Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I agree with you that retaking the test is not to shape your scores, it is more to refine your opinions. All testing is weighted in a certain way, it depends on the amount of emphasis given to a certain field. IMO, agree/disagree vs. Strongly agree/disagree on this test has too big of a gap. When I modified just a few answers on this test, it switched me from slightly left to further left than Gandhi! Mind you, I didn't change my positions, just my conviction to my thoughts!
Karin, some people who retake the test may try to make their scores 'better', but I think the vast majority who retake it, take it with the idea of being more precise with their answers. In my case, I retook it because I had misunderstood two statements and found out that I had misunderstood after asking two people what the statements really meant. And what's the use of reporting scores that aren't really applicable to oneself? I don't think most people want to misrepresent who they are, or in this case, their political leanings.
I'd like to only see test results from the first try. From reading the posts on another site I've come to the conclusion many have retaken it in order to reshape their score.
I took it once without a thought to the outcome. You should have a column for number of times taken. I don't view it as much of an eye opener knowing so many have manipulated their scores. lol
I'd like to only see test results from the first try. From reading the posts on another site I've come to the conclusion many have retaken it in order to reshape their score.
I took it once without a thought to the outcome. You should have a column for number of times taken. I don't view it as much of an eye opener knowing so many have manipulated their scores. lol
Alex, I like the idea of giving Obama a chance for the same amount of time as repsac3 suggests (a year or two).
Good quote:
quote for the day
"It's a long term problem, starting well before Obama took office, and it's going to take long term solutions, and perhaps a little patience, to get the ship righted, again. If Turdblossom sez we need to take The Long View in judging his boss, Bush 43 (perhaps our kids or grandkids will know the "truth" about him), then surely we can give 44 a year or two before making those same kinda snap judgments that Karl said are likely so wrong about the guy who was actually in office when all of this got started... Just something to consider..." -Blogger repsac3, in the comment section of a conservative blog on the current state of the economy.
Here's an interesting little 3-5 minute test that you might enjoy taking. No need to report your scores if you don't feel like it, but it is somewhat of an eye-opener.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/test
I wouldn't have expected any other answer than the one you gave. I don't think anyone who believes in a god could answer in any other way either.
I don't know who created God and I don't care.
Your stupid polls prove nothing and do not show the venom exhibited.
Your Obama delusion syndrome is clouding your eyes. That poll tells the truth but it conflicts with the fairytale you've concocted in your mind so you resort to calling it a "stupid poll".
Nonetheless
Perhaps in your case it reflects an inherent lack of decency.
Two Steps Back on Labor Rights
By ELAINE L. CHAO
The Obama administration's zeal to not "waste a good crisis," as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton put it, has been stunning even for Washington insiders to behold. In the first 50 days of Barack Obama's presidency, Congress approved $1.2 trillion dollars in new spending, or $24 billion a day. That's $1 billion every hour. The national debt now is $11 trillion and climbing.
The Democratic Party's governing elite has long believed there is no problem that European-style policies cannot cure. This is why President Obama's agenda centers on vastly expanding entitlement programs, strengthening unions, and increasing government control over the private sector.
The stimulus bill contains multiple provisions that burden the already strained unemployment insurance system with new entitlements, such as paying workers who choose to leave the workforce for "family-related" reasons. Imposing such entitlements on an insurance system designed to support workers who are laid off compromises the integrity of the program. To sustain the expanded system in the future, states will have to levy higher unemployment insurance taxes on employers. And raising taxes on jobs will only lead to fewer job opportunities. That is why some governors such as Rick Perry (R., Texas) and Bobby Jindal (R., La.), are taking a pass on stimulus money that would broaden their states' unemployment benefits.
In a move that certainly pleased unions, within days of taking office Mr. Obama issued executive orders rescinding requirements for workers to be informed of their right not to pay portions of union dues attributable to political activities with which they may disagree. These orders are mere prelude to the forthcoming congressional debate over the "Employee Free Choice Act," which should more accurately be called the "Employee No Choice Act." This bill will deprive workers of their right to secret ballot elections in unionization efforts, and impose a 120-day deadline for companies to sign a labor contract -- after which government arbitrators would dictate labor contracts.
Efforts are also underway to cut the budget of the lone federal agency charged with protecting union members' rights and ensuring union integrity. In January, the Department of Labor's Office of Labor-Management Standards implemented a rule requiring that relevant information on union finances be provided to rank-and-file union members to better ensure transparency and accountability, as required by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959. In the rush of actions after the inauguration, the Obama administration delayed the effective date of this rule. It remains to be seen if other union transparency and accountability rules will be gutted or revoked.
