Article Examiner
There is a more recent article version. Commentary - Barbara F. Hollingsworth: America’s new blacklist
Map data ©2008 LeadDog Consulting, Tele Atlas - Terms of Use WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Numerous articles and films have depicted the mid-1950s as some of the darkest days in American history. That’s when scores of Hollywood entertainers were blacklisted — denied employment based on accusations by Wisconsin Sen. Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee that they were communist sympathizers. What’s really un-American, we’ve been told countless times since, is persecuting people for their beliefs. But the blacklist is back. No, not in Tinseltown, where engaging in un-American activities will actually boost your career. At colleges and universities across the country, skeptics of global warming, Darwinism and other entrenched liberal doctrines are being ostracized, denied tenure and even fired for not buying into the prevailing campus orthodoxy. Asking questions is now likely to cost you your job. A new documentary-style film, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” starring Ben Stein, scheduled for release in early April, examines the blacklisting now happening on today’s college campuses. For example, astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez was denied tenure at Iowa State University last month because of his views on intelligent design (ID) — which posits that the design of the universe is the result of some sort of higher intelligence, not random evolution — even though this academic superstar discovered several planets and published 68 highly cited scientific papers. Meanwhile, the ISU religion professor and outspoken atheist who started the petition demanding Gonzalez’s ouster was promoted to full professor. Examiner.com Related Articles:
Closer to home, Carol Ann Crocker talks about losing her job at George Mason University for merely mentioning ID in her cellular biology class, as does Richard von Sternberg, who lost his Smithsonian research position for including an article on ID in a peer-reviewed technical journal. One can understand, if not condone, persecution of academics who bring up ID on secular campuses. But even though ID would seem to mesh well with Christian colleges’ religious world-view, they are no haven for expelled academics. Baylor mathematics professor Robert Marx explains in the film how he was ordered by his dean to take down an ID-related Web site. Research institutions vying for $50 billion in federal funds do not dare allow faculty members to even mention ID, Mark Mathis, the film’s executive producer, told me. A former TV anchorman, Mathis is appalled at the level of “extreme intolerance” exhibited toward anybody who questions what he calls “massive holes” in the prevailing neo-Darwinist orthodoxy. “We just want to talk about the science,” Mathis says. “People who accuse ID advocates of being religion-driven are the ones who can’t stop talking about religion.” “Expelled” does an excellent job of exposing the new blacklisting at tax-supported institutions of higher learning, where academic freedom is supposed to be the guiding principle and professors are supposed to be able to follow the evidence wherever it leads. But when Stein goes to England to interview Oxford-educated evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, the film is absolutely brilliant. After asking the famous author of “The God Delusion” a number of questions about the origins of life, a deadpan Stein finally gets Dawkins to admit that he has “no idea how the universe started” and, even more amazingly, to speculate that life as we know it may have begun when “aliens” flew down from outer space and “seeded the Earth.” If there’s room in elite academic circles for people like Dawkins, surely a small corner can be found for scientists who look at the same universe and instead of imagining UFOs, see the handiwork of a Master Designer instead. Barbara F. Hollingsworth is the local opinion editor of The Washington Examiner. She can be reached at bhollingsworth@dcexaminer.com.
Story History
22 hrs ago - Dr. David Gratzer: McCain is wrong on drugs
4 days ago - Benjamin Newell: A burning need for power
4 days ago - Melanie Scarborough: Hassling everybody equally
7 days ago - Quin Hillyer: Judge knot still holds
Comments
|
|
Home |
Politics |
Sports
Business |
Blogs |
Also Visit: Family Movies and Books Venues, Sports and Music Concerts, Artists and Tickets Be Inspired - Quotes and Stories |
Comments from Examiner Readers
8:42 AM MST on Wed., Mar. 19, 2008 re: "Jay Ambrose: Second thoughts on first flush of Obama-mania"
Ralph Phelan said:
It is only recently, however, that we have found out about Obama�s rabidly radical pastor. A question for the MSM ... why didn't you tell Democratic voters about this before Super Tuesday? It's not like this Wright guy was news to anybody who gets their news off the web. Were you all in the tank for Obama, or just too darned lazy to order the videos from TUCC website and give them a look?
