California has done itself no national favor by rejoicing over homo nuptials. Like Massachusetts, California is only isolating itself more and more from the American moralists who find homo nups repulsive.
Yet to see the evening news, Californians are the posh intellectuals who have it all. Not. They parade their conceit levels with such obnoxious hubris that the rest of the country reaches for the bucket. Truly.
Like Hollywood, California thinks it?s a breed above the rest of us. Instead, California liberals are merely upstart spoiled brats who write their own values, claiming that they have it made in the ethical shade. One of these days these liberals will come to the stark realization that they have taken themselves out of the national family, just as Massachusetts has divorced itself from the country?s good.
The rest of the column is every bit as superior and self-righteous as these first three paragraphs, and you really can't help but snicker at it when it's all over. Here this guy is excoriating pro-gay-marriage Californians as elitists, but his reason for doing so is because they won't kowtow to his particular brand of American "moralists." Basically, he's saying, Our morality is superior and what we say should be the law of the land! Who the hell do these people think they are, daring to disagree with us? And yet the folks in California are the elitists!
Before some conservative comes on here complaining that J. Grant Swank is not representative of all conservatives and how dare I portray him as such, let me stipulate that, no, I'm not trying to say that the good Rev. Swank speaks for every single person on the right side of the aisle. His views, however, seem to have been espoused by quite a few of those folks since Bush won the election. Maybe this is just because I live in God-fearing Alabama, but I can't tell you how many times I've been smugly told by someone that the people have spoken, they spoke up for Bush and Christian morality, and idiot liberals like me should just go along with the flow if we know what's good for us. Usually this includes some mention of liberals like me as "elitists."
Well, here are the definitions of "elitism" as defined by Dictionary.com: "The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources"; "The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class"; and "Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class." Thus making an elitist "someone who believes in rule by an elite group." Gosh, that sound like any particular Christian Right you know of?
Look, I know there are plenty of liberals out there who snicker at anyone who lives in a "red state," worships Jesus, or voted for Bush as being stupid. And let the record show that, as someone who meets two out of those three criteria, I don't care for those particular liberals' attitude. But I'll be damned if I'm going to be written off as "elitist" just because I elect not to fall right in lockstep with everything the Christian Right wants to do. I mean, criminy, these people calling anyone else "elitist" is almost as bad as Michael Jackson suggesting someone's getting a little too chummy with his kids.
Calling the right wing on this is going to be tricky, granted, but I hope the Democrats find a way to do it. 'Cause nobody whose attitude basically boils down to "I'm holy and good and Jesus loves me, so you have to admit I'm right all the time" has any business lobbing the "elitist" grenade at anyone. As for me, I'll leave politics out of it and continue to confine my elitism to my taste in cars and football teams, which, as everyone knows, is unimpeachable.
1 comment:
You suck.
Oh, and Scrushy too.
Post a Comment