Elitism?

There was a front page news story in our local Republican Party mouthpiece, The Arizona Republic, this morning, blaming the recent election rout on the fact that the Democratic Party is seen as too elitist.

The party of the New Deal, the Civil Rights Act, the labor movement, populism ... They're the elitists? Certainly, an argument can be made (and indeed I've been known to make this argument myself) that they've lost touch with that part of themselves in recent years as part of their efforts to follow the 'Contract on America'-inspired Republican Party to the right.

Who's who in the Republican Party?

George W. Bush ... Well, we know all about his connections to Saudi and Texas oil and big business. Enron, anyone?

Dick Cheney ... No matter how he tries to insist he has no connections to Halliburton, hasn't he intervened to make sure they get their contracts? And he may not be getting a bi-weekly paycheck from them, but he's still collecting money from them and he'll get it sometime in the future. That may not be a de jure conflict of interest, but it certainly ain't ethical.

Bill Frist ... Involved in owning the largest chain of hospitals in the country, involved in writing and passing laws that directly benefit the family business.

Trent Lott ... Raises huge amounts of money from corporations to hand off to Congressional corporate puppets like John Shadegg. Immense ethical questions have arisen about him and his dealings.

Let's look at something I think is illustrative and compare George W. Bush and John Kerry. Of the two of them, which has most routinely associated with royalty outside his duties in government?

There's your elitist, you bastards.