Posted on 04/15/2008 12:09:05 PM PDT by vietvet67
Perhaps the greatest lesson to be learned by Democrats from this weeks bitter brouhaha is that when you get advice about how to hook rural, white, blue-collar voters from a guy named Mudcat, youd best listen.
Dave Mudcat SaundersDemocratic strategist, bluegrass enthusiast, and general pied piper of the Bubba vote, as he calls ithad a little-noticed fight with liberal bloggers back in June 2007 that perfectly presaged this weeks controversy.
I have bitched and moaned for years about the lack of tolerance in the elitist wing of the Democratic Party, or what I refer to as the Metropolitan Opera Wing. These are the people who talk of tolerance but the only true tolerance they ever exhibit is for their own pseudo-intellectual arrogance, the then-Edwards adviser proclaimed in his typical profanity-peppered prose on Time magazines Swampland blog.
The liberal blogosphere, capital of the elitist wing, shot back in predictable, intractable style. MyDDs Chris Bowers called Mudcats post a work of paranoid genius while a Daily Kos blogger seemed unclear as to why the Democratic party should give respectful attention to rural voters (in any region of the country). In short, Saunders was roundly criticized for deigning to criticize the liberal activist support of the blogosphere in the name of rural, southern whites.
Nevermind the fact that those rural whites are the key to Democrats winning back the South, much of the Midwest, and the Great Plains states, and subsequently winning national elections again. Though his electoral record is spotty (see Bob Graham and John Edward), Mudcats call for respect of rural whites is nonetheless important, and has produced results.
When his message has met up with the right candidate who was willing to listen, there were glimmers of hope for the future of the Democratic Party. In 2001, he and other advisers managed to turn the voters of southwest Virginia back into Democrats, fielding Mark Warner, whose pedigree was as effete as John Kerrys. Mudcat helped the Connecticut native and Harvard-educated millionare cozy up to rural voters by serving up basic respect and a NASCAR sponsorship. The state of Virginia is now more purple than its been in quite some time.
Unfortunately for them, Democrats have chosen to follow the advice of another political acolyte with a somewhat less constructive approach. Thomas Frank, author of Whats the Matter of Kansas? gave voice to the feelings of another bitter political constituency in 2004: Those with Redefeat Bush bumper stickers on their cars and conspiracy theories in their hearts.
Those who woke up on Nov. 8, 2004 and thought, like the headline of a prominent British newspaper, How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB? needed an answer, and they found it in Franks bestseller. His thesis was that rural voters had been duped by Republicans into voting against their economic self-interests, and that if they could just be shown the error of their ways, theyd gladly become the big-government labor-loyal proletariat they should be. The fact that the Democratic ticket had looked and acted like a competitive line-up for Monty Pythons Upper-Class Twit of the Year contest had nothing to do with it, of course.
The fact that liberals chose Franks handbook for condescension over Mudcats more constructive message is telling. Its a proposal for a fundamental shift in American politicsfrom a center-right nation to a center-left onewithout any movement required on the part of the Democratic Party. Its a plan built on wooing rural voters by first questioning their sanity, motives, and moral fiber.
To many liberals, views as detestable as conservative ones cannot be explained by anything other than mental illness and ill will, false motives and false consciousness. The Blame America first crowd became the Blame the voter first crowd, and the relatively sanguine results of 2006 seemed to validate their theory. Its a political strategy without personal responsibility born of a political philosophy that eschews the same value, and it was always destined to fail.
Obamas comments about small-town America, delivered to a group of rich liberal donors in San Francisco, were the utterly unsurprising culmination of a electoral plan built on disrespecting the very voters needed for election.
This week, Hillary Clinton gave Obama the critique someone should have given the Democratic Party four years ago. When asked why Obama wasnt connecting with rural Pennsylvanian voters, Clinton explained instead of looking at himself, he blamed them.