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Melanie's call for Politically Correct Racism? said:
Melanie, when POLITICIANS make decisions for POLITICAL GAIN, it is called "POLITICAL CORRECTNESS." Looking with suspicion at others based on their race is RACISM. Precisely what is so "obvious" about immigration status? Bumper stickers of foreign flags? Speaking Spanish in public? Playing soccer without being ashamed of your team's name (Honduras de Manassas). As someone who has incorrectly been confused for a Puerto Rican and Panamanian, I have little reason to trust the suspicions of others. Will the Hispanic heritage of our First Lady be "obvious" to a police officer? Should those of us without "obvious" Nordic ancestry have to put up with the fears of people such as Melanie, because she is too important a citizen to be harassed because of her particular ethnicity? Is Melanie fine with the harassment of those who kinda sorta look like they might be illegal immigrants, rather than trying people based on actual criminal behavior?
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Mike Jones said:
Maybe what passes for "conservative politics" in the US simply doesn't stand up as well as other political philosophies to the scrutiny and participation engendered by Web 2.0, mashups, etc. But, hey, go try it. Let's display Bush's budgetary disaster in all its dynamic Web 2.0 glory, complete with letting people calculate the impact on their own pocket books. Let's make a mashup between Spitzer (new American conservative hypocrisy isn't limited to the Republican party), his prosecutorial witch hunts, and his prostitute mistress. Talk radio fits the American right by letting talk show hosts push a lot of emotional hotbuttons, without any fear of repercussions from the truth. The web fits Republican, small-government, liberal and libertarian ideologies, ideologies that American conservatives are about as far away from as one can be these days.
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Johnny Lucid said:
Kudos to Benjamin Newell for reporting such an eminently sensible proposal by Mayor Fitch. But Mr Newell needs to complete his studies of politics, especially the environmental sort. The professional environmental activists will do all in their power to keep this from being constructed for the simple reason they are opposed to nearly every technology based on combustion for the purpose of creating heat to generate power: internal combustion engines, coal/oil/gas power plants, nuclear power even the sun (it "causes" global warming!).
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
juan carlos navarrete said:
Second Part: This point , is about the prejudice, and the prejudice is very dangerus for the society, anywhere.Is important, that our police dont think whit prejudice, because, this men are the wall between our society and the terror,this a important point . when the good guys , begin thinking whit prejudice , the door is open for the bad guys.
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Once again Melanie Scarborough has hit it right on with her commentary - this one entitled "Hassling everybody equally". Our society is suffering because we are tolerating those who refuse to follow the rules and our own citizens are suffering. How can that be acceptable to politicians? The Police departments need to stand firm.
2 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"In the previous 214 years of this country�s existence, not a single judicial nominee had been blocked by a permanent filibuster." ??? Can you say, "Chief Justice Fortas"?
5 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Eric O'Keefe said:
Good article. A similar process is well advanced in the political arena, with Paul Jacob indicted for "conspiracy against the state" in Oklahoma for backing a spending limit petition drive. Campaign finance laws are also selectively enforced to punish amateurs for challenging incumbents.
2 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Barely About Barack said:
What does this column have to do with Barack Obama? Once again, Mr. Ambrose grafts Barack onto a partisan rant that lacks perspective. (Jay made the same mistake in his "Obama... Yuccaing" column earlier this year, forgetting to mention that Utah's Republican Governor [John Huntsman] opposed the federal government's dumping of nuclear waste in his state.) This is a "Democrats suck" column that cites a single incident in which McCain asked for competitive bidding. As an afterthought, Ambrose wraps it with two statements that are critical of Obama. Was Ambrose this critical of Halliburton's treatment by our current administration (with ties to VP Dick Cheney)? Not very persuasive.
