I still don't get it. Numerous critics of the GOP Presidential debate on MSNBC the other week have tried to make the case that the questions had some sort of "liberal" bias since they focussed on such things as whether the candidates believe in evolution rather than asking the candidates about the war on TERRA and gave minor candidates more face time than the frontrunners.
In a conversation after the debate, Huckabee said, "I wish life were so simple. If it were, we'd be in a game show and not running a presidential campaign ... If I'd had time, I would have asked whether he meant macro or micro evolution?''

That's a different sort of answer than what is inferred from a simple "no'' forced by the manic pace of a 90-minute "debate'' among 10 candidates, none of whom is qualified to seriously debate scientific theory. Nor, as president, should they try. In fact, Huckabee says he does believe in evolution (with qualifications) and thinks Darwin's theory should be taught in schools.

"I do know that species do, in fact, adapt and there are many instances of adaptation and mutation,'' he said, "but I still believe that the design has a designer and the creation has a creator. I wouldn't pretend to fill in the blanks between what God created and what is today.''

Microevolution and macroevolution can't be properly distilled in this space, but broadly speaking, micro allows for the possibility of a creator. McCain more or less expressed the micro view that evolution doesn't necessarily preclude God.

These are interesting and complex issues that compel smart, thoughtful people to passionate debate and serious investigation -- too complicated, in other words, for an insta-response in a politically charged arena.

The debate question was fundamentally a setup for ridicule. No one was served and no one, alas, is the wiser.
It's actually quite important whether a candidate believes in evolution or not--and can state his or her position succintly. Moreover Huckabee's knee-jerk "no" answer coupled with after-the-fact bullshit tells us he's willing to mess with children's education on ideological grounds he has a difficult time justifying. This pandering to the religious right is certainly a problem Republicans have to wrestle with and a major concern amongst most voters; therefore, it's more than fair to ask this question of all candidates sooner rather than later, even if it's a simplistic yes-no question.