as if you didn't need proof that aol is run by a bunch of morans....

http://noticias.aol.com/inmigracion/quiz/citizenship

they have "the new citizenship test" in which they feed false information to unsuspecting aol subscribers. it's on the 5th page of their rotating links on their home page and also at the direct link above. 17 of the questions are correct, but 2 of them, AOL GOT WRONG!

just in case you didn't know:

:::::::::::::::::SPOILER BELOW :::::::::::

































- the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is asserted in the declaration of independence, not in the bill of rights (the first 10 amendments to the constitution).

- new jersey indeed once was a british colony

- i'll let them get away with declaring george washington the first "president of the united states", because technically he was indeed the first person to have that exact title. but samuel huntington earlier first held the title of "president of the united states in congress assembled" under the articles of confederation, which governed this country between the time of the american revolution and the ratification of the constitution. ideally, the question would have been phrased more clearly, e.g., "who was the first president of the united states under the constitution?"

yes i am aware that this last point is a picky picky nit, but the first two are major. i can't believe they have this garbage up on their site. ok, yeah, i can believe it, but still....

:dunce:

Anybody who needs to show things in big block letters for their audience to understand it, is not going to be a fountain of knowledge.

with their assertion that The Federalist Papers were the basis for the US Constitution. They were a advocation for the Constitution, not the basis of it.

the magna carta was more of a "basis" than the federalist papers.

moreover, that sort of statement has become highly politicized, as the federalist papers have plenty of stuff that not everyone at the time agreed with, nor does everyone now. certain conservative factions have elevated selected aspects of the federalist papers to a level where the have more legitimacy than they should. they were merely, as you say, advocacy essays from a small number of people who backed the constitution.

It specifies speech, press, religion, right against unlawful search and seizure. I don't remember the rest.

and there was another choice that IS specifically in the bill of rights.