A meaningless victory

Rand Paul's Kentucky win is being booted around the dumbisphere and Atlantic correspondent Joshua Green weighs in here with a decent but incomplete analysis. Green is an earnest sort, seems like your typical, bright, well-educated, liberal / progressive journalist. Ironic that this representative of the so-called elitist class, in explaining why Rand Paul signifies nothing, forgot that education is biggest reason why.

In Kentucky's case, lack thereof.

Kentucky is a poorly educated state. Kentucky has the highest ratio of people over 65 who didn't complete high school (42%) and big chunk of that group didn't make it past the ninth grade. Older, uneducated white people are the big, fat core of the Beck/Palin/Limbaugh/Coulter/name-your-dumbass demographic.

Click to see complete, full-size image

How uneducated is Kentucky?
 
* Dropouts - Kentucky has the 3rd highest ratio of high school dropouts in the adult (18+) population. Only Texas and Mississippi are worse.

* College graduates - Kentucky has the 4th worst ratio of college graduates in the adult (18+) population. Only Louisiana, Arkansas and West Virginia are worse. (Ratio includes people whose educational attainment stops at an associates degree).

Click to see complete, full-size image

This is not to say that Kentucky isn't making progress. In the 18-24 age group, Kentucky improves by 10 positions in higher education attainment and by 12 positions in the dropout ratio, vs. the all-adults averages.

Click to see complete, full-size image

There's a similar picture 25-34 age group, as Kentucky improves by 5 positions in higher education attainment and by 16 positions in the dropout ratio.

Click to see complete, full-size image

 The 35-44 age group is only slightly better than average for all Kentucky adults.

Click to see complete, full-size image

Education attainment in older groups of working-age adults falls like a rock: almost 20% of Kentuckians aged 45-64 didn't graduate high school and only 27% have a college degree, vs. (for example) 40% in North Dakota.

Click to see complete, full-size image

The data show that Kentucky adults are significantly less-educated than the national average. The difference between Kentucky and more developed states, typically in the northeast, is stark.

Therefore, a huge reason why tea bagger "success" will be hard to repeat outside of states where uneducated white people have undue influence is that they will not benefit from a preponderance of credulous adults, primed by lack of education to swallow Faux drivel.

(Analysis by TheRaven, Data source - U.S. Census Bureau)

Sean Wilentz Strikes Back

Sean Wilentz literally wrote the book on early American democracy. His 2005 work, The Rise of American Democracy won the Bancroft Prize and was a Pulitzer Prize finalist. Wilentz' pedigree is immediately off-putting to the Risible Class: Yale, Columbia & Oxford, and he teaches at Princeton. The motley group of pundits and politicians who kowtow to evangelical nonsense and confuse random sound bites for legitimate argument dismiss scholars like Wilentz as elitist eastern liberals.

The Risible Class acquires power with twisted appeals to credulous voters. Their power base is white, mostly uneducated and largely fundamentalist/evangelical. People who accept the bible as literal truth are very easy to control. Proof lies in three decades of Republican use of so-called "values" to beguile the white working class into voting against its own interests. Drop a few code words, like "eastern liberal" and legitimate debate can be preempted by superstition. You don't even need complete sentences, let alone a paragraph or two. If Glenn Beck is any indication, the Republican base can be manipulated with incoherent babble.

Wilentz also writes for The New Republic and other media outlets. In the context of long-held views of consequential presidents, Wilentz' stand on Grant is fairly brave. He recently published a vigorous defense of Grant in the New York Times. The first sentence in his New Republic review of U.S. Grant: American Hero, American Myth begins thus: No great American has suffered more cruelly and undeservedly at the hands of historians than Ulysses S. Grant. In historical matters, Wilentz is not a stereotypical eastern liberal. That is not to say that the Risible Class will not continue to hold him in contempt as it was Grant who nullified the Klu Klux Klan.

TheRaven also notes that Jill Lepore, no lightweight among prize-winning, ivy-league historians, gave Wilentz a fairly wide berth in her NewYorker review of The Rise of American Democracy. With Wilentz established as a genuinely fair & balanced expert, we turn to the most execrable item on the "modern" Republican agenda.

Nullification.

That word should inspire anger, disgust, loathing and fear. In a constitutional context, nullification is the worst possible heresy. The notion that states can choose which Federal laws they will abide by was born in John Calhoun's fevered defense of slavery. Nullification is political rabies. Calhoun's nullification movement was smacked down by Andrew Jackson, yet it would not die. The plague returned in the 1850s but the Civil War only sent it into hibernation. Racial segregation was rabidly defended in the 1950s and now that (surprise!) America has an African-American President, slavering nullification proselytizers lunged for the bully pulpit once again. Wilentz' nullifer smack down can be found here: http: //www.tnr.com/article/politics/the-essence-anarchy?page=0,1

When state legislators threaten to disobey Federal law they mimic long-dead slave owners and cynically abuse the credulous. Legislators in Georgia, Oklahoma and other miscreant states fail the first test of their convictions: comparison to the most famous southern icon (who didn't commit treason). Andrew Jackson was a borderlands descendant, a self-made man, a slave-owner, a leader, a southern gentleman and a genuine tough-guy. He was a product of his times, with a personal code of honor. It's difficult to see how acceptance of slavery and a reliable sense of right and wrong could live in the same man but the 1820s were long ago in a cultural context. Slavery wasn't completely abolished in New York until 1827. The key to understanding the importance of Jackson's stand is comparison of what he had to gain versus what a southern gentleman President stood to lose from aggressive suppression of a pro-south political movement. The key point is that Jackson put country first in suppressing Calhoun's nullification movement.

Compare Jackson to our current crop of dissembling state legislators. That they dishonor themselves is without question. They also dishonor the men and women who gave their lives over the 223 year defense of The Constitution. Consider those Americans who currently defend our interests overseas. These "modern" nullifiers dishonor the very people they supposedly represent. Their deceitful use of the credulous is shameful, disgraceful and absolutely contrary to their obligations as American citizens and the oaths they swore to uphold the Constitution!

In a different time, their actions would be characterized with only one word.

Sedition.