Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Election 2008

Elections in America: Millionaires Accusing Each Other of Elitism

By Brad Reed, AlterNet. Posted April 14, 2008.


This country can't afford to have another election decided by the idea that a member of the ruling class is "genuine" and others are "elitist."
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Millionaire lawyers, politicians and journalists are all savaging Barack Obama for being an elitist.

Obama's particular crime in this case was saying that Democrats have done a lousy job of dealing with the concerns of working-class Americans, thus allowing the Republicans to swoop in with their God-Guns-n-Gays brand of politics that scapegoats homosexuals, illegal immigrants and George Clooney as the prime culprits behind blue-collar woes. This is not a particularly new argument, and has been a popular theme in mainstream discourse ever since author Thomas Frank published his excellent book What's the Matter With Kansas? in 2004. Nevertheless, both the media and the rival candidates pounced on Obama's statements and accused him of making "outrageous San Francisco remarks" and of "offending small town America." Worst of all, Obama's words rendered him an "elitist" in the eyes of his critics, which in American political discourse is akin to being a child molester or a Frenchman.

But is Barack Obama really an elitist as his opponents claim? Well of course he is -- he's running for president of the United States! He wouldn't have gotten this far in life if he'd spent the past 20 years driving a truck or moonlighting as a fry cook at Arby's. Like every other successful politician in the United States, Obama is a member of America's political ruling class, which means that like every other presidential candidate in recent memory, he is typically insulated from the lives of ordinary people. Does Obama really have any idea what it's like to live like a "Real American?" Of course he doesn't, and neither do John McCain and Hillary Clinton! Does any rational person out there believe that Obama, Clinton and McCain spend their free time away from the campaign trail hanging out at Jimmy Ray's Chicken'n'Beer Depot playing darts with the common folk?

In theory, this point should be fairly obvious. Even before getting elected, most politicians made a good deal of money in their careers as lawyers, doctors, actors or oil tycoons -- you know, real salt-of-the-earth sort of work. But for reasons that have long confounded sane people everywhere, our national millionaire press corps gives positive coverage to political candidates who are the most adept at lying about their ability to connect with regular folks. And because it apparently takes too much work for our press corps to sift through the candidates' policy positions to figure out what each of them is actually offering blue-collar voters, we don't even get rational assessments of politicians' working-class cred. Instead, we get piles and piles of anecdotal evidence.

For instance, any rational observer should be able to discern that George W. Bush has not been a particularly good president for blue-collar people. From the bankruptcy bill that made it harder for Americans to escape debt, to the tax cuts that were tilted heavily toward the uber-rich, to his mercifully-botched scheme to privatize social security, all of Bush's major economic initiatives have been tailored specifically to shaft working-class people in order to benefit really, really, really, really, really rich people. While some major media figures, most notably Paul Krugman, tirelessly pointed this out, the vast majority of our bonehead millionaire pundit class declared Bush to be more in touch with the average American than elitist snobs such as John Kerry and Al Gore.

What were Bush's qualifications for being the Voice of the Common Man, you ask? For one thing, he cleared brush. As the Washington Post reported in 2005, "President Bush's idea of paradise is to hop in his white Ford pickup truck in jeans and work boots, drive to a stand of cedars, and whack the trees to the ground." Cue up the Toby Keith CD, baby, we got a real workin' man on our hands! Also: Bush wore a flight suit. Even though Bush had never actually seen combat of any kind, merely donning a flight suit made him "a high-flying jet star," who was "virile, sexy and powerful" and whose clothing made "the best of his manly characteristic." And finally: President Bush did, in fact, have a pair of testicles, as Peggy Noonan expounded upon rapturously in a 2004 column that she titillating titled "He's Got Two of 'Em."

