Our Ignorant Population - No wonder we continuously lose more freedoms

Truth-Bringer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Messages
880
The following links show an increbible level of ignorance. As for being able to name the Vice-President, there is a contradiction - 69% of people could name the current Vice-President (meaning almost a third could not...), but when asked who Richard Cheney was, only 21% knew the answer. Go figure...

Public Knowledge of Current Affairs little changed by News and Information Revolution

(This also shows THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE ARE GETTING THEIR NEWS FROM JON STEWART'S DAILY SHOW AND THE COLBERT REPORT. BOTH COMEDY PROGRAMS!!!)

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=319

Here's a link from Findlaw.com - Most Americans can't name a single Supreme Court Justice:

http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/client/act_dsp_pdf.cfm?name=mr060110-2revis.pdf&id=2933

And get a load of this article:

Most Americans agree with Constitutional principles, but don't know document's details, survey shows.

COPYRIGHT 2002 Knight Ridder Washington Bureau

Byline: Steven Thomma

WASHINGTON _ With their country at war, Americans celebrate the 215th anniversary of their Constitution on Tuesday, even though most of them admit they don't know much about what's in it.

While only 16 percent of adult Americans say they have a "detailed" knowledge of the document, a strong majority agrees with its bedrock principle _ that the country should follow the will of the majority...

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms...e=ITM&item_id=0286-8775571[quote]link[/quote]

THAT WAS NOT THE BEDROCK PRINCIPLE OF THE CONSTITUTION. Even the author got it wrong!!!!

"It [is] inconsistent with the principles of civil liberty, and contrary
to the natural rights of the other members of the society, that any
body of men therein should have authority to enlarge their own
powers... without restraint." --Thomas Jefferson: Virginia Allowance
Bill, 1778. (government or the majority has no right to usurp authority that deprives any individual of inalienable rights under Natural Law)

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as
are injurious to others." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia, 1782. (meaning government or majority does not have the right to claim any power over people if they are acting in peaceful, honest, voluntary ways)

"Laws provide against injury from others, but not from
ourselves." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776 (meaning the majority cannot make laws punishing victimless crimes such as prostitution or smoking marijuana)

"The people cannot delegate to government the power to do anything which would be unlawful for them to do themselves (as individuals)." - John Locke (the principle influence of the political thought of the Founding Fathers)

As Jefferson warned:

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson

A couple of more surveys showing a high level of ignorance in general:

National Survey Reveals More than 70% of Americans Don't Know Plastic is Made from Oil

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/070420/20070420005536.html

New Survey Suggests Most Americans Don't Know What's in a Cigarette

http://quitsmoking.about.com/b/a/257714.htm
 
Werbung:

PLC1

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 20, 2007
Messages
10,601
Location
The Golden State
Scary, isn't it?

Patriot Act, chip, chip, chipping away at our liberties.
Asset forfeiture act, chip, chip some more.

It's time we picked up the Constitution, dusted the footprints off of it, and replaced it as the cornerstone of liberty, but that's not likely to happen in an atmosphere of ignorance.

I wonder how many of the sheeple still think that Iraq attacked the US on 9/11, or that Saddam Hussain was in cahoots with Al Qaeda?

How many know what powers the president does and doesn't have?

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson

That's as true today as it was in Jefferson's day.
 
R

Rokerijdude11

Guest
Scary, isn't it?

Patriot Act, chip, chip, chipping away at our liberties.
Asset forfeiture act, chip, chip some more.

It's time we picked up the Constitution, dusted the footprints off of it, and replaced it as the cornerstone of liberty, but that's not likely to happen in an atmosphere of ignorance.

I wonder how many of the sheeple still think that Iraq attacked the US on 9/11, or that Saddam Hussain was in cahoots with Al Qaeda?

How many know what powers the president does and doesn't have?



That's as true today as it was in Jefferson's day.
heres something truly scary.............we are in agreement!!!
 

Castle

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
225
Location
Former US of A
I wonder how many of the sheeple still think that Iraq attacked the US on 9/11, or that Saddam Hussain was in cahoots with Al Qaeda?
I'm still looking for people that EVER thought Iraq attacked us on 9/11 or that Saddam was in bed with Al Qaeda. Guess I hang out with too many people that still have their long and short term memories intact. Plenty of reasons to kick the stink out of Saddam without these.

-Castle
 

PLC1

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 20, 2007
Messages
10,601
Location
The Golden State
I'm still looking for people that EVER thought Iraq attacked us on 9/11 or that Saddam was in bed with Al Qaeda. Guess I hang out with too many people that still have their long and short term memories intact. Plenty of reasons to kick the stink out of Saddam without these.

-Castle

Well, there are interviews like this one, dated Friday, May 2, 2003:

Laurel, Md.: Why is the press softballing Bush about Iraq? How come no one is challenging him regarding the fact he still ties Iraq with al Qaeda? And how about the fact that no "weapons of mass destruction" have even been found in Iraq which was the administration's main justification for our invasion?

Dana Milbank: I don't think the press has been particularly soft on Bush about linking Iraq and al Qaeda. I know we have written regularly about the absence of evidence of serious links. It may be that the administration, after hinting at a link, stepped back from such rhetoric in the runup to the war, preferring to focus on Iraq's weapons.
 
Werbung:

Castle

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
225
Location
Former US of A
Well, there are interviews like this one, dated Friday, May 2, 2003:
Ahh yes, Well a Washington Post interview. (hint)
I particularly liked this bit.
"the president did not directly assert a linkage. But in the way he juxtaposed sentences and paragraphs, a reasonable person would have concluded from the speech that Saddam Hussein was, in fact, responsible for Sept. 11."
So a "reasonable" person could connect the dots if they tried hard enough!? What is reasonable? Who decides that? Is reasonable anyone who hates Bush or is it any leftist with an axe to grind? I never assumed that 9/11 was a Saddam job after any of Bush's speeches. So am I not a reasonable person?

I don't care what political affiliation you are. If you can't think for yourself (and most politicians/media outlets are hoping you can't) It wont matter what they're telling you or why.

-Castle
 
Top