Calling those with whom they disagree stupid

They say it with alacrity and confidence: Sharron Angle is stupid and ignorant. She doesn’t know the Constitution or history.

They say it smugly and without feeling the need to proffer a shred of evidence. They just know.

Scott Dickensheets was the latest to hoot at the Tea Party crowd and heap ridicule by accusing voters of “celebrating candidates and figureheads who espouse nut job views, reject legitimate expertise, embrace ignorance.”

Mark Warren, who co-wrote Harry Reid’s book “The Good Fight,” piled on with a piece in Esquire:

“Are the positions espoused and policies promised by the ‘Tea Party’ movement and by its candidates coherent? Beneficial? Ruinous? Stark raving mad?

“Instead, we have allowed Angle to blather away the finer points of her lunacy, meekly accepting her insulting nonsense that she was taken out of context (is there a proper context for threats of armed insurrection because you're a sore loser?), or her equally insulting diatribes against a press that she feels has it in for her. If only we were truly deserving of that complaint. Because the truth is, of course, that we don't have it in for her nearly enough.”

In April, that press in the form of The New York Times reported on a survey that found self-identified members of the Tea Party movement are wealthier and better educated than the general public, but the lefties persist in their assumption that they are just ignorant rubes because they disagree with them.

Warren unleashed a torrent of name-calling based on this premise, calling Angle “ignorant and paranoid and displeased at the very existence of government, and is objectively speaking a halfwit …”

Angle is ignorant of the Constitution? On a certain television show she revealed a better grasp on the document and history than her questioner.

Jon Ralston asked Angle about separation of church and state. “You know that is in the Constitution,” he flatly stated, almost screaming in indignation.

She replied, “Actually Thomas Jefferson has been misquoted like I’ve been misquoted out of context.” She went on to say Jefferson was telling a church that a wall of separation between the church and the state is to protect the church from the state.

The Establishment Clause does not “separate” the state and religion.

Disagree with their interpretation and you are stupid. Offer a solution to problems that don’t involve another federal government program and deficit spending, you are an ignorant, stark raving nut. Speaking of raving: