QandOQuestions and Observations |
||
|
||
| Comments | ||
|
Around half, he says, hmmm? Posted by: Bithead at May 28, 2004 01:39 PM |
||
|
I don't know for sure, but I would imagine that some of these statistics make things sound worse than they are. One simple reason: I assume there is a high correlation between ignorance and not voting, and vice versa. So, basically, if somebody really has no clue who their senators are, or the vice-president is, hopefully they're not voting either. That's my source of comfort at least. Posted by: Clark Taylor at May 28, 2004 01:45 PM |
||
|
Dale, Boortz is absolutely correct, and I've been wailing about this stuff with my friends for years (and, yes, they all know who our leaders are and why they should or should not support them). The fact is that the Democratic Party -- while populated with operatives who are smart -- depend on the ignorance of the public for their political survival. I'd say Boortz got up on the right side of the bed. If more people followed suit, this would be a better, and freer, country. On those rare occassions where a really bad policy comes down the pike, like HillaryCare, it takes a Herculean effort on the part of the opposition to move public opinion away from it. We dodged the universal health care train once, but I doubt we can do it forever. I'm given hope, however, by the two landslide elections of Reagan. The media elites tried their best to convince the public that he was a dolt, a "second-rate actor" who brought shame to our country just by sitting in the Oval Office. They failed. But as long as the media continue to consider gas prices the ONLY measure of the economy (how convenient and unique right now), paint Iraq unfairly as a complete mess in which U.S. presence is universally reviled, and pound on Abu Ghraib while ignoring much more damaging scandals such as the U.N.'s oil-for-food scandal which was responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqis, national stupidity will be difficult to reverse. Posted by: Jim at May 28, 2004 03:05 PM |
||
|
The majority of people in this country are -- certainly in political terms -- abject morons. There is absolutely no question in my mind about this. I live now amid the Eloi. Boortz has reached exactly the wrong conclusion about what this means. It verges on validating the concept of mortal sin to maintain them with the welfare state, instead of summarily subjecting them to Samuel Adams' "animating contest of freedom" in order to try their competence to so much as walk the earth. If the rotten bastards all starved where they stood in vast numbers, I would happily step over their bodies on my way to a real live America. I am as serious as I can be. Their die is cast, and I have no sympathy for any of them. "Fiat iusiticia, ne pereat mundus." Posted by: Billy Beck at May 28, 2004 05:03 PM |
||
|
And I thought Leno's JayWalking segment was being culled for the worst possible answers. Posted by: George at May 28, 2004 08:48 PM |
||
|
Just try reading the employment application from a recent high school graduate. Or try sitting through an interview with such a person. Or try to explain to the high school grad behind the counter why he or she shortchanged you. You will laugh to keep from crying. At the age of 18, these people have the legal right to do anything except drink alcohol: they can enter contracts, vote, drive cars, marry, bear children, and own firearms (in most states, if not all). The problem is that I don't think our representatives are very much smarter. Posted by: Steverino at May 29, 2004 12:01 AM |
||
| Post a comment | ||