Comments on: Anti-Science Candidate Susan Hutchison Mocks Richard Dawkins

By: Hemant

Hemant — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:13:41 +0000

Why? It may ensure she looses the race but why should it exclude her from the race? Could you cite a legal principle on which you would base this suggestion?

Matt — I don’t mean that, legally, she shouldn’t be allowed to run. I mean that in the voters’ eyes, her anti-science views should make them not want to vote for her.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 13:26:55 +0000

The video has been removed, due to a ‘copyright claim by the Washington Public Affairs Network’. Anyone got an alternative link?

By: Matt Stone

Matt Stone — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 13:03:05 +0000

That alone should make her unqualified to run for public office.

Why? It may ensure she looses the race but why should it exclude her from the race? Could you cite a legal principle on which you would base this suggestion?

By: Karen

Karen — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:48:08 +0000

Evangelicals believe that the name of Jesus has special powers and that it provokes the ungodly into fits of rage (it’s really the demons inside them, you know!).

Her assertion that Dawkins came unglued when the name of the savior was mentioned falls right into that meme. I’m sure her audience was eating it up.

The comparison with Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann seems right on – attractive, camera-ready airheads who look harmless but are really dangerous religious activists.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:35:47 +0000

Her story is obviously largely fabricated. Her story has grown a lot more grandiose with each telling and she has told it a lot of times. No one puts their hands around the face of a stranger in a public setting and lectures about the importance of Jesus. I’m sure the audience loved it, but it just didn’t happen that way.

By: e

Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:52:22 +0000

I have filled out my ballot, and even the Republicans I chat with at my gym are not voting for her (I am clinging to the notion that this means something).

By: AxeGrrl

AxeGrrl — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:20:54 +0000

Perhaps this is superficial of me…..

but I’m automatically ‘suspect’ of anyone who has that many DaVinci veneers.

Combine that with being a Dubya supporter and my “Danger, Will Robinson!” meter goes off the charts.

By: GullWatcher

GullWatcher — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:45:44 +0000

It doesn’t often get made this simple. If he’s telling the truth, I most certainly won’t vote for her. If she’s telling the truth, I most certainly won’t vote for her. It’s a win/win situation, or possibly more of a lose/lose one in her case.

One thing not mentioned here is how she has fought to distance herself from the Republican party. She insists she herself is a moderate, and not a Republican, rejecting the label repeatedly in interviews. Her positions and history says otherwise.

Well, except possibly in one regard – despite her newfound interest in politics, she has seldom bothered to vote for the last eight years.

By: hoverFrog

hoverFrog — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 05:24:52 +0000

I love how “Sarah Palin” has become an acceptable phrase for anyone who is religiously embarrassing to the point of insanity. I wonder if she will find herself in the Oxford English Dictionary one day.

By: Fastthumbs

Fastthumbs — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:45:01 +0000

Yes, someone like this could win in KING County.

As progressive as Seattle is, King county tends to be the opposite.

Not exactly the King County executavie seat, but in 1988, the WA state Republicans chose Pat Robinson (not Bush Senior) for the presidential candidate… Shows you how ass backwards the Republicans tend to be here.