly hopeless long shot. IMO, a “bottom up” educating of the public, starting with clearing up major misconceptions about the nature of science, is the best hope.

  13. “In an interview, he supported privatization of Social Security, a constitutional amendment to restrain spending, and the right of schools to teach intelligent design.”

    Source please. Prove that you’re not a lying fanatic, and don’t hand me any crap equating critical analysis to ID or you’ve only proven that you’re a self-liar, as well.

  14. Ricky won’t be back.

    Are these people really Rubio supporters, or are they disruptors sent in by Crist’s campaign to make Rubio look like the choice of idiots?

  15. Gabriel Hanna

    So I have to vote for IDIOTS at least part of the time.

    Are you sure that’s a good idea?

    When it’s better than the alternative. Sometimes all you have is a choice between evils.

  16. Gabriel Hanna

    Source please. Prove that you’re not a lying fanatic, and don’t hand me any crap equating critical analysis to ID or you’ve only proven that you’re a self-liar, as well.

    We need to be critical of the theory that the ratio of the circumference of a circle is to its diameter is 3.1415927….

    And don’t hand me any crap equating critical analysis to saying that the Bible says pi = 3 or you’ve only proven that you’re a self-liar, as well.

    (whatever that is)

  17. Gabriel Hanna quotes a troll who said: “Source please.”

    Sheesh! I was quoting Time magazine, and I gave a link. If the troll wants the source Time used, he can ask them.