E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
The hottest argument in Republican circles these days isn’t about immigration, taxes or even health care policy. It’s about New Gingrich and whether nominating him as the party standard-bearer would be disastrous or providential.
The pundits and professional consultants have weighed in on the question in a largely negative manner but many of the Republican candidates seeking election to Congress next fall don’t appear to share the concerns the GOP establishment seems to have about the impact Gingrich would have on downballot races as their presidential nominee.
A dozen of the GOP’s top recruits to run for Congress, part of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s “Young Guns” program for 35 promising candidates, said in interviews with NBCPolitics.com over the last week that they’re not worried about running with the former House speaker at the top at the ticket. Some are downright excited about the prospect.
"I’ve been telling people all along that Newt is the real thing, and he’s substantially different than when he was Speaker of the House," said Dave Garrison, the Republican challenging Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett in Texas.
“I think for my race, my views are more in line with Newt Gingrich, and if the base rallies behind a Newt Gingrich-like candidate, it will benefit me,” said another Republican running for Congress in the southwestern U.S., who asked for anonymity in order to speak candidly about the race. “I think Newt’s a more exciting candidate; he’s going to bring more attention to the conservative cause.”
Some Republicans worry that, at best, Gingrich wouldn’t be as competitive of a candidate against President Barack Obama, and would diminish Republican prospects downballot. At worst, the GOP establishment fears an implosion by Gingrich, whose career has been marked by lapses in discipline, that has catastrophic effects on the Republican brand in 2012.
Conventional wisdom in Washington, reinforced by recent polling, suggests that Gingrich would perform worse as a general election candidate than former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. But the crop of Republican candidates seeking election to Congress doesn’t seem to mind.
Data from the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll reinforces that viewpoint. Gingrich performs worse against Obama than Romney in key demographic groups like women aged 18-49 and independents. Romney also fares better versus Obama in the Northeast and West, according to the data. At the same time, the poll showed that conservative enthusiasm is behind Gingrich, signaling that he could carry GOP enthusiasm with his candidacy.
In the interviews, the Candidates’ opinions toward Gingrich boiled down to the belief that, while he might not be the perfect nominee, he’s more likely to aggressively contest the election and, by that strategy, spark Republican enthusiasm, particularly among conservatives. The candidates brushed off Gingrich’s baggage, both personal and professional.
Most candidates refused to pick explicitly between Gingrich and Romney when assessing which of the two might help their own prospects. Two of the GOP’s most astute political minds – Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole and former Virginia Rep. Tom Davis, each of whom spent time running the NRCC – said the Gingrich-or-Romney effect would vary most strongly across regions of the country.
“What we’ve seen in polling to date is that Gingrich is a weaker candidate at the top of the ticket, especially in the Northeast and Midwest,” Davis explained. “Romney is more acceptable to swing voters in that area.”
But even an admitted Romney admirer like Mike Clark, a Republican candidate in Connecticut, expressed comfort about having Gingrich at the top of the ticket. “He certainly stimulates a lot of discussion. One of my concerns is that a lot of voters are apathetic, and I think he erodes that,” he said. “I would not view a Gingrich campaign as a death knell for the Republican Party in the Northeast.”
The candidates see the presidential contest affecting their own races in several key ways. Chiefly, they say that a good candidate could help drive turnout, especially in swing districts where every vote matters at the margin. They also see the eventual presidential candidate as helping to set the pace and tone of their debates. That might mean that when Gingrich, who’s given to speak extemporaneously, says something controversial on the national stage, it will trickle down to other GOP candidates.
“If he’s the candidate and he takes a position on something with illegal immigration or the economy or whatever, I think it’s a totally appropriate question to ask a candidate,” said California Republican candidate Gary DeLong.
“There isn’t any question about it that my opponent, whoever he or she may be, will try to find whatever the most extreme position whatever presidential candidate might have, and push me right up against it,” said John Koster, a GOP candidate in Washington state. “And they can probably expect Republican candidates will take Democrats and shove them right up against President Obama.”
It’s fear of exactly that scenario that’s driven concerns about Gingrich among Republicans in Washington, some of whom view the prospects of a Gingrich implosion as a matter of when, not if. And at that point, a serious stumble could harm the GOP brand. Their unease about Gingrich is well-documented; a number of them expressed their concerns this week to Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper.
