I found this interesting test online today.  I took it and it seemed to be fairly accurate in testing how a person leans to one side or another.  3 others I work with took it, and they all agree that it comes pretty close to how they view themselves.

http://madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.html

FYI:  I scored a 30, which ranks me between George Bush Sr. and Bob Dole.  I would be interested in how some others in here scored.

I looked at this quiz, but stopped answering because it it bogus.  The choices are bogus, slanted, and stupid.  My advice?  IGNORE IT.

There is/was a much more accurate guage of political persuasion posted here during the cite's last manifestation, but I can't find the address. 

In addition, I think most of us know what are politics are.

Apart from me Carlos, I have no idea what my political slant is. According to this 'bogus' quiz I scored 19 which is between Bill Clinton and Colin Powell. I am almost in the middle!

I found this interesting test online today.  I took it and it seemed to be fairly accurate in testing how a person leans to one side or another.  3 others I work with took it, and they all agree that it comes pretty close to how they view themselves.

http://madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.html

FYI:  I scored a 30, which ranks me between George Bush Sr. and Bob Dole.  I would be interested in how some others in here scored.


Puts you with Jack Kemp.  I got a 35 which puts me with Bob Dole.

Here is the other site.


http://www.politicalcompass.org/



Cat

According to the political compass, Catwoman I am roughly around the same area as Gandhi (libertarian). I have no idea if this is a good thing or not . . .  ::)

I came up with 26% between George Bush and Jack Kemp

I'm about 52-48 leaning to the right. I'd love to have Kerry and Bush working together and yet I know that would probably never work.

On the Mad Rabbit site, I scored a 19. On the Political Compass, I was about a square to the right and two squares above Gandhi. According to this, I am a pinko. :(

The terms "liberal" and "conservative" have been so perverted I don't trust any test claiming to assess to what degree I am either.  I do refer to myself as "liberal" if I have to pick one or the other.  However, some of my points of view on social issues might be called "conservative."  That is, I would call myself socially "liberal," but others may think of my as socially "conservative" because I am not socially libertine.  The term liberal has been equated with libertine by both people on the Right and the Left.

I'm about 52-48 leaning to the right. I'd love to have Kerry and Bush working together and yet I know that would probably never work.


I would love to see that, too.  It can happen, though.  Look at how united the govt was right after 9/11.  Too bad it took such a horrible disaster to figure it out.

This is an interesting test as well.

On this test, I had the following scores:

Left/Right:                              3.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian:  1.95

This places me slightly Right, and slightly Authoritarian, which is just about where I would place myself.

I have long considered myself to be "Moderate", and so far both of these tests seem to say the same thing.  While the scoreing of the first one did place me more "Conservative" then I rank myself, it was an interesting starting place.  It actualy places me right about even with Tony Blair.  Right/Left we are about the same, but he seems to be slightly more Authoritarian then I am.  Rather interesting, since he is a member of the Labour Party.

According to the political compass, Catwoman I am roughly around the same area as Gandhi (libertarian). I have no idea if this is a good thing or not . . .  ::)


Same Here

Tanya

Like DC, I don't give much credence at all to these tests but they're fun so.......
On the graph, I placed almost exactly where Ghandi supposedly was.
On the "scored test", I had a 13, right between Bill and Hillary :-[  :o AARRRRGGHHHH! Not a pretty mental picture. ;) :)

I am walking hand in hand with Nelson Mandela. I feel proud and honored.

i got a 6 on the rabbit quiz (between ted kennedy and hillary clinton) and i think about 4 left and 4 down (not sure took it a long time ago) on political compass

i got a 6 on the rabbit quiz (between ted kennedy and hillary clinton) and i think about 4 left and 4 down (not sure took it a long time ago) on political compass


A six!?!?!?  Holy crap, I didn't it was possible to go that low.

On the political compass I scored along with Thatcher and Ariel Sharon.

i got a 6 on the rabbit quiz (between ted kennedy and hillary clinton) and i think about 4 left and 4 down (not sure took it a long time ago) on political compass
Wow, someone who is more liberal than me! Wear that "liberal" crown proud and don't let anyone tell you that it's a bad thing. ;)

Wow, someone who is more liberal than me! Wear that "liberal" crown proud and don't let anyone tell you that it's a bad thing. ;)
I am not liberal but certainly respect your right to be one....just as I wish more liberals would respect MY right to be a conservative.... :)

I am not liberal but certainly respect your right to be one....just as I wish more liberals would respect MY right to be a conservative.... :)


R&RF,
I think all of us respect your right to be conservative, I certainly do.  But you must realize that the point of political debate is to convert the other guy to one's position.  So, some  fundamental issues: Are you and your loved ones better off now than you were 4 years ago?
Do you feel safer now than you did 4 years ago?
Is our national budget deficit a good thing or a bad thing?
Why haven't we captured/kill Bin Laden?
How can you support a president who can't not put his foot in his mouth?
My point is that it is fine to hold conservative views, but there is also a broader view that one might need to consider. 

But you must realize that the point of political debate is to convert the other guy to one's position.


Actually, to me that is not the purpose at all.

I know that ideology is to fundamental an issue to ever look at in that way.  It is the equivelant of trying to say the Pope reached out to Jews, Muslims, and the Eastern Orthadox Church, to try and convert them to Catholicism.

Myself, I look at political debate for these reasons:

1.  To try and reach a mutually agreeable compromise
2.  TO try and understand each other's point of view (at least respect it, even if you/I do not agree with it).
3.  Try to find common ground, and work on those instead of dividing more on the differences.

Just like the gay marriage issue.  The fundamentalists on each side will NEVER agree.  But hopefully, compromises (like registered Domestic Partners) can get enough of an agreement from both sides that at least some movement is made.

I am not trying to gain "converts".  I simply try to show the other side *MY* view on something.  I would like to get the same respect in return that I give them.

I can disagree with somebody, and still respect their belief.  I am against Abortion for moral reasons, but also feel it should NOT be made illegal.  I can respect both of the extreem views, and still not agree with them.

Although I am sure (and have seen) a lot of people trying the "conversion" type of debate, I do not support it.  In order to change a person's view that much, it takes something much more profound.  I know this because I did that conversion myself about 15 years ago.  And it was a long process, taking about 2-3 years.

Actually, to me that is not the purpose at all.

I know that ideology is to fundamental an issue to ever look at in that way.  It is the equivelant of trying to say the Pope reached out to Jews, Muslims, and the Eastern Orthadox Church, to try and convert them to Catholicism.

Myself, I look at political debate for these reasons:

1.  To try and reach a mutually agreeable compromise
2.  TO try and understand each other's point of view (at least respect it, even if you/I do not agree with it).
3.  Try to find common ground, and work on those instead of dividing more on the differences.

Just like the gay marriage issue.  The fundamentalists on each side will NEVER agree.  But hopefully, compromises (like registered Domestic Partners) can get enough of an agreement from both sides that at least some movement is made.

I am not trying to gain "converts".  I simply try to show the other side *MY* view on something.  I would like to get the same respect in return that I give them.

