MSNBC's Wagner Deliberately Distorts Santorum Swipe at Obama to Be Anti-College Tirade
If you were to believe MSNBC's Alex Wagner -- which, I'm sure you don't -- GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum is anti-college, believing the acquisition of higher education to be a mark of snobbery.
"Is it hypocritical, given Rick Santorum and the fact that he holds not one, not two, but three degrees -- more than the president, -- for him to allege that having a higher education is a form of snobbery?" Wagner pressed Santorum campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart on today's edition of Now with Alex Wagner. I don't know what they teach at Brown University, where Wagner went to college, but one hopes it has nothing to do with Wagner's deliberate mischaracterization of Santorum's recent swipe at President Obama.
Far from saying that being college-educated is form of snobbery, what the former Republican senator said at an Americans for Prosperity event on Saturday -- and Wagner's producers aired earlier in the segment -- was as follows (emphases mine):
SANTORUM, first clip: President Obama once said he wants everybody in America to go to college. What a snob!
SANTORUM, second clip: There are good, decent men and women who go out and work hard everyday and put their skills to test that aren't taught by some liberal college professor that [is] trying to indoctrinate them.
"Before we went to break, we were discussing Rick Santorum's latest comments equating wanting to send your children to four-year college with snobbery," Wagner repeated at the open of segment following the Stewart interview.
Wagner may disagree with Santorum's rhetoric on the campaign trail, but nothing in those remarks suggests that Santorum believes a college education in and of itself is snobby or that parents desiring to send their kids to college is snobby.
An Ivy League-educated journalist like Wagner should be able to accurately and fairly report on the news, even if she's offering commentary in disagreement with it.
"I dare say what you are characterizing as President Obama telling people what to do is also known as the American Dream," Wagner lectured Stewart after she defended her boss's criticism of President Obama. "Many people in this country think that sending their children to college is the achievement of something in this country," Wagner added.
As to Wagner's take on the American Dream, the Library of Congress might beg to differ, noting that historian James Truslow Adams coined the term in a 1931, defining the dream as one of "a social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position."
The essence of the American Dream is highly individualistic and divorced from European concepts of class hierarchy, Adams added, where the individual is "able to grow to fullest development... unhampered by the barriers which had been erected in older civilizations, unrepressed by social orders which had developed for the benefits of classes rather than for the simple human being of each and every class."
It's up to the individual, not a president or any politician, to decide what his or her "fullest stature" and "fullest development" is and to pursue it. That was Santorum's point and it fits perfectly with Adams's classical definition of the American Dream.
- Ken Shepherd's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Walk and chew?
Submitted by Franksam on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 5:26pm.
If everybody can do something, it's too easy.
It has nothing to do with
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 5:49pm.
It has nothing to do with ease or difficulty. Some people just don't want to go to college. Why should someone who chooses a vocational school to be a carpenter or a plumber be considered less successful than someone with a bachelor's degree in political science or art history?
Even if you want to...
Submitted by Franksam on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 7:18pm.
I'm not talking about wanting to do something. I'm talking about dumbing down college or anything else. For example, I wanted to play pro baseball, but I sucked. Maybe MLB needs to let me play and give me a free walk every fourth at bat, just so I can say that I got to first base. That would be an exciting game.
Many people cannot master trades. Besides, these days I'd consider the plumber and carpenter route to be more successful than poli-sci or art history. I'm not in favor of paying for stupid people to go to college, regardless of their dreams, and I don't want a stupid person working on my brakes, either.
No Republican can win in this
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 5:45pm.
No Republican can win in this media climate. If they don't think women should get birth control for free, they are "denying birth control to women." If they don't think every kid needs or wants to go to college, they are "anti-college."
According to Wagner and other liberals, apparently the ONLY way to get stature is from a college degree. Forget about recognizing one for what he is.
Media Climate
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 9:34pm.
"No Republican can win in this media climate." While difficult for a Republican to win in the current media climate, I think it's very do-able. Check out this recent poll in USA Today. If Rick Santorum can lead in a national poll, at this stage of the game, with the most negative press imaginable, then come this fall, it's very do-able for any Republican to beat Obama.