“Romney definitely gives Republicans their best chance downballot,” said a veteran GOP strategist familiar with congressional contests who requested anonymity to provide candid analysis. “Whether the Republican nom wins or loses, the most important thing for congressional candidates is a close race.”
Cole, the Oklahoma congressman who headed House Republicans’ campaign efforts in 2006-08, was more forgiving. “The reality is that presidential campaigns are long and complex,” he said. “While that can really magnify your flaws, it also means that any single flaw is seldom debilitating.”
A few of the Republican candidates contacted by NBCPolitics.com citied the Massachusetts health reform Romney spearheaded as governor as a reason to give them pause about him.
“In my district, what I hear, the epitome of right track/wrong track is ObamaCare,” said Ed Martin, one of two Republican candidates in Missouri’s Second district. “Here’s the problem with Romney: RomneyCare dilutes that argument.”
Most of the candidates said they’re planning their campaigns independently of the eventual nominee. (“Campaigns can really rise and fall in a matter of minutes. I’m not going to irrevocably tie myself to any one candidate,” said Ricky Gill, a GOP candidate in California).
And still others believe that Republicans’ enthusiasm in beating Obama in 2012 is enough to carry the day, regardless of the eventual nominee. (“To the extent that the election is a referendum on the Obama administration, whoever the nominee is, they’re going to do just fine,” said Andy Barr, a repeat Republican candidate in Kentucky.
Even Gingrich supporters acknowledge the candidate’s flaws. Garrisson said the former Speaker’s talk about “amnesty” – referencing his statements in favor of allowing a citizenship process for illegal immigrants who establish roots in the U.S. – doesn’t help him. Garrisson also said Gingrich’s advocacy work on behalf of troubled mortgage giant Freddie Mac, which earned his firm a reported $1.6 million, “cumbersome.”
The former speaker’s personal baggage – three marriages, the current one being the byproduct of an affair – are well-documented, too. None of the candidates mentioned that as a concern, though. And Gingrich has sought to defuse the issue by publicly acknowledging that he’s made mistakes, and saying that he’s sought forgiveness for his actions.
And just as primary voters appear to be looking for someone who might rock the boat, so are Republican candidates.
“I think what we want at the top of the ticket is someone who’s smart and articulate and is willing to challenge the status quo,” said Mark Meadows, a House candidate in North Carolina.
Leave a Comment:
Gingrich represents an evil, dark side in America of people who lost the civil rights revolution of the late 50s, the 60s, and 70s. He represents an evil, dark side of America who are the one half of one percent of wealthiest Americans who believe they have an innate gift to be rulers over the working classes who are innately gifted to be the servant class. (If you do not believe this last statement, then you have NO experience with the private, boarding schools of America where the children of the wealthy classes are taught exactly that!) He represents the TEA Party who are little more than members or lackeys of the right wing, extremist, militias---the militias that spawned such scum as Timothy McVeigh, Oklahoma City bomber who murdered and maimed hundreds of Americans. Gingrich, indeed, represents an evil, dark side of America that every intelligent, ethical patriot in the American Republic has dreaded might someday own Congress (they already own the House), the Presidency, and the Supreme Court.
Moron breath, the civil rights movement would have never gotten off the ground without the "evil" christian white , hateful, jewish rich people that backed Martin Luther King and fought against the southern Dems like Al Gore's papa. King was a registered republican. Please, I know what you've been spoon fed by lib/commies, but do some research.
You should actually meet some tea party types before you judge. Oh, i'm sorry, you meet them everyday. Polite, friendly, concerned Americans everywhere you go. Open eyes please.
RP: Thank you for your support. You'll notice I did not identify political parties, but you did. Clearly, you are among those I described.
TJ is actually quite right.
If you have not seen it, you should check out Dylan Ratigan's meltdown on Morning Joe. He does not blame parties, but the money and the wealth that has bought and paid for our government. Gingrich is the poster child for the revolving door between government and the moneyed elite. That same poster child was seen on milk cartons late in the 90's. Wherever he went, he should have stayed there, for the good of the nation.
Party lines mean little to nothing, when Social Darwinism is the goal. Each such era, where wealth dictated public policy, was met by a movement of rebellion. Only in America did you have the legal means to end unbridled oppression of the masses. The Robber Barons were put down by the Populist and then Progressive movements, which demonstrates (in the current day) that history repeats itself.
Gingrich, and really ALL the Republican wannabes represent the gastric disturbance occurring in the Corporate States of America and the political streetwalkers. They are so bankrupt of ideas and integrity that they are all pandering to whoever wants the best deal in a pay-to-play government.
You described a fictional people who live in the minds of the easily deceived. Take your pills and turn on rachael, she's waiting for you.
All the mainstream party candidate from BOTH parties are lobby bankrolled puppets. Obama has backed every banker or military contractor desire they put forth. Every bailout, every country invasion, every financial law to pass and he signed every single civil rights destroying bill proposed. The real clincher was when Obama let the Federal Reserve shove $16 trillion out the backdoor without a peep. When asked about it he replied "no comment". The entire Democratic party had "no comment". They still refuse to discuss the Federal Reserve tossed out $700,000 for every family in America to prop up wealthy FOREIGN financial investors. I mean this has to be addressed!!! This was an "instant" end to our depression and financial problems for decades but Obama decides to LET the FED instead prop up wealthy European banking families.
I mean literally every single thing these "Robber Barons" has Obama in his hip pocket. I totally agree that all the mainstream GOP candidates are nothing more than Obama with another face. Ron Paul is the only one not on their payroll. He has never taken any corporate or union lobby money in 30 years of service.
There is no "progressive" movement. Its leadership sold itself out to Fascist corporate interests decades ago. Their leadership is too busy licking the boots of and saving Jon Corzine and the Goldman Sachs mafia to give a crap about the American people.
RP: You can make your insipid, little quips you believe are cool, but the fact remains you are what you have become and what you support---and you have become and support the dark side of American life. Look around you. You have no friends, no sense of community, nothing. Today might as well have been yesterday and tomorrow is like today...... Life only gets worse and more miserable for you............
Adams: Tell us the consequences that would have followed had TARP and Stimulus not been implemented. The debt incurred certainly added to the national debt, but what would have been the economic consequences for the American Republic and the rest of the world had not every industrialized country on the planet invested billions to prevent the total collapse of the world's financial systems, including the American financial system. Let me give you a hint. David Stockman, President Reagan's Director of Budget and Management, (who seems to agree that TARP and Stimulus should not have been implemented) said that certainly American and world financial systems would have collapsed; yes, the world would have been in a complete, economic depression today; and yes, unemployment in America would amount to 30% or higher for decades while the markets were adjusting to the collapse. He did not address the political consequences that would have followed, but certainly there would have been dire political consequences. I know I'm probably talking to someone who flips off these things to minor disruptions of life, but the American voter does know what those consequences would have been and they voted against you. They will do the same in 2012.
Ron Paul is an honorable man. I like him in many ways. Much of what he says makes sense, but what does not make sense is his social Darwinst economic theory that existed during the rise of the Second Industrial Revolution before Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Woodrow Wilson. Then, Progressivism was defeated and social Darwinism reinstated in 1921 that led to the financial collapse of American financial system and the collapse of the Second Industrial Revolution in 1929.
The entire world's economic systems collapsed during the 1920s and 1930s that took decades and decades to work through. Franklin D. Roosevelt brought Progressivism back in 1933 and it did make life better for Americans. They elected him four times which should tell you people living at the time thought things were getting better for them. World War II moved us out of the depression for a while, although the taxpayers paid higher taxes and bought war bonds to provide monies to the federal government to buy tanks, planes, guns, uniforms, and salaries, for men and women to fight the war. Still, it was the taxpayers who footed the bill for both the "New Deal" and America's participation in World War II.
We have not experienced a complete collapse of the American financial system since 1929, although we just averted it in 2008. Yes, the national debt has increased, but the cost of funding years of a collapse of the financial system would have been astronomical. We are now working our way throught the debt, but do not forget the American economy is the strongest by far on the planet. The alternative would have been unthinkable.