Which brings us back the recent troubles that Obama has had lying to convince our press corps that he's in touch with the average American. You see, Obama's problems in this area aren't merely confined to his statements about white working-class voters being bitter. For one thing, Obama decided not to wolf down artery-clogging piles of meat-flavored goo when he visited Philadelphia. After all, what could be more authentically American than eating your way to an early death? Also, Obama isn't very good at bowling. Bloomberg columnist Margaret Colson said that Obama's low bowling score was a "doozy" of a mistake, since voters apparently want someone who's good at "looking, acting, or sounding like the locals, eating homemade specialties, even if it's funnel cake and smoked meat products, or wearing a Teamsters or Yankees cap for the first time." Yeah, Barack, come on -- you don't want these people to know that your life is a billion times more interesting than theirs! You're running for president!

These phony proclamations of "elitism" are not unique to Barack Obama, of course. John Kerry got pounded for his Brahmin ways after having the gall to windsurf. Al Gore got trashed in the press corps for sighing during a 2000 debate. Mitt Romney got pummeled for the way he ate pizza, Bush I for ordering a "splash" of coffee. John Edwards? Paid too much for a haircut. Hillary Clinton? Has a phony laugh. And on and on and on and on.

Why is our millionaire pundit class so gosh-darned interested in finding allegedly "genuine" ruling-class politicians to champion as tried'n'true representatives of Real America? Without subjecting them to intense psychological treatment (not a half-bad idea), I have no way of knowing. But I do know that this seems to be a uniquely American phenomenon in the industrialized world. Most politicians in Europe, Canada and Asia, from what I've seen, are a bunch of technocratic dweebs who spend their campaigns arguing over which of their dweeby technocratic proposals would make their countries better marginally places to live. In other words, they base their campaigns on actual politics rather than bowling scores.

But can you imagine what would happen if Gordon Brown or Nicolas Sarkozy or Angela Merkel tried to show how they were rugged and in-touch with the common man by dressing up in a flight suit or speeding around the countryside in a pickup truck clearing brush? They'd be justifiably laughed out of office, because sane people in other parts of the world don't care whether or not their political leaders drink lager or enjoy watching football on the telly. Heck, just look at Sarkozy! Do you really expect him to pretend that he enjoys hanging out in the countryside with a bunch of dull old grape farmers when he'd obviously rather be going on fancy vacations with his international supermodel wife? And can you blame the guy?

What is so depressing about our press corps' bizarre penchant for picking and choosing which members of the ruling class are "genuine" and which ones are not is that the United States simply cannot afford to have another election decided by this trivial nonsense. For the past eight years, sane people have watched in horror as George W. Bush chain-sawed the country's coffers with tax cuts, trampled over both international and domestic law and inexplicably got us involved in an endless bloody war in Iraq. While I can't claim to speak for Real Americans -- after all, I don't eat cheese steak or clear brush on a regular basis -- I can speak for myself when I say that I don't want my political leaders to be my friends; I only ask that they not actively try to destroy the country and the rest of the world. And at this point, I don't care if our next president is the unholy love spawn of Richie Rich, Thurston Howell and Charles Emerson Winchester III. As long as they can end the Iraq war, provide national health insurance and generally make life in this country stink less than it has under Bush, then they've got my vote.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: media, clinton, obama, election08, mccain, elites

Brad Reed is a writer living in Boston. His work has previously appeared in the American Prospect Online, and he blogs frequently at Sadly, No!.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Election 2008! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Bless you
Posted by: Sanglug on Apr 14, 2008 10:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bless you, Brad Reed. You've nailed it. The most sane commentary on this molehill of a controversy I've seen.

Now let us collectively put our actions where our words are by ceasing to read (and quote, and comment on, and otherwise generally promote) the bloviators in the media and news corps who feed us this trivial swill. The only recourse we have is to disempower them, and we must begin to do so personally and collectively, starting now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Its impossible!
Posted by: Drclaw on Apr 14, 2008 10:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..to be the love spawn of that trio, that is...they are all men. Ivana Trump anyone?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

jeanna
Posted by: jeanna on Apr 14, 2008 10:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does being brought up by a middle class single mom & grandparents make Obama elitist? Oh yes, he lived in Indonesia and then in Hawaai as a
child and teenager. Tres Elite! He went to a prep school, probably on a scholarship where he was probably much poorer than his class-mates. He attended "elite" universities, not because of family connections or wealth, but on his scholastic ability. Well yes, i guess
that is rather elite in a sense. He worked as a community organiser on the south side of Chicago. Now that IS an elitist occupation for a young man of superior abilities to choose.
But let's look up the word elite: "the best or most powerful of anything considered collectively, esp of a group or class of persons". Well there you have it. His opposition admits he is "the best"!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: jeanna Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters
Speaking for David Broder
Posted by: thenthelightningwill™³²®© on Apr 14, 2008 11:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am outraged, Mr. Bradley Roquette the Third, that you would make light of the pain some proverbial barber in some city I've occasionally flown over feels.

You, and Obama, hurt these low income, low information nobodies with your horrible insinuations, and only Cokie Roberts, Tim Russert, and myself can explain to America exactly how they feel.
~

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Of course Obama (et alia) is elitist
Posted by: hotdog on Apr 14, 2008 11:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If he were not, he would grasp the simple remedy of the single payer national health plan.

It is ironic that John Edwards, with his $400 hair cuts, got that while Obama (to say nothing of Clinton and McCain) does not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Of course Obama (et alia) is elitist Posted by: thenthelightningwill™³²®©
It worked for Dumya
Posted by: Crazy H on Apr 14, 2008 11:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They managed to portray him as "a guy you'd like to sit down and have a beer with." Even though he's a teetotaller.

Maybe they should have billed him as "a guy you'd like to sit down and snort a line with."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It worked for Dumya Posted by: bluepilgrim
Obama is a millionaire.
Posted by: JimmyVaughan on Apr 14, 2008 12:10 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's net worth is $1.3 million.

Millionaires-in-Chief.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Obama is a millionaire. Posted by: bluebuddha
» I read the third paragraph, wiseguy Posted by: JimmyVaughan
Manly Characteristics
Posted by: doctor corndog on Apr 14, 2008 12:13 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't care if our next president is the unholy love spawn of Richie Rich, Thurston Howell and Charles Emerson Winchester III.

Actually, I do care, because such a triple Y chromosome hypermale would have testosterone levels off the charts and, continuing the bowling theme, a pair of 16 pounders that would make Chris Matthews swoon and Peggy Noonan weak in the knees. McCain wouldn't stand a chance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: gnaw_bone on Apr 14, 2008 12:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good God, what a sensational column.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

History Repeats Itself
Posted by: ohb0b on Apr 14, 2008 12:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If something works, don't fix it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log_cabin_campaign

TIPPECANOE AND TYLER TOO!

Politics depends on people forgetting the past.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Exactly right - and who no longer wants to talk about "free trade" deals?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 14, 2008 12:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's particular crime in this case was saying that Democrats have done a lousy job of dealing with the concerns of working-class Americans, thus allowing the Republicans to swoop in with their God-Guns-n-Gays brand of politics that scapegoats homosexuals, illegal immigrants and George Clooney as the prime culprits behind blue-collar woes.

In fact, it was the Lawrence Summers - Alan Greenspan - Robert Rubin wing of the Democratic Party that played a major role in screwing over all those blue collar workers in the first place - not as big a role as the Republicans played, but without the Clinton's support for NAFTA it would never have passed.

By the way, econometric modeling is absolute bullshit, as the NAFTA econometric models proved - models that claimed that both Mexican and American workers would see pay raises as a result of NAFTA.

Instead, what's happened is that U.S. subsidized agribusiness interests have driven Mexican farmers into poverty. A large portion of these farmers (some 1 million) have migrated, often illegally, to the United States where they form the backbone of the labor force of agribusiness - from picking strawberries and onions to working in slaughterhouses. This has resulted in a downward pressure on wages in the United States. However, that's not the real downward pressure on labor wages - that's due to the outsourcing of U.S. blue-collar jobs to China.

