Quantcast

America's World View

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,335
2,448
Hypernormality
From The Observer:

I found this at the end of an article discussing the current 'Scopes II' trial in Dover. Interesting and scary. Makes me like my 'licence to vote' idea even more...

The American world view

64 per cent of people questioned for a recent poll said they were open to the idea of teaching creationism in addition to evolution in schools, while 38 per cent favoured replacing evolution with creationism.

40 per cent of Americans believe God will eventually intervene in human affairs and bring about an end to life on Earth, according to a survey carried out in 2002. Of those believers, almost half thought this would occur in their lifetime with a return of Jesus from heaven.

1 adult American in five believes that the Sun revolves around Earth, according to one study carried out last summer.

80 per cent of Americans surveyed by the CNN TV news network believe that their government is hiding evidence of the existence of space aliens.

70 per cent believe it likely that Saddam Hussein was involved personally in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
:p :think: :stosh:
 

Discostu

Monkey
Nov 15, 2003
524
0
It really does explain exactly why GWB is president. Except the alien one, that explains why Hollywood makes billions.
 

Discostu

Monkey
Nov 15, 2003
524
0
This really is shocking though. I can think of someone I know that would believe in / agree with one of those, but not all or even the majority of them. I would really like to see how the questions were phrased.

Are you sure the surveys weren't conducted in the towns of Bumblescum, Mississippi and Roswell, New Mexico?
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,335
2,448
Hypernormality
Discostu said:
This really is shocking though. I can think of someone I know that would believe in / agree with one of those, but not all or even the majority of them. I would really like to see how the questions were phrased.

Are you sure the surveys weren't conducted in the towns of Bumblescum, Mississippi and Roswell, New Mexico?
No, Not a clue. Although The Observer is a pretty reputable broadsheet, I doubt they'd use dodgy sources.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
I don't have a whole lotta faith in my feller countrymen these days but it's not as bad as that "poll" would indicate.......cept maybe in sum holler down the bayou or some such.

If it is in fact that bad and I really am living in a terribly isolated/insulated environment of my making, keep that sh!t to yourself. I don't want to know about it. A standard high school education should have occured somewhere with the people providing those answers.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
Changleen said:
From The Observer:

I found this at the end of an article discussing the current 'Scopes II' trial in Dover. Interesting and scary. Makes me like my 'licence to vote' idea even more...

:p :think: :stosh:

While the premise of your "licence to vote" suggestion has merit, in practice, it is what is known as a "poll tax" wich was deemed illegal by the 24th amendment to our constitution.

There is an interesting case brewing right now in Georgia in which the State Attorney General is trying to make it mandatory for people to show an offical state ID card or drivers licence in order to be allowed to vote as a means of quelling possible voter fraud. The argument against, is that such a requirement would disenfranchise those who lack the means to get to a licencing bureau.

Odd related fact; there are currently 2 million more state ID's and drivers licences issued in Georgia than there are registered voters.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,335
2,448
Hypernormality
Interesting - You need ID to vote in most places I think. I'm kinda suprised you don't need it in the states.

Licence to vote: I'm not sure I actually believe in that, but on the other hand I find the level of ignorance and stupidity expressed by some people so vast I just can't help but be disgusted that they could possibly be allowed have the same amount of influence on the future of the world as you or I. Maybe everyone should have 1 vote, but you could earn more by displaying your knowledge and understanding of world or national affairs?
 

PonySoldier

Monkey
May 5, 2004
823
0
Woodland Park Colorado
Changleen said:
Interesting - You need ID to vote in most places I think. I'm kinda suprised you don't need it in the states....

While this may be true in Georgia in Colorado I have to be registered to vote and I have to produce a photo ID at the time of voting to prove who I am....
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Changleen said:
Maybe everyone should have 1 vote, but you could earn more by displaying your knowledge and understanding of world or national affairs?
No way.

Didn't you read animal farm? Can't be having some more equal than others. :nope: :p

I guess this ties in to how you evaluate a citizen's "worth". You can't do it without heading towards one or another of many segregationist pitfalls.

