The fight for our culture and our children

Reading: The De-valuing of America "The Fight for our culture and our children" by William J.Bennett. The following paragraph(s) give a clear and concise argument regarding the liberal elite and their worldview.
As I read this, the thought process of many in our nations Capital, media and education circles have become clear to me.
This is no longer a scuffle between Democrats and Republicans. It has become a fight to tear down the very fabric of our culture and rebuild it in the liberal elite mindset. The result has dire consequences.

________________________________________________________
Bill Bennett writes:
Make no mistake. By elites I do not mean registered Democrats. The elite are people who, unlike the rank and file Democratic party I came from, are often not at home with the traditional beliefs of most Americans; they tend to be skeptical and mistrustful of American society. Their measure is not simply the extent to which our society falls short of realizing its ideals,but sometimes the wholesale rejection of American ideals. Marked by alienation, suspicion and doubt, the liberal elite call into question what is commonly thought of as "the American dream."
From what I have observed, the liberal elite proceed from a certain social and political predisposition. The predisposition tends to be an adopted orientation, not a conclusion based on evidence and argument. When you sift through their arguments,you will often find that modern-day academics and intellectuals (which many elites fancy themselves to be, or long to be) have arrived at their positions not, ironically, through intellect, through open-ended, disinterested thinking and inquiry, but through disposition, sentiment, bias, and ideology.Many intellectuals are predisposed to accept certain premises and arguments- a preconceived reality.They search for facts to sustain their political position.The approach is (as philosopher Karl Jaspers said of Marx's writings) "one of vindication, not investigation" Serious public debate is therefore a casualty, since they are not likely to change their minds on the basis of compelling empirical arguments. Their starting point is not evidence but ideology. They are undeterred by what Thomas Huxley called "the tragedy of a fact killing a theory."
Another motivation of critics of American practices is status.They hope to achieve reputations, among other elites especially, for being original,deep thoughtful and unconventional. Odi profanum vulgus ("I hate the vulgar crowd") is a fitting slogan. If the middle class likes it- be it conventional morality, patriotism,Ronald Reagan,or even Rocky, light beer, cookouts,or Disney World-that alone is enough for many of the elites to disdain it, often with an aura of self-assured moral and intellectual superiority. The goal of life is the acquisition of the "advanced" attitudes,in contrast to ( in the view) the more crass, unsophisticated, simplistic attitudes of the middle class,of most Americans.
At a gathering of the elite, an often performed ritual is to mention a derided object or individual,followed by a superior laugh and roll of the eyes. As the novelist Tom Wolfe has pointed out, oftentimes in the eighties, when elites met, they didn't make arguments against Ronald Reagan or his policies, they simply mentioned his name and snickered.
These deep divisions go a long way toward explaining differences in public policy and the tenor and shape of contemporary public discourse. By virtue of their influence much of the debate on social and domestic policy, include matters such as education, drugs, AIDS, abortion, sexual norms, race relations, welfare and poverty, economics, law and the arts. This confluence has had its effect. "elites abandoned the ethic of character," George will has written, "an ethic that encouraged and even enforced right conduct." This abandonment has consequences.