Huckabee spins himself in circles on AIDS quarantine

Yesterday, the AP highlighted some absurd comments from Mike Huckabee, offered during his 1992 Senate campaign, when he advocated isolating AIDS patients from the general public and warned that homosexuality could “pose a dangerous public health risk.”

“If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague [from the general population],” Huckabee wrote at the time.

By any reasonable standard, Huckabee’s comments were ridiculous and offensive, but at least for his sake they were made 15 years ago. Now, as a presidential candidate, he has an obvious course to take — claim ignorance and explain how far his understanding has progressed since 1992. (It may not be the most accurate tack — C. Everett Koop and the Surgeon General’s office explained to the nation that the disease could not be contacted through everyday contact four years before Huckabee expressed support for a quarantine, but it’s still his best strategic option.)

But the candidate who’s still surprisingly far from being ready for prime-time hasn’t yet learned how to respond to these questions.

On Fox News Sunday this morning, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee denied that he ever called for quarantining AIDS patients in 1992, claiming that he “didn’t say that we should quarantine,” but that the onset of the AIDS epidemic “was the first time in public health protocols” that “we didn’t isolate the carrier.” […]

Huckabee then asserted that he stands by his 1992 comments, saying he wouldn’t “run from” or “recant” them.

Sweet Jeebus, it’s as if this guy is practically trying to make himself appear foolish.

First, trying to parse the meaning of fairly plain language is ridiculous. Based on his defense this morning, Huckabee didn’t say we “should” quarantine AIDS patients, he only said we “must” isolate them from the public. It’s hard to imagine even the conservative Republican base finding this coherent.

Second, he won’t “recant” obvious nonsense from 1992? Why on earth not? There’s no shame in saying, “What I believed 15 years ago was mistaken.” For goodness sakes, Mitt Romney routinely suggests, “What I believed 15 minutes ago was mistaken.” Huckabee can’t even concede making a mistake when it’s this obvious?

It gets back to a point I mentioned the other day — Huckabee’s easy skate to the GOP’s top-tier is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, he’s been able to quietly sneak up on his rivals, who’ve been going after one another and leaving Huckabee alone. On the other hand, now that the race has reached crunch time, and Huckabee is a credible challenger for the nomination, all of the scrutiny comes at once, and the former governor has to be able to keep up.

So far, he’s shown he can’t take the heat. Pressed on the Wayne Dumond disaster, Huckabee has taken to lying about what transpired. Pressed on the NIE, he dismisses reasonable inquiries about major news as “gotcha questions.” Confronted with obvious stupidity from 1992, he doesn’t know how to distance himself from his own mistakes.

Does this guy even have a staff? Is there no one around to help prep him for these TV interviews? Credible presidential candidates just aren’t supposed to go on national television and parse the meaning of the word “quarantine.”

The Huckster is playing to his audence, and – trust me on this one – they love it (at least as evidenced by comments at a website I stopped visiting as a result of seeing this fact in the comments). His base thinks like this even now, and see The Huckster as being brave enough to “voice the truth” as they have known it all along. I know it seems strange, but these people really are that stupid. They do indeed believe the earth is 6,000 years old and that “global warming is a liberal plot,” and even if it is true “God will take care of his creation.”

  • “Sweet Jeebus, it’s as if this guy is practically trying to make himself appear foolish.”

    How does that differ from politics as usual, especially–but not only– Republican politics? “Tax cuts increase revenue;” “bomb/invade first, try diplomacy later;” “the Constitution says that a Republican President is free to ignore any law passed by Congress that he doesn’t want to bother enforcing;” “mandates decrease health insurance coverage”–Huckabee on AIDS is no more foolish than anyone propounding any of these positions.

  • The faster Huckabee can reveal himself to be a nutter, the better, IMHO. He gives the impression of being something other than an angry, pre-packaged, same-old GOP candidate, but underneath the wit and charm he’s worse.

  • Doing my best to get inside the mind of a hypothetical Huckabee supporter (not a pleasant task), I don’t think any of this hurts Huck.

    Many Christian Right types would still favor quarantining AIDS sufferers because they tend to get the virus from an “immoral, unnatural” lifestyle. Yes, that’s an ignorant, stupid thing to think, but we’re talking about Republican social conservatives here.

    Wayne Dumond’s post-parole victims were just collateral damage from an honest exercise of Clinton Derangement Syndrome. No moral culpability should attach to Huck from something like that, right?

