Culture Intelligent Design News

South Carolina: ID-friendly Santorum more popular than thought?

Spread the love

Further to “Did ID-friendly Rick Santorum actually win Iowa?, here are some subsequent poll numbers:

South Carolina Poll: Romney: 27%, Santorum: 24%, Gingrich: 18%

Evidently, Santorum is more popular than previous coverage would lead one to expect.

Just in: Mark Steyn on how Santorum got to be clsssified as weird:

Weirdly enough, this crazy weird behavior is in line with the advice of the American Pregnancy Association, which says that “it is important for your family members to spend time with the baby” and “help them come to terms with their loss.”

No, the surge probably won’t last, and we’re mainly interested in seeing whether the ID-friendly Santorum Amendment to the No Child left Behind will come up. And if so, whether it will have any effect one way or the other.

Here’s Santorum on the Santorum Amendment

(Scroll down for other news stories.)

Meanwhile, a timely warning for Santorum:

They hate him with that special ire reserved for his virtues, not his vices.

They will go after him not just to defeat him, but to smear his good name, to associate it with their own muck, to take a decent and honorable man and try literally to make his name mean mud.

True. Attacks on a candidate for his vices have a certain “You lucky dog! You don’t deserve all that and public office too!” air about them. By contrast, nothing beats the cold fury felt by some against the guy who just did the job right, took nothing but his pay cheque, and went home.

Hey, the mugging is just beginning now. Realistically, a weakness is that he takes people seriously whom the “winners” deem road kill.

Also: Rasmussen, Gallup, show Santorum has strong chance. Krauthammer calls him “worthy challenger.” Curious that, however it turns out, no one saw it coming.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

5 Replies to “South Carolina: ID-friendly Santorum more popular than thought?

  1. 1
    Neil Rickert says:

    Many democrats and liberals are really hoping that Santorum wins the Republican nomination.

  2. 2
    News says:

    Hmmm, Neil Rickerts. The easiest way to see is whether they go into attack dog mode before or afterward.

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    OT: Seems PZ Myers favorite mascot is refusing to ‘evolve normally’;

    (epigenetic) RNA editing responsible for colder water survival in octopus – January 2012
    Excerpt: Researchers have discovered that when it comes to the survival of an octopus living in frigid waters, the reasoning is not a difference in the gene DNA but rather a difference in the RNA editing.,,, Rosenthal and Garrett believed that in order for an octopus to survive in the frigid cold waters of the Arctic and Antarctic seas, they would have had to have changes in the DNA sequence. (Which is standard Darwinian reductionists thinking, but) ,, They realized that RNA editing must be in play. In RNA editing, the cells synthesize an RNA version of the particular DNA with an amended nucleotide sequence which will alter the amino acids and change the proteins function. (Of course the researchers, as usual, give Darwinism credit even though the finding directly controdicted what they expected from their starting Darwinian perspective, but the truth is that this ‘epigenetic RNA editing’ demonstrates foresight and engineering that Darwinism is at a complete loss to explain the origination of.)
    http://www.physorg.com/news/20.....topus.html

  4. 4
    Chas D says:

    Of course the researchers, as usual, give Darwinism credit even though the finding directly controdicted what they expected from their starting Darwinian perspective

    They thought something and it turned out to be something else? Say it ain’t so. Still, RNA editing is performed by proteins, which are formed from DNA – either way, the change is inherited in the normal way: DNA. The fact that the ‘changed DNA’ lay not in the gene itself, but another gene that acts upon its primary transcript, is a pretty familiar scenario – see alternative splicing, for example, also performed by DNA-produced, inheritable proteins. DNA, RNA and other proteins are all legitimate targets for genes.

  5. 5
    Joe says:

    Your position can’t explain RNA editing nor alternative gene splicing.

    Strange, that…

Leave a Reply