Archive for the ‘ignorance’ Category

The uttercluelessness of Obama supporters

October 13, 2008

Howard Stern does some actual investigative reporting and finds Obama supporters completely and utterly without a clue.

Seriously, these idiots are even saying they support Sarah Palin as Vice-President if Barak Obama is elected, and that Obama made “the right choice” by selecting her as his running mate!

The democrat party has really sunk deeply since the days of JFK. How sad.

Ok, to be fair, even Barak Obama’s actual running mate is confused about the ticket.

Advertisements

Most Europeans are ignorant on the facts…

August 18, 2008

Hmmm…that could be the reason Barak H. Obama is so popular there.
The UK Telegraph reports that “British attitudes towards the United States are governed by ignorance of the facts on key issues such as crime, health care and foreign policy”

A poll of nearly 2,000 Britons by YouGov/PHI found that 70 per cent of respondents incorrectly said it was true that the US had done a worse job than the European Union in reducing carbon emissions since 2000. More than 50 per cent presumed that polygamy was legal in the US, when it is illegal in all 50 states.

The survey showed that a majority agreed with the false statement that since the Second World War the US had more often sided with non-Muslims when they had come into conflict with Muslims. In fact in 11 out of 12 major conflicts between Muslims and non-Muslims, Muslims and secular forces, or Arabs and non-Arabs, the US has sided with the former group. Those conflicts included Turkey and Greece, Bosnia and Yugoslavia, and and Kosovo and Yugoslavia.

Asked if it was true that “from 1973 to 1990 the United States sold Saddam Hussein more than a quarter of his weapons,” 80 per cent of British respondents said yes. However the US sold just 0.46 per cent of Saddam’s arsenal to him, compared to Russia’s 57 per cent, France’s 13 per cent and China’s 12 per cent.

Almost a third of Britons believe that “Americans who have not paid their hospitals fees or insurance premiums are not entitled to emergency medical care”; by law such treatment must be provided.

I think it is a pretty safe bet that a survey of American “liberals” would result in much of the same woefully ignorant answers.

HT to Mr. Reynolds

Greens kill children

May 21, 2007

Green heroine Rachel Carson got DDT banned. Prior to that malaria was nearly wiped out. Now malaria kills more than 800,000 children under age five every year according to the CDC. Rich Karlgaard points out, “Every year, 800,000 small children die from malaria, a disease once nearly eradicated. Ponder that.”

HT to Mr. Reynolds who pens these telling words, “…ongoing political battles over DDT, which tend to pit green correctness against the lives of poor people in the Third World.”

Update: Reducing” the number of children just may be part of their master plan.

Educating the media

April 22, 2007

Here are several examples of the MSM pointing out their ignorance of the subject (or just spouting the party line in willful disinformation).

Greg Pierce in the Washington Times Inside Politics column also caught the ignorance (or intentional lies) of ABC.

Scarcely three hours after Monday’s massacre at Virginia Tech, Brian Ross and Dana Hughes of ABC News posted a story on their “Blotter” blog (blogs.abcnews.com/ theblotter) implying that the expiration of a 1994 gun law was to blame.
“High-capacity ammo clips became widely available for sale when Congress failed to renew a law that banned assault weapons,” began the ABC story, which cited the “expert” opinion of Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence: “When you have a weapon that can shoot off 20, 30 rounds very quickly, you’re going to have a lot more injuries.”
At the time of that report, there was no information about the weapons Cho Seung-hui used to kill his victims before committing suicide. Since then, law enforcement officials have said the mass murderer used two pistols (reportedly a 9 mm Glock and a .22-caliber Walther), but there was nothing to suggest that large-capacity magazines were involved in the crime.
“Does ABC News have an obligation to report facts, or is peddling a political agenda buttressed by lies their preferred stock in trade?” Bob Owens wrote yesterday at the Media Research Center’s blog, NewsBusters.org.
“The Ross entry states that high-capacity magazines ‘became widely available for sale when Congress failed to renew a law that banned assault weapons.’ This is a patently false statement, containing no truth at all.
“High-capacity magazines have been around for more than half a century, and the sale of high-capacity magazines has not impacted whatsoever by the 1994 Crime Bill. These magazines were freely and commercially available, both in retail stores and online, without interruption, for the 10-year life of the ban, the decades preceding it, and afterward.”
“Armed America” author Clayton E. Cramer sent an e-mail Monday night to Robert Stacy McCain of The Washington Times, pointing out another problem with the ABC News item.
“The only time that an extended magazine is going to make a difference is if someone is shooting back at you,” said Mr. Cramer, a firearms historian.

HT to Mr. Reynolds

democrats don’t let ignorance get in the way of writing legislation

April 19, 2007

Hot Air has the video of Tucker Carlson nailing democrat Rep Carolyn McCarthy. Not only does she shamelessly spread the “guns criminals use” about the thankfully ended anti-civil rights semi-automatic rifle ban, she doesn’t doesn’t even know what the terms are in her own bill. For example, she has no clue to as what a barrel shroud is.

Wikipedia has a good note on how the anti-civil rights “gun grabbers” actively try to confuse the issue and keep people from learning the facts:

As early as September 1988, Josh Sugarmann, gun-control activist and executive director of the Violence Policy Center, coined the term assault weapon to denote various semi-automatic firearms with features commonly associated with firearms used by military and/or law enforcement personnel. Sugarmann adopted the “assault weapon” label from the Sturmgewehr 44, a German military rifle used during World War II; Sturmgewehr translates into English as either “Storm Rifle” or “Assault Rifle.” Note that this term is not synonymous with assault rifle, which has an established technical definition and refers only to military rifles with full-automatic capability. Sugarmann pushed for new legislation to restrict or outlaw civilian ownership of such firearms, stating that “The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons — anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun — can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”

Today, there is still no exact or universal definition for the term “assault weapon,” although the term has gained significant popularity among gun-control advocates.