As I Said: I’m With Broder, John Doe Is Stupid. And Newsweek?
For those of you who are wondering whether John Doe really is stupid: today, Nick Rivera links to this poll. The results of the poll:
Even today, more than four years into the war in Iraq, as many as four in 10 Americans (41 percent) still believe Saddam Hussein’s regime was directly involved in financing, planning or carrying out the terrorist attacks on 9/11, even though no evidence has surfaced to support a connection. A majority of Americans were similarly unable to pick Saudi Arabia in a multiple-choice question about the country where most of the 9/11 hijackers were born. Just 43 percent got it right—and a full 20 percent thought most came from Iraq.
And if that’s not said enough, there is also this:
Closer to home, more Americans are able to name Jordin Sparks as the winner of the most recent season of American Idol (18 percent) than can identify John Roberts as the Supreme Court’s chief justice (11 percent). Only one in three (31 percent) know that Ben Bernanke is the current Federal Reserve chairman; a quarter (26 percent) think Alan Greenspan, who retired in early 2006, still holds the position. Still, more than half of those polled (59 percent) could identify Nancy Pelosi as House Speaker in a multiple-choice question.
But wait, there is still more to come!
- Only 37% could identify Abraham Lincoln as the first Republican president
- “Roughly half (53 percent) are aware that Judaism is an older religion than both Christianity and Islam (41 percent aren’t sure). And a quarter of the population mistakenly identify either Iran (26 percent) or India (24 percent) as the country with the largest Muslim population. Only 23 percent could correctly identify Indonesia. Close to twothirds (61 percent) are aware that the Roman Empire predates the Ottoman, British and American empires.”
- “only a small minority (17 percent) correctly chose “greater output from the sun†from a list of items as the lone factor that does not contribute to global warming (with 65 percent mistakenly believing that rice patties are not a contributing factor).” Damn that sun, causing global warming every day!
- “Geography is not the strongest subject for many Americans either. Less than half of the poll’s respondents (45 percent) know that South Korea is closer to Japan than Vietnam, the Philippines and Australia. Close to twothirds (64 percent) do know that the Amazon River is in South America. And despite Iraq’s ongoing relevance to current events, just half (50 percent) could select Libya as the only country out of a list of four that doesn’t border it.” Furthermore, Newsweek reports: “Less than half (42 percent) of the public was aware that Iraq only existed as an independent nation since 1920″
There are quite some sad results there – but I wonder about Iraq. 1920? I did not know that either. I thought that the Brits got a mandate and that it became messy, basically, and that it took quite a long while for Iraq to truly become an independent nation. So I did some research: Wikipedia – “Britain granted independence to Iraq in 1932.â€
Read more here.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
22 Responses to “As I Said: I’m With Broder, John Doe Is Stupid. And Newsweek?”
Wasn’t Abraham Lincoln named after a car?
According to Donklephant one in five Americans believe the sun circles the earth. Forget about teaching religion in science classes. It’s really time to teach science in science classes.
Others have already commented about the errors in the reporting of the results themselves; just a quick scan showed this, for example: “twothirds” [sic; "two-thirds"].
Global warming is far from sacrosanct except among the emotional True Believers; global warming is at this time simply a popular political topic. Moreover, rice patties are something you make and eat; rice paddies are the fields you may remember from tales of Vietnam.
I have hated the dumbing-down of English and of society for years! (Also how much more vulgar and less civilized it has become, beyond merely being a consequence of growing up ME, ME, ME.)
If the poll could have its factual and English errors corrected, it would be a useful basis (as is a regular citizenship test) for qualifying and weighting the suffrage.
Dems wouldn’t like that, though!
Please, Wikipedia is not “research.”
Part of the issue is determining when a nation actually becomes a “nation,” particularly one cobbled together from former Ottoman provinces.
1920 is the date Iraq officially fell under British mandate authorized by the League of Nations which legitimized the borders to the western powers (the borders were, of course, no legitimate to the locals since they unnaturally divided tribes and ethnicities). The actual borders were determined a year earlier (January 1919, actually) after being carved from the Ottoman provinces or “villayets” of Basra, Baghdad and Mosul. Ironically, Mosul was originally supposed to fall under the French who received the province of Syria after the Ottoman defeat, but the Brits got it instead. How much different might things be today if the Mosul villayet had been joined to Damascus and not Baghdad?
Anyway, 1932 is when Iraq became independent under a stooge Hashemite monarch and ceased being a British colonial protectorate.
So, when does an artificial “nation” like Iraq become a nation? When its borders were drawn in 1919? When it received a “mandate” from the League of Nations in 1920? Or when it became “independent” in 1932? Depends on ones perspective, but 1920 is probably the best date.
Something doesn’t make sense.
31% know that Ben Bernanke is the current Federal Reserve chairman, but only 11% that Roberts is the Chief Justice?
Perhaps more people feel they have “skin in the game” in the market than in the Supreme Court. After all, from the perspective of that who are not political junkies like most of us are, the Court spends most of its time on issues that seem highly abstract and the province of foaming screamers. The market, on the other hand, deals with MONEY.
It is hardly any kind of authority!
Entropy: click on the link. I link to other sources at my own blog. I went after it, because I knew that 1920 wasn’t correct. Iraq became an independent nation, truly one, in 1932. Not in 1920. Before 1932 Britain still considered itself to be the parent country so to speak.