I can disagree with somebody, and still respect their belief.  I am against Abortion for moral reasons, but also feel it should NOT be made illegal.  I can respect both of the extreem views, and still not agree with them.

Although I am sure (and have seen) a lot of people trying the "conversion" type of debate, I do not support it.  In order to change a person's view that much, it takes something much more profound.  I know this because I did that conversion myself about 15 years ago.  And it was a long process, taking about 2-3 years.


I agree with you to an extent. Yes, I tell people THIS is what I believe, or That is my view. I do respect other views and beliefs and like you, I hope that my views and beliefs are also respected. However, I do hope that when I present evidence of WHY I view something one way, that the other person may also see what I see and be presuaded into changing their views. If not, I do respect that. But discussions related to views and beliefs SHOULD NEVER include name calling. Please, don't get me wrong. I am NOT saying that you do that, Mushroom. I have NEVER seen you stoop to that level. I am saying that there are a few people here who do. To me, when someone stoops to that level, they basically lost their argument because they can't think of anything intellegent to add to the issue so they have to make potshots. That is not a conserative vs liberal issue, that is an "I don't know how to debate" issue-and there are people like that on all aspects on the political spectum.

I do agree with you about understanding the other point of view and to try to make compromises. That would be nice but unfortunately, this is not a perfect world and there are some who want it all (I am talking about those people in Washington-on both sides of the isle.) I do have many friends who are die-heart Republicans. Even though I don't agree with their politics, I still concider them good friends. Yes, we have agreed to disagree. And usually we just don't talk politics.

I too had a "conversion" probably about the same time you did. I was once registered as a Republican (I know a surprise to many here). Today, I am a liberal independant.




Cat

On the Madrabbit test, I scored a 24 - just under George Bush, Sr.

On the political compass test, Economic - 1.5 to the Left
                                         Social - 0.26 in the direction of Authoritarian

Holy Buckingsplanf! I'm a 14!

I have a lot of conservative views, but I'm anti-rich people, pro-the little guy. I guess that makes me more liberal, my compassion and all.

R&RF,
I think all of us respect your right to be conservative, I certainly do.  But you must realize that the point of political debate is to convert the other guy to one's position.  So, some  fundamental issues: Are you and your loved ones better off now than you were 4 years ago?
Do you feel safer now than you did 4 years ago?
Is our national budget deficit a good thing or a bad thing?
Why haven't we captured/kill Bin Laden?
How can you support a president who can't not put his foot in his mouth?
My point is that it is fine to hold conservative views, but there is also a broader view that one might need to consider. 
ALL I know is if Gore had won....and he did NOT....the terrorists would have run us over by now....at least Bush defends us....Clinton didn't in '93 and neither would Kerry, he's all talk.

Though with some of the questions I choose the "lesser of 2 evils"... :o I am shocked that I am a 22...between Colin Powell and George Bush...and I thought I was ultra conservative!  ;D I can always  respect anothers views, as long as we can remain decent to one another...I hate mud slinging...no matter who is doing the slinging...

Here is the other site.


http://www.politicalcompass.org/




It said I was hopelessly polarized and I should never enter a voting booth as I would be there for hours trying to make a decision.... ::)


Seriously, you know that spot where the crossed lines meet....? ;D


Incidentally, I found it highly suspicious that the results page had a link called:

"A few words about the Extreme Right"

but did not have one called:

"A few words about the Extreme Left" ::)

I came up with 26% between George Bush and Jack Kemp


That is exactly where I came out on this one, altho' I came out a bit more toward the 'non-authoritarian side' on the Political Compass one. I highly suspect that the Political Compass test was liberal sponsored and the other one conservative...

Hmm... that's odd.  On my screen, it said "Welcome to the revolution, Comrade."  ;D  Just kidding!!! 

Actually, I was pretty close to Nelson Mandella on the one and  between Ted and Hillary on the other one. 




My god, we must have been separated at birth.  Tears of joy for our reunion :D

(Hee hee!  Warning, really bad joke coming up) Ah yes, we were joined at the pinkies, weren't we?  ;D


.......ummm, ohhhhh ;D ;D ;D    (It took me a minute)

Getting off the topic a bit. A while back, I ordered something on-line from a company that sells a lot of former soviet "stuff". I got an e-mail confirming the order.


Glorious Comrade,

Your Sovietski Collection parcel, containing the treasures from a bygone
era which you ordered (order #) has shipped via U.S. Postal Service
Priority Mail.

We're pleased to provide you with this report, as we crawled under barbed
wire to rescue this merchandise in the first place and then transported it
to our heavily-guarded warehouse inside the cargo hold of a Russian Naval
vessel (a.k.a. "fishing trawler").

Packages shipped via Priority Mail generally arrive within 2-4 business
days.  To ensure safe passage of your package during its journey, we have
dispatched a crack team of Spetznaz commandos, armed to the teeth and
trained to lay down their lives to protect your parcel.

When we are certain your package is safely in your hands, we will break
out the vodka and toast to your health, happiness and another successful
delivery. (The party is sure to last late into the evening.)

We hope you had an adventurous time shopping at Sovietski Collection. If
you have any questions about your order or about any of our other
treasures from a bygone era, please call or fax us or send us an email at
orderstatus@sovietski.com. (But, please don't call too early in the
morning, as we may still be toasting to your health and happiness.)

We would also appreciate it if you would fill out a short survey that will
help us improve our services.  Please click here:
http://orders.sovietski.com/survey/c_survey.asp.

Glorious Comrade, we very much appreciate your order and hope you shop
with us again soon! (This message will self-destruct in 60 seconds.)

Spasibo (Thanks),

M. S.
President

P.S. If you've enjoyed this email, keep an eye out for our other rogue
shipping confirmations on your next order. Too many toasts and the boss
has let the creative guys go wild!

********TOP SECRET********




I cut the guy's name out. I just thought this was so funny that I had to share it.  ;D ;D ;D




Cat

That was wonderful, Cat, thanks for sharing it with us!  :)

I ordered something from them once and got that letter.  We had a good laugh
over it. Sooooo cold war. ;D ;D ;D

Conservative enough to know that theDemocrats had thier convention last month and there are no jerky Republicans protesting and whining. Now, just when the Republican Convention is getting under way look who's there to whine. Michael Moore who could become the new spokesperson for Slim-Fast if he ever changed his clothes and showered and got rid of the old crusty hat on his matted down hair, standing next to that "wonderful" example of a representor of GOD, Jesse Jackson! Oh, and let's not forget Hillary throwing in her hatred. I think the three of them should go off to thier cave until the debate begins ::) Liberals accuse Convervatives of hate, and yet they spew it everywhere they go!

Conservative enough to know that theDemocrats had thier convention last month and there are no jerky Republicans protesting and whining. Now, just when the Republican Convention is getting under way look who's there to whine. Michael Moore who could become the new spokesperson for Slim-Fast if he ever changed his clothes and showered and got rid of the old crusty hat on his matted down hair, standing next to that "wonderful" example of a representor of GOD, Jesse Jackson! Oh, and let's not forget Hillary throwing in her hatred. I think the three of them should go off to thier cave until the debate begins ::) Liberals accuse Convervatives of hate, and yet they spew it everywhere they go!


Can somebody please explain to me what he is trying to say.  All I read is hate being spewed.
Bodacious you are much to old for temper tantrums and name calling.  Take a time out
and when you have collected your thoughts we can discuss the issues.

Can somebody please explain to me what he is trying to say.  All I read is hate being spewed.
Bodacious you are much to old for temper tantrums and name calling.  Take a time out
and when you have collected your thoughts we can discuss the issues.

I'm more conservative than liberal...and i can't stand that blow-hard Moore....but even I don't understand what Bodacious Boy means! ???

I'm more conservative than liberal...and i can't stand that blow-hard Moore....but even I don't understand what Bodacious Boy means! ???
I apologize for not being more clear. I was merely trying to say that the Republicans had respect enough to let the Democrats have thier Convention in peace, so WHY can't the Democrats be decent enought to do the same?

I apologize for not being more clear. I was merely trying to say that the Republicans had respect enough to let the Democrats have thier Convention in peace, so WHY can't the Democrats be decent enought to do the same?

The Republicans have the Presidency, the Senate, the House, the Supreme Court, the majority of the governorships, a Federal Reserve chairman who was an Ayn Rand disciple,  most of the corporate executives in their pocket...I mean, they'd look pretty silly if they started bellyachiing about how things are going now!
::)

I'm more conservative than liberal...and i can't stand that blow-hard Moore....but even I don't understand what Bodacious Boy means! ???

That's OK, neither does Bodacious Boy!
:P

and NOW that slob Moore is gracing Rolling Stone Magazine  :P

Conservative enough to know that theDemocrats had thier convention last month and there are no jerky Republicans protesting and whining. Now, just when the Republican Convention is getting under way look who's there to whine. Michael Moore who could become the new spokesperson for Slim-Fast if he ever changed his clothes and showered and got rid of the old crusty hat on his matted down hair, standing next to that "wonderful" example of a representor of GOD, Jesse Jackson! Oh, and let's not forget Hillary throwing in her hatred. I think the three of them should go off to thier cave until the debate begins ::) Liberals accuse Convervatives of hate, and yet they spew it everywhere they go!


It doesn't matter if nobody understands it, BodaciousBoy. You gave me a laugh - well done to you, man.  ;D

and NOW that slob Moore is gracing Rolling Stone Magazine  :P

Hey, I thought it was bad enough when Dr. Hook made the Cover of Rolling Stone!  Don't worry, next month they'll have Karl Rove in a leather biker jacket, posing with his Fox Terrier, Adolph.
:D

The Republicans have the Presidency, the Senate, the House, the Supreme Court, the majority of the governorships, a Federal Reserve chairman who was an Ayn Rand disciple,  most of the corporate executives in their pocket...I mean, they'd look pretty silly if they started bellyachiing about how things are going now!
::)


Well, don't forget...  the PEOPLE elected the people to most of those positions.  It is not like they staged a coup and placed themselves there.

And as for the Federal Reserve chariman...  Bill Clinton had 8 years to replace him, and that did not happen.  Since Allan Greenspan was good enough for Bill Clinton, why is he not good enough now?

Well, don't forget...  the PEOPLE elected the people to most of those positions.  It is not like they staged a coup and placed themselves there.

And as for the Federal Reserve chariman...  Bill Clinton had 8 years to replace him, and that did not happen.  Since Allan Greenspan was good enough for Bill Clinton, why is he not good enough now?

Yeah, that's my point, Republican voters put most of those guys on office, so why would they complain?  They're in charge!
I didn't like Greenspan under Clinton, either.  Clinton was basically a pro-business, socially moderate Republican who happened to be a Democrat.  I mean, he resembles the pre-Reagan Republicans.  Reagan ushered in the age of extremist chicanery in the Republican party.  The Republican propanda machine tried so hard to turn Clinton into a cross between Abbie Hoffmann and Larry Flynt that they totally lost sight of what the man was really about.

Yeah, that's my point, Republican voters put most of those guys on office, so why would they complain?  They're in charge!
I didn't like Greenspan under Clinton, either.  Clinton was basically a pro-business, socially moderate Republican who happened to be a Democrat.  I mean, he resembles the pre-Reagan Republicans.  Reagan ushered in the age of extremist chicanery in the Republican party.  The Republican propanda machine tried so hard to turn Clinton into a cross between Abbie Hoffmann and Larry Flynt that they totally lost sight of what the man was really about.


Republican voters?  How about *ALL* voters?  I can't think of a general election where only Republicans voted.

And either I am dellusional, or you are.  Clinton a "socially moderate" Republican?  I am still shaking my head at that one.

I thought that I would return to this topic, and bring up why I originally started it.

One thing that I notice is that on here, there are 2 main groups.  You have the Left, and the Right.  And there is a very small group that is in the middle.  I like to think that I am one of those that is in the middle.  In fact, by looking at the poll Catwoman listed, that is almost exactly where I am.

According to that poll, I ranked about 3 points to the right, and about 2 points Authoritarian.  Considering I am Conservative and pro "law and order", that is probably pretty close.  By according to that poll (and by myself) I am hardly a "raving right-wing lunatic".

I believe in fair trade and business expansion.  But I also believe that business should not be exploitive of either the environment or the people.  I believe in law and order, but do not want a police state.  I believe that EVERYBODY is equal, and should be treated as such.  I believe in the right to own firearms, but that criminal use of them should be severely punished.

I believe in the "right to choose", but wish that the choice made was for life.  I believe that people who prey on our children are the worst form of scum, and should be dealt with more seriously then other criminals.  I do not believe in "hate crime" laws.  To me, any violent crime is hateful by it's very nature.  The US is not the "Policeman Of The World".  But if nobody else will take action to protect other countries, I do not want to stand around doing nothing and see innocent people killed.

I believe our justice system should be a "forum to find the facts and punish the guilty".  Not what it has become, a system of lawyers lying to get the guilty off.  I believe that this is the greatest country on the planet, but that does not mean that we are better then anybody else.  I believe that ANYBODY can succede, not just the Rich White Males.

Raceism, sexism, anti-Semitism, anti-Catholocism, "gay bashing", these are all disgusting actions, and should not be tolerated in any form.  Profit is a good thing for business, but it should not be put above the needs of the employees and customers.  The Earth and nature is strong and resiliant.  While it should not be exploited, it can be harvested in a respectful and careful manner.

If you actually read what I just put down, you will see that most of my views swing both directions on the political pendulum.  But by seeing some of the responses in this forum, I have often had to wonder.

One thing I can encourage everybody is to look at yourself with open eyes.  I do not condem anybody for their viewpoints (as long at is it not hateful).  I believe that the Constitution gives everybody the right to make a horses ass of themselves.  ;D  (said very much tongue-in-cheek).

I admit, I greatly love reading the responses in here.  I also love seeing that I often find common ground with both sides.  While Don Carlos and I disagree a lot, we also quite often find common ground on things we both agree with.  And if I can find things in common with somebody who uses Che Guevera as his avatar, I can't be all that far to the Right, can I?

Republican voters?  How about *ALL* voters?  I can't think of a general election where only Republicans voted.

And either I am dellusional, or you are.  Clinton a "socially moderate" Republican?  I am still shaking my head at that one.

So you think he's socially liberal?  On what grounds?

I think Arnold put the democrat or republican issue the best:

If you believe that government should be accountable to the people, not the people to the government, then you are a Republican.
If you believe a person should be treated as an individual, not as a member of an interest group, then you are a Republican.
If you believe your family knows how to spend your money better than the government does, then you are a Republican.
If you believe our educational system should be held accountable for the progress of our children, then you are a Republican.
If you believe this country, not the United Nations, is the best hope for democracy, then you are a Republican.
And, ladies and gentlemen, if you believe that we must be fierce and relentless and terminate terrorism, then you are a Republican.
Now, there's another way you can tell you're a Republican.  You have faith in free enterprise, faith in the resourcefulness of the American people and faith in the U.S. economy.

I think Arnold put the democrat or republican issue the best:

If you believe that government should be accountable to the people, not the people to the government, then you are a Republican.
Hence the USA Patriot Act, which makes the any person accountable the government darn well pleases!
If you believe a person should be treated as an individual, not as a member of an interest group, then you are a Republican.
Hence the Heritage Foundation, the NRA, the Cato Institute, the Thursday Group, The Heartland Institute, the Center for a Constructive Tomorrow, and so and so on and so on...
If you believe your family knows how to spend your money better than the government does, then you are a Republican.
Hence tax policy that cuts taxes for corporations and raises payroll taxes for working families.
If you believe our educational system should be held accountable for the progress of our children, then you are a Republican.
Hence the movement to destroy our public schools in favor of chartered education, which has been proven to be a laughing stock.
If you believe this country, not the United Nations, is the best hope for democracy, then you are a Republican.
Hence the illegal disenfranchisement of voters unlikely to vote Republican--out of respect for democracy, of course.
And, ladies and gentlemen, if you believe that we must be fierce and relentless and terminate terrorism, then you are a Republican.
Hence the squandering of hundreds of billions of dollars on a war for oil and capitalist plunder in Iraq instead of confronting Saudi Arabia, home to 19 of 20 9/11 hijackers.
Now, there's another way you can tell you're a Republican.  You have faith in free enterprise, faith in the resourcefulness of the American people and faith in the U.S. economy.
Hence no-bid government contracts for Halliburton, state subisidies for small business destroying retail leviathan Wal-Mart, crony capitalism for the super-rich international elite in the Carlyle group, and the export of the American blue collar economy to slave-wage Third World labor....and a shady governor-recall scheme that put a dopey Austrian B-movie muscleman in charge of the eigth largest economy of the world.
:o

I believe our justice system should be a "forum to find the facts and punish the guilty".  Not what it has become, a system of lawyers lying to get the guilty off.  .



It is also quite apparent that the justice system has become a system of lawyers trying to get the guilty off, and a system of prosecutors trying to get a conviction without regard to the guilt or innocence of the accused, even if they have to manufacture or hide evidence. 

I think Arnold put the democrat or republican issue the best:

If you believe that government should be accountable to the people, not the people to the government, then you are a Republican.
If you believe a person should be treated as an individual, not as a member of an interest group, then you are a Republican.
If you believe your family knows how to spend your money better than the government does, then you are a Republican.
If you believe our educational system should be held accountable for the progress of our children, then you are a Republican.
If you believe this country, not the United Nations, is the best hope for democracy, then you are a Republican.
And, ladies and gentlemen, if you believe that we must be fierce and relentless and terminate terrorism, then you are a Republican.
Now, there's another way you can tell you're a Republican.  You have faith in free enterprise, faith in the resourcefulness of the American people and faith in the U.S. economy.




Nice spin. But why not try this?


Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:

1. Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad
guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when
Cheney did business with him, and a bad guy when Bush
needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

2. Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is
communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital
to a spirit of international harmony.

3. The United States should get out of the United
Nations; our highest national priority is enforcing
U.N. resolutions against Iraq.

4. A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her
own body, but multi-national corporations can make
decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

5. Jesus loves you and shares your hatred of
homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

6. The best way to improve military morale is to
praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and
combat pay.

7. If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents
won't have sex.

8. A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our
long-time allies ("that's old Europe") then expect
their cooperation and money.

9. Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound
policy. Providing health care to all Americans is
socialism.

10. Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are
junk science, but creationism should be taught in
schools.

11. A President lying about an extramarital affair is
an impeachable offense.  A President lying to enlist
support for a war in which thousands die is solid
defense policy.

12. Government should limit itself to the powers named
in the Constitution, which include banning gay
marriages and censoring the Internet.

13. The public has a right to know about Hillary's
cattle trades, but George Bush's driving record is
none of our business, nor are D!ck Cheney's task force discussions with
energy industry our business either.

14. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime
unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an
illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.

15. What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital
national interest, but what Bush did in the 1980s is irrelevant.





Cat

US out of UN!

US out of UN!

Oh, well, if you just want to quick extreme right wing bumper stickers from the '80s, here's one from Lyndon LaRouche:
"Nuclear Plants not Marijuana Plants"

Nice spin. But why not try this?


Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:

1. Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad
guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when
Cheney did business with him, and a bad guy when Bush
needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

2. Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is
communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital
to a spirit of international harmony.

3. The United States should get out of the United
Nations; our highest national priority is enforcing
U.N. resolutions against Iraq.

4. A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her
own body, but multi-national corporations can make
decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

5. Jesus loves you and shares your hatred of
homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

6. The best way to improve military morale is to
praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and
combat pay.

7. If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents
won't have sex.

8. A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our
long-time allies ("that's old Europe") then expect
their cooperation and money.

9. Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound
policy. Providing health care to all Americans is
socialism.

10. Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are
junk science, but creationism should be taught in
schools.

11. A President lying about an extramarital affair is
an impeachable offense.  A President lying to enlist
support for a war in which thousands die is solid
defense policy.

12. Government should limit itself to the powers named
in the Constitution, which include banning gay
marriages and censoring the Internet.

13. The public has a right to know about Hillary's
cattle trades, but George Bush's driving record is
none of our business, nor are D!ck Cheney's task force discussions with
energy industry our business either.

14. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime
unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an
illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.

15. What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital
national interest, but what Bush did in the 1980s is irrelevant.





