The Evolution Test

In a fascinating article over at the New Republic, Ben Adler surveys the personal beliefs of 15 prominent conservative commentators on the subject of evolution. As a friend of mine pointed out this morning, Adler's survey serves as a great litmus test for conservatives; it provides a quick and easy (though far from foolproof) way of sorting the serious-minded conservative thinkers from the panderers and the wingnuts.

By my count, only five of the survey's participants passed the test (Jonah Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, David Brooks, William Buckley, and Richard Brookhiser). These respondents all indicated, without equivocation, that they believe in evolution, that evolution should be taught in schools, and that "intelligent design," if mentioned at all, should not be a part of the science curriculum. The other respondents all failed the test, some more spectacularly (Grover Norquist, Pat Buchanan, Bill Kristol) than the rest (John Tierney, James Taranto, Norman Podhoretz, Ramesh Ponnuru, Tucker Carlson, Stephen Moore, and David Frum). All of these respondents either equivocated in some significant way, responded ambiguously, engaged in blatant pandering, or flat-out gave looney answers.

It's interesting to note that the conservatives who passed the test were either moderates (Brooks) or old school economic/libertarian type conservatives (Krauthammer, Goldberg, Brookhiser, Buckley). Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

My friend asked me whether I could think of a similar litmus test to apply to liberal commentators, one that might separate the serious-minded liberals from the partisan hacks and far left looneys. I haven't been able to think of one yet. Any ideas?