Assuming John McCain can win this election, and will, who should/will he the VP?

I can give my brief preferences to the various choices that McCain might and should make. I will list then in order of preferred choice by me then include what I think McCain will do by percentage. 

VP2008 Stakes…(my choices in order)

1)      Sarah Palin Gov of Alaska is a good conservative that would help in four important ways.  She would help swing women who might have been favorable to Hillary. She would give cause to the history transition into the next presidential election cycle. Sarah would also bring support from the Conservative and Evangelical crowds perhaps bring excitement from the base. Palin could also help fortify the Energy Goals that could shockingly bring upside for the down ticket elections.                  McCain likelihood of choosing   8%

2)      Paul Ryan Rep from Wisc…Paul is a favorite among conservatives and is only 38! He is a policy wonkish guy who could be the LBJ to McCains legislative agenda. He would bring support from the base and help put Wisconsin into play and perhaps secure a solid Midwest boost for McCain. Paul would bring a generational confidence to the transitional election cycles moving forward.           McCain likelihood of choosing  10%

3)      Bobby Jindal Gov of LA…again like Palin it would bring an executive to the race…something lacking in the two choices for President. His youth, loyalty and conservative credentials would serve the ticket well. Jindal would help bring minority interest to the Party and perhaps bring a boost from the base. Jindal is a strong conservative and fiscal hawk, McCain likes him too.      .           McCain likelihood of choosing  12%

4)      Sam Brownback Sen from KN…Sam is the most loyal McCain supporter. The only attendee of the Memorial Day weekend ranch retreat to honor McCain’s wish for it to be private.  Social Conservatives would be energized by Sam, and his acumen and solid credentials would be strong ingredients to a tight team. Sam is a vocal and experienced McCain firster…a willing second fiddle. Sam would be strong in Missouri and Iowa and Catholic Pennsylvania. Yet, his somewhat demure nature would not overshadow McCain. Sam is preparing to run for Gov of Kansas…look to 2012    McCain likelihood of choosing  15%

5)      Mark Sanford and Mitch Daniels  Govs of SC and IN respectively…Yes I have grouped them together, because they are the same choice. Two GOV’s who are strong conservatives from strong GOP states. Would ignite the base a bit, and bring loyalty to ticket, they are safe choices. Neither is particularly harmful to the ticket, but are not Madison Avenue choices either.     McCain likelihood of choosing   8%

6)      Mike Pence Rep from IN…Mike is the Paul Ryan Clone…solid conservative credentials, Crist handsome without the tan. Mike is a radio voice and TV face guy who would appeal strongly to both Conservatives and Democrat Women—yes it worked for JFK and Obama. Indiana could be a contested state if Obama chooses Bayh…so protecting IND could prove important. He is exceptional on issues and is wonkish and well prepared.

                                          McCain likelihood of choosing  8%

7)      Tim Pawlenty  Gov who would not bring too much to the ticket, other than great loyalty to Sen. McCain. Unlikely to win his own state from the DEM history of voting in Presidential elections. A history of solid conservative credentials that have been tarnished while in the mansion. Would be a slight boost in conservative circles but perhaps not the kick he needs                       McCain likelihood of choosing  8%

8)      Mitt Romney  frm GOV of MA…popular late choice for President, some buyer’s remorse on McCain…which makes the DOLE/KEMP wrong head on ticket a likelihood reason for McCain to avoid this selection. His wealth, understanding of issues, and solid economic credentials would balance McCain. He has the TIGER in him that can be the attacker for McCains statesmanlike demeanor.     McCain likelihood of choosing  9%

9)      John Thune  Sen from SD…giant killer of Tom Daschle. Good looks, great Midwest appeal and solid conservative. John is an all-american boy…BUT…he is from a state that has one congressional seat…would look like a comedy team standing next to McCain. Too nice to be the attacker. He would bring much to the ticket but not enough to be the choice.         McCain likelihood of choosing 5%

10)   Charlie Crist and Chris Cox  GOV of FL and SEC Chairman…both are pop choices in the media, but lack several key things. Charlie is still single and slightly to the left of Sen. Martinez…does not sell well to conservatives. He brings hope for FL but could cost the base. Chris Cox, like Crist is loved by the media pundits…he is a good conservative with wonkish memory and good looks…both Charlie and Chris pass the look good test…are very well prepared to speak and sound like team players. The drawback is that both are vested with too much baggage…Charlie is single, too liberal and Chris is mired in the Credit, Housing and SEC squabbles facing the nation.     McCain likelihood of choosing   7%

11)   Tom Ridge, Mike Huckabee, Colin Powell, Joe Lieberman, Condi Rice, Rudy Guilliani, et al.  Each have major weaknesses…each have some strengths…but I would be shocked to see the selection to come from this camp. HOWEVER…this camp and names not listed would be consistent with John McCain’s maverick tendencies! So do not be too shocked to find a selection that is both overwhelming in its brazenness and underwhelming in its ability to help the ticket.  John McCain is many things but perhaps most of all a person who likes to march to a different tune…

                                                                                                     McCain likelihood of choosing   10%

John McCain will choose the person John McCain wants to choose…so I suspect I will not be too excited by this selection…I have listed the preferences I have in order, and have indicated the percentage chance that McCain will select them.

U. S. Catholic school enrollment reached its peak during the early 1960s when there were more than 5.2 million students in almost thirteen thousand schools across the nation.  The 1970s and 1980s saw a steep decline in both the number of schools and students.  By 1990, there were approximately 2.5 million students in 8,719 schools.   From the mid 1990s though 2000, there was a steady enrollment increase (1.3%) despite continued closings of schools

 

reported school closures, and illustrates that the elementary schools in the twelve large urban areas of the country have been the most affected, with a loss of 13.3% of schools since 2003.

 

the national and elementary enrollment trend data. Since 2000, elementary school enrollment has declined by 24.7% in the 12 urban dioceses and 15.8% in the rest of the U.S.

A Scientific Dissent on Darwinism

"I am skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged." Jed Macasko-Cal Berkeley

Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based public policy center, compiled the list of statement signers (attached). Among other things, the long list may help to answer the contention of designated spokespeople for the series "Evolution" that "virtually all reputable scientists in the world" support Darwin's theory. Institute officials charge that officials of WGBH/Clear Blue Sky Productions have used that contention to keep any scientific criticism of Darwinism from being acknowledged or examined in the eight-hour series. "They want people to think that the only criticism of Darwin's theory today is from religious fundamentalists," said Discovery president Bruce Chapman. "They routinely try to stigmatize scientists who question Darwin as 'creationists'."

"The numbers of scientists who question Darwinism is a minority, but it is growing fast," said Stephen Meyer, a Cambridge-educated philosopher of science who directs the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture at Discovery Institute. "This is happening in the face of fierce attempts to intimidate and suppress legitimate dissent. Young scientists are threatened with deprivation of tenure. Others have seen a consistent pattern of answering scientific arguments with ad hominem attacks. In particular, the series' attempt to stigmatize all critics--including scientists--as religious 'creationists' is an excellent example of viewpoint discrimination."

 

Signers of the statement questioning Darwinism came from throughout the US and from several other countries, representing biology, physics, chemistry, mathematics, geology, anthropology and other scientific fields. Professors and researchers at such universities as Princeton, MIT, U Penn, and Yale, as well as smaller colleges and the National Laboratories at Livermore, CA and Los Alamos, N.M., are included. A number of the signers have authored or contributed to books on issues related to evolution, or have books underway.

Despite repeated requests, the series' producers refused to cover scientific objections to Darwinism. Instead, the producers offered only to let scientific dissenters go on camera to tell their "personal faith stories" in the last program of the series, "What About God?" According to Discovery's Chapman, "This was almost an insult to serious scientists. Some of these dissenting scientists are not even religious. When you watch that last program, you realize they were wise to refuse to take part in it."

Jed Macosko, a young research molecular biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, and a statement signer, said, "It is time for defenders of Darwin to engage in serious dialogue and debate with their scientific critics. Science can't grow where institutional gatekeepers try to prevent new challengers from being heard."

We have found recently a Judge in England who ruled on FACTUAL errors in Al Gores propaganda docu-farse about Global Warming that is being shown in public schools all over the world without rebuke. Our tax dollars are going to PBS to offer one-sided theories that refuse to consider an alternative theory or be scrutinized.

The environment of open scholarly thought has been eroding on Campus’ all over the country where instructors no longer engage in true Liberal Arts education or Scientific Methods to discern the possible outcomes, theories or possible truths, rather they have been replaced with ‘Political Correct Thinking.’