Do some research: type in “Iraq independence” in google, and see what you get. Also – if Britain was able to declare Iraq completely independent in 1932 it kind of automatically means that Iraq was not truly independent before that time.
Iraq – independent: 1932. Quite simple.
Here is another source: “3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration); note – on 28 June 2004 the Coalition Provisional Authority transferred sovereignty to the Iraqi Interim Government”
And the CIA World Factbook: “in 1920, it was declared a League of Nations mandate under UK administration. In stages over the next dozen years, Iraq attained its independence as a kingdom in 1932.”
The League of nations declared it a mandate under UK administration.
It really isn’t that difficult.
I don’t think the point of the poll was to gauge whether or not people knew the exact date of Iraq’s creation/independence, but whether they knew it was relatively recent.
But don’t let me interrupt your nitpicking
Chris, in that case, the question should have been asked differently. 1920 and 1820 are both wrong. They asked when did Iraq become an independent nation? Not “approximately when” or “what year is closer”.
Michael,
Yeah, they should strive to be accurate.
Mvdg,
You’re right, I didn’t read the actual poll question closely enough. Independence is definitely 1932.
Chris, the poll (not just any questions about Iraq) was meant to test public knowledge of various issues the public should already know. It can be laughable sometimes when this happens*, but overall it’s disgusting. The suffrage should really be qualified, and weighted. (Yes, you, a lefty actually would qualify and carry a lot of weight with your vote. “Use it responsibly.”)
* Before I tired of and stopped listening to talk radio shows, one thing I actually wanted to hear on the Hannity show was the periodic broadcast of the “man on the street” who would walk in New York and ask passers-by on the air questions at the most basic level: “Do you know who the Secretary of State is? Who is the Vice President of the United States?” I wanted to hear this because it can be of interest, in the case of incorrect answers, to learn what the people believed the answers actually to be. But so many stupid kids would fail to answer correctly and when confronted, would actually find it funny! I was disgusted by that. These people are unfit to vote!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-_I0lcyYMo
When did 9/11 happen?
Click on the link. There is nothing in this post that tops this!
Why isn’t 1920 correct? Iraq sure wasn’t independent before then, was it?
On a semi-serious note, I’m sure America is all bent out of shape that they don’t know all that you all do. I don’t know how they can get up in the morning not knowing who the Fed Chairman is, or which country (they’re not going to anytime soon) has the largest number of Muslims. And, by the way, I’m sure they consider you (collectively) dumb for not knowing the things they know.
And on a totally serious note, what difference does it make where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from? It’s not as if anyone is doing something about it; our politicians still suck up to Saudi Arabia as much as they ever have.
Many of them are clueless that they are clueless, or worse, know it but don’t care. What matters is not what we may or may not know, but what they do not know that they obviously should.
Of what value and importance are what they hold dear as opposed to so many people, merely happening to include us on here?
These poll items and citizenship questions should be used to screen and remove unfit voters.
DLS:
ah, but unfit is in the eye of the beholder… and if some people had their druthers, you’d be among those deemed unfit.
and who are you to define what someone should or shouldn’t know? once you finish telling us what we’re supposed to consider important, perhaps you’d like to tell us how to live our lives, what movies we should see, books we should read, candidates we ought to vote for?
and why, since there are more of them (idiots) than you (smart guys), don’t they get to determine what society ought to know? heck, if you don’t know who won American Idol, then there are 50 million or so people who’d likely consider you in need of some educating. be glad they don’t bother with the things you find important, you might not like it if they did.
stevesturm though I can certainly see the dangers behind putting an exam prior to voting (since the contents of such an exam would be in constant danger of manipulation) instinctively I must side with DLS. There are certain people that when you hear what they have to say you really get the feeling that they belong nowhere near a ballot box.
My political sensibilities, with a few exceptions, could not be more different from DLS, but quite frankly you need a certain KNOWLEDGE in order to have a qualified OPINION. You don’t think the fact that a large proportion of people thought there really were WMDs or that Saddam collaborated in 9/11 influenced the vote in ’04 at all? I firmly believe that if people were less ignorant, more engaged, Bush would never have been re-elected. In fact, I doubt he would have been nominated in the first place. Moreover, ignorance (and a giggling idiotic half-pride in such ignorance) is what allows politicians to spout absolute drivel instead of facts, evidence and policy, since a huge swath of air-heads can’t be bothered to read long sentences or watch television segments without big explosions and dramatic music.
Again, I don’t have any idea how one could impose a test without the risk of that test becoming corrupted or biased, but I am very convinced that the 11% of Americans who answered “yes” when asked if Osama bin Laden had been captured must be kept away from the voting booth for the safety of the rest of us.
Lynx: let’s accept in theory your position that one must have certain knowledge in order to have an opinion which in turn is needed to be able to vote. but why should you get to determine what knowledge is needed? why shouldn’t those who don’t pay attention to the things you do get to determine whether you are knowledgeable enough to vote?
and by the way, I feel that if more people knew just how much of an idiot Kerry was the vote wouldn’t have been as close as it was… which pretty much illustrates my point, that just like beauty, what is important it is all in the eyes of the beholder… and I’m no more entitled to push my view on others than they are to push theirs on me.