What needs to happen more than anything is education. What IS happening is that even that tenet that a lot of us take for granted is being threatened to the point where people are/could be fed whatever is necessary to ensure the empowerment of a certain faction....IE: teaching intelligent design to directly or indirectly make religious leaders or candidates more viable.

Gotta spread the smarts, not create an elitist voting contingent that can be trusted to make the decisions for everyone else. That's (supposed to be) the job of a congress. ;)
 

ALEXIS_DH

Tirelessly Awesome
Jan 30, 2003
6,147
796
Lima, Peru, Peru
Damn True said:
Odd related fact; there are currently 2 million more state ID's and drivers licences issued in Georgia than there are registered voters.

thats not odd. i have a valid Alabama license (expires next year) and, obviously, am not registered to vote...
 

MTB_Rob_NC

What do I have to do to get you in this car TODAY?
Nov 15, 2002
3,428
0
Charlotte, NC
ALEXIS_DH said:
thats not odd. i have a valid Alabama license (expires next year) and, obviously, am not registered to vote...
Not to mention folks under the voting age can (and in cases of driving and getting jobs) are required to get either a driver's license or a state issued ID card.

Nothing too fishy about that.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,335
2,448
Hypernormality
kidwoo said:
No way.

Didn't you read animal farm? Can't be having some more equal than others. :nope: :p
Yeah, If that ever happened, it'd be terrible! :rolleyes:

I guess this ties in to how you evaluate a citizen's "worth". You can't do it without heading towards one or another of many segregationist pitfalls.
You get them to write a couple of thousand words about the political landscape in the US. Then you divide the papers into two piles: Retards and Voters.

What needs to happen more than anything is education. What IS happening is that even that tenet that a lot of us take for granted is being threatened to the point where people are/could be fed whatever is necessary to ensure the empowerment of a certain faction....IE: teaching intelligent design to directly or indirectly make religious leaders or candidates more viable.

Gotta spread the smarts, not create an elitist voting contingent that can be trusted to make the decisions for everyone else. That's (supposed to be) the job of a congress. ;)
Agreed. In all seriousness education is clearly the key. However, that would appear to be one of the key areas of regression right now, so we're not off to a good start. Until no child is actually left behind, I don't think it's that unreasonable to exclude the willfully ignorant from making important decisons. After all, we don't let drunk people drive, or let unqualified people prescribe medicine. Why the hell would we let someone who knows nothing about the politcal issues of the day make a decision about them on our behalf?
 

Tenchiro

Attention K Mart Shoppers
Jul 19, 2002
5,407
0
New England
Changleen said:
Why the hell would we let someone who knows nothing about the politcal issues of the day make a decision about them on our behalf?
That is the great thing about America, we have a government of the people by the people and for the people. Everyone has an equal say and an equal chance to participate in the government.

In other words we get the government that we deserve.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
kidwoo said:
Gotta spread the smarts, not create an elitist voting contingent that can be trusted to make the decisions for everyone else. That's (supposed to be) the job of a congress. ;)
You mean like the electoral college?

It would be nice if we could at the very least ensure voters had a basic understanding of civics and the rules of American governance. Actually putting that into practice though, as you said, presents more pitfalls than an Atari game.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Changleen said:
Why the hell would we let someone who knows nothing about the politcal issues of the day make a decision about them on our behalf?
I agree, I don't think we should......... but if we kill him, then Cheney gets to be prez.


My biggest problem with what you're saying is that establishing a more qualified voter contingent leads itself very easily to corruption. I was only half kidding with the animal farm reference. We can't even be sure our all-inclusive voting system is legit....blackwell-diebald, katheryn harris etc....

I can't even fathom a "we're more qualified to decide your fate than you are" mentality. I don't own a gun so I'm sure I'd end up in the retard pile (yes I'm wide open, please make jokes).