The interesting thing to postulate, would be that if the media was flipped upside down in it's coverage, would Obama even get 30% of the vote?
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Kingfish, I didn't mean a
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 9:47pm.
Kingfish, I didn't mean a Republican can't win the election; I meant can't win the battle of bias. No matter what they say, the media twist their words.
Thanks motherbelt
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 10:18pm.
Thanks for clearing that up, motherbelt. Your post did give me the perfect opportunity to link the USA Today poll, though.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
The campaign must be against the Media itself
Submitted by NL207 on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 9:46pm.
The MSM have aligned themselves with the most left wing elements of the Democratic party. To defeat the Democratic party is to break this Media's power to frame the debate. they are one and the same. In fact, the Democrats, the MSM and big government are one in the same. To defeat one they must all be defeated. This must be accomplished if Liberty is to survive in America.
I think Wagner has a
Submitted by kg on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 12:24am.
I think Wagner has a comprehension problem. You say one thing and she comprehends something completely different.
"DumbAssity of Dope"
Wag no more
Submitted by mmilesll on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 6:07pm.
This moron probably didn't get out of grade school and we are supposed to believe her? I think not.
Santorum made his point in a
Submitted by stratman on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 6:17pm.
Santorum made his point in a boneheaded way. It was red meat to the specific crowd he was talking to. I don't believe Santorum meant college is in itself snobbish. Nor have I seen proof that Obama meant if one doesn't go to college then you are less, including not a good and decent person.
Santorum got wound up and blurted out what he thought would work best for him. His 'snobbish' comment was pandering to that particular audience and was incorrect. While the angle of his attack was wrong, his intended message of a good and decent life is not determined by attendance in college is correct.
IMO, Santorum is calculating as are all politicians and more inartful than some, hence the explainations required to clarify actual missteps (not media-made tempests).
Simmer down, Rick. You've got the momentum, the polls and the message. Now look presidential.
I disagree.
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 9:49pm.
I think his "What a snob" comment was right on; nothing "boneheaded" about it. Liberals think a college degree is the minimum threshold for success.
The fact that it was tailored to that audience doesn't make it wrong.
It's education inflation. Entry level jobs that used to require a high school diploma and maybe some experience now require a college degree. Positiions that used to require a Bachelor's Degree now require a Master's.
Obama frequently implies that one "sine qua non" of middle class "success" is college education for one, and for one's kids. He never says "if they want to go."
Remedial Education
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 10:28pm.
And to expound on your points, motherbelt: Having a high school diploma is no guarantee that someone can read at a high school level. The amount of remedial education that goes on in college is extremely large, and sadly, purchased with lent money, when their public education should have taught those basic skills to begin with.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Baloney. There's nothing
Submitted by balboa on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 11:40pm.
Baloney. There's nothing snobby at all about wanting to provide everyone with a college education. Stratman is right. Santorum was pandering.
My Obligatory Comment
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 12:29am.
Per The NewsBusters TOS:
I don't know about this providing - giving without expense - everyone with a college education, but I do worry that you and I agreeing is a sign of the impending Apocalypse.
;-)
It is scary...
Submitted by balboa on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 8:25pm.
It is scary...
I Know People Will Disagree
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 12:09am.
I welcome other explanations and the potential to change my mind after reflection. Like Mark Levin says, I would vote for an orange juice can over Obama. Hell, I'd vote for Hillary over Obama. (yeah, it's that bad) So, while I will vote for Santorum in the General Election if he is the candidate, and he's ocean's apart better than Hillary or the orange juice can, I am not convinced he is the best choice to get the job done once in office.
Either Santorum came up with the snob comment on the fly or it was calculated in advance - and poorly performed. Either way, snarky comments in this type of setting - a political rally - are red meat pandering. I think you are spinning by calling it tailor made.
Using class warfare to denounce class warfare was childish. You might as well pull Hitler on Obama next because you're bag of tricks is running out. Santorum was going for reverse-snobbism which is like reverse-racism. It's still racism and it's still snobby. It was boneheaded because Obama has not said this and Rick did not need to go there to make his excellent point. Hence it was pandering.
Education inflation is not Obama's fault nor is it a reason to not go to college. Higher education has long been a means to get ahead in life, for majorities and minorities, rich, poor or middle class. It is not necessarily snobby to want more education let alone achieve it.
You may be correct that Obama is snobby on education, but I have difficulty finding him so because he didn't qualify his comments on higher education with "if they want to go". This is one time I will not take him to task for what he specifically did not say.
'Now with Alex Wagner.' 'Up with Chris Hayes.'
Submitted by SickofLibs on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 6:24pm.
I think MSNBC is onto something with this new short-names thing... they should follow thru with it on all the other shows...
'Vagina with Rachel Maddow'
'WTF? with Al Sharpton'
'Sproing! with Chris Matthews'
'Rayciss! with Martin Bashir'
'Nuts! with Larry O'Donnell'
'Embalm! with Andrea Mitchell'
'Unions! with Ed Schultz'
'Black! with Melissa Harris-Lacewell-Dom DeLuise-Perry'
"Another Point"
Submitted by mad53PA on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 6:26pm.
I have a son who is a senior in high school. I recently went to a "career open house" and one of the points made by more than one guidance and career counselor was this:
In today's economy, a college degree is no longer a guarantee of employment. If your son or daughter is considering a trade school or looking at other types of training for specific job requirements, don't discourage them.
The fact of the matter is that they would have an opportunity to have a skill that is in great demand today (electrician, plumber, mechanic etc).
Times have changed and Santorum is right. If I had to do it all over again, I would have found a trade. Hell, I have a friend who is an investment banker and lives large. Went to his home over the weekend and met some of his neighbors. One owned an asphalt company, and another had his own electrical contracting firm.
The only "snoot" here is Wagner.
This chick
Submitted by fivestring_assassin on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 6:34pm.
is a straight up idiot
This chick
Submitted by fivestring_assassin on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 6:34pm.
is a straight up idiot
Deliberate Distortions
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 7:51pm.
It's what the left does best. Just think of the good they could do if they put the same time and energy into positive activities. But, noooo, they choose to engage in the evil activity of creating harm.
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
I remember school back when
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 8:42pm.
I remember school back when trades were encouraged and college was an option. In fact the High school I went to had a drafting program and an auto mechanics and wood shops and metal shops. We also had three different classes of students. One for teh smart ones, one for the slow ones, not the retarded, and one for everyone else.
Back in my day
Submitted by mandrake on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 8:49pm.
You had to learn latin to become profoundly stupid.
The irony now...
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 8:52pm.
is that the kids in high school taking auto mechanics, plumbing, etc, are made fun of. Once they are out of school, they are the ones with jobs making fun of the college grads living in mom's basement with no jobs and a ton of debt.
Radical, your should qualify
Submitted by PaleHorse on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 10:08am.
Radical, your should qualify your comment a bit given your past statements. You failed to mention that the kids learning trades are successful with jobs...unless they're muslim and people like you refuse to use their services because you don't trust them. Right? You did just make this unbelievable admission about a mechanic on another thread.
Palehorse
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 10:21am.
I don't have to qualify/defend/explain/edit anything I said regarding the religion of (cutting people to) pieces. I have every right to patronize any business I want to for whatever reason I want to. At least for now.
Radical, of course you have
Submitted by PaleHorse on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 10:29am.
Radical, of course you have the right. If you want to refuse business to an establishment because of your own bigotry, that's your prerogative. Personally, I tend to judge services based on whether or not they are performed correctly and in a timely manner. The religion of the person performing those services never factors into the equation. That's just me though.
PalehorseI
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 10:40am.
Just don't expect to be a male nurse or doctor treating a female patient. They don't like that. Of course since women aren't supposed to be educated it makes health care difficult to obtain. Try reading "Not without My Daughter" for a peek into the lives of Muslim women. Then you might just understand why I feel there are enough mechanics around that I don't need to patronize one who belongs to a religion that treats women as without value.