    If Huck is caught in a scandal involving s-e-x, it might hurt, but the stuff on the table now won’t even make a ripple. Even though it should to rational people.

  • “Second, he won’t “recant” obvious nonsense from 1992? Why on earth not? There’s no shame in saying, “What I believed 15 years ago was mistaken.” For goodness sakes, Mitt Romney routinely suggests, “What I believed 15 minutes ago was mistaken.” Huckabee can’t even concede making a mistake when it’s this obvious?”

    Uh, Steve, Huckabee is just following the SOP of George Bush, who also can’t admit a mistake. We’ve had seven years already of this “Christian” government, we can’t AFFORD any more.

  • He’s not trying to look foolish, he’s trying to be as honest as possible without coming right out and saying “Yes I want to lock up the qu33rs,” because he knows that will trash his chances at the White House.

    If you really think his opinion of gays and lesbians has changed for the better and he regards his 1992 BS as a “mistake,” I’ve got some nice land in Florida going cheap!

  • Huckabee is just demonstrating why we need a doctor in the White House in 20008. We need someone who actually understands healthcare issues from the sharp end. That’s why I’ll be voting for Dr Ron Paul in 2008. Go Ron Paul!

  • Confronted with obvious stupidity from 1992, he doesn’t know how to distance himself from his own mistakes.

    Maybe he hasn’t had time to read the papers;>

  • Yesterday I read a comment here tying Hukabee to Jesus. Some how his belief in Jesus makes his political stances acceptable. ***Harris Hukabee:: commenter went on about being open minded and reading the testaments etc as if somehow this was connected to the politics of Hukabee. This frightens me. This is how the Inquisition got started. Mention “Jesus” and suddenly whatever you say or do is justified and any wrongdoing is now forgiven. It’s amazing how when talking about some political issue we end up with Jesus who had nothing to do with politics and if he were to see the ultra wealth generated in his name by the “religious” he would vomit. How did we get here? Hukabee has brought the pulpit with him into politics and his pretentious act is just as bigoted as these ranting faith healers.
    His response to his ‘92 comments indicate that he is lacking in integrity preferring to lie if necessary rather than admit he was wrong. His lying about Dumond shows he doesn’t really believe the Jesus crap he spews but finds it useful to gather votes (“I used to be a Baptist minister so how could I be dishonest or wicked in anyway?”)

    I firmly believe that is one factor that should dis-qualify you from holding public office…if you’ve ever been a minister of any faith…because that means you’ve taken an oath to a higher power that is superior to any oath you would take to the constitution. Admit it and get out of office.

  • ***”We need someone who actually understands healthcare issues from the sharp end. That’s why I’ll be voting for Dr Ron Paul in 2008. Go Ron Paul!”
    Yeah Ted Benson…I’m tired of this crap too. Time for change in America. Pull government out of everything. I’m gonna pledge allegiance to AT&T. Most will be pledging to EXXon but I’m going with AT&T ‘cause I believe they can raise the biggest corporate security army the fastest. As far as the bridges and hiways are concerned the market will sort it out. AT&T is self sufficient but Exxon has to keep going after the oil. I like their hospitals better too. I wonder where they will let me live. Since there’s not enough gold in the world to back up the trillions of debt the old America has already incurred we can just give Hawaii to China. Thank God Paul will end the occupation in Iraq but after all the corporations no longer need it as the war profiteers corps like Haliburton and Blackwater can now act independently all over the world working for Exxon openly instead of having to go through the government and the state dept.. They can just claim What war? Corporate secrets and all. Unrestrained capitalism at it’s best

    . No more government interference. Privatization would makeoad repairs happen faster, well maybe not faster but they’d get done. Better than the buildings in Iraq I hope but without any safetty checks by government. No EPA or CPA, screw the lead paint and sick kids. They should know better than to buy from China anyway. Dr. Paul is right, we don’t have to even worry about health care if just don’t get sick to begin with.. And the government would protect us from diseases and plagues and natural emergencies…oh wait, I meant AT&T or Exxon would protect us…wouldn’t they…or is it the free market morals? Oh well, Paul will straighten it out. The best thing you can say about Paul that you can’t say about any of the other GOP candidates is that He is a man of integrity and high moral ethics.

  • Just curious: have any readers of The Carpetbagger Report experienced an epiphany as a result of someone commenting here to say “Go Ron Paul”? Has anyone actually decided to vote for him because of the bots that drop by?

    I didn’t think so.

    I’m a regular reader here, and I learn a lot from CB and especially from his large following of intelligent commenters. Ted @ #8 is not one of those intelligent commenters.

  • How many of us espouse the same views we held 15 years ago? This is not to agree with or malign Mr. Huckabee, but, rather to make a point.

  • How many of us espouse the same views we held 15 years ago? This is not to agree with or malign Mr. Huckabee, but, rather to make a point.

    No way. Uh-uh. The correct questions are:

    1. How many of us jostled for a position that would give us the power over the lives of a lot of people and were unforgivably ignorant (or just plain lying) about a serious public health matter and used that serious public health issue to vilify a sector of the population?

    (Hello? Anyone?)

    2. How many of us, assuming we were very wrong about something 15 years ago couldn’t – when the subject came up again – just say “Hey, I was wrong I don’t believe that any more and I’m sorry for being so ignorant”?

    That’s the point.

  • Some thoughts from the http://www.rethinkingaids.com web site:

    Welcome From Etienne de Harven, MD, President of Rethinking AIDS 


    I am very pleased to welcome all the visitors of the new Rethinking AIDS (RA) website!
    As many of you are probably aware, RA has been re-activated and re-organized since late 2005. Thanks to the expertise and dedication of the thirteen highly motivated Members of RA Board of Directors, new bylaws have been drafted and recently approved, and a President, a Treasurer (David Crowe) and a Webmaster (Bryan Owen) have been appointed. The goals and purpose of RA have been defined, and its involvement has been stressed in a world-wide effort to 1) eradicate the dogma according to which an elusive retrovirus is the cause of the syndrome, and 2) support research and public awareness on possible alternative causes of the disease. These topics were the central focus of an important meeting of the RA Board of Directors that took place in New York City, on June 10-11, 2006.
    Unquestionably, AIDS is a dramatic aspect of human pathology, first recognized in 1981, in the Los Angeles area, among a small group of gay men. The definition of the syndrome has been changed several times, and considerable differences exist between what is called AIDS in North America and Europe, and what is called AIDS in Africa. Despite these differences, research aimed at curing and hopefully preventing the syndrome has been, for the past 23 years, exclusively and dramatically restricted to one single, totally unproven hypothesis; i.e., the hypothetical role of a retrovirus identified as ‘HIV’ in 1984. Stubborn dogmatic adherence, by the entire academic community, to this unreasonable hypothesis can only be explained by a desperate effort to salvage the reputation of many cancer research laboratories that had been highly biased, between 1960 and 1980, in large programs aimed at demonstrating that retroviruses are involved in the causation of human cancer.
    Hypothesizing, without any trace of scientific evidence, that a retrovirus was the cause of AIDS permitted the perpetuation of retroviral research highly profitable for the pharmaceutical business, and avoided embarrassing closures of many retrovirus oriented laboratories.
    The retrovirus hypothesis was presented 23 years ago, and the entire, world-wide research effort on AIDS has been restricted to that unique hypothesis ever since. Most dramatically, the clear evidence, in 2007, is that this hypothesis totally failed to help. Based on that single and scientifically unproven hypothesis, AIDS research failed to deliver any curative AIDS therapy, it never permitted scientists to prepare a reliable vaccine, and it never led to verifiable epidemiologic predictions. As early as 1987, Peter Duesberg had the courage and scientific authority to ring the alarm bell. In doing so, he has been the scientific founder of the Rethinking AIDS movement of ‘Dissidents’ (‘The Group’), that was crystallized in 1991 by the historic statement that has been supported and signed by more than 2,300 concerned scientists (including two Nobel laureates) and innumerable attentive rethinkers from other fields. Cancer research had been put on the wrong track by placing emphasis on an enzyme ‘marker’ of cancer cells in 1970; AIDS research has been put on the wrong track by hypothesizing retroviral causation in 1984.
    In order to accelerate general awareness of this disastrous situation, Rethinking AIDS (RA) has been, recently, setting up several mechanisms. It has created the website you are currently visiting, it has appointed a Public Relations task force for the presentation of professionally formatted messages to the media, it is organizing one annual Board of Directors general meeting, and it is currently reactivating contact with our 2,300 signatories of the 1991 statement. This shall soon permit us to start a fundraising program. The money raised will be used for setting up dissident conferences, publishing dissident books and lectures, creating dissident films and videos, advising the victims of the HIV fear campaign paradigm, educating the public on matters related to alternative, non toxic protocols for consolidating immune responses, and educating the public on the unacceptable toxicity of so-called antiretroviral drugs as well as on the total lack of specificity of so-called seropositivity tests. The ambition of RA is to lead this struggle on a world-wide basis. RA’s ultimate goal is to rapidly contribute to the final implosion of the HIV=AIDS=Death paradigm. Nothing less!
    The RA Board of Directors is the main operational body supporting this ambitious and urgent program (see the Board section on this website for all names and short CVs). The strength of the Board is in the diverse background of its members. Some are academic scientists; some are highly dedicated rethinkers, for many years, in the dissident movement. You shall find many documents written by them at this website. Obviously, they don’t all share identical views on some detailed points of the HIV debate. They are, however, forming a strongly united group. United because they all share the scientifically based opinion according to which: a) AIDS is not an infectious disease; b) AIDS is not caused by a retrovirus; c) serological and viral load tests are not reliable for the diagnosis of AIDS; d) HAART drugs do more harm than good; e) adequate public hygiene and sanitation, well balanced nutrition, and curtailing the use of recreational drugs can prevent and control AIDS much better than all the toxic ARV therapeutic regimens; and f) several alternative and non-viral factors can explain the occurrence of most acquired immuno deficiencies in humans. This is a lot to agree about!

