David Frum is right in Time. The deep recession is keeping the GOP competitive. Add to that Obama’s mien, Pelosi’s arrogance, Reid’s cluelessness, and the GOP looms large.
Still that doesn’t change the fact that the GOP has a problem with college graduates and the 200k+ crowd. Although not identical, the GOP lost both the last time out. The party of Prescott Bush is now the party of Palin. And political reality suggests that either the GOP reach out to Hispanics or pickup more white voters.
In Massachusetts, Scott Brown picked up Reagan Democrats and independents, but was frozen out in Brookline and Newton. So yes the working class is in play. But among high-end voters the GOP has a way to go. A boggy stock market and Obama’s tax hikes scheduled for 2011 though may give high-end voters buyers’ remorse.
Right after the 2008 elections, I joined the NRA and the Ripon Society. The GOP needs both streams. This cycle I’ve contributed to Rob Simmons, Robert Bennett, Mark Kirk, Tom Coburn, Mike Castle, and Pat Toomey. The GOP needs them all.
44 responses so far
1 sinz54 // Feb 8, 2010 at 12:24 pm
If anyone symbolizes the GOP’s emphasis on individual achievement and free markets, it’s the young entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley. Men like Steve Jobs and Sergey Brin created whole new industries, new jobs, new markets–and one of the few bright spots in America’s economy.
Yet the vast majority of them vote for Dems, and the vast majority of them supported Obama in 2008. Why?
The culture of Silicon Valley owes much to the culture of the rest of the San Francisco Bay Area and of Stanford University and UC Berkeley, all of which are an easy drive from Silicon Valley. That culture is socially liberal. Many of the first computer entrepreneurs, like Steve Jobs who founded Apple, were former student rebels and hippie types who considered personal computing their form of rebellion against the “establishment” (which was IBM in those days). Hot tubs and marijuana are still common forms of weekend recreation out there.
Here in MA where I live, the new biotech companies in Cambridge MA inherit their culture from the nearby universities of Harvard and M.I.T. Again, socially liberal, laid-back.
Finally, in Obama they saw an “egghead” who was intelligent like themselves. These folks put a high premium on talent and brains. They don’t admire “Joe the Plumber”–Joe the Plumber works for them, as a janitor in one of their companies.
The GOP can’t really make a dent with this crowd unless it starts demonstrably appreciating science and education and brains–and opens its party to those who are social moderates.
It’s tough. The GOP base sees San Francisco as practically enemy territory. Yet the Southernmost part of the San Francisco Bay Area is Silicon Valley, which should be a place the GOP base can admire as entrepreneurial and individualistic.
2 PracticalGirl // Feb 8, 2010 at 1:05 pm
Sinz-
Good points.
The “Joe the Plumber” and Palin phenomena definitely is a turn off to many of us in the categories listed above. And it isn’t “class warfare” or “elitism” that causes this. It’s the idea that the complicated process of governing the most complex government on earth can be done by just any ol’ Average Joe Six Pack. The GOP will have to stop advancing “average” as a standard for leadership before most educated Independents and even moderate Democrats could even begin to hear their message.
It is unfortunate that the GOP has chosen to try to make a wedge issue out of those who value brains and talent over gut feelings. And that is the biggest damage the party has done to itself. Those who do value these traits have a basic distrust for the GOP and its ability to govern. They are also the people with much to protect and who can draw a line from point A-Z to see where and how it went wrong or right.
Honestly- it doesn’t take a superior education or money to understand things that don’t work. And yet, the GOP is STILL selling “everything was rosy under Bush/Cheney”to anybody who will listen and telling us that a return to Reaganomics (rejected by many of its authors and proponents as ‘not right for now’) is the ticket. The message, the plans, the people they advance-everything will have to reflect solutions for our country as it is today, not how it was 25 years ago if the GOP is to have any chance at all at those who have the temerity to actually evaluate policies and people based on what works, rather than on base emotions.
