You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Liberals must come down off our high horses
2006-06-01
By Chuck Williams

It took me nearly one-third of my life to come to a simple conclusion: Liberals are elitists.

Now, maybe that's not such a big deal to some, but to me it has become quite bothersome. It's pretty clear to me now that average hard-working Americans, be they red-staters or blue-staters, can smell the stench of elitist, intellectual posturing by so-called liberals and progressives.

One of the reasons why this bothers me is because I fear that it will cause us to continue to lose presidential elections.

The second thing that bothers me is that I may be one of those elitists. After all, I couldn't wait to tell the world that I had earned a Ph.D. I smile a bit on the inside every time my students and/or coworkers refer to me as "Dr. Williams."

I'm not so sure when it became important for people to know that I knew more than they did. What I do know is that it does not serve me well with average folk; this is at the core of the problem for liberals, and, given that we make up the base of the Democratic Party, it's also at the core of why we keep losing presidential elections.

To me, politics is about one thing: winning elections. Sure, policy and activism are wrapped up in there, too, but at the end of the day, you want to win - period!
I think I see your problem, bub. It's a problem that afflicts the Democrats. Y'see, when politix is about winning elections, that means that the things like ideas and principles and service aren't present. They can't even take second place, since politix is only about one thing, not many.

There's much to be said for the principle of compromise. It keeps us from reaching political extremes, because we have to cover enough ground to include people whose ideas aren't all that different from ours to make up a majority. If politix is only about winning elections that means compromise reaches its illogical extreme. Nothing guides the actual administration, there aren't any real goals. Once you're in office, the next step is to start getting ready for the next election, not actually doing anything.
My opinions about all this have been influenced by working for the Democratic National Committee, regionally, and volunteering for various local elections. What I've realized is that you have two camps within the Democratic Party. You have folks who think too much, and folks who work very hard to ensure that our candidates are elected. Don't look now, but the nerds are attempting to take over the frat house. The problem with that is, they can't help us win elections. They simply stand around sipping green tea and talking about how great it would be if everyone read Armistead Maupin's Tales of the City. It's no wonder folks have begun to call us effete. We sit around, legs crossed, sporting Birkenstocks, and looking down on people who don't read as much as we do.
Those nerds are the policy guys, and their vaporings are what passes for ideas among libs. So you're talking about a two-pronged attack on the republics, one being the unprincipled and the other being the loons.
And, when you really get down to the nitty-gritty, you realize that somehow we feel that all that carrying on makes us better human beings than everyone else. That our values and morals are better than others. This is what really annoys folks about us. What I've also realized is that this is a character flaw, and, that this does more to divide America than any of Patrick Buchanan's hate-filled rhetoric.
I don't think Patrick Buchanan's hate-filled rhetoric divides the nation. Most people dismiss his patter as a vanity campaign for... ummm... something. Not for president anymore, since for all the hoots of "Go, Pat, Go!" something like 3.2 percent of the voting public bothered wasting a ballot on him. I'm a lot more concerned with liberals' hate-filled rhetoric lately, since it's actually more overtly hate-filled than is Patrick J.'s. On the other hand, I'm not real worried about the nation being divided, since that's why we've got two political parties instead of one. They break down to a liberal lunatic party that's obsessed with winning elections on the one side, and a conservative party of ineffective suits that pretty much wins elections by default but is afraid to govern. A bare majority has been going with the ineffective suits for the past few years, because they've been trading ideas while the libs have been jumping up and down and rolling their eyes and looking for causes further and further out in lefty field. I suppose that can change at any point, especially since the only thing that matters in politix is winning elections, but I hope it doesn't.
Folks who don't read six national newspapers a day hold as much value and worth to our society as those who do. These folks raise families, work very hard for a living, and spend time thinking about ways to better their quality of life. They know what will serve their best interests, and they know what will not.

If the liberal elite would stop writing and chatting so much about how this country should be, they would learn more about how it is. We need to come out of the library from time to time and actually put our ears to the ground. We will find that the blue-staters are looking for leaders who will represent them, even if they don't have college degrees or sip imported beers.

At one point, that was the Democratic Party; today it is not. People were right to leave us. We gave them nothing to hold on to. We are no longer the party of inclusion; it only looks that way on billboards and campaign advertisements. If we do not address this issue soon, we will need more than a Florida recount to make this party relevant again.
Posted by:Anonymoose

#28  Dedicated Lefty Netters-Bloggers are already ascribing themselves andor their movement as synonymous wid SOCIALISM, albeit like true PC-lovers = chicken littles they haven't Officially/Publiclydecided between Western-Euro Socialist or Asian Communist. In any case, the conversion of the Democrat Party and the anti-Unitarian Unitarian Clinton-centric NPE has begun. IMHO THE DEMOLEFT HAS BEGUN ITS OVERT MOVE TOWARDS BECOMING THE DE FACTO FUTURE COMMUNIST-STALINIST PARTY OF AMERICA. One day in the futre, America = Amerikkka = NORTH KOREA > we Amerikanskis will be told Amerika is sovereign and independent, but in reality we will be PC and covertly controlled fron Russia-China aka Communist Asia-Eurasia. Americans get to pretend we're de facto independent and self-governing, Russia-China gets to pretend they do NOT rule us or control us; =/OR Americans get to pretend we are controlled by Commie Asia, Russia-China gets to pretend we're sovereign and self-governing, to put in another way. HOWEVER THE PC FEEL-GOOD INTERPRETATION(S), AMERICA = AMERIKA > NO MORE.
IFF America's enemies had a choice, they'd probably prefer for Amerikkka to be defeated wthout Americans even realizing it.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-06-01 21:08  

#27  Sorry in advance to all the civil engineers out there.