Cat



First off are you sure you know what spin means?  Okay here I go:

1.Sure Reagan armed him, but Reagan is not running for president now is he?  At the time Saddam truly was the lesser of two evils, but still evil.  He commited genocide for Christ's sake, I thought liberals were the compassion party.  How many more people had to die?
2.Well I guess it is a double-standard, but they are not led by Fidel Castro.
3.I already said it, US OUT OF UN.  I'm sick of asking them, most americans do want us out, and the UN does nothing to stop senseless murder around the world, its all talk and no do.
4.A woman making a decision with her own body is okay, but a woman making a decision if the baby she is having can live or die is not okay with me.  If Bush wins the genocide ends (because in the next 4 years whoever win the White House gets to pick 3 new supreme court justices.
5.Gosh this is to ignorant/stupid to even really respond to.
6.Where exactly have you heard veterans benefits are being slashed.  That is a liberal talking point proved wrong so many times its not even funny.  Proof maybe?
7.Oh they still will, but condems in schools?  Come on!  Something seems morally wrong with teaching 13 year-old its okay to have sex at their age as long as they wear a condem.
8.Old friends are not really good friends.  France and Germany may be allies, but they really don't give a dam* about us.  The UK I think is our best friend today.
9.Do we provide health care to Iraqis?  I didn't know that.  Socialized health care has been proven wrong so many times.  First off the quality is low, and people should be able to choose their own doctors.  Great Britain and Canada are the best examples of this.  Look at Canada they have outrageous waiting lists at hospitals across their country.  The Calgary Herald reports that in Calgary alone about 25,000 residents suffer and even die as they linger before obtaining the necessary treatment at the city's 4 major hospitals.  Its so bad the waiting list is 62 weeks to get a hip replacement at one hospital, and 54 weeks for a knee replacement at another.  That is just the tip of the iceberg too.  The Canadian Medical Association has released a 10-point plan call ''The taming of Queue'' that proposes benchmark waiting times.  But the Calgary health region is broke, even with the hundreds of millions thrown into it by Canada's government (which came from tax dollars.)  Socialized medicine doesn't work, never has never will.
10.Creationism should be taught in school in Religion classes, and I have never heard anyone in my life say tobacco isn't really dangerous.  Global warming is probably a real problem, but I always wonder how if the weather man can't predict the weather tomorrow, how can he(a scientist) do it 100 years from now? 
11.Thousands?  Yeah we did lose thousands on 9/11 didn't we.  We reached the 1,000 mark 3 years ago today.  Clinton should and did get impeached, he lied under oath, a crime which everyone here would have gone to jail for 5 years.  He stood up and vowed to ''tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help me God'' and he still LIED.  Bush lied?  No.  Everyone knows the information he got was flawed, but the democrats want to keep trashing him like its his fault.  Russia, the CIA, and even some middle-eastern countries all said Iraq has WMD's.  Don't give me that crap.
12.I only support censoring the internet in the parts where the porn industry uses cartoons to draw kids to their filth.  Go to google.com and type in disney, some of the reults are porn!  Sick isn't it?  Gay marriage should be left up to the states, a constitutional amendment will never pass anyway, but if DOMA every gets overturned it will pass.  Leave DOMA alone and leave gay marriage to the U.S. states, that way the other 49 states don't have to suffer because of Massachusett's mistake. Marriage isn't a constitutional right, owning guns is.  And what do the democrats want?  To ban guns.
13.We already know about Bush's DUI's, the democrats brought that out 4 days before the election in 2000 and Bush almost lost because of it.  Cattle trade?  I really haven't even heard of it, all political figures are attacked in their personal lifes, get over it.
14.Limbaugh was addicted to pain killers, not really in the same ballpark with Cocaine and Meth.  His drugs were legal, those aren't.  How many people addicted to drugs and innocent people killed because someone is doing drugs while driving have to die before y'all get its suicide.
15.Again, all political figures are attacked, and both sides are guilty of double-standards and you know it.  Get over it.

It is also quite apparent that the justice system has become a system of lawyers trying to get the guilty off, and a system of prosecutors trying to get a conviction without regard to the guilt or innocence of the accused, even if they have to manufacture or hide evidence. 


WHile this does happen on occasion, it is very rare.  In fact, I believe that 99.9999998% of the "manufactured evidence" claim is just coprolite by defense lawyers.

Don't forget, OJ's lawyers claimed that all the blood evidense was manufactured.  He claimed that the bloody glove and socks found in his house were planted.

David Westerfield claimed that the hair and fiber evidence from when he killed Danielle Van Dam was manufactured.  He claimed that the body could not have been placed because the police were wrong about the time of death.  His lawyers claimed a different time, which was conviently a time when he was already under continuous surveilence.  Never mind the fact that right before she was finally found, his lawyers were trying to arrange a plea bargain for LWOP, if he told them where her body was.

Since 1981, Mumia Abu-Jamal has claimed that he is innocent in the murder of a Philadelphia Police Officer.  Never mind the fact that Mumia was shot by the Officer's handgun.  And never mind the fact that the officer was struck 5 times by Mumia's handgun.  Many witnesses said they saw Mumia shoot the officer, then walk up and shoot him multiple times in the head and groin.  And when they were both in the hospital, he told a nurse that he hoped the officer was dead.  Yet, he still claims he was innocent, and that he was trying to help the officer from a mysterious "3rd person".

Andrea Yates murdered her 5 children.  Yet in her trial, her lawyer claimed it was "postpartum depression".

Au Pair nanny Louise Woodward was found guilty of 2nd degree murder in the death of the 8 month old baby she was hired to care for.  Her claim was that the parents had harmed the child.  Even though the injuries that caused the death (he was dropped on the floor) could not have happened at any time other then when she was taking care of the infant.  After being convicted, the jury imposed a sentence of 15 years to life.  The judge disagreed however, and order her immediately released.  She has since left the country and returned to England.  (side note: the "expert" who tried to prove she was innocent was none other then Barry Scheck, of OJ fame)

In 2000 at Veteran Field in Philadelphia, an 11 year old girl was dragged to a trash area and gang raped by three 16 year old boys.  Their defense is that she was "flirty" with them, and asked for it.  One of the rapists was found not guilty, and the other 2 were convicted, and were sentenced to 2-3 months in a treatment center.  The judge claimed that the criminals deserved "mercy".

In 2000, Alejandro Avila was accused of rape of the niece and daughter of his then girlfriend.  Both girls were 9 years old.  Even though he failed a lie detector test and forensic evidence showed that both girls had been sexually abused, his lawyer claimed that he was innocent, and that the girlfriend had done the abuse.  He also claimed that the charges were all false, and were only filed because they had broken up.  He was found innocent of all charges.

In 2002, five year old Samantha Runnion was kidnapped, raped, and killed.  Samantha lived in the same apartment complex that Alejandro Avila's girlfriend lived.  Eyewitness descriptions of the car used to kidnap her were to Alejandro Avila.  Blood and DNA evidence linked Alejandro Avila to the crime.

Maybe if the trial in 2000 was more interested in TRUTH then in "getting the scumbag criminal free", then Alejandro Avila would have been in jail in 2002 for the rapes he did 2 years prior.  Then, Samantha might have actually been able to enjoy her 6th and 7th birthdays.  But she will never have any other, because Alejandro learned the lesson from his first trial: do not leave a living witness to your molestation.

First off are you sure you know what spin means?  Okay here I go:

1.Sure Reagan armed him, but Reagan is not running for president now is he?  At the time Saddam truly was the lesser of two evils, but still evil.  He commited genocide for Christ's sake, I thought liberals were the compassion party.  How many more people had to die?
Saddam committed genocide for Christ's sake?  Maybe he'll get off the hook and Dubya will say, "Have a cigar!"  We sold Saddam the gas he used when he "gassed his own people," so we need to own up to our complicity in his atrocities.  We did NOTHING when he killed all those Kurds.  Hire a thief to catch a thief, don't be surprised when your pocket gets picked!