3 PracticalGirl // Feb 8, 2010 at 1:25 pm
Sinz-
Your point about the socially liberal/laid back being turned off byt the GOP is also right on target. But I think it’s time we stop looking at the “hippie” culture/generation as the culprit. An entire new generation has come of age, one that just isn’t affected by the traditional GOP social agenda. In fact, in the last election, many of this voting block just giggled at it. They are graduating from high school and college into a country with shrinking jo opportunities and massive debts. For the most part, they really don’t care if Johnny Has Two Mommies, or if Johnny’s Two Mommies are married. For the most part, they think it’s silly to worry whether GI Joe like Jane or Jack. They care that they are stepping into a job market that has become not just tight but in some cases non-existent. They care that they are in debt the moment they become taxpayers, for bloated, out of control spending that, in large part, went to benefit other parts of the world.
Talk to a bunch of 18-25 year olds to see where their priorities lie. Then you’ll see the REAL isssue the GOP must contend with: How to sell their traditional, social messages of faith and family to a group who has largely been raised in non-traditional family units, who have come to accept that gay people are, well, people, and who are largely unchurched. None of the fire-and-brimstone really resonates with most of this group. And they tend to listen to those who can deliver solutions in a positive message, just like Mommy and Daddy and their teachers and coaches have all their lives. Not saying this is “all good”, but it is reality and the GOP is ill-equipped to reach them.
4 mike farmer // Feb 8, 2010 at 1:33 pm
It appears that many of the college graduates and those who make over $200,000 are turning against Obama and his policies, so what should the Republicans do to win these “elites”?
As an aside, that’s strange criteria to be an elite. If that’s all it takes to be elite, then elite doesn’t mean very much. I would think elite needs to be more…uh…well, elite.
5 blowtorch_bob // Feb 8, 2010 at 2:17 pm
Some very insightful comments from PracticalGirl.
The only thing I can add is there ain’t that much difference between the Dems and the GOP anymore. The sooner you realize that the much happier you’ll be.
Sure there’s lots of differences along the edges but at the core both are controlled by Goldman Sachs. We can talk about Sarah Palin and “fire and brimstone” Christianity all we want but the basic fact remains is free market economics has become the Official State Religion of American Democracy.
For the most part, this free market “neoliberalism” is just a fancy term for ponzi schemes which have blanketed the global economy and are now in a state of collapse.
6 brandon // Feb 8, 2010 at 3:02 pm
“Finally, in Obama they saw an “egghead” who was intelligent like themselves.”
Which just proves that many of the so called “elites” are either very naive or just plain ignorant.
Obama had no real world experience or accomplishments. His college records have been sealed. They judged his “intelligence” on the fact that he could string words together better than George W. Bush.
There was no legitimate proof that Obama had what it takes to be the President of the United States and his first year has not proven those of us who saw through this empty suit to be wrong, yet the “elites’ spoke of him like he was the long awaited messiah.
Many times the Joe the Plumbers of the world have more common sense than those who think they are smart.
7 jakester // Feb 8, 2010 at 4:03 pm
When people babbel about the elites, they set themselves as being up as stupid, low class and ignorant, like the 2 teaparty faves, Palin and Joe Skinhead Plumber. Look at people like brandon above, he is obviously like Joe da Plumber; subpar, ignorant and proud of it. Neither of those two could make it into Harvard except to unplug a toilet.
Every time someone runs his mouth about the elites, I automatically label them as morons or cheap populist demagogues.
8 jakester // Feb 8, 2010 at 4:04 pm
mike farmer
cause “elite” these days means someone who doesn’t like pitbulls and hockey.
9 balconesfault // Feb 8, 2010 at 4:18 pm
I am amused when conservatives cite William F. Buckley’s quote on preferring governance by the first 400 names in the Boston phone book to hypothetical governance by the Harvard Faculty.
That of course explains why Buckley chose to pay a lot of money to send Christopher Buckley to Yale … instead of simply encouraging his son to take to the streets of Boston and learn from an ocean of Joe the Plumbers.
10 jakester // Feb 8, 2010 at 4:26 pm
balconesfault,
good point, Buckley was definitely elite and didn’t go around dressed in camo in a pickup to be something he wasn’t! He kept his tone and arguments intelligent, educated and reality based, not crude personal attacks or stupid gross generalizations like today’s con idols. His jabs at intellectuals were on the same level of Orwells; disgust at their penchant to excuse or admire totalitarian monsters like the Communists.
