Why do you post like I am attacking you? I wasn't.

I am glad you are educated. I'm glad that you know the facts. My point was to show that not everyone knows the facts as much as people would like to think everyone does or should. Apparently those senior citizens that are now contracting AIDS don't know all the facts. Not everyone knows all the facts. THAT is my point. Continue teaching AIDS facts in school…it has lowered the stats on teenagers infected with HIV…education is key! But what about those people that are 20+ years older than you that are now becoming infected?

I agree that everyone SHOULD know all about AIDS and the dangers unsafe sex or activities; but not everyone does. THAT IS MY POINT! Those are the people that should be reached.

I am not seeking to be on the "moral high ground",

"the suggestion that I was attributing to Huckabee the stance that these quarantined people should not receive treatment while captive is utterly false",

was an attribute that you took upon yourself in a VERY loose reading of what I posted.

Whether or not you overtly STATED that Huckabee's comment wasn't ignorant of the subject, you certainly suggested that there was justification for his position based on the SUPPOSED lack of consensus/certainty about AIDS. My point is simply that the fact that the CDC didn't change their mind about AIDS until 1992 is not a relevant means of rebutting criticism of his stance.

The CDC is a governmental agency, subject to the political pressures and powerplays that go along with that. Just look at the FDA, which supposedly protects us from profiteering drug companies making false claims about how safe meds are. It's been completely politicized under this administration. Do you think it would have been less likely for the CDC to have been politicized when the subject was a disease largely affecting the gay and IV drug addicted segment of the population, with a Republican president in office?

While I can appreciate the sentiment that not all schools had it as "good" as I did wrt health education, I must insist that it should be prerequisite for any candidate for the US Senate to at least have as much knowledge as a 16 year old public school student about the major public health issue of the day. That's just being a diligent public servant/candidate.

Furthermore, the suggestion that I was attributing to Huckabee the stance that these quarantined people should not receive treatment while captive is utterly false. It might help you to feel that you have the moral high ground, but it would take a VERY loose reading of my words to justify that leap.

And, for the record, I went to public school in Pennsylvania, not Seattle, in an affluent (and far from liberal) area where my family was among the least well-off in the area. I finished high school in Knoxville, TN, in the 1992/1993 year, and even they knew that AIDS wasn't spread by casual contact by then. I think I've got pretty strong evidence that, even in the small town south, this info was common knowledge when Huckabee made his ill-considered remark. (And I had to retake Health class my senior year due to differences in how the 2 schools gave credit for it. My Health teacher in TN was a track coach who was very conservative and in his 60's. He somehow knew what Senatorial candidate Huckabee couldn't be bothered to find out.)

WOW…. Erik Seatlle, WA (copied from your post)

Be thankful that you were not among the ignorant masses. I merely posted to give some of the less informed of the subject something to read that might give them a more basic timeline of the truth. Not everyone went to schools that were liberal enough to teach on this subject of knowledge obtained from anywhere other than the CDC. Most kids were lucky to hear all the reasons FOR abstinence/safe sex/don't share needles and have it explained to them in some format other than a 30second "blahblahblah" from a health teacher that was probably also the athletic director or coach. Maybe someone should have sent out a national flyer to everyone that was not in school at that time.
There are more people over 50 now with AIDS than in 1992 because of misplaced information.

"The truth of the matter is that HIV surveillance shows that 11 percent of all new AIDS cases are in people over the age of 50. Statistics also show that new AIDS cases rose faster in the over 50 population than in people under 40." From Mark Cichocki, R.N.

So ignorance shows no age limit, and the AIDS virus doesn't discriminate!

***AND***
Huckabee NEVER stated that he wanted to quarantine AIDS patients WITHOUT medical treatment. I never stated that Huckabee's statement wasn't ignorant of the subject. And PLEASE don't think that just because it was taught at your school, that every school was like yours in 1992. Apparently SOME people were not listening (or not in school)or we would not have the pandemic of AIDS that we have now.

And to answer your last question….it would be better if EVERYONE thought about what they are going to say BEFORE they said it. But if that were the case, presidential elections would be based on looks alone.

Please spare us, "Informed!" I was a senior in High School in 1992 and I very distinctly remember having been taught in health class prior to that year that contracting AIDS could be prevented through safe sex/abstinence and not sharing needles.

Regardless of how a US governmental agency (the CDC) was finding, it was common enough (and important enough)knowledge to find its way into public school courses before 1992. Nobody is saying that "we knew it all" in 1992, but we knew enough not to entertain the idea for more than a minute that quarantining those who had AIDS was an appropriate, or even effective, response. Hint: We also knew that there was a gestation period that would make quarantining useless, since people would likely continue their risky behavior for some time before the symptoms clued them in that there was a problem. It goes beyond the revisionist to simply misinformation to suggest that Huckabee's comments come from anything other than ignorance of the subject.

