- The Washington Times - Thursday, March 23, 2000

'Who is she really?'

"Recently I watched a television biography of Hillary Clinton and found myself startled, as I always am, by the number of times she has radically changed her look. It's not just her hair (during the first year of the Clinton administration I lost count after 11 styles), it's her whole persona. In the space of that first year, she went from the hair-banded, suit-wearing tough campaigner of 1992 to the frumpy, polka-dot-dress-wearing June Cleaver of her health-care crusade. In the blink of an eye, she's Madison Avenue Barbie, stretched out across the cover of Vogue. Now, back in campaign mode, she has adopted the look of a New York local-news anchor: 'Hillary Clinton: She's On Your Side.'
"These changes are so dizzyingly frequent that even the most nonpartisan observer is left to wonder: What is she up to? Who is she really? And what does she want?"
Danielle Crittenden, writing on "All About Hillary," in the April 3 issue of National Review

Darwinian dilemma

"You always knew that evolutionists had ambitions of being more than scientists of being prophets of a total evolutionary worldview. The latest evidence of such intellectual imperialism comes from a new book, 'A Natural History of Rape,' which claims that natural selection explains all human behavior even the crime of rape… .
"The rise of evolutionary psychology is forcing people to grapple with Darwinism's profoundly nihilistic moral implications. In the words of sociobiology's founder, E.O. Wilson, 'the basis of ethics does not lie in God's will'; instead, ethics 'is an illusion fobbed off on us by our genes' because of its survival value. Those who accept Darwinian evolution, yet raise moral objections to 'A Natural History of Rape,' are being inconsistent to their own foundational assumptions… .
"In short, Darwinism and its unpalatable moral implications are a package deal; protest, and you invite a return to the theistic worldview.
"It's an agonizing dilemma for evolutionists: Either they can be logically consistent to their starting assumptions, but end up with an inhumane worldview or they can be true to their God-given sense of morality, at the cost of being inconsistent."
Nancy Pearcey, writing on "Darwin's dirty secret," in the March 25 issue of World

Cultural consequences

"When it comes to education, almost every rule has exceptions. And I am sure that there are instances in which a plausible case could be made for giving over some part of a liberal arts curriculum to the study of popular culture. By and large, however, I believe that when we talk about 'Higher Education and the Study of Popular Culture' we are talking about an educational disaster area… .
"Nor is it an accident, as the Marxists used to say, that when it comes to popular culture in the academy, the politics almost always turns out to be left-wing. The truth is that the study of pop culture has been pursued primarily as a means of attacking the traditional academic concentration on objects of high culture. The ubiquitous Henry Louis Gates Jr., chairman of Harvard's Afro-American Studies Department, was simply stating the truth when he noted that 'ours was the generation that took over buildings in the late 1960s and demanded the creation of black and women's studies programs, and now … we have come back to challenge the traditional curriculum.' The consequence of the development that Professor Gates so candidly described is that many liberal arts majors are being graduated having read little more than a handful of popular novels, a bit of esoteric literary theory, and various works that confirm their chosen ideological prejudices."
Roger Kimball, writing on "The Corrosive Trivialization of Culture," in the winter issue of Academic Questions

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2020 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide