The World's Most Popular Political Quiz

Here's a little something to play around with :)


The World's Most Popular Political Quiz

How the World's Smallest Political Quiz redefined politics, took over the Internet, impressed the experts, and made politics fun for more than 3 million people

After taking the World's Smallest Political Quiz, the famous online test that instantly pinpoints your political ideology, no two people have exactly the same reaction. Click on the post title to take the quiz yourself and see.

Consider Courtney, a self-described "young Republican." She took the Quiz and was surprised by the result. "I [scored] libertarian centrist," she said. "I really think I lean to the right, but apparently some aspect of my social liberalism has centered me. Interesting."

For blogger Jessy, the Quiz confirmed what she already knew. The avowed liberal landed smack-dab in the liberal quadrant and said, "I could not agree more."

Then there's Krzysztof -- nicknamed "Critto" -- from Poland. For him, the Quiz was exciting. "I am a libertarian, after taking the Quiz!" he said enthusiastically. "I love the World's Smallest Political Quiz, for it is cute, small, and very useful."

Cute? Well, OK; let's not argue with a guy named Critto. Small? You bet. It takes less than two minutes to zip through. Useful? Absolutely, if the surge of people taking the Quiz is any proof.

Every day, more than 4,000 people flock to the Web site of the Advocates for Self- Government (www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html) to take the Quiz. That's 166 people an hour, 24 hours a day. In fact, since 1996, when the Advocates started tracking results, more than 3.6 million people have clicked, moused, and surfed their way to the Quiz.

Why the enormous popularity -- especially when so many other political quizzes clutter up the Internet?

Sharon Harris, president of the Advocates, has a theory. "The Quiz offers a more diverse way of looking at politics," she said. "It gives people a fast, accurate way of determining who agrees with them most."

That "more diverse" insight is the key. Before the Quiz came along, politics was a two- way street. You were either liberal or conservative, and that was that.

Enter David Nolan, an MIT political-science graduate. In 1969, Nolan realized that traditional political definitions didn't make sense. He observed that liberals usually supported personal liberty (they defended free speech), but opposed economic liberty (they liked high taxes and strict regulation of business). Conservatives were the opposite. They supported economic liberty (low taxes and minimal regulations), but opposed personal liberty (they applauded laws against pornography).

So far, so good. But what about people who supported both personal and economic liberty? They didn't fit. Nether did people who opposed both personal and economic liberty.

Nolan finally resolved the paradox. "I began to doodle around with the idea of trying to reduce the political universe to a graphical depiction," he told The Liberator magazine in 1996. "I thought, 'Maybe we can delineate this on some kind of map, using a two-axis graph.' "

That was the breakthrough. Instead of looking at politics as a two-way line, Nolan designed a political chart that went in four directions -- high or low on economic issues, and high or low on personal issues.

Conservatives and liberals fit in this new political spectrum. So did libertarians and statists, who Nolan added to the mix. Libertarians scored high/high on liberty issues; statists scored low/low. Later, centrists were added in the middle -- and the Nolan Chart, a new way of looking at politics, was born.

In 1985, Marshall Fritz, founder of the Advocates for Self-Government, added 10 questions to the chart. He squeezed it all onto a business card-size handout, dubbed it the World's Smallest Political Quiz, and took it to a local print shop.

The rest is history. Over the years, the nonpartisan Advocates distributed 7 million printed copies of the Quiz to help spread the word about libertarianism. In 1995, the Quiz made the jump to cyberspace where it immediately became the Internet's most popular political quiz, with 13,400 Web sites linked to it today.

But is it accurate? After all, the Advocates is a libertarian organization. Did they rig the Quiz so everyone would score libertarian?

No, says an expert. Cynthia Carter, professor of History and Political Science at Florida Community College at Jacksonville, said, "Although this quiz is provided by a Libertarian organization, it does not lead you to answer in any particular way."

That may be why instructors around the USA use the Quiz in their classrooms. If you peeked into classrooms at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, Carnegie Mellon University, or Texas A&M University (to name just a few) over the past few years, you'd find find students answering the Quiz's questions.

Even cynical reporters -- always eager to expose a phony -- have been impressed by the Quiz's insight and honesty. For example, the Washington Post reported, "The Quiz has gained respect as a valid measure of a person's political leanings."

But don't let the scholarly recommendations fool you. The Quiz isn't a boring political science project -- it's fun. In fact, that is the one reaction that just about everybody who takes the Quiz does have in common.

Professional astrologer Adze Mixxe said it best. No matter what your political identity is, he told people, "You will get 100 percent enjoyment from the World's Smallest Political Quiz." And isn't that a political score everyone can agree on?