11 mike farmer // Feb 8, 2010 at 5:36 pm
“cause “elite” these days means someone who doesn’t like pitbulls and hockey.”
I’ll stick with the non-elites, then. You guys are just way too intellectual.
12 brandon // Feb 8, 2010 at 6:58 pm
One of the biggest problems with the elites is their condescending attitude toward anyone who they don’t consider part of their group. Often rather than discuss someone’s points, all they can do is insult.
Jakester writes that I’m “obviously like Joe da Plumber; subpar, ignorant and proud of it.”
Jake, did it possibly occur to you that it could be possible for someone to think Obama was not qualified to be president and to not be “subpar, ignorant and proud of it.” The answer is obviously no because that is what “liberal groupthink” does to someone like you.
13 jakester // Feb 8, 2010 at 8:41 pm
Brandon, yes, someone can declare Obama is unqualified, but the way you did it, by running down his Harvard education, make you seem low class and thoughtless; a person of nil intellect & gravitas. You deserve to be condencended to, since you talk like all you are able to do is parrot back juvenile dreck from talk radio bigmouths or other petty partisan pundits. Next, we’ll hear something witty about his magic teleprompter. You are too ignorant and self absorbed to see your irony, when it is Palin types who go around saying he isn’t a citizen, a revolutionary Marxist, closet Muslim, a terrorist, just like Hitler, a racist and should be impeached for some vague unspecified crime like bowing to the Japanese emperor. But since those are real Americans, I have to take them seriously or risk being tarred as an elitist.
Obama is qualified to be president, after all, he does meet the minimum standards. After 8 yearrs of Bush and 1.5 years of Palin, your ilk has lost any credibility to judge any president’s qualifications. Not that I aupport Obama, but I would prefer him to some stupid piece of low class trash like Plumber or Palin. Sure, there are Ivy Leaguers who are clueless, and people who never went to a fancy college or at all who are quite wise and learned, but those two aren’t in that crowd.
But I will say this, unless you are able to point to some real coherent group of elitists, like the old Eaton and Harrow aristocratic types who used to, (still do to a large extent), run the UK, babbeling about elitists is childish and stupid and will only endear to others who are childish and stupid too! Neither Biden or Obama came from any blue blood lineage or were born in the purple, nor are Rush & Anne Coulter common simple folks.
14 brandon // Feb 8, 2010 at 9:15 pm
Jake, another area that “elitists” like you aren’t good at apparently is reading comprehension (“running down his Harvard education,” nowhere in my post) or spelling (condencended, I assume you mean condescended).
But you are good at the insults, (“make you seem low class and thoughtless; a person of nil intellect & gravitas” “all you are able to do is parrot back juvenile dreck from talk radio bigmouths or other petty partisan pundits” “You are too ignorant and self absorbed.”)
You read all kinds of things into my simple point that it was the so called “elitists” and “brightest” that drank the Kool Aid” and thought that Obama was “The One.” Others like myself saw that his speeches were full of cliches and platitudes and that the man was basically an unaccomplished first term senator who was enough of a narcissist to write two biographies even though he had done nothing in life that was significant.
But instead of debating my point as to why the so called “elites” are so naive and gullible and put so much faith into an amateur like Obama, you start (after your insults) talking about Palin types and Limbaugh and other nonsense.
You are certainly free to disagree with my post but the real question I have for you is why can’t liberals disagree without claiming that those of us who disagree are of “nil intellect?”
15 Mandos // Feb 8, 2010 at 10:45 pm
The problem is that American conservatives—with the possible exception of some paleocons of the type that live in the pages of American Conservative—never even recognize when their ideas aren’t consonant with the facts. That leaves either the suspicion that they’re arguing absurdities in bad faith or they lack intellectual depth.
16 Mandos // Feb 8, 2010 at 10:49 pm
I can argue with, eg, Pat Buchanan’s writing on a number of things. See, I disagree with his particular motivations and moral philosophy, but I and Buchanan live mostly in the same universe. Take the leaders of right-wing populism today, however: I’m not convinced that I and Glen Beck live in the same universe, or even I and Michael Steele. That is the problem.
