Back to Clive Crook's blog homepage
More on Democrats and respect
September 9, 2008
As promised in my previous post, some examples of the hundreds of messages I am getting about this article. (I know you only have my word for it, but I promise you these instances are quite representative. And something to bear in mind perhaps if you are sceptical about the writers’ bona fides is that these extracts are, as I say, from emails and not from comments on the blog intended for publication.)
The divorce [between working class Americans and Democrats] started long ago, about the time of George McGovern. His candidacy drove my father, for example, to vote Republican for the first time in his life. As for myself, I strongly oppose most of the policies of the Republicans, but, frankly, being in the same room with liberal Democrats and listening to them talk, alienates me, too. The arrogance and condescension is so thick you could cut it with a knife.
—
I was a liberal once, serving as general counsel of the Peace Corps…, and it was some years later that the attitude you so aptly describe began to really alienate me from my former allegiance. It wasn’t so much the policies, although I’ve also moved to the center/right over the years, as it was the smugness, the patronizing attitude, and the almost pervasive hypocrisy that made the left intolerable. You give them credit for being well-intentioned, and I think you’re right, but they’re getting awfully mean this year.
One of the ironies is that I’m not really a member of the right either. The left drove me out, but I’m not comfortable with a lot of the conservative positions. The one thing that makes the right fundamentally more acceptable, though, is that for all their faults, the right wing politicians by and large do not think they are smarter than the left or the people of this country. The left is utterly convinced that the only reason others don’t agree with them is that they’re too stupid. Unfortunately for the left, the people are at least smart enough to pick up this attitude.
—
[Good piece] on Palin. I say this as someone who would like to see Obama win. I’m amazed at how ugly and counterproductive the behavior you describe on the part of of out-of-touch media/lefty blogs etc has been.
—
I am a Democrat and African-American and I found your article to be dead-on accurate. You could detect the snideness of liberal Democratic reactions a mile away. I find that Democrats from those parts of the US not located on the coasts tend to understand this, too. If you support his campaign you can only hope that it does not fall for this same mindset - something that so far they have avoided doing, hence its appeal in the Midwest and the West.
I want to reflect more carefully on the many emails I’ve received that take issue in a thoughtful and courteous way with my argument (as opposed to merely screaming about my duplicity, stupidity, ethnic origins and intellectual corruption) and I will come back to the subject again. But here is part of an email from a dear and esteemed American friend that I wanted to post and respond to straight away.
You are painting the entire Democratic party with the same brush thereby doing to them exactly what you are accusing them of doing to the Republicans. Being in (and from) small town America, I am constantly amazed at the thoughtful discussions I have had with both Republicans and Democrats on the candidates with no personal attacks or animosity expressed. It has been really interesting - very different than the last few elections. Perhaps the column needs to be more directed to the media.
The second thing that annoyed me is the final paragraph: “It will be hard. They will have to develop some regard for the values that the middle of the country expresses when it votes Republican. Religion. Unembarrassed flag-waving patriotism. Freedom to succeed or fail through one’s own efforts. Refusal to be pitied, bossed around or talked down to. And all those other laughable redneck notions that made the United States what it is.”
Except for the religious reference (I cannot abide mixing politics and religion), I can’t understand why you think that these are primarily Republican traits (I don’t like “values” references either). I think of everyone who told me how they cried during Obama’s speech (me included) because they felt hope and that surge of patriotism that they had been missing. And I know of no one who isn’t proud to succeed or fail on their own, or refuses to be pitied, bossed around or talked down to. I know you are making a point but I think this paragraph took away from the power of the piece.
Well said, Jana. I certainly intended no disrespect to grass-roots Democrats: my complaint is chiefly addressed to the party’s spokesmen–Obama is the exception–and advocates in the media. I believe they are letting the wider liberal movement down. I will say, though, that good-natured discussions between ordinary Democrats and Republicans might be harder to find in Washington DC, New York City and other metropolitan liberal redoubts than they are for you in Idaho.
