WITH GOP PRESIDENTIAL WANNABE MIKE HUCKABEE MAKING NO SECRET OF HIS SUPPORT BASE being, by and large, what could best be called "Wally World Republicans" as opposed to "Wall Street Republicans," perhaps it would be best to define what constitutes a "Wally World Republican."

For the obvious, expect such to be low-class "white trailer park trash," to use the vernacular.

Drawing it out some, your typical "Wally World Republican" can expect to be:

• Lower-working-class socioeconomically, usually blue collar unskilled or semi-skilled with little or no realistic potential for advancement.
• More than likely resident in lower-income or otherwise economically-disadvantaged communities with latent socioeconomic complacency in unskilled blue-collar manufacturing as the socioeconomic foundation, or otherwise unlikely to attract real jobs for fear of "destabilising the established industrial base." Said complacency making these same communities all the more vulnerable to exploitation by carpetbagger types in the "home business," "work-from-home" and "gifting club" arenas.
• Unlikely to come to terms with the changing socioeconomic paradigm, having been brought up more than likely in a time when unskilled manufacturing jobs predominated and the socioeconomic paradigm favoured export-based models "to protect American jobs."
• Educationally-speaking, more than likely to read and comprehend @ a 4th- to 6th-grade level, and all the more likely to have their children homeschooled based on apartheid South Africa's syllabus of Nasionale Christen Opverdoing, placing idealised "values" above core skills with clear and present risk of developing warped ideals.
• Unlikely to have due regard for "getting their money's worth" (as in emphasising the useful and practical) in their shopping, as opposed to getting what they want cheap above all else.
• Especially likely to have been brought up in an abusive, broken or otherwise dysfunctional home, with episodes of physical and/or sexual abuse (including incest) inflicted by parents and/or siblings and all the more likely to wind up abusing wife and/or children themselves, excusing such as "Christian Love" if and when pressed to explain. Said upbringing also developing a latent contempt for State welfare based on such only "contributing to moral weakness and lapse" notwithstanding repeated studies disproving such an interconnexion.
• Notwithstanding latent objections to homosexuality, "Wally World Republicans" are all the more likely to bond with fellow males for the sake of their own hubris-laden machismo, drinking beer, swapping dirty stories and discussing all manner of lurid "conspiracies" brought up on conservative talkback radio over recent days, among other adventures in political incorrectness.
• Holding Amerikanischer Realkultur to be Morally Superior to All Other Kultur, notwithstanding their objections to violence, "obscenity," "indecency," "miscegenation" and "unscreupulous Jewish control and influence upon the New York-Hollywood Axis of Evil;" more than likely to regard Branson, MO to be The True Centre of Amerikanischer Realkultur in a "pure" and idealised form.
• About their only interests the "Wally World Republican" is likely to have on their horizon are DIY home and automotive projects, trashy films and TV shows, sport (especially so NASCAR and so-called "professional wrestling"), sexually-suggestive jokes and stories, beer, junk food and xenophobically jingoistic patriotism.
• Patriotic feelings in the element are all the more likely to be such which regard Old Glory to be some class of a Holy and Sacred Icon With Supposedly Sacred and Mystical Powers (cf. Nazi Germany's treatment of the swastika flag as an icon of Hope and Salvation for the Aryan Master Race) and America being the Portal and Gateway to Heaven, not to mention Center of the World, the Universe and the 28 Known Galaxies--in other words, a xenophobically isolated brand rivalled in depravity only by North Korea and the so-called "Union of Myanmar" (a/k/a Burma).
• Regarding deliberate ignorance and stupidity as virtuous.

Thus defines the "Wally World Republican."

=============

AND TALK ABOUT DIVINE JUDGEMENT OF THE HIGHEST ORDER, come to think of it: Hours after GOP Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee won "Super Tuesday" primaries or caucuses in Alabama, Arkansas and Tennessee, those same states (not to mention parts of Louisana and Mississippi as are all the likely to support the Huckabee campaign) were hit by a series of tornadoes as have caused (to the moment I write this) some 50 deaths, hundreds of injuries and considerable property damage.

=============

SOMETHING FOR THE ELMER GANTRY CROWD TO THINK ABOUT IN EXPLOITING LATENT HOMOPHOBIA among these same "Wally World Republicans" in particular, by way of Britain's Advertising Standards Authority taking issue with a mobile billboard campaign by the "Christian Congress for Traditional Values:"

Ad
A mobile poster for the Christian Congress for Traditional Values (CCTV) showed a family consisting of a man, a woman and a young son and daughter.  Body copy beside it stated "GAY AIM: ABOLISH THE FAMILY."  CCTVs website address was printed beneath the body copy and a banner across the picture of the family identified CCTV and showed a logo.

