More Americans can name the members of Homer Simpson’s family than can name the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, according to a Freedom Museum study. (Hat tip: A Nun Mouse.) Well, duh… The Simpsons is way more important! :)
OH please. This like touting a survey saying that the number of people who could find the capital of the US is less than the number of people who could pick elvis out of a lineup where everyone else is dressed as members of GWAR. Its a little too easy.
Look, I’m not one to defend the ignorance or stupidity of the American public, but they are getting a raw deal on this one. Naming members of a sitcom that has been on television for what, SEVENTEEN YEARS?! How much day-to-day interaction do people have with the constitution.
As best said on NRO’s The Corner, if you really want to show ignorance of the Constitution, see how many people know what the tenth Amendment is. This smells alot more like a survey done by an organization dedicated to protecting freedom of speech to justify their own existence.
Stupid free speech organizations, trying to defend free speech. Jerks. I bet next they’ll try to defend a free press, freedom of religion, the right to peaceably assemble, and a right to petition the government for a redress of grievances! Can you BELIEVE these liberals?
Folks. This is good news. People aren’t worried about their rights because their rights go on untrammeled. It’s a bit like an election with a 45% turnout. More than half of the population gives the two parties a cursory once-over, thinks, “Eh, whatever,” and flips on “According to Jim.” If one party contained potential tyrants, this would be different.
To put it another way: I have a serious problem with the free speech restriction/incumbent protection legislation parading itself as “campaign finance reform.” If I wanted to Xerox off “Vote for Smith” or “Defeat Smith” handbills and hand them out on a street corner, I’d like to think that the law will be on my side. Well, not the case now. So, toward my own defense, I’d submerge myself in first amendment minutiae and find myself saying, “Marge, perfect; Bart, perfect; Lisa, perfect; other kid, perfect.” One’s knowledge of something is close to whether or not one’s ox is being gored. Most people are outside these intramurals, so they don’t care.
I dunno. The Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo managed to protest the loss of free speech in Argentina even as news editors disappeared for criticizing both guerrillas and the government response. (No, I’m not comparing Bush to a military junta. I’m pointing out an example where your logic is flawed.)
Or consider: commentors here are using free speech to protest the loss of free speech in the McCain-Feingold Act! That must mean no worries!
Uh, no. As a matter of fact I participate a great deal. It’s just that I’m not put out a great deal by those who don’t participate at all. Low voter turnout (and its offshoot, political ignorance) is caused, first and foremost, by people who are content to have either side win. It is a sign, therefore, of a healthy democratic process.
This is an archived post. Comments are closed.
To leave a comment on a newer post, please visit the homepage.
March 1st, 2006 at 2:01:21 pm
Even worse, 20 percent think that the first amendment includes the right to own a pet.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/03/01/tuned_to_america_simpsons_trumps_civics/
March 1st, 2006 at 2:06:05 pm
As Mr. Cheney’s favorite character might say, “Exxxccelllent.”
March 1st, 2006 at 2:40:06 pm
OH please. This like touting a survey saying that the number of people who could find the capital of the US is less than the number of people who could pick elvis out of a lineup where everyone else is dressed as members of GWAR. Its a little too easy.
Look, I’m not one to defend the ignorance or stupidity of the American public, but they are getting a raw deal on this one. Naming members of a sitcom that has been on television for what, SEVENTEEN YEARS?! How much day-to-day interaction do people have with the constitution.
As best said on NRO’s The Corner, if you really want to show ignorance of the Constitution, see how many people know what the tenth Amendment is. This smells alot more like a survey done by an organization dedicated to protecting freedom of speech to justify their own existence.
March 1st, 2006 at 3:09:53 pm
Explains why Americans aren’t up in arms about the wiretapping, Patriot Act provisions.
March 1st, 2006 at 3:44:16 pm
Amen, Lojo. My feelings EXACTLY.
Oh, and props to the GWAR reference…….
March 1st, 2006 at 4:14:06 pm
I have griped for years that the average american cannot name enough people entrusted with the ability to review laws to overturn a bad law.
Not only do they not know what their rights are, they do not know the people’s names who make that determination.
March 1st, 2006 at 4:15:56 pm
Stupid free speech organizations, trying to defend free speech. Jerks. I bet next they’ll try to defend a free press, freedom of religion, the right to peaceably assemble, and a right to petition the government for a redress of grievances! Can you BELIEVE these liberals?
March 1st, 2006 at 4:40:55 pm
Sean -
Only in America can a moonbat get in front on hundreds of cameras and microphones, thousands of people, and decry the loss of free speech.
BTW, 69% of people were able to name freedom of speech. Less than 20% could name freedom of religion.
Besides, want to look at something that really does threaten and restrict free speech? Two clues: McCain and Feingold.
March 1st, 2006 at 4:53:42 pm
Most Americans may not know about their First Amendment Rights. But, by God, they know they have the Right to Remain Fabulous!
March 1st, 2006 at 5:38:23 pm
Aren’t the Rights to Redress and the Rights to Remain Fabulous closely related?
I could swear is somewhere near the Fiftiest Amendment, right next to the Right to Unlimited free Napster downloads of GWAR.
It was Senator Monty Burns that brought that one up before the great 2003 Constitutional Conclave at the Springfield Civic Center, right?
It’s been awhile since I had ConLaw, though.
March 1st, 2006 at 8:53:04 pm
GWAR. Heh.
March 1st, 2006 at 11:17:05 pm
Folks. This is good news. People aren’t worried about their rights because their rights go on untrammeled. It’s a bit like an election with a 45% turnout. More than half of the population gives the two parties a cursory once-over, thinks, “Eh, whatever,” and flips on “According to Jim.” If one party contained potential tyrants, this would be different.
To put it another way: I have a serious problem with the free speech restriction/incumbent protection legislation parading itself as “campaign finance reform.” If I wanted to Xerox off “Vote for Smith” or “Defeat Smith” handbills and hand them out on a street corner, I’d like to think that the law will be on my side. Well, not the case now. So, toward my own defense, I’d submerge myself in first amendment minutiae and find myself saying, “Marge, perfect; Bart, perfect; Lisa, perfect; other kid, perfect.” One’s knowledge of something is close to whether or not one’s ox is being gored. Most people are outside these intramurals, so they don’t care.
March 2nd, 2006 at 7:08:26 am
I dunno. The Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo managed to protest the loss of free speech in Argentina even as news editors disappeared for criticizing both guerrillas and the government response. (No, I’m not comparing Bush to a military junta. I’m pointing out an example where your logic is flawed.)
Or consider: commentors here are using free speech to protest the loss of free speech in the McCain-Feingold Act! That must mean no worries!
March 2nd, 2006 at 10:08:49 am
texasyank thinks democracy really is that spectator sport he’s been dreaming of all his life…poliitics and sports and passivity rolled into one!
March 2nd, 2006 at 11:39:31 am
Uh, no. As a matter of fact I participate a great deal. It’s just that I’m not put out a great deal by those who don’t participate at all. Low voter turnout (and its offshoot, political ignorance) is caused, first and foremost, by people who are content to have either side win. It is a sign, therefore, of a healthy democratic process.