As for the idea that those values or cultural affinities are widely shared or even universal, this has not been my experience. Obviously I am moving in the wrong circles, but the metropolitan liberal, in my experience, regards overt religious identity as vulgar, and evangelical Christianity as an infallible marker of mental retardation. Flag-waving patriotism is seen as a joke and an embarrassment. My point about refusal to be talked down to, and so on, was not intended to imply that only Republican voters think that way. What I was trying to say is that the liberal elite seems to forget that ordinary Republican-leaning Americans are proud people who want to be treated with some respect, that they are in fact entitled to it, and that their insistence on it is a quintessentially American idea.
Your last sentence is well said, Clive Crook, and I agree completely. But would it be any less true if the words “Republican-leaning Americans” were replaced with “Democratic-leaning Americans”? All voters want respect. But how much respect have the great majority of Americans, regardless of party, received from their government during the Bush/Cheney years?
How much respect can we expect to receive if John McCain, who has voted with George W. Bush 90% of the time, and still has the nerve to insult the voters’ intelligence by calling himself a “maverick”, is elected to the White House?
This is why, once again, with all due respect, I have to say that this is an utterly phony issue, nothing more than the brainchild of some clever RNC speechwriter.
Stupidity in running idiotic campaigns or, even worse, administrations? Yes, there is more than enough of that to go around, particularly in the case of the Democrats with regard to this campaign, especially in the failure to recognize the talents and aspiration of women that is likely to cost them the election. There is also stupidity aplenty in the case of the Republicans with regard to governing, as they have betrayed and debased every ideal this country stands for during their past eight years in office. Surely, that cannot be called respect.
Posted by: algasema | September 9th, 2008 at 7:41 pm | Report this commentI thought Christians are not supposed to lie. Yet you have Sarah Palin out there lying about being for the Bridge to Nowhere when she was for that now infamous bridge.
Also, McCain who is supposedly so wise on national security measures voted Yes for the Iraq War! GOP told us they were going to fight terrorism and they led us into Iraq, a phony and pretend war. The real war should have been waged in Afghanistan. The GOP now has an agent of change, a phony and pretend Person Sarah Palin who is a puppet more than an agent of change. The real agent of change is Barack Obama.
Posted by: Angellight | September 9th, 2008 at 9:13 pm | Report this commentI apologize for so many posts, but the worst lack of respect of for ordinary Americans is on the part of the corporate-owned media. Why, for example, do we see only fawning programs about Sarah Palin’s alleged family values and ability to parrot back a single speech written by a Bush hack, or about John McCain’s POW war record, which has been public knowledge for decades, with no mention about Bob Woodward’s new bombshell book about the appalling failure of leadership in Iraq, or of Scott McClellan’s already forgotten book about how he was repeatedly lied to and betrayed by the same White House that he so faithfully tried to serve?
The media, especially the four major TV channels, all owned by giant corporations with a very clear interest in not being taxed or regulated by a Democratic administration, are guilty of showing more contempt and less respect for the intelligence of American voters than all the liberal politicians put together from the time of Thomas Jefferson (assuming that he was indeed a liberal) until now.
In the unlikely event that anyone has missed my point, the issue of the alleged “lack of respect” for the voters by the “liberal elite” is nothing more than a red herring, straight out of Karl Rove’s playbook. It is disconcerting to see a respected journalist like Clive Crook going along so unquestioningly, as if there were any real substance to this absurd charge.
To what will no doubt be the great relief of many who disagree with me, I will take a short break from further posting, at least on this issue.
Posted by: algasema | September 9th, 2008 at 9:21 pm | Report this commentalgasema #110: “worst lack of respect for ordinary Americans”.