TJ First of all there really is no "US Economy" anymore. There is only the Federal Reserve banker economy backed only by the printing presses of the FED. The taxpayers could not pay back even 1/10th of this $15 trillion if they told us the world would implode so they are backing nothing. The FED crashed the economy as their first "bubble" intentionally created. They were greedy because they figure the people would quickly throw them out just like the other two times. The FED causes all the bubbles..... for THEIR profit. When you remove the private bankers from running this economy you remove all your Darwinism drivel. You are analyzing the reactions and results instead of the nature of the problem. There is nothing but global bankers leading the all the depressions, bubbles and every other negative thing in our economy. The politicians and party's have become nothing but their puppets hiding them like like the Wizard of Oz.
You have bought into the propaganda of the global investors. You probably believed about WMD until the bluff was called. You swallow their BS hook line and sinker. All FDR did was start borrowing from the FED at an accelerated pace which became possible after he unbacked the dollar. Anyone can borrow on the backs of future generations and look like a hero to those reaping the benefits. It is like me giving away your kids retirement fund so my buddies can have an ornamental job for awhile. Are you being fleeced or handed a freebie?
FDR also lied to the people telling them Social Security was a retirement plan and the money was held in trust despite the Supreme Court telling him both violate the commerce clause so he changed it to just a tax and entitlement... with ZERO PRESS. To this day people believe that urban legend he spewed to get his slush fund passed in a depression yet. All the Presidents you mentioned were complete stooges of the global banking industry and started this nightmare called the Federal Reserve. Those crooks conned the people into believing self serving global bankers would create anything but a mess like this. This entire bailout is Unconstitutional, and these buy-in's of Freddie/Fannie and GM were even worse.
Back to 2011. At some point, the massive manipulation of our brains, orchestrated by Spanky Paulson/Bernanke and all of their uber-wealthy cronies, will end. Reality will intrude. The global economy MUST crash because there are simply too many dollars "worth" of worthless assets gathering dust in the safes and hard drives and account ledgers of the world's financial instutions. Tens of Trillions of dollars worth! And no amount of mass hypnosis (in the form of 'pundits optimism'), or empty words (in the form of government guarantees on EVERYTHING), or spin can change reality. Get that? Reality cannot be changed. A few trillion infusion by the taxpayers is like bailing with teacups on the Titanic while a gaping 160 foot hole is in the side.
When you embrace the global bankers you dance with the devil and he will get his due. We are playing with fire by propping up these wealthy European families and a handful of US legacy corporate lobby's. You and people like you are willingly paying them ransom and extortion money. Just like a blackmailer you have only wet their appetite for no consequences to their actions. It will crash no matter what we do the only difference is how many of us they can con into going down with them.
This isn't even a issue most people are so sick of the Republican obstructionism and their Anti American Worker most of them will only see the Capitol in a picture.If the Democrats that are in Washington now do not take a stance against the Republican Anti American machine they will be gone too.
Let's see, 2006 dems take over house and senate. 2008 they take presidency. Hummm.. stay with me genius. So, from 2006 to 2010 they control at least 2/3 of govt and all from2008 to 2010. Are you still with me? 2010 reps win house. Now I know the math skills in this country are lacking, but the reps only have 1/3 of govt. Change the channel now and then, please. Only a lib could argue your thinking.
So you feel that this excuse your giving justifys the attack on the working American People and the Republican party driving our people into poverty.If so you are one pathetic piece of s,hit.
You need to turn up the volume and get your head out of limbaugh's ass
Read it again dog breath, and your boy obumbles seems to be doing a great job at driving us into a rat hole. Like Carter like son.
Obstructionism of a communist takeover. Oh not to mention Obama does not have one dollar to spend on all his wonderful ideas without taxing the crap out of someone else. Peter to Paul is his methodology.
Vote For Anyone BUT Romney!
Obama and Gingrich both think they are the smartest person in the room. Gingrich wins. People need jobs and that is not going to happen with Obama.
Gingrich's comment about "take a bath and get a job" smacks of "let them eat cake". He's so very clearly out of touch with everyday people. As a historian, that should worry him; the great income divide in France didn't go so well for the elite a couple of centuries ago. We may not take up arms today, but we can certainly take up the ballot box. Gingrich would be an extremely dangerous man as president.
Let's see, when Obumbles says Pennsylvania voters "cling to their guns and bibles" he is so eloquent and maybe a genius. He's a black bigot. Oh yes, they exist. Holder, Maxine Waters, Rev Wright etc... That's why the country is so divided and needs someone to unite.
