I think i figured it out, let me know what you think,
this stereotype (above stated) married, some waited until sex for marriage, and live a simple life of conformity. They are being bombarded with the sexual nature of our pop culture. This reminds them of what they may have lost by marrying so young and nieve. By now they have kids and can not leave the situation, so they suck closer to the church that reminds them what good people they are. This pride is all they have left after losing so much of life to a mate. They were willing and easy targets for bush to rally as they repress their sexual nature and hate people that are not of the same beliefs. Given that society has evolved to the idea that multiple relationships creates a well learned person. This explains why they were so blinded, by his no-gay, no-abortion attitudes, as this sterotype wants more than anything to be doing the right thing, by marriage and conformity, despite culture showing them the opposite.
2007-03-15 22:21:37 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
the Q was do you see this stereotype as a tool for bush to rally support
2007-03-15 22:46:38 · update #1
By jove I think you've got it!
I've also noticed that Bush supporters that I know are generally depressed people, focusing on the negative constantly (in their personal lives, I mean) Have you seen the movie Jesus Camp yet? It's only going to get worse. The lady on there that runs this camp says she actually admires how the Muslims train their kids at a young age to die for their God, she wants to inspire Christian youth to be just as fanatical (but it's okay, because her God is the right one) It's so scary I can hardly stand it.
And yes, I do feel that Bush uses this as a tool, it's blatantly obvious to those without blinders on.
2007-03-15 22:26:17 · answer #1 · answered by Just Me 2 · 2⤊ 5⤋
It's just what it says it is- a stereotype. Maybe somewhat accurate but never truly accurate. I didn't vote for Bush and I fit a small portion of your stereotype. I support him as president even if I don't agree with all he does because I believe in and love my country. Much of the statement is hypothetical & assumes way too much. I like to believe that I'm way too complicated as a person to fit neatly into any catagory and I believe that most people are likewise hard to catagorize.
2007-03-15 22:31:41 · answer #2 · answered by George 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Supreme Court chose Bush the first time and Madison Avenue along with Rove's dirty tricks prevailed the second.
2007-03-16 00:31:24 · answer #3 · answered by emiliosailez 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the quick answer could be no, in a unusual experience. Our representatives have spent money at a undeniable fee for years. they have taxed the inhabitants at a fee that brings in an volume of money that does no longer cover that spending. and it is the reason we've a deficit. So ... we needless to say might desire to decide. Are we spending too plenty, no longer taxed adequate, or the two? it rather is possibly a mixture of the two. maximum people do no longer enjoyed to be taxed heavily, certainly, yet in addition they want a honest volume of things and centers. they want the streets plowed, the roads flat, the police stress at artwork, the parks open, etc. in addition they want some thing of a protection internet for people who won't have the ability to help themselves (the dimensions of the internet varies). So -- enable's settle for it -- many want centers yet do no longer want to pay for it. i do no longer want to pay a dime extra effective than I might desire to pay. i want government centers introduced effectively. and that i want the government to pay because it is going, different than interior the time of national emergency. is this concept that complicated for legislators?
2016-10-18 12:33:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The no-abortion, no-stem cell research, no-gay thing SCREAMS religious involvements. I say this, if the church wants a place in this government, it should be forced to pay taxes just like any other money making business.
Most of these folks on the right (politicians) who say that all these things are immoral, are very unlikely to believe this way when away from the pulpit, and probably couldn't define moral if you asked them.
2007-03-15 22:27:31 · answer #5 · answered by trevor22in 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
wrong they have a brain and use it. they do not need validation by their peers to know right from wrong. they enjoy life and do not have to lower themselves to that of a mongrel dog and then convince themselves that they follow pop culture.Those people understand the concept of holding themselves responsible for their actions and that takes courage.
2007-03-15 22:33:11 · answer #6 · answered by neoconammo 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Bush is an idiot but his network stole two elections and took the USA to war. The USA gets leaders it deserves.
Repression works in mysterous ways!
USA citizens willingly gave up rights due to fear and want to be called and known as "Patriots". Pathetic.
2007-03-15 22:25:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
Nice statement, but I see no question!
2007-03-15 22:33:52 · answer #8 · answered by cantcu 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