Now, Hillary Clinton is an avid supporter of globalization, which has really become the modern equivalent of the slave trade. She was on WalMart's board of directors, she supports NAFTA, her campaign manager is deeply involved with China and Colombia trade issues - and this is the person who is supposed to represent "blue-collar interests"?

Recall that Clinton's director of the CIA was James Woolsey - the same James Woolsey who, along with Joe Lieberman, is a member of the Committee on the Present Danger - a very similar group with as the Project for A New American Century. Woolsey played a major role, along with Chalabi, in cooking up the bogus WMD reports on Iraq. That's what the Clintons are all about, once you get past their chuckly exterior.

Recall also the gross spectacle of Rupert Murdoch arm-in-arm with Hillary Clinton?

That was another calculated political move. The woman is a political weathervane with no morality or substance of her own to guide her decisions. Her career has been one long game of kissing up to powerful people and corporations while pretending to have a populist-progressive agenda. She wanted to be a right-wing neocon, because it seemed popular at the time. I could see Hillary Clinton going with Condi Rice for her VP pick - they're two peas in a pod.

The fact is, there is a cabal within the Democratic Party who secretly support many Republican objectives - and it includes people like Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, Diane Feinstein, Jane Harman, John 'Jay' Rockefeller, and the like. Those people should all be forced to announce themselves as what they really are: Republicans in Democratic clothing.

After all, why do you think the Clintons publicly claimed that McCain would be a better president than Obama?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thoughtcriminal, you rock Posted by: hagwind
Should he/she be an average person of the people?Or a great intellect above the crowd?
Posted by: bettina9292 on Apr 14, 2008 1:14 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok.. The author is missing some key facts about Obama.One-he was born in Hawaii to two college students who came from middle class and poverty situations. Father penniless from Kenya- with scholarships from the government and mother under 20 on scholarship and not much different.Within two years his father divorced his mom and left for Cambridge.
His mother came from non college educated parents who were transient-moving from job to job and state to state looking for stability. Yes, after his parents divorce and mother's re-marraige he lived abroad in Jakarta with mother and step father who were a step above the extreme poverty of an average government worker in a third world country alike Indonesia. But when his step father started selling out for corporate capitalism work and social circles- his mother dumped him. His mother continued on a dime to get her college degrees seeking unstable living arrangements that most of the time worked out to be just living with her parents as an adult.
Obama's grandparents actually raised him on a furniture/insurance salesman's salary and a head bank teller's income. Eventually, his grandfather was permanently unemployed and his grandmother had to support the entire family. Obama did get into the only private/"state" run Hawaii high school academy limited to its residents, which might be construed as an elitist breeding ground. But his family lived day to day living apartment life.
His father died practically destitute and yes he was educated with a Harvard PhD in Economics that he was unable to use because of the constant upheaval of African politics.
Yes, he went to Occidental and Columbia on Scholarships. Yes, he went to Harvard Law on Scholarship. He had one corporate job in between for 6 months and quit to do community organizing for 2 years in the South side of Chicago for such limited salary that he had to live where he worked .
Ok-so he made it big in Civil Rights litigation and his best selling books. Is he an elitist? Maybe now? No, I don't think so. Most definitely a high achiever and possibly a narcissist. But no one forgets, parents or grandparents living day to day on a dime. No one forgets divorce and abandonment by a parent. What about the struggles of being an African American in the USA? Being on scholarship doesn't get you everything without eating a lot of humble pie.
In contrast, take George W. Bush. He was raised by one of the wealthiest families in this country. Winters in Greenich, Connecticut. Summers in Kenibunkport, Maine. He went to Yale as a legacy student. Ran the Texas Rangers professional baseball club into the ground when daddy Bush gave it to him to play with. He admits that he was a poor academic student and received every luxury know to the upper crust elite.Both of his parents together. Dad prior President of the US. Brother Governor in Florida. Neither a person above the crowd or a person with great intellect either. As governor of Texas his long standing achievement is the excessive amount of death penalty cases that actually get past the row to the electric chair. Oh, lets not forget his born again status as a recovering coke head, whiskey toting womanizer. But he was elected because of his family's power and wealth and that he "appeared to be an average Joe" spin, spin. This was all because he spoke rather obliquely and in a rather uneducated fashion. He appeared to be average..
Obama's upbringing is more average in that he they faced much adversity and that he was unique and smart enough to go beyond but never elitist enough to forget the pain of his traveled road of youth through adulthood.
Obama wanted better for himself and he got it through luck, intellect, timing and mostly hard work from nothing. An elitist talks the talk but never walks the talk. Obama has walked the talk and gets his hands dirty working in the thick of it-doing things to change society for the better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Could
Posted by: brock_samson on Apr 14, 2008 1:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... akin to being a child molester or a Frenchman