I already said it, US OUT OF UN.  I'm sick of asking them, most americans do want us out, and the UN does nothing to stop senseless murder around the world, its all talk and no do.
Most Americans learn squat about history in school and are systematically starved for any perspective on foreign affairs Mr. Limbaugh doesn't want them to hear.
A woman making a decision with her own body is okay, but a woman making a decision if the baby she is having can live or die is not okay with me.  If Bush wins the genocide ends (because in the next 4 years whoever win the White House gets to pick 3 new supreme court justices.
Fetuses are not people, women are not incubators, and if they try to overturn Roe v. Wade, there will be hell to pay!

Where exactly have you heard veterans benefits are being slashed.  That is a liberal talking point proved wrong so many times its not even funny.  Proof maybe?
http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=3402
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0328-11.htm
But this is indeed a murky issue.  It is clear Bush increased spending on vets benefits for 2001 and 2002, however, when you crucify the fiscal health of the country on tax cuts for the rich, and then go marching off to war, you will inevetibly have slash social benefits of all kinds, including veterans benefits.  Record federal budget deficits make life harder for everybody except the super-rich, and veterans are very few among their ranks.

Oh they still will, but condems in schools?  Come on!  Something seems morally wrong with teaching 13 year-old its okay to have sex at their age as long as they wear a condem. "Condem," is that a Freudian slip, or what?
:D
Old friends are not really good friends.  France and Germany may be allies, but they really don't give a dam* about us.  The UK I think is our best friend today.
So? The Republican-dominated U.S. government doesn't give a dam* about me, sow why should I begrudge France and Germany.  Heck, it's not their job to care about me.  Incidentally, Mr. GWBush2004, the Republicans don't give a dam* about you either.  Sure, you make a comfortable living, but you're not among the financial elite they're looking out for.  Now you may thinks to yerself, "the government isn't supposed to help me, it's my job to help myself."  Good man, self-reliance, I'm all for it.  However, that's not what the board of Exxon-Mobil says when they meet at corporate headquarters!
Do we provide health care to Iraqis?  I didn't know that.  Socialized health care has been proven wrong so many times.  First off the quality is low, and people should be able to choose their own doctors.  Great Britain and Canada are the best examples of this.  Look at Canada they have outrageous waiting lists at hospitals across their country. 
There are problems with ALL health care systems.  We're all aware of them.  However, we can no longer entrust the public health to private interests.  If you put together the number of Americans with no healthcare, or woefully inadequate healthcare, it exceeds the combined total populations of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand!  The American public needs to adopt the presumption that anything rich Republicans says we're not supposed to want is probably the right thing to fight for!
Creationism should be taught in school in Religion classes, and I have never heard anyone in my life say tobacco isn't really dangerous.  Global warming is probably a real problem, but I always wonder how if the weather man can't predict the weather tomorrow, how can he(a scientist) do it 100 years from now? 
Your evangelical friends will not be happy until fundamentalist Christian dogma is taught as absolute truth, but not in PUBLIC schools.  They don't want public schools to exist.  Maybe you haven't heard anyone say tobacco isn't really "dangerous," though in your lifetime Dr. Tobacco was still saying there was no hard proof smoking was addictive.  Anyway, every time you leaf through a magazine, you see ads telling you smoking is fun, hip, macho, and sexy.
BTW, my friend, get a dictionary and look up the difference between "weather" and "climate."
Thousands?  Yeah we did lose thousands on 9/11 didn't we.  We reached the 1,000 mark 3 years ago today.  Clinton should and did get impeached, he lied under oath, a crime which everyone here would have gone to jail for 5 years.  He stood up and vowed to ''tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help me God'' and he still LIED.  Bush lied?  No.  Everyone knows the information he got was flawed, but the democrats want to keep trashing him like its his fault.  Russia, the CIA, and even some middle-eastern countries all said Iraq has WMD's.  Don't give me that crap.
The Bush Administration used only the intelligence favorable to going to war with Iraq, which it was going to do 9/11 or no 9/11.  The flawed intelligence was countered by other intelligence the Bush people conveniently ignored.
I only support censoring the internet in the parts where the porn industry uses cartoons to draw kids to their filth.  Go to google.com and type in disney, some of the reults are porn!  Sick isn't it?
Does the Google safe search option filter those out?
You know, I would like to find and dismember all the punks who create spyware, adware, scumware, and Trojan Horses that infect people's computers, but it's impossible to do.  I let my guard down last month and got infested with that swill.  I managed to get rid of most of it, and I'm still trying to get rid of CoolWebSearch. 
The problem with censoring the internet is you can't do it just a little.  The porn people, the gambling people, and the spyware people live to outfox the blockers and the censors.  If you were to insure that no ten year old kid would ever see smut, you would have a narrow, stunted, state-controlled network of government-approved white bread, nothing resembling the WWW we know now.
Limbaugh was addicted to pain killers, not really in the same ballpark with Cocaine and Meth.  His drugs were legal, those aren't.  How many people addicted to drugs and innocent people killed because someone is doing drugs while driving have to die before y'all get its suicide.
Nooooo, Limbaughs drugs were NOT legal.  If you obtain prescription drugs without a prescription you are commiting a CRIME.  If you kite or forge a prescription that's called "uttering" a false document and is just as illegal as buying crack on the street.  If you buy a "controlled substance" on the street, it doesn't matter if it's heroin or Valium, it's still a crime.  It shouldn't matter if Limbaugh does it, Jeb Bush's daughter does it, or Joe Blow does it.  But Limbaugh believes only Joe Blow should go to jail.

Nooooo, Limbaughs drugs were NOT legal.  If you obtain prescription drugs without a prescription you are commiting a CRIME.  If you kite or forge a prescription that's called "uttering" a false document and is just as illegal as buying crack on the street.  If you buy a "controlled substance" on the street, it doesn't matter if it's heroin or Valium, it's still a crime.  It shouldn't matter if Limbaugh does it, Jeb Bush's daughter does it, or Joe Blow does it.  But Limbaugh believes only Joe Blow should go to jail.


In reguards to Limbaugh, I take a middle ground when it comes to his drug addiction.

As a former drug counselor, we recognize that most people addicted to prescription drugs do not start out looking for a high (when the drug was originally prescribed to the person).  Those are what are normally considered "accidential addictions".  They are still addictions, but the idea is not as much to "get a high", but to continue to feel to them what has "become normal".  This is similar to the "maintenance fixes" that heroin addicts use.

As far as Noelle Bush, that was straight-out drug abuse, no if, and, or but.  Her drug was not for pain (which Limbaugh's was).  She had never been prescribed the drug she was trying to acquire.  Plain and simple, she was a College kid, looking for a high.  His was an accidental addiction, her's was an intentional desire to get high.

That does not excuse what he did.  It was still wrong, and he got treatment for his problem.  But there is a difference.