The People Speak

Here's an interesting read :) Call it an unplanned follow-up on my earlier poll regarding the media. One of our local news stations put out the question to the public, regarding our trust of the media. Click the title of this post to read hundreds of the public's answers, or click here: http://www.kxly.com/Global/story.asp?S=11128895

Sound Off: Do you still trust news reports?

Posted: Sep 14, 2009 2:25 PM PDT Updated: Sep 15, 2009 12:10 PM PDT

The number of Americans who don't trust news reporters is at an all time high. A new Pew Research Study shows that 63% believe news stories are inaccurate. An overwhelming majority- 74%- say stories favor one side or the other. For the first time, a majority of Democrats have joined Republicans and Independents in saying news reports are biased. Study authors say the internet makes finding mistakes and biases much easier. What do you think? Do you still trust news reports? Email us: soundoff@kxly.com

Too Many Zukes? Overwhelmed? Try Baked Zucchini Slices

Here's something different to do with your over-abundance of zucchini. And it's even relatively healthy! Shhhhh... don't tell anyone ;)

2 medium zucchini (or one big one) cut into 1/4" slices
1 cup plain or seasoned bread crumbs
Ground black pepper to taste
Garlic powder to taste
Italian seasoning to taste
Onion powder to taste
A dash or so of chili powder, to taste
1 tbs. beef bullion powder
1/2 cup grated Parmesan cheese (the kind in the can)
2 whole eggs (can use just the whites, or even egg beaters if desired)

Preheat oven to 475 F

In one small bowl, stir together the bread crumbs and other dry ingredients. Taste for flavor, adjust as needed.

Beat the eggs in a separate bowl. Dip zucchini slices into the egg (I like to put the beaten egg into a zip lock bag and shake all the zucchini slices in it all at once). Then dip the slices in the bread mixture, and place on a greased baking sheet.

Bake for 5 minutes in the preheated oven, then turn over and bake for another 5-10 minutes, until browned and crispy.

Serve with marinara sauce or ranch dressing. Makes a couple baking sheets full.

Actually, these baked slices can be used as a base for a nice zucchini parmigiana, as well. A bit different result than the usual parmigiana, but well worth the extra few minutes needed to follow the above recipe. Great addition to a veggie lasagna too, use as one of the layers.

You can also freeze these for later casserole-type use. After you remove them from the oven, let them cool on the baking sheets, then put the entire pan into the freezer. Once the slices are frozen, bag 'em up and return them to the freezer. Using them later, the texture won't suffer and the flavors will be great, so rest comfortable knowing they'll be a fine addition to a future recipe.

Erosion of 4th Amendment Rights in Washington

From the Seattle PI today. Daily it appears our Constitutional Rights are being eroded. Here goes the 4th Amendment down the tube. Not that drunk drivers should be allowed to skate free, quite the opposite. My personal feeling is that one's driving privileges should be removed for life on the FIRST DUI accident conviction, period. I also believe that impairment, for DUI purposes, should be demonstrated by more than a mere .08 BAC. People can have .08 and have no impairment whatsoever. I do however believe that forcing a blood test (for anything) is an infringement on one's rights against unreasonable search and siezure. That's my thought for the day.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Police can force blood tests on suspected drunken drivers, high court rules

By LEVI PULKKINEN
SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF

In a divided decision, the state Supreme Court on Thursday upheld rules allowing law officers obtain search warrants to force blood tests from suspected drunken drivers.

Following a challenge by a motorcyclist who was forced to submit to a blood after a crash in Seattle, a 7-2 majority of justices found that officers acted correctly in drawing the man's blood after securing a search warrant. A Seattle Municipal Court judge initially held that the blood evidence could not be used against motorcyclist Robert St. John; a King County Superior Court judge reversed that decision and St. John appealed.

At issue, according to the majority opinion authored by Justice Susan Owens, was a provision in the state's "implied consent" law, which generally holds that drivers agree to submit to a blood alcohol-level tests under reasonable grounds. Drivers may refuse -- and often do, primarily to deny authorities evidence against them -- but in doing so usually lose driving privileges.

The majority found that state law allowing drivers to refuse such tests does not prohibit law enforcement from conducting a blood draw pursuant to a search warrant.

"The implied consent statute explicitly allows a police officer to obtain a blood alcohol test pursuant to a warrant," Owens wrote, "even after a driver refuses a voluntary blood alcohol test."

Writing in dissent, Justice Richard Sanders argued that the majority had misinterpreted a 2004 addition to the implied consent law, which notes that the law does not preclude "a police officer from obtaining a search warrant for a person's breath or blood." The dissenting justices held that phrase was meant to apply in instances where blood had already been drawn, not to compel a test.