Posted by: algasema | September 9th, 2008 at 9:25 pm | Report this commentWe get our FT one day late here in small town Oklahoma. My husband first read your article and then recommended it to me. We each understood it differently (my understanding was correct, of course.) As we are absolutely surrounded by true right-wing zealot Republicans who constantly ridicule and mock the Democrats, (Rush Limbaugh plays on our local radio 5 days a week) my feeling is that the lack of respect goes both ways. As a 67 year-old grandmother, I certainly don’t feel that Democrats are always right, but I am truly appalled that we might have Sarah Palin as our President in a few years (probably 2012)and, I must admit, if we elect McCain/Palin in 2008 I will agree with your so-called “metropolitan liberal” that yes, we are idiots.
Posted by: Janice Garrett | September 9th, 2008 at 9:26 pm | Report this commentIn the 150 comments or so, I note a theme…the Right Wing mocks the leftish politicians and the incumbent media.
The Left Wing mocks the rightish politicians and the voters.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | September 9th, 2008 at 10:36 pm | Report this commentRegarding your Article “Democrats must Learn Some Respect”:
I found your article interesting and mostly true.
I have two comments.
1.) I disagree with your statmement that apart from Fox News and Talk Radio most of the rest of the media are liberal. Do you mean by “liberal” that they are more liberal than the BBC which I take as a standard for “neutral” reporting. I believe the vast majority of US media are more conservative than the BBC.
2.)My second comment is really a question. If you are right that the liberals are contemptous and arrogant vis a vis a large section of the population - and I believe you are probably right about that - how can they manifest the opposite?
They can hardly cling to guns, become bigots, and false patriots or hide behind religion.
How then do they show their respect?? In your article you admit it would be hard but you do not say exactly what the liberals must change.
Surely you do not want them to emulate the conservatives.
It looks like from your point of view they will either have to give up their principles or lose the elections.
In other words how can one not have contempt for gun nuts, religious fundamentalist, flag waivers, and book censors and maintain any integrity?
Posted by: Walter H. King | September 9th, 2008 at 11:14 pm | Report this commentJohn Powers,
to be fair, you would have to add:
The Right Wing also mocks voters… from minorities.
Posted by: Dave | September 10th, 2008 at 11:07 am | Report this comment“the BBC which I take as a standard for “neutral” reporting”
Ah, but there is your mistake, my friend! The BBC is hardly neutral.
Posted by: Annette | September 10th, 2008 at 2:24 pm | Report this commentWell, Clive Crook, again you miss the mark, but you’ve said one definitely true thing:
“Obviously I am moving in the wrong circles, but the metropolitan liberal, in my experience, regards overt religious identity as vulgar, and evangelical Christianity as an infallible marker of mental retardation. Flag-waving patriotism is seen as a joke and an embarrassment.”
These things you regard as contemptuous views are simply truths.
But ask yourself, why is it necessary to say anything about religious beliefs in an election?
The answer is simple: because the Religious Right insists, over and over, on pushing these things before us.
Just like insisting that the brainless notion of creationism be taught in public schools. Or the old notion that the Ten Commandments should be on the walls of courthouses. Or the stuff about prayer in public schools.
There are lots of evasngelical Christians in the U.S. who do not share with the fundamentalists their demands this way. There are very thoughtful ones, but we do not hear from them.
We hear from the folks who tell us homosexuals cause hurricanes. The people who say a bloody war is God’s will. The folks who just do not seem to understand that America is a pluralistic society - founded by worldly men to have freedom from religion - and that religion belongs in their tax-exempted churches, not in national politics.
The same goes for rah-rah, mindless patriotism which really is just another religion, a secular one, the American Civic Religion. Why in God’s name should a flag pin on a lapel matter? That is definitely not a good emphasis.
The American establishment likes to keep this rah-rah stuff ginned up because it makes it so easy to start new wars. It is also a form of emotional compensation for the unhappiness and anger so common on America’s streets. Having lived half my life in America, I know this is a fact.
Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO | September 10th, 2008 at 2:37 pm | Report this commentDave,
I disagree. Having worked on (and still working on) a few initiatives, pigeonholed as “right-wing” in education (and housing), which would allow students to attend the school of their choice (and live where they liked) rather than being assigned by the State, the amount of disdain from the Left towards minorities was overwhelming.