No problem, my dad was a Civil Engineer and he told that joke.

Here's one back,
"Beware of Statistics and Averages. Take for instance a man standing barefooted with one foot on a block of ice, and the other foot on a hot stove."

"On the average, he's comfortable"
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2006-06-01 20:39  

#26  I thought Ph D stood for Phoney Doctor.
Posted by: anonymous2u   2006-06-01 18:56  

#25  Rafael, don't forget BASIC. They all know BASIC - but nobody over 12 would ever admit to it..
Posted by: CrazyFool   2006-06-01 17:45  

#24  Of course, I'm not an engineer.

Neither am I. I fall in the Arts & Science camp (the science half). Didn't have the marks for engineering.

Sorry, Frank. Engineers have (better) jokes about A&S too, but this is a family blog I gather :-)
Posted by: Rafael   2006-06-01 17:40  

#23  granted
Posted by: Frank G   2006-06-01 17:12  

#22  LOL, Rafael. Of course, I'm not an engineer.
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-06-01 17:12  

#21  TW, computer jockeys are learned people too. They can all speak at least 18 languages: C, C++, Perl...Polish, reverse Polish...

Oh hell, one more engineering joke:

Three engineering students were gathered together discussing the possible designers of the human body. One said, "It was a mechanical engineer. Just look at all the joints." Another said, "No, it was an electrical engineer. The nervous system has many thousands of electrical connections." The last said, "Actually it was a civil engineer. Who else would run a toxic waste pipeline through a recreational area?"

Sorry in advance to all the civil engineers out there.
Posted by: Rafael   2006-06-01 17:10  

#20  A< few remarks: politics is not about winning elections but about doing something for your country , and I would dare to say, for humankins

Second: He tells about liberals reading too much implying that at least they ahave very learned). Sorry but they aren't. They read mediocre philosphy (eg Sartre), pseudoscience and liberal litterature, ie books written by people who don't know the differnce betweeen a bit and a byte.

Youy are learned when you read hard science, technology, economics and real history (NOT Chomsky) and political science. But if they did that they would become conservatives. :-)
Posted by: JFM   2006-06-01 16:27  

#19  Rafael, Piled Higher and Deeper is only the literal translation, whereas knowing everything about nothing at all is the meaning. ;-) BS, on the other hand, is just too much fun to give up especially, I suspect, for all the computer jockeys whose schools granted them a BA instead.

Great jokes!
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-06-01 16:26  

#18  BTW, the whole engineering vs arts & science battle is as old as...farming. Oh man, so many jokes, so little time.

Two engineering students were walking across campus when one said, "Where did you get such a great bike?" The second engineer replied, "Well, I was walking along yesterday minding my own business when a Beautiful woman rode up on this bike. She threw the bike to the ground, took off all her clothes and said, "Take what you want." The second engineer nodded approvingly, "Good choice; the clothes wouldn't have fit anyway."

What is the difference between Mechanical Engineers and Civil Engineers?
Mechanical Engineers build weapons; Civil Engineers build targets.

An engineer was crossing a road one day when a frog called out to him and said, "If you kiss me, I'll turn into a beautiful princess." He bent over, picked up the frog and put it in his pocket.
The frog spoke up again and said, "If you kiss me and turn me back into a beautiful princess, I will stay with you for one week." The engineer took the frog out of his pocket, smiled at it and returned it to the pocket.
The frog then cried out, "If you kiss me and turn me back into a beautiful princess I'll stay with you and do ANYTHING you want." Again the engineer took the frog out, smiled at it and put it back into his pocket.
Finally, the frog asked, "What is the matter? I've told you I'm a beautiful princess, that I'll stay with you for a week and do anything you want. Why won't you kiss me?" The engineer said, "Look I'm an engineer. I don't have time for a girlfriend, but a TALKING frog, now that's cool!"
Posted by: Rafael   2006-06-01 16:02  

#17  Mind you, a B.S. isn't much better. I've always wondered why you in the states haven't caught on to it yet. In Canada we've switched to B.Sc.
Posted by: Rafael   2006-06-01 15:45  

#16   a PhD means one knows more and more about less and less

I always thought it stood for Pile higher & Deeper. :-)
Posted by: Rafael   2006-06-01 15:41  

#15  The joke in academia, which clearly dear Chuck somehow managed never to hear as he smiles to himself when people call him Dr. Williams, is that a PhD means one knows more and more about less and less, until one knows absolutely everything about nothing at all. Or a least that's what Daddy used to say about the post-doc researchers he was training to kill small rodents in creative ways.