Americans should also be concerned about the protectionist impulses -- as evidenced by the "Buy American" provision of the stimulus package -- of those now in charge, which run counter to one of the painful lessons of the Great Depression. Impeding international trade will ignite retaliation by America's trading partners, deepening and prolonging the economic downturn. Policy makers should also resist closing America's doors to skilled workers from overseas, many of whom are educated in our universities and whose talent can help make our economy stronger. Yet provisions like the "Employ American Workers Act" in the stimulus package limits banks that receive government funding from employing skilled foreign workers.
European-style interventions to which the Obama administration is inclined will not make America more competitive in the world-wide economy. Such policies will not increase growth, will not decrease unemployment, and will not increase wages for workers. Evidence of this has been apparent for decades in Europe's declining growth rates, higher unemployment, lower per-capita income, and longer durations of unemployment. America has problems; Europe's are worse.
Yet despite all of this, the Obama administration seems intent on radically expanding government's role. This is because, as White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has stated, "crises are opportunities to do big things."
It was telling that in his recent address to Congress, the president downplayed the credit crisis's culpability for the recession and swiftly segued to implicating oil, health care and education. Why would the president draw a line between the recession and these other issues, unless he wants to exploit the current situation to advance an agenda unrelated -- and even antithetical -- to fixing the economy?
Perhaps spending trillions of taxpayers' yet unearned dollars seems trivial when socialized medicine and rewarding political allies are your priorities. But it is not the change most Americans had in mind.
Ms. Chao was the 24th U.S. Secretary of Labor.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123742166937078741.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#printMode
Lol, You have so many issues it isn't even funny.
"The epithet "The Mutt" is a reference to the man's racial background, and it's amazing that you can't see it as out of bounds. "
Wrong, already explained to you several times. They are his own words and nearly everyone is a Mutt.
Moveon.
Perhaps in your case it reflects an inherent lack of decency.
The words "shrub" and "decider", while derisive, have no racial component... carry no racist overtone.
The epithet "The Mutt" is a reference to the man's racial background, and it's amazing that you can't see it as out of bounds.
We've been through all of this before....
It's a reflection of the terms "shrub", "decider" and you will only see me use it when certain posters use those terms...
Now get over it.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/msgsearchbyboard.aspx?boardID=15109&srchyr=2008&SearchStr=shrub
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/msgsearchbyboard.aspx?boardID=15109&srchyr=2008&SearchStr=decider
Maybe you need to speak with those 2?
"Most of us are Mutts, you just want to turn Obamas statement into something else."
If this is so why is it you who refer to him as "The Mutt". Is it meant to highlight our shared humanity? Face it; his usage was in the form of a self-deprecating comment. Yours is meant to give offense.
Back when Ice-T and Dr Dre were young rappers they called their group "NWA" which stood for Niggaz With Attitude. They actually use that word often in the hip hop genre. Do you feel similarly licensed to use that word as well?
Exactly what we don't need now...
Obama climate plan could cost $2 trillion
Tom LoBianco (Contact)
UPDATED:
President Obama's climate plan could cost industry close to $2 trillion, nearly three times the White House's initial estimate of the so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation, according to Senate staffers who were briefed by the White House.
A top economic aide to Mr. Obama told a group of Senate staffers last month that the president's climate-change plan would surely raise more than the $646 billion over eight years the White House had estimated publicly, according to multiple a number of staffers who attended the briefing Feb. 26.
"We all looked at each other like, 'Wow, that's a big number,'" said a top Republican staffer who attended the meeting along with between 50 and 60 other Democratic and Republican congressional aides.
The plan seeks to reduce pollution by setting a limit on carbon emissions and allowing businesses and groups to buy allowances, although exact details have not been released.
At the meeting, Jason Furman, a top Obama staffer, estimated that the president's cap-and-trade program could cost up to three times as much as the administration's early estimate of $646 billion over eight years. A study of an earlier cap-and-trade bill co-sponsored by Mr. Obama when he was a senator estimated the cost could top $366 billion a year by 2015.
A White House official did not confirm the large estimate, saying only that Obama aides previously had noted that the $646 billion estimate was "conservative."
"Any revenues in excess of the estimate would be rebated to vulnerable consumers, communities and businesses," the official said.
The Obama administration has proposed using the majority of the money generated from a cap-and-trade plan to pay for its middle-class tax cuts, while using about $120 billion to invest in renewable-energy projects.
Mr. Obama and congressional Democratic leaders have made passing a climate-change bill a top priority. But Republican leaders and moderate to conservative Democrats have cautioned against levying increased fees on businesses while the economy is still faltering.