Too stupid to choose where to go to school…where to work..where to live were all frequent sneers from lefty “community organizer” types.
The right-leaning (more like free marketers) tended to respect the choices of the individuals in matters of housing and education. The lefties tended to demand that minorities (and majorities for that matter) toss away their common sense and do as the authoritarian left commands.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | September 10th, 2008 at 3:30 pm | Report this commentMr. Crook - first, I like your column and I read it regularly to get an idea of how we Americans are perceived by those living outside our country.
It sounds to me like you’re talking to people who are extreme left. The folks at the extremes don’t respect anyone and that includes republicans, conservatives, ideologues. I thought I shared the values of folks on the left, the “liberals”. So I got involved in some of liberal activist groups in the Los Angeles area for a few years and was surprised to learn that they are just as closed minded and rigid as the folks on the extreme right. It was a great lesson learned, that I am not a liberal, I’m in the center.
I do not appreciate the religious right insistence that I believe in god, that I get “saved”, they, who do not respect my rights to make my own decisions regarding my body, who want to redefine contraception so that it’s considered abortion, who think god had decided we should go to war, that god is above the law, that god is a higher law, that we don’t have to take care of the environment and other issues because the 2nd -coming rapture is about to take us away. It’s a great excuse not to solve our problems and to continue on this path of running our country into the ground. It’s hard to respect.
Posted by: Maggie Knowles | September 10th, 2008 at 5:45 pm | Report this commentIn 2004 I heard George W. Bush, who claimed to be the President “for everyone” call John Kerry a “Massachusetts Liberal” like it was the dirtiest epithet he could summon. As a Democrat who has spent much of my life in Massachusetts, I did not exactly take this as a signal of “respect.” Mr. Bush more recently called us “angry liberals” at the RNC convention, dripping scorn on the legitimate grievances of yes, liberals, along with about 80% of the American population who doesn’t love where he’s brought us. We are called “elitists” and “latte sipping liberals” if we dare to live in a city or believe in gun control, and we’re called unpatriotic if we dare to suggest things could be done better, and we’re called godless degenerates if we don’t believe in merging church and state. Think of the humiliation heaped on John Kerry when he went hunting and apparently didn’t look manly enough, the jokes about his alleged Botoxing (have you seen Giuliani or Schwarzenegger lately?) or, god forbid, the fact that he spoke French. The gall of the man!!!!!! So please don’t talk to me about scorn. The Right (and, of course, as there are for Democrats, there are surely exceptions for Republicans) have spewed contempt at us for years.
Posted by: Liza | September 10th, 2008 at 6:13 pm | Report this commentStepping back from this debate for a minute, it occurs to me that the last generation or so has not been terribly cheering for the Left in most countries. It sometimes seems as though every country that has not had a Reagen or a Thatcher, has at least drifted in that direction.
In such circumstances, a political partisan can think in one of two directions.
a) They can re-examine their beliefs to see if they have made a mistake somewhere that the electorate has spotted. Success would be personally painful, and involve a lot of unpleasant arguments with good friends and allies.
b) They can blame those idiots in the polling booths. They can accuse the voters of idiocy, and their own adversaries of lies and deceit.
Option b) obviously sounds more congenial. It is also likely to make people who pick it sound arrogant and dismissive to non-supporters. In fact, picking it would make you sound very much like the caricature “elitist” out-of-touch American Liberal.
Posted by: ad | September 10th, 2008 at 10:56 pm | Report this commentQuoting Mr. Crook’s esteemed American friend: “You are painting the entire Democratic party with the same brush thereby doing to them exactly what you are accusing them of doing to the Republicans. Being in (and from) small town America, I am constantly amazed at the thoughtful discussions I have had with both Republicans and Democrats….”
Bingo! Being from what some call “the heartland” Mr. Crook’s friend may not be paying full attention to how far his/her liberal Democratic brethren on the coasts have strayed from traditional American values.