Don't hold your breath , Radical....
Submitted by NC Cop on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 10:43am.
Palehorse has learned everything he needs to know about Muslims by watching the "Harold and Kumar" movies.
Radical, I wonder if you feel
Submitted by PaleHorse on Wed, 02/29/2012 - 10:24am.
Radical, I wonder if you feel the same way about the other religions that treat women as second class citizens.
BS
Submitted by CJohnson on Mon, 02/27/2012 - 11:29pm.
You don't need a college degree for half of the job's in existence, or more.
Higher education snobbery? Oh yes, it is there.
Submitted by drsamherman on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 12:21am.
We hear this all the time in medicine, where a physician who graduated from Harvard or Hopkins is assumed to be "better" practitioner. I am not saying both medical schools are not fine institutions, but their ratings as medical schools are based more on their research funding and number of academic physicians they produce and less on the quality of professional instruction they provide. Each physician is taught at a common level to attain licensure through the appropriate process. Each school or college of medicine is accredited to roughly the same standards. What is more important is the quality of post-graduate medical education and the ability of the physicians trained in those programs to produce outstanding clinical results. Academic medicine is about research grants, and it is a "bring in the dough or out you go" world. Sorry, but the majority of physicians did not attend medical school to be shut in a laboratory producing NIH grant applications and articles for journals.
The same type of academic snobbery exists in every profession, whether law, medicine, pharmacy, nursing, etc., but it is most pronounced in law and medicine. I am clinical faculty (e. g. the unpaid kind) at four medical schools in Texas. I train medical students and psychiatry and neurology residents alike, and I have been offered full time academic positions in the past. Problem is, at heart I am a clinician who likes treating patients and I am uninterested in the frippery that goes with the ivory tower. My patient load is roughly 75% higher than any given academic psychiatrist or neurologist holding a full time appointment, but at least I don't have to go begging for NIH money or play the political games they do.
Everyone Has To Pass The Boards
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 1:01am.
My opinion is certain schools facilitated learning with better prepared notes for the student and/or gifted lecturers. I recall wasting time finding information because the syllabus sucked, the lecturer sucked, the required textbook sucked, and the class note sucked. Example: Embryology. Maybe Harvard's Embryo sucked too. Then again, maybe it's Embryo that sucks no matter where you go. ;-)
For many, eventually it's what you do after graduating that counts with your peers, not what school you went to.
The following is for everyone. I'm sure DrSam's heard it.
Scary, huh?
The "teaching to the board" proposition?
Submitted by drsamherman on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 11:08am.
Not only scary, but much reflected in the newer medical schools which don't even bother trying to hide it. Any health care professional educational program which teaches just enough to pass the boards should have its accreditation re-assessed.
For those on the board who are not licensed professionals, the point of solid education in that profession is that it provides you with tools that facilitate life-long learning about new advances in science, new ways to apply the "art" of your profession as well as evaluating and proposing new ways and new considerations. The whole point of a profession is to advance the level of what you can do for your patient/client. It is NOT to pass the board and then good luck with the rest.
Strat: Embryo sucks wherever you go--unless you really love that stuff!
The Boards
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 6:47pm.
I meant that the Boards are the minimum one must perform in order to be a physician. I wasn't thinking at all about teaching to pass the test, but the phrase "you'll need to know this for the Boards" or some similar comment is not uncommon in schools. Additionally, the results of Step I of the current boards, or earlier iterations of the test, could be used to determine what subjects you need further study.
Teaching for the Boards would be a mistake. I agree it's about a foundation of knowledge, methods of assembling, filtering and applying knowledge, and honing the skills for life-long learning.
One of the worst instructors taught Embryo. We already had him in the anatomy lab. Never wore gloves. First day of Embryo he had several jars containing preservative and conceptuses which he plucked out with his bare hands to show the class. His lectures were confusing and his clarifications rarely clarified. His syllabus was nihilistic and worthless. His tests were abysmally written. The Unabomber's manifesto made more sense. Student dissatisfaction was commonplace and stretched over years. Administration was aware. He probably had tenure and/or good money grants.
