""I'm appalled," said Stanford history Professor Barton Bernstein."

Anything that appalls Berstein is a good thing. Rumsfeld continues to serve his country....

"Rumsfeld continues to serve his country...."
You left off the last word: "poorly"

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

he's not welcome. i'm getting t-shirts done up. you'll see them on the streets shortly.

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

We'll just give him a dose of Palo Alto liberalism, and have him visit the Opportunity Center.

Pretty questionable in my mind. This appointment makes Hoover look less credible. I doubt they care what I think, but they must have *some* concerns about their reputation, and I'm guessing that more people than not look at Rumsfeld with doubts and misgivings. Whatever accomplishments he had prior to the war, his recent failures as a military and political leader will surely dominate his legacy in the eyes of most people.

Another one of "those" in town...

God help us.

Reading this, no one can doubt that Stanford is mightily committed to diversity.
In selecting Rumsfeld for Hoover status, Stanford has reached to the bottom of the barrel to balance out the mostly brilliant and positive contributors to humanity that operate from their wonderous institution. What a blight on the record of an otherwise fine institution!

Rumsfield definitely belongs in a tower - along with another doubtful non-hero, George Schultz) - but it's doubtful that anyone who has followed their horrific, power-mongering careers - careers that claim "success" over the blood-stained bodies of their hapless victims - would imagine for a minute that any tower they inhabit wouldn't be surrounded by guards - to keep the both of them and their poor-excuse-for-strategic-thinking ideas as far away from the rest of humanity as possible.

We should give him a warm welcome and the respect he has earned through many years of public service. Thank you Stanford and welcome Mr. Rumsfeld.

Advocacy editing?
Sad.

Hear, hear Rumsfeld! It takes courage to buck the hate propoganda machine and move here! Better get armed guards to protect you from the "tolerant and accepting" liberals around here who are committed to free speech only for those that agree with them, and so committed to diversity they want to run out of town anyone who disagrees with them.

One of the many reasons I am no longer a Democrat is that to be a to be for free speech, tolerance and intellectual pursuit is now to be a Republican.

If you are so clouded in your partisanship that you cannot recognize that this man is incredibly intelligent, talented, knowledgable and that he has given so much of himself to his country, you are typical of what has traditionally been referred to as "so Palo Alto" but, as indicated by several posts here, a dying breed.

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Let us not forget that the Stanford community prided itself on its refusal to do defense work at SLAC and its exclusion of NROTC, and actually made SRI remove Stanford fom its name because they were doing war related work. While I have been a friend of Stanford through the years, it has been with the affection one feels for a somewhat daft friend whose idiosyncracies one ignores. We expect children to be childish, we hope adults will grow up.

Thanks, Walter, for the reminder of what Stanford is. To refuse an entity because they do "war related work" when the military is the ONLY reason we still have the freedom to say and teach anything we want, allowing Stanford to even exist, is the height of hypocrisy and ingratitude.

Are there ANY reasonable, balanced universities left in the States besides MIT? ( They have Chomsky, but at least they are balanced out so that students can read and hear other points of view and actually practice THINKING, and they have ROTC)

Saying that the military is the only guardian of the Constitution lets the rest of America off too easy.

There is a form of defeat that does not have troops marching down our streets. It is when our laws are subordinate to the General Assembly, our rights are circumscribed by a different picture of human rights and our trade is by leave of others. We get the greater by accepting the lesser.

I didn't say the military was our ONLY guardian of the Constitution..I said that without it we would not exist. We have to always remember that our military is our last line of defense when no other option looks like it will work in time. I only hope we keep using our military before it is too late.

Rumsford coming here may actually attract more like thinkers to move here also. I am all for it. It would be good to get more views here rather than the present everyone thinks the same mentality.

oops, i see what you mean, I DID say "only"..but meant that without it we would have no freedoms. but I can see how you would take it to mean that there are no other guardians of our freedoms. of course, that is completely false. just that nobody else is our last line of defense.

sloppy writing. should focus on my work, instead!

Why does Stanford hate Arabs?

Why do Arabs hate Arabs? Why do Arabs not defend Arabs?

Wallis:

Using your "logic", no driver could be held accountable for exceeding the speed limit because lots of other people are speeding, too.

How unfortunate that the editors chose to completely delete some of the comments made by Dr Ferragamo and are acting as if they never happened.
Why are the editors supporting Dr Ferragamo?

Because the editors love Arabs?

Please, Froggy, your last was dense even for you.
On the other hand, speed limits are set for radar enforcement by a measure of average speed. That is why they do not use radar on some Palo Alto and Los Alto streets. It still does not explain why Arabs are Arab's worst enemies. I have to wonder what your Doctorate is in. I have some guesses I will keep to myself. Unless I need an adjustment.

Are you denying Stanford hates Arabs?