Recently, American presidential contender Michele Bachmann has garnered attention by openly sympathizing with intelligent design. In “Bachmann Inside the Ring at Last” ( Townhall, 7/22/2011) Suzanne Fields offers a bit of background on the candidate, who is performing better than expected:
She’s known for doing her homework, building an argument based on personal research with facts, a quick intelligence and passionate conviction. She makes mistakes. She got the Founding Fathers and the arguments over slavery mixed up, a mistake like Barack Obama’s famous reference to “the 57 states.” Her mistakes aren’t as major as the liberal media blow them up to be, but she sometimes talks faster than she thinks. It’s a failing seen before among politicians, pundits and even philosophers.
Her critics say that as smart as she is, she has suffered from spending too much time inside her “biblical worldview.” In my informal interviews of conservatives, I’ve found that they want her in the fray, rallying the troops on the social issues, but that’s about as far as they want it to go. They find her savvy and a great campaigner, but they prefer her working for others rather than herself. (Just like Sarah Palin.)
Bill Dembski warns that, even if she wins, the wrong science advisers will pretty much cement current problems.
One difficulty, sources say, is that very few elected officials even try to do what the public actually wants, because as long as no one else is actually going to do that, they do not need to.