Posted by: Tory Torrison | September 11th, 2008 at 1:12 am | Report this commentBravo Liza. BTW, take a good look at McCain. Compare videos of him during the primary only a few months ago. Does he not look like he’s had some botox treatments lately. Has no one noticed the forehead unlined, the cheeks smooth as butter, the jowls tight as a drum, the skin smooth, skin cancer surgery scars non-existent, (either surgically removed or injected) and age spots erased. Successful treatments result in looking rested, refreshed, not tired and anxious. Surprised no one has mentioned these obvious changes? Don’t be. Who’s going to go there? Not the Democrats. When the shoe’s on the other foot, Democrats turn the other cheek. Democrats are too polite to get down and dirty. Personal attacks unworthy of a high achieving, well mannered, intellectual, articulate gentleman? He’d rather take the high road. (policy lectures are de rigeur). Botox is a private matter. A matter of choice. Remind you of anything? Democrats are afraid of being accused of some ism: ageism say. The tables have been turned, cynically, albeit brilliantly, against the Democrats. Turnabout is fair play. Politics is a dirty business. Not for the faint hearted. Does anyone remember Adlai.
Posted by: claudia | September 11th, 2008 at 3:47 am | Report this commentIts impossible not to think that the GOP is stupid. Sorry about seeming smug but for most of us Democrats here in San Francisco its not smugness but terror that the stupid GOP is going to get in and destroy the country and the world for another ,….years.
The GOP now stands for nothing other than Guns (Palin and the poor and ignorant) Oil, (think Cheney and the morally bankrupt scheming cold war warriors) and Propaganda (think Faux news Murdoch and the mega powerful busy duping the Guns set)
If you are wavering I guess you have just made a ton of money as a suit wearing guy in the city of London and dont want to pay much tax.
Posted by: scientella | September 11th, 2008 at 5:10 am | Report this commentYou identify a supposed lack of respect for white working class values shown by liberal Democrats. I beg to differ. I think it is the white working class that has little but contempt for the values of the Democratic party’s left wing.
I would describe those values as: tolerance and respect for diversity; inclusiveness rather than tribal exclusivity; the search for common ground over the continual search for enemies.
If that sound like liberal condescension on my part, then I suggest you haven’t been listening to the ugly, vituperation of the right wing pundits, bloggers and politicians
Posted by: Nari N. | September 11th, 2008 at 6:53 am | Report this commentI guess I view this entirely differently. Why is it that Democrats are the ones who are constantly having to apologize for their ideals? Why is it looked down on to be educated and well informed about the facts? And if you are, why are you are considered an elitist snob? That makes no sense to me.
Aren’t we just buying into the whole concept that the American public should collectively be dumbed-down, and easily manipulated by our political leaders, and to challenge this, well you are being an elitist, and that is WRONG.
We should be proud of being aware of the real issues, not apologizing for it!!
Posted by: meljomur | September 11th, 2008 at 8:07 am | Report this commentI will end my self-imposed break just long enough to say that I am glad to see same balance coming back into the discussion about elitism. The idea that, in view of the despicable Republican record of lies, smears and distortions against the Democrats, as we are witnessing now in the reactions to Obama’s attempts to tell the truth about Palin’s less than “reformist” record, it is ridiculous to say that the Democrats have a monopoly on “lack of respect” for the voters. What absurd balderdash!
Before I sign off again. I would like to issue an invitation to all of you patriotic flag wavers in the “heartland”. You want American flags? Come to liberal, elitist, latte-drinking New York. (By the way, I don’t drink latte-I am strictly a green tea man.) You’ll see more American flags here than you could have ever imagined. And not just today, on the anniversary of 9/11, but every day in the year.
Why do you think that the terrorists picked a place like New York to hit instead of a more “patriotic” town somewhere in Middle America? Why did they kill not only 2,500 American citizens but also 500 immigrants (most, but not all of them, legal) from 90 different countries, something that none of our politicians in either party ever mentions?