Wouldn't it be better if politicians who were unprepared to answer a question simply did some research before spitting out an answer that seems clearly informed by a desire to keep all the gays (gasp) and druggies (gasp) over there in Gay and Druggie Town?

(Insert ironic comments about Limbaugh drug addiction and Repub gay sex scandals here.)

Maybe the third post is a charm. We don't want to segregate but we'll sensor the daylights out of comments on CNN.

Post some facts if you want to sound intelligent…north or south.

http://www.avert.org/his81_86.htm

If you would like the timeline on knowledge of AIDS, you all need to read this. It's on the web, it's available to the world. Not everything was black and white in the knowledge of AIDS in 1992.

1992 History
"The CDC, under pressure from patients and doctors, decided to revise its definition of AIDS. The previous list of illnesses that defined AIDS had been criticised for some time because it did not include many of the conditions most often seen in HIV positive women and injecting drug users. The new definition would take effect from the start of 1993."

So please stop pretending that "we knew it all" in 1992. The CDC didn't even "know it all".
You will also find some pretty amazing facts about former President Bush and Clinton, and how the MEDIA affected the global warning of AIDS. Not everything, as I said, was black and white. These were A LOT of gray areas.

mike RI,,,, NO,, this is somthing Cuba does to this day,, look into it. then tell all your lib friends about it

What about Ron Paul then?

<<>>

The man is a Baptist minister AND pro death penalty…uhmm "Thou shall not kill?" HUGELY hypocritical.

K from Florida, you might like to know Ryan White died in 1990 two years before Huckabee made his statements. If Mrs. White was so vocal she had ample time to confront Huckabee regarding his views prior to today.

Do a little research before you decide to be all high and mighty. You just set yourself up to look uneducated.

To Michael Arnaud-Glen Burnie, Maryland:

Posters who spell disease "diease" are not qualified to comment on calls for enlightenment. If you can comprehend the words of the post by Voltaire, why can't you write a post that makes sense? Why should anyone be swayed by your bizarre rants?

Your obviously "moral" objections to unmarried sex and drug use don't address the purely scientific issue of preventing the spread of HIV in the (clearly unavoidable) event that sex and drug use occur. It is not the government's job to impose a moral structure upon the members of a free society. I don't look to politicians to tell me what's right. Do you? I think the electorate tells the government what's right by voting. No?

Since we're electing a president and not an Imam, I'm not getting why you think our government should refrain from providing people who are already sexually active or addicted to drugs with some risk mitigation devices (i.e., condoms, clean needles). You would apparently prefer a government that ignores the reality that non-monogamous relationships and drug use exist. That might be easy to do down in the holler, but that fantasy doesn't really hold up too well if you've ever been to D.C.

Hey Michael Arnaud-Glen Burnie, ive heard that phrase but thiink its ill applied.

If being a proponent of reason, empiricism, and scientific method, while detesting blind faith, mysticism, supernatural thinking, superstition, and religious dogmatism qualifies me as narrow-minded, than I shall happily accept your title! And actually, I am in good company with my beliefs; Carl Sagan, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, 85% of the Royal Academy of Sciences, the majority of Nobel Prize winners and many other prominent free thinking philosophers, intellectuals and scientists.

So perhaps you’re satisfied with being led by the status quo, or the majority, however, majority rule doesn’t work in mental institutions. Free thinkers are often the instruments of change, and are often responsible for previous fallacies and harmful dogmas to be pushed by the wayside.

I'm sure many of the civilians in Nazi Germany were ok with what was going on. I'm sure the Psychologist Stanley Mailgram was surprised to see how many of his subjects elected to continually administer shocks to subjects who were obviously in pain, simply because someone in an authoritative position instructed them to do it. So no, I’m not particularly sold on the notion that the majority always knows best.

Ohh, should I respect Islamofacists for their literal interpretations of their Koran, which sanctions the death or destructions of those who oppose their religion? I mean they are being consistent. You may disagree with me, but there is nothing hypocritical about what I have said. And I never stated my political affiliation or preference for any candidate. I just don’t want a Baptist minister.

Good to see you're back today Christopher. I was wondering where you've been all day– I figured Mommy and Daddy grounded you from using the computer. I really love your comments about Texas… too bad you don't have a clue what Texans are like, because if you did, you would realize that most of us are just like other Americans. Contrary to whichever John Wayne movie you've seen, we are not all rednecks and hicks who ride around on horses.

It's people like you who make me glad that I'm from Texas, because most Texans have common courtesy and respect for others.

