Howard Dean gets owned by Mike Rowe 'the worst idea I’ve ever heard'

Mike Rowe's Facebook page has become a destination for common sense and words of wisdom on the internet. Rarely do you find someone speaking such honest truths that people on the left or the right come together in praise. Recently, Scott Walker has come under scrutiny for not finishing college, but now he's a favorite for the GOP presidential nomination. Is he qualified?

A fan of Mike's named Kyle said, "Howard Dean recently criticized Gov Scott Walker for never finishing college, stating that he was "'unknowledgeable.' What would your response be on college as a requirement for elected office?"

After recounting his audition for a job at QVC, for which he had no typical experience but qualified by talent, Mike explained why he felt Howard Dean was way off in his criticism of Scott Walker.

"Look at how we hire help - it’s no so different than how we elect leaders. We search for work ethic on resumes. We look for intelligence in test scores. We search for character in references. And of course, we look at a four-year diploma as though it might actually tell us something about common-sense and leadership," Rowe wrote.

"Obviously, we need a bit more from our elected officials than the instincts of a home shopping host, but the business of determining what those 'qualifications' are is completely up to us. We get to decide what matters most. We get to decide if a college degree or military service is somehow determinative. We get to decide if Howard Dean is correct."

"Anyone familiar with my foundation knows my position. I think a trillion dollars of student loans and a massive skills gap are precisely what happens to a society that actively promotes one form of education as the best course for the most people. I think the stigmas and stereotypes that keep so many people from pursuing a truly useful skill, begin with the mistaken belief that a four-year degree is somehow superior to all other forms of learning. And I think that making elected office contingent on a college degree is maybe the worst idea I’ve ever heard."

"But of course, Howard Dean is not the real problem. He’s just one guy. And he’s absolutely right when he says that many others will judge Scott Walker for not finishing college. That's the real problem."

The full post is below:

Hi Kyle

Back in 1990, The QVC Cable Shopping Channel was conducting a national talent search. I had no qualifications to speak of, but I needed a job, and thought TV might be a fun way to pay the bills. So I showed up at The Marriott in downtown Baltimore with a few hundred other hopefuls, and waited for a chance to audition. When it was my turn, the elevator took me to the top floor, where a man no expression led me into a suite and asked me to take a seat behind a large desk. Across from the desk, there was a camera on a tripod. On the desk was a digital timer with an LED display. I took a seat as the man clipped a microphone on my shirt and explained the situation.

“The purpose of this audition is to see if you can talk for eight minutes without stuttering, blathering, passing out, or throwing up. Any questions?”

“What would you like me to talk about,” I asked.

The man pulled a pencil from behind his ear and rolled it across the desk. “Talk to me about that pencil. Sell it. Make me want it. But be yourself. If you can do that for eight minutes, the job is yours. Ok?”

I looked at the pencil. It was yellow. It had a point on one end, and an eraser on the other. On the side were the words, Dixon Ticonderoga Number 2 SOFT.

“Ok,” I said.

The man set the timer to 8:00, and walked behind the tripod. He pressed a button and a red light appeared on the camera. He pressed another button and the timer began to count backwards. “Action,” he said. I picked up the pencil and started talking.

“Hi there. My name’s Mike Rowe, and I only have eight minutes to tell you why this is finest pencil on Planet Earth. So let’s get right to it.”

I opened the desk drawer and found a piece of hotel stationary, right where I hoped it would be. I picked up the pencil and wrote the word, QUALITY in capital letters. I held the paper toward the camera.

“As you can plainly see, The #2 Dixon Ticonderoga leaves a bold, unmistakable line, far superior to the thin and wispy wake left by the #3, or the fat, sloppy skid mark of the unwieldy #1. Best of all, the Ticonderoga is not filled with actual lead, but “madagascar graphite,” a far safer alternative for anyone who likes to chew on their writing implements.”

To underscore the claim, I licked the point. I then discussed the many advantages of the Ticonderoga’s color.