And there isn't anything wrong with being either an elitist or a snob, so long as one acknowledges the possibility that others who aren't in The Department may meet or exceed the standards you set, without being so ostentatious about it. It's the old, not-judging-a-book-by-its-cover thingy, my dear Dr. Charles.

Of course, that insistence on the title just goes to show he doesn't quite make the cut he's so keen on. In elite academic circles, the kind he doesn't seem to be aware of either, it's assumed that everyone has a PhD in something or other, and only medical doctors are so addressed, so that they can be easily identified in case of emergency.

Yes, I'm a snob, and married to a true, self-made elitist; this means I'm smart enough to be proud to have any of you Rantburgers over for tea, Mr. Wife would be clever enough to try to learn from your knowledge and accomplishments (I couldn't have married a man who wasn't), and neither of us is so foolish as to be impressed by titles or possessions. But don't call me Dr. Wife -- I never could ignore all the interesting things that need to be learned long enough to focus on learning everything about a particular bit of nothing, and neither can he. ;-)
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-06-01 13:05  

#14  Insert your favorite plumber joke here. :)
Posted by: Elmesing Spavising7222   2006-06-01 13:01  

#13  Those non-degreed domestic beer drinkers just actually might make more than he does.

Posted by: anonymous2u   2006-06-01 12:56  

#12  Life's a bitch. All that education, and no penis.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-06-01 12:47  

#11  mcsegeek1 got it right.

As a conservative/libertarian who has a college degree, wears Birkenstocks (until I found something cheaper and better), sips imported beers and green tea, reads six national newspapers blogs daily, I can say that Liberal elitist attitudes were a major factor driving me away from the Dems forever (it's also driving me away from my Church, but that's another story).

Unfortunately, this guy's suggestion smacks of more of the "need to re-package the message" meme that Dems can't seem to get beyond. Guys, Howard Dean praising gun-toting Southerners ain't gonna fly.
Posted by: Xbalanke   2006-06-01 12:42  

#10  Its the difference between the Engineering and Science knowledge and Arts and Science.

What are Philosopher's good for?
What's an Engineering good for?

Which knowledge is more useful to society?

Which is more likely to be in the Democratic party?

Posted by: 3dc   2006-06-01 12:34  

#9  Chuck an "Elitist"? Maybe.
Douchebag? Oh, definitely!
Posted by: tu3031   2006-06-01 12:23  

#8  "Chuck" Williams? Prior to this article, it was Dr. Charles Williams, Esq....he's got a good start on fake sincerity.
Posted by: Inspector Clueso   2006-06-01 12:19  

#7  lol PB
Posted by: mcsegeek1   2006-06-01 11:56  

#6  I'll show you some hate filled rhetoric you mamby pamby green tea sippin' birkestock wearing elitist wannabe maggot infested peace pansie flip boy!
Posted by: Patrick Buchanan   2006-06-01 11:52  

#5  We don't want him.
Posted by: GOP   2006-06-01 11:39  

#4  Doesn't matter, he'll be purged from the Party soon enuff. Welcome to the GOP, Dr. Williams.
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-06-01 11:26  

#3  Well liberals are elitists, but alot of this guy's thinking is just bullshit. Got news for ya pal: CONSERVATIVES also read 'six national newspapers a day', 'drink imported beer' and even (shock of shocks) have college degrees you pompous ass. Ironic that a guy talking about coming down off the high horse is on one himself. Listen up Einstein, you still don't get it. Conservatives are NOT hicks from the sticks.
Posted by: mcsegeek1   2006-06-01 11:23  

#2  This is the first realization for this radical, not liberal.

Next, in no particular order are first the realization that the purpose of running for office is not to win office, but to earn office--it's not a damn lottery.

Second, that being elected means that you have been hired for a job, not to rule over others. What you do in that job is usually as rote as what you would do if you worked in a fast-food restaurant.

Third, that being elected is not an end to itself. Those politicians who in past lived and breathed running for office (such as Bill Clinton), while despising the work they were supposed to do in that office, accomplish nothing more than keeping someone deserving from helping others in that office. They are a benign tumor, at best, and a malignant one at worst. Destined to be forgotten, despite their lust for "legacy".

Fourth, that they enter their new office as novices. They are not hired for what they *know*, but on the assumption that they will study and learn what they need to know. If they do not study the issues before them, then they are just deadwood, either doing what they are told, or voting based on ignorance, prejudice, emotional gratification and whim.

This latter problem is the worst among elected officials, people who sometimes seem ovine in their herdlike behavior, purely out of ignorance.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2006-06-01 11:22  

#1  "...begun to call us effete..."
Begun??? I seem to recall VP Spiro Agnew calling you that way back around 1970.
Posted by: glenmore   2006-06-01 11:15  

00:00