Doggedly searching for the crux of the biscuit.
I started to get all depressed over the fact that 22% of Americans in a recent poll believe that Iraq used weapons of mass destruction during this last conflict. But then I found this post by Bob Harris at thismodernworld.com which helps to put that number in perspective by running through some other recent poll results. Turns out that 22% is roughly the same percentage of Americans who approve of the way the Catholic Church has handled the pedophilia scandals or believe that civilian deaths in Vietnam were relatively rare. And it is only twice as many as those who wish Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman was their personal physician. Bob's other trenchant observation about the numbers: "About the same number of people who think it's an advantage to be a woman in America would eat a rat on live TV."
So remember: you can get a quarter of the country to agree with just about anydamnthing.
TrackBack‘Only 17 percent correctly said that none of the hijackers was Iraqi.
"That really bothers me because it shows a lack of understanding about other countries -- that maybe many Americans don't know one Arab from another," Popkin said.’
Point 1
I’ll bet the vision of Americans differentiating between Arab nationalities is truly preposterous to anyone from Asian or Hispanic descent. If I had a dollar for everytime someone referred to someone who spoke Spanish as a “Mexican”, or an Asian tourist as Chinese, well maybe I’d be as rich like Cheney.
I have gotten lot of crap for considering Sociology as a science (ahem, no eye-rolling, it was my major) but one VERY key thing I took away from it was that the majority of these polls are f***ed up. First of all they are mostly conducted via the internet which eliminates all the population who don’t have computers. They rarely give you the total number of responendents either, which is another fatal flaw.
Point 2
An example of some good ol’ American thinking.
I recently spent time with my 75-year-old-Republicans-are-God Grandmother. She proceeded to spend an afternoon informing me that Iraqi’s were responsible for the bombing of the world trade center. I futiley tried to convince her otherwise citing news stories and examples. Her next statement was, if Dubya hadn’t stopped him, Saddam would have become the next Hitler.
Granted I watch the Daily Show for a pragmatic dialouge on world events, at least I know when to separate the truth from fiction. However, she cannot accept that her Sunday morning televangilst may not be the most knowledgeable source of news.
The next day’s conversation centered around why Dubya was “chosen by God to be president” and that “all democrats care about is making sure the welfare people get free money”. Keeping in mind that her sole source of income comes from Social Security and Medicare it is interesting how she didn’t recognize that as “welfare” of some sort.
The Moral
I find American’s in general to be complacent when it comes to any big issue. You believe what CNN tells you, you believe what Benny Hin tells you, you believe what your doctor tells you, because they supposedly tell the truth. Guess what, every now and then *GASP* people with power lie. There are so many different ways to not tell the truth-- omission, outright or by default, and it is impractical to take for granted one portrayal to be correct just because Dan Rather said it was so. It is so much easier to let someone spoon-feed your beliefs than it is to form opinions on your own. Everyone is guilty of it to a certain extent.