4 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Extraterrestrial Master Designer? said:
"All Dawkins does is cast some alien being in the role of the Creator. Hardly a ringing endorsement of Darwin, and begs the question of where the seeding aliens came from"...... From other seeding aliens? Currently, Alien Designer hypotheses are as scientifically plausible as Supernatural Designer hypotheses. It makes for interesting dinner conversation, but not for substantial science classroom curricula. Scientists can (and do) poke holes in evolution all of the time. They are supposed to do so, as part of the scientific process. Intelligent Design is so nebulous a concept that any conceivable holes can be explained away by blaming the designer. Am I wrong by stating (again) that only a supernatural designer will be accepted by IDs supporters? The Discovery Institute's column in the Examiner last year suggests that its ID assertions are based on ideology, not science. Random mutation isn't an acceptable explanation to them, so a purposeful hypothesis is asserted to replace
13 agree | 10 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Provocateur said:
Well, we still have to come to terms with all those inconsistencies in the "good book" and how Moses Plagiarized the Ten Commandments from the tha 42 (negative) confessions of Ma'at. Sooner or later the whole religious plot will unravel and we will have to adjust they way we think of G-d. Just like we did when we discovered he did not live in the clouds. BTW, did you notice since DNA testing was employed there has been no more bleeding statues of the Virgin Mary?
9 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"Where is the scientifically verifiable evidence that the intelligence of such design is supernatural, if not materially extraterrestrial, as Dawkins hypothesizes in the article and documentary? How many people would jump off of the "ID" bandwagon if science claimed that the Master Designer was an alien?" All Dawkins does is cast some alien being in the role of the Creator. Hardly a ringing endorsement of Darwin, and begs the question of where the seeding aliens came from.....
6 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Extraterrestrial Master Designer? said:
EDIT: Sorry, incorrect column cited. Physicists are not biologists. Additionally, doubting evolution in the early 20th century does not equate to accepting intelligent design as scientifically sound. Why assume that poking holes in a widely accepted and verifiable scientific theory such as evolution is the same as accepting the vague hypothesis of intelligent design? Where is the scientifically verifiable evidence that the intelligence of such design is supernatural, if not materially extraterrestrial, as Dawkins hypothesizes in the article and documentary? How many people would jump off of the "ID" bandwagon if science claimed that the Master Designer was an alien?
7 agree | 7 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Among the evolution theory doubters: Nobel Prize winning physicists Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Werner Heisenberg. Sounds like an uneducated bunch of rubes ....
8 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
All Hillarys experience and STILL she votes 2 invade Iraq. The most threatning people in the world Tehran? Please re-think that statement and pretend you're fr. IRAQ. USA r the only ones w/ nuclear weapons and thanx to us invading IRAQ'other countries are arming themselves. Thanx to America funding oppresive regimes, other countries hate us! Now all the sudden every last white person who tried to reshape this country and voted for obama is being belittled by being told they have white guilt'. Hillary and Baraks policies are almost similar, the difference is his money came from Americans, he can't be bought. The clintons have been bought and paid for. People from china to south africa are watching this democratic nomination race. Do you think it's just because theirs a woman and a black man running? NO!it's deeper than that babe. We set the tone for the rest of the world. All yor logic,that's why we're in this situation now.Who didn't know we were going 2 war when Bush to
8 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I notice absolutely no analysis on the benefits and effectiveness of the filters and converters. That is a big hole in the article and makes the story highlyl suspect. What share of the market does Corning hold? What is a "leading manufacturer" in the context of this story? And what is the "higher end fuel" that the truckers must buy? If it is low sulfer diesel fuel, we have been very slow to require refiners to take the sulfer out of diesel fuel. Europe has required it for years and it is necessary for the common rail injectors to function. What is the higher cost of goods that results from cleaner running engines? What percentage is the increased costs of transport? This article is loaded with innuendo with no specifics to support its premises.
