Duggars' Endorsements Go Missing From Mike Huckabee's Website Jun 5, 2015, 2:04 PM ET
By BEN GITTLESON Ben Gittleson More from Ben »
Assignment Editor
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, left, waves to supporters as Jim Bob Duggar, right, looks on during a campaign stop inside an aircraft hanger at Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport in Highfill, Ark., Friday, Feb. 1, 2008.
AP Photo
Endorsements of Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee by members of the Duggar family disappeared from the former Arkansas governor's campaign website this week just prior to Josh Duggar’s parents’ revealing details of his sexual misconduct. But the Huckabee campaign said they were always meant to come down.
Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar's photographs and words of endorsement had appeared prominently on the homepage of Mike Huckabee's campaign website since the beginning of his run for president last month. The couple, who along with their 19 children starred in TLC's reality show "19 Kids and Counting," have defended themselves amid harsh criticism over allegations their eldest son, Josh Duggar, 27, molested five underage girls when he was a teenager.
Their photos had been at the top of seven that appeared on the right side of Huckabee's homepage under the label, "I Like MIKE."
"America needs Governor Huckabee for president!" Jim Bob Duggar was quoted as saying.
"Governor Huckabee is a man of faith who is very wise, and will help get our nation back on track," read Michelle Duggar's endorsement.
A campaign spokesperson told ABC News that the website's developers "always intended for the graphics to rotate out at the first of each month." The photos appeared on the site as recently as Monday, June 1, according to an archived version of the page on the Internet Archive.
"The old ones were routed out on June 1," the spokesperson said. "That has always been the plan."
The endorsement's disappearance was first reported by Talking Points Memo.
When allegations of Josh Duggar's behavior first surfaced last month, Huckabee issued a statement expressing his full-throated support of the family, saying, "Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things."
By BEN GITTLESON Ben Gittleson More from Ben »
Assignment Editor
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, left, waves to supporters as Jim Bob Duggar, right, looks on during a campaign stop inside an aircraft hanger at Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport in Highfill, Ark., Friday, Feb. 1, 2008.
AP Photo
Endorsements of Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee by members of the Duggar family disappeared from the former Arkansas governor's campaign website this week just prior to Josh Duggar’s parents’ revealing details of his sexual misconduct. But the Huckabee campaign said they were always meant to come down.
Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar's photographs and words of endorsement had appeared prominently on the homepage of Mike Huckabee's campaign website since the beginning of his run for president last month. The couple, who along with their 19 children starred in TLC's reality show "19 Kids and Counting," have defended themselves amid harsh criticism over allegations their eldest son, Josh Duggar, 27, molested five underage girls when he was a teenager.
Their photos had been at the top of seven that appeared on the right side of Huckabee's homepage under the label, "I Like MIKE."
"America needs Governor Huckabee for president!" Jim Bob Duggar was quoted as saying.
"Governor Huckabee is a man of faith who is very wise, and will help get our nation back on track," read Michelle Duggar's endorsement.
A campaign spokesperson told ABC News that the website's developers "always intended for the graphics to rotate out at the first of each month." The photos appeared on the site as recently as Monday, June 1, according to an archived version of the page on the Internet Archive.
"The old ones were routed out on June 1," the spokesperson said. "That has always been the plan."
The endorsement's disappearance was first reported by Talking Points Memo.
When allegations of Josh Duggar's behavior first surfaced last month, Huckabee issued a statement expressing his full-throated support of the family, saying, "Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things."
"Fox News barely covered (the Duggar family) scandal until Megyn Kelly was able to secure this interview."
— Brian Stelter on Tuesday, June 2nd, 2015 in an interview on "CNN Tonight"
[h=1]Brian Stelter: Fox 'barely covered' Duggar story until Megyn Kelly secured exclusive interview[/h] By Katie Sanders on Friday, June 5th, 2015 at 5:35 p.m.
Inside Edition previews Megyn Kelly's interview with Jill and Jessa Duggar about their brother Josh's fondling of them as a teenager. It’s been a big week for Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly, chosen by the famous Duggar family of TLC’s 19 Kids and Counting to exclusively air their side of the story involving the oldest Duggar son molesting five minors, including his sisters, a decade ago.
But to some observers, Fox’s intense promotion of Kelly’s June 3 interview with parents Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar and her later sit-down with two daughters molested by Josh Duggar marked a drastic shift in the network’s coverage of the story.
"It’s slightly amusing that Fox News barely covered this scandal until Megyn Kelly was able to secure this interview," said CNN senior media correspondent and Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter on June 2. "Now they’ll be covering it a lot more."
We wanted to double-check Stelter’s analysis. Was Fox News essentially mum about the story until Kelly scored the at-home exclusive?