Creating the basis for such a system would be frightening in itself. We just need to outlaw things like fox news claiming some kind of fair a balanced programming. I think that would solve a lot. Of course we have a court that deemed them "entertainment", and not bound to their claims. That kind of crap needs to stop and would go a long way me thinks.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
kidwoo said:
Creating the basis for such a system would be frightening in itself. We just need to outlaw things like fox news claiming some kind of fair a balanced programming. I think that would solve a lot. Of course we have a court that deemed them "entertainment", and not bound to their claims. That kind of crap needs to stop and would go a long way me thinks.
Well if you are going to do that you'd then have to get rid of NPR and the majority of the rest of the news outlets. There are few, if any that aren't biased one way or the other.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Damn True said:
You mean like the electoral college?

It would be nice if we could at the very least ensure voters had a basic understanding of civics and the rules of American governance. Actually putting that into practice though, as you said, presents more pitfalls than an Atari game.
That actually would be a good idea. I'm sure immigrants who have recently studied for their citizenship exams know more than the average native-born us voter.

My big beef is people getting tainted or highly limited news on what their government is actually doing and then using that for their basis on voting decisions. You say there's a liberal media bias, I'd say there's just a general sensasionlist bias. So we come to an impass there as well. I feel like I have to look at bbc news to get accurate, detailed news about my own country, but also about what goes on beyond its borders.....and that I have to listen to both left and right tainted reporting to find out about the thoughts of the people that live around me. It sucks.
 

Ciaran

Fear my banana
Apr 5, 2004
9,839
15
So Cal
Damn True said:
It would be nice if we could at the very least ensure voters had a basic understanding of civics and the rules of American governance.
You mean make them take government, civics, and poli sci, and history classes? Gasp! Not that!!! (j/k)

Maybe what we need is seriously higher standards for our schools. If a kid gets left behind it means he repeats the grade untill he gets it right. Then we can make having a high school diploma a requirement to vote.

I agree that education is the key. Sadly no one seems to give a hoot about education. Standards are getting lower and lower. Parents don't whine that their kid is stupid, they whine that the kid didn't get promoted to the next grade.

I think that until there are some very high and stringent education standards in place and the people as well as the gov't of our nation take education very very seriously we are fvcked. We are fast becoming a nation of fat, lazy, stupid people.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,335
2,448
Hypernormality
kidwoo said:
I agree, I don't think we should......... but if we kill him, then Cheney gets to be prez.
:p Good stuff.


My biggest problem with what you're saying is that establishing a more qualified voter contingent leads itself very easily to corruption. I was only half kidding with the animal farm reference. We can't even be sure our all-inclusive voting system is legit....blackwell-diebald, katheryn harris etc....
Yes, there are a million problems with the implementation. The biggest of all being "Who gets to decide who is qualifed?" I'd suggest a College education as a good starting point, or if you you didn't attend but still think you're smart, some sort of equivalency test. Maybe that 1950's 8th grade test that got posted the other day... :)

I can't even fathom a "we're more qualified to decide your fate than you are" mentality.
But we already have that. We vote, supposedly for people who are more qualified than we are to do just that, then essentially don't get to even have a look in on any of the decisions that are actually made. The other problem being right now of course, the guy who got in is less qualified than a drunk redneck.

Creating the basis for such a system would be frightening in itself. We just need to outlaw things like fox news claiming some kind of fair a balanced programming. I think that would solve a lot. Of course we have a court that deemed them "entertainment", and not bound to their claims. That kind of crap needs to stop and would go a long way me thinks.
Yes, I agree.

On the other hand we could just remove the vote from Rural folks... :sneaky:
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Damn True said:
Well if you are going to do that you'd then have to get rid of NPR and the majority of the rest of the news outlets. There are few, if any that aren't biased one way or the other.

I know npr always gets slammed with being liberally biased (by the right), but what are you basing that on? Garrison Kielor ribs republicans on Prarie Home Companion but that's a show, not the news. Terry Gross goes a little slanted on another show but again, that's not the news.

I can say that fox is heavy with the slant because it's owned by a multinational tycoon who looks out for his own interests. I can also say that whatever is the topic de jour on right wing talk radio that day is also the news that makes reporting on Fox news.

