|
![Hoodwinked!]()
Hoodwinked! (2005)
IMDB rating: 6.70
Plot: The “Little Red Hiding Hood” fairytale gets an imaginative update. After The Wolf (Patrick Warburton) is found at Granny’s charged with an intent to eat an investigation starts up by Nick Fippers (David Odgen Stiers). Red (Anne Hathaway), The Wolf (Warburton), The Woodsman (Jim Beluchi) and Granny (Glenn Close) give their stories, Flippers and Cheif Grizzly (Xzibit) and the rest of the police try to find out who is the Goodie Bandit. Bill: Anthony Anderson, Twitchy: Cory Edwards, Boingo: Andy Dick.
|
Directors: Edwards Cory, Edwards Todd, Leech Tony
Actors: Belushi James,Warburton Patrick,Anderson Anthony,Stiers David Ogden,Xzibit,Palminteri Chazz,Dick Andy,Edwards Cory,Edwards Todd,Edwards Tye,Gaither Benjy,Greene Joshua J.,Marino Ken,Animation,Family,Comedy,
Conservatives who are poor: don't you realize that voting democrat is in your self-interest?
In "What’s the Matter with Kansas" Thomas Frank argued that the GOP successfully hoodwinks poor whites into voting against their self-interest. The GOP’s economic policies favor the well-off. But they get poor people to vote for them by luring them in with ‘red-meat’ culture issues: abortion, guns, god, etc.
I find this explanation quite plausible myself. But I’d like to hear from some poor GOP voters. Why do you vote for a political party that so obviously caters to the interests of the powerful rather than the powerless?
@ sophist: I disagree. The question is about political philosophy, and so is appropriately placed.
@ James C: Actually, I have a Master’s degree in philosophy and am about to get a PhD in political philosophy, so I think I understand the definition of the term "philosophy". 
I’m middle class, and not a conservative, but I will offer up an answer none-the-less.
Not everyone views "self-interest" in totally economic terms. For some people, principles actually do matter more than finances. For some people, gun rights ARE self-interest. For others, god IS self-interest. Some people DEFINE their own self-interests in terms other than that the author is trying to define for them.
Some people will happily take a policy that taxes rich people less if it is packaged with a promise not to restrict gun ownership, especially if they hope to some day be rich and benefit from the one policy in the long term while benefiting from the other in the immediate term.
It is sad and short-sighted to assume that everyone’s definition of self interest is the same as the author’s. And proof that the author probably doesn’t understand many of the people he is writing about. He’s trying to foist a definition of self-interest on to them that they do not define the same way for themselves.
If you ever want to come to a true understanding of an opposition group then you *mus*t understand the group AS THEY UNDERSTAND THEMSELVES, not as you think they should be or should think or should feel according to your own mores and values and desires.
You are trying to do that by asking the question of the group in question, and good for you, but you could probably get a better response in the political forums than you would here.
Wesley B | Nov 25, 2009
they make promises to all those pore people.
promises they can’t fullfill.
MISTRSMART. | Nov 25, 2009
Wrong section! This belongs is politics or political science.
Sophist | Nov 25, 2009
Poor people don’t want to compromise morals.
But rich democrats sure do.
Gabe | Nov 25, 2009
So now go buy Glenn Beck "Arguing with Idiots" nuff said……………………..
Griz | Nov 25, 2009
Paychecks come from the well-off, not from government handouts.
So yeah, economic policies which favor the well-off are in my best interest as a poor conservative.
Poor as in I lost my job two years ago as a residential carpenter and have not been able to find work anywhere. Also, I did not know that I had a deadline to file for unemployment so I missed that deadline and have spent two years with no benefits.
That indicates how often I file for unemployment-I did not know that I had a deadline to meet.
catharsis | Nov 25, 2009
When I was a young man, I could remain at home and be far better off (at least until I wore out my welcome), or I could move out and face the slings and arrows of life.
I moved out.
Now why would I move out when living at home and eating my mom’s Mac & Cheese would have been in my personal self-interest? Same reason I favor the conservative economic philosophy.
Houston, we have a problem | Nov 25, 2009
Religion is a powerful thing.
And I think, even if you yourself are poor, you might believe in survival of the fittest in republican terms.
Styx | Nov 25, 2009
Do not come to this section again until you ask an educated person the definition of philosophy
James C | Nov 26, 2009
I would probably vote democrat if it weren’t for those ‘red meat’ culture issues.
But the demacratic party should be the one changing for me, not the other way around.
That’s why I vote indepenetly and avoid biases party lines, that way, I vote that the government goes in my interests.
Edit: Oh yes, and I have to agree with whoever said it before me, this is not the political section. It’s the philosophical section. Although this does kind of have a philosophical ring to it, it should be under politics.
KingFrog. | Nov 26, 2009
GHO$T | Feb 03, 2010
Leon Bass