I realize that for some reason this particular type of bigotry is acceptable in America... but please, do we need to propagate it here?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» This was irony... Posted by: jparsons
The presidency is a job. Elect the best the best person to do the job...
Posted by: Sojourner on Apr 14, 2008 1:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...so long as s/he's not a CEO who thinks the US is just another corporation, especially one out to make life wonderful for oil barons.

Yes, the label "elitist" can be tossed at a candidate to see if it sticks. It's just another pejorative that no one really knows what it means. But in the world of advertising, brands are what matter. And if you can paste an unpopular brand on your opponent, there are enough folks who might head in the other direction.

I had been irritated by the long campaign, but now I am glad to see that it gives us time to work through some of the chaff that gets in the way. Like Hillary's laugh and Barack's minister.

Hillary's bigger problem is getting Bill's foot out of her mouth. Barack's is the nativist racism that will be uglier than anything Americans have seen in a long time. Only the elite know what "elitist" means. Miss Manners is the only one offended.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Generally you're speaking and generally you're wrong
Posted by: TheIndyVoice.com on Apr 14, 2008 2:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's slightly more than disingenuous to lump all elites into the same group. For instance, you can't make the claim that Obama is equally out of touch with the likes of someone like George W. just because they're elites. George W. Bush is an elite as a privilege of birth, while Obama has had privilege and became an elite. 2 totally different animals.

Is Obama an elite? Sure but he's a guy who after being the editor of Harvard's law review and graduating at the top of his class went on to work on the South side of Chicago helping the disadvantaged. He didn't start a failed oil company with the help from his daddy's friends like Bush or seek his personal fortune by immediately joining a high rolling law firm, like Clinton.

Calling someone an elite gives no indication as to the character of the individual. Case in point; Gandhi, MLK Jr., and Einstein were all elites. So is Chomsky and Zinn, and I for one want them that way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You're Almost There
Posted by: radical53 on Apr 14, 2008 4:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a very good article. My far-left perspective is a little different, though. The media is not as inept and dim-witted as they seem. They are a big part of the power elite (there's that word again) and they are making the most motivating election in decades into a real bore.

We started this campaign with the first serious black candidate, the first serious woman candidate, a Mormon candidate, several very experienced candidates, and a couple of crazy, maverick Republicans. Now we are down to the daily demand to repudiate some unseemly remark made by a friend or supporter of one of the candidates. Each over-the-top comment is then rebutted with a clever, "yeah, but a friend of my opponent said the following!". Each "dust-up" (a new media term that is making me vomit) becomes the news story of the week, leaving no time for a serious discussion of the candidates or the issues. People are tuning out of this media-cheapened process.

