Sarah Palin, the “Intelligence” of Democrats, and an Interview with Tom Kratman - Part 1

Yesterday, Vox Day had an interesting take on the irrational hatred directed at Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin by the left. In my own posts on the topic, I've emphasized the class aspect of this. Those behind the Palin smears are not really going after Palin herself, but what she represents: the great American middle class that loves their country, their God, nice cars and big trucks, fast food, pro sports, Budweiser beer, basically everything that makes America such a pleasant place to live. I see an incredible level of left-wing social elitism behind the attacks on Palin. This is not just conjecture on my part: as a career academic, I have dealt with such attitudes for most of my adult life.

Day, however, has focused upon the intelligence aspect of all of this, and perceptions thereof. At issue is the fact that Democrats love to point out how percentage-wise, most of those with postgraduate university degrees tend to prefer their party's candidates. Thus, they conclude, the Democratic Party is the choice of smart people. Of this, Day writes:

There's actually more Republicans with college degrees than Democrats; college grads voted for Bush 52-46 in 2004. Also, as a reader pointed out recently, it's important to keep in mind that the most-educated group is only an approximation for the most-intelligent group. Since has been previously shown, those majoring in education are the very least intelligent of the college-educated - with an estimated average IQ of 91 - the large numbers of M.Ed.- and D. Ed.-holders who disproportionately lean Democrat further reduces the number of genuinely intelligent individuals in that most-educated 9.4 percent of the population. That factor probably isn't enough to entirely make up for the 25-percent Democrat advantage, but does reduce it significantly.

Democratic Party triumphalists should, of course, keep in mind that their party is also the overwhelming choice of those who never completed high school, which these days is not exactly a high educational bar to clear. Thus, in overall terms of intelligence, the perceived advantage that many Democrats seem to imagine they have likely doesn't exist. In fact, it is Republicans who may have the advantage. Nonetheless, Democrats love to refer to Republicans as "stupid" and have been doing so for decades. Within my own lifetime, I recall many a prominent Republican (like Ronald Reagan, both George Bushes, Bob Dole, and now Sarah Palin) being referred to as stupid by Democrats and liberals whose accomplishments were miniscule by comparison. The insult has become a staple of Democratic talking points, irrespective of the intelligence of those throwing it.

However, considering that the "intelligence gap" just might favor Republicans, Day frames the situation thusly:

Consider, then, the probable reaction of the normal individual to a similar attitude copped by someone with sub-standard intelligence, and then think about how unconvincing he would find any arguments presented by such an irritatingly clueless idiot. This is why the smugness and conceit of both Democratic politicians and grass-roots Democrats alike is so off-putting, not only to Republicans but also to independents and third-party people like me; it's like being lectured about mathematics by someone who has never heard of algebra or geometry, but is inordinately proud of his ability to multiply two numbers and assumes that you're still getting by with addition.

The Democrats are insulting the intelligence of millions of Americans as well as their social status. As anyone with an intelligence quotient higher than that of a kumquat will tell you, that is no way to win an election.

On that point, the very leftist, observant, and linguistically colorful sci-fi writer John Scalzi has taken his fellow Democrats and liberals to task for their treatment of the Alaskan governor:

No, seriously: What the fuck is wrong with you? The GOP picks a woman VP 24 years after you do, for the same goddamn reason you did (a contentless call to shore up a shrinking base), and you act like you've never seen this movie before? I just don't know what to say to you about that. Also: squirting yourself messy over a vice presidential candidate. Good fucking gravy, how off the fucking script can you possibly get. For God's sake, she's scandal-plagued Atwater spawn from a state with the population of Fort Worth, Texas, whose job it will be to work the lights of the Naval Observatory for four years. She's a walking, taking advertisement for how easily placated religious conservatives are at this moment in history. She doesn't walk on water, unless it's frozen and the moose she's hunting has wandered out on it. So will you please focus.

Gotta admit, Scalzi brought a smile to my face, particularly with the part about McCain's running-mate being "scandal-plagued." Short of the smears, liberals and Democrats don't have much to go on when trying to criticize Palin. Once more, the true political genius of McCain comes to light.

***

Speaking of sci-fi writers, yesterday Eric Blair e-mailed me a link to this interview of Tom Kratman, posted at Blackfive by a contributor named LaughingWolf. Coincidentally, Kratman happens to mention Scalzi during the interview. Give it a view:



Again, for those new to this blog, Mr. Kratman has been a regular reader and commenter here since last May, when I responded to an insult thrown at him by the detestable Charlie Stross.