27 agree | 30 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Critical Reader said:
The concept of the endowments is to replace college loans with grants for kids who are discouraged by financial aid processes. If a college that proves that they can provide excellent education to capable students, the idea of the endowment is to eliminate the students debts and fees. Whether or not a college accepts a student lacking in knowledge of politics or geography has little to do with the endowments or their purpose. And even if it does there is no evidence that the endowments are responsible at all for the issues that the author seems to feel are problems (k-12 education being the major contributor in the article as proof the college system is broken) In short article fails to connect the function of the endowments with an objective assessment of its results. I rate this article 3/10.
42 agree | 43 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
How fascinating you are more interested in the wellbeing of phone companies then your own civil liberties. And how throughly your mind must be rotted by the fear mongering of fascist. I highly suggest you read the history of fascism and how quickly those in Spain and Italy and Germany gave up their civil liberties to feel protected
49 agree | 51 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Funny how republicans are complaining about people solving the problems that republican nitwits created
36 agree | 51 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"Their brains have been numbed by Ninetendos, rap music, and nitwit fare from Hollywood." As opposed to older voters, whose brains were numbed by tobacco, bigotry, and nitwit fare from Hollywood. Bridge the generation gap, bubble boy.
41 agree | 53 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Have a heart: Missing a deadline by a day should not cost the company $500 million. The 54 month extension is designed to account for bureaucratic delays that deprive the patent holder of its proper rewards. To forgive a days error seems consistent with the statute's purpose. jfc
44 agree | 47 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Might be nice to learn a lesson or two from our country's past mistakes.
48 agree | 43 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This explains why younger voters are flocking to Obama. Their brains have been numbed by Ninetendos, rap music, and nitwit fare from Hollywood.
61 agree | 55 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Scarborough sounds like all the other right-wing warhawks. Yeah, that policy's been working just GREAT for the last 7 years...
53 agree | 50 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Obama will help ... government-managed plans ... government oversight... CHOICE Hmm..are you thinking CHOICE from the government like the Post Office, or the IRS. I want the government managing my health care like I want a tiger for a babysitter.
50 agree | 56 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Observer said:
This coming election results to me are imaterial as far who is picked as president. All of them are bad for the country, whether republicans or democrats. They all are shallow,self serving fonies etc. What is important to me is is to evaluate the ethos of the country, the values of the majority of the population in choosing between a woman, a black or a semi nut white man. The bar for the presidential contest has bem lowered to the minimum. Alea jata est.
62 agree | 55 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Melanie, Your article attacking Obama and his supporters is offensive. I am an Obama supporter who happens to know a good deal about his stances on issues. How about you try quoting from me rather than Susan Sarandon? Try this: Obama will help make quality health insurance more affordable to millions of Americans by setting up government-managed plans, with government oversight, that leverage collective bargaining and strength in numbers so that ALL AMERICANS will have the CHOICE to get the same health care benefits that are provided to employees at big companies.
67 agree | 77 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Melanie hates McCain, hates, Obama, and obviously hates Hillary. Who's she stumping for? Ron Paul? Some eventual Libertarian candidate who'll be lucky to get 1 percent of the popular vote? Enjoy the next 4 years of whining about subsidized college loans.
53 agree | 44 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Good article Melanie. Keep it up. People need to know the real Obama.
53 agree | 53 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Kent said:
This is referred to as 'Poetic Justice' for those idiots who put O'Malley in office. How does it feel?
73 agree | 75 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This "mandatory purchase" rule sets a truly bad precedent: a) Regardless of how efficient the alternative energy source, the alternative energy market can set their own rate - guarantees a profit! b) Put the alternative sources on state-controlled land (like windmills on Backbone Mountain in Garrett Co, or even out in the bay) and the State is put in an implicit obligation to Ensure Profitability. c) and who pays for this? .... WE DO! This is truly REVOLTing.
78 agree | 75 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
When I took the SAT 1 and 2 tests ten years ago, I was never asked about Congress, much less about European geography. My application essays never asked me about those subjects, and none of my recommendations were written by World Studies or Civics teachers. To wit, I had to pass a Citizenship Test to graduate from Montgomery County. Still, how many colleges (elite or otherwise) require their students to know this stuff before they graduate? What's more, how many additional multiple-choice tests will we require our high schoolers to pass before Melanie Scarborough's sense of fiduciary outrage is satiated?