Nonetheless, I guarantee that I will show up on election day to vote to defeat that media darling, that tool of the Military Industrial Complex - the mentally unstable Senior Senator from Arizona. I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You're Almost There Posted by: begruntleed
Perhaps Both Are
Posted by: dockboy on Apr 14, 2008 6:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps both Obama and Hillary are just genuinely elitist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

:-(
Posted by: jacksmith on Apr 14, 2008 6:44 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
MY FELLOW BITTER, STUPID, WORKING CLASS PEOPLE.

YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT, TOO :-(

If you think like Barack Obama, that WORKING CLASS PEOPLE are just a bunch of BITTER!, STUPID, PEASANTS, Cash COWS!, and CANNON FODDER. :-(

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary’s than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)

Best regards

jacksmith...

p.s.

If you don't know that the huge amounts of money funding the Obama campaign to try and defeat Hillary Clinton is coming in from the insurance, and medical industry, that has been ripping you off, and killing you and your children. And denying you, and your loved ones the life saving medical care you needed. All just so they can make more huge immoral profits for them-selves off of your suffering...

You Might Be An Idiot, Too!

You see, back in 1993 Hillary Clinton had the audacity, and nerve to try and get quality, affordable universal health care for everyone to prevent the suffering and needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of you each year. :-)

Approx. 100,000 of you die each year from medical accidents from a rush to profit by the insurance, and medical industry. Another 120,000 of you die each year from treatable illness that people in other developed countries don’t die from. And I could go on, and on...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: -( Posted by: luml0003
» Sad Posted by: westomoon
:-(
Posted by: jacksmith on Apr 14, 2008 6:46 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
DON'T BE DUPED !!!

Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses from early on. Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. With Hillary Clinton you are almost 100% certain to get quality, affordable universal health care very soon.

But first, all of you have to make certain that Hillary Clinton takes the democratic nomination and then the Whitehouse. NOW! is the time. THIS! is the moment you have all been working, and waiting for. You can do this America. “Carpe diem” (harvest the day).

I think Hillary Clinton see’s a beautiful world of plenty for all. She’s a woman, and a mother. And it’s time America. Do this for your-selves, and your children’s future. You will have to work together on this and be aggressive, relentless, and creative. Americans face an even worse catastrophe ahead than the one you are living through now.

You see, the medical and insurance industry mostly support the republicans with the money they ripped off from you. And they don’t want you to have quality, affordable universal health care. They want to be able to continue to rip you off, and kill you and your children by continuing to deny you life saving medical care that you have already paid for. So they can continue to make more immoral profits for them-selves.

Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama’s. She also leads in the electoral college numbers that you must win to become President in the November national election. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

As much as 30% of Obama's primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help.

Hillary Clinton has been OUT MANNED! OUT GUNNED! and OUT SPENT! 4 and 5 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is. YOUNG PEOPLE. DON’T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose.

The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. Everyone needs to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton NOW! So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy.
The democratic party, and the super-delegates have a decision to make. Are the democrats, and the democratic party going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee to fight for the American people. Or are the republicans going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee through vote fraud, and gaming the DEMOCRATIC party primaries, and caucuses.

Fortunately the Clinton’s have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton’s. Only the Clinton’s are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen.

