Skip to comments.Bachmann: Schools should teach intelligent design
Posted on 06/17/2011 5:37:57 PM PDT by ejdrapes
Bachmann: Schools should teach intelligent design New Orleans, Louisiana (CNN) Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann explained her skepticism of evolution on Friday and said students should be taught the theory of intelligent design. Bachmann, a congresswoman from Minnesota, also proposed a major overhaul of the nations education system and said state administrators should be able to decide how they spend money allocated to them by the federal government. "I support intelligent design," Bachmann told reporters in New Orleans following her speech to the Republican Leadership Conference. "What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide. I don't think it's a good idea for government to come down on one side of scientific issue or another, when there is reasonable doubt on both sides."
By CNN Political Reporter Peter Hamby
New Orleans, Louisiana (CNN) Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann explained her skepticism of evolution on Friday and said students should be taught the theory of intelligent design.
Bachmann, a congresswoman from Minnesota, also proposed a major overhaul of the nations education system and said state administrators should be able to decide how they spend money allocated to them by the federal government.
"I support intelligent design," Bachmann told reporters in New Orleans following her speech to the Republican Leadership Conference. "What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide. I don't think it's a good idea for government to come down on one side of scientific issue or another, when there is reasonable doubt on both sides."
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
She is an embarrassment to women AND conservatives.
Bachmann pushing intelligent design and other “extreme” religious right agenda items will ensure that she and whomever she partners with will lose.
For gosh sakes, don’t go so far right just because the nut in the whitehouse is far left. It’s not worth that gamble of losing.
Center right is the ticket for a win.
Big mistake. Any conservative candidate should be calling for elimination of the Federal Dept. of Education, and permanent eviction of the Feds from all activities not specifically named in the Constitution.
I think that this issue is not the hill to die upon. A candidate should not deign to discuss it. I think that evolution is one of the grandest hoax ever perpetrated, but the issue is not in the Top 100 issues for Americans right now. A President could discuss his or her thoughts about ID, but while this position may draw primary voters, it will make victory next November immeasurably more difficult.
Still using the picture with the McCain Palin sign in the background.
Pure genius. LOL
>>I like Michele, but I do not agree. Intelligent design is not science and should not be taught as such. <<
It is close to a “middle ground” position as a Conservative candidate can get. I am pretty sure it will never happen but when you get the base, you get the base with all its idiosyncrasies.
We can try to keep this discussion about the wisdom of her position more than fallacies of ID. But we shall see...
oWhy don’t you post those few pics of Palin and Romney at the Tea Party? You know, the one where she said it would be okay to share a ticket with the Mittster. Post that after you post Palin selling McCain as a Tea Party guy too. m’kay?
Then we will be fair.
Is Bachmann a YEC? That’s the death knell nationally.
Note to the slime merchants. Don't expect to get away with whisper campaigns around here. Every time you slime any of the candidate, you are going to be challenged to put up or shut up.
These sort of scum bag political tactics have NO business being used by Conservatives.
Thyat’s a vote killer for me. She’s jumped the shark.
This is too bad. Michelle is not as smart as I thought. She’s being sucked into an infinite morass of “gotcha” social issues the Marxist media is trying to tar her with.
All any GOP candidate for any office needs to do is stick to the following issues:
1. Reduce taxes and spending.
2. Do not increase the deficit.
3. Repeal Obamacare and replace it with real reform.
4. Repeal EPA authority over atmospheric gases.
5. Seal our borders from infiltraters.
6. Repeal all regulations and taxes obstructing the creation of jobs.
No matter what question is asked, you give only an answer for one of the above questions. It’s called “staying on message”, and no matter what you think of him, Scott Brown wrote the book on that, and it’s one of the main reasons he got elected.
I saw GOP candidate after candidate go down in flames in 2010 because they couldn’t keep their mouths shut and stay on message.
I hate to say it, but Michelle’s candidacy is probably over with. She’s already fallen prey to the left-wing’s vicious game of divisiveness.