Add to that, the fact that Limbaugh is a public figure, who placed himself before the eye of the public and the media.  Noelle however is a private citizen.  Her father is the Governor of Florida, she is not.  It is not really fair to bring her up in this type of situation.  She had no control of who her father is, just as her father does not have any control of what she does as an adult.

And you can't blame everything on parents.  Even kids raised properly in all areas have become criminals.  Just as kids who have been raised in slum housing projects have gone on to become Doctors and successful members of society.  Limbaugh is a fair target, but why not leave Noelle out of this political debate?

In reguards to Limbaugh, I take a middle ground when it comes to his drug addiction.

As a former drug counselor, we recognize that most people addicted to prescription drugs do not start out looking for a high (when the drug was originally prescribed to the person).  Those are what are normally considered "accidential addictions".  They are still addictions, but the idea is not as much to "get a high", but to continue to feel to them what has "become normal".  This is similar to the "maintenance fixes" that heroin addicts use.
What bugs me is the hypocrisy.  These guys love to talk about "personal responsibility."  By conservative dictum, Limbaugh had a "personal responsibility" to recognize he had a problem, and get his sorry @ss OFF of the dope.  That means going to NA and saying, "My name is Rush and I'm an addict."  From there he would use his "self-discipline" ('nother favorite buzz phrase of the Right) to follow through on the treatment plan and tame his cravings.  But he don't have his @ss no "personal responsibility," no "self-discipline."  He's gonna turn his life into one long Andy Warhol pill party!  He's sending his maid down to the Denny's parking lot with 55-gallon drum to pick up his stash for the week!
I have made exactly the same argument you made on behalf of El Rushbo on behalf of Joe Blow doper, only to have right-wingers say I'm making "excuses" for people who won't take "personal responsibility."  Just like Dr. Bennett who said of his eight million dollar gambling addiction, "I never gambled away the milk money," somehow Rush is better than the junkie in the alley because he is stinking rich! Like I say, the Right hates responsibility, unless it has the word "personal" in front of it AND they're talking about poor people!
Florida prosecuters are still after Rush's punk @ss.  I wish them luck.

Add to that, the fact that Limbaugh is a public figure, who placed himself before the eye of the public and the media.  Noelle however is a private citizen.  Her father is the Governor of Florida, she is not.  It is not really fair to bring her up in this type of situation.  She had no control of who her father is, just as her father does not have any control of what she does as an adult.

And you can't blame everything on parents.  Even kids raised properly in all areas have become criminals.  Just as kids who have been raised in slum housing projects have gone on to become Doctors and successful members of society.  Limbaugh is a fair target, but why not leave Noelle out of this political debate?

Fair?  I'll tell you something about fair!  If Noelle Bush was named Noelle Smith and she was a poor black lady on welfare, she would have gone to jail!  She would have gotten a crummy public defender who would have sold her right up the river.  Not that old Jeb would have heard of a Noelle Smith, but if he did, he'd say she deserves to go to jail for being a druggie and a scofflaw.  Different money, different standards!

Fair?  I'll tell you something about fair!  If Noelle Bush was named Noelle Smith and she was a poor black lady on welfare, she would have gone to jail! 


Actually, most areas have programs for "first time offenders".

As long as you are not dealing, a lot of areas will accept a plea bargain in exchange for drug treatment.  Some even go as far as expunging the record after successful completion and a preset "clean time".

That Noelle got that is no surprise at all.  I know of several veterans that entered the VA treatment center because of such an agreement.

These programs vary by location and state though.  As long as it is a first offense, and the amount is not considered to be for anything other then personal use, you can get into them.  That is nothing special or unique.

Actually, most areas have programs for "first time offenders".

As long as you are not dealing, a lot of areas will accept a plea bargain in exchange for drug treatment.  Some even go as far as expunging the record after successful completion and a preset "clean time".

That Noelle got that is no surprise at all.  I know of several veterans that entered the VA treatment center because of such an agreement.

These programs vary by location and state though.  As long as it is a first offense, and the amount is not considered to be for anything other then personal use, you can get into them.  That is nothing special or unique.

It depends on the state, the drugs, and the quantity thereof, but you're most  likely right.  In the case of a first time forgery of a prescription, or first time illegal position of prescription drugs, I've never heard of anyone going to jail.

It depends on the state, the drugs, and the quantity thereof, but you're most  likely right.  In the case of a first time forgery of a prescription, or first time illegal position of prescription drugs, I've never heard of anyone going to jail.


As hard-line as I am against drugs, I am fully in favor of these programs.  I believe in treatment and giving addicts help.

However, if they do not follow-through with the treatment, then they should be punished.  It is on them if they are given a chance and fail to take advantage of it.  If they are caught a second time, then the punishment should be much worse.  I also favor a "3 strikes" type of view, considering them habitual criminals.  If somebody has such little self control, then they should not be in society.  (I also feel like this for drunk drivers).

I much prefer concentrating on the drug dealers.  They are the ones that should get no pity.  They are the real criminals.

I'm confused as to why this one is in here ???  PPD is a very serious mental illness that she truly did suffer from and was undergoing treatment for.  While in most cases, the mother does not murder the child, many have had thoughts of doing so.  Also, there have been more cases than I care to count where the mother has committed suicide because of it.  IMO, charges should have been brought against the father as well for encouraging her to have more children when she had been diagnosed with it in the past and they had BOTH been told that subsequent pregnancies would result in longer, deeper bouts with PPD.

I think dad was a big creep.  I just remembered his demeanor on camera.  I understand immediately after your children are murdered, you're going to be in shock.  However, his behavior was indicative of something more sociopathic.  Really eerie.
I don't see how the state could bring charges against him just for being a creep. 

I thought she was insane, but not evil.  Yates needed to be locked up in a psychiatric facility for the rest of her life.

I thought she was?  I think the dad should've been charged with "reckless endangerment".  If you knowingly leave your child with someone who you know has a problem, and that child is injured, then you are responsible.  There was recently a case here in IL where a mother was charged with "reckless endangerment" because she left her kids in the care of someone who she KNEW was high and the kids ended up starting a fire because the "babysitter" passed out.

It's easier to define on or off drugs than it is to define mentally competent versus not mentally competent.  I'd have to look up the Yates case again, but if she did harm her children in the past and was diagnosed with a sever mental illness prior to the her murdering her children, there may be a case of "reckless endangerment."  I think it would still be tough to make the case stick.

She had never physically harmed them, but after prior births (if I'm not mistaken, the last 3 out of the 5), she had been treated for Post Partum Depression and I believe had threatened suicide.  The doctors had warned them that once you get it, if you have subsequent births, you are most likely to get it again, and each time, it gets worse.  After the last birth, she was so bad that his mother would come over each day (and stay until he got home from work) to make sure nothing happened to her or the kids.  Unfortunately, on this day, she was late or something :(

Of course, post partum depression is treatable.  The mother with PPD needs pychiatric care and close monitoring.  In the Yates' cult-like lifestyle, Mrs. Yates' needs were severely neglected.  However, can you make the case that her participation in their isolated and zealous lifestyle was forced and non-consensual?