“This is not a game” (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: -(NAFTA? Posted by: bessie
» RE: -( Posted by: luml0003
The Annie Oakley & Wild Bill Show
Posted by: bessie on Apr 14, 2008 10:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Little Hil Annie Oakley & Her Wild Bill have a lot of nerve collecting $800,000 from Columbia for 'speaking fees'. Talk about ELITE. Since Annie is now anti-trade, maybe, someone should suggest that they return these fees as a show of good faith. In the meantime, this circus show goes on complete with duck hunting & boiler makers. How many small towns are now shuttered and desolate? When our manufacturing base disappeared and Walmart gobbled up small main streets everywhere, many suffered. With Bush, this trend has now affected the majority of us. So now Annie Oakley & Wild Bill in their most cynical way tell us not to be 'bitter'. Obama was talking honestly about economic issues and wedge political issues that confuse voters into voting against their own economic welfare. I can't pretend that I knew how devasting NAFTA would be but I remember wondering where all the "Made in the USA" labels went. So now Annie and Wild Bill want us to forget about their support of NAFTA and to ignore their own personal funding from free trade interests. Tell you what, the real Annie Oakley & Buffalo Bill probably gave an entertaining show for an honest dime. This circus show is not entertaining - it's based on lies, pandering, hypocrisy, and a lot of dishonest dimes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Senator Clinton's campaign is in disarray
Posted by: jd3 on Apr 14, 2008 11:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've heard that Senator Clinton has had trouble meeting financial obligations for her campaign events, and we've seen that while she has backtracked on her story about facing sniper fire, Bill Clinton has not adjusted his story to match hers. I think she needs to get her own house in order, and I hope this Wednesday night's debate will enable Senator Clinton to stop sounding like a broken record on one statement by Senator Obama -- since I think this process is doing the Republicans a huge favor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Or....
Posted by: talkville on Apr 15, 2008 3:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps the Main Stream Media, most especially but not exclusive on all cable television stations, as well as each one of us with ourselves and with others could summon up a bit of honesty and integrity for just a moment and at least entertain the notion that barely under the surface of these election 'waters' are bubbling up a whole lot of circumlocutions and such that deal with tender and sensitive histories.

I watched CSpan in the wee hours on the day following Obama's oft-repeated commentary and was quite surprised (although wryly and in strange ways relieved) that at least 5 or 6 of the 'open-phones' callers used a word: "uppity" with respect to this topic. Soon, all over main-stream media, commentators and 'analysts' and pundits of all persuasions were using the term "elitist" to refer to Obama's comments. These appeared to cover the gamut of those 'upper-class', 'middling-class' and 'populist' persuasions.

Jon Stewart made a great point on his 4/14/08 "Daily Show". In a sense, we DO need, and desperately, an 'elite' person to be elevated to the office of president of the USA: someone who has superior judgment, acumen, understanding, character and sense of responsibility toward the momentous tasks that are going to be required to not only repair the deep and enduring damage that has been wrought on the country, domestically and internationally but at the very least to begin to steer it into saner and more wholesome directions which, among a multitude of other things, also includes elevating all of us towards being better, more 'elite' citizens and human beings in our individual, social and even species relations with one another.

As for honesty, integrity and responsibility, a real good start might be found in some intense self-reflection on the part of the multitude of so-called 'experts', pundits, analysts and others in the Main Stream Media outlets. That, unfortunately, is the Murky Ocean the majority of this country swims around in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Its not what he said its where he said it
Posted by: Phenix on Apr 15, 2008 5:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is running a good campaign but he has given republicans ample ammunition against him for the general election.

Excerpts of Rev. Wright's speech will be played in key states and they'll probably be effective.

Michelle Barack's comments about America will be played constantly. I do not know what she was thinking when she said she was finally proud of America. It was a dumb comment to make and if its off the cuff then its understandable but it seemed as if it was a speech.

Now Obama goes to San Fran to talk about rural and small town issues? What politician in their right mind would talk about rural rage in San Fran? To a lot of people San Fran represents all that is wrong with America ie a bastion of gay liberal prissy intellectuals who are just down right un American. Also its an illegal immigration safe zone or something to that effect. He finally talks about the economic and cultural divide but does it in one of our most divisive cities. If he says this in a small town then he would take a lot less flak because he would have been in a small town discussing small town issues with local residents.

And of course he is a member of the elite. I do not know if he is an elitist but very few people get to that position of power with out taking care of society's elite.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a breath of fresh air!
Posted by: hagwind on Apr 15, 2008 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I live in a place that is seasonally infested by the affluenza, some of whom regularly attract major media attention. Over the years I've had several opportunities to watch the national and regional press swarm all over these people. When the objects of their attention are off in their enclaves or otherwise unavailable, the media people fan out looking for "local color." Local color is lying around in plain sight, but most of them manage to miss it completely. It's not that they literally can't see or hear us; it's that they've got their rather narrow ideas about what's important and what's worth covering, and if we don't fit into those narrow ideas we're not newsworthy. Needless to say, this doesn't stop them from filing stories about us, especially those of us who fit their notions of "local color." The results are incomplete and distorted at best, embarrassingly inaccurate at worst.

I figure that if they can miss so much about a place where no one's shooting at them and nearly everyone speaks the same language they do, their reporting from other places can't be trusted either. So if all your information about something comes from the mass media, the chances are you don't know as much about it as you think you do, especially if your medium of choice is TV.

I'm probably not the only one whose immediate reaction to What's the Matter with Kansas? -- or, more accurately, to the reaction to What's the Matter with Kansas? -- was "Damn, it sure took you long enough to figure that out!" Maybe if they stop accusing each other of elitism long enough to listen to people outside their own little circles, they'll learn something worth knowing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DupeNation
Posted by: Ignatz deFyre on Apr 15, 2008 9:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Contemporary American elections are a production designed to mislead the citizenry into thinking that there is really a contest. (It's tempting to throw in a comparison to American idol, but at least on AI individual talent has a fighting chance). The machinery of USA government has too much inertia to be affected by one person, or even a committee of persons, within the span of 8 years. The state of current affairs is the culmination of a hundred years, more, of backroom political work. The faces at the front of this crowd change every 4 to 8 years, but the crowd is pretty much the same, and as embedded as ever. Sorry for the doomsday thinking, but given the docility and apathy bred into Joe American only a catastrophic event will lead to meaningful changes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Campaign Financing
Posted by: Southern Gal on Apr 15, 2008 12:29 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We're not likely to get a man/woman of the people in the office of president. The system is rigged for the very wealthy. It takes obscene amounts of money to become a candidate and even more obscene amounts of money to make it through a campaign. You'll notice that the media and the campaigns make a huge deal of how much money raised. We have never seen the likes of money spent on recent campaigns. It truly is time for real campaign finance reform and public funding of campaigns. It's not likely to happen because the people in power want to stay in power. The upper elete don't want the likes of the rest of us getting into positions of power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you!
Posted by: La Jen on Apr 15, 2008 11:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for making me laugh out loud. Thank you for helping me regain some sanity after being told that I worship Obama because he is black, and that I am obsessed by race, for trying to start up a dialog on race with people I thought I knew, who also referred to Obama as a "child of privilege," which caused me to search through his bio trying to understand why they would say that....as you can see there is still some sanity left for me to regain. I guess you're right, "elitist" is the ultimate insult to these people.

La Jen

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

elitist v elite
Posted by: brodriv on Apr 19, 2008 3:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems to me that when people say "of course, Barack Obama is elitist" because he's wealthy and ivy-educated they conflating elitist with elite? Why isn't that distinction being made?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: elitist v elite Posted by: lamac66
Come On
Posted by: lamac66 on Apr 19, 2008 7:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't think any OTHER candidates in the election was born to a teen mother. Has any other candidate been on public assistance? What about turning down guarenteed six figure income out of college to work in the inner city as a advocate for the poor or disinfranchised?

Does that consitute an elitist?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Multimillionaire political spouses accuse millionaire of being elitist
Posted by: whealeydj on Apr 20, 2008 10:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if you follow the link thoughtfully provided by Jimmy Vaughn you will find that Clinton net worth is 33+ million and Mccain is 40+ million. moroever most of the income is recently earned from his best selling books.B and M Obama claim they just paid off their student loans. I sure wish Bill Clinton and Cindy McCain would pay off the credit card debt and student loans of everyone under 65 and the hospital bills of everyone over 65 yo prove their spouses are not elitist. i.e remove the beam from your own eye first ye hypocrites.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement