And not just stupid, but arrogantly and pridefully stupid, where they look down upon those who worked hard and studied hard and got an education to better themselves, their families, and their futures. As an aside, I have nothing but hateful contempt for anyone, whether they are downstate or not, who disdains education. (They refer to the educated as the “elite” or the “establishment,” by the way).
Anyway, the arrogant and prideful idiots who are now Teabagger candidates throughout this country are being exposed for the idiots they are. Sarah Palin was exposed in 2008 and has been repeatedly exposed every time she has opened her mouth since. Christine O’Donnell was most recently exposed yesterday. Sharon Angle, Joe Miller, Jan Brewer, and several other teahadists have shown their ignorance and unintelligence often on the campaign trail.
The latest to do so is Jon Runyan, the former Philadelphia Eagle. In his debate last night with freshman Rep. John Adler (D-NJ), he was asked for “an example from the last 10 or 15 years of a Supreme Court decision in which you strongly disagree?” Runyan’s response?
Decided in 1857.
Sigh.
I mean come on.
It is obvious what happened here. Right wingers have, for years, going back to at least George W. Bush in 2000, used the term “Dred Scott” as a dogwhistle to the anti-choice radical right, showing somehow they are against abortion. So Runyan was probably using the Dred Scott decision in that vein. I have never understood this point, because the Dred Scott decision affirmed the practice of slavery, and if you are anti-choice, you are for taking away the reproductive freedoms of hundreds of millions of women, forcing them into a slavery all their own. Regardless, I am glad at the very least Runyan knew enough to know Dred Scott was a decision he disagreed with.
But he really should stop thinking about his memorized talking points while the question is being asked, and start listening to the question. If he had done that, perhaps he would have known the question was looking for a response during the last 15 years. I mean, we can forgive mentioning a decision that is relatively recent, like say Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1990 or Roe v. Wade in 1973 or Bowers v. Hardwick in 1986. But Dred Scott from 153 years ago? Really Jon?
This is becoming an epidemic. If I were a national Teapublican, I would immediately order a 12 hour Constitutional law class for all teabagger candidates everywhere. Because obviously these candidates have never learned on their own what is in the Constitution. They are not intellectually curious enough to pay attention to the news about recent Supreme Court decisions. And the reason why that is is because they have been adherents to a political ideology that disdains education and intelligence. And the reason why that is so is because education and intelligence reveals their ideology to be at best flawed and at worst failed.