Issue
The complainant believed the ad suggested all gay people were against families and family values.  He challenged whether:

1. this was an accurate representation of the views of gay people and

2. the ad was likely to cause serious or widespread offence or condone anti-social behaviour.

Response
1.  CCTV said they believed the common understanding in the UK of what constituted a family was a married man and woman, both of whom had been born in that gender, and their children.  They believed this understanding stemmed from the UK being a traditionally Christian country with the concept of a family being rooted in Judeo-Christian principles.

They believed the homosexual community was represented in the media and in the consciousness of the population at large by a public campaign for legislative and moral change, and that the ad represented their views in a factually accurate way.  CCTV believed it was legitimate for them to state their opinion that these were the views of the public campaign.  They did not believe the ad suggested that all gay people shared those views.  They believed the campaigners who sought same-sex marriage did not do so simply to achieve the same domestic situation that was available to heterosexuals but also because they aimed to redefine and abolish the traditional family.  They said it was that aim to which the poster referred.  CCTV cited the 1971 Gay Liberation Front Manifesto documents which described the traditional family unit (husband, wife and children) as working against homosexuality, and which stated "We must aim at the abolition of the family."  CCTV said that other aims listed in the 1971 Gay Liberation Front Manifesto and which had resulted in legislative or social changes included the teaching of homosexuality in schools; equalising the age of consent for homosexuals and heterosexuals; using the media to detract from the traditional family as the norm and introducing legislation to prevent discrimination against homosexuals in the workplace.  CCTV cited a similar manifesto published by the National Coalition of Gay Organisations in the USA in 1972, and several authors, individual campaigners and organisations who had publicly stated similar aims in the UK and abroad to illustrate how widely held they believed the views were.

2.  CCTV said their claim was their genuinely-held belief for which they believed they had provided adequate substantiation.  They believed it was legitimate for them to highlight their concern that traditional Christian family values and religious liberty were threatened by the legislative changes homosexual groups campaigned for, and that there was a place in a democratic society for views both for and against to be expressed.  They believed the potential for the ad to cause offence was minimal because the aim to redefine the concept of the family was so widely and openly acknowledged by the homosexual community.  They acknowledged the ad might have caused offence or irritation or was unwelcome to people who disagreed with the statement but they did not believe the reaction was so widespread as to make it unacceptable.  They said they did not intend the ad to result in violent reaction or antisocial behaviour.

Assessment
1.  Upheld
The ASA noted CCTV's argument that they believed it was legitimate that their ad represented their point of view and considered CCTV was flagged clearly as the author of the ad.  We considered, however, that in the absence of information to the contrary, the statement was likely to be understood to represent the prevailing view of the gay community.  We noted the evidence CCTV provided indicated that some sections of the gay community had spoken out strongly against the traditional concept of the family.  We also noted, however, that the evidence was based mainly on a document published by the Gay Liberation Front, a radical gay group which disbanded nearly 30 years ago.  We noted that the language used and claim made in the ad did not appear to reflect the stance taken by today's mainstream campaigns by the gay community which expressed a desire for the responsibilities of gay people caring for children to be equal with those of heterosexual people.  We also noted that a family unit today was increasingly less likely to necessarily comprise a married man and woman and their children.  We considered CCTV had not supported the claim.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 8.1 (Matters of opinion).

2.  Upheld
We noted CCTV's argument that they believed it was legitimate that they were permitted to express their genuinely held beliefs.

As noted in point 1 above, we considered the statement was likely to be understood to represent the prevailing view of the gay community when that was not the case.  We considered the statement and the way it appeared was likely to cause offence both to the mainstream gay community and supporters of equality, and was likely to be seen as controversial and possibly inflammatory by a significant number of people who saw the poster in an untargeted medium.  We concluded that the poster was likely to cause serious or widespread offence and might lead to antisocial behaviour.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clauses 2.2 (Social responsibility), 5.1 and 5.2 (Decency) and 8.1 (Matters of opinion).

Action
We told CCTV to ensure future campaigns were not presented in a way that could cause serious or widespread offence or which might lead to antisocial behaviour.

Next thing you know, expect the Pseudoreligiopolitical Right to scream (in the key of "Ring around the collar! Ring around the collar!") "Christian Persecution! Christian Persecution!!" in their obviously idiotic stylee, and lacking credible substantiation, as ever.