Ok, this is my results for the political compass test:

Economic Left/Right: -9.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.00


So, I am pretty far left.

Ok, this is my results for the political compass test:

Economic Left/Right: -9.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.00


So, I am pretty far left.


"Pretty far"?  I would have to admit, that is about the most extreme result I have seen on this test!

"Pretty far"?  I would have to admit, that is about the most extreme result I have seen on this test!



Actually, Carlos' score is
Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Authoritairian/Libertarian: -8.62


I don't think you can get more left than that.


Mine is not as far

Economic Left/Right: -7.50
Authoritairan/Libertarian: -6.82


But still to the left.



Cat

Actually, Carlos' score is
Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Authoritairian/Libertarian: -8.62

Mine is not as far
Economic Left/Right: -7.50
Authoritairan/Libertarian: -6.82


Then is it any wonder when I am amazed at some of the opinions in here.  :P

My results are:
Economic Left/Right:                3.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian:  1.95

I think I can most closely claim the "Moderate" crown in here.  And that is a position I think I fit right along with.

Then is it any wonder when I am amazed at some of the opinions in here.  :P

My results are:
Economic Left/Right:                3.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian:  1.95

I think I can most closely claim the "Moderate" crown in here.  And that is a position I think I fit right along with.


Just bringing this back from the graveyard, so newer members will know what we were talking about.  :)

As my avitar and sig line might suggest, I have never denied being on the left.  I fact, I am probable the most leftist contributer to the board.  I have read a good deal of Karl Marx, probably more than anyone else who posts here, and, with a few exceptions, what he has to say makes a good deal of sense, both as historical/economic analysis and as human, and humane values.  I make no bones about that, nor do I make any appolgies.  And yes, these ideas inform the posts I make regarding specific issues,  I would add, agreeing with Karl's mother, that he might have written less about capital and made a bit more of it.

I got a 4 on the madrabbit test, putting me with Ted Kennedy.

Political Compass:

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -6.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.31

And I know i've taken it before, I thought it would be interesting to take it again.

i tested -5.5 economic and -5.74 social on political compass, which is even further left than last time i took it

I got a 16

i tested -5.5 economic and -5.74 social on political compass, which is even further left than last time i took it


I took the test again, and I am kinda shocked.  Here are my previous results:

Economic Left/Right:                3.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian:  1.95


Here are my new results:

Economic Left/Right:                1.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian:  0.56

I am going to take it again in another week, just to see if it is truely accurate, or today was just a fluke because it is almost quitting time on Friday.  :P

I am still very moderate, just more so now then I was before. 

I scored 8 on the first test. And I'm somewhere in the bottom-left corner on the second test (politcal compass). Very much what I expected.

the first test i couldn't answer because i'm canadian so half of the questions meant nothing to me.

the second test...Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -4.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.59

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -6.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.64

Almost on Ghandi's spot  :o

Which is odd, because i'm not a fan of his..


I got a 10 on the first, which put me level with Hillary Clinton..

Fair enough

I'm a moderate lib, but leaning more lib than moderate  :)

I'm a moderate lib, but leaning more lib than moderate  :)


Considering DevoRule = the old me, ditto.  ;D

In all sense of reality I'm a moderate that leans to the conservative side.  This is looking at all issues, not just a few.  when it comes to abortion I'm 110% conservative, I can point that out too.

The original quiz is gone, so I did a search and found another:


<div align="center">
<a href="http://www.blogthings.com/liborconquiz/">How Liberal / Conservative Are You?</a>
</div>

I don't know if it's the same one, but I scored 85% liberal, 15% conservative.  Which is pretty much how I view myself.  I'm most conservative when it comes to immigration and crime.  I believe illegal immigrants should be sent back, and that we should have less legal immigration.  There are just too many people here!  As far as crime goes, I'm against capital punishment, but I believe we need to be tougher on many criminals.  Whenever you read about a cop dying in the line of duty, for instance, his killer almost always has a rap sheet a mile long and would have been better off locked up.

Between Ariel Sharon and Adolf Hitler on the Political Compass.

Overall: 70% Conservative, 30% Liberal
Social Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal
Personal Responsibility: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
Fiscal Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal
Ethics: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal
Defense and Crime: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal

I'd say that's actually fairly accurate.

Between Ariel Sharon and Adolf Hitler on the Political Compass.


I hope you don't get elected into office  ;D

I hope you don't get elected into office  ;D


It's ok, you wouldn't know about it until the men in brown shirts took you away  ;)

No, i'm kinda suprised really. I dare it's because I basically don't support any sort of rehabilitation programe and am a strong advocate of the death penalty. My feeling is this..
a) I don't feel taxpayers should pay money to rehab some drug addict who's stupid enough to smoke crack or whatever.
b) The facts will show you that rehabilitation (for what it costs) dosen't work.
and c) Anybody stupid enough to do something against the law, well, i don't want them on the streets breeding and commiting more crimes.

It's ok, you wouldn't know about it until the men in brown shirts took you away  ;)

No, i'm kinda suprised really. I dare it's because I basically don't support any sort of rehabilitation programe and am a strong advocate of the death penalty. My feeling is this..
a) I don't feel taxpayers should pay money to rehab some drug addict who's stupid enough to smoke crack or whatever.
b) The facts will show you that rehabilitation (for what it costs) dosen't work.
and c) Anybody stupid enough to do something against the law, well, i don't want them on the streets breeding and commiting more crimes.


I've said this before, but I think that while the ultimate Left view is anti-dp, probably nearly half of American liberals, esp in California, support the dp.  I am weakly for the death penalty, as a lib. It seems like death penalty is most unpopular in New England and the Great Lakes region.

As for rehab, I think we should just make drugs legal.  At least weed, I don't know about crack and stuff but certainly pot.  For stuff that should be illegal, I support rehab if it doesn't cut into education and stuff.

Overall: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal 
Social Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal 
Personal Responsibility: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal 
Fiscal Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal 
Ethics: 0% Conservative, 100% Liberal 
Defense and Crime: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal 

Overall: 65% Conservative, 35% Liberal 
Social Issues: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal 
Personal Responsibility: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal 
Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal 
Ethics: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal 
Defense and Crime: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal 


Although I must say, some of the questions did not give an option that I was 100% in agreement with... but i had to pick one.

Although I must say, some of the questions did not give an option that I was 100% in agreement with... but i had to pick one.


I found myself in the same situation.

I found myself in the same situation.


And the same here.

Most tests today are set up to determine if your either a Psychotic Religious Zealout NeoConservative or a Psychotic Welfare Loving Pinko. There is nothing to determine if one is a Paleo-Conservative or a Liberal.

I came out 95% liberal, but i don't tink it's an accurate quiz.

I came out 95% liberal, but i don't tink it's an accurate quiz.


As i stated above, it basically picks extremes. On many issues i fall right in the middle.

We need a test with more options, but that test came out just about right for me.

I consider myself to be a moderate conservative.


Here is another test.

http://www.politicalbrew.com/politest.cgi

On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Conservative (74).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Conservative (72).