  • Okie, #12 –
    Well, their comments persuaded me to go and look at Paul’s website. However, that gave me several additional reasons why I would never vote for him.

  • Will someone puleeze stuff a sock in james k. sayre?

    a) AIDS is not an infectious disease;

    Seriously, fuck you. A lot.

    e) adequate public hygiene and sanitation, well balanced nutrition, and curtailing the use of recreational drugs can prevent and control AIDS much better than all the toxic ARV therapeutic regimens;

    Never mind. There is no amount of fucking that will clear your pathetic little head. On behalf of all the people who died following snake-oil salesmen like yourself, stick your head a bit further up your arse, say until your elbows are pinched against your side and you can’t type.

  • We have a woman, an African-American, an Indian, a former P.O.W., a “yankee” , a Southerner, a Baptist preacher and a Morman in the race for the leader of the free world…….I LOVE THIS COUNTRY!!!!

  • I’m a pastor and this whole Huckabee AIDs discussion just shows that the media is completely out of touch with the common people. What is considered politically correct on homosexuality is believed in by a small minority of people. Church going people who read their Bibles know that homosexuality is a sin. AIDS is predominately a result of a sinful lifestyle. Quite frankly, even today, it seems kind of crazy to allow people with AIDs to go around randomly having sex with others. It actually is a crime, so a quarantine isn’t so bizarre an idea. We support Huckabee because he isn’t politically correct, he is biblically correct. The more of these “scandals” the comes out in the media, the more church goers will support him. So, keep it up. How about some more articles like the one I saw the other day “Huckabee says homosexuality is sin.” We say Amen to that. As pastors, we now individually influence thousands of people with our websites, email and blogs. We support Huckabee and believe he will win the nomination and the election.

  • The day that “church going people” of Pastor Truth Teller’s hateful ilk (#20) constitute the majority opinion on homosexuality in this country is the day I light out for Norway or Iceland or some other civilized country. Pastor, there is no hell, and it’s extraordinarily lucky for you there isn’t!

    What a sorry lot of Repug candidates. Honestly, does ANY sensible person think Hillary on her worst day wouldn’t be ten times the president of any of these goons?

  • The AIDS/STI Infoline is a province-wide service that provides free and confidential support and assistance to callers from Winnipeg and any other community in Manitoba. The people who answer the phone can:

    * Answer questions and provide health information about HIV/AIDS/STIs
    * Help provide connections to other community resources
    * Mail out health literature upon request
    ================
    jack

    Put The Message Where It Matters! WideCircles aka Wide Circles represents relevant, distributed, highly targeted and efficient internet word of mouth marketing using entertaining or informative messages that are designed to be passed along in an exponential fashion using social network mediums such as blogs, forums, wikis and so on.
    http://widecircles.com

  • Greater effort by Huckabee. AIDS is a serious (often fatal) disease of the immune system transmitted through blood products especially by sexual contact or contaminated needles.
    _____________________________________

    Petric Rodger
    Wide Circles
    Wide Circles
    [url=http://www.widecircles.name]Wide Circles[/url]

  • People have fear about AIDS But If people take care about there relation then there is no problem in there life. This is nice post people have learn about this topic. It is a nice topic and your article is also nice.

    Thanks
    Daniel

  • Comments are closed.