It has always struck me as inherently unconvincing to argue that President Obama is an elitist, considering that he grew up as a mixed-race kid raised largely by his grandparents in a home of unextraordinary wealth. It’s true that he managed to get himself a couple of Ivy League degrees, but you could say the same thing about most presidents, even brush-clearing George W. Bush. In fact, Dubya, despite his down-home affectations, fits the bill of an elitist in nearly archetypical fashion. The son of a president and grandson of a senator, he was, as Ann Richards famously put it, “born on third base and thought he’d hit a triple.” Barack Obama was born in the on-deck circle and hit an actual home run.
But, whatever, the difference is that very few people ever took a look at George Bush and came away thinking that he was smarter than they are, so he didn’t elicit the visceral “he’s thinks he’s better than you” response that Obama sometimes does. Some folks don’t like people who are contemplative. So it goes.
Matthew Continetti wants to riff on this elitist thing, so he seizes on an anecdote from a long Obama profile Carrie Budoff Brown and Jennifer Epstein did for Politico about a dinner the president had in March while visiting Italy. Obama had asked the U.S. ambassador to assemble some interesting dinner guests. Here’s a partial list of things about this dinner that Continetti objects to, presumably because they demonstrate that the president is not a man of the people:
- The dinner was held at the Villa Taverna, which has a history that “goes as far back as the tenth century” and has an art collection that “includes Roman sarcophagi and centuries-old imperial busts.”
- The food and wine were too good: “The menu that evening included a variety of pastas, and wines from Tuscany and the regions around Venice.”
- The president was rude and talked for too long: “Dinner lasted four hours.”
- The president was “at home” in this “sumptuous and Baroque setting, amid these beautiful artifacts of long-gone civilizations.”
- The guests were too rich and smart: “The interesting Italians surrounding him included a particle physicist, two heirs to the Fiat auto fortune, and the postmodern architect Renzo Piano.”
- The conversation was too intellectual: “The dinner conversation…touched on architecture, on art, on science, and on urban planning.”
- The president had too good of a time: “The next morning, during a briefing, the president—whose office holds a burden of responsibility matched only by its power—regretted that his job involved duties other than pretentious conversation with extremely wealthy famous people.”
Perish the thought that this man who has degrees from Columbia and Harvard might sometimes pine for a life of the mind devoid of the mundane responsibilities of heading a political party and leading a nation. And he’s drinking Tuscan wine!!!
Roy Edroso rightfully mocked Continetti, not only for the aforementioned nonsense, but for making up the conversations he imagines take place at the president’s dinners in order to criticize them. That exercise in projection is actually amusing, but not so his effort to enlist Friedrich Nietzsche in the defense of his argument.
The next time the president indulges in his intellectual curiosity, perhaps someone will bring up the subject of political philosophy. I for one can not help thinking of Nietzsche when I consider the drift and lassitude and emptiness of Obama’s post-presidential presidency. The sort of exhaustion we see every day was predicted long ago. “Who still wants to rule? Who obey? Both require too much exertion,” wrote the German philosopher of the Last Men whom he predicted would appear at the end of History, would emerge when democracy was triumphant. These hollow-chested men, Nietzsche said, would blanch at the first site of difficulty. They would surrender and look inward, content to spend their days in the pursuit of pleasure. In Obama we have more than a Last Man. We have a Last President.
As a philosophy major I can attest that there are few things less likely to end happily than a half-wit undergrad carrying a copy of Also sprach Zarathustra.
And, so, Continetti calls forth the Übermensch to criticize elitism.
Sounds like Peggy Noonan only a few hundred times more pretentious.
When the GOP call President Obama it is nothing more then a code word for “UPPITY”. It has nothing to do with the traditional meaning of “Elitist” and all to do with race.
Bingo. Right out of the gate.
Smart ass ni-clang’s gotta know their place. If not put them there.
I suppose that’s why they did the same general thing to Bill Clinton? And why the will do it to HRC? Hell, man…they’d do it to an albino centrist of Scandinavian descent if it served their interests.
Please.
It really isn’t about race.
It’s about power.
AG
Sorry Aur-thor, for many many GOPers and TP libertards, IT IS about raced ….. like their lying claim the North was aggressive 163 years ago, they lie and try to obscure their racism, sorta like poppa paul has done over the years.
Being “about race”…no matter in which directions that racism is aimed…is about power.