It's campaign season and money talks, but demagoguery
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 02/28/2012 - 1:21pm.
is the real coin of the realm. And Santorum seems determined not to be outspent in that category:
The Facts
Obama’s statement on college education, made in his first speech to a joint session of Congress in 2009, is easy to check. The president, noting the success of the GI Bill after World War II, said the United States should seek to once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world:
“And so tonight, I ask every American to commit to at least one year or more of higher education or career training. This can be community college or a four-year school; vocational training or an apprenticeship. But whatever the training may be, every American will need to get more than a high school diploma. And dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It’s not just quitting on yourself, it’s quitting on your country — and this country needs and values the talents of every American.”
Hmm…that sounds like Obama is talking about more than just a four-year college; he simply says “one year or more” and includes community college, vocational training or an apprenticeship on his list of possibilities.
Indeed, compare Obama’s 2009 quote with this one:
“There's technical schools. There's additional training, vocational training. There's skills and apprenticeships. There's all sorts of things that people can do to upgrade their skills, to be very productive and great workers here in America who provide for their families and build their community.”
That actually wasn’t Obama; it was Santorum, offering his alternative to college on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.” We have a hard time discerning much of a difference, and Santorum’s campaign did not respond to a request for an explanation. [my bold]
True, the preceding is provided by the Washington Post. But I have yet to see a shred of evidence corroborating Santorum's version, viz., Obama the Snob..."want[ing] everybody...to go to college" [so they can be indoctrinated by liberal professors].
Jer
Good grief,
Submitted by Boudin on Wed, 02/29/2012 - 8:59am.
God forbid someone questions the liar in chief. For as much bs the dimwits dish out, your skin is rice paper thin.
Your comparison fall way short,,, again. Obama has said I want them to have the chance to go to college—even if their parents aren't rich.
You libs want to use our facilities of education, to produce more brain dead morons. Why else do you feel the need to control every aspect of it, why else are they complete failures? Why else do leftist file lawsuit after lawsuit when local communities what to take control of their kids education.
Sorry, Boudin...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 02/29/2012 - 11:01pm.
But in this case Santorum proved to be the liar in chief...a point which the Parade article merely reinforces. So, thanks for linking it.
By the way, even Charles Krauthammer believes Santorum's recent foot-in-mouth statements cost him the win in Michigan's primary:
“You know that attack on Kennedy, the speech he made in 1960 on religion, and Santorum said it made him want to throw up. He talked about college, the fact that he said Obama was trying to push it for everyone that reflected elitism, snobbery, and indoctrination. There’s a point there about liberal higher education but it was extreme and overstated,” Krauthammer continued. “And on contraception, an issue which has been decided, settled in the country a half century ago, he’s on the wrong side of that. And you saw that in the women’s vote! Santorum came dead even on the men vote. And the women’s vote he lost by 5% and that’s what cost him the election. And I think you saw that reflected in the speech he made. What did he talk about? His mother, his wife, and his daughter, and he spoke about them as independent and professional trying to undo the damage he had done in the gender gap. So I think that remains the story. Santorum had his shot. He will have one more shot I think in Ohio. but again, Romney, slow, steady, unspectacular, is the one who sort of remains standing when all the wind blows away and the sand disappears.”
Maybe you should take your "paper thin" argument up with Dr. Krauthammer and let him school you.
Jer
Obama and his followers..
Submitted by uhohshortsonthe... on Wed, 02/29/2012 - 7:48am.
...remind me of the high school guidance counselors I dealt with all the time when I was an Army recruiter. They tried to push every single kid into college, even semi-worthless community colleges, just to meet some status for the school. Never mind that in some of the schools, maybe 50% of the graduates would even remotely be considered college material. They always showed disdain for those students who just wanted to continue vo-tech training and get a skilled laborer job.