Type to search

Fox’s Hasselbeck Wants Voting Test; Trump Doesn’t Know His Senate From His House

Memo Pad Politics

Fox’s Hasselbeck Wants Voting Test; Trump Doesn’t Know His Senate From His House


Boy, it’s a good thing Fox “News” doesn’t follow its own rules re: “Hollywood types,” like telling them to shut up and sing, act, or whatever evil, liberal-heathen thing they do for a living. Because how then could we enjoy the always-entertaining spectacle of News Barbie, aka Elisabeth Hasselbeck (whose stellar Palin-esque CV consists of Survivor, Style Network’s The Look for Less, and The View), bringing us her well-informed political views and knowledge of our nation’s history?

Making her daily appearance on Fox & Friends (of course decked out in a pretty pink frock, because that’s how ladies dress), Hasselbeck was engaged in a conversation with Utah Civics Education Initiative co-chair Lorena Riffo-Jensen about the advantages of requiring civics tests for students. But that wasn’t nearly crazypants enough for Hasselbeck, who ventured forth with the suggestion that such a test should be required in order to vote.

“Should you have to answer, I mean, the majority of these questions?” she babbled. “If not by graduation of high school, but by the time you vote?… It’s a more meaningful measure when you vote perhaps too.”

Why, yes… by all means let’s return to the days of segregation and Jim Crow, where one had to pass an arbitrarily designed “literacy test” in order to vote. That certainly made for more “meaningful” election results… as, of course, did having the conservative Supreme Court appoint the president in 2000. However, these days, the idea of a civics test before voting would likely benefit Democrats far more than Republicans, who make it a point of pride to be as ignorant as possible, especially when it comes to the big, bad gubmint.

Perhaps the first person to take the test should be Republican favorite and perpetual presidential candidate Donald Trump, whose knowledge of even the most basic tenets of how our government works can be summed up in one tweet:

Yep. Not to be outdone by Sarah Palin—who thinks the Department of Justice is called “the Department of Law” and operates from the White House—The Donald is actually under the impression that a senator is next in line to be Speaker of the House of Representatives. The other chamber of Congress. Your average middle-schooler could tell you otherwise, but hey…

So Lady Elisabeth might want to be careful what she wishes for—the party could lose millions of votes if her idea is implemented, as a large chunk of the Republican base is not exactly known for its literacy—or its civics expertise.

 Video: The Raw Story; Photo: About.com

 Want to read more about politics? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!



  1. Lynda Groom September 22, 2014

    She is clearly one of the dim bulbs in the Faux box. Just a little understanding of our history would go a long way, but considering what she is…perhaps not!

    1. stcroixcarp September 23, 2014

      Unfortunately all the bulbs at Faux are dim. The men are as pathetic as the ladies in pink.

    2. mah101 September 23, 2014

      Saying someone on Fox is a dim bulb is not fair to light bulbs. Someone that stupid on Fox is equivalent to a black hole from which light cannot escape.

  2. Stuart September 23, 2014

    Careful now, people. A senator can become House Speaker. Really. There’s nothing in the Constitution that requires the House Speaker to be a House member. Just as there’s no requirement that a Supreme Court justice have a law degree.

    Yes, Trump really meant Senate majority leader, but in today’s world, would it surprise anyone if House Republicans chose a senator (say, Ted Cruz) to be Speaker? Or chose non-lawyer Palin for the Supreme Court?

    1. mah101 September 23, 2014

      True enough.

    2. Allan Richardson September 24, 2014

      I read somewhere that technically, the Pope does not actually have to be a Cardinal, or even a Bishop, or even a priest, before being chosen Pope; the Cardinals could, if they chose, ordain any adult male Catholic as priest, bishop, and Pope all at once. Presumably, they could even recruit a man who is willing to convert and be baptized before becoming Pope. But would it ever HAPPEN? About as likely as the US House of Representatives choosing a Speaker who is not already an elected Member of the House (AND the majority party).

  3. janis mcdonald September 23, 2014

    I would like to think that our kids have to pass some type of literacy, even civics test to graduate high school (NOT to vote) — but that might be a bit of pie in the sky. I work in treatment, so the kids I run into aren’t exactly coming out of the best high schools — but it is tragic to meet high school GRADUATES who cannot read! I assume math and logic skills aren’t much better. A little LOGIC in our voters would likely give rise to more reality-based elected officials, one would hope!(?)

  4. FireBaron September 23, 2014

    Considering 95% of Fox viewers couldn’t pass a civics test, I am all in favor of this. Maybe it would keep the mouth breathing, drooling, knuckle dragers from showing up and voting for whatever candidate (who is probably more ignorant than they are) happens to have the Republican nomination.

  5. aabsalooka September 23, 2014

    If I was Fox News I would be frightened of educated people, not trying to disenfranchise the uneducated. Without the uneducated they would be off the air.