I’m more interested in the report this woman received $250,000 in farm subsidies. Is the report true, what are the facts? Is she receiving an ethanol subsidy, wind mill subsidy, solar panel subsidy? If so how much? What other “Federal Funds” is this “conservative” receiving-if any?
if they would simply teach the facts, anyone with any sense would see the evidence of design.
Excellent observations. The MSM will be looking for gotcha statements from conservatives (never from the left).
When conservatives stay on message, we win. The message are those 6 points. Ronald Reagan had about six points and stayed on message and won.
I see, you want us to just say screw the scientific method. You have your dogma, Evolution, as handed down to you by the high priests of the "Church of Science" and so anything that challenges those dogmas is heresy that must be purged.
You people have become the very thing you claim to be against. You are unthinking, reactionary and dogmatic.
What next for you all? Book Burnings? Auto De Fes?
Science in science class. Theology in social studies or what have you.
Seems simple enough to me. Never saw the big deal over it.
People will decide for themselves.
There is no scientific method in ID. It is simply an attempt to replace science in the classroom with religious dogma.
Intelligent Design may not be science, but it is common sense.
But Bachmann is wrong to venture here. As another poster said, STAY ON MESSAGE! She won’t gain many independents with this talk.
I’d be happy if they just taught ‘em how to read and write.
I’m with you on that part but I do like this part:
“The federal government, she said, should “block grant all money currently that goes to the states back to the states, so that Louisiana can decide how they want to spend the money, which may in fact be different on how Minnesota spends its money.”
This would be a good start.
if ID was taught in some other class (not science), I could go for that.
Exactly the same here. I might not support this or that canidate but I will make the case FOR my choice, not slime theirs.
Soulless conservatism. I like it. s/
See Obama golf.
See Michelle shop
Oops, that was supposed to be included in the second grade primer.
Definitely no brain sturgeon
Let each teach what is desired, and let the free market decide.
New concept (for libs).
It is a lie circulated by the Huffington Post clown posse back in 2008 in an attempt to derail her congressional campaign. Her father in law ownes a farm, she has nothing to do with it. She has consistently voted against Farm Subsides,
...Bachmann made the controversial decision to vote against a five-year farm bill. The bill, which had been vetoed by Pres. George W. Bush, won the support of the two-thirds required in the House and Senate to override the veto. Bachmann not only voted against the bill which both of Minnesotas senators, including Republican Norm Coleman, and six of the eight members of the states congressional delegation, voted for but was also outspoken in her opposition to it, lambasting it for exempl[ying] the very worst of Washingtons ways and for avoiding every single opportunity for actual reform
Perhaps this might be a lesson for the smear merchants on how you post on this website if you want to be taken seriously.
Lesson 1, You source your facts.
Talk about hypocrisy!
First, we learn she thought the American Revolution started in Lexington, New Hampshire, so we learned she sucked at learning history. Now, we learn she believes in the “young earth.” Now we know she also sucked learning science.
I like Sarah Palin and hope she gets in the race because we need a field that’s conservative heavy. I know that she doesn’t behave the way some of her supporters do and maybe she’ll be an example of class.
Why is it ok for a national politician to have an opinion about that local school boards should and should not teach, but not ok for that same politician to not have an opinion about forced purchase of healthcare at the state level???
I don’t post much on Palin threads anymore. Funny, here you are in all your glory on a Bachmann thread bashing Michele in favor of a non candidate.
Hypocrisy seems to be catching. LOL
And which candidate, candidate mind you, is your candidate? Romney? TPaw? Huntsman? Paul? Just asking, because I have one. I used to get asked that by y’all a while back.
>>Is Bachmann a YEC? Thats the death knell nationally.<<
Apparently not. This declaration puts here in the “hey folks, let’s be reasonable here” camp. Like I said, it APPEARS to be a compromise position. It isn’t but it appears to be so.
Exactly! Education bureaucracy is not in the Constitution.
We need a radical Constitutionalist for President.
It is just as true as Global Warming, and skeptics of both are equally extremist.