Stelter told PunditFact that he first started thinking about the coverage disparity when he saw a story by liberal site Media Matters for America that compared light coverage by Fox with intensive coverage by MSNBC and CNN. He and CNNMoney media reporter Tom Kludt did their own research and reached a similar conclusion for a story about the interview.
"Along with the amount of time spent, we took into account the type of Fox's coverage," Stelter said. "Early on, the mentions of the controversy were fleeting, not substantive at all."
The controversy went public when In Touch Weekly published the first story May 19 about Josh Duggar being the suspect in a 2005 underage sexual abuse investigation. In Touch and the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette published more stories May 21 based on a police report that said the father did not go to law enforcement until a year after the fondling incidents took place.
After the stories appeared, Josh Duggar resigned his position as executive director of the Family Research Council and apologized in a statement, saying, "Twelve years ago, as a young teenager I acted inexcusably for which I am extremely sorry and deeply regret. I hurt others, including my family and close friends. I confessed this to my parents who took several steps to help me address the situation."
TLC pulled all episodes of 19 Kids and Counting the next day, May 22.
Fox first told its viewers about the situation in a 30-second segment on May 22, followed by a 20-second segment on May 23. On May 26, the Duggars were mentioned on The Five in the context of Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee defending the family. "You don’t go around defending the Duggar family when you’ve got bigger issues going on," said pundit Greg Gutfeld. Fox analyst Howard Kurtz criticized the media’s focus on the Duggar family in a May 24 segment.
Those are the only references we could find before May 30, when Kelly’s interview was announced.
Needless to say, those mentions of the story were super-brief — especially when you compare how the other networks handled it. CNN and MSNBC anchors devoted considerably more time to the controversy from the start.
We used Critical Mention, which searches closed-captioning transcripts, to look for mentions of the Duggars on the three networks from May 19 to noon on May 30, roughly when the interview was announced. This method isn’t perfect — misspellings aren’t captured, for instance — but it does provide a rough snapshot of how often each network discussed the family.
Fox News personalities mentioned "Duggar" four times. Within the same timeframe, the family name came up 99 times on CNN and 72 times on MSNBC.
On Stelter’s home network of CNN, the story was brought up on five different shows on May 22, with Erin Burnett OutFront and Anderson Cooper 360 devoting substantial chunks of air time to interviews with an In Touch staffer and child psychiatry professionals, as well as going into other TLC shows with stars that fell from grace. CNN Tonight host Don Lemon continued to explore the story in his May 26-28 shows.
On MSNBC, nearly every show on May 22 talked about the story, including hosts Alex Wagner, Ed Schultz, Al Sharpton and Chris Hayes, often bringing in experts to dissect some of the story’s finer points. The network continued to cover the story on May 26, 27 and 28.
Fox began to report the story in more depth on June 1, when Kelly criticized the media’s handling of the story with Fox media analyst Howard Kurtz. She equated the rush to cover the story as feasting on a carcass, going after CNN specifically for bringing up how GOP presidential candidates had taken pictures with Josh Duggar before the scandal broke.
Kelly’s coverage of the story has also focused on the release of police records, which she and the Duggars say should have never been made public.
Other shows on the network, including The O’Reilly Factor, Outnumbered, Your World and Fox and Friends, started talking about the Duggars in the context of Kelly’s interview. From noon on May 30 to about 5 p.m. on June 5, there have been 134 mentions of "Duggar" on Fox, according to Critical Mention.
Fox News spokespersons did not offer comment for the story.
Our ruling
Stelter said, "Fox News barely covered this scandal until Megyn Kelly was able to secure this interview."
Our review of media mentions of the Duggar story among CNN, MSNBC and Fox supports his statement. Fox News’ coverage was fleeting before Kelly’s interview was announced.
We rate his claim True
13th December, 1941, midnight:
Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery…. …. When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let’s be the only people who are immunised against the disease. (p 118 & 119) -- Shitler
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other," John Adams declared.Adams, John, message to the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts, October 11, 1798. "Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of republicanism and all free government, but of social felicity under all governments and in all the combinations of human society."Adams, John, Letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, August 28, 1811.
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to a political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim that tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness," George Washington stated.Washington, George, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796. "We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which heaven itself has ordained." Washington, George, First Inaugural Address, April 30, 1789. ↩
[SIZE=+3]Hitler Myths[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-2]Originated: 29 May 2005[/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2]Additions: 29 Sep. 2010 [/SIZE][/FONT]
The following provides a brief explanation for some of the most common misconceptions about Adolf Hitler. Unfortunately in today's 'Faith-based' culture, rarely do people look closely at the reasons or evidence of Hitler's belief, many times confusing the beliefs of other prominent Nazis for Hitler's views.
Myth 1: Hitler was not a Christian
Myth 2: Hitler pretended his Christianity only for political purposes
Myth 3: Hitler got his ideas of Aryan superiority and Jewish hatred from Darwinian evolution
Myth 4: Hitler followed Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy
Myth 1: Hitler was not a Christian
The entire section on Hitler's Christianity provides ample evidence for his brand of Christianity. The evidence itself destroys any opinions or beliefs about Hitler's alleged apostasy.
