An elitist is what?

In this campaign, one of the differences has been in how Barack Obama has gone beyond suggested solutions to opening discussions into the source from where these problems have arisen. This can be risky, and he hasn't always gone there by choice.

After the issue exploded, Obama spoke on deep racial divisions and differences. The whole episode showed white Americans, if they cared, some of the thinking in the inner cities. Many of these things are the sorts politicians generally exploit rather than try to discuss and heal. If they discuss them, they do in short sound bites treating people as though they are incapable of understanding anything complex.

There was a book awhile back about what has gone wrong in Kansas. I didn't read it but read excerpts about what has led to its reversion (due to religion) to not teaching science where it comes to creation. This kind of response from small town Americans could have been written anywhere across the nation as people have often voted against their own economic interests based on things they feel are bigger (insert your own answer for what that would be). Rural, economically depressed Pennsylvania was the most recent source when Obama was asked what was the problem for him in getting votes there and he tried to explore the question honestly. What a mistake in politics.

Obama said that their anger (more acceptable word than bitterness) at government programs, which too often seem to hurt them more than help them, can cause them to rely on what they feel they can trust (guns and religion) and distrust what they don't know (people not like themselves and change). He didn't make it a racial issue but clearly it could be. As he said, he didn't phrase it well, but he's not wrong in the dialogue he was trying to get started. He has never promised solutions to everything but rather discussions and people working together to find those answers.

Hillary Clinton jumped onto the Republican bandwagon so fast that it is beginning to look like they are mailing her talking points. She praised Pennsylvania small town people-- no bitterness there that she's ever seen. Her family is just like them and they are patriotic, loving and go to church regularly just because they love it so much (don't ask if she goes too). She called him an elitist who doesn't understand these good people like she does (try not to start laughing). She compared him to those elites Al Gore and John Kerry-- which given his background is kind of amazing, but hey...., it worked before.

Clinton went on to discuss how she herself is no elitist as she headed for a pub to slam a shot of hard stuff and chug a beer while reminiscing on how much she loves duck hunting. The media barely had to ask McCain to jump on the pile as his buddy Hillary (for now) had done his work for him. If she can't win, it's obvious who she would prefer be the next president.

So, Obama is an elitist... or is he? It would depend on what the meaning of "IS" ... is. If an elitist is someone who believes because of the class or family from which they have come, they are entitled to rule (dictionary definition); then the question was being asked about the wrong candidates-- although there is nobody who would run for the presidency who wouldn't qualify as an elitist. They have to believe they are superior to others to even try for the job.

Hillary Clinton emphasizes again and again that she is entitled to rule because of who her husband is and what she and he have done in the past for our country. She makes sure everybody know she's tough enough. Her latest such macho entry was in the recent debate where she said anytime a country in the Middle East is attacked, we should go in to defend them, attacking their attacker. Again what did John McCain even have to say although he already had espoused the worldwide police job that he presented as our duty-- even gave it a name (which I won't repeat as I hope it doesn't catch on anywhere but in these two neo-con politicians).

As for elitism of the financial sort, both Hillary Clinton and John McCain have that covered. She hasn't lived in anything but a mansion in a long time and neither has he. McCain's credentials to be a ruling elite come not only from ruling class father and grandfather (admirals) but also has a mother and wife of wealth. His wife's family fortune jump started his political career. He has more money than either Clinton or Obama.

So in terms of understanding the ruling elite, why weren't these two asked about themselves? It's because I don't think that is the definition of elite that was meant by the accusation. I think it's a different meaning the accusers have in mind. It is that of a person who is highly educated, a scholar, an orator, possibly bilingual. This kind of elite refers to someone who will willingly discuss tough problems and not choose one syllable words to do it.

When fascism tries to take over a country, it promotes religion and patriotism. It ridicules scientists and intellectuals. As fascism grows in strength, it eventually kills or imprisons the intellectuals by setting them apart as a risk to the country, as being elites who deserve to be killed or imprisoned. Look at history to see if what I am saying is true.

When they go after Obama as being an elitist, it's because he's an intellectual as it sure isn't due to his family's fortune. It's part of an overall view from that part of the right that is ready to dismantle our public school system, make it harder for ordinary families to send their teen-agers to college, and who seek control over who gets advanced degrees or runs the government.

It appears to me that the McCain/Clinton Siamese twins are trying to convince voters that intellectuals are the elites, the ones who cannot be trusted. Being educated, speaking well is a threat. A person who looks at the deeper problems in our country, who discusses what is going on with our small towns, THAT person is THE threat.

Especially for McCain, who thinks Bush has done a good job on the economy and right now on the war, he doesn't see the country needing someone who can understand the nuances of a serious problem. Serious problems only need yes or no answers. We have seen how well that has worked the last 7 years with another leader who also has had absolutely no respect for intellectual solutions or the people who offer them.