17 PracticalGirl // Feb 8, 2010 at 10:52 pm
Brandon-
Are you new here? There are many discussions that happen on FrumForum in which we bash each other’s views, sometimes with gleeful, unabandoned disrespect. But there is also and often a lot of substance in the discusssions, as well.
I would ask you a question: Why wouldn’t a liberal (and many conservatives, as well) frame the sophomoric debate that is the loudest and proudest on the right currently as that of “nil intellect”? The right has bombarded our country with the lowest common denominator-in the leaders they advance, in the hollow soundbites they have passed as “argumentative policy”, and with their entire political discourse. I might suggest that “dumbed-down” is the new “elite” for the right. And it is terrifying.
BTW, Professor: Many a typo-letters left off, accidental misspellings-show up on this blog. Not everybody has time to proofread every word they write, and the Forum has no edit function. To single out Jake is silly. And a bit elitist, to be frank.
18 Mandos // Feb 8, 2010 at 10:54 pm
2nd afterthought: The reason why I feel like I live in the same universe as the “serious” paleocons is that both they and I know a failed series of imperial adventures when we see one. That grounds us in the same factual universe, at least, and the rest of the issues become a disagreement about judgements, moral philosophy, and so on.
Can I say that about the rest of the conservative movement? Unfortunately not.
19 msmilack // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:01 pm
Funny to hear you brag about guns. Maybe you can explain a contradiction that continues to baffle me. Why to people most against abortion, as the taking of lives, are the most likely to favor guns which, in case they haven’t noticed, kill more people in this country than weapons of any kind in any other industrialized country in the world. What is the connection? The hypocrisy blows my mind.
20 PracticalGirl // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:08 pm
Mandos,
I echo your sentiments. The content coming from the Salesmen of the Apocalypse-Beck, Limbaugh, even Steele- is designed to rabble rouse and raise the emotion, for the good of their wallets, mostly. Buchanan and all the old guard are people who still see conservatism as something to be revered and followed for the good of their country. Although I rarely agree with the content, I can respect it for its roots. The other stuff? Nothing but tilting at whatever windmill that can produce a windfall.
21 brandon // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:10 pm
Practical Girl,
I don’t post on this forum much, but have been around since August.
“Why wouldn’t a liberal (and many conservatives, as well) frame the sophomoric debate that is the loudest and proudest on the right currently as that of “nil intellect”?”
Jake wasn’t framing the debate you mention, he called me someone of “nil intellect” based on one post.
You have no problem with him insulting me repeatedly, but me calling him out for spelling is silly and elitist.
Perhaps you can tell me how his response contained any “substance?”
22 PracticalGirl // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:16 pm
Brandon,
Touche. But golly, son, you’re gonna have to get a thicker skin to hang out here. Especially when you lead with fire such as:
“Finally, in Obama they saw an “egghead” who was intelligent like themselves.” Which just proves that many of the so called “elites” are either very naive or just plain ignorant.
Hello, kettle. Meet black.
Know what? In this entire conversation, I’m not sure that anybody has done a very good job of defining “elite”. Care to take a stab?
23 Mandos // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:24 pm
I’ll take a stab WRT the use of “elite” in the title. Frumian conservatives see a group of people who accomplish things economically, scientifically, and otherwise intellectually (in literature, art, and so on), and view these people as the ones who will write the history books, bring back American innovation, and so on.
These are the “elite” they see, and they notice that most of these perceived Atlases of civilization vote for people with (D)s after their names.
And they want The Conservative Movement to have some amount of credibility with these people as time goes on, so that The Movement will not pass away when the winds of history shift.
OK. Well. I think that the definition of “elite” is pretty clear. I think the real problem for Frumian conservatives is to define what exactly The Conservative Movement is, as they think it should be embodied in the GOP, and what it has to offer the “elite”. Because that’s not been very clear so far. Is it lower taxes (on a decaying social infrastructure and increased urban destitution and violence)? Is it protection from foreign enemies (by paying billions for KBR and Halliburton to squander in Iraq)? What is it?
24 brandon // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:26 pm
Maybe I’m used to a little bit more intellectual discourse than one should expect at the Frumforum.
I ‘m just pointing out that all Jake can do is insult which is so typical of liberals. When the facts aren’t on their side, they resort to acting like 12 year olds on a school playground.