Didn't you see that survey about 2 years ago that asked people what news outlets they patronized the most and then compared their opinions on current topics with actual fact? The fox news contingent was at the bottom. Npr followers were at the top with CBS, NBC etc scattered between them. I'll find it for you if you want.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
Well, Ciaran, you'll get no argument from me on any of that. I will however submit that I think in places we are trying to improve standards in our schools. Case in point the woefull results from Texas and Californa's standard graduation tests and the attempt (though perhaps in vain if the teachers union has their way) to introduce accountability to the teachers.

A graduation should mean that the student has achieved at least a minimum level of achievement. There are many, I am sad to say, that disagree.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
kidwoo said:
I know npr always gets slammed with being liberally biased (by the right), but what are you basing that on? Garrison Kielor ribs republicans on Prarie Home Companion but that's a show, not the news. Terry Gross goes a little slanted on another show but again, that's not the news.

I can say that fox is heavy with the slant because it's owned by a multinational tycoon who looks out for his own interests. I can also say that whatever is the topic de jour on right wing talk radio that day is also the news that makes reporting on Fox news.

Didn't you see that survey about 2 years ago that asked people what news outlets they patronized the most and then compared their opinions on current topics with actual fact? The fox news contingent was at the bottom. Npr followers were at the top with CBS, NBC etc scattered between them. I'll find it for you if you want.
It's as clear as day that they are highly biased in their reporting of the news (the entertainment stuff is just that, and Keilor is actually pretty tough on both sides when the situation calls for it). Morning Edition, All Things (but an opposing viewpoint) Considered, & Talk of the Nation are waaaaaaaaaaaaaay biased. The "Weekend Edition" shows are actually quite fair, but they do have more time to produce them, and......they know their listenership is down on the weekends.

Don't get me started on Terry Gross. Political bias aside, she just bugs the heck out of me. It's supposed to be an interview show, but she does all the damn talking.
 

Ciaran

Fear my banana
Apr 5, 2004
9,839
15
So Cal
Damn True said:
Well, Ciaran, you'll get no argument from me on any of that. I will however submit that I think in places we are trying to improve standards in our schools. Case in point the woefull results from Texas and Californa's standard graduation tests and the attempt (though perhaps in vain if the teachers union has their way) to introduce accountability to the teachers.

A graduation should mean that the student has achieved at least a minimum level of achievement. There are many, I am sad to say, that disagree.
My beef with the system is the low standards. I went to public school, catholic school, and secular private school. The public schools (all of them) were woefully far behind the catholic schools. In catholic school I was a mediocre student. When I transferred to a public school I was considered a "gifted" student. These attempts to make things better in public schools aren't enough. There is no reason a high school exit exam should test to an 8th grade level.

I do realize that sadly, thre is no easy answer. The answer lies in dramitically increased funding to all schools, extremely high standards, and holding the parents as well as the student and educators responsible. How to implement all that, I have no idea.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,335
2,448
Hypernormality
Wow, we pretty much all agree on this. Edumacation is the way to go - but it's going to take 2 or 3 generations for that to make a difference if the schools were fixed tomorrow. What do you do in the mean time? Let America become a backwater where China has it's call centers?

And Ciaran, good post.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
Well, using more recent events if you listened to "Morning Edition" at all during the Roberts questioning you will recall that the overwhelming majority of the soundbites replayed were clips of Dem's attacking, insulting and impuning the credibility of Roberts.

Simple tactic, repeat something often enough and people will believe it. Thankfully it didn't work this time as Roberts was pretty much beyond reproach.

However one has only to look to the similar tactic used against Bork to see a sucessful example of the Dems leading their lapdogs in the media into groupthink.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Damn True said:
Well, using more recent events if you listened to "Morning Edition" at all during the Roberts questioning you will recall that the overwhelming majority of the soundbites replayed were clips of Dem's attacking, insulting and impuning the credibility of Roberts.

.
Which is exactly what I heard on Hannity's show, Limbaugh's show and on news websites. It's not biased, it's just what happened. THERE WERE NO REPUBLICANS MAKING A STINK. The dems were. Think about it. But I did hear one republican (don't remember who) pretty much just thank him for his honesty. I heard that on npr as well.