House Republican leaders blasted the costs in the new estimate.
"The last thing we need is a massive tax increase in a recession, but reportedly that's what the White House is offering: up to $1.9 trillion in tax hikes on every single American who drives a car, turns on a light switch or buys a product made in the United States," said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner. "And since this energy tax won't affect manufacturers in Mexico, India and China, it will do nothing but drive American jobs overseas."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/18/obama-climate-plan-could-cost-2-trillion/print/
To paraphrase a popular phrase:
"Sh*t doesn't just happen"
I don't know who created God and I don't care.
Your stupid polls prove nothing and do not show the venom exhibited.
There is no racism you moron, you have been told repeatedly...
Most of us are Mutts, you just want to turn Obamas statement into something else.
I don't know what was said by sorta...but it was obama that called himself a mutt..:^)
LOL I think a little recruiting would be nice...its a little lonely in the 1st quadrant...Hey does that mean we are #1 ?? they are right..it is lonely at the top..<VBG>..:^)
Hmmm possibly twins separated at birth ?? Hmmm..:^)
I agree Karin..all a matter of one's perspective..and beliefs..and it is personal...Right or wrong is all relevant to your beliefs..IMO..:^)
Hello all I have been away from the board for a few days...and It looks like I have to agree with woofer here...if it were me with an agenda I would post the score I wanted the board to believe...gads two posts in a row that we agree on...you sure that test is accurate ?? :^)
I thought it was pretty funny too, although there may be another party that doesn't.
Thanks...you gave me a good laugh here. :)
extelecom, please do me a big favor and explain this.....
It is neither rational or logical to believe all around you was simply created by mere chance.
I'm assuming then, that you think that a god of some sort had to have created the universe, your argument being that the universe could not have "just happened."
Using the same argument though, how do you explain how your god came about? According to your line of reasoning, god couldn't have "just happened." Who created your god? I'd like to know.
And please don't go on to talk about other things. I asked two pretty direct questions (both essentially the same), and I'd like to hear the answers to them, and nothing else.
I'll tell you a little secret. Karin mentioned the big bad wolf and Santa Claus, and believe it or not, I think man created those images. Another secret and this one is awful. I think that man created an image of a god when there never really was one. Native American Indians had it right when they created theirs. At least they had gods that allegedly did something good, like bring rain and sunshine. They'd do their dances, and sure enough, eventually rain or sunshine would appear.
"It is neither rational or logical to believe all around you was simply created by mere chance. "
Sure, but it's perfectly logical to think that a diety waved it's mighty hand (tentacle?) and caused it all.
One is not required to prove a negative.
As I said before, there's a great deal of difference between a man's sef-deprecation and your nasty racism.
quote for the day
"It's a long term problem, starting well before Obama took office, and it's going to take long term solutions, and perhaps a little patience, to get the ship righted, again. If Turdblossom sez we need to take The Long View in judging his boss, Bush 43 (perhaps our kids or grandkids will know the "truth" about him), then surely we can give 44 a year or two before making those same kinda snap judgments that Karl said are likely so wrong about the guy who was actually in office when all of this got started... Just something to consider..." -Blogger repsac3, in the comment section of a conservative blog on the current state of the economy
The Long View
by Turdblossom
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZDBkZWQzNWM2ZDIwN2QyMTg4OTUzMjc1ZGFhOTc5OTM=
Lol, That is exactly what the antiwar libs. and the "poor mistreated Clinton" libs. did.
Why do you continue to post this lie on every board you visit?
absolute crap on your part
after 911 Bush's approval rating was very high
the entire world was pretty much on our side
it was only after Bush @ Co spread their many lies to justify their war of choice in Iraq (that had absolutely noting to do with 911)... and the total incompetence in which it was handled
don't try to change history just because you're a Bush die harder
The breeding grounds for the new libs are at festivals where they play music from bands like "ekoostik hookah" and it is also where they make interstate drug running connections.
"Can you imagine if after 9/11 liberal blogs and talk show hosts had hoped that Bush would fail... so we could pick up more seats in Congress?"
Lol, That is exactly what the antiwar libs. and the "poor mistreated Clinton" libs. did.
>"Actually, it's perfectly logical"<
I couldn't agree with you more.
Actually the statement:
"The idea of a god is sort of illogical on the face of it."
is what is illogical.
It is neither rational or logical to believe all around you was simply created by mere chance.
First, I have to correct your Economic score (from a -7.0 to a -8.0.....the best score of all), the next time I update the database. And I'll add that I'll invite a few more people to take the test who I know are hard-core conservatives. It doesn't seem fair that most of the people taking the test so far are liberals. We need some balance. Huh? Did I just say that? Maybe I'll forget about asking more people. lol
I think we need to do some recruiting.