I would define “elites” as anyone who thinks that their viewpoint is superior to others because of some status they think they have achieved. That status could be because of their education, income level, family background, taste in the arts or in areas like food, or even the fact that they live in some hipster enclave in New York or San Francisco.
25 Mandos // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:28 pm
OK. Then do you think that there is a reason for conservatives to pursue this group of people? Do you think that these people have a claim on a superior viewpoint?
26 PracticalGirl // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:40 pm
Brandon:
Do either of you find it odd that “elite”, as you both have described, seems to be only applied to those on the left? If, as Brandon suggests, an elite is anyone who thinks their viewpoint is superiors to others because of the status they have attained, then aren’t these “elites” on boths sides of the street?
27 brandon // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:46 pm
Mandos: I think conservatives should go after voters wherever they might be found. It might not ever be “cool” to be a conservative, so we might not after win the “hipster” voter. But we should definitely make sure our viewpoint is represented at universities and in intellectual circles.
PracticalGirl: Yes there can be conservative elitists. Some members of certain religious factions might fit that definition, but I thought this particular article and thread were only about the “liberal elites.”
28 PracticalGirl // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:52 pm
randon:
From the beginning of the post:
“Still that doesn’t change the fact that the GOP has a problem with college graduates and the 200k+ crowd.”
Nowhere does Green mention “liberal elites”. It’s an assumption that was made along the way, and I find that extremely telling for all. Unless the only folks in the country who graduated from college and make over 200K+ are liberals.
29 Mandos // Feb 8, 2010 at 11:55 pm
P.G.: Oh, I totally agree with the point you are trying to make. The “elite” thing is ultimately a vacuous marketing term. Hence my hedges with “perceived”, etc.
To me, it’s not even clear that the putative lumpenproletariat are all that conservative, on the whole. If you take things issue by issue, left and left-of-center opinions poll surprisingly well. America’s predicament is ultimately in the dysfunctional political class. ie, the elite “elite.”
30 balconesfault // Feb 9, 2010 at 1:14 am
I would define “elites” as anyone who thinks that their viewpoint is superior to others because of some status they think they have achieved. That status could be because of their education, income level, family background, taste in the arts or in areas like food, or even the fact that they live in some hipster enclave in New York or San Francisco.
Well, first off – anyone who thinks that taste in the arts or food is a reflection of someone’s political acumen is an idiot. But then I don’t particularly care for any backwoods anti-elite fetishism either, like a Chairman Mao creating a cult of plain clothes and wooden beds. I enjoy a good beer as much as anyone – had a couple before I went to the Kansas UT game tonight, and am enjoying one right now – but anyone who picks political candidates on who they’d rather drink a beer with or go watch a basketball game with deserves whatever craptacular comeuppance they get.
But aside from that … I would define “elites” as anyone who thinks that their viewpoint is superior to others because of some status they think they have achieved. That status could be because of their education, income level, family background…
Doesn’t the above define the “qualification” level of about 80% of the neocon movement spokesmen?
What the hell has William Kristol ever done, than beside being Irving Kristol’s son and going to Harvard? The Bush clan is a bunch of rich kid 3rd generation political scions with legacy Ivy League admissions. Robert Kagan, son of Donald Kagan and Yale grad. Norman Podhoretz, Columbia University. Paul Wolfowitz, Cornell undergrad, University of Chicago Political Science PhD. Charles Krauthammer, Balliol College, Oxford, and then Harvard Medical. Daniel Pipes, son of Harvard Professor Richard Pipes, Harvard BA, Harvard PhD.
These are the guys who pretty much crafted American foreign policy in the last Administration. Without much of any credentials except for being elites who ascended to a level where mutual backslapping gave each other greater and greater status (and for many, seeming regular sinecures on Sunday Morning talk shows and Fox News).
But when it’s a black guy from a middle class family who makes it to Columbia and Harvard Law without any family legacy to grease the skids … suddenly we’re talking elitism. Or uppity. I get confused sometimes.
31 brandon // Feb 9, 2010 at 1:38 am
“anyone who thinks that taste in the arts or food is a reflection of someone’s political acumen is an idiot.”