Sanders also lauded Seattle Municipal Court Judge Judith Hightower's original finding that the law does not "authorize additional evidence gathering" after a suspected drunken driver refuses a blood alcohol test

"Obtaining a blood sample from St. John by search warrant plainly violated the express prohibition of (statute) since St. John withdrew his consent and no exception under the statute applied," Sanders wrote in the dissent. "If we accept the majority's reasoning, a driver's refusal to consent … would be meaningless."

Owens was joined in the majority by Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, as well as justices Charles Johnson, Barbara Madsen, Tom Chambers, Mary Fairhurst and Debra Stephens. Justice James Johnson joined Sanders in the dissent.

Levi Pulkkinen can be reached at 206-448-8348 or levipulkkinen@seattlepi.com.

You Have a Voice! Use It!!

TODAY: Call your Representative that sits on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and ask that they vote in favor of H.R. 1881, for TSA Collective Bargaining Rights! You can find your representatives by entering your zip code in the section to the right of this text.

A list is also available at this location: Click Here.


* Ask your members of congress to support the House-passed unused FERS sick leave package of provisions in the House-Senate DOD Authorization Conference! Click Here.

* Ask your Representatives to support HR 1507, the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2009! Click Here.

* Support for Pay Parity! Click Here.

* Oppose the Boehner/Cantor proposals to change retirement rules for federal employees! Click Here.

* Ask your representative to cosponsor H.R. 2978! H.R.2978 can lift the cap of age 22 for eligibility for coverage as a dependent under FEHBP! Click Here.

* Support Equal Treatment in Benefits for Federal Employees! Ask your Senators and Representatives to support S. 1102 in the Senate and H.R. 2517 in the House, for the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligation Act! Click Here.

* Ask your Representative to co-sponsor H.R. 2736 to make the federal contracting process fairer to federal employees and more accountable to taxpayers! Click Here.

* Ask your Senator to co-sponsor S.924, to make the federal contracting process fairer to federal employees and more accountable to taxpayers! Click Here.

* Ask your Senators and Representatives to co-sponsor S.707 and H.R. 1722 for Telework! Click Here.

* Ask your Senator to co-sponsor S.354 for Paid Parental Leave today! Click Here.

* Ask your Representative to co-sponsor HR235, The Windfall Elimination Provision! Click Here.

* Ask your Senator to cosponsor S. 469, to support retirement annuities for future CSRS retirees! Click Here.

* Ask your Representative to cosponsor H.R. 1203, the Premium Conversion Bill! Click Here.

* Ask your Senator to cosponsor S.491, the Premium Conversion Bill! Click Here.

Oven Roasted Tomatoes

Are you overwhelmed with excess tomatoes from your garden this fall? Here's the answer! Much easier than making and canning salsa, tomato juice or sauce or paste, and much more versatile! There is absolutely nothing like roasting tomatoes to bring out the best tomato flavor and in my book, there is virtually no other way to freeze tomatoes that will result in as fine a product as this.

While Roma tomatoes are the best for this recipe, as they're drier, any tomato will do nicely. I used Romas this year, and made salsa from the Ruetger's and the Early Girls - those that didn't get eaten as BLTs or tomato sandwiches, that is!

Slice your Romas in half, and remove the seeds and juice. Lay them out on however many cookie sheets you think you might need. The bottom of a broiler pan works great too. I can only do two pans at a time, due to oven size. You can crowd them together on the pan, because they shrink quite a bit while roasting.

Get out a big mixing bowl, and put about 1/2 to 3/4 of a cup of olive oil in it. Add some sea salt, some pepper, some celery flakes, some parsley flakes, some rosemary and some basil. Measurements? Well, I used probably half a teaspoon of celery flakes, salt and pepper, and maybe a teaspoon and a half or so of the others. Add about a tablespoon of minced garlic and some of the oil from the jar too. When I use fresh garlic, I use probably 4 cloves, pressed. Mix it all up, then dump all the tomatoes in. Mix them up real good with your hands, then lay them back out onto the pans. Any leftover oil mixture, just put over the top of the tomatoes.

Put them in the oven at about 250, and let 'em roast. I like them a bit more done than not, so I figure about 5 hours, or when they're dried and starting to carmelize but still somewhat soft. In about an hour's time, your house will smell fabulous!

