Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
With an appropriate disclaimer that I would give the same sex ed that you would, you're sounding like that guy who wrote "What's The Matter With Kansas", in which he says that all the red-staters voted against their own interests, but in which he made the mistake of thinking that he knew what their interests were as well as they did. I think they might say that you are judging by the wrong criteria.
|
I haven't read the book, as it seems somewhat cheesy. But I saw the author on the Daily Show (for a few minutes -- like most people, he gives a crappy interview on that show) and got the impression that he says that the "red staters" voted against their
economic interests.* Not against their interests overall, or more accurately not against what they define as their interests.
Kind of what the Romans called "bread and circuses."**
*I'm not sure I agree with him on that, either. Response one would be "farm subsidies." Response 2 would be "you think the blue-staters will let the red states keep sucking on the federal teat forever if they could do anything about it?"
**Not really, but I like saying "bread and circuses." It's the ancient equivalent of tits and beer.
