Obama's limousine liberalism

Many of educated "elite" voters have made an effort to bring about change in our society, including Obama. The status quo is unpopular now. Eighty percent of the country thinks were are going in the wrong direction, and some of those people must be working class. By definition 80% of the population is not in the "elite" category. McCain represents the status quo and has no experience with economic issues.

People who are racist, much less violently so deserve to have everyone from the elites down to paramecium feeding off of sewage look down their noses at them. If scum who would impale a black man passing by with an American Flag (slate.com/id/2188648/ - copy and paste) have a problem with being looked down upon, that's their damn problem - I have no sympathy for racist filth.

If Obama loses this election, he will have no one's racism to blame but his own.

People who are racist, much less violently so deserve to have everyone from the elites down to paramecium feeding off of sewage look down their noses at them. If scum who would impale a black man passing by with an American Flag (slate.com/id/2188648/ - copy and paste) have a problem with being looked down upon, that's their damn problem - I have no sympathy for racist filth.

Gee, you're just overflowing with sympathy, aren't you?

Racism isn't the only kind of prejudice. Besides, how many of the elites who looked down their noses at the poor working-class whites actually interacted with black people on a day-by-day basis? Except for their maids and chauffeurs, I mean.

If you look at the electoral map, can anyone find one red state that Obama is likely to turn blue with his attitude?

Based on Marie Cocco's column, it sounds like the folks in South Boston were bitter and had a lot of antipathy towards people who weren't like them.

I mean, I can understand why it's a dumb thing for a politician who wants people's votes to say, but all of the people who seem to get into such a high bit of righteousness over it never seem to be contradicting the basic facts of what he said. Indeed, the excerpts from the column largely seem to confirm it. Is the point of the column to argue that the working class whites of South Boston didn't have misplaced antipathy and that they really should have been angry at random black passers-by?

Daniel,

Florida, Louisiana, and Missouri won't be in play at all if Obama is the nominee. Even Kerry didn't come all that close in those states.

This kind of thinking on the Democratic side is why so many GOP political hacks are surprised to find themselves so upbeat about this election.

all of the people who seem to get into such a high bit of righteousness over it never seem to be contradicting the basic facts of what he said.

Bill, come on. The man claimed that working class people cling to churches, guns, and hostility to free trade, immigration, and people of other races because they're just bitter about their own job losses.

That's either Marxist or moronic. Or both.

Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, Florida, Missouri, Louisiana

Nope. Colorado has been getting more blue-ish of late, but Obama's getting crushed by McCain there. Florida and Louisiana are red locks. New Mexico's Hispanics aren't turned off by McCain, given his immigration stance, and Obama is still very weak among this reliably Dem constituency. Virginia's softer, but the military vote will keep it red. Missouri's also softer, but it's another place where Obama should be doing better, but isn't.

He's peaked.

The only people who these comments are having resonance with are Clinton surrogates and Republicans.

So the talking points say. When Obama locks it up, a lot of Hillary's base--not surrogates--are going to be in play.

we can start focusing on the economy and Iraq, not class warfare.

The 527s you're counting on to do McCain in will keep this Obama material just as fresh as it is today. Given that Obama's economic credentials are about as impressive as McCain's, I don't know that the economic emphasis helps him. The Iraq War won't come across as badly in McCain's hands, given that his son has been on the front line.

As hard as it would have been to believe sixty days ago, it looks like the Republicans have gotten the best possible matchup.

And we wonder why politicians pander and lie to us?! Obama expressed a truth, awkwardly. For this bit of thoughtcrime he is elevated to the rank of elitist. God forbid somebody should speak frankly about the alienation of the millions of Americans who have been relentlessly stripped of jobs, status and wealth by the real elites.

Interesting discussion. But I wanted to raise one point. Why is it that everyone who is anyone can say all sorts of critical, sterotypical, over-generalized and unfair things about our large cities--New York, Chicago, San Fran, etc.--and it's considered (at best) fair game or (at worst) taken as gospel?

Meanwhile, look a little funny at small towns or rural areas, well you might as well pluck hearts from puppies.

I've live in a big city. But I used to live in small towns. Let me tell you, there are a lot of great people in those little towns, but they ain't all salt of the earth. You don't have to live on Michigan Avenue and have graduated from Harvard to be an elitist. Sometimes a doublewide and a Bible is more than enough.

I think like Matt, many of us have lived in small towns and suburbs. I also believe like Matt that not all small town folks are the salt of the earth.
If conservatives didn't cling to God, how in the world would David Kuo, Rod Dreher, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, and John Hagee exist in the conservative establishment? Why did President Bush say Jesus was his favorite political philosopher?
Why are conservatives upset? Have you ever heard of the large atheist Republican group? Ever hear of the Republican agnostic coalition?
The real core of the Republican religion problem doesn't lay with folks like Rod and David though, it lay more with Robertson, Falwell, and Hagee. These guys are bona fide millionares who have no interest in the poor or humility. Their gospel is condemnation and division.
I've never heard of any major Evangelical organization that works to help get foster kids into loving homes, let alone provide prenatal care to single mothers. I challenge anybody in the Beliefnet community to give a link to a major national Evangelical organization that engages in this activity instead of condemnation.
We can call Obama a limousine liberal till the elephants come home. But Obama's comment about small town elements clinging to God and being used isn't off the mark.
As far as the world coming to an end because of gay marriage, you wouldn't have known it from the way the Republican majority in Congress voted in 2006. The majority of Republicans actually voted against a constitutional ban.
In fact, bastion of family values - Lynn Cheney - has a daughter who is an out and proud lesbian. I have a hunch that affluent economic conservatives are way more socially liberal than they're letting on. That's quite contemptuous of the rural social conservatives they're supposed to be representing.
Let's start talking about Republican hypocrisies.