I told him that he must have cheated because our scores were too close.
I got a -4.12 on the Economic left/right, he a -3.88= 0.24 difference.
I got a -5.18 on the Social Libertarian/Authoritarian, he a -4.87= 0.31 difference. The total difference (0.24 + 0.31)= 0.55
Although you both had the exact same Economic score, you got a -3.38 in the Social, making the total difference between yours and his 1.49.
What I'm thinking is that he probably copied your Economic test answers, and my Social ones. In fact, I covered my test papers when I realized what he was doing (peeking over).....which is why he didn't get the exact same score.
poorgraduate and I appear to have very similar scores... interesting. i may have to take a peek at some of his posts. lol
Mine
-3.88 -3.38
His
-3.88 -4.87
poorgraduate and I appear to have very similar scores... interesting. i may have to take a peek at some of his posts. lol
Mine
-3.88 -3.38
His
-3.88 -4.87
Actually, it's perfectly logical. It's all a matter of perspective. One of my favourite views on the subject:
***That story about lemmings rushing over cliffs to their deaths is a myth, created by a Walt Disney movie in 1958.
I do not know if "God" exists any more than you do, and I have just as much "proof" for my argument. In a sense "God" does exist, as much as Santa Clause or Little Red Riding Hood. Those characters exist, they may not be walking around on the earth, but they exist in some form. Thousands of children believe that Santa Clause flies through the air and their are a whole bunch of films about him, so I guess you could say that he exists.
Now we could take it a step further and say that the story of Little Red Riding Hood is actually a story about a real event that actually happened. It was written with some artistic license of course, but the events actually took place at some point in our history. Wolves were much more clever back then and could actually mimic human voices. The reason that they can't speak anymore is because one day a wolf played a trick on a god and the god became so angry that it took the wolves voices and put them in a crater on the face of the moon, which is why wolves howl at the moon, they are crying for their voices to be returned to them.
It exists, the wolves with voices, they exist on this page.***
In Reply To 'sortagreen':
***The idea of a god is sort of illogical on the face of it.***
Your so stupid... He called himself a Mutt, nothing racist about it. Go crawl back in your hole.
"...force us into using unnecessary but highly satisfying hand gestures" - Too funny!
extelecom, what you said makes zero sense.
You left off the notion that some might have an "agenda" and wouldn't want any one to know the truth.
If that were the truth, the person would want to show scores that represented his dishonest intentions. In other words, if a person was working for a political party- let's say for the Republican party- but he posted on the boards as a liberal Democrat, he'd want his phony results to be posted. It would be even more convincing.
On a side note, I remember a guy on ragingbull.com who was a Republican but would come on the boards and say things like, "I knows dat the Republicens r stoopid. Dats y I am voting for a Demmocrat."
Updated Political Compass Results with poorgraduate's and your scores......
Of course they wouldn't but why take the chance they could have moved from MA to VA or NJ and are just waiting in the weeds to block your maneuver and force us into using unnecessary but highly satisfying hand gestures.
I dunno Peg. I see those Boston stickers on the car... I used to feel bad for them y'know? But now...
Just kidding. Let the best team win, (as long as it's the Yankees)
A liberal is a guy who's too even handed to take his own side in an argument.
That's why we do poorly when we're in control. We're too busy bending over to fair to the other guys.
Can you imagine if after 9/11 liberal blogs and talk show hosts had hoped that Bush would fail... so we could pick up more seats in Congress?
And yet these shameless ninnies are willing to say just that about Obama while the nation faces some of its toughest times ever.
Do you really believe drivers from NJ or VA would maneuver to block a driver with a MA license plate, hence a high probability of being a RedSox fan?
If what you say is true, then God has no control over the human spirit and all of the "praying to God for things to work" is useless because he already knows what is going to happen, but will not choose the path.
The purpose of prayer is that God wants groveling. Not that he's going to help or anything. He just likes that.
What's wrong with that? The last thing I want to do is tip off another driver my intentions as they may take blocking maneuvers.
Even VA drivers are more advanced than that - they don't use any signals and make their move when they're ready. With VA drivers allowed to (legally) carry a concealed weapon in their vehicles, I put my NJ driving skills aside and refrain from leaning on my horn.
Followers
|
2
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
273
|
Created
|
03/10/09
|
Type
|
Premium
|
Moderators |
All political opinions welcome - but be able to defend your position, not just bash your opponents thoughts. I would love to turn this into a board where everyone's opinion could help all of us, but if I can only further the Democratic agenda, I'll be fine with that.
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |