Posted on 10/06/2005 2:30:51 PM PDT by freedomdefender
It looks like, just like East Coast liberals, D.C. conservatives think they're better than people in the rest of the country. They went to better schools, so they're smarter and hipper, and they can tell the rest of us what to do. (Sad to learn that Ann Coulter buys into this kind of ignorant elitism.) True conservatism holds just the opposite view - D.C. ISN't the center of the universe, and intelligence can be found throughout the country - and in schools in many states and regions.
My husband changed his mind on the Meir's nomination when he heard George Will's condemnation of her. He calls Will "every liberal's favorite conservative" and decides that if snobby Will is against her, that's a point in her favor.
Yeppurs.
Why do morons think that can change people's minds by insulting them? This has to rank as one of the stupidest 'arguements' of all time.
I wouldn't be whining about that there's been plenty of name-calling on both sides.
Your statement is not accurate. People who have questioned her nomination ON THE BASIS OF SNOBBERY have been criticized. And rightly so. Snobbery is a form of self-imposed ignorance; it judges people by the school they attended or their family pedigree, not their personal accomplishments, skill or knowledge. I could accept the criticism that Miers' views aren't clear enough for her to be nominated, but that's not the core of the criticism that some of the D.C. pundits are offering. They're targeting her because she went to law school at SMU (the same university that the president's wife attended), as if an SMU graduate by definition can't be intelligent and accomplished. THAT's snobbery - the kind of ignorance that has been a motive force behind liberalism for decades, justifying the East Coast liberals in their delusion that they can and should tell the rest of us how to live our lives because they're brighter and went to better schools. When "conservative" pundits start buying into the same delusion, you bet they're gonna get flak, and they deserve it.
Methinks the so-called divide among we conservatives springs from the judicial goals we prioritize. An assumption that seems to be made too frequently is that all of us are all wound-up in the abortion and prayer in school battles. I, for one, am much more interested in whether the appointee would take world opinion into account when interpreting our Constitution. And if hate-crime legislation should be used to limit our right of free expression. Then, how about full enforcement of our immigration laws? Although these subjects are rarely brought to the forefront, I think a sizeable number of conservatives would like a little attention devoted to these questions.
Good point. Although you may not have meant it in this sense, Ann Coulter is definitely not going to change Bush's mind on Meirs by insulting Meir's law school, since SMU is the alma mater of Bush's wife. I look to John Kerry for an attitude that sneers at hinterland schools - - that's not supposed to be the outlook of conservatives. It's clearly not Bush's outlook. I was disappointed to learn that it's the outlook of a lot of our D.C. conservative pundits.
He has faith and will weather this too. How I wish he didnt' have to deal with this, but he's got the strength and faith.
I will continue to pray for him and our country.
I think it is interesting and important to note the relative proportion of membership in various religious groups on the Supreme Court. I think that would make Harriet Miers the only evangelical baptist on the court.
And that could be why some conservatives, consciencely or unconsciencely oppose her.
Criticism of Harriet Miers never had anything to do with elitism, that's a complete straw-man argument. "The New Republic" is obviously just trying to marginalize conservatives within the Republican party by branding us "elitist"
Sure, frame the debate in terms of elitism. Sort of "Racist Lite." So easy to spread on bread.
People who insist on merit, are labeled "elitist" by people who are short on it.
The pattern is unmistakable - no one is interested in answering our concerns, only in telling us how terrible we are for having them. This has been the prelude to the bait-and-switch in the past, what has now become the stock technique for the corporatists in the GOP to silence the conservatives.
I didn't frame it that way. The elitists did. Read Ann Coulter's latest column. Her beef with Miers is that Miers didn't go to "a top law school."
I went to the same university, Cornell, that Ann Coulter did (somewhat of an embarassment to me as I despise her.)
I've always been annoyed and irritated by Ivy League elitism myself (and it is a severe East Coast problem); I used to coach the speech & debate team there, and we've have new kids join the team, find out they were competing against Illinois State or Southwest Missouri State, contemptuously sneer, and then get their butts kicked (for a variety of weird reasons college speech and debate is dominated by Midwestern, often obscure, schools.)
I've run into a lot of brilliant people from no-name colleges, and I knew a lot of idiots at Cornell (some with PhDs.)
This whole "elitist" thing is one big straw man.
I feel it fundamentally misrepresents the major issue at hand.
People just want a candidate with a well documented strict constructionist history. There are dozens of such candidates. This was not one of them. When campaigning, Bush promised to nominate such a justice, so many of his supporters rightly feel disappointed, even wronged, by him not doing so.
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.