In which the new guy takes umbrage with elitist arguments

Can I still call myself the new guy? Maybe "the guy who disappears from posting for month" is more apropos. But, I digress.

Kids, I'm not pleased. Maybe you read the blog "Left on Lanier." In fact, I threw them some well-deserved love a couple of months ago. But, they got it wrong today and I'm irked.

In a post titled "Georgia High School Student gives finger to DOJ," one of their front pagers unleashes a fairly vicious screed against Secretary of State Karen Handel. Now, normally, I'm all about knocking on Handel. I think she's been an overly litigious partisan hack who acts more like the secretary of the Georgia GOP than the Secretary of State. And, since in a former life I worked at the state party and dealt with her hackery there, as well as in the context of Jim Powell's PSC campaign, I like to think I know whereof I speak.

I don't have a lot of nice things to say about Karen Handel.

Now, Mad Dog's basic point, as I see it is, valid, but his framing of it is just kind of offensive. He takes Handel to task (and rightfully so) for continuing her quixotic quest to fly in the face of the U.S. Department of Justice after DOJ has repeatedly told her that she can't go dropping voters off the rolls, willy-nilly, despite how much it helps Republicans in Georgia. (Silly DOJ, they just don't seem to understand that there are more important things in Handel-land than justice. Like, you know, winning elections.)

So, like I said, it's the framing, which is basically saying that Handel is unqualified to make those judgments because she hasn't got a college degree. Grab a lab coat, because I'm going to dissect this thing up.

First, the title of the post is... well, it just ain't right. "Georgia High School Student gives finger to DOJ" Problem is, Handel isn't a high-school student, she's a high school graduate. So, this isn't a case of a eager beaver junior at Cedar Shoals drafting her own amicus brief. So that's kind of a cheap shot.

Then there's this: "A high school graduate has issued a public statement declaring that the 'DOJ has effectively directed the State of Georgia not to comply with or enforce federal law.'" Well, at least now we're admitting that Handel is a graduate, not a student. But, the implication here, as I'm reading it, is that because she doesn't have a piece of paper, she's not allowed to express her (wrong-headed, admittedly) opinion, in the course of doing her job as she sees it? Plain and simple, there's no educational requirement to be Secretary of State. It should also be pointed out that Handel herself probably didn't write that legal opinion, and not because she doesn't have a degree, but because the Elections Division pays very qualified attorneys to research and write on legal and elections issues. In fact, even if Karen Handel had a Bachelor's, J.D., an L.L.M. in election law, and just for grins, a Ph.D. in microbiology, she wouldn't have written that thing herself because it's not her job. It's her staff's job.

And finally, there's this zinger at the end: "If that’s not too hard for a high school graduate to do." Again, a cheap shot.

Big picture time. Go nuts on Handel, if you want. Be my guest, and save me a water balloon or two. But not on her lack of a college degree. First of all, not having a college degree does not equal stupid. But that's the implication here, and it's not only wrong, it's downright offensive.

Second, Democrats do not win this argument. Grab a mop, because I'm about to drop some science. According to the U.S. Census, only 26.6% of Georgians have a bachelor's degree or higher. (This is 2005-2007 American Community Survey data, though I think it's safe to say that the number might jump a few tenths of a percent after the 2010 census.) So, if Democrats want to make lack of educational attainment an issue, we're not going to win that battle, and we risk offending a significant portion of the 73.4% of Georgians who don't have a piece of paper to hang on the wall and, I suppose, the right to have opinions about matters legal or political. (One of that offended 73.4% is, obviously, yours truly.)

Third, if a majority of Democrats are actually intellectual elitists, (and I don't think we are), then that says some pretty scary things about our party. I'm a Democrat because I was raised as a Democrat, by a grandfather who grew up on a farm in Ila during the Depression and the New Deal, a grandmother who grew up at the same time in Athens when it was still a small town, and a mother who came of age during Camelot. All of them taught me, by their actions, what it means to be a Democrat and what Democratic values are. And, interestingly, they all had about the same level of education as Karen Handel. I don't think we're becoming a party of intellectual elitists, but this line of rhetoric makes me queasy.

To sum up, Grift got it right in the comments, when he said, "..if you choose this tactic with Cagle and Handel, they will likely roll out the same old line of liberals being 'elitist' and 'arrogant.' And this time they’d be right. Combine that with the fact that you will basically insult every voter who has bootstrapped their way to success without a 'receipt' and I think you have a very stupid strategy."

Yup.

Until next time, thanks for reading.