Could someone explain to me why being educated is apparently a bad thing?

Because during the election I recall people mentioning how smart and well spoken Obama was and then stating that was his problem.
 
The recent surge in anti-intellectualism has also left me shocked. It was intellectuals who founded this country (no not Christians) and intellectuals that made it a great nation. No, they weren't perfect and some of them were scoundrels.

But most were great men from diverse backgrounds. I think the tide is turning now and smart is once again chic.
 
It seems to be widely held in America that education is for the purpose of making money, and serves no other purpose. Conservatives especially seem to resent educated candidates for public office. They like to pretend that Republican candidates are speaking about their interests when they talk about protecting business and lowering taxes, when in fact, they regard them as ignorant nobodies who need to stay out of the business of running government.
 
Being educated is not a bad thing.

I voted for Obama, but honestly... I'm regretting it. He's making me nervous with his policies. He's bringing "Change" as promised, but I don't think I welcome this "change"...

Are you dwelling on the election just because there is not much good to say about him now?

:(
 
There is a contingent in this country that is completely anti-intellectual and anti-education. We see them in here everyday. It's hard to take them seriously when their very platform comes from their own uneducated ignorance. They spew crap like saying all colleges are liberal-making factories and our schools are aimed at destroying "traditional" values and morals. Of course they completely miss the fact that the conservative politicians they love and worship attended those same colleges and schools. Basic logic gets right past them and shows them up for what they really are: uneducated themselves and full of fear of anyone else who is properly educated.

EDIT:
Jam_Til:
There was already precedent in having to lower the pay rate in order to name Clinton to SOS. Nixon did it for his Attorney General, and I imagine that as a Constitutional law expert that Obama understands the word "precedent" quite well.

And you missed Olbermann's whole point (imagine that). He was making a point about how busy the President of the United States is, and how, if Bush was telling the truth, he would have had to read 2-3 books a week to make that number he claimed. That lends itself to wondering just what the hell Bush was doing that he had so much time for reading. I work over 8 hours a day, am a quick and avid reader and only have time to put about a book a week away. The President's day is much fuller than mine of course. Get the point? Fiction or non-fiction had exactly zero to do with it, or saying that Bush read too much. Should I make assumptions about your own level of education? It might not be too hard considering your claim that Obama is a Marxist/socialism fan.
 
Back
Top