“A vibrant yellow, perfectly suited for an object that needs to stand out from the clutter of a desk drawer.”

I commented on the comfort of it’s design.

“Unlike those completely round pencils that press hard into the web of your hand, the Ticonderoga’s circumference is comprised of eight, gently plained surfaces, which dramatically reduce fatigue, and make writing for extended periods an absolute delight.”

I pointed out the “enhanced eraser,” which was “guaranteed to still be there - even when the pencil was sharpened down to an unusable nub.”

I opined about handmade craftsmanship and American made quality. I talked about the feel of real wood.

“In a world overrun with plastic and high tech gadgets, isn’t it comforting to know that some things haven’t evolved into something shiny and gleaming and completely unrecognizable?’”

After all that, there was still five minutes on the timer. So I shifted gears and considered the pencil’s impact on Western Civilization. I spoke of Picasso and Van Gogh, and their hundreds of priceless drawings - all done in pencil. I talked about Einstein and Hawking, and their many complicated theories and theorems - all done in pencil.

“Pen and ink are fine for memorializing contracts,” I said, “but real progress relies on the ability to erase and start anew. Archimedes said he could move the world with a lever long enough, but when it came to proving it, he needed a pencil to make the point.”

With three minutes remaining, I moved on to some personal recollections about the role of pencils in my own life. My first legible signature, my first book report, my first crossword puzzle, and of course, my first love letter. I may have even worked up a tear as I recalled the innocence of my youth, scribbled out on a piece of looseleaf with all the hope and passion a desperate 6th grader could muster...courtesy of a #2 pencil.

With :30 seconds left on the timer, I looked fondly at the Dixon Ticonderoga, and sat silently for five seconds. Then I wrapped it up.

“We call it a pencil, because all things need a name. But today, let’s call it what it really is. A time machine. A match maker. A magic wand. And let’s say it can all be yours...for just .99 cents.”

The timer read 0:00. The man walked back to the desk. He took the pencil and wrote “YOU’RE HIRED” on the stationary, and few days later, I moved to West Chester, PA. And a few days after that, I was on live television, face to face with the never-ending parade of trinkets and chotchkies that comprise QVC’s overnight inventory.

I spent three months on the graveyard shift, five nights a week. Technically, this was my training period, which was curious, given the conspicuous absence of supervision, or anything that could be confused with actual instruction. Every few minutes a stagehand would bring me another mysterious “must have item,” which I’d blather about nonsensically until it was whisked away and replaced with something no less baffling. In this way, I slowly uncovered the mysteries of my job, and forged a tenuous relationship with an audience of chronic insomniacs and narcoleptic lonely-hearts. It was a crucible of confusion and ambiguity, and in hindsight, the best training I ever had.

Which brings me to the point of your question, Kyle.

I don’t agree with Howard Dean - not at all.

Here’s what I didn’t understand 25 years ago. QVC had a serious recruiting problem. Qualified candidates were applying in droves, but failing miserably on the air. Polished salespeople with proven track records were awkward on TV. Professional actors with extensive credits couldn’t be themselves on camera. And seasoned hosts who understood live television had no experience hawking products. So eventually, QVC hit the reset button. They stopped looking for “qualified” people, and started looking for anyone who could talk about a pencil for eight minutes.

QVC had confused qualifications with competency.

Perhaps America has done something similar?

Look at how we hire help - it’s no so different than how we elect leaders. We search for work ethic on resumes. We look for intelligence in test scores. We search for character in references. And of course, we look at a four-year diploma as though it might actually tell us something about common-sense and leadership.

Obviously, we need a bit more from our elected officials than the instincts of a home shopping host, but the business of determining what those “qualifications” are is completely up to us. We get to decide what matters most. We get to decide if a college degree or military service is somehow determinative. We get to decide if Howard Dean is correct.