98 agree | 105 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Marty doesn't care, he has to do this to earn his Liberal wings! Besides, the real pain will be after he's gone.
124 agree | 121 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
John Costello said:
The problem doesn't start in high school but in grammar schools which don't teach grammar or reading or addition or multiplication etc. I learned about Congress in a history class in the 4th grade. Last spring I had to give a high school graduate I work with a basic introduction to American history and our political system. He didn't know the differences between senators and congress critters. He thought Abraham Lincoln was a democrat because the democrats ewre for black people. Fortunately, he can read, and I told him where to go on the internet for the Federalst Papers, something he hadn't heard of either. He is not unique.
110 agree | 121 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Thank you. A great article. Maryland is about to commit economic suicide with O'Malley leading the charge. Maryland needs more power. Less will strangle the ecomomy. The ignorate voters in Maryland are also economic fools. There is no hope. I'll be leaving Maryland soon.
113 agree | 113 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
MD 4 O'Malley said:
If Martin O'Malley is for it then it must be a good thing. People, please stop thinking about the positions of the candidates and just vote for Hillary. We need Hillary. We must have Hillary. She is the BEST candidate to be President on DAY ONE. Remember, a vote for Hillary is a vote for Marty O'Malley, the governor we all LOVE.
114 agree | 112 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Nathan said:
When you have an endowment of $35 billion, even if 99% of that is restricted, then that's still $350 million left over. The only argument I can make against this is that if we were to stop State & Federal funds from going to universities, then that removes a lot of the sway Congress currently has. This only matters when it comes to complying with Federal law, and especially with allowing military recruiters on campuses. Get rid of those funds, and the colleges will be free to kick recruiters off, which I don't think is an ideal situation. Anyways, high-schools need to be reformed drastically in this country, but they've always been bad. I worked as a Legislative Aide on Capitol Hill not long ago and I was always shocked not only by the number of kids but all by the number of adults & seniors who not only didn't know how many Senators they have (hint: they come in doubles), but didn't even know what the Senate was.
122 agree | 110 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Endowments are generally restricted for specific purposes chosen by the donor. If a donor chooses to leave $1Million to endow a lecture series on the arts, the lucrative 80k/yr that it earns cannot legally be used for student scholarships. Another donor may give $10million for an endowed chair of widgit design. You might think that 800k is too much to pay a prof, and the university may even agree, but it cannot decide to use that money to pay three profs or for student scholarships. Before complaining about these massive endowments, critics have a responsibility to track down how they are spent and how they are allowed to be spent. For example, what fraction of UofMD's billion dollar endowment is unrestricted?
128 agree | 113 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Dr. Ellen said:
My sister-in-law asked the same question - and she's a teacher. Perhaps that datum offers some insight ...
118 agree | 112 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Zugernaut said:
Missouri has been spending fewer and fewer state funds on higher education. In fact, we're currently ranked 49th. Wahoo for us! The state has also capped tuition increases, which means we're being slowly starved. But hey, I'm sure we can just "cut out the waste," the answer that geniuses provide without bothering to study a situation. But hey, if we cut funding enough we can help increase our underclass of burger-flippers, and I'm sure that's an America we can all agree on.
122 agree | 117 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Frank said:
Our leaders are too mentally obtuse to understand what their policies mean. But unfortunately here at the local and state level - they are also too arrogant to ask for opinions from people that can be impartial and fair. These pigs need to be removed from office. Vote for "the other guy/gal" in the next 5 year's worth of elections and let's get back to owning our own government. Instead of it owning us.
125 agree | 117 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
FreedomCall said:
Our country needs a leader that respects the will of the people. Please take a look at the reasons why McCain is wrong for America, and support someone that can actually turn our great country around, rather than keep it on the same downhill course. Our personal freedoms are at stake. How much privacy and freedom are you willing to give up to our government for them to �protect us from a terrorist threat� that has no more likelihood of killing an American than a bolt of lightning. Fear is a powerful weapon, and we cannot let ourselves be oppressed by it.
