textbook anti-intellectualism part 2.

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’”

— Isaac Asimov

As promised Part 2 regarding the Steve Nass agenda. and this quote from mike mikalsen:

the idea that some universities are more concerned about “indoctrination than education.”

To drive this second point home, Mikalsen notes the recent outcry over UW-Madison political science professor Charles Franklin telling Isthmus that voters in the recent election were “pretty damn stupid.”

“There are too many campuses where they spend more time on the partisan politics than on an education,” says Mikalsen. “Steve has asked for viewpoint neutrality. He wants the university to be a place where ideas are exchanged and people can have rational and reasonable debate over policy issues. But in order to have that you have to have a fair representation of all of the viewpoints and I don’t think anybody would argue right now that the conservative viewpoint is overly represented on any UW campus.”

There is much outrage over UW-Madison political science professor Charles Franklin telling Bill Leuders:

Franklin, perhaps a bit too candidly, conceded the point. “I’m not endorsing the American voter,” he answered. “They’re pretty damn stupid.”

Typically, the fake outrage reigned so much that that Franklin walked back on his comments. As someone who has continually called this election season, thanks to the “tea party” the year of dumb, I think he prematurely retreated.

Lueders article was about Wisconsin replacing Russ Feingold with Ron Johnson and the reasons for it.

Throughout the campaign, Johnson ridiculed Feingold’s claimed status as a maverick within his party. Do the folks who voted for this multimillionaire manufacturer, whose campaign was bankrolled by the corporate right, really think he’ll defy his party more often than Feingold defied his (887 times, to be exact, including 97 times as the lone holdout)? If that happens, I swear, I’ll shave my head and eat my hair.

So in the context of replacing Feingold with Johnson because he was not independent enough, yes he seems to be spot on.

Then Lueders touches on the Governor race:

Now consider Wisconsin Gov.-elect Scott Walker’s promise to magically create 250,000 new jobs and reinvigorate the state’s economy even as he rejects $810 million from the federal government to extend high-speed rail to Madison, a necessary first step toward bringing it to the Twin Cities.

Walker, a former high-speed rail supporter, got elected in part by lying to the people of Wisconsin about this pot of cash. He said and still insists he wants to use it for other transit projects, like fixing the state roads and bridges he says are “literally crumbling.”

But Walker’s claim that Wisconsin could use this money however it wants, like a Best Buy gift card, has always been, as Jim Doyle put it, “pure fiction.”

Again, if anyone voted for Walker because he was going to give the train money back and THEN create 250,000 jobs, again the observation seems to be correct. If people voted for Scott Walker because he was going to use the $810 million dollars of federal money on roads and bridges in Wisconsin, then it might be an understatement.

Franklin even in his retreat, tried to justify what the voters did with this line:

Tea party supporters 89 percent Johnson, Tea party opponents 88 percent Feingold. Results in the governor’s race were nearly identical. Voters overwhelmingly matched their preferences to their candidate choices well. They may not have known every detail of the candidates’ positions or records, but in the big things they picked the right candidates for themselves. This is the same “tea party” that had paul ryan and Tommy Thompson as their main speakers in Wisconsin and helped to overwhelmingly re-elect Career politicians paul ryan and Jim Sensenbrenner.

As

Lou K put it earlier:

Paul Ryan voted for TARP – he stays
Russ Feingold opposed TARP – he’s gone
Paul Ryan supported the Iraq War – he stays
Russ Feingold objected to the Iraq War – he’s gone
Ryan voted for the Patriot Act – he stays
Feingold opposed the Patriot Act – he’s gone

Ryan supported the $750 billion/1 year TARP despite constituents 100 to 1 opposed – he stays

Feingold supported the $900 billion/10 years health Care Reform despite constituents 2 to 1 opposed – he’s gone.

Ryan’s the Tea Party candidate
Johnson’s the Tea party candidate

Feingold is not.

Lets also not forget that this Wisconsin election cycle elected a reality TV \"star\", an ex tv reporter, and almost elected an ethically challenged lawmaker who stole from charities to run a campaign.

Maybe, if Mr. Nass and Mr. Mikalsen took a look at the facts, they would see that in a higher education campus setting, where an open mind and logic wins out, people can see through the current bunch of extreme right wing viewpoints.

As John Stuart Mill pointed out:

“Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.”