I want to apply for an NEH Summer Stipend for 2014. I can argue that my project fits into their Bridging Cultures program, and all. It has a funding ratio of 8% and that is from among people who are actually allowed to apply, after applying to apply.
Our university can nominate two people. In the past I never applied for this stipend because I am not in one of the disciplines the University says it wants to prioritize for them. You apply to the University for permission to compete; they choose their two favorites; those are allowed to compete. Since I am already at a disadvantage because of discipline, I should probably be as politic as possible and not publish an opinion piece that criticizes another part of the university.
I am fairly ill with worry over this since I want to be able to speak. This problem, however, is why the scientists are so coldhearted. They will not say anything, will not be at all controversial, because they need the green light the Office of Research and Sponsored programs. I am more coldhearted than these scientists because I can at least think: they will stop you anyway, so you have nothing to lose by autocensura and everything to gain by publishing the piece and writing the proposal. That is, I am a truly coldhearted scientist.
These are my least favorite things about academia: peer review is not blind, and you are constantly told and also shown it is unwise to speak freely.
Axé.
coldhearted scientist وداد 
Well, I am a scientist and applying for grants and I can tell you the only way to be sure not to get a grant is to not apply. So I say you should do it and if you do get to the second stage, I am pretty sure your university will be happy with the prospect of getting funding and will support you.
I am not considering not applying. I am considering not publishing an opinion piece that contains criticism of something else that happened at the university.