Ron Paul, Government and Racism, April 16, 2007 on the House floor:
Again:
“By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called ‘diversity’ actually perpetuate racism.”
Simpler?
Sure.
Get people at each other’s throats because of “race.”
Divide and conquer.
Hitler knew.
So does the PermaGov.
Bet on it.
AG
FACT CHECK: Ron Paul Personally Defended Racist Newsletters
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/12/27/395391/fact-check-ron-paul-personally-defended-racist-n
ewsletters/
‘Racist newsletter’ timeline: What Ron Paul has said
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2011/1229/Racist-newsletter-timeline-What-Ron-Paul-
has-said
Ron Paul and his racist newsletters
Why his philosophical allies embraced white supremacy
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/22/ron_paul_and_his_racist_newsletters/
Just more PermaGov politiical media in action. I pay no more…or less…attention to rags like Salon than I do to The National Review or the NY Post. It’s the Fox News/MSNBC syndrome. All talking points, all day. i trust none of them. Apparently you do.
What do I trust?
i trust my own long-honed understandings and intuitions. I’ll take mine, you take yours and what’s gonna happen will happen anyway.
So it goes.
And…have a nice day.
Later…
AG
Cannot REFUTE THE FACTS,
attack the messenger,
pathetic aur-thor, typical for you;
but pathetic in this case.
poppa paul allow this top stand for over a decade, and even tried to deny it when it originally broke and your defence is to attack the messenger who helped expose poppa pauls racism??????????
t-o-t-a-l-l-y p-a-t-h-e-t-i-c
“I am for truth, no matter who tells it.” – Malcolm X
Hi-larious!
Arthur, you really lack integrity. One statement on the House floor, which you cling to like a 2 x 2 piece of Styrofoam in the middle of the Atlantic, does not undo a career of policy positions and alternative statements which enabled open racists to say, “Yep, Ron Paul is one of the best members of Congress!”
Here’s some truth that we can all understand. Even you, hopefully:
“Don Black, the founder of the white nationalist group Stormfront, told The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur that he supported Paul’s (2012) presidential candidacy…
“He’s clearly not a white nationalist, he does not have the same worldview we do,” Black told Cenk. “But we agree with his stand on the issues, which we believe are heartfelt, coincide with ours.”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/28/stormfront-founder-ron-pauls-views-coincide-with-ours-on-most-
issues/
He is an elitist, though.
How many of his constituents have one degree, never mind two?
How many of his constituents are millionaires? (And that’s before he hit the White House.)
How many of his constituents can send their kids to private school? Vacation on the Vineyard?
What does he know about payday loans, and shut-off notices, and foreclosures?
What we need is a man of the people, who understands the trials and tribulations of ordinary folks trapped in a recession.
“What we need is a man of the people, who understands the trials and tribulations of ordinary folks trapped in a recession.”
I disagree. What we need is a bright person who understands history; we’ve go that. What said person needs is advisors who understand the aforementioned trials. We’ve recently had a dose of ‘joe schmoe’. Worse, ‘schmoe’ was neither very bright nor a student of history.
What we “need” is a bright person who understands history and hasn’t sold himself to the highest bidder(s) in order to become president. Yes, Obama was born middle-ish class and of mixed race. And yes, he’s a very bright and gifted man. But he has thrown in with the corporate-owned PermaGov. I will give him the benefit of the doubt. It is quite possible that he did this with the best of intentions. However, the move has backfired and he is now in the service of elitists. Caught in that position, possibly his only rational moves have been to do what he can do, take what he can get and hope for better days after his presidency is over. I wish him the best. I also anxiously await the day that he is gone from the White House. I do not really much care who succeeds him…it’s going to be another PermaGov choice, that is certain. Perhaps one with less talent for prevarication will finally spill the beans to the American sheeple. I sincerely hope so.
AG
This is why we actually need is a stinking rich president.
Because if you were never poor in the first place, you can’t forget where you came from. And there’s nothing worse than forgetting where you came from.
That way it hurts less when he sells us out, you see. Because he is going to sell us out.
No one can sell us out if we don’t buy in.
AG
Obama is not being called an elitist for his academic accomplishments and wealth nor even how those particular things might make him unresponsive to the needs of the non-elite. He’s being called an elitist for his (mostly imagined) disrespect of Traditional America’s totems, which is then used to gin up ressentiment.