Try again.

Better yet, let's both listen tomorrow morning and come back eh? You tell me where you hear the liberal and since I will be listening to the same thing on probably the same affiliate (sacramento right?) I'll know what you're talking about.

And read that survey I linked to if you haven't already.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
That is precisely my point, there were also a crapload of Dem's that weren't making a stink (I can find the vote tallies) in fact, there were a bunch who were in favor of his appointment. But THAT was glossed over and they focused instead on the dissent.

As to the poll data, I read it the first time it appeared here. Some interesting data but it is no more telling than any other poll.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
~ Mark Twain

I listen almost every day. The feed you get from Sac, is actually from SF I believe, and Morning Edition is a national show. If I am able to tomorow (I don't yet know what my conference call schedule is) then you are on.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
'woo,
You like NPR and that's fine. It's broadcasts are tailored to meet the preferances of those in their demographic, just like any other broadcast. They are speaking to their audience. Their audience is largely liberal so they say the things their audience wants to hear.

But don't kid yourself into thinking anything special or different is happening on NPR when compared to any other broadcast media. It's all focus-grouped, polled and sanitized for your protection. They know what you want to hear and that's what they give you.

I think that may be part of why the BBC seems so different. They aren't broadcasting to you or I or any other American for that matter. They are broadcasting to the focus-grouped and polled wants and desires of the UK. It is no different than our media in that regard. It's just that it is tailored to a different audience.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Damn True said:
'woo,
You like NPR and that's fine. It's broadcasts are tailored to meet the preferances of those in their demographic, just like any other broadcast. They are speaking to their audience. Their audience is largely liberal so they say the things their audience wants to hear.

But don't kid yourself into thinking anything special or different is happening on NPR when compared to any other broadcast media. It's all focus-grouped, polled and sanitized for your protection. They know what you want to hear and that's what they give you.

I think that may be part of why the BBC seems so different. They aren't broadcasting to you or I or any other American for that matter. They are broadcasting to the focus-grouped and polled wants and desires of the UK. It is no different than our media in that regard. It's just that it is tailored to a different audience.
I agree with you somewhat.

But I brought up fox news in the context of it being deemed "entertainment" whan that monsanto report was chopped up for a year before it was reported and two reporters from fox were fired for their refusal to participate in the chopping. Neither NPR nor any other major news outlet has been given that sort of liberty. They make a fair and balanced claim and were freed from being held to it. Your parallel is not warranted.

Addition: I don't think NPR is doing anything special. That's what I DON'T like about them. They rehash the same crap just like everyone else. I'm not putting them on a pedestal or anything, I just don't think they are the leftist version of fox news....which has been proven to be of a rightist slant. But folks on the right claim npr is some sort of leftist propaganda machine, which it most certainly isn't. It's just as boring as everyting else.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Damn True said:
BTW woo,

The study you re-posted was funded by the Ford foundation. Not exactly what one would call an impartial organization.
Oh my god. Not those liberal bastards!!!!!

They must be lying!!!!
Check out thier website. They are evil evil people.

It still doesn't mean that npr is the liberal equivalent of fox news.
 

Damn True

Monkey Pimp
Sep 10, 2001
4,015
3
Between a rock and a hard place.
Not necessarily. But one must as they say "follow the money" then upon finding out where it comes from view the information through the appropriate lens of skepticism.

You'd do the same if the study was funded by, for the sake of argument, The American Enterprise Institute.


We've clearly digressed from the topic of the thread.....
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,335
2,448
Hypernormality
Damn True said:
I think that may be part of why the BBC seems so different. They aren't broadcasting to you or I or any other American for that matter. They are broadcasting to the focus-grouped and polled wants and desires of the UK. It is no different than our media in that regard. It's just that it is tailored to a different audience.
I see what you're saying, but the Beeb don't 'cater' to focus groups like a US station - They have a government mandate to be provide impartial reporting. You can read it on their site somewhere.