I was struck by this comment by a voter in today's New York Times account of last night's U.S. Senate debate in Delaware:

While Mr. Coons had broader range on issues and current events, he sometimes seemed mean-spirited. When Ms. O'Donnell asked whether a company he was connected to would benefit from the clean energy bill, he scoffed, “It was difficult for me to understand from her question what she was talking about.”

That could just serve to reinforce Ms. O'Donnell's image, which has had deep resonance this election season — that of an ordinary person trying to bring common sense to Washington.

That appealed to Alexandra Gawel, 23, a sociology major at the university who has worked her way through college as a waitress.

“She is someone I can relate to,” Ms. Gawel said, outside the debate hall in the late afternoon. “She's not had everything handed to her.”

This is a classic American myth, perpetrated by Hollywood, starting with Mr. Smith Goes to Washington--and it's a lovely fantasy. Mr. Smith was an inspired amateur. He followed the news and astonished his local oligarch puppet-master by actually reading the bills he was about to vote on, then making up his own mind. He was part of generation that took citizenship seriously and kept itself informed--even the "average" folks, our grandparents, who came home from work on the assembly line and read the evening newspaper (which actually had news in it, unlike the crapola sensationalism that passes for news on cable TV). I'd take a couple of average citizens like that in the Senate anytime, especially if they made the effort to learn the issues once they got there.

But Christine O'Donnell is not like that. She is attractive, to some, because she doesn't know anything. She couldn't name a Supreme Court decision she disagreed with, not even Roe v. Wade. There is no way she could ever be confused with a member of the elites; there is no way she could be confused with an above average high school student. Her ignorance, therefore, makes her authentic--the holy grail of latter-day American politics: she's a real person, not like those phony politicians. In that sense, she--and the lifeboat filled with other Tea Party know-nothings--follow in the wake of our leading exemplar of ignorant authenticity, Sarah Palin (who seems every bit as unaware of public policy--she certainly never talks about it--as she was when a desperate and petulant John McCain chose her to be his running mate).

There is something profoundly diseased about a society that idolizes its ignoramuses and disdains its experts. It is a society that no longer takes itself seriously. This is not a complaint about the current Republican tide, by the way: that's part of the natural flow of political life, a result of the economy and the President's abstruse brand of politics.

Continues @ Time.com
==================

I believe that Klein brings forth a real issue that can hurt US in many ways, not the least of which is the upcoming election. Since when does EDUCATED equal ELITE? MOST educated are not elite, IMHO. 

Elite was a word used in relation to class where the person of (high) means flaunts a CONSUMPTION lifestyle in front of others who may not have that lifestyle. That is the quintessential definition of elite.  In behavior terms, you have a touch of elitism if you do not respect the other person for THEIR dignity of labor.  Here's a simple test. If you get into a cab and cannot carry an ordinary conversation with the driver and you do not thank him/her for the ride (apart from paying the fare] when they get you to your destination on time and without accidents], you have a touch of elitism.  If you have a lot of work to do sitting in the cab, ask for permission; that is a human being with dignity of labor, and not a machine sitting and driving the car!  And it doesnt matter how well off you are.

We are making a very bad mistake if we communicate to our children a derisive definition of Elitism as Educated.  This is especially so at a time when we really need to raise the education level of our country to be able to compete on equal EDUCATION-FOOTING on the world stage.  I emphasize education-footing because, no, it does not take a person with a degree to cut our hair, rather an increase in education level of our country leads to further improvements in society at large, including higher level of education and motivation in the family.  The US Society as a whole needs to have higher level of education to be able to gain more competitive edge for the future EVEN AS the global economy flattens out the US [and I know, that's not a fun message to hear, but it's the truth].

There are many of my relatives who ask about comign to the US and I tell them that the new land of opportunity is India and China; why would you want to move. It is a surprising message to them. Grass is so much greener to them on this side.  In many was, the GRASS certainly is.  There are MANY things about the US that are so very attractive, the greenery, the environment most attractive among the many positives.  But "the land of opportunity" it is not, anymore, I am afraid.

And, until we start to really accept that educated people are who we respect, admire and promote to opportunities and offices, we will demotivate our youth and send mixed messages at home to our children about the value of education.  So, we better start looking at what we truly want the word "elite" to convey and use it correctly, lest our children start to think they better not become educated (= elite).

Ignorance is just plain ignorance.  Glorifying ignorance is stupidity and highly irresponsible.