A recent poll asked Americans the question, "From which country did America gain its independence?" An astounding 26% of all respondents could not accurately answer this question! Has our educational system become so terribly inept that the most basic tenets of our history are unknown to over a quarter or more of our citizens, depending upon the basic history question asked?
In that same light, Jay Leno does an excellent job of pointing out the absurdity in the lack of knowledge of people regarding basic historical facts of their country. And to think that these people still probably vote! (Any guesses which party for which they vote?) In Jay's video below, he interviewed a college professor that could not answer these basic U.S. History questions.
We seriously need to change things right now in our schools. No wonder we have lost our soul as a nation when a significant percentage of our people don't even know anything on even the most elementary terms as to our founding or early history as a country. We need a lot more folks like Grandpa in the video and a whole lot less like the college professor.
10 comments:
Yeah, looks like we're headed down the road to Idiocracy all right.
But there's no reason to believe these people voted for the party you don't like. As a matter of fact I would say there's a good chance they DON'T vote, period.
Jim, I can only hope you are right that these people simply do not vote at all.
College instructor? hmmmmm
Pretty sad that someone other than Glenn Beck could be that clueless.
Dave, your partisan ignorance is showing. Say what you want about Beck, but he is a VERY well read historian.
I consider myself to be fairly well-versed in US history and I cannot even come close to holding a candle to Beck.
They have to diminish Glenn Beck because he exposes the idiocy that is this administration.
They can't debate the facts so they do what they do best like all the good little quislings who bow to the alter of Obama.
Actually, Glenn Beck is not a historian. He frequently distorts history and, often times, makes things up. He comes to insane conclusions based on little more than his desire to paint all liberals in a bad light. I pity those who think they are being educated by this numbskull.
And his sourcing is definitely suspect. Two weeks ago he cited in his "historical analysis" a prominent American Nazi named Elizabeth Dilling and her 1936 book called "The Red Network." He used the rantings of a Nazi as "proof" that the Obama administration are all communists. When called out on promoting a book by a Nazi, he said he didn't research the author.
Tells you all you need to know about the scholarship of Mr. Beck. I rest my case.
Splash, did Huffington Post or Daily Kos give you that information, because I am pretty certain you have not listened to Beck for more than 10 minutes in your life, if ever, sir?
Further, Beck has literaly dozens of researchers and historians on staff that typically go to the source of ORIGINAL documents, letters, texts drafted by the people involved in such historical issues whenever those documents are available.
He does not rely as much as most "historians" do on other "historian's" work, so Beck's information isn't based on the opinion of some revisionist left-wing kook historian that thinks Woodrow Wilson or FDR should be sainted while Washington and Jefferson should be cast into the pit of hell because they were racist white homophobes.
His historical work is based on original sources and not derivative agenda-based crap that is often taught as fact to our school children these days. This causes the NEA etc to say how Beck's history is revisionist when the truth is that THEY are the ones guilty of this crime.
The result is that you get students that are educated towards a political agenda instead of historical truth.
Case in point. You evidently have been taught at some point in your life, as has our current President, that America was not founded on Judeo-Christian values despite overwhelming first hand documentation from nearly all of our founders to the contrary.
This simply doesn't fit the progressive agenda though and must therefore be taught as being untrue or revisionist.
Objectivity and honesty for all aspects of history, good and bad, should be taught rather than what will advance a particular cause, sir.
You continue to substitute your opinions for facts about the country's founding. I'll let you stick with that delusion because trying to shake a conservative off of their baseless claims is like arguing with a wall.
History is history. Facts are facts. Putting a right wing spin on things does not mean Beck is without an agenda. In fact, he is probably the most misguided and agenda-driven manipulator in the history of television.
The right seems to have a pathological condition of refusing to believe anything that does fit comfortably into their world view, so over the last 30 years or so, it has constructed an alternate version of both American and world history. Facts be damned, you're going to keep on telling it, and attacking those who have the audacity to disagree.
The book that Beck praised which was written by American Nazi Elizabeth Dilling is not some made up Saul Alinsky thing or whatever lame way you try to dismiss facts that you don't like. He said it on his radio show. He told his listeners to read the book by Dilling because, according to Beck, she was just like him. His words.
Like I said, when called out on promoting an anti-Semitic book, on June 6, Beck said, "But I'm also getting some amazing mail from the left that now says I'm a Nazi anti-Semite because I quoted a book on Friday -- it was the Red Book, or something like that. It was a who's who, who's in the communist party in 1935. Apparently, I don't know, apparently written by a Nazi sympathizer here in America. Part of the, I'm sure -- I don't know because I didn't look it up"
He didn't look it up, Paine. That's your brilliant historian. Case, once again, closed. The man does not know what the hell he is saying. And if it were Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann that recommended a book by a Nazi to their audience (even inadvertently) you would be all over them, attacking them relentlessly and calling them anti-Semitic. How about some balance, Paine?
Oh, and by the way, Ronald Reagan said FDR was the greatest president of the 20th century. I guess he's some lefty, revisionist historian, too.
Splash, I don't know anything about this incident with Beck to which you are referring. I will do some research and get back to you on this. If what you say is true, Beck should indeed have apologized and explained how this could have happened.
I have listened to him enough to know that the incident you have described would not be the norm for him at all, sir. He often rails against racism, anti-semitism, and always against anti-Americanism.
As for Reagan, he was once a Democrat too. He also grew and became the great President he was. (One which was very different from that of the FDR he one time admired, I might add.)
Post a Comment