Wow, what a surprise.  People who watch Fox News almost daily are significantly more likely to be misinformed on issues than those who never watch it.  Here’s how Fox News viewers responded to some basic questions:

– Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely) (91 percent of those who watch Fox News “almost every day”)

– Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points) (72 percent)

– The economy is getting worse (26 points) (72 percent)

– Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points) (60 percent)

– The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points) (63 percent)

Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points) (49 percent)

The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points) (56 percent)

– When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points) (38 percent)

– And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)(63 percent)

I am starting to truly understand what the ignorant sheeple who watch Fox News see in Sarah Palin: cocksure, prideful ignorance that all of them can be proud of.

  1. Lev says:

    It’s amazing that Fox News can convince people that their income taxes have gone up when they can just look at their own damn W2s and see for themselves. I mean, I can roughly tell when my paychecks get bigger or smaller.

    Oh, wait…average FOX viewer’s age: 67. Would have no way of knowing. Never mind.

    • Metavirus says:

      i’ve been telling people for years: the olds are DANGEROUS!  lil ol biddies who like segregation just fine tyvm back in the good old days and who clutch their purse while walking by a group of nigras have way too much power in this country.  imagine if the largest voting bloc in midterm elections were 8 year olds!  president justin bieber!

      • Lev says:

        Yeah, the current group of seniors baffles me. Most of the WWII generation has passed on, now we have the pre-Boomer, “Goldwater Kid” generation as our seniors. Generation is so conservative that even its counterculture was right-wing. Damn beatniks.

        For some reason this made me think of a Christgau pan of a Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young album from recentish times: “And when Stills explains how when he was young old people were wrong and now that he’s old young people are wrong and then disses “overfed talking heads” without ever once acknowledging overfed singing exhead Crosby to his immediate left, I imagine some computer nerd with more brains than sense joining the arms race just to get even.”

      • Gherald says:

        So how soon can we curb entitlements and have them “DANGEROUS olds” paying attention to the economy like the rest of us? Or are optional private accounts still a fascist plot to destroy Social Security? Just sayin’

        • Metavirus says:

          lol.  just because i know that olds are dangerous doesn’t mean i want them to live in penury!  :)

          • Gherald says:

            What’s this about penury? It’s only a matter of phasing out handouts so that in the future people will be responsible for themselves.

            • lol.  people being responsible for themselves in terms of retirement = millions of olds living in penury.  in case you didn’t notice real wages adjusted for inflation have stagnated for a long time.  as a result, people earning middle income ($50kish) hardly have enough money to pay for essentials, much less save for a poverty-free retirement.  always remember this graph when you make sweeping statements about social security:

              http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/chartbooks/fast_facts/2005/chart07.gif

              • Gherald says:

                I’m relieved you and the SSA know what to do with everyone’s money better than we do.

                • Lev says:

                  Well, considering how much stupid shit most Americans spend their money on these days (and would spend Social Security money on if it weren’t deducted from their paychecks, of course), and add in the fact that Social Security has ended poverty among seniors as a problem here in America, and I’d say they’ve done a pretty good job.

                  Now, if people in this country saved like they do in Japan, and the poverty rate were substantially less than it is now, maybe we could talk about means-testing and private accounts and stuff like that. I’d be thrilled if all our social problems got solved and we could slash social program spending on the grounds that it wasn’t needed. But given the results of the past thirty years I’m fairly sure that the only chance to fix these problems is through deliberate policymaking.

                  • Metavirus says:

                    very well said!  in many ways, social security is actually one of the most successful programs in our government’s history.  as you said, it eliminated nearly all senior poverty and also eliminated nearly all poverty for the disabled/mentally challenged. considering that wages have stagnated in real terms for the last several decades, people making $50k/year simply don’t have enough spare money lying around to save for retirement and, if there were no social security, would enter their elder years in complete poverty after they became unable to work.

                    NOT TO MENTION the fact that social security IS NOT THE BIG GORILLA IN THE ROOM.  Medicare and defense are the two huge things that threaten our long-term fiscal health -- NOT social security.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>