To Huckabee's defense, let's remember the attitude of the medical community about AIDs-hysteria. According to doctors, AIDS was poised to be the worst medical disaster in history since the black plague. It was commonly believed in 1992 (although well known it was not transmitted through 'tears') by researchers that the virus could easily mutate to an airborne virus.
But, that doesn't defend Huckabee's current statements. Admit you were wrong and move on.
I'll never vote for anyone who doubts evolution. I hate to admit it, but just his name turns me off-President Huckabee? please

To David from Gilbert;
As to where Mrs. White was 15 years ago, she was fighting for her sick son while also trying to allow him to receive the education he needed. Because of the bigotry, he was not allowed to go to school due to the fearmongering of folks like Mr. Huckabee. She was VERY vocal!!! Obviously, you are too wrapped up in your uneducated views. to have known that sir.

Hey, Voltaire Enlightenment, does the phrase 'people in glass houses shoudn't throw stones' mean anything to you?

You talk of the need for a new 'enlightenment'. A president above the religous 'piffle' as you call it. For some who doesn't like narrow-mindedness you sound very narrow-minded yourself.

It sounds as if noone believes the way you believe, then they're wrong and ignorant and need you to show them the way. Isn't that what you're saying about all those 'man-made doctrines' you so detest.

I'm all for everybody having their own opinions, but stop being a hypocrite about it.

"Isolate" people infected with HIV/Aids.
So, if he isn't aware in 1992 of all the information published on how the infection is spread, do we expect him to understand the meaning of intelligence to assist our country or use it, our resources, and our national budget in the same way to assist his personal beliefs as Bubba Bush.

And exactly why should Hollywood activists reach into their pockets to find a cure. Did the entertainment industry start the infection? does he know something no other medical specialist doesn't?

What's next? Segregation?

Do we really want to have a president that guides the country through his religious beliefs. Do we really want to end up like a middle eastern country and treat our citizens in the same way. Maybe have a Holy War between Hollywood and the followers of his views?

I never thought I could be more worried about how someone could possibly make our country even worse after the Bush administration, however Huckabee looks like he could stand a good chance.

If I am totally incorrect, maybe I am a sinner after all. Because then I will have "missed the mark" as Huckabee has defined a sinner to be

Where was Huckabee in the early 1980s when AIDS was a "gay disease" and Reagan turned his back on suffering people? Where is he when the Bush administration limits the distribution of condoms in Africa, believing we should educate them about monogamy (with a spouse who could possibly have AIDS anyway thanks to a previous partner or parental transmission) instead of giving them the means of protecting themselves. There are ways to stem the tide of AIDS, but preaching that 15 years ago, you believed in "isolation" doesn't solve the problem. You want votes, Huckabee? Use this to outline your plan on how to further educate and protect the public against the disease. I seriously doubt you will. It's way easier to say that your god hates sex and these sinners deserve it.

At that time, we didn't know whether AIDS was spread by tears, blowing your nose, skin-to-skin contact, sexual transmission, blood transfusions, not washing your hands, handling dangerous chemicals, or what. The virus that causes AIDS and the way it was transmitted from person to person had not been discovered at that time.
Posted By Terry, El Paso, TX : December 11, 2007 10:45 am

Wrong, wrong, wrong Terry from the country of Texas. In 1985 reports came out that HIV was not spread casually. this report showed that only fluids that contained blood were a risk factor. Please do you research before you post crap. You sound more like Frist who recently stated that he wasn't sure if HIV was spread threw tears. I believe this was just 3 short years ago. By the way Senator Frist is a doctor…a republican doctor. Spreading fear and lies to cause some of your so called "fueled by some anti-gay sentiment."
Shut up already Texas.

I can't wait for 2022 when all the Republicans will be saying "yeah, well we didn't know much about Global Warming 15 years ago"

All the necessary information about AIDS existed in 1992, but some people aren't big fans of science or facts. After all, the majority of the scientific community is just one big liberal conspiracy.

Specific to Anonymous in Acme PA:

Where would we be today if we had followed Huckbee's lead in 1992? Let me give you some examples of where we would likely be:

1) Without federal funding we likely would not have discovered the current therapies for HIV until muuch, much later…thus, we would have likely had tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths,

2) We would have had the civil rights of people who were not a danger to the public conveniently set aside because of bigotry, fear and ignorance about how the disease was spread…this policy would have likely been overturned by the Supreme Court (correctly) and never would have been part of public policy.

3)We would likely have not seen the dramatic drop in the infection and death rates that we saw in the 90's, since, had we followed Huckabee's lead of blaming only gay people…and not looking at medical science…we would have lost the opportunity to impact the real causes of AIDS through safe sex education and condom distribution (policies that both the first Bush and the Clinton administrations supported).

Please, this was 15 YEARS AGO! Nobody knew anything about HIV/AIDS then.
Posted By Gordon, Boston MA : December 11, 2007 10:15 am

Gordon your hillbilly wagon is ready to transport you to the south to be isolated with the rest of the ignorant rednecks. Reports were out in 1985 stating that HIV is not spread casually. I'm surprised you know how to turn on the computer to type your hate!