  6. David September 23, 2014

    If they pull that off then we need mental competency testing for owning guns. I am not against guns, just against people so anti social or agoraphobic that they need weapons to leave their homes. Many probably are crazy. Plus we need to apply the affrighting law our founding fathers put in place to deal with people carrying weapons openly. I am sure anyone who backs the forefathers wisdom on the 2nd amendment would back their invention of the affrighting law. Of course they were nearly all Deists, so maybe they can’t be trusted to have written our Constitution.

    1. kenndeb September 23, 2014

      So I guess you are also afraid of the first amendment, along with the second, and the rest of the constitution? Why are liberals so afraid of the American people having unalienable rights? I know those rights and freedoms interfere with your hopes of world domination,

      1. David September 23, 2014

        I am not liberal, I own many guns including assault rifles. But I question the mental ability of fraidy cat little girly men, to scared to venture in public without being armed for war. They seem delusional.

        1. kenndeb September 23, 2014

          You talk like a liberal, and most likely walk like a liberal, therefore you must be a liberal. People don’t carry out of fear. We carry to be prepared. I know that is something liberals can’t imagine because you are so use to having someone take care of you, but for a big part of the American people, it is a way of life.

          1. David September 23, 2014

            I imagine you open carry because your testosterone levels are out of whack. You should see your gynecologist about a hormone supplement before you go completely femme.

          2. kenndeb September 27, 2014

            Actualy, I seldom carry open. I only strap on a holster when I’m out in the wilds. When I carry around people, it’s usually conceled.

          3. dpaano November 10, 2014

            Oooh, lucky us! Does your gun make your package feel bigger???

          4. jamesowens September 23, 2014

            are you related to lindsey grahm or the other sissy fearmongers lol

          5. Independent1 September 23, 2014

            Nice try at a copout lowlife. It’s only fear of the unknown that drives people to want to always carry a weapon. THERE’S VIRTUALLY NO OTHER REASON!!!

          6. porter September 26, 2014

            prepared for what. Please tell me if you are so fired up about your second amendment rights. 2 Question 1]What part of the second amendment gives the right to have a gun 2] why are knives over 6inch long and switchblade illegal . Just asking

          7. kenndeb September 26, 2014

            Answer to first question: The right to keep and bear arms.


            he answer to second question: Knives over 6in long and switchblades are not illegal, in most areas of the country. I have several so called switchblades. Illegal to carry, but not to possess. Tennessee just passed laws allowing carrying of switchblades. As far as a knife over 6in goes, I have over 100 knives that fit into that category, and none are illegal, even to carry on my belt. Most of the laws you speak of are usually for you city folk.

          8. porter September 29, 2014

            I’m at a lost here I did not ask about the second amendment. If you had read it, you would have seen that ” I ask” you where does it give you the right, to have a gun. as you posted it says the right to bare arms .To the second point those are on your side and Wikipedia everyone knows is and opinion site not base on facts. Yes I do live in a city I ALSO HAVE 3 ARCE OF LAND IN THE COUNTRY AND GUESS WHAT I HUNT .I’ll tell you I have no need for a ar15 semi auto rifle. Not to shoot Bambi I don’t, nor for target shooting and if you do maybe you should take up knitting or climbing a tree because you have no clue about a gun

          9. kenndeb September 30, 2014

            Wow. Three whole acres. I’m impressed. I’m so glad you feel no need for an AR. And why would you want to shoot Bambi?

          10. porter September 30, 2014

            Hey answer the question WHERE does the second amendment give us the right to own or have a guns. The govt. bars Americans from certain arms T.N.T, nitro, prime cords, tanks, and a host of over things. kenndeb , I’m not saying to take away your or any ones else right to have a gun. What I am saying doesn’t my rights, not to have to worry about someone carrying a conceal gun or an open one should also come into the discussion. I believe you to be a thoughtful person so in that vein can you not see how some Americans are saying ,that those who like guns are taking away my rights to feel safe in public. I and you know that their are a lot of people that don’t need a gun, and yes the laws that are on the books need to be acted upon, When the N.R.A. steps in and starts to complain about their rights .I’m sure you know that the N.R.A. is the lobbing arm for the gun business. As to Bambi you know that was just a way of saying that this is stupid, Do you really need a 30 round clip and assault rifle to keep your home safe. This is all that I’m saying why can’t we bar or ban these type of weapons from our streets while still keeping the second amendment intact . I await your reasonable response. that dig was just that a dig

