I would have added this to the current "bittergate" thread we have, but George Will(one of my favorite political commentators)talks about Liberal Elitism as well.

Rest of Article can be found here and makes a good argument of what Liberal Elites are and defines them well (or at least what conservatives define them as) .

Now some may say that Liberal Elites is a made up buzzword by the conservatives in order to attack Democrats but, here is a video of Jon Stewart and The Daily Show which definitely has been leaning left the last couple of years. Not only do they not attack BHO for his comments but they go after HRC and defend "Elitism" at the end of the video.

I was disgusted when I saw it last night and the video only enforced the notion that "The Daily Show" is definitely for BHO and is only attacking HRC because she is running against him right now.

LOL you were disgusted?

Did it go against Comedy Central's claim to be "Fair and Balanced" in their satirical TV shows?

I'm sure glad there are no Conservative Elitists.

They don't claim to be for the Democrats either. But I'm disgusted by blatant political bias from a lot of places both right and left.

I think this is a misrepresentation of what Obama was trying to say.

It's a comedy show, get over it.

I find George Will entertaining at times, but what's really laughable is the idea of him decrying someone else - anyone else - as being overly elitist.

Gotta love the rich WASP corporatist shunning of elitism.

I barely watch it anymore. Mostly because of the bias, it just makes the show less funny and I wish it was like before. I only watch the Colbert Report now and even though it is biased, it isn't as much and is a lot more funny when he does it. Also he doesn't hesitate to make fun of liberals when he has the chance, where as Stewart seems to restrict himself.

I could care less if you like the show or whatever reasons you choose to watch it or not.

But to be disgusted by the political bias of a comedy show is LOLOL.

My first reaction as well.

"Elitist" is becoming rightspeak for "panders to ignorance less (or even differently) than us".

His article, and as usual it is a good read, has nothing to do with some generic definition of elitism and everything to do with defining and explaining the origination of American liberal elitism. He thinks the Obama's fit the bill, while George is certainly the antithesis of an American liberal elite. Nothing laughable here at all.

Frankly, I didn't even bother reading Will's article. My comment is mostly a reaction to all the talking heads and pundits who have no right to claim any particular insight into how small-town Americans think or act, since they are themselves so disconnected to the real world and live such a rarefied existence.

I will read the Will piece eventually, though, because he is a good writer.

http://people-press.org/commentary/d...AnalysisID=131

"By an overwhelming margin (83% to 14%), the American public favors raising the federal minimum wage to $7.15 per hour -- a hefty $2.00 an hour increase. And nearly half (49%) say they strongly support such an increase."

George Will: Minimum Wage Should Be Zero

Why is George Will such an elitist thug? Why does he think he knows what's best for low-income workers!?!?! Doesn't supporting the abolishment of the minimum wage, despite the fact it enjoys so much widespread, popular support, make him some kind of dirty elite? Needless to say, this guy went to Princeton (Ivy Tower Ivy Leaguer) and Oxford (oooo la de da, studying abroad), and won a Pulitizer Prize (now he and Edward Albee can spoon and not feel dirty about spooning with non-Pulitizer Prize winners). He's made millions publishing books about politics and old tyme baseball. What an effete, elitist snob ldo.*









*A special note to those on this forum who don't understand sarcasm: I'm not making an argument for or against the minimum wage. I'm not arguing the minimum wage should be raised. I don't think George Will hates poor people; in fact, I like George Will. And I have the utmost respect for Princeton and Oxford. For those of you who need everything spelled out for you, George Will criticizes Obama for his elitist attitude, despite the fact Will's support for the abolishment of the minimum wage completely contradicts the humble middle-class Americans he claims to champion. And I don't doubt this is the only issue where Will supports a policy prescription that runs counter to what a vast majority of low-income and middle class Americans want out of government. So it's a little much for Will, he of Princeton and Oxford, and who writes some of the absolute most boring, stuffy books about baseball and how it was played when he was a kid four centuries ago, has made millions publishing books and syndicating his articles, and who supports a bunch of conservative economic policies that are completely anathema to working class Americans criticizing anyone for their elitism.

I like Will, and it's specifically because he's an elite -- he doesn't dumb down his content, he writes as if he's a guy that went to Princeton and Oxford, and appreciates political philosophy. *His* ivory-tower interpretation about what constitutes elitism and the requisite amount of celebration of "American working class values" while simultaneously supporting policies that counter what those American working class voters want, writing books that only elites can appreciate (like anecdotes about Rogers Hornsby and Thomas Jefferson's view of statecraft), and making millions from it, however, is bit much.

Dvaut,

I can't help get a chuckle out of your (understandable) need to start adding disclaimers to your posts.

It won't help, by the way.

Strawman.

Great rant, are you going to address anything he said now? Or are you just going to attack the messenger?

This isn't attack the messanger ikes. Do you have a little cript sheet of one-line crap to post, and you just cycle through them?

Part of his argument -- in fact, the main tenant of his argument -- is that Obama doesn't champion middle-class American values, that liberals have been openly disdainful of them. How would George Will, of all people, be in a position to know that? How would George Will, he of Princeton and Oxford and the litany of elitist pursuits, know what the **** middle class, salt-of-the-Earth Americans think?

It's hard to get any value out of conversing with you ikes when you demonstrate time and time again you don't actually read the posts your responding to, consistently misunderstand the point, can't figure out what the hell the person your responding to is talking about. I had to spend three posts in the thread about gas taxes to get you to drop your ridiculous strawman and irrelevant one-line nonsense. I annotated my post just for posters like you ikes -- guys that are clearly incapable of reading and thinking and then responding in a non-inane way.