To Brad of Texas…

Two flaws with your posting:

1) You claim that there wasn't strong medical consensus in 1992 that AIDS was NOT spread through casual contact. Actually, there had been medical evidence of this for over a decade by 1992…and the fact that the CDC guidelines for universal precaustion came out in 1987 demonstrates that there was, in fact, MEDICAL consensus.

2) You use the example of the fear that was expressed by NBA players when Magic Johnson announced his HIV status as evidence of a lack of such a consensus. Ummmmm…..since when are NBA players representative of the medical community?

It might surprise you John in Columbus that there are no federal laws barring discrimination based on sexual orientation today.

The closest thing homosexuals have is Executive Order 13087 signed by President Clinton. This order barred discrimination of homosexual employees in civil service positions. It does not, however, bar discrimination of employees in agency positions such as the CIA, the FBI, or the NSA.

The order was not signed until 1998 toward the end of Clinton's second term. The order was oppossed by members of Congress but it was not nullified by vote.

This not only underscores Mike Huckabee's comments made in 1992 but also underscores the view of elected politicians as well as the general population regarding homosexuals.

It might also suprise you to know there are viable medical studies which show homosexual behavior poses as significant heath risk. A study was publicized in the American Journal of Public Health which highlights many of these risks, not only HIV/AIDS. Does that make the Journal a group of bigots?

The Gay and Lesbian Medical Association also acknowledges these significant health risks. Are they also homophobes?

Mike Huckabee makes a statement reflective of medical science and that makes him hateful, spiteful, and a bigot? Most doctors also fit that same classification then.

All of you that are opposing Huckabee on his AIDS comment make me sick. If we had only done what he has said in the past, the AIDS epidemic would not be where it is today. If we would have isolated the virus a long time ago, this would not be an issue. It only makes sense. There are a lot more people who do NOT have the virus than DO, so if you want save more lives and not bring about our own destruction, isolate the virus.

Even more lives would be saved if we banned tobacco. -Rafi

Wait a minute now… Are you saying that contracting AIDS is the side effect of a bad choice?

Not sure which is more upsetting. That this ignorant candidate is gaining support or that the guy who wrote this post is on my side of the argument (Posted By Nelson Colorado Springs Co : December 11, 2007 10:21 am… Seriously, read that). These candidates should focus more on issues like education.

This is the tip of the iceberg of this man's ignorance and lack of compassion. Some call it political correctness–not me, it's just plain old "I don't care what you think" attitude. His viewpoints so far certainly do not appear to be bremming with piety, humanity, acceptance, and forgiveness!!

“His recent comments regarding the 1992 statement was that he was considering the safety of the general populous instead of approaching disease as a civil rights issue.”
By David, Gilbert, AZ

David, Huckabee’s statements about all gays being a threat to public health and his advocacy of quarantine as a means of combating the disease are the very reasons that victims of HIV/AIDS needed to it addressed as both a health and a civil rights matter. His views were not based on medical science or public health – they were informed by homophobia and a willingness to strip citizens of their rights, regardless of the facts.

The first President Bush specifically included HIV status in his advocacy of the Americans with Disabilities Act (in 1991, by the way) specifically because of the irrational bigotry of many ill-informed people whow ere happy to discriminate against AIDS victims out of ignorance and fear. Now we know that Mike Huckabee was among them.

Again…the facts of wehat we knew about AIDS in 1992 EXPOSES Huckabee's bigotry…it doesn't explain it away.

CNN: ENOUGH WITH THE CENSORSHIP!

What exactly is the problem here?

The man made a statement based on the information about AIDS (which was little to none) at the time. Big deal.

If the guy was a liberal you'd all be saying how he only wanted to protect the public from a disease we knew little about.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

"With all due respect Dave, this logic is obtuse. There are millions of Americans who believe all kinds of idiotic things such as astrology, psychics, ghosts ect. Yes, he is being consistent by being a religious literalist, which speaks to his limited intellect."

Actually for Mike Huckabee to make a statement contrary to his beliefs would constitute a "follow the herd instinct" as you put it. He would simply be pandering to the centerists for votes. Fortunately for Huckabee he is not willing to compromise his values just for the sake of being elected. He is who he is and that's exactly who he displays on the campaign trail, unlike some of the other candidates who waffle back and forth daily and make excuses for their past voting record.

Huckabee makes no excuses and issues no apologies. Personally I respect the man for standing up for his beliefs even if they seem antiquated to others.

Besides, why the outrage now? Where was Jeanne White-Ginder 15 years ago? Why was she not outraged then? It would seem to me she and Huckabee would have hashed this issue out long ago. It appears to be a contrived set up to me.

To Kim in Midland, MI:

Thank you for your excellent post! I am so tired of the gay community being villified for "causing" this epidemic, when, as you so clearly illustrate, the nation owes the gay community at that time a huge debt of gratitude — without them, the epidemic would, in all liklihood, have been much worse.