Anyone familiar with my foundation knows my position. I think a trillion dollars of student loans and a massive skills gap are precisely what happens to a society that actively promotes one form of education as the best course for the most people. I think the stigmas and stereotypes that keep so many people from pursuing a truly useful skill, begin with the mistaken belief that a four-year degree is somehow superior to all other forms of learning. And I think that making elected office contingent on a college degree is maybe the worst idea I’ve ever heard.

But of course, Howard Dean is not the real problem. He’s just one guy. And he’s absolutely right when he says that many others will judge Scott Walker for not finishing college. That's the real problem.

However - when Howard Dean called the Governor “unknowledgeable,” he rolled out more than a stereotype. He rolled a pencil across the desk, and gave Scott Walker eight minutes to knock it out of the park.

It’ll be fun to see if he does.

Mike

Did Democrats just betray fair elections? The SAVE Act controversy explained

DOMINIC GWINN / Contributor | Getty Images

One of President Trump’s key campaign promises, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, faces fierce opposition from Democrats in the Senate.

The SAVE Act recently passed Congress for the second time and is now headed to the Senate. This voter security bill mandates proof of U.S. citizenship for all federal elections. It garnered unanimous Republican support in Congress but was backed by only four Democrats, consistent with last year’s Senate rejection of the bill.

Glenn has repeatedly emphasized the urgency of securing our elections, warning that without reform in the next four years, free and fair elections may become a thing of the past. However, the SAVE Act faces significant hurdles. Republicans lack the Senate votes to overcome a filibuster, meaning the bill’s fate hinges on bipartisan support—something Democrats have been reluctant to offer.

So, what exactly does the SAVE Act do? Why are Democrats opposing it? And how can you help ensure its passage?

What the SAVE Act Entails

Stefan Zaklin / Stringer | Getty Images

The SAVE Act is straightforward: it requires voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship before casting a ballot in federal elections. This measure responds to reports of voter fraud, including allegations of noncitizens, such as illegal immigrants, voting in past presidential elections. Acceptable forms of identification include a REAL ID, U.S. passport, military ID, birth certificate, or other specified documents.

Additionally, the bill mandates that states remove noncitizens from voter rolls and lists of eligible voters. It also establishes criminal penalties for officials who fail to comply with these new guidelines.

Democrats’ Opposition to the SAVE Act

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Democrats have strongly criticized the SAVE Act, arguing it discriminates against women, transgender individuals, and minorities. They claim that people who have changed their names—such as women after marriage or transgender individuals—may struggle to vote if their current ID doesn’t match their birth certificate. However, the bill allows multiple forms of identification beyond birth certificates, meaning affected individuals can use updated IDs like a REAL ID or passport.

The argument that minorities are disproportionately harmed is slightly more substantiated. A recent survey showed that 93 percent of voting-age Black Americans, 94 percent of voting-age Hispanics, and 95 percent of voting-age Native Americans have valid photo IDs, compared to 97% of voting-age whites and 98 percent of voting-age Asians. However, in 2024, only about 58 percent of the voting-age population cast ballots—a trend that has been consistent for decades. There’s little evidence that Americans are prevented from voting due to a lack of ID. Instead of opposing the bill, a more constructive approach would be to assist the small percentage of Americans without IDs in obtaining proper documentation.

How You Can Make a Difference

Melissa Sue Gerrits / Stringer | Getty Images

The stakes couldn’t be higher—free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our democracy. Conservatives must rally to ensure the SAVE Act becomes law. Contact your Senators to express your support for the bill and highlight its importance in safeguarding electoral integrity. Grassroots efforts, such as sharing accurate information about the SAVE Act on social media or discussing it with friends and family, can amplify its visibility. Local advocacy groups may also offer opportunities to organize or participate in campaigns that pressure lawmakers to act. Every voice counts, and collective action could tip the scales in favor of this critical legislation.

