My new tenure at “Yes to Democracy” (where I’ve already started a small war!) has given me the chance to yell about one of my favorite subjects: antifeminism in the Republican ranks, and how McCain will perpetuate that legacy of marginalization. Time to revisit the Republicans’ surreptitious plan to reclassify contraceptives as abortion (my earlier post on the legal aspects of this issue is here).
For a fantastic (and novel) look at the issue, check this must-read post on the issue by one of the newest members of “Yes to Democracy”. Thanks to “Fabulously Jinxed”!
While McCain has yet to take a side on this dramatic proposed rollback of women’s rights, his stated belief that “life begins at conception” seems to suggest he’d fall in with the Republican hard-line, and okay legislatively redefining away contraception:
That’s the bad news. The good news is that MoveOn.org has finally taken note. Join the Facebook group, and realize that there’s more on the line in this election than just abortion. Contraceptives could be next.
Governor Tim Pawlenty and Senator Evan Bayh just finished an informal debate on “Face the Nation”… And Senator Bayh spectacularly stayed on message, hitting serious issues by emphasizing Obama’s Iraq plan and stressing that it counts McCain and Bush as some of it’s converts, while also calling on McCain to denounce Jerome Corsi’s slanderous book. He showed a remarkable ability to be forceful, yet positive, and call the Republicans on their negative talking points.
Republicans have been banking on the “elitist” label to tar intelligent liberals as “out-of-touch” for at least the past eight years… to the detriment of the Republic. The trick was to link intelligence and deep policy thinking to higher education, and let higher education stand as a proxy for (1) the hated university professor and (2) the money to pay for higher education, drawing on both ideological and class divides. Let Rush Limbaugh do the rest.
Somewhere along the way, though, the term lost touch with its original meaning: “elitism” was, originally, only offensive insofar as it connoted entitlement, and removal from reality. But the “financial” aspect of elitism dropped out somewhere in the Bush years, leaving “elitism” as a purely cultural theme, attributable only to intelligent liberals, confounding its original pejorative nature. Knowledge earned through hard work is hardly elitist; it’s in line with the American ideal of the self-made individual.
Now, talking down to someone who’s lost their house? Misunderstanding the troubles of those with less than 1/1000th of your net worth? Blaming individuals for a market problem? That’s elitist, out of touch, and condescending.
It’s time to reclaim the “elitist” label, by bringing it back to its original meaning. John McCain is the place to start. Barack Obama’s compelling life story rebuts the charge of his “cultural” elitism, so long as he keeps quiet about the arugula, and every inch of his education was earned. His personal fortune is no greater than McCain’s, making his “financial” elitism a knock-out between the two… except insofar as McCain lacks comprehension of the plight of middle America. Time to emphasize every mistake he’s ever made in contextualizing the current economic downturn, and take his own invitation to misconstrue his definition of “rich”:
Talk about dodging the question.
At worst, the prior clip can be misrepresented to show that McCain doesn’t understand the real definition of “wealth” in America – almost no-one bankrolls $5,000,000 in one lifetime. Arguably, that’s dishonest. But even at best, the clip displays a total lack of understanding of the rich/poor gap in America: “cut everyone’s taxes” isn’t an answer, and it misrepresents what McCain’s plan would actually do, completely refusing to engage the questioner on what “class” means in America. McCain’s so out of touch with reality that he doesn’t even acknowledge that his tax cuts affect people with different means. Whither that alleged vast amount of experience?
And how come the new guy sounds so sensible, talks so candidly about his plan (dare I say he talks “straight”?), and seems to understand that taxes do not, in fact, look the same to every citizen?