An estimated 550,394 people have died of AIDS in the USA, most since 1989. Approx 39,000 new AIDS cases are diagnosed each year, 988,376 in total. 45,669 people were diagnosed with AIDS in 2005, 17,011 died. What were we taking about again??

There have been several comments on this board about how we should give Huckabee a pass because of lack of information about HIV/AIDS at the time.

In 1992 the only people who didn't know what constituted safe and unsafe exposure were the people who hadn't bothered to do any research. That might be understandable (although hardly commendable) for the general public, but it us completely unacceptable for someone who was, at the time, seeking election to the U.S. Senate. From 1987 to 1991 I was a college student, and I can guarantee you that everyone in my school had gone to great lengths to understand what did — and what did not — cause the transmission of the virus! In addition, President Bush, Sr. himself gave a speech in 1990 seeking to dispell many people's fears. For Senator Huckabee to either: a) not bother to conduct research on an important topic before speaking to it; or b)use fear and ignorance to further his own political aspirations, was (and is) worthy of scorn. And for him to not have the integrity to now say "I was wrong and I realize now how callous and hurtful my comments at the time must have been" shows clearly how lacking he is in character.

Is this guy for real? Just another religious zealot that should not lead this country.

Among many problems with his comment, is where would we put all these people? And what about the rest of the world population with AIDS, what do we do with the 25% of Africa that's infected with HIV? Perhaps we can donate Arkansas as the place where we can quarentine all of the world's people infected with the virus.

maybe if we would have isolated aids victims then now we wouldn't have millions infected? just a thought people.

You are right David from Arizona– Huckabee was correct to question why HIV/AIDS received more federal money and attention than other debilitating ailments. And just because he won't recant or apologize for what he said 15 years ago does not mean he still believes the same thing… it means that he's not going to apologize for something he ONCE said just to make people happy, like Democrats tend to do when they get called out.

Yes, by the 90's there was a good amount of research telling us that HIV could not be spread by casual means, but it was not scientific consenus. I can remember how nervous the athletic community was after Magic Johnson revealed he had HIV. The general public was very scared, and Huckabee was merely trying to protect people, even though he was misguided.

By the way, David, pay no attention to Wayne. He's real good at making hateful and idiotic one-liners, but his class hasn't yet learned how to write a paragraph. Be patient with the lad.

This 15 years ago crap is getting OLD. For us growing up during this time, Salt n Pepa had a song out Called Lets talk about Sex (b-side Lets talk about AIDS) that was a hit on the radio. This was in 1991!!! We had groups singing about safe sex on the radio but yet This freak didnt know about AIDS? And you guys would want to vote for someone who is this uneducated???? I dont understand. Before you make comments you know nothing about, Maybe you should reserch a little before you open your mouth.

“There are millions of Americans who share the same views on homosexuality that Mike Huckabee has. It's part of a religious doctrine taught to every Christian, Jew, Muslim, and Mormon. They all share the same teachings against homosexuality. Mike Huckabee is just more vocal about those teachings.
In all honesty for Mike Huckabee to say any different would make him a hypocrite, which he isn't.”

With all due respect Dave, this logic is obtuse. There are millions of Americans who believe all kinds of idiotic things such as astrology, psychics, ghosts ect. Yes, he is being consistent by being a religious literalist, which speaks to his limited intellect. Just because the follow the herd instinct within humans allows us to believe such antiquated notions of reality based on obviously man-made religious doctrines, is nothing to brag about. Such blind faith and rejection of reason has done nothing good for humanity, but has led to wonderful things like the never ending Middle East idiocy and the inquisition. He may not be a hypocrite, but neither are jihadists who kill in the name of their stupid man-made doctrines. We need someone who is above this piffle. We need a new enlightenment, and an end to this religious backsliding which is slowly taking us back to the Middle Ages!

Just another religious zealot who says whatever it takes as a justifiable means to an end. More compassion for illegals than our own citizens.

Whenever a nation the size of our own decides to "isolate" a particular group of people, disaster follows. Even if something like the holocaust or the Japanese internment isn't the actual objective, something like that inevitably happens.

Coming in the 90's, when people knew that AIDS wasn't casually passed on, these comments are ignorant and ridiculous and not fitting for an American president.

Folks we are beating a dead horse here! How much did any one of us know how HIV/AIDS is transmitted 15 years ago! We were all ingorant back then! People we are talking about 15 years ago! You Huck haters were just as ingorant back then as well! Next topic, please!

Nice Wayne. What, are you twelve? You sure act like it.

Just think of all the people that would not have AIDS today if we have only listened..

Posted By spinstopper : December 11, 2007 9:26 am

Even more lives would be saved if we banned tobacco. Since this option would be far less expensive and less discriminatory than an AIDS quarantine, I'm assuming you'll be all for it?

When will people realize that the homosexual population in the United States SAVED the rest of us from HIV and AIDs, rather than causing it.