"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

-Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park

The monstrous Dire Wolf, extinct for 10,000 years, has returned. This larger, ancient wolf species—popularized by HBO’s Game of Thrones—was resurrected by Colossal Laboratories, a Dallas-based bioscience company. Colossal utilized both preserved ancient Dire Wolf DNA and modern gray wolf DNA combined with some clever gene-crafting and a healthy pinch of hubris to create three approximations of the ancient canine.

While the wolves posed for a photoshoot alongside Game of Thrones props and its creator, Colossal’s broader plans remain unclear. However, what Glenn recently uncovered about the company is far more monstrous than the wolves will ever be. Glenn revealed that the CIA, through a nonprofit group known as In-Q-Tel, is funding Colossal's endeavors to bring back all sorts of extinct beasts. With the recently released JFK Files exposing the CIA’s unchecked power, Glenn warns of the dangerous potential behind this genetic manipulation—and the rogue agency’s possible motives.

Here are the top three most horrifying uses the CIA could have for this technology:

Dual-Use Technology

Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

Colossal and other biotech firms advertise a variety of "civilian" uses for bioengineered beasts, including research subjects, exotic zoos, and even climate restoration. As dubious as those uses are, Glenn revealed that the CIA could be cooking up something much worse. Gene-editing tools like CRISPR are inherently dual-purpose and easily adaptable for military use. As one of Colossal’s major investors, the CIA gains prime access to cutting-edge biotech, likely eyeing its potential for warfare.

Frankenstein’s Spy Lab

Like AI, one can only guess at the maximum capabilities of this gene-editing technology. On air, Glenn speculated about bioengineered resilient organisms, animals with tweaked senses designed for espionage or combat in areas inaccessible to drones or humans. Playing God to create new weapons of war sounds right up the CIA's alley.

Even worse than man-made mutant mutts, Glenn pointed out that these augmentations are by no means limited to animals. We could see (or rather, hear unverified rumors of) the rise of the next generation of super soldier projects. Human experimentation is not outside of the CIA's scope (think MKUltra), and genetically or chemically augmented humans have been a pipe dream for many a clandestine organization for decades. Is there anything more horrifying than an agency with as little oversight as the CIA in control of something as powerful and potentially devastating as gene-augmentation?

Eco-Warfare Unleashed

MARCELO MANERA / Contributor | Getty Images

Why attack a single target when you could attack an entire ecosystem instead?

Anyone who has had to deal with the destructive effects of fire ants knows how dangerous an invasive species can be to the human, plant, and animal inhabitants of any given region. Now imagine genetically engineered Dire Wolves or Woolly Mammoths unleashed by the CIA to cripple an enemy’s agriculture or environment. Such a weapon could inflict irreparable damage from a distance. Even the mere threat of eco-warfare might serve as a deterrent, though its unpredictability could reshape the world in ways we can’t control or repair.

Trump’s Liberation day unveiled: 3 shocking takeaways you need to know

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

President Trump’s new tariffs have sparked global outrage, and even conservatives are divided over the merits of his plan.

On Wednesday, April 2, 2025, President Trump declared "Liberation Day" to usher in a new era for the American economy. This bold initiative began with the introduction of sweeping tariffs on most—if not all—countries trading with the United States. These tariffs are reciprocal, meaning the percentage charged to each country mirrors the tariffs they impose on U.S. goods. The goal was to level the playing field between America and its trade partners.

As Glenn predicted, these tariffs have caused some immediate damage to the economy; the stock market has been hit hard, and China has already imposed a retaliatory tariff. While many fear that a recession is inbound, along with a global trade war, others are trusting in Trump's plan, keeping their head and preparing to ride out this rough patch.

So, what exactly are these "Liberation Day" tariffs, and what happened on April 2? Here are the top three takeaways:

Baseline Tariff

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

To kick off Liberation Day, the White House unveiled a baseline tariff affecting all imports to the U.S. Starting April 5, 2025, every good entering the United States will face a 10% tariff, regardless of its country of origin. While some nations face additional tariffs on top of this baseline, others—like the UK, Australia, and Argentina—only pay the 10% rate. These countries enjoy this leniency because they impose relatively low tariffs on American goods.

