If you’re up for a laugh, do enjoy this post by Jennifer Rubin over at her Commentary blog about Obama’s comments on Pennsylvania mid-class voters. Right before noting that her argument for Clinton’s superiority to Obama has “nothing to do with race or class”, she launches into a characteristic conservative tirade against the educated “elitism” of Obama that supposedly places him out of touch with middle class voters. I’m always amazed by the tendency of movement conservatives to project their own rhetorical tactics onto their opponents. They rail against “class warfare” and “identity politics”, but built an entire era of political ascent by creating a boogieman of the wealthy elite on the coast who reads The New Yorker, drives a BMW, eats Bree and wants to force them to love fags and colored folk. It’s odd, because the degradation of “elite” status is exactly the opposite of what you’d expect from a “conservative” tradition. But such confusion is clarified when you realize that which the latest Obama flap clearly illustrates: that it’s more a tactic of distraction from the real elites by shifting the meaning of the label. When “elite” became associated with education, curiosity and intellectualism rather than actual power and influence, the conservative cause won. Only when liberals manage to revoke the unwritten requirement that our president be an illiterate fucking moron will such damage be repaired.