The answer is that the terrorists hated everything that really makes America the greatest country in the world. And what is it that makes us great? Is it our money, which is mostly borrowed from China? Is it our military, which even McPalin admits is badly overstretched? Of course not.
Our greatness is in our tolerance, our religious freedom, our diversity and our belief in racial and social justice - everything that the far right fanatics who have run the Republican party for almost 30 years want to destroy.
Posted by: algasema | September 11th, 2008 at 11:28 am | Report this commentAnother “algasema”: Please ignore the first three words: “The idea that” in my sentence continuing with “in view of”. The sentence should have begun with the latter three words.
Posted by: algasema | September 11th, 2008 at 11:34 am | Report this commentAlgasema and John Chuckman…. time you give others space to reply no?? Yours are the ones I keep seeing on Mr Crooks last posts.
That being said I am inclined to agree mostly with what Mr Crooks has said. In my experiece, it is the liberials/left that have given me and those around more greif for our views.
I consider myself conservative, being catholic, pro-life and believe everyone has a right to their opinions be it owning a gun (i dont) or letting their kids to be taught the bible in school (will they really be THAT crazy growing up??). And Im black too.
Ive been talked down to, preached at, sometimes treated like Im a poor, misguided or confused (or both!) soul. Me saying Im not sure about Barak Obama is almost tantamount to betraying my race. Wosrt thing is because I dont always agree with some liberal views Im called closed minded and am expected to change MY views meanwhile the thought that I may just have a point to my arguements never ever crosses the mind of anyone. Then theres the labeling of abortion as womens rights (I know so many many woman against it) not to mention the fact that Im religous… So, in some way its made out, especially in the circles I move in (mostly yuppies, bankers) that I should be somewhat embarassed for having these views. Its annoying, painful and leaves me feeling most indignant.
Surely all this must point to a lack of respect of my views. I know there are those crazies out there who speak for ‘right-wingers’ but seems to me sometimes, just about everyone else says something that can arguably be seen as a lack of respect of a conservative point of view.
And no, Walter. The BBC isnt neutral, they have a liberal bias. Theyve admitted to it themselves.
Posted by: Chuck | September 11th, 2008 at 2:48 pm | Report this commentChuck, I don’t know whether this will be the last post on this blog or not. What does it matter? And how much space am I taking away from you by writing my comments? OK, so you are a conservative. Fine. You are entitled to your views. So are we liberals. America is all about the right to disagree.
My only gripe is with the far right cable TV and talk show people who yell and scream (often literally - look at Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly) that anyone who disagrees with them is an arrogant, condescending, out of touch, terrorist-loving, elitist wimp who hates America.
By buying into the “arrogant, condescending, elitist” part of this fantasy, though certainly not the rest, Clive Crook has done all of his readers, who look to him for a balanced, objective view of America, a great disservice.
As Bill O’Reilly himself would say, I leave it to you or anyone else who wants to to post the last comment on this blog.
Posted by: algasema | September 11th, 2008 at 3:40 pm | Report this commentI’ve spent a number of years intensively reading and arguing on politicized American websites. The difference between the 25% of Americans who are liberals or Democrats and the 25% of Americans who are conservatives or Republicans is not whether they think their opponents and the uncooperative masses are stupid. It’s HOW they think the masses are stupid.
The progressives are exasperated by the failure of the middle classes and working classes to recognize their best interests (as understood by them). The middle classes are intensely snobbish regardless of their political persuasion (it’s not just the liberal Dems–see Michael Savage’s sneers about his back-home roots).
The conservatives are married to the trope that the poor (and blacks, hispanics, etc.) are poor because they are lazy, vicious and stupid.
On this the more rabid partisans of the political class factions often agree.
“Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.” ~John Stuard Mill
“Human pigeons”–a nickname for the homeless and not just in the USA, I’m afraid.
Yes, liberals turn into NIMBYs when the childrne of the poor compete with their carefully groomed children for university places.
The conservatives are riddled with class warriors of their own–Scrouge would have been considered a liberal by the Ayn Rand-loving “libertarians” and McCain is a RINO “Republican in Name Only”.
Surprise, surprise–the urban liberals are mostly upper middle class and prejudiced against Rubes and Hicks. So are the suburban conservatives.
Both loose sight of “Purple America” in the heat of their partisan bickering. Both have more in common with the Enemy than the apolitical majority.
Posted by: Brant Boucher | September 11th, 2008 at 4:21 pm | Report this commentRoger,
I tend to agree with you about New York. NYC is very patriotic, flag waving and pro-USA (also pro Jets, for kickoff weekend) in all its stripes and manias.
Just went to the belated labor day parade there Saturday, and I can safely say that the Union men and women were most certainly flag waving, gun toting, beer (and whiskey and tequilla) drinking, bagpipes playing, tattoo wearing, drum beating Americans.
The guys I talked to don’t want higher taxes, terrible schools, or an Al-Qaeda slaughter in Iraq any more than I do…A+ experience all around.
JBP
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | September 11th, 2008 at 4:21 pm | Report this commentAnd neither do I, John. I suppose that makes me a typical New Yorker too.
Posted by: algasema | September 11th, 2008 at 5:28 pm | Report this commentChuck,
I can’t imagine anyone cares about your biography. I fail to see its even being relevant.
And if you don’t like something posted, seems simple to me, you just don’t have to read it.
Whatever your background, race, religion, food preferences, sexual identity, state of health, etc, you actually just read like one more whining American.
Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO | September 11th, 2008 at 5:42 pm | Report this commentAs another resident of rural America, I too am surrounded by right-wing radio & lots of hate speech by Republicans that is repeated on an endless loop. It’s hard to compete with falsehoods that become facts through repetition & religious fervor. I don’t see Democrats as elitist so much as willing to look to science & education to solve our problems, and to weigh facts & seek a consistent moral point of view, even to their undoing. They will give credit to the other side & seek compromise (as Obama has repeatedly praised McCain), but the Republicans I am exposed to, on the radio & the ones who mimic what they hear, don’t give an inch.
They do believe in hard work & accomplishment, and that is exactly what the Republican party is counting on, when they endlessly repeat any story of a poor person caught cheating the government out of $200 rather than what we should really be focused on: the billions in handouts to private contractors & corporate friends of the administration. Now our soldiers in the military don’t have to peel potatoes and prepare their own meals as our parents’ generation would have done, they have private contractors to do it at a cost to the American taxpayers of about $12/meal.
When was George Bush self-reliant? He has rich parents & friends to bail him out of every failed business endeavor. As Gore Vidal said, “What we have in this country is socialism for the rich & free enterprise for the poor.” What happens to our veterans? They get John McCain who votes against their benefits, education & GI bill. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps & suck it up! You’re just missing a few limbs & perhaps suffering from PTSD. At least he wears an American flag on his lapel. Whew, that’s a relief.
Democrats want our country to be great again through advances in stem cell research, alternative energy, and science & technology. That is why we’re world leaders. We want to have intelligence & expertise in government, not a president who holds our public institutions in contempt. We want to welcome all views and find the best solutions. In short, we want a president for ALL Americans. Obama is the only one who will do that. How is that elitist?
Posted by: JIV | September 11th, 2008 at 5:53 pm | Report this comment“How is that elitist”
Exactly the point:
“Democrats want our country to be great again through advances in stem cell research”
A group of (bipartisan by the way) politicians and Hollywood nitwits want to spend taxpayers money not for science (embryonic stem cell spending is an earmark, not an NSF/NIH grant), but to make a point against the pro-life crowd.
Damn science; Damn the facts; we can get Sherly Crow to support us if we agitate against pro-lifers. Money which could well be spent on high school science education is thrown at a boondoggle to smack political opponents.