          11. kenndeb October 2, 2014

            As per the second amendment, American citizens should be well trained( well regulated) and as well armed as any military. Seeing that our new country had no standing army, and that all able bodied men were the nations defense. I know that the gun control advocates have disputed the meaning of the second, but it is what it is. Our founding fathers wanted to be sure that our country would never be faced with anyone or any group ruling over the people. The second amendment also assures that our government would not become too powerful. The saying of “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” is very true. Many in power want more. And would continue to take power until they are stopped. Having an armed populous is a really good deterrent for those seeking absolute power. Throughout history, the very first thing that happens just before subjugating a people, is confiscation of firearms. Once you disarm the populous, you have very little resistance. Hence, controlling what weapons can and can not be possessed, is actually unconstitutional. Most of those weapons you mentioned are not actually considered firearms, but more accurately defined as ordinance. I would agree that most of ordinance should be controlled, but there are permits that do allow people to own such items.
            I prefer a handgun and shotgun for home defense, but there are valid reasons for use of an AR for that purpose. I don’t think that mag capacities are a real issue. Most magazines over 30 rds are unreliable. I can drop a mag and reload is less than 3 seconds, so having to use 10 rd mags are more of an inconvenience than anything else.
            The guns on our streets are not legal firearms to begin with, unless you are lumping the criminals with those of us that do follow the laws. Gun control does nothing to curb criminal activity. What difference does a weapons charge make to someone that has just killed someone? Gun control is only a means to control the people.
            I look forward to further conversations with you. You seem to be one of the few rational people on this site.

          12. porter October 2, 2014

            I enjoy a goo healty debate where each one get to state their point of view this will be a little post have to get to class

          13. kenndeb October 6, 2014

            I do appreciate our exchange, unlike many I have on this site.

          14. porter October 16, 2014

            hey I’m back and while I can agree with some of what you said there are some things I can’t . The only thing I’m asking is this can we not find a way that both parties are happy. Their some people that to see or to think that a gun is out in public cause’s a deep fear . maybe this is insane but that’s the way they feel they also feel that those that they elected are not listening to them. We both know that this is the case our congress is about who has the biggest lobbist not about passing laws that benefits every one until this happen . this will always be a problem

          15. dpaano November 10, 2014

            And that’s why we now have a very active military….we have no need for civilians to tote guns all over the place….but apparently, that’s the way the Conservatives interpret the Constitution.

          16. dpaano November 10, 2014

            Wow, you must REALLY be afraid, but I’m not sure exactly of what…..give me a break!!!

      2. midway54 September 23, 2014

        As usual, your post is another one filled with disconnected series of sentences amounting to nothing more than a combination of bumper sticker idiocy exposing your complete lack of intellectual skills to communicate intelligently. I suggest that you belong in the same mental state as the character holding the misspelled sign calling others “morans.”
        What is so astounding is that you obviously are unaware of your recurrent habit of exposing your unrelieved ignorance of political and social issues facing the Country.

      3. mah101 September 23, 2014

        kenndeb, I have to point out that the folks who wrote the Constitution were pretty much liberals. Pretty radical ideas, government by the people and inalienable rights…

      4. jamesowens September 23, 2014

        nope rights belong to the people not the corporations and their lobbing groups

  7. Kim Serrahn September 23, 2014

    I’ll take that test and on air just to be able to show up their commentators. trouble with that is they will have ear pieces in and teleprompters so they could pass. One thing I would worry about is that I might get beaten up by O’Reilly when he loses.

  8. jamesowens September 23, 2014

    that blonde bimbo couldnt complete a sentence if it wasnt written on her cue cards

    1. Allan Richardson September 24, 2014

      She makes Kelly Pickler (when she blew the question on “Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?”) look smart by comparison!

      Question: In which country is Budapest located?
      Kelly’s search for an answer: Europe? Is Europe a country?

      At least Kelly was TRYING to reach an honest answer; this one is just reading a script.

  9. jamesowens September 23, 2014

    i vote yes for the test 90% of the nummys who believe the lies the gop feeds out coulnt pass a civics test unlees they rig it like they do the elections

  10. Wedge Shot September 23, 2014

    I would never call anyone a stupid bitch but if the designer shoe fits….

  11. 5612jean September 24, 2014

    You know if she had an ounce of sense she would be dangerous. What she is proposing is reminiscent of the days when testing was required in order to keep minorites from voting. I won’t say she’s a racist, but she has racist tendencies.

    1. Allan Richardson September 24, 2014

      To be fair to her, she may be so ignorant of what happened before she was born that she does not even KNOW that literacy tests were used to suppress black voting. And she is well paid not to ask any “embarrassing” questions!

      1. porter September 26, 2014

        I’m sorry but she was on the view, and it was taught in history. Unless she went to a school that left that part out. She had to know what she was saying. Know one can be that clueless

  12. AnitaC24 May 3, 2016

    This nation of fools deserves a incredibly-flawed candidate like Trump! The reality-show-watching fools think he’s the real deal — who will knock some sense into Washington! He’ll be impeached within 3 months!


Leave a Comment

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.