If Continetti had decided to do an ironic contrast of Obama’s visit to Italy with the depredation of a man unemployed for 16 months in WV or a child refugee from Central America living in a border shelter that’d be one thing. It’d be hypocritical because he’s a conservative and they get off on it, but he’d have something of a point. But he’s not mocking Obama’s wine choices and length of the dinner party for that reason, he’s doing it to paint the president as a Disrespectful, Illegitimate Other.
It’s not American totems. It’s the GOTP relentless, scatter-shot psyops. They called Obama “elite” for having OJ with his breakfast rather than coffee and preferring Arugula and Dijon mustard. But at the same time, they were attacking him as low and vulgar because of his taste in music and the ‘terrorist fist jab,’ once they’d figured out what it was.
They’ve been working to discredit him (and every other Democrat) 24/7 anyway they can with as many voters as they can. They don’t get that his personal dignity and gravitas are impervious to their annoying but ultimately trivial smears. The only people really responding to their lies are their perpetually angry racist base.
I’m calling him an elitist for not declaring property to be theft, and not seizing the commanding heights of the economy in the name of the workers.
I don’t know about you, but I expect nothing less when I pull the lever for a University of Chicago law professor.
You know, heads on pikes, tumbrels, that sort of stuff.
It’s what professors do.
“It’s what professors do!!!???”
Where you been, DXM?
“Professors” generally do as little as possible. They keep their jobs by hook or by crook and use
slave labor…errr, ahhhh,indentured labor(better known as graduate student labor)…to do most of the real teaching and research work. Bet on it. Furthermore, they generally don’t really care much how well or how badly the labor is being done as long as little attention is drawn to it because of either gross incompetence or brilliance above their own pay grade. If such attention is drawn to it then they throw the offending grad student under the academic bus (usually after stealing any good work he or she might have done) and get themselves a new one to do the work. I have friends and relatives going to high-level schools and baby…that’s the word. Bet on it.Obama has indeed been very “professorial” in his approach to the presidency. He has delegated the work…certainly a necessity at his level…and he has done so very sloppily. John Kerry, Kathleen Sebelius, Eric Shinseki and Janet Napolitano are several of the absolute incompetents that immediately come to mind, and there are loads more. Eric Holder’s no genius, either. On plentiful evidence. Meanwhile, Obama has very “professorially”…and also quite professionally (He has a real future in showbiz if he so desires. He could even play himself in the movie.)…maintained a high level of bullshit in speech after speech and appearance after appearance. “Publish or die” is the academic idea. “Talk or die” in the political equivalent. From State of the Union speeches right on down through the many sad comic interludes spent blathering with late night idiots which are the equivalent of “Rah-Rah!!!” speeches to the alumni, he has done his Professor Preznit job quite well. Why the bad ratings now? Overexposure as much as anything else. Time to move on.
Which he will soon do.
So it goes.
Do not overestimate academia, Bunky. The whole system’s gone to shit, not just the government. Bet on that as well.
Later…
AG
Wow. At least you have the FauxNews inspired talking points down. Quite a caricature. It may have been a minute or two since I was in school at any level, but the impression I managed to get from the experience, and anything I have been able to glean from those academics I manage to keep in contact with (and perhaps the inconvenient data that might have been published somewhere) is that they tend to work ridiculously long hours, and depending upon the institution that work may be more oriented to their research responsibilities or to their teaching responsibilities. The idea that the “work” has been palmed off on grad students strikes me as grossly inaccurate and unfair.
In the sciences, I suspect that most of what they do falls under the rubric of “ordinary or normal science” to borrow a term from Kuhn (I am sure there is some rough equivalent for the non-scientific disciplines) – they’re not rocking any boats, usually, nor are their students and post-doc assistants (at the higher levels). But that is to be expected. Major theoretical innovations have historically been few and far between. Academic types tend to be a cautious bunch, actually, and don’t suddenly shift theoretical paradigms without good reason. The higher levels also can be very competitive and cut-throat, and grad students (as well as junior faculty) can get on the wrong side of a department’s “politics”. Given that employment is “at will” in our country, that invites a number of abuses. That does need to be changed. The competitiveness of the biz I don’t see changing any time too soon, though. It is what it is.
My most recent sources? Cornell + Yale. A close friend and close relative in both schools. Graduate students in masters + doctoral programs. One in science and one in the arts. Plus my own experience teaching high end musical content as a visiting specialist in any number of universities and conservatories. I stand by what I have seen. A whole lotta shuckin’ goin’ on. The higher up the food chain, the more shucking.
Fox News?
I wouldn’t know what they are saying. Never touch the stuff. Don’t watch MSNBC either. I see what I see and I say what I say. Deal wid it.
AG
Here’s a little something that goes a bit beyond dueling sets of personal impressions:
So Much to Do, So Little Time:
There is a lot more to the article, and the study itself is pretty preliminary, but it gives some insight into what most of these folks are up to.
#1-We were talking about “professors.” Not adjuncts, not teaching assistants, not “faculty participants”…professors. As in “tenured.” We might as well add administrators, too.
#2-“…faculty participants reported…”
And what might that “61 hours per week” contain?
This:
I believe that I used the word “shucking.” Just in case you don’t speak adequate jazz talk:
Wikipedia:
I just don’t believe them. In the freelance NYC music business world, when I phone, text or email someone about work I can expect a 95%+ return rate within 24 hours. maybe even higher. Work is scarce and highly competitive They know that if they don’t answer I will simply have to go on to the next candidate, and that If they regularly don’t answer I’ll simply stop calling.. When I do the same thing with academics or other denizens of privileged bureaucracies, the 24 hour response rate is down to about 25%.
Make that an even 1/3rd.
Well?
Are faculty shirking their teaching duties? My sources and my own observation say yes they are. That 1/3rd of more of their time that is not involved with imparting or collecting knowledge? Is the university a teaching place or is it not? If I spent 1/3rd of working time as a musician not playing the music that i was being paid to play; if I said that ancillary responsibilities were taking up 1/3rd of my workday; if I was as unapproachable and unpinnable as are most high level academics and academic administrators? I wouldn”t get any work.
Remember, this is all based on their truthfulness in answering in the first place. And why should they be any different from the rest of the country? Who tells the truth here these days? That can be risky The government doesn’t. The media don’t. Why should academics not paint the brightest picture they can manage?
AG
P.S. I had to contact someone about personal business recently. Not super important business, just something that I had offered to do for him in a familial sense. I phoned, I texted, I emailed. No answer. I called my son…a doctoral student at an Ivy league school…to make sure I had the right cointact info.
He said…and I quote…”Dad. Y’gotta remember…he’s an academic.”
Oh.
Academic entitlement.
Once the tenure fix is in?
Fuggedaboudit!!!
Bet on it.
Let me guess – you didn’t bother to read the article, did you. Even the bits that I posted here mentioned…wait for it…full professors as part of that database. OMG. In other words, you argument fell apart the moment you started with point #1 in your missive. But hey, that has never stopped you before. Care to dig any deeper?
“…full professors as part of that database.”
And?
Which part?
A quote from that massively impressive Boise State piece, provided to us by a media organization called Inside Higher Ed.
Absolutely classic academic ass-covering.
We’ve just started so it’s not anything to count on.
It’s very small so it might not mean much.
Only Boise State members were invited…that’s in Idaho, right? And roughly 94% of them were simply not interested enough to answer. I mean…what else is there to do in Idaho? Harvest fucking potatoes?
However…”the findings are ‘highly suggestive…’ “
Yeah.
Right.
My own “findings” are also suggestive. They suggest that John Ziker, “chairman of the anthropology department at Boise State University,” is trolling for academic grant money so that he can climb higher up the academic ladder.
Publish or perish.
Hustle or get busted.
Inside Higher Ed?
When I first read it I saw “Inside Hired.” i really did. It’s a closed game.
Listen up, DD.
Almost the entire higher educational system of the United States of Omertica is an ongoing scam bubble. It sells outrageously high tuition rates that cripple the families and students who buy into the inevitable debt with the promise that there will be an American Dream waiting at the end of the academic rainbow. But when all but a few of the brightest and hardest working students scuffle their way through the whole scam, at the end they find out that there is no useful work waiting for them, that they would have been better off taking up a good-paying trade like being a plumber.
But NOOOOOoooo. They have bought the same bill of goods that you are trying to foist off on me.
“Inside Higher Ed?”
What a sad little site.
Go read it in great detail.
I’ll go read me some Shakespeare.