The evidence shows that:
Hitler was born and baptized into Catholicism
His Jewish antisemitism came from his Christian background.
His early personal notes shows his interest in religion and Biblical views.
He believed that the Bible represented the history of mankind.
His Nazi party platform (their version of a constitution) included a section on Positive Christianity, and he never removed it.
He confessed his Christianity.
He tried to establish a united Reich German Church.
Hitler allowed the destruction of Jewish synagogues and temples, but not Christian churches.
He encouraged Nazis to worship in Christian churches.
He spoke of his Christian beliefs in his speeches and proclamations.
His contemporaries, friends, Protestant ministers and Catholics priests, including the Vatican, thought of Hitler as a Christian.
The Catholic Church never excommunicated Hitler. He died a Catholic.
To ignore the evidence of Hitler's Christianity demonstrates how power of belief can obscure the facts.His Jewish antisemitism came from his Christian background.
His early personal notes shows his interest in religion and Biblical views.
He believed that the Bible represented the history of mankind.
His Nazi party platform (their version of a constitution) included a section on Positive Christianity, and he never removed it.
He confessed his Christianity.
He tried to establish a united Reich German Church.
Hitler allowed the destruction of Jewish synagogues and temples, but not Christian churches.
He encouraged Nazis to worship in Christian churches.
He spoke of his Christian beliefs in his speeches and proclamations.
His contemporaries, friends, Protestant ministers and Catholics priests, including the Vatican, thought of Hitler as a Christian.
The Catholic Church never excommunicated Hitler. He died a Catholic.
Myth 2: Hitler pretended his Christianity only for political purposes
This one represents one of the most persistent constructions about Hitler's Christianity. Revealingly, proponents of this myth never provide evidence for this hypothesis. If he, indeed, pretended himself as a Christian, then on what evidential material does it stand on? If Hitler acted as a pretend Christian, then were does he disown his belief in Christ? Does he write in his private notes that he used religion only for political purposes? Did any of his close associates or friends think so? Where?
Of course Hitler did try to use political force to control Christianity and he tried to establish a unified Reich Christian Church, but this only supports his stand on his view of "positive Christianity" as described in the Nazi party platform (their version of a constitution). And yes, he criticized the Catholic and Protestant hierarchy, but so what? So do Popes and Protestant leaders. Martin Luther himself strongly condemned the Catholic religion and thought of it as the work of the Devil.
I suspect that those who propagate this myth rely on mainly one source: the dubious reliability of Hitler's table talk (a second-hand source that allegedly records the words of Hitler). The table-talk got edited by the anti-Catholic Martin Bormann (Hitler's secretary) and describes political views against the hierarchy of orthodox Christianity (just as Bormann would have liked) but even here, Hitler never speaks against Jesus Christ, but rather in favor of him. (See Hitler's table talk and other extraneous sources).
What obliterates this theory comes from the fact that Hitler continued to express his "positive" Christian views, well after his rise to power. If, indeed, he needed Christianity only for political purposes, then why-oh-why does he continue with the charade after he has established himself as absolute dictator?
But just for the sake of argument, lets pretend that Hitler really did pretend his Christianity; that his sole aim went to politically winning over German Christians so that he could gain their confidence. How in the world does that improve your argument in protecting Christianity from Hitler? If that proved the case, then who should get the blame, Hitler or the gullible Christian German citizens who believed him? And what does that say for the integrity of Christianity if the most Christianized country in the world could not distinguish a member of their own belief system? Think about it. If the most pious Christians and clergymen could not tell if Hitler practiced false or "real" Christianity, then how in the world could anyone tell? I submit that the only way to tell comes from the very words from those who make the claim. Indeed, this constitutes the very flaw of any religion because there never has existed a testable way to determine the truthfulness of a belief in the supernatural. And if you cannot tell by the words of your fellow Christians, then anyone with minimal acting talent can deceive anyone, including monks, bishops, or popes. In fact, monks, bishops and popes themselves, could fall prey to falsehood. I submit to you that a false Christian and a real Christian makes absolutely no difference. Why? Because if I have it right (and I think I do) then Christianity never represented reality, thus an honest believing Christian and a dishonest believing Christian fall on equal turf: they both have it wrong, and they both practice falsehoods!
The only evidence we have, or could ever have, about people who call themselves Christian comes from the very confession of those making the claim. And since Hitler makes his claim to Christianity abundantly and clearly, we can only rely on his claim, regardless of whether he actually believed in Christ or not. False Christianity has as just much validity as any claim to Christianity, even if you could prove dishonesty.