Jeez, Rod, if you're going to tar and feather a guy, at least bring some imagination to the task. Calling the leading Democrat "a limousine liberal?" Isn't that like calling a Republican "a fat cat?" I thought you had more style than that.

For an alternative view suggesting that Obama might be a good guy after all, even if he doesn't always wear a flag pin in his lapel, check out this interview with him from Bryant Gumbel:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpDf83l6z4c&feature=user

"Fat cat" has always been, in my experience, a term applied to Democrats the way "country club" is applied to Republicans.

Sorry, but Barack doesn't get to pronounce judgment on the emotional and spiritual well-being of unemployed laborers in fading towns in flyover country. He just doesn't. Maybe after he's been the Great Healer for a few years, that'll be okay, but not yet.

You mean like the people who lost their jobs on the Southside of Chicago when the mills there and in Gary, IN shutdown? The people he was working with while John McCain was in the Senate and Hillary was in the White House.

I've been to the Southside and I can assure you that there are precious few limousines there.

Steve
On the Republican side you have rich, Ivy league educated people running for office generally proposing economic plans that put the country in more debt, raise the stock market and make the rich richer.

On the Democratic side you have rich, Ivy league educated people running for office generally proposing plans to help the poor that dont work very well, raising taxes but balancing the budget and the rich get richer a bit more slowly.

Only the Democrat is called a limousine liberal.

That's because it's 'hypocritical' to want to help people who aren't like you, apparently. (We all remember the parable of the Bad Samaritan, where Jesus explained that our neighbors are those with whom we are most alike, not weirdos who help people injured on the side of the road.)

Or maybe the theory is that the rich, to be rich, had to step on the heads of people below them, so claiming to want to help them now is hypocritical. (And here I thought it was supposed to be the left that thought poorly of the rich.)

Or, more likely, you've found a damn stupid Republican talking point that doesn't mean anything. Anyone who's running for president is almost certainly wealthy and well-connected (Which means, gasp, they hang out with other wealthy people.) and spends a lot of money on their image (That's what gets them elected.). And in my lifetime the Republican nominees have had to work a lot less for their wealth than the Democratic ones did.

But the Democrats are all pampered girly men (Except the woman.) who never did a day's work in their life, whereas Bush is an actual cowboy. According to the media.

David,

Calling opponents "hypocritical" is an obsessive habit of the Left, not the Right.

The cause of hostility to "limosine liberals" has never their desire to help others. It's their desire to require third parties (usually non-wealthy whites) to help those considered most deserving, without themselves incurring any of the pain and hardship. The busing crises of the 70s were only the most extreme examples of that: Rich suburban liberals self-righteously demanding the disruption or destruction of working class white neighborhoods and schools so that poor blacks could be helped.

No one objects to A helping B. A forcing C to help B, while A does little or nothing himself, is another matter entirely.

i marvel at terms like "limousine liberalism", or "latte liberalism", or the old classic "wine and cheese liberals" that get thrown around to dismiss any progressive who's enjoyed a fair bit of success in his/her life. how does our current president, who likes to potray himself as a "regular guy", relate to the six-pack crowd, having grown up in and been surrounded by affluence and influence his whole life? remember his mother's comments about how much "better" it was for the Katrina survivors living in cramped, dirty, and crime-ridden Superdome?

the fact is Obama has had a unique experience among any of the recent or current presidential contenders. he grew up a mixed-race child at a time when being so did not necessarily endear you to either race and often made you the target of outright scorn. while not poor, he certainly didn't enjoy the degree of affluence many of his opponents did. he took out loans to go to law school, and -- long before he ever ran for political office -- walked away from a pile of money in corporate law to work as a community organizer among Chicago's poorest, most disenfranchised citizens.

what so "limousine" about all that?

This guy should have been a lawyer.

With the right Southern drawl, that's pronounced "lye-er."

Funny thing, though, is that Obama is both.

"This guy should have been a lawyer."

My feeble attempt at humor!

I suspect Obama is factually challanged at times. Unfortunately he has two others for company.

Mel- Uhh, actually I just read that somewhere today and cant find it again. I dont know the Bush family history that far back. Was willing to let someone berate me for my ignorance as the price for not having to research it. I wouldnt usually resort to such low politiclal tactics as calling someone a limousine conservative. If this is a well known political false accusation I apologize for my ignorance and laziness.

Steve

Google "Bush" and "trading with the enemy"

The Bush family fortune was founded by war profiteers in the Civil War, selling shoddy to the U S Army. Their family motto should be "War is good for business" Remember George I, going to war with Iraq in 1991 to help his business partner, the Emir of Kuwait? Where was he on 9/11 by the way? Oh yes, at a business meeting with his business partner, Osama bin-Laden's brother.

he sounds more darwinian than christian.

Honestly, i didn't get it!
What about "limousine liberalism?"