As I said to one of the other reflexive AG bashers here recently…I’m through with your lame shit. Go proselytize your MSNBC-influenced ideas to some other sucker.
“Don’t feed the trolls” used to be an internet meme.
What a waste of time.
I coulda had a V8.
Have a nice day.
AG
So yeah, you can spout every right-wing talking point I have ever seen foisted at higher ed (or our educational system in general). Well, bully for you. Enjoy your willful ignorance.
Thanks, Don Durito! for the most part academics are ppl who love learning and intellect and want to share that love with others, whether students, colleagues, or others in their field. Something the statistics don’t tell you, the amount of work directing one dissertation is known to be [in universities] equivalent to teaching a course. So someone teaching a full load, plus general advising, committee work then, if advising dissertations, has the equivalent of a couple more courses. And a dissertation director has responsibilities to the student for the rest of their academic career (helping them with jobs, publications, getting a start in the field) and for the most part they fulfill that as well.
An elite is not the same thing as an elit-ist. He’s made it into a high-income group mainly by being a talented writer. He knows a lot about fairly serious bill-paying from college loans and his mother’s cancer and especially making a living working with actually poor people at an age when almost anybody with his background would have been staying with that extremely remunerative law firm. I’m pretty sure he didn’t believe in those days that belonging to the elite makes you better than other people, and there’s some hope that he still doesn’t.
Amazing. When I go to a dinner, I attempt, as best I can, to say things that are intelligent. I bring forth observations from history, from art, from science, because I know something about these. I am sure, in some cases, that people consider me pretentious. But I am not alone in this – most people who go to dinner parties try to contribute. What is wrong with that? You go to college to get educated. Education means learning stuff that others might not know.
In the perfect Repukeliscum world, we all talk about how much we admire Duck Dynasty, because the essence of the anti-knowledge and anti-science ideal is admiring morons.
Barack Obama is a man who seems to have always been curious and not satisfied with the easy answers. He seeks insight into the human experience and appreciates the arts – in their low down bluesy forms as well as their more disciplined expressions. These characteristics are what keep a person from getting old. I do not have any sense that he thinks these values make him inherently better than the next person. Just another load of b.s. It springs from a bottomless well.
That’s just the sort of dinner party that Thomas Jefferson enjoyed.
I was just thinking of Jefferson, an intellectual elitist if there ever was one, renowned for his love of both books and good wine.
And don’t forget slave sex.
He didn’t.
AG
Word, me too. “Why is Continetti trying to make Obama sound like Thomas Jefferson?”
He is PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
He SHOULD be having dinner with these kinds of people.
PERIOD.
NO. He shouldn’t be having dinner with Scooter and Bubba from the Local Beer Hall.
HE IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD.
And, yes, these ARE the people who should be at his dinner table, abroad and at home.
G-M-A-F-B.
You forget one thing.
Obama is a black man in a White House.
Anything he does is unacceptable because he doesn’t belong in that there house, and doesn’t belong in Italy as a representative of ‘Murrica.
Cause he’s black.
I know.
I know.
Being President While Black is an impeachable offense.
In a “normal” country most people want their leaders to embody the very best qualities and traits of their nation, be that in science, the arts, media, business, law or the professions. They are proud of any accomplishments their leaders may have in those areas and feel it reflects well on them if their leaders have shown outstanding abilities in those ares. Does that make the leader different from the vast majority of the public? yes it does. Is that a bad thing? Absolutely not. What is the point of having a leader if s/he knows no more than you do? Why would you want to be led by someone with less ability than you or many others have?
It is a sign of gross personal immaturity and insecurity to feel intimidated by someone with more knowledge in some area than you have. The faux posturing as “men of the people” of leaders who are otherwise more intelligent is actually a calculated insult to the vast majority. By definition, a President is a member of the elite. The question is: which elite, and is that elite at least attempting to govern in the best interests of all.
Why would anyone want a moron with their finger on the nuclear button?
There is an argument to be made that President Barack Obama is not the populist that his background as a community organizer led a lot of people to expect. That his reliance on a Harvard brain trust for economic policy advantaged the 1% and disadvantaged the 99%. But like most right-wing and GOP arguments, the sort of Maureen Dowd hallucinogenic candy bar journalism of Matthew Continnetti either swings wide of real issues because they affect GOP donor interests or is authentically clueless.
