I've taken a couple of days to ruminate on Barack Obama's “bitter” comment and the ensuing “elitist” controversy before offering comment. Obviously, in strictly electoral terms his remark was a stupid thing to say, whether true or not and whether he meant it or not. Obama has to learn to check his impulses; sometimes you get the sense that he has such an inner confidence that he simply doesn’t think he’s prone to error. He is.
Which brings me to what we're really talking about here: arrogance, not elitism--a distinction that seems to have escaped many in the media. (The conservative media is not confused at all, of course, cheerily doing John McCain's bidding for him by echoing the “elitist” theme as often as possible; the gang at FOX News has been wetting themselves lately.) I worked sanding wood floors during college summers alongside guys who were high school dropouts, living paycheck to paycheck, often with a variety of low-level legal troubles. And some of them were quite confident about themselves, their confidence often bordering on arrogance. And there are plenty of high-status people who are humble, even timid to the point of being self-abnegating. The point is that a poor man can be arrogant and a rich woman humble, but only an elite can be elitist; it is a class distinction, by definition.
The irony here is that Obama comes from a more modest background is of far more modest means today than most senators, including both of his remaining presidential competitors from that august (read: elitist) body. Still, he has a sometimes-perceptible arrogant streak, something that I didn't notice initially but was pointed out to me by several (non-Hillary supporting) women. And though his successes in life -- professional and personal -- surely warrant a level of confidence few people are entitled to project, he needs to dial that confidence back just one notch when it approaches the tipping point toward arrogance. If Obama learns any lesson from this episode, it ought to be that.
--Tom Schaller