The failure of the Democratic Party to take responsibility for its own electoral failures is perhaps a perfectly natural intellectual offshoot of a political philosophy that requires no one to take responsibility in their own lives, but it lies at the heart of Democrats problem with rural voters.
As a 2006 political science study of rural populations showed (and as anyone whos actually lived in a small town could tell you), the "individualistic ethic and legacy of self- employment and home-ownership inclines them to adopt the self-image of the independent entrepreneur and property owner rather than that of the laborer in need of state regulation and protection .. Republican emphasis on personal effort, limited government and free markets fits comfortably within this self-image" (James G. Gimpel and Kimberly A. Karnes, University of Maryland).
Liberals routinely assume small towns are unfailingly desperate places filled with helpless people largely because they can think of no other explanation for people living in them. They project their own values on those communities, mistake proximity to a sushi bar with quality of life, and assume these people must be waiting for someone to rescue them.
But the man who owns a mechanics shop or a contracting business with his wife and raises a family in a house of his own on a decent chunk of land is not looking for the government to rescue him from anything. He has troubles, but he is not helpless; he may lack a Ph.D., but he is not stupid, and the suggestion thereof is not appreciated.
Kansas itself is a perfect example. At the time Franks book was written, the state had enjoyed lower unemployment numbers than the rest of the country throughout the 90s and into the 21st century, and reported only 3 percent of its citizens living below the poverty line, as opposed to about 12 percent nationally.
Obamas messaging has been a smashing success thus far in his campaign, and even has the potential, on its face, to speak to rural whites in a way other Democratic messages have not. He often sounds more positive about the American dream than Edwards and less cynical about the future than Clinton, which could work well if rural whites actually believed what he said.
Im asking you to believe, reads the welcome message for his web site, Not just in my ability to make change in Washington Im asking you to believe in yours.
But this week he sent the same old Democratic message to rural voters, and theyre listening.
Barack Obama: He cant believe in you.
Mary Katharine Ham is the managing editor for Townhall.com.
Video, please!
Is he callin me a cracka?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wiu_aunWgM
I’ll have to change my comment a bit. In this one when he delivers the “black” line, he’s more comfortable in voice, but not in a “black accent” like at the Annie Oakley speech.
Still, he knows his white liberal audience well.
A better quality of this video from someone else appeared a while ago at politico.com
Maybe the Obamination should join his cousin Odinga’s cabinet in Kenya instead of gracing the rest of us with his prescence..
"Hussein Obamas big mouth, small brain, condescending, America-hating, grandkid-baby-terminating, born-alive-infant-abandoning, America-hating-wife, kooky-moonbat-America-hating-pastor, racially-divisive, race-baiting, crotch-saluting, America-flag-disrespecting ... chickens ... coming home to roost ...!"
For an inside look at the real Hussein Obama and his elite hate America backers at San Francisco where Hussein Obama made his elitist remarks,
Go here to see the thread with all The Pictures posted and Here to see another thread about it.
Lots of interesting comments on the threads.
This thread is useless without pics.
Of MKH. Not of Obama. Definitely of MKH.
}:-)4
NASCAR fans are just bitter, clinging to their guns and religion in the face of an economy that forces them to watch low-class cars like Chevys, Fords, Dodges and Toyotas. If Obama was president, NASCAR could afford to race Mercedes, Volvos and Saabs.
Cool. As part of the Metropolitan Opera Wing puts Obama that much closer to the ‘fat lady’ that is going to sing the end of his campaign!
But the man who owns a mechanics shop or a contracting business with his wife and raises a family in a house of his own on a decent chunk of land is not looking for the government to rescue him from anything. He has troubles, but he is not helpless; he may lack a Ph.D., but he is not stupid, and the suggestion thereof is not appreciated.
BUMP!
'La bonne cuisine est la base du véritable bonheur.' - Auguste Escoffier
(Good food is the foundation of genuine happiness.)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Hmmmm...does nobamba have a Gollum personality?
That Obamie, he shore be a caution. Yessum, he be sumpin else entirely.
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.