119 agree | 115 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
MoultrieGAConservative said:
I agree 100 percent with the sentiments expressed in this article. I've said from the very beginning that McCain is the one candidate unacceptable to the true conservatives of the GOP base under any circumstances (only possibly Arlen Specter could have been a worse choice for the GOP!). For the first time in 30 years it's looking like I will have to vote a 3rd choice in the general election for POTUS and VPOTUS while voting Republican only in the down-ballot contests. That's a shame, and it probably means the Democrats will have the White House come January. So be it; at least my conscience will be clear. I'd rather the Democrats get the blame for the coming debacle during the next four years. Sometimes it takes a nasty intestinal bug to clean out the colon. It will be "The Carter Years Redux," but maybe that's what it's going to take to wake up the electorate enough to choose a Republican candidate who is truly Reaganesque the next time. Mitch
141 agree | 148 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"And while some of Hillary�s supporters actually relish another two-for-one Clinton administration, it could hardly appeal to Obama to have the didactic duo as vice presidents. Dick Cheney is at least discreet in his manipulation of the Bush White House." With these words, Scarborough exposes herself as a right-wing, reactionary amateur who tacitly admits that the Bush/Cheney administration has been a disaster with less than a year left in office. McCain didn't betray the Republican Party, the party betrayed true conservatism and was taken over by the right-wing culture warriors it was courting to win elections. Now they are turning on anyone who disagrees with their extreme brand of more-conservative-than-thou Republicanism, not unlike the "Islamofascists" they condemn.
129 agree | 133 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
It is about time.
144 agree | 142 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
sean connelly said:
Probably the best analysis I've seen this year.For all of your citedv reasons and then some,Republicans ought get off the suicide McCain express and vote for Romney.
135 agree | 136 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I disagree that conservative Republicans will support McCain if he does manage to win the nomination. I, myself am "a conservative". I will vote for Governor in the Texas primary, but I will not vote for McCain in the general election if it does come down to it. Nor will I vote for Clinton or Obama. Hate to say this, but I will have to sit this one out for the very first time since I voted for Ronald Reagan and I have always voted straight Republican ticket.
154 agree | 140 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
There's no chance that Obama will be the VP for Clinton. The Democratic nominee, whether Clinton or Obama, will select a white male as VP. Democrats think Americans are racists and sexists and are not going to risk a "two-fer". The Clintons also do not want an ambitious VP with an independent power base, like Gore. They want a loyal solider, which is why they'd likely pick Wesley Clark. Plus, why would Obama want to be part of an administration where the VP will be at best #3 on the totem pole? While Republicans will grumble, they will support McCain if Clinton is the Democratic nominee. McCain's VP pick will almost certainly be Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, who will excite the party and conservatives. McCain versus Clinton is the only race that the GOP has a chance to win in 2008. Romney would be a respectable loser against Clinton or Obama.
147 agree | 148 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I will not vote for John McCain who would permanently destroy the Republican party. He has spent the last 8 years betraying and undermining the Republican party while pandering to the liberal left. I would rather have a Democrat win and finally take the blame for this mess that we're sinking into. Whether it is Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or John McCain, they will advance the liberal agenda. And each of them will take the country down the road to ruin. After 4 years, when the economy has tanked, when the dollar is worth nothing, when socialism has completely overtaken our economy and ground it to a halt, when social security has gone completely bankrupt, when the economic strain has undermined our military to the point where we are weak, when liberals have eroded the conservative values to the point of complete moral decay, only then will we realize the socialistic danger that we have been slipping into. At that point, we will go crawling on our hands and knees to Mitt Romney
153 agree | 153 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
pilsener said:
McCain is vastly superior to Hillary on earmarks - IF -he chooses to attack her on it. So far McCain has shown almost a pathological inability to criticize Democrats with more than a single sentence or phrase at a time. I cannot fathom why McCain finds it so easy to verbally attack Republicans who disagree with him, but shows great reluctance about criticizing Democrats or their policies.
273 agree | 159 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree