How Bush Apologetics is Like Intelligent Design Apologetics

I just left a heated discussion in the lobby of my department about why, oh why do Bush supporters find him above criticism? Who on earth can be that above criticism? A colleague of mine, Ralph, however just sent this excellent post from Bull Moose. Bush is like "a brother" to the conservative, male frat guys who will defend him.

But, I started thinking more (in an email to Ralph) what is so similar between the defense of Intelligent Design and "W": no principle of falsifiability.

Whereas in the evolutionary scientist community, evidence that disproves major hypotheses will be accepted by the community if it is reproducible, no evidence is sufficient for a rethinking of major hypotheses. Moreover the science-based community actively seeks to disprove its hypotheses.

What evidence is sufficient for disproving the theory of Intelligent Design?

What evidence is sufficient for criticizing the President?