If there had not been a population of opening gay men in San Fransisco, doctors never would have seen the statistically significant numbers of cases of rare diseases that marks infection with AIDS. We should thank our lucky stars.

Without the gay population getting sick first, in such a small geographical area, HIV would be spread to the general public, unknownly, and probably infected many, many more people before doctors realized there was a new disease. It could be like Africa, where a large % of the population is infected by heterosexual sex.

It could have been here. So stop villifying these people, they were the canary in the mine for the rest of us.

But then I don't expect most voters to read beyond the CNN headlines. I'm surprised most voters can even read at all.

Posted By David, Gilbert Arizona : December 11, 2007 11:54 am

I would think it would be nearly impossible for YOU to read, David - what with your head so far up your own butt.

At first glance Huckabee actually seems charismatic, beliveable, charming and funny. Everything a candidate would want.

…However…

When you look more closely at what this guy has actually said and done, he is a very very very creepy guy.

Hope he wins the Republican candidacy, I have a feeling the dirt behind this is guy is just waiting to pop out.

Its seeping slowly right now, wait for the flood, not even Noah (the Ark guy) could not save Huckabee.

3) We knew that annual AIDS-related deaths soared past 30,000 by 1990. Yet Huckabee felt that not a single cent of government money should be spent to find a cure (he said that Hollywood stars should foot the bill.)

Posted By John, Columbus, OH

This isn't a true statement. Huckabee said he was not in favor of increasing the federal spending for AIDS research. He did not say he wanted to eliminate funding all together. His comment was made in reference to the disproportionate amount of money spent on AIDS research in comparison to money spent to cure other diseases such as breast cancer.

He did say he thought celebrities should dip into their own coffers to help fund research. He made this comment in light of the fact that celebrities were yammering for more federal funding.

Mike Huckabee is very much a put up or shut up kind of guy. His recent comments regarding the 1992 statement was that he was considering the safety of the general populous instead of approaching disease as a civil rights issue. This is why he won't recant the statements. He also said AIDS research would be an important part of his administration. But then I don't expect most voters to read beyond the CNN headlines. I'm surprised most voters can even read at all.

As far as Huckabee's coment goes, he's a frontrunner now and everyone is going to look for a way to bring him down. That's just the politics of the day. Welcome to election season.

As for the basis of his comments, noone really knew 15 years ago how HIV/AIDS was spread so his comments were that of a Baptist minister playing for his audience.

Yet for everyone who calls him a bad man, derides him for his views, let's look at some facts.

Just about every public high school nurse has a supply of condoms to hand out to the student body. Local health departments do the same thing. Programs have been put in place to get needle drug users to come get clean needles for their habit. The screening process for donating blood has gotten better over the years,but it still depends on the honesty of the donor. One sure fact of the diease is if you have sex with an infected person you will get the diease yourself. Plus, there is no cure for this diease. These are just a few hard facts.

Alot of people in this country have come down on Bush and his abstinence only programs, but of all the things mentioned above, giving out condoms and clean needles two of them, the diease is still spreading along with evvery STD know to man.

By giving needles to junkies, you're not stemming the spread of AIDS, you're just encouraging more drug use and the continued spdread of the diease. By handing out condoms, you're not stemming the spread of the diease, you're just encouraging unsafe sex.

Whether anyone wants to admit it or not the only sure way to not get AIDS is to not have sex till you get married and hope your spouse is a virgin. Unlikely to happen. Until our society get passed the "I'm not really hurting anyone with what I do" attitude, the diease will continue to spread. Until everybody realizes that the liberal approach isn't working just like the conservative, the diease will continue to spread.

Until this isn't used just as a political issue during campaigns and our ELECTED SERVANTS start doing their jobs the diease will continue to spread.

WAKE UP CONGRESS and whoever will be President and do your jobs.

"Interesting how those that go to church and are preached love but have no compassion to give it, but they sure do want your vote!"

Hector (and all those who are quick to judge on "compassion"), from what is listed above, nothing states that Huckabee didn't have compassion for those with AIDS. All that is written is that he would have isolated them so the chance for the disease to spread was decreased. Didn't call for a deduction in funding going into AIDS research, though he did call for those in Hollywood to put their wallet where their mouth is. Additionally, isn't protecting the innocents in society, such as all the young Ryan White's in the country not a sign of compassion?

I could forgive Huckabee for his 15 year old comments, even though it was clear even then that AIDS wasn't transmitted casually, but his refusal to change his stance now is unforgivable.

i am particularly saddened that we are still determining a presidential nominee's qualifications by how much a person of faith he/she is. do we really need ANOTHER George Bush?

Yes, 15 years ago a lot was not known how AIDS was tranmitted, but since then we have learned and I am truly amazed that this candidate for president will not admit that like everyone else he was ignorant at that time but is educated now. AIDs is a world wide probelm and it is not segregated to the gay community. Let's talk about how we are going to deal with this issue instead of bashing each other.

