Barack SnObama continues to point fingers at those who object to his recent remarks offending small-town Americans, people of faith, Second-Amendment believers, and citizens who support enforcing immigation laws. Asked at an exclusive fund-raiser in San Francisco why he wasn’t more popular in Pennsylvania, Sen. SnObama suggested that Americans living in “small towns … get bitter [and] cling 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”. Certainly, this bitterness theory explains Sen. SnObama’s church of choice.
But many who make important personal and policy decisions based on reason rather than emotion resent Sen. SnObama’s apparent projection and accuse him of elitism. Sen. SnObama counters that these opponents are playing politics. Yes, really, here’s his statement:
I’m not a perfect man, and the words I chose I chose badly. They were subject to misinterpretation; they were subject to be twisted, and I regret that. I regret that deeply.
When people suggest that somehow I was demeaning religion, when I know that I’m a man of deep faith, somebody who in my own life has held on to faith, held onto my confidence in God during times of trial and tribulation, then it sounds like there’s some politics being played.
When people suggest I was somehow being elitist and demeaning hunters when I have repeatedly talked about the tradition that people pass on from generation to generation, hunters and sportsmen, and how I have consistently spoken about my respect for the Second Amendment, when people try to suggest that I was demeaning those traditions, then it sounds like there’s some politics being played. And what really burns me up is when people suggest that me saying that folks are mad, they are angry, they are bitter after 25, 30 years of seeing jobs shipped out, pensions not fulfilled, health care lost, the notion that people are surprised, and are suggesting that I’m out of touch because I spoke honestly about people’s frustrations, that tells me there’s some politics going on.
Yes, of course, “[T]here’s some politics going on.” Sen. SnObama’s remarks were political; they were an attempt to explain a political reality; they were given at a political fund-raiser, while Sen. SnObama is running in a political campaign.
But perhaps we can excuse Sen. SnObama for getting caught off-guard by the strong resentment to his remarks. He did make the statement at a closed-door fund-raiser in San Francisco, where he had every expectation of being among elitist friends. Moreover, liberal disdain for small-town America, for faith, for self-reliance, isn’t exactly news. Neither is the smugness that continually oozes from Sen. “You’re likeable enough, Hillary” SnObama.
But the real reason why Sen. SnObama’s elitism isn’t news is that modern liberalism is inherently elitist:
Modern liberalism is based on the premise that some people are just too incompetent to make it on their own and need their superiors, like Sen. SnObama, to plunder the competent in their ersatz behalf.
Liberal cultural disdain for anyone who relies on God and himself isn’t merely a narrow-minded revulsion for what are misunderstood as antiquities. It is a key component of liberal political elitism. The enlightened, the Vanguard, understand that “regular people” need them, and they understand the noble position of benefactor-by-proxy in which fate has placed them. If some of those “regular people” don’t see that, it’s because they’re naive. That naivete explains why those ignorant small-town Pennsylvanians aren’t flocking behind Sen. SnObama. And that naivete is dangerous. If people think that something other than the civil government can take care of them, they won’t vote for a condescending would-be nanny who tells them otherwise. Such ignorance is a threat to leftist political hegemony. It must be mocked.