Oh the irony.

I love how you claim that you aren't attacking the messenger in one breath, and then directly go on to do it again. Presumably, George Will believes that middle class, small town America does not cling to religion, protectionist ideas or a hate of certain groups different from them because of a lack of economic prosperity. This does not seem to be too controversial of a position.

If you were to attack this assumption, then you would be accurately attacking George Will's understanding of the middle class. Instead you choose to focus on Will's life experience in what I can only assume is an attempt to avoid debate on the actual issue. But just in case you need someone from middle class America to confirm Will's view for you, I'll inform you that the vast majority of "us" do not feel that Obama's comments accurately portray how we think and live.

If you feel so differently about something pertaining to Will's understanding of the middle class, you should actually explain WHY he is so very wrong. Anything else is an attack on Will himself, and no amount of spew on your part will change that.

Dvaut, I think you are misreading that article. Where in that article did Will claim that he championed middle-class Americans? I've heard him make this point many times in various forums. His point is that some liberals (in his opinion) think working class people don't vote for them as much as they should because they are either mislead by manipulative Republicans or they aren't educated enough to realize that voting for Democrats is in their best interests.

Will isn't claiming that he is a spokesman for working people, he is claiming that a certain type of liberal looks down on those people because they aren't smart enough to vote for those liberals. Will believes that when people vote on non-economic issues, such as guns, god, gays, etc...they are voting for what they believe is in their best interests, contrary to the belief of those liberals.

I found a George Will article that articulates his position on this matter. This article is a response to the Thomas Frank book, "What's The Matter With Kansas."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Jul7.html

ikes, you're inability to read and comprehend simple English is incredible. I've written in words about as clear as the English language allows that I'm not criticizing Will's life story, his life experiences, or Will personally. I'm criticizing Will's ability, or lack thereof, to be a legitimate arbiter of the political whims and proclivities of "middle class" Americans, given that Will may be the biggest elitist, fop in modern political journalism.

Why presumably? I love how you demand I address Will's "argument", then happily concede you're just guessing as to what the **** Will actually believes. A+ ikes, gg coherent posting.


translation: If you were to attack what ikes presumes is Will's argument, then you would be accurately attacking George Will's understanding of the middle class.

Seriously, ikes...very serious question: are you reading the thread? Do you understand my argument.

I'll repeat it, again: George Will has no understanding of the middle class. George Will is a Prince/Oxford educated guy who wins Pulitzers and makes millions of dollars. You demanding I address your presumption about Will's understanding of the middle class (which you happily concede he doesn't actually articulate, hence why you're presuming) is just a patent question begging fallacy.

ikes, please read what I write before responding. It's painfully obvious you're not doing this.

lol ikes, student at U of M, who spends alot of time on the Politics forum making thinly veiled brags about how much a prospective Democratic tax hike will cost him thousands of dollars because he banks so much playing poker while studying at an elite American university -- champion and spokesman for the American middle class. But remember, it's those dirty liberals who are clueless, condescending elites!

gg attachment to reality

ikes, please read what I write before again. Just give it a try. It's not difficult.

I'll repeat it, again, just for you ikes: George Will has no understanding of the middle class. I can't argue with Will's "understanding of the middle class", because he's in absolutely no position to have any understanding whatsoever of the American middle class lifestyle. George Will is a Prince/Oxford educated guy who wins Pulitzers and makes millions of dollars. You demanding I address your presumption about Will's understanding of the middle class (which you happily concede he doesn't actually articulate, hence why you're presuming) is just a patent question begging fallacy that assumes Will has any understanding of American middle class lifestyle at all. He's an Ivy League/Oxford educated millionaire who writes columns and books for a living. He's in absolutely no position to have any kind of understanding whatsoever about what kind of rhetoric alienates the middle class -- what they do or don't feel bitter about -- whether or not Democratic Presidential candidate rhetoric antagonizes them.

Read what I wrote ikes. It's not difficult. I've repeated myself numerous times now.

How in the world could Will know this? In between writing about 19th century baseball, collecting millions of dollars in royalties from his books and syndicated articles, he's looking into the soul of the middle class through the prism of his Princeton/Oxford education?

*If* Obama is guilty of rank elitism for pretending to know what motivates working-class Americans, Will is guilty (by your own admission) of the exact same offense. Again, how would George Will -- seriously, George Will, he of Princeton/Oxford, Pulitzer Prizes, millions of dollars, and books chalk full of baseball anecdotes -- be able to discern "that when people vote on non-economic issues, such as guns, god, gays, etc...they are voting for what they believe is in their best interest"? Why is claiming this, from his ivory tower, penning books about Joe DiMaggio and writing editorials, some kind of legitimate channeling of the American working class hoi polloi, while Obama doing the same is some kind of disgusting elitism?

If real, honest-to-goodness middle class voters (ie., not George Will) want to claim Obama is an elitist who's out of touch with their real interests, far be it from me to disagree. But when George Will makes the argument that Obama is an elitist who's out of touch with real middle-class interests, I call BS -- George Will is just about the last person on Earth who should be arbitrating whether or not, when middle class voters vote on non-economic issues, such as guns, god, gays, etc...they are voting for what they believe is in their best interest.

I don't have to be a black person to understand black issues and I don't have to be a woman to understand women's issues. The entire assumption that George Will can't discuss what the Middle Class may be like because he is not in the middle class and never has is completely bogus.