{"id":5117,"date":"2008-04-14T14:07:15","date_gmt":"2008-04-14T14:07:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.beliefnet.com\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html"},"modified":"2008-04-14T14:07:15","modified_gmt":"2008-04-14T14:07:15","slug":"interesting-take-on-the-obamas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html","title":{"rendered":"Interesting take on Obama’s elitism controversy"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kaus lists four problems with the Obama gaffe. Here’s <\/a>the fourth:<\/p>\n

Yes, he’s condescending. It’s not just that in explaining everyone to everyone Obama winds up patronizing everyone. He doesn’t patronize everyone equally. Specifically, he regards the views of these Pennsylvanians as epiphenomena–byproducts of economic stagnation–in a way he doesn’t regard, say, his own views as epiphenomena.** Once the Pennsylvanians get some jobs back, they’ll change and become as enlightened as Obama the San Franciscans to whom he was talking. That’s the clear logic of his argument. Superiority of this sort–not crediting the authenticity and standing of your subject’s views–is a violation of social equality, which is a more important value for Americans than money equality. Liiberals tend to lose elections when they forget that.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I think that pretty much nails it.
\nBut I know you guys think that Obama can do no wrong, that he isn’t condescending, just truthful (thus proving exactly what the right thinks of you) and won’t be swayed by anything anyone says. That’s fine but I bet he’ll say something again that will be considered condescending by everyone but the Obama supporters (Obama will come out and apologize for it but the supporters will still defend him just as they are doing now), and I bet you guys will say the exact same things you are saying now. I’m going to note this post so I can link to it when it happens (and I will be more than happy to apologize and link to this post if he doesn’t make another elitist blunder).
\nAnd Kristol makes this<\/a> point:<\/p>\n

I haven\u2019t read much Karl Marx since the early 1980s, when I taught political philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania. Still, it didn\u2019t take me long this weekend to find my copy of \u201cThe Marx-Engels Reader,\u201d edited by Robert C. Tucker \u2014 a book that was assigned in thousands of college courses in the 1970s and 80s, and that now must lie, unopened and un-remarked upon, on an awful lot of rec-room bookshelves.
\nMy occasion for spending a little time once again with the old Communist was Barack Obama\u2019s now-famous comment at an April 6 San Francisco fund-raiser. Obama was explaining his trouble winning over small-town, working-class voters: \u201cIt\u2019s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren\u2019t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.\u201d
\nThis sent me to Marx\u2019s famous statement about religion in the introduction to his \u201cContribution to the Critique of Hegel\u2019s Philosophy of Right\u201d:
\n\u201cReligious suffering is at the same time an expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, and the soul of a soulless condition. It is the opium of the people.\u201d
\nOr, more succinctly, and in the original German in which Marx somehow always sounds better: \u201cDie Religion … ist das Opium des Volkes.\u201d
\nNow, this is a point of view with a long intellectual pedigree prior to Marx, and many vocal adherents continuing into the 21st century. I don\u2019t believe the claim is true, but it\u2019s certainly worth considering, in college classrooms and beyond.
\nBut it\u2019s one thing for a German thinker to assert that \u201creligion is the sigh of the oppressed creature.\u201d It\u2019s another thing for an American presidential candidate to claim that we \u201ccling to … religion\u201d out of economic frustration.
\nAnd it\u2019s a particularly odd claim for Barack Obama to make. After all, in his speech at the 2004 Democratic convention, he emphasized with pride that blue-state Americans, too, \u201cworship an awesome God.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I guess this might be the fruit of the black liberation theology (which is Marxist in nature) that Obama has been imbiding over the last 20 years.
\n(via<\/a>)
\nAnd then there’s this<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters nationwide disagree with Barack Obama\u2019s statement that people in small towns \u201ccling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 25% agree with the Democratic frontrunner while 19% are not sure.
\nPartisan and ideological differences suggest that the comments are more likely to be a factor in the General Election than in the Primaries. A plurality of politically liberal voters\u201446%–agree with Obama\u2019s statement while 33% disagree. Moderate voters take the opposite view and disagree by a 51% to 27% margin. Seventy-four percent (74%) of conservatives disagree with Obama\u2019s statement, only 12% agree.
\n[…]
\nForty-five percent (45%) say that Obama\u2019s comments reflect an elitist view of small town voters. Thirty-seven percent (37%) disagree. Republicans overwhelmingly say that the statements are elitist and most Democrats disagree. Among unaffiliated voters, 40% say they represent an elitist view while 34% disagree.
\nPeople who have followed the story are much more likely than other voters to disagree with Obama\u2019s statements and to consider them elitist. To date, just 25% have followed the news story Very Closely while another 30% have followed it Somewhat Closely. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

(via<\/a>)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Kaus lists four problems with the Obama gaffe. Here’s the fourth: Yes, he’s condescending. It’s not just that in explaining everyone to everyone Obama winds up patronizing everyone. He doesn’t patronize everyone equally. Specifically, he regards the views of these Pennsylvanians as epiphenomena–byproducts of economic stagnation–in a way he doesn’t regard, say, his own views…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":119,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[399],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5117","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics-2"],"yoast_head":"\nInteresting take on Obama's elitism controversy - Reformed Chicks Blabbing<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Interesting take on Obama's elitism controversy - Reformed Chicks Blabbing\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Kaus lists four problems with the Obama gaffe. Here’s the fourth: Yes, he’s condescending. It’s not just that in explaining everyone to everyone Obama winds up patronizing everyone. He doesn’t patronize everyone equally. Specifically, he regards the views of these Pennsylvanians as epiphenomena–byproducts of economic stagnation–in a way he doesn’t regard, say, his own views…\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Reformed Chicks Blabbing\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-04-14T14:07:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Susan Johnson\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Interesting take on Obama's elitism controversy - Reformed Chicks Blabbing","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Interesting take on Obama's elitism controversy - Reformed Chicks Blabbing","og_description":"Kaus lists four problems with the Obama gaffe. Here’s the fourth: Yes, he’s condescending. It’s not just that in explaining everyone to everyone Obama winds up patronizing everyone. He doesn’t patronize everyone equally. Specifically, he regards the views of these Pennsylvanians as epiphenomena–byproducts of economic stagnation–in a way he doesn’t regard, say, his own views…","og_url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html","og_site_name":"Reformed Chicks Blabbing","article_published_time":"2008-04-14T14:07:15+00:00","author":"Susan Johnson","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html","name":"Interesting take on Obama's elitism controversy - Reformed Chicks Blabbing","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-04-14T14:07:15+00:00","dateModified":"2008-04-14T14:07:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/#\/schema\/person\/b4e41455e911277a4681a65e81271065"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/2008\/04\/interesting-take-on-the-obamas.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Interesting take on Obama’s elitism controversy"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/","name":"Reformed Chicks Blabbing","description":"Politics and current events from a Reformed perspective, by Michele McGinty","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/#\/schema\/person\/b4e41455e911277a4681a65e81271065","name":"Susan Johnson","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/020\/02041661cf28a19369e083191c05c819x96.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/020\/02041661cf28a19369e083191c05c819x96.jpg","caption":"Susan Johnson"},"url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/author\/sjohnson"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5117","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/119"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5117"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5117\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5117"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5117"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/reformedchicksblabbing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5117"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}