It is a point of agreement, generally, that a healthy Republic--or a democracy--has as a prerequisite an educated electorate. Few would contend that the state of education in the United States is in nothing short of a deplorable condition (we can argue why on some other occasion), it is nothing short of amazing that the most educated in this country are also those who seem to rely most on emotive fear as a key motivation for their political views.

The recent attacks on Sarah Pelin, and the Middle America she represents, I find astounding. In particular, the shrill yawlp by Matt Damon, obviously quaking in his boots at the prospect of a religious person in the White House, "with the nuclear codes," epitomizes the far left's failure to recognize their own beliefs as a religion. While the Hollywood elite represent only a component part of those who fear a Bush-Cheney-McCain-Pelin theocracy, the view echoes also in academia and among those left-wing supporters of the Democratic party.

It is frankly ridiculous that any Republican would institute anything like a theocracy in the United States. Certainly there are those who would, but they are not found amongst the Middle America supporters of Sarah Pelin or even the unpopular Bush administration.  Republicanism is all about maximizing liberty, which has as a prerequisite a respect for diverse expression. But as my wife is so fond of saying, "the First Ammedment does not protect one from being offended--in fact, precisely the opposite is true. It virtually guarantees that everyone will be in some way offended."

But being offended does not convey, as the Left so often proposes, a right to be free from hearing contrary opinions. In supporting such anathema as the so-called "fairness" doctrine--and the use of Leninist redefinition to control the argument is obvious here--they prove just how uninterested they are in the cornerstone of American democracy--the right of free speech. The Republican idea is to provide the freedom of all caring citizens to participate, leaving the free market of ideas to sort the good ideas from the bad.

But there is a problem. When education breaks down, messianic demogoguery can replace reasoned debate. This perhaps partially explains the emotive foundation for political party affiliation in our country, because those who are largely uneducated will fall for any pap with great promises, regardless of its basis in fact. This accounts, I believe, for Obama's popularity, his messianic image that stands not so much on its own but for the hatred of the Left for the Bush Administration.

Why, then, are the most educated in this country the most suceptible to his empty messages? I would submit that those who are the most educated in this country are so specialized in their pursuit of knowledge that they lose perspective. Many of those who are educated believe, like Woodrow Wilson, that humans have somehow evolved beyond war and violence. The Bush Administration, in this view, in its readiness to commit the United States to war, is less highly evolved than they simply because the President and his advisors view state violence as a legitimate tool of policy. But their opposition, amongst a rational elite, should be expressed as a rational debate. This isn't the case, however--they argue instead based on fear and hatred (Perhaps the hatred comes from a fear of war and violence). But it comes across not as argument, but hatred.

Hatred and fear. These are old, tribal emotions that have been with us since the dawn of time. It is possible, perhaps, that Middle America, in pursuing the joy and advancement of their families have aligned themselves not with the overwhelming negative emotive message of the modern Democratic party but with the messages of hope, the belief in the strength of our country and our system?

Like most zealots, Matt Damon and those like him fail to recognize the extremity of their position and see all those who disagree not only as wrong, but as dangerous. It has been often observed that the most unforgiving and unyielding point on the modern American political spectrum is the far left, which labels all contrary opinion with its own brush--as zealotry.

So long as our educational system lies in tatters, the risk of demogoguery from either the right or the left is potent, particularly in days of challenge that await an increasingly dangerous world. While the vast center is generally silent in political debate, it looks like Sarah Pelin has solidly connected and, if the numbers are right, has tapped into that reserve of common sense from Middle America that Obama, Matt Damon and those like him so despise.