He's bailed out the cronie capitalists on wall street, and payed off unions, and now he's stealing our Soc Sec. Wake up.
your just plain fuc,king stupid
Waaa! you don't know what to say, do you SFB.
Now I hear this morning that your genius senate and fabulous president are planning to tap your mortgage
with fees to pay for raiding Soc Sec to buy your vote. Isn't he just the greatest president ever?
According to this morning's LA Times, Mr Gingrich believes that, as president, he could ignore, or even remove judges and even entire courts that ruled against him. He calls that "checks and balances." If this is so, then what comes next, ignore or remove Congress when it doesn't agree with him? Long live King Newt the First!
"Mr Gingrich believes that, as president, he could ignore, or even remove judges and even entire courts that ruled against him."
Well -- we don't have to worry about that because con-man Newt isn't going to be president. A year from now her will be running his yap as a Fox commentator.
Newt at his best...
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2006/07/16/6314/newt-world-war/
It is stunning to think that a man can spout such stupefying, paranoid delusional stuff and still be taken seriously by anyone, let alone the MSM!
He has first shot in the remake of Dr. Strangelove; Newt IS Major Kong.
Newt Gingrich has had big ideas, and still has some, but he's not really fit to be president. One of the problems with our particular form of democracy is that it lacks stability because, no sooner is one election over than the next campaign begins. Some programs take longer than four or six years to see them through.
We have instability enough. Gingrich is so erratic that he would act as a force multiplier. His metier is selling ghost-written books with titles like "Red, White, and Blue," and, "Why Not Wealth?" Let him do what he does best. Let him rake in as many shekels as he can, continue in his celebrity, get a new wife when the old one wears out, and get a job as a commentator on Fox News.
Oh yeah you're right. He hasn't had as much experience as the other whores. He's not exactly Binyamin Hoch is he?
I just think obumbles is the greatest prez ever. He's so smart. He makes all before him pale by comparison.
OK enough. Obama, please. You're not serious.ABO.
OK enough. Obama! Obama! Please.
Last time they successfully shoved Obama down your throat. Romney is the candidate they're shoving down your throat now. Gag America.
Fellow Conservatives: Is it not curious that right after the Freddie Mac criticism by Romney the SEC (under order from Obama) decided to go after leaders of Freddie Mac. A blatantly political move that shows a common goal between Romney and Obama to destroy Gingrich. That tells you at the least that Obama fears Gingrich more than Romney. There is no other plausible reason.
It is beyond debate that the Republican establishment is trying to bring down Newt and prop up Romney. If you are for the status quo..... vote for Romney. It is just that simple. If you want change you will need to look elsewhere. Pick your horse but we are all losers with Romney.
I'm waiting for one of the news media people to ask Newt, "What time does the balloon go up".
Oh how funny masterbaiter.
One thing about this board,it sure proves the point the Fox Ditto Heads have no sense of reality.
One thing about this board, it sure proves the point the msnbc twits have no brains.
What an intelligent and though-provoking exchange. You both ought to be ashamed of yourselves. That belongs on a kindergarten playground.,
As with the last debate, every person on that stage is better then the racist socialist lib status puke in there now! 2010 and the Nevada/ New York campaigns show people waking up to the lie's, hate, division and total disregard to the hardworking American people! After the scandels BEGINING with solaynda, fast and furious, campaign slush funds etc, you pathetic puke democrats will see a very different face in government and our children and grandchildren will again have a better country to hand down to theirs then what your welfare loving, you owe me, the dog ate my homework crap that is spewed by this pathalogical lieing puke of a president and administration!
The conservative GOP has two choices whether they like it or not. The evangelists and war mongers have to just suck it up or live with Obama for four more years. Either they vote for Ron Paul as the nominee or lose the election by a landslide if he either takes the Presidency as an independent or just sinks the boat of the GOP crook of the week. Even the mainstream press changes the GOP "leader" like their socks. Ron Paul is steady as a rock and it is difficult to tell how well he is doing because he is getting zero press, they shut down the polls when he wins claiming unfair advantages etc.
