So... I can remember with the current moron in the white house, it was stated quite often that he did well in the elections because of how he spoke, his mannerisms, the (what should be) transparent efforts to look 'common', i.e, clearing brush, riding horses, and what have you. And now with the whole "Obama is an elitist" shenanigans going on, I'm wondering, just what is wrong with that? Is it bad to have an education? Is it bad to have refined taste in things? Why is it that our leaders are, honestly, decided by small town cowboys, hilljacks, country bumkins and hayseeds, and those who have money and profit off of them. Do these people really look at their lives, the world around them, and say "this is great, I want someone JUST LIKE ME, who has, obviously, been just as successful". It's starting to get annoying how we seem to celebrate mediocrity and frown upon things like intelligence, education, science, advancement...
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? so, does this mean that you don't think Obama is an elitist? does having an education make you an elitist or contribute in a distinct fashion? does Obama have more refined taste than the current President Bush? and how would you know? does everyone who grew up in Texas and has a ranch qualify as a hayseed? Lyndon Johnson was the most powerful man in the US at one time and his wife was Lady Bird. is that a bumpkin name* or what? Jimmy -- my brother is a thorn in my side -- Carter was a peanut farmer. sounds pretty country to me. on the other side of the aisle, Richard Nixon was nominally a Quaker, which is just about as odd a religious sect as they come, save snake handlers. it's hard to imagine that Nixon had refined taste, though he did have a chance to go to Harvard, but he had to decline because he could not afford to live away from home. personally, i think you're the elitist. i bet you don't watch "America's Funniest Home Videos", even though you secretly think they are funny. *given to her by a nursemaid, or not.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? Movement conservatism feeds off of conflict, off the feeling that "we" are "losing," that "they" are making fun of "us." I mean, the issue you identify is just another aspect of the war on Christmas, or global climate change denialism.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? Conservatives say the same thing about liberals, but with obviously different examples. Regardless, I welcome elitism in elections, as long as elitism is code-word for intellectualism that rejects populism.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? Do you know many Quakers? Because with regard to the dozen or so I know quite well....odd is hardly a word I'd use to describe them.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? I would describe them as odd, because odd means unorthodox or unconventional. I find nothing wrong with using the word odd to describe them, just as much as I consider it a compliment to be unorthodox or unconventional.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? Why, because they didn't elect John Kerry? The initial poster called Bush a moron, yet Kerry's academic career was no more distinguished. 2004 should have been a slam dunk for the Democrats, but they put forth an unappealing northeastern elite and then can’t figure out why they lost.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? This is a very insightful post. Far above the typical posts here on this forum. It demonstrats an objectivity that should serve as a positive example.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? Wow, that benign post elicited a kitty response? Touchy, touchy. Look if you’re going to label the half the electorate as drooling idiots then don’t be surprised when they view you as elitists. You should read The Wisdom of Crowds. It is an interesting insight on how the idiots usually get it right.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? 1. I said people are stupid. As a general rule that's true of humans in both their individual form and their mob form. Nothing elitist about that view -- misanthropy is quite egalitarian. 2. Surowiecki's views really aren't that original. Related ideas have been part and parcel of the intellectual history of the West since the 18th century -- and arguably even earlier. 3. Even he says crowds only get it right under certain conditions -- conditions which arguably aren't at all operative in our modern world of media and politics. 4. A crowd of kittens ...
Elitism is a negative when it communicates a disdain toward those whom you are asking to vote for you. It's not always a negative. FDR was as elite as you can get, and he did all right politically.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? the individual Quaker is not odd. when Quakers get together and participate in their form of spirituality, sometimes it varies so widely from what conventional Christian churches do in contrast, it has to be viewed as odd. i did not mean that in a pejorative way, though i can see how one might take umbrage, especially since i referenced Richard Nixon, who is not always viewed as being the sort of person one would invite to dinner. the sucker could debate, but he sweat something fierce. i don't think Nixon was an elitist, at least not while he was President.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? Swear to God, that guy lived in my dorm in college. (Stuart Scott did, too. Boo-yah!) I would tell y'all about ol' Jim, but I wouldn't want to be judged on the type of person I was at 19 years old, and I doubt he would either. I'll just say this...in the DTH, it was the custom to write the basketball preview by referencing the songs of a band. Jim did it one year using REM. So he has that going for him. (I'm such a dork...I still remember him talking about Kevin Madden by writing that his transfer letter was a letter never sent.)
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? You can be upper class or highly intellectual but still express values in a universal way that hit home across class and education groups. Obama was doing this until Clinton (or the press, not sure who was first) hung the elitist premise out there and then Obama promptly stepped in it on NAFTA in Ohio and his condescending comments in San Fran. The problem with elitism in Presidential politics is that an elitist conveys a message that what's good for certain elites (in Obama's case, intellectual elites) is good for the rest of the country as well ... even though they might not be smart enough to understand it. That owngoal even needs to ask the question is surprising. Elitist snob.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? So is it elitist to namedrop about a writer who describes a populist theme in a thread assuming that anyone who votes for a Bush thinks he's "jist folks"?
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? I've been to a Quaker wedding and thought the ceremony was quite beautiful, plus the reception was as much a blast as any wedding reception I've attended. Sure, the ceremony was out of the ordinary, which I suppose one could call odd in a non-pejorative way. Frankly, it was the comparison/contrast to snake handlers that I thought was a bit pejorative....despite the "save" language. The reference to tricky-Dick didn't bother me.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? I am guessing that this may be the first time that the Clinton's have been referred to as "movement conservatives." Seriously, the funny thing to me is that Obama came from a humble background and has worked most of his career with people from humble backgrounds (until he got to the US Senate) and turned down ample opportunities to join the country club set at every turn and Clinton labels him as "elitist." Substantively, it is funny as well. The basis of Obama's campaign is that the masses need to demand change from their government. Not just in an election, but after. He has said that Health Care Reform will only happen if there is a ground swell for it that pressures the government. His presidency is premised on the people taking control of the government (to the extent that is possible). Clinton on the other hand, has run a campaign where it seems that she is Santa Claus. She is going to determine what is good for us and then give it to us.
Re: Can anyone explain this to me? Perhaps it's elitist to presume that people wish to lead their leaders.
For some strange reason people resent being treated like inferiors. I actually agree with your perspective, but I can understand the resentment of elites, particularly toward those who rub it in. With regards to politics, I think it's more a matter of seeking a candidate with similar cultural values. I find it hard to believe that people who wanted to have a beer with George Bush imagined a son a President and grandson of a Senator was just a regular guy.