Reciprocal Tariffs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

For the countries that levied heavy tariffs against America, Trump hit them back hard. Cambodia, for instance, now faces a steep 49% tariff, while China contends with 34%, the EU with 20%, and Iraq with 39%. While these tariff rates may seem steep, they are all a good bit lower than the rates they apply against the U.S (see the full chart here). Trump’s strategy is to make foreign goods prohibitively expensive, encouraging manufacturing and jobs to return to American soil. Whether this gamble succeeds remains to be seen.

Canada and Mexico

Aaron M. Sprecher / Contributor, Chris Jackson / Staff | Getty Images

Notably absent from the "Liberation Day" tariff list are Canada and Mexico, America’s closest neighbors. That’s because Trump already imposed tariffs on them earlier this year. In February 2025, he slapped a 25% tariff on most goods imported from both countries to pressure them into curbing the flow of fentanyl across U.S. borders. Exceptions include agricultural products, textiles, apparel, and other items protected under NAFTA.

Does France's latest move PROVE lawfare is on the rise?

Sam Tarling / Stringer | Getty Images

An all-too-familiar story unfolded in France this week: the is law being weaponized against a "far-right" candidate. Does that ring a bell?

Glenn was taken aback earlier this week when he learned that Marine Le Pen, a popular French conservative, had been banned from the 2027 election following a controversial conviction. The ruling shocked French conservatives and foreign politicians alike, many of whom saw Le Pen as France’s best conservative hope. President Trump called it a "very big deal," a view shared by French commentators who fear this marks the end of Le Pen’s political career.

But this isn’t just about France—it’s a symptom of a larger threat looming over the West.

A double standard?

Fmr. President Sarkozy (left) and Fmr. Prime Minister Fillon (right)

BERTRAND GUAY / Contributor, Chesnot / Contributor | Getty Images

As of Sunday, March 30, 2025, Marine Le Pen led the polls with a commanding edge over her rivals, offering French conservatives their strongest shot at the presidency in years. Hours later, that hope crumbled. Found guilty of embezzling EU funds, Le Pen was sentenced to two years of house arrest, fined €100,000 ($108,200), and banned from public office for five years, effective immediately.

Glenn quickly highlighted an apparent double standard. Former President Nicolas Sarkozy and former Prime Minister François Fillon faced similar—or worse—corruption charges, yet neither was barred from office during their political runs. So why Le Pen, and why now? Similar to Trump’s "hush money" trial, legal troubles this late in the election cycle reek of interference. The decision should belong to voters—France’s largest jury—not a courtroom. This appears to be a grave injustice to the French electorate and another crack in democracy’s foundation.

This is NOT about France

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

This pattern stretches far beyond France; it’s a tactic we’ve seen before.

In early 2025, Bucharest’s streets erupted in protest after Romania’s Constitutional Court annulled the first round of its presidential election. Călin Georgescu, a rising conservative, had clinched an unexpected victory, only to have it stripped away amid baseless claims of Russian interference. His supporters raged against the decision, seeing it as a theft of their voice.

Both Georgescu and Le Pen echo the legal barrage President Trump endured before his 2024 win. The Left hurled every weapon imaginable at him, unleashing unprecedented lawfare. In America, the Constitution held, and the people’s will prevailed.

Now, with Tesla vandalism targeting Elon Musk’s free-speech stance, a coordinated pushback against freedom is clear—spanning France, Romania, the U.S., and beyond.

The war on free will

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

Trump’s 2024 victory doesn’t mean lawfare is dead; Europe shows it’s thriving.

France and Romania prove its effectiveness, sidelining candidates through courts rather than ballots. Glenn warned us about this years ago—when the powerful can’t win at the polls, they turn to the gavel. It’s a chilling trend of stripping voters of their choice and silencing dissent, all the while pawning it off as justice. The playbook is polished and ready, and America’s turn could come sooner than we think.