Posted on 04/27/2008 1:30:52 PM PDT by neverdem
Allow me to introduce myself. According to the general clucking of the national punditry, my 2004 book – "What's the Matter With Kansas?" – is supposed to have persuaded Barack Obama to describe the yeomanry of Pennsylvania as "bitter" people who "cling to guns or religion or . . . anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Mr. Obama's offense is so grave that the custodians of our national consensus have elevated it to gatehood: "Bittergate."
In truth, I have no way of knowing whether some passage of mine inspired Mr. Obama's tactless assertion that the hard-done-by clutch guns and irrationally oppose free-trade deals. In point of fact, I oppose many of those trade deals myself.
But I know one thing with absolute certainty. The media flurry kicked up by Mr. Obama's gaffe powerfully confirms an argument I actually did make: That as they return again to the culture war, what the soldiers on all sides are doing is talking about class without actually addressing the economic basis of the subject.
Consider, for example, the one fateful charge that the punditry and the other candidates have fastened upon Mr. Obama – "elitism." No one means by this term that Mr. Obama is a wealthy person (he wasn't until last year), or even that he is an ally of the wealthy (although he might be that). What they mean is that he has committed a crime of attitude, and revealed his disdain for the common folk.
It is a stereotype you have heard many times before: Besotted with latte-fueled arrogance, the liberal looks down on average people, confident that he is a superior being. He scoffs at religion because he finds it to be a form of false consciousness. He believes in regulation because he thinks he knows better...
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Obama and his wife made a combined 6 figures income before he ran for the Senate. Like most arrogant elitest Leftist Mr Frank is a habitual liar. After all, he is only lying to us ignorant bitter peons.
Did the As pick up Frank Thomas? That would be a lot more interesting to me than this Thomas Frank nobody. The Big Hurt vs. the Little Nothing.
Yep. The Big Hurt is back. Oakland GM says he’s in great shape but I thought he looked a little overweight in recent footage. We shall see
Actually, there is nothing wrong about the "bitter" part. We all get bitter about something or other practically every week.
What is truly offensive is "CLINGING-gate".....
.... where Obama describes small town America as "clinging to religion" as in "the opiate of the masses".....
.... and "clinging to guns" as in "the fools actually believe in the Second Amendment" ....
.... and "clinging to antipathy toward people who aren't like them" as in "they are a bunch or xenophobic and racist bigots".
Yes, Frank and Barack Hussein Obama are both habitual liars, and not very good ones at that. Forget what’s the matter with that Midwestern state, what I’d like to know is what’s the matter with those two latte liberals.
What part of that is a "stereotype"? That's an accurate description of almost every lib I've ever known in my entire life.
Speaking of "bitter"! Thomas Frank has real issues. This is a man who is intensely jealous of wealth -- whether earned by inventive conservatives (Sam Walton) or clever liberals (hedge fund managers).
His is a viewpoint cultivated by those to whom life has been "unfair". Didn't we all know somebody like this in high school?
“It is a stereotype you have heard many times before: Besotted with latte-fueled arrogance, the liberal looks down on average people, confident that he is a superior being. He scoffs at religion because he finds it to be a form of false consciousness. He believes in regulation because he thinks he knows better than the market.”
Some call that a stereotype — I call it a succient description.
And exactly what is the matter with this stereotype, Mr. Frank?
It seems to fit you, for example, to a tee.
succient = succinct
GMTA. You posted while I was still typing # 10.
No matter how you spell it, Thomas Frank's writing isn't.
Actually, I think he's dead on here.
The distrust and antagonism towards "the elite" among more ordinary Americans is not based on their financial success. It's based on their obvious contempt and disdain for us and what we believe in.
I'd much rather have had a drink with Sam Walton than with Mr. Frank, and I suspect Mr. Walton would feel the same way. I read Walton's biography, and I got no hint from it that he despised me. Mr. Frank can't complete a paragraph without showing his disdain.
This remarkable cultural history, originally published in 1997, is in many ways the Rosetta Stone of media bias; going back to the 50s to explain how and why the media-industrial complex behaves the way it does. His status as a major lefty only enhances its credibility, since he is so clearly biting the hand that feeds him.
He doesn't like my interpretation of his work, btw, but facts are facts and he did a fantastic job of collecting and presenting them. His own biases apparently came into play only after he realized he had given away the ranch.
George Wallace got shot for antagonizing the “pointy headed intellectuals”, the elite
Other than his success, I don’t know much about Walton. But years ago I taught in a Long Island Gold Coast school district. I taught the Graces, of W.R Grace fame, the Ronzoni kids, and several other financially upscale kids. Those kids were great, the parents top notch. The folks I had qualms about were those kids whose parents grew up on 4th Avenue in Brooklyn and never ever wanted to be reminded about that. I think of them whenever I see the haloed one.
I once did some work on the Santa Fe condo of a guy I later discovered was among the 10 richest men in America at the time. Great guy. Not a hint of condencion or superiority.
I believe liberals are more ignorant than any other pejorative. Not ignorant in the sense of knowing how perform various technical functions, but in their basic inability to understand human nature. In his book about Kansas, Frank wonders why average Kansans are averse to government help when "it is in their best economic interests" if I'm quoting him semi-correctly. If he doesn't understand why average Americans don't like the idea of being nannied to death by gov bureaucracy, he better find another line of work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.