Huckabee and Divine Intervention
Filed under: 2008 elections, Feature, Mike Huckabee — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on December 7, 2007 @ 1:14 pm CET
Former Governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee said something that has raised many eyebrows in the blogosphere and will undoubtedly continue to do so. When a student asked him why he’s surging as he is in the polls - with the little money he has raised - Huckabee answered: “There’s only one explanation for it, and it’s not a human one. It’s the same power that helped a little boy with two fish and five loaves feed a crowd of five thousand people.”
He went on to say that “[t]here literally are thousands of people across this country who are praying that a little will become much, and it has. And it defies all explanation, it has confounded the pundits. And I’m enjoying every minute of them trying to figure it out, and until they look at it, from a, just experience beyond human, they’ll never figure it out. And it’s probably just as well. That’s honestly why it’s happening.”
Jim Garaghty, Dan Riehl, Ace of Spades, Hot Air, Ron Chusid, Pamela Leavey and Betsy Newmark are chastising Huckabee for saying the above. What happened is, of course, that Huckabee gives people the impression that he think that God is on his side. That’s quite arrogant and it’ll worry quite some people. And rightfully so. However, as James Joyner points out, Huckabee probably tries to sound humble. He’s the kind of man who praises God when something good happens to him, but who blames himself when something bad happens.
So, on the one hand I’ve got to disagree with most of the other bloggers: I think that you have to interprete this in its context. On the other hand, I think that it wasn’t a smart thing to say considering that it will turn many people off - not just liberals but also many Republicans. What’s more, although I think that he meant it in a ‘humble way’ I’m not 100% sure about it after watching the video (you can watch it below). Yes, there’s some humility in there, but there’s also some ‘I’m God’s choice’ in there. I get the idea that the students aren’t applauding to celebrate Huckabee’s humility but because they truly believe that God is on Huckabee’s side.
Of course, people are free to believe such a thing, but a candidate shouldn’t say it out loud.
I think quite highly of Huckabee, but this combined with his support for policies that I consider to be in breach with the principle of small government would worry me if I were an American conservative. After yesterday’s speech, I feel increasingly more confident about Mitt Romney.
Huckabee’s campaign, meanwhile, explained what Huckabee meant:
Let me clarify, while Governor Huckabee endorses Jesus, he certainly isn’t saying that Jesus endorses his candidacy.
Like most Christians, Governor Huckabee believes in giving God the credit for the blessings—particuarly the unexplainable good fortune—that come our way. That is all he was trying to say, as I’m sure, most people will recognize.
On the one hand I say yes, on the other hand I’ve got to say… I watched the video a couple of times and I get the impression that he did mean to say that he’s surging in the polls because of God’s blessing.
1 Xel
December 7, 2007 @ 1:45 pm CET"He’s the kind of man who praises God when something good happens to him, but who blames himself when something bad happens."
Yeah, because that is just what I want the most powerful man in the world to think.
"What’s more, although I think that he meant it in a ‘humble way’ I’m not 100% sure about it after watching the video (you can watch it below). Yes, there’s some humility in there, but there’s also some ‘I’m God’s choice’ in there. I get the idea that the students aren’t applauding to celebrate Huckabee’s humility but because they truly believe that God is on Huckabee’s side."
"God here. Invade… The Gaza Strip this time. Improve it all. No trust me trust me you’ll honor me and your dad and history will vindicate any unplanned side-effects. Oh come on I selected you myself didn’t I?"
Two things happened here - either he tried to get people’s devotion to God to rub off on him by saying he is meant by the "creator of the universe and everything else!", i.e. actually invoke the most beloved god in our time on his side, which is insanely arrogant.
Or he wasn’t very serious but thinks voters should feel good about a man who is willing to throw around such bombast as if it belongs in a campaign.
Both possibilities make me suspect the guy is as capable of flexible thinking and admitting mistakes as the current divine appointee.
2 Michael van der Galien
December 7, 2007 @ 1:48 pm CETAnd what the heck is wrong with that huh? That’s how many Christians think / act. Your opposition to Huckabee gives me the impression that your problem isn’t Huckabee, it’s Christians in general.
3 Xel
December 7, 2007 @ 2:05 pm CET"And what the heck is wrong with that huh? That’s how many Christians think / act. Your opposition to Huckabee gives me the impression that your problem isn’t Huckabee, it’s Christians in general."
So god can do everything yet the reason he doesn’t stop bad stuff along with causing good events is because he works in mysterious ways. Jeez, Iahve, you’re not making things too inconvenient for yourself, I hope.
How can anyone say what is a strictly individual responsibility and what was aided by God? Is there some quote in the bible that tells people to blame themselves for anything failing yet give some definite credit to God whenever there is success? If not, how does one reconcile God’s benevolence and eternal, unlimited power with all the failures that obviously happen?
This is what bothers me with all the unconditional christianity that figures in US politics - it’s all bandied about with plenty sincerity and gravitas but no real intention to do anything except stoke some emotions. It’s not supposed to be thought about but just supposed to be a sign that you have the "guts" to say what most of the voters feel good about when hearing.
4 Michael van der Galien
December 7, 2007 @ 2:08 pm CETWhat a bunch of nonsense Xel. If you think it’s a problem, you’re free to think so, but I for one am happy that there are many people who praise God when something good happens, yet take responsibility for their own failings nonetheless.
You may consider that inconsistent, I consider that humility, prudence and wise.
5 Xel
December 7, 2007 @ 2:41 pm CET"If you think it’s a problem, you’re free to think so, but I for one am happy that there are many people who praise God when something good happens, yet take responsibility for their own failings nonetheless."
I for one don’t think this makes them less reliable or likely to have good qualities, but I do think it is not sense-making. Like, at all.
"You may consider that inconsistent, I consider that humility, prudence and wise."
I think it is unneccessary and won’t make anyone more likely to succeed or do good things. I take all the blame and credit I deserve and I’m probably no less prudent or otherwise effective in my actions as the average christian who uses Huckabee’s non-logic.
6 Lynx
December 7, 2007 @ 4:13 pm CETXel, stop, please, I beg you.
It won’t work, you KNOW it won’t work. Everything good is Gods merit and everything bad is humans fault. No it does not make sense, but it’s something so deeply ingrained in the psyche of almost every Christian that you are likely to get belligerent reactions every time you question it, and you’re not likely to change any minds. If their faith were attached to rationality they wouldn’t have it or it would be a very different kind of faith. This is a deeply emotional one, the kind that allows children to still bristle in defense of their mothers even if their mothers are abusive. Friendly theological discussions are fine, and openly challenging religious bigotry against all things secular is necessary, but you’ll get nowhere with this.
It doesn’t even matter all that much, as long as the real meaning is what Michael said; thanking his god for all the good things. It doesn’t change the way most Christians do things, I don’t see it as the slightest bit dangerous. I don’t see it as the slightest bit true either, but no harm no foul, no use messing around with beliefs that need not affect you personally.
It’s quite different if Huckabee is trying to insinuate that his god is purposefully trying to get him to win, thereby trying to give himself the ultimate celebrity endorsement. President by divine right is way overboard. I suppose only he can know what he really meant by it. If you trust Huckabee you’ll think he was being humble, if you don’t that he was being manipulative.
7 Michael van der Galien
December 7, 2007 @ 4:26 pm CETBut you see clearly that Xel does take offense. When someone says ‘praise the Lord’ Xel gets upset. That’s anti-religious bigotry.
That’s a ludicrous statement. You imply that God is abusive. That’s one. Two is: actually it’s very rational. It’s faith mixed with reason. That you don’t understand that doesn’t make it ‘irrational.’ In fact, I’d say that non belief is partly irrational.
8 Xel
December 7, 2007 @ 4:35 pm CET"But you see clearly that Xel does take offense. When someone says ‘praise the Lord’ Xel gets upset. "
Boy howdy are you and Steck touchy. I simply state that I think it goes against Huck’s run for the White House to state somehting so illogical as if it is impressive. I have no problem with praise of god - it’s the fact that the beliefs behind said praising are used with such selectivity that I must object.
"In fact, I’d say that non belief is partly irrational."
I would point out that you missed a hyphen but it is quite clear that the lack of a hyphen is the smallest problem with the above.
9 Lynx
December 7, 2007 @ 4:42 pm CET<blocquote>That’s a ludicrous statement. You imply that God is abusive. That’s one. Two is: actually it’s very rational. It’s faith mixed with reason. That you don’t understand that doesn’t make it ‘irrational.’ In fact, I’d say that non belief is partly irrational.</blockquote>
1. I wasn’t implying so much that god is abusive (though seeing some things in the world, I certainly could, but that’s a discussion for another time) as much as belief in a god is a deeply emotional link, like love of a parent, where the minute a believer feels their faith is questioned, or the benevolence of their deity attacked, it causes a knee-jerk defensive reaction. People will resist believing anything bad spoken about their mother, and likewise anything bad spoken about their god.
2. Religious faith is irrational. Non-belief is only irrational if it becomes a positive belief in the nonexistence of a god. Then I admit it must be irrational because it expresses a positive certainty that you cannot have. A lack of belief in god is like a lack of belief in fairies, that is, utterly irrelevant to the person it’s applied to in the absence of people who hold the positive belief. There is a difference between the two. We’ve discussed this before and if you really want to we can go over it again. We don’t agree. We will likely NEVER agree on this point, and many others pertaining to religion. I think we’re just going to have to be content with the occasional philosophical debate and with you not thinking me an amoral heathen and me not thinking you an irrational zealot
10 Interested
December 7, 2007 @ 5:08 pm CETYou have misspellings, incorrect grammar and related in your posts. Want to continue to go there Xel?
11 Xel
December 7, 2007 @ 5:13 pm CET"You have misspellings, incorrect grammar and related in your posts. Want to continue to go there Xel?"
Yeah, I don’t mind being called out on my careless use of English.
12 Xel
December 7, 2007 @ 5:15 pm CET"Religious faith is irrational."
Yes it is. Of course, it doesn’t make it useless or an intrinsically bad influence on people, but it does offer room for something better.
13 Interested
December 7, 2007 @ 5:17 pm CETWe would be here all day with that.
14 Xel
December 8, 2007 @ 4:39 pm CET"We would be here all day with that."
Yeah, I don’t have much time to spend beyond making comments, but go ahead if you have nothing better to do.
15 Rich Horton
December 8, 2007 @ 5:44 pm CETXel, I suggest you never watch a big sporting event on TV (or at least the interviews with the players afterward). As a comedian once asked, "Why is it that the winners always thank God while the losers blame themselves? Just once I’d like to hear a guy say ‘We were doing alright…until Jesus made me fumble!’ "
As I remember, everyone in the audience laughed because they knew EXACTLY what the comedian was talking about. I find it odd that you are shocked, just shocked, to see the same sentiment in a presidential candidate.