Barack Hussein Obama is the head of state of the the most powerful military state in the world. The country that he presides over is one of the two largest by far. And American culture for good or ill still dominates a goodly number of other countries, despite nationalist and fundamentalist religious reactions. That in itself is the definition of “elite”.
Had he not behaved the way he did among the rich and powerful of Europe, the rap on the President was that he was not big enough for the job. That he lacked the skills and knowledge to deal with these folks as equals.
Maureen Dowd should share some of her cannabinoid edibles with Continetti. At least it will convert his writing from pretentious to hyperbolic.
Oh, come on.
You mean Republicans would attack him if he was less elite?
Such as, if he took his jacket off in the White House, or if he put his feet up on a table?
Oh, no way, that wouldn’t happen! Conservatives don’t attack Obama for being a tyrant in one breath and a weak-willed pushover with the next!
Good Ole Propaganda without policy is kinda sad to watch, isn’t it.
When President Obama leaves office, he will be the guy who prevented a depression, rescued the entire auto industry, passed student loan reform, credit card reform, financial reform, healthcare reform, and essentially climate change reform.
We have a financial consumer protection bureau, and will have a healthcare system providing health care to an additional 40 million people. And oh yeah, he also repealed “Don’t ask, Don’t tell”.
He took out Bin Laden, took out Gaddafi, decimated Al Qaeda,ended the Iraq war, is ending the Afghanistan war, and unlike the last dude in the White House who got us stuck in Iraq for a decade to get WMD that didn’t exist, Obama got Syria’s ACTUAL WMD without a shot being fired.
The DOW has doubled in value, the deficit has been cut in half, and we are on a pace for the best jobs numbers since 1999. In fact next month Obama will break Clinton’s all time record for the most consecutive months of private sector job growth at 52.
This doesn’t even include lesser discussed things like the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill, a complete overhaul of our food safety laws, the largest land conservation bill in a quarter of a century, and the NEW START treaty.
Yet listening to people speak of this president is like listening in on a baseball conversation where the player in question has been averaging .330, with 30 home runs and 120 RBIs for the last 5 seasons yet instead of discussing a possible MVP award they say he doesn’t even belong in the majors.
A current sports metaphor for Obama’s treatment is the severe criticism LeBron James has been catching for his severe leg cramps during Game 1 of the Finals.
“Sure, LeBron’s been the best player in the NBA almost from the moment he came out of high school to go pro. Sure, he’s carried many mediocre teams to the Finals, and he’s working on leading the Heat to a third straight Championship. Sure, he was carrying a massive burden on both sides of the court while the temperature in the arena rose to 90 degrees. BUT JORDAN/BIRD/JOHNSON/RUSSELL WOULDN’T HAVE COME OUT blah blah blah…”.
The Team Conservative coaches have never defined this word and never will. “Elite” is deployed ONLY against Dems, never against a Repub. What in hell would one call RMoney?
Vis-a-vis Obama, there is a distinction between an elitist and an intellectual. And of course, one born to any economic class may cultivate aesthetic tastes and values (“the prez was at home in this sumptuous Baroque setting, amid these beautiful artifacts!!” How un-American can you get?) One may even become a “natural” aristocrat, although it is not something one sees in American political leaders too often. This is understandable given the rampant rancid stupidity, cultural insecurity and general spite of the average American turd.
Many of the (moneyed) “elite” of the last Gilded Age did things like found orchestras and art museums, cultural assets that are seen as “elitist”. Many of them had an idea of how many symphonies Brahms wrote, for example. They even listened to them!
Today’s Gilded Age plutocrats build underground garages for their auto collections and buy outfits like the LA Clippers, which are just more of a for-profit, money-draining scam on the hapless plebes. I guess that’s what a cultural “elite” is now expected to do in our degenerate nation, but it’s sort of hard to see this as “intellectual”.
Attacking a national leader like our prez along these lines simply makes clear the almost unbelievable intellectual (and moral) bankruptcy of the loathsome American “conservative” movement, its coaches and paid scribblers—and to the extent such braindead shit resonates, the crappy, spiteful Traditional American.
What a country.
Yes, he is.
Even more accurate?
The President is an Elitist Meme.
And a member of the elitist team as well.
SHHHhhhh!!!
Don’t tell anybody.
He is part of the .01%.
Frontman extraordinaire.
Bet on it.
AG