You might be surprised at how often one can come close to guessing someone’s politics by their taste in movies, music, tv etc.
Obviously nothing is 100%, but in many if not most cases if I know your 3 favorite radio stations I can guess your politics.
32 balconesfault // Feb 9, 2010 at 1:46 am
Ahh – but I said political acumen. Not politics.
33 jakester // Feb 9, 2010 at 2:54 am
Brandon,
no one is going to deny that Obama’s speeches, like most politicians’, are full of platitudes and cliches, and that many people were swept away by his act. I guess that is called democracy. But just by watching and listening to Obama vs. Palin/Joe Duh Plummer, I can tell he is a hell of a lot smarter than those two. BTW, Palin’s speeches, like most politicians’, are full of platitudes and cliches and really cheesy common faux homespun images(pitbull with lipstick, my least favorite dog), and that many people were swept away by her act too. But that is part of American democracy too, the country person vs the city slicker routine is a shopworn act. Wouldn’t it be nice if the conservatives could come up with someone intelligent and sophisticated to advance their cause too?
34 jakester // Feb 9, 2010 at 3:02 am
“I would define “elites” as anyone who thinks that their viewpoint is superior to others because of some status they think they have achieved. That status could be because of their education, income level, family background, taste in the arts or in areas like food, or even the fact that they live in some hipster enclave in New York or San Francisco.”
Sounds like a lot of modern cons; who wear their ignorance, backwardness, bigotry, fundamentalist beliefs and nerdiness as badges of honor, like reverse snobbery, “i have so little class or intelligence which means I am superior to you degenrate sophisticates”. Your “definition” is the kind of crap like that that tells me you lack any sense of irony. ALL you are doing is parroting back the trash that Laura Ingraham or Rush Limbaugh feeds the proles. You’re hilarious, an elitist of the common
35 brandon // Feb 9, 2010 at 11:31 am
Jake,
Why are you so hung up on Palin, Joe The Plumber, and various talk radio personalities?
The country faces serious problems right now and the current administration is not doing anything substantial to face these issues.
My point is that us “elitist of the common” at least had enough sense not to put the leadership of the free world in the hands of Obama. You and others were either too stupid or too naive to understand what you were voting for back in November.
36 jakester // Feb 9, 2010 at 12:13 pm
Hey Brandon, guess what, I didn’t vote for Obama. As well as I disagree with just about everything you said. But it seemed that everyone who noticed that Palin was just plain simple minded and subpar was labeled as un-American and/or elitist, including this blog’s namesake. I brought in Palin, Joe The Plumber, and various talk radio personalities because like you they not only turn Obama into some sort of monster/incompetent he is not, but babbel about an amorphous ill defined groups of so called elitists. From where I sit, Coulter, Palin, Rush, Laura, Bachmann look pretty elite to me too while I struggle to keep my two old cars on the road or just pay the rent.
37 brandon // Feb 9, 2010 at 12:58 pm
Forgive me for jumping to the conclusion that you voted for Obama. Your rants are so typical of the Obama worshippers that it certainly appeared to me that you must have been a supporter.
I have never said I think Obama is a “monster.” I do think he is incompetent and also somewhat of a narcissist. The past year has proven that those of us who thought that in 2008 were correct.
My only point about the “so called elites” was that they often don’t use good judgement, have common sense, or understand human nature as well as the common folks.
Perhaps if you had a better temperament and weren’t so quick to insult and judge other people, you wouldn’t be struggling with old cars and rent.
38 sinz54 // Feb 9, 2010 at 1:04 pm
brandon:
I agree.
But the engineers and scientists in Silicon Valley or the MA Route 128 ring don’t go around beating their chests about their innate moral superiority over others. They’re too busy building iPhones and iPads and BlueTooth and WiFi and developing cures for various chronic illnesses like cancer.
I specifically omitted talking about social scientists and political scientists–the ones who go to Harvard to get Poli Sci degrees with the expectation of doing social engineering backed up by liberal politicians. Those young people aren’t ever going to be conservatives. They intend to make their living off of Big Government.
The engineers and scientists I was speaking of, didn’t support Obama because of some shared sense of moral superiority. They supported Obama because Obama promised his Administration would be science-based, and would push advanced technology in information processing and alternative energy sources–projects that they are already working on.
