Elitists, we don’t need no stinking elitists.

(Update) More words from Lady Rothschild on CNN. She may try to explain her claim to see Obama as an elitist, but from her example isn’t Sarah Palin the most inexcusable elitist.  Her inability to show humility when asked to perform a job that she is unprepared for is truly ludicrous.  And on the Democrats playing the “class” card, one need only look at the new McCain claim that he is for the workers and he will fight with them against the “old boys club” in Washington and on Wall Street.  The essence of that battle is workers versus big business.  Proletariat versus bourgeoisie.   But as we have already heard, it’s hard for one of the “old boys” to take up the torch of the people and fight against the club he has been a member of for well over a generation.

I find this discussion mind-numbing and rather ludicrous. Here we have Lady Lynn Forester dDe Rothschild turning from her support of Hillary Clinton only to garner her support toward John McCain. She may utilize her middle class upbringing as evidence that she isn’t part of the elite, but I still find it hard to see someone married to a KNIGHT and being an executive of a multi-million dollar company, so nonchalant about calling someone of a lesser status of being elite. One may have forgotten what being “elitist” means. Her monetary status qualifies her. As does her royal associations. And her ability to influence the mass populous, being that she is in the private sector and not politics, is the ultimate form of elitism. I have money, which means you should listen to me.

A second statement:

Her reference to Adlai Stevenson, and related Wall Street Journal op-ed piece, was a targeted shot at the intellect of Barrack Obama. But again, I find it hard to understand how a Lady, educated at Columbia University, can expect to have her words be accepted by the middle class undecided voters; when she writes her opinions in a newspaper that the middle-class doesn’t read and uses references to past political figures the average “Joe” just wouldn’t know.

She went so far as to make a snide comment about Obama using the word “audacity” to fuel his early presidential campaign. Well is audacity really such a negative word?


  1. the quality or state of being audacious: as

a: intrepid boldness

b: bold or arrogant disregard of normal restraints <had the audacity to defy his boss>

I would also point out that the meaning of intrepid is:P resolute fearlessness, fortitude, and endurance.

So are any of those qualities negative? And is it so terrible that a candidate recognizes the restraints settled upon by years of negative progress, so only to want to break free and inspire hope in the American people. I guess all those others with audacious ideas should have just sat back down and let the plain thinkers run things as usual? Right Dr. King or President Kennedy? Civil rights-petty dreams. Man on the moon-implausible theory. Re-energized America-media hype and elitist jargon. Sorry your Ladyship, I think you ate a rotten truffle.

She goes on to claim that Obama is elite because he goes to Germany to speak to Europe, uses the word “audacity” to describe his claims, and is trying to advance his personal gain while moving past his responsibility to his constituents.

Fairness, fair rules, and protection of the middle class. Hmm so let’s analyze how McCain will work towards those ideals…

Fairness – Not so much, with misleading and despicable political attacks on Obama and the Democrats.

Fair rules – Sending lawyers to Alaska to interfere in a bipartisan investigation, oops.

Protection of the middle class – Again missing the boat, seeing as McCain wants to give tax breaks to the wealthiest among us; which I suppose her Ladyship is a member of. Funny how that all works out.

Pretending to be upholding the tenets of “her” Democratic party is nothing more than fluff. She goes on to cite past examples of Obama miscues on energy policies (big oil subsidies) and ear marks (mentioning the Bridge to Nowhere). She goes on to claim that the “rednecks” are the ones calling her bitter, the ones she points out that Obama slighted by misstepping and saying they are bitter. She has just fallen into the same “quit digging whilst in a hole” problem that Carly Fiorina made the unfortunate of starting. (Firoina has been made to “disappear” by the McCain campaign.)

Much like the PUMA supporters, whose original acronym meant (Party Unity My Ass), her Ladyship seems to have made a post-rational decision to support a candidate with views contrary to their own without a reason that is based on rational thought. Their emotional misguided ranting only proves that their arguments are weak and only add fuel to the political engine of the Republican party. If this were an ancient battle, one could liken it to a legion of Roman soldiers defecting to the Gauls, because they didn’t like how the first spear had ordered the other legions ahead of their own. Plus the Gauls have swords too, so one way or another the fight goes on. This isn’t going to teach anyone a lesson, unless it is to be reminded of the song “It’s my party and I’ll cry if I want to.”

The only point that actually made sense was her plea to leave abortion out of the debate. Funny how she was misinformed that it was the Democrats who have made it such an issue. Dear Lady, it was the Republican Right that have re-introduced abortion as a key issue. It might be hard to see the little people from that

Links to CNN Video

Campbell Brown Interview

Situation Room Interview