For those Huckabee apologists who claim that his views in 1992 were simply a reflection of what we knew about HIV/AIDS att he time, let's review what we DID know about the disease in 1992:

1) In 1992 we knew that it was not a "gay disease", contrary to Huckabee's survey response that said that gays represented a public health threat. Even conservative Republicans knew this - remember young Ryan White and Mary Fisher's address tot he 1992 Republican Convention? Apparently Huckabee didn't.

2) In 1992 we knew that AIDS wasn't contracted by casual contact. Safe sex methods were actually part of Reagan's CDC AIDS prevention program as of 1986. Yet Huckabee was still advocating quarantine as a solution tot he problem in 1992!

3) We knew that annual AIDS-related deaths soared past 30,000 by 1990. Yet Huckabee felt that not a single cent of government money should be spent to find a cure (he said that Hollywood stars should foot the bill.)

Looking at what we knew about AIDS in 1992 only magnifies Huckabee's callousness and ignorance of the facts, it doesn't explain them away.

Further, his willingness to look the other way as tens of thousands died and his intentional use of misinformation are enduring refelctions of his character, which voters should remember. Why? Because of what we knew…and so did he.

Please, this was 15 YEARS AGO! Nobody knew anything about HIV/AIDS then.

Posted By Gordon, Boston MA : December 11, 2007 10:15 am

Nobody knew anything by 1992 ???!!!!
You're more out to lunch than he is !!!
Laughable, and pathetic…..

To all those who posted about the fact that Huckleberry made the AIDS comment fifteen years ago when "we knew nothing about the transmission of the disease." You're missing one very important point…Huckleberry said just recently that he stood by the comments he made fifteen years ago. He's homophobic, theocratic, and doesn't stand a chance should he win the GOP nomination.

Please, this was 15 YEARS AGO! Nobody knew anything about HIV/AIDS then.

Posted By Gordon, Boston MA : December 11, 2007 10:15 am

With all due respect Gordon, I think you have 1992 confused with 1982. By 1992 the pathogenesis of HIV had been worked out pretty well and it was WELL established that casual contact was not a risk. The only lingering issue at that point was that screening for HIV was not yet as good as it is today but Huckabee's position was simply driven by hate for gays and he was using teh fake public health position as justification.

"what did you say 15 years ago…??

Posted By Chris, Middletown, CT : December 11, 2007 10:54 am

Fifteen years ago I was 10, and I still knew that you couldn't get AIDS by breathing on someone. That's something I was taught in elementary school.

Posted By Rafi, NY NY : December 11, 2007 11:04 am"

Thank you! 15 years ago we knew a LOT about AIDS & HIV. Now if it were 25 years ago, then I would understand the confusion. But 15 years ago, there's no excuse for this talk. Someone wasn't paying attention. Hard to do I guess when you're in a closet of hate.

what did you say 15 years ago…??

Posted By Chris, Middletown, CT : December 11, 2007 10:54 am

Fifteen years ago I was 10, and I still knew that you couldn't get AIDS by breathing on someone. That's something I was taught in elementary school.

He's a nasty little man, and even in this crowd he doesn't look presidential.

Posted By J.Crobuzon : December 11, 2007 10:41 am

Since he's a former Baptist minister, perhaps he should find a nice Baptist church where his homophobia would be appreciated. I suggest Westboro Baptist in Topeka, Kansas.

"Don't blame him, no one back then knew much about AIDS!"

Before anyone tries this excuse again, please read the article carefully:

1) Yes, people in 1992 knew AIDS was not spread by casual contact.

2) Huckabee TODAY says he stands by his comments from back then.

The campaign season is meant to do exactly this, weed out crazy people who should absolutely not be granted power.

This is something that Iran would do…NOT Americans!

This guy is disgusting and an embarassment to this country. He calls himself a christian?

The comments were a time capsule of the day - little understanding of how AIDS was actually transmitted was public knowledge - with that being said - one has to wonder about the people coming out of the woodwork who "suddenly" want to talk to political candidates about comments made 15 years ago….what did you say 15 years ago…??

There are millions of Americans who share the same views on homosexuality that Mike Huckabee has. It's part of a religious doctrine taught to every Christian, Jew, Muslim, and Mormon. They all share the same teachings against homosexuality. Mike Huckabee is just more vocal about those teachings.

In all honesty for Mike Huckabee to say any different would make him a hypocrite, which he isn't.

Huckabee's recommendation that AIDS victims be quarantined was not irrational, though it may have been fueled by some anti-gay sentiment.

At that time, we didn't know whether AIDS was spread by tears, blowing your nose, skin-to-skin contact, sexual transmission, blood transfusions, not washing your hands, handling dangerous chemicals, or what. The virus that causes AIDS and the way it was transmitted from person to person had not been discovered at that time.

