How to Distort Statistics

Posted on | December 28, 2005

I ran across a couple of conservative blog links touting new statistics on the whole Bush Wiretapping scandal that is en vogue. Since I reflexively look at the stats themselves and such, I was a little skeptical of these rather generalized claims.Both Michelle Malkin and “the Political Teen” are displaying a statistic that states 64% of Americans polled believe that the NSA should be allowed to wiretap suspected terrorists and people living in the US. In their haste to go “Neener! Neerner! Neener!” they forget to look just a little bit deeper and see a few things that were missing.

First, no one is making a big deal that the NSA was wiretapping individuals in and of itself. The furor is over the fact that it was done without a warrant of any kind and thus would be a violation of the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution and already it may help some suspected terrorists held by the US walk. This is not a question of if it should be done since national security is a priority, but rather it is about how it should be done in terms of legality. In fact, the stat both Malkin and TPT are showing states “Sixty-four percent (64%) of Americans believe the National Security Agency (NSA) should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States.” You will note that the quote uses the word “suspects”. This would denote that there is evidence that exists potentially linking these individuals to terrorist activities and thus would have probably cause in getting a warrant in just about any court.

Next, the controversy is not so narrow as to pick out the NSA for doing this specifically. As I have stated in previous blog entries, some of the groups being spied on are groups opposed to the military’s ban on gays under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” which has been proven to hurt the military’s skill base since 54 Arabic speakers have been eliminated under the policy and was mentioned by the 9/11 Commission. So it could be said that those are supporting these illegal wiretaps do not have the nation’s best interests in mind in general or in matters of national security.

So when you really look at what Malkin and others are saying, it really is nothing more than a distortion in statistics because they fail to look further into it. Another blog, Ace of Spades, had a headline “More Rasmussen: 64% Say Warrantless Eavesdropping OK” yet when I went over to the link, Firefox could not find the use of the word “warrant” at all. I wonder where Ace got that from then.

Blog Links:

External Links:

Filed Under NeoConservatives |

Comments

4 Responses to “How to Distort Statistics”

nathan118
December 30th, 2005 @ 4:49 pm

The 4th ammendment doesn’t say anything about listening.
The Angry Fag
December 30th, 2005 @ 4:52 pm

If listening does not constitute a search, then you also agree that the conversation is not evidence.

Same with data taps.
zandperl
December 30th, 2005 @ 11:24 pm

You might say Ace’s comment was unwarranted. *rim shot*

Glad you took the time to hunt down to the roots of the data. Most people just swallow whatever they read whole. I’ve been admittedly burying my head in the sand over this issue, but I may just have to catch myself up on it now.
The Angry Fag
December 30th, 2005 @ 11:24 pm

LOL. I actually did laugh at the joke