If the press got behind Ron Paul and embraced this groundswell for two weeks there would be absolutely no stopping him. He would roll over Obama like a steam-shovel. They have been behind each of these other lobby owned stooges for weeks and can't get any of them off the ground. Ron Paul is the only one who can beat Obama in the debates. The other GOP candidates are just the same old right wing declare war on everyone crap. Ron could actually draw a huge amount of liberals sick of the war and tired of the global bankers or those supporting the deficit mongers in Washington. Many are also afraid of all the civil rights being thrown down the toilet.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who can consistently draw from the GOP, Democrats and most of all slam the independent and those who left their party voters. There are simply more liberal government dependents than GOP. If the GOP candidate can't draw from the Democrats and get all the independents they are doomed.
Fiscally conservative and socially liberal is the key to this election and none of the mainstream party candidates have it. They also have no comprehension of the word "cut" and are afraid to even mention the word.
Run, you sarcastic, mean, money-grubbing Pillsbury doughboy sonofabitch...RUN!!
The last thing the conservative movement needs right now is a nominee that's only "a little Mitt better" (pun intended) than the joker who's currently the "Resident in Chief" (again, pun intended).
Seriously if Mitt's the nominee the election is over, since he can't get over 25% of the republicans to support him in poll after poll, so you end up with another Bob Dole or John McCain (that couldn't get their base excited either, which means a lower turnout election night) and the dems win again (and trillions more will be spent in additional social experiments about getting folks back to work by paying off the unions).
At least if Newt's the nominee the base gets fired up and turns out. He's not my first choice, but of those running he's the only one with the ability to get things done in Washington, D.C. if elected, even Bill "Bubba" Clinton gave him credit on that point just a few weeks ago.
I'll share some News with the Lame stream Media....If the GOP does not start talking about the Man that is winning Iowa right now ......Gop or no Gop the American Voters will teach you a lesson!
Just because you cant buy Ron Paul does not mean he wont be your friend...he has just two rules.
tell the truth
and
function by the constitution
Gee GOP whats wrong with that.
This seems a little odd to me. GOP candidates favoring Gingrich. While former GOP congress members, who actually worked with him, thinks that Gingrich isn't fit to be dog catcher. Maybe they need a history lesson. Gingrich is an admitted liar and cheat. The GOP is the one's who removed him from his office. Anyone who believes anything this man says, is going to be in for a shock.
Americans couldn't be more fed up than they are right now. 94 votes from congress on the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT.....S BILL 1867 along with 1031 which WIPED OUT ALL OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS....Americans can be arrested, detained indefinately without a trial for doing absolutely nothing wrong!!! WAKE THE FUK UP PEOPLE.....NEWT IS CONGRESSES PUPPET!!! The best Christmas present AMERICA CAN HAVE IS RON PAUL.....otherwise it's FEMA CAMP FUNTIME AMERICA....Watch out for those black FEMA vans!!!!
The only trust worthy one of the entire bunch is RON PAUL!!!! He will bring back our civil liberties, and uphold our Constitution!!!! Newt will bring about Martial Law and round up Americans on American soil according to Bill S 1867 along with S Bill 1031 of the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT which passed on 12/2/2011. NEWT IS THE PUPPET FOR CONGRESS......TYRANTS AND TRAITORS TO ALL AMERICANS!!!
Congress took away our Constitutional rights on 12/2/2011 94 - 6 NEWT IS THIER PUPPET!!! WAKE UP!!! WAKE UP!!!
65% of the top 1% are Democrat huh? That is no surprise, a stereotypical Republican is either a greedy, wealthy, self centered, pompus, arrogant individual associated with OLD money OR they are ignorant, bible toting, racist haters. If you don't fall into one of those categories, you are usually someone who is a wealthy wanna bee and there is no way that political affiliation is going to help you out there. Most of the wealthy people are too intelligent to be Republican. It doesn't surprise me a one bit. How can anyone of any reasonable level of intelligence consider alligning themselves with a party that has no issues with placing candidates in the public eye that opendly admit that they do not believe in evolution, think the world is only 5000 years old, and refuse to admit that scientifically provable FACT is not true? The debate earlier in the year when you had all of the prominent figures front and center being asked if they believe in evolution was a classic. I can't see how any educated person can allow themselves to be drawn into this obvious charade.