There is a huge crew in the media and politics that wants voters to toss out all common sense to score political points. That is the sneer.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | September 11th, 2008 at 6:15 pm | Report this commentAs an exasperated Minnesota farmer & RNC delegate said after McCain picked Palin to play to the religious base, “If you don’t like abortion, don’t have one. Social issues won’t create jobs for us in Minnesota.”
That’s why he’s switching parties to vote Obama.
Republicans use social issues to win elections. It’s great that you’re Catholic & pro-life, Chuck, but is that the purpose of your vote? Is that what government’s for? Biden is Catholic & pro-life too, but he doesn’t feel the need to legislate it for everyone else.
We do need government, though, for a prepared & equipped military, clean air, safe food, properly maintained highways & bridges, advances in energy, educational opportunity, etc. etc.
Posted by: JIV | September 11th, 2008 at 6:18 pm | Report this comment[…] is a link to a follow up post - More on Democrats and respect - in which Crooks discusses some of the reaction to that […]
Posted by: Revisiting the Democrats’ cultural complacency « The Inquiring Mind | September 12th, 2008 at 12:06 am | Report this commentClive, this is ridiculous. You’re an Englishman educated at Oxford and LSE. You live in Washington, D.C., and have only lived in the US for 3 years. And yet you’re going to hold forth on how small town Americans vote against liberals because the metropolitan dwelling elites are always looking down on them. How did you gain this insight? Have you ever met anyone from a small town? Or have you, like most other pundits, acquired mind reading abilities along with your press credentials?
Your article is like a museum of right wing memes. Liberal media! (Originated 1968 and used successfully by the Republicans for 40 years). Elitism! Small Town Values! Coastal Condescension! Jesus! The Flag!
Did you think of any of this yourself or is there a right wing playbook you cribbed from?
Posted by: Reece | September 12th, 2008 at 6:23 am | Report this commentI haven’t read any of the comments - just commenting on Clive’s piece.
From CC’s description,
Posted by: fxtrader | September 12th, 2008 at 4:20 pm | Report this comment“the metropolitan liberal, in my experience, regards overt religious identity as vulgar, and evangelical Christianity as an infallible marker of mental retardation. Flag-waving patriotism is seen as a joke and an embarrassment. ”
This sounds like a description fit to most European polititians… And actually most Europeans.
I’ve always been astounded by the American tendency to be optimistic (”proud people who want to be treated with some respect, that they are in fact entitled to it”) and always so sure of being right and never doubt. In a major way, that is that attitude that has allowed, more than anything else, americans to lead the world. I’ll call this the “pioneer spirit”.
And while i respect and admire this, I can’t help thinking that the European attitude - based around cynism, self-doubts, distrust… - is reassuringly better suited to the new multi polar world that has emerged. It’s not the Black or White world of the US, but a myriad of greys.
And while I agree with CC’s analysis that the Dems need to be careful and rise beyond this so they don’t appear condescending.
I stick by my opinion that the BBC is the standard by which all other english speaking media should be judged for fairness and impartiality.
It is true that in the 1930 under Lord Reith the BBC was very politically biased in favor of the Nazis and even went as far as to ban Mr. Churchill from broadcasting in 1937 and 1938. Since the retirement of Lord Reith the
coverage has become quite balanced and the world wide coverage is many times greater than any other news organization. It is the world’s largest broadcast newsgathering operation with 41 international bureaus. In 2002 they reported from more than 150 countries.
The vast majority of Newsgathering’s 600 staff are independent journalists.
Posted by: Walter H. King | October 29th, 2008 at 6:35 am | Report this commentCorrespondents are trained to produce reports across a range of programs and media. There is no comparable news gathering organization anywhere in the world. The BBC is independent of the British Government and not subject to control by any of the national parties in Britain. In large part it is supported by a licence fee that is mandatorily levied upon owners of Radios or TVs in Great Britain. For more information I recommend the following URL from which I gathered some of this information.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/heritage/story/