Bush turned off the entire MA biotech community with his ban on the development of new embryonic stem-cell lines. Obama promised the biotech community that he would reverse the ban–and that’s one of the few promises he’s kept so far.
Chris Mooney wrote a book, “The Republican War on Science,” in which he illustrated how, for a variety of reasons, Republicans (particularly conservative Republicans) have engaged in attempts to discredit basic science. Ann Coulter’s attacks on Darwin’s Theory of Evolution are viewed by scientists and engineers as some horrible throwback to the Dark Ages.
39 balconesfault // Feb 9, 2010 at 1:13 pm
They supported Obama because Obama promised his Administration would be science-based, and would push advanced technology in information processing and alternative energy sources–projects that they are already working on.
Which, by the way, he has done.
40 sinz54 // Feb 9, 2010 at 1:19 pm
jakester:
In MA where I live, we were fortunate to have a true intellectual right-winger as a talk-show host (!!!): David Brudnoy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brudnoy
He was a college professor, he was erudite, he could discuss great works of literature or the fine arts as well as politics. He was also a movie critic for his radio station. He disdained sports and hated hockey (sorry, Boston Bruins).
Despite his right-wing views and his intellectual airs, he was beloved by MA. He passed away in 2004, and we in MA will always miss him.
We conservatives need more like him.
Brudnoy was an existence proof that “conservative” and “intellectual” can be compatible–and that when they’re compatible, they can attract a real following even in a liberal state like MA, even with the liberal students at MA colleges.
41 anniemargret // Feb 9, 2010 at 2:05 pm
Everyone: Can we all just put the ‘elitism’ canard back on that old dusty shelf? Can we all just agree that we know elitism when we see it?
There are all kinds of elitism, some based on economic wealth, some on snootiness in culture and education. There is no one size fits all pattern for elitism. And one does not have to have a Yale or Harvard degree to witness elitism, given that Ms Wasilla once again cheered her ‘real folks’ at the rally just a few days ago. Real folks. You know exactly who she is alluding to….and against!
Enough. This country need men and women of good will and character, liberal and conservative for checks and balances in good governance. We can disagree on policy but the stupid culture wars have got to go. We need people of high intellect (and that means education whereever and whenever you can get it), but also an ability to be open to hearing all povs and stuck to a status quo. The world is changing rapidly and we’d better be prepared for it.
While I admire and respect Obama, if a Republican ends up winning the WH in 2012, then by golly, I want to be able to at least respect him or her, not be embarrassed by someone still parading around spanking people for their cultural backgrounds and education (or lack of it). The Palinistas with their penchant for Christian superiority, their absurd railing against big cities and ‘universities’ gotta go.
I went to CUNY, the bastion of liberalism in the 70s. (yes, I’m that old). I came from a blue-collar woring Republican socially conservative (but never bigoted) and fiscal family, and 12 years prior of strict Catholic schools. I loved every minute of it. I learned not to be afraid of thought, even if someone is antithetitical to what you are used to thinking. In the end, you make up your own mind about things. I’m grateful for that experience….so many different kinds of people, different religions, different ethnic backgrounds. I’m the better for it. So quite bashing liberalism!
OK…feel better now.
42 anniemargret // Feb 9, 2010 at 2:08 pm
Lord, my grammar/spelling was atrocious! Editing function…please.
43 balconesfault // Feb 9, 2010 at 4:46 pm
The Palinistas with their penchant for Christian superiority
Another form of elitism, mind you.
44 Churl // Feb 9, 2010 at 5:03 pm
So, graduates in which college majors are conservatives going to win back, and how: Teaching? English? Sociology? Political Science? Womens’ Studies? Communications? Journalism? Psychology?
And for the $200k/yr plus folks, which ones? The financial wizards who keep generating banking crises (Latin American Debt, Savings and Loan Crash, Dotcom bubble, Russian debt, the latest lunacy) and keep getting bailed out by the government? Trial lawyers? University presidents? Heads of tax-free foundations? Executives of R&D companies who live off government grants? Defense industry honchos? Union presidents? City administrators?
You must log in to post a comment.