But regardless of how you view a person's claim to their religion, to say Hitler used Christianity only for political forces has absolutely no historical basis to back it up. To simply rely on belief or opinion says absolutely nothing about historical fact.
Myth 3: Hitler got his ideas of Aryan superiority and Jewish hatred from Darwinian evolution
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hitler showed no knowledge of Darwinian evolution or natural selection. Nowhere in Mein Kampf does he mention Darwin, natural-selection or even the word "evolution" (in the context of natural selection).[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]As for Aryan superiority and his Jewish hatred, Hitler clearly describes in Mein Kampf how he slowly began to change his mind about the Jews from the influence of the anti-Semitic movement of the Christian Social Party. His views with regard to anti-Semitism he said, "succumbed to the passage of time, and this was my greatest transformation of all." (read volume 1, chapter 2). Nowhere does he explain his anti-Jewish beliefs in Darwinian terms.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In his private notes, where he describes the Bible as a "Monumental History of Mankind," Hitler outlines his views of the Aryan and the Jew, all in the context of Bible reasoning, never in the context of Darwinian natural selection.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Moreover, Hitler viewed progeny, not in regards to evolution but in terms of blood lines (a Biblical view). He peppered his writings and speeches with "blood" words. Examples in Mein Kampf include:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"One blood demands one Reich."[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Bavarian by blood, technically Austrian, lived my parents..."[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]...the German in Austria had really been of the best blood..."[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"...the weakness of leadership will not cause a hibernation of the state, but an awakening of all the individual instincts which are present in the blood..."[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Clearly, Hitler had no scientific sophistication or an understanding of Darwin's theory of evolution and his "blood-line" explanation of human "progress" reveals a Biblical view, not a Darwinian view. He did, however, at times express ideas, not from Darwin, but rather from Herbert Spencer's concept of Social Darwinism, which has little to do with natural selection and served as an adjunct to his already established religious views. Spencer's Social Darwinism tried to connect Darwin's biological theory with the field of social relations. The result of Social Darwinism resulted in many eugenics programs that began in America and adopted by the Nazis. [Note that Darwin never expressed the idea that natural selection could extend from biological systems to social systems.][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hitler best sums up his belief of Aryan superiority and his stand against the Jews with his declaration in Mein Kampf:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.."[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Nor can Christains accuse the Nazis of promting Darwinism or claim that the Holocaust came as a result of Darwinist thinking. In fact, the Nazi Germans banned writings about Darwinist philosophy. The Lists of Banned Books, 1932-1939 included the banning of:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Writings of a philosophical and social nature whose content deals with the false scientific enlightenment of primitive Darwinism and Monism (Häckel)." [translated] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]and also: [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"All writings that ridicule, belittle or besmirch the Christian religion and its institution, faith in God, or other things that are holy to the healthy sentiments of the Volk." [translated] [/FONT]
Myth 4: Hitler followed Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy
If Hitler followed Nietzschian philosophy or even admired his work, then where does he describe him or his philosophy?
Nowhere in Mein Kampf does Hitler even mention Nietzsche, or Nietzchian terms such as superman (uberman), or super race. Of course Hitler did think the Aryan's represented a superior race to the Jews, but never in Nietzchian terms.
Note that Joseph-Arthur de Gobineau invented the theory of the superior Aryan race in the 1800s in his book, An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races. Gobineau believed that racial mixture would bring about the decline of "superior" peoples. Gobineau influenced Richard Wagner (beloved by Hitler), and Houston Stewart Chamberlain (whom Hitler read and met), both of who influenced early National Socialism (and both mentioned in Mein Kampf). Popular in Germany in the 1900s, many Germans accepted Gobineau's ideas and, no doubt, influenced Hitler either directly or indirectly. Moreover, Hitler's "superior" race ideas sound like a combination of Biblical race laws and Gobineau's Aryan race ideas, but not at all like Nietzsche.
Nor does it make sense that the Christian Hitler would admire an atheistic Nietzsche. Hitler loathed atheism. In his writings and speeches, he admonished atheists. For example:
We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out. -Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933
The pre-Nazi Thule society began in the early 1900s. Rudolf von Serbottendorff became the driving force of this order which practiced occultism and an admiration of Nietzsche. Many members of the Thule society later became Nazis and did influence Nazi literature. However, Hitler never showed any interest in the Thule cult or in its pagan practices.
Anyone who uses such material to justify a Hitler-Nietzsche link simply lacks historical depth (laziness of research) and has no understanding of Hitler.
Let's face it; Hitler showed no philosophical sophistication. If any philosopher had an influence on him, it probably came from Schopenhuer (which he does briefly mention in Mein Kampf). Hans Frank, Hitler's personal lawyer, recalled that Hitler carried a copy of Schopenhauer's World as Will and Representation with him throughout World War I, but Hitler never revealed any appreciation of Friedrich Nietzsche or his philosophy.