It is only in hindsight that we see how best to handle the epidemic: use condoms, avoid blood transfusions, and use clean needles when you shoot up.

Let us suppose that half the neighbors on your block die tonight. The symptoms are fever, vomiting, black dots all over the skin, and severe muscle cramps. Six months from now it will be discovered that an insane chemist poisoned the water supply, but you don't know that yet. Would you let your teenage daughter babysit at the house of a victim while the dead man's spouse makes funeral arrangements? I doubt it. You would be calling the health department demanding that victims be quarantined.

Huckabee would make a terrible president, but not because of the quarantine comment.

We have to think, people. A democracy is only as good as its voters.

He's a nasty little man, and even in this crowd he doesn't look presidential.

What a great Christian you are Mike Huckleberry !!! I'll bet you were a barrel of laughs during the Inquisition, weren't you? Compassionate Christian? The two terms are diometrically opposed IMO. Say hi to the next wave of Democratic leadership you hypocritical loser.

This is obviously the viewpoint of a severely homophobic man.

It's alarming to me that he hasn't come out of his own closet, a closet full of fear and misinformation and hate.

Good Job Mr. Huckabee American change their view all the time. HIV what it is a deadly disease there is no cure. We have learn a lot about AIDS 15 years.That what happens when you take the spot light. The people and the press start digging up the pass.

Please, this was 15 YEARS AGO! Nobody knew anything about HIV/AIDS then.

Well we know that aids is simply God's punishment for homosexuality right? In the tradition of Pat Robison and Jerry Fallwel, lets bring on the theocratic United States with Huckabee in 08; where no embryonic cells will be left uncounted! Maybe we can start stoning adulterers again too! We all know that evolution is not true, despite massive scientific evidence, and the earth was created like 8000 years ago, but that doesnt matter. Here is the slogan, "Surrender your reason, Huckabee 08; its time for a new middle age!"

I wonder how much this guy has learned about AIDS and other diseases. I don't think he has learned much. It would be great if we could keep those who have it from spreading it further. That could be a touchy subject because plenty don't know they have it and some don't care if they spread it or not.

Another concern is about the perception that Huckabee is homophobic. That could hurt him for those that are homosexuals as well as their friends, families and supporters (political and otherwise). If Huckabee isn't, this could hurt him if he tries to reach out to the homosexual community; it might hurt him worse if he does with the back lash from the Conservative Christian block which is very influencial.

As a Republican who likes Huckabee (but may not vote for him), I have to say that I'm astounded that he said this and now won't admit it was wrong. This is the kind of backward thinking we don't need.

Let's see, Huckabee is a Baptist minister, a member of the party of family values and compassion?!?!?!

yet, the voters who claim the same high moral ground will flock to him and divest themselves of their prejudice as merely a flaw in their character!!!

Of course, the Reagan Administration never recognized AIDS publicly during his 8 years, did nothing to stem the tide of its spread and contributed to the runaway disease by refusing to fund programs to stop it so why should this shining light be any different, eh?!

<bWOW. I now know why this guy's name sounded familiar to me.

As an American living with HIV, I am also now reminded that it is because of this kind of thought
(well more like, lack of thought; really)
that makes me post a comment here anonymously.

Shame on him. He should be isolated along with other narrow minded persons.

What's next, persons with Diabetes should be sent away?

Get a clue, man!

So he'll change his stance on the Cuba embargo on a dime, but won't change his belief on a disease after decades of research showing that he was wrong? Not what we need in the White House. Send this man back to Arkansas.

"Yet he said he would state his view differently in retrospect."

Then state it differently…how do you isolate without quarantine? What is his take on HIV/AIDS today? These are question he can't just ignore because the people wont like his answer….

In 1992 i was 9 years OLD and I knew that AIDS and HIV was not contracted by casual touching. How is it that this guy didn't.

This guy is just about as dumb as Bush… and just like bush he STANDS BY his stupidity… He did'ntknow that IRAN had shut down its program 4 years ago… when it was practically the only thing on the news… All the other candidate had already made there statements and this guy had NO IDEA. What else does'nt he know… news flash the earth is round, revolves around the sun, and is MORE than 6000 years old

But no one wants to talk about the realities of the lives that would have been saved..

It's amazing enough that any leader in 1992 (I could understand 1982, but 1992??) would make such an outrageous comment, displaying complete ignorance of the large body of medical evidence from respected researchers at the time. But for him to stand by his comments now, as if they were justified and he was appropriately informed then, is more shocking. He is trying to fool us all and rewrite history to cover up an embarrasing statement, and no one should let him get away with it!

OMG - this dude is so lost, does this guys IQ even register on the scale?

Interesting how those that go to church and are preached love but have no compassion to give it, but they sure do want your vote!

Just think of all the people that would not have AIDS today if we have only listened..