These can be frozen, or stored in the refrigerator. To freeze, let them cool then place the pans in the freezer so the tomatoes will freeze individually. Then put them into zip lock bags or plastic containers and return them to the freezer. To store them in the refrigerator, I prefer to put them into pint jars then fill the jars with olive oil. Figure about 2-3 weeks this way... only 4-5 days without the olive oil. Use the excess oil when the tomatoes are gone for sauteeing or as dip for bread. I don't recommend canning these because the oil will cause the lids to not seal properly.

You can remove the skins after they're roasted, if you prefer.

These are fantastic on toasted breads as an appetizer, or to add to your Italian red sauces, or cut up in pasta salads. They go nicely in soups and stews, too. Quite a few of these get eaten plain here, by themselves, before they ever even get to the freezer!

If you're using tomatoes other than Romas, cut them into wedges and be sure to remove the seeds and juices. They may take a bit longer to roast, because the flesh is juicier, but they'll taste just as good.

Feel free to experiment with any herbs that you might prefer, toward recipes you might like to use them in.

Enjoy!

Burning Man '09

Burning Man '09 is happening all this week. For a live 24-hour video feed, go to http://www.burningman.com/web_window.html . You'll have to copy and paste due to this system's apparant inconsistency in creating useable links. Could be user error, but whatever on that. *grin* The more interesting video takes place after dark. The title here links to their homepage, a wonderfully eclectic community of musicians, artists, and plain ol' folk who just enjoy keepin' it real. Enjoy!!

Researched - H.R.45 - Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009

I received this email today, and did a bit of research on it. Unfortunately, I did so after forwarding it, but the majority of the information is true and I felt it was worth posting here. Click on the above title for an easy path to the text of the bill.

*********************** The email:

It has started.

Very important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House. This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009.

Even gun shop owners didn't know about this because it is flying under the radar.

To find out about this - go to any government website and type in HR 45 or Google HR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. You will get all the information.

Sponsor: Rep Rush, Bobby L. [IL-1] (introduced 1/6/2009)
Cosponsors (None)
Committees: House Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 2/9/2009 Referred to House subcommittee.
Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

Go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and fill in the above information in the search option.

Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm - any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless:

It is registered

You are fingerprinted

You supply a current Driver's License

You supply your Social Security #

Each update - change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25 - Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail.

There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18.

They would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison.

If you think this is a joke - go to the websites and take your pick of many options to read this. It is long and lengthy. But, more and more people are becoming aware of this. Pass the word along. Any hunters in your family - pass this along.

This is just a "termite" approach to complete confiscation of guns and disarming of our society to the point we have no defense - chip away a little here and there until the goal is accomplished before anyone realizes it.

This is one to act on whether you own a gun or not.

*********************** The Facts:

In a nutshell, the Blair Holt bill would:

* Prohibit possession of any handguns or any semiautomatic firearms that can accept detachable ammunition-feeding devices (excluding antiques) by anyone who has not been issued a firearm license.

* Require all sales of those types of firearms to go through licensed dealers.

* Direct the Attorney General to establish and run a federal record-of-sale system.

* Require the possessors of firearms to secure them (by secure gun storage or safety devices) when they are kept in locales where children might be capable of gaining access to those firearms.

In order to be issued a firearm license under the provisions of the Blair Holt legislation, applicants would be required to submit the following information to the Attorney General:

1. A current, passport-sized photograph of the applicant that provides a clear, accurate likeness of the applicant

2. The name, address, and date and place of birth of the applicant

3. Any other name that the applicant has ever used or by which the applicant has ever been known

4. A clear thumb print of the applicant, which shall be made when, and in the presence of the entity to whom, the application is submitted

5. With respect to each category of person prohibited by Federal law, or by the law of the State of residence of the applicant, from obtaining a firearm, a statement that the individual is not a person prohibited from obtaining a firearm

6. A certification by the applicant that the applicant will keep any firearm owned by the applicant safely stored and out of the possession of persons who have not attained 18 years of age

7. A certificate attesting to the completion at the time of application of a written firearms examination, which shall test the knowledge and ability of the applicant regarding:

* the safe storage of firearms, particularly in the vicinity of persons who have not attained 18 years of age

* the safe handling of firearms

* the use of firearms in the home and the risks associated with such use

* the legal responsibilities of firearms owners, including Federal, State, and local laws relating to requirements for the possession and storage of firearms, and relating to reporting requirements with respect to firearms

* any other subjects, as the Attorney General determines to be appropriate

8. An authorization by the applicant to release to the Attorney General or an authorized representative of the Attorney General any mental health records pertaining to the applicant

9. The date on which the application was submitted

10. The signature of the applicant

There is a link to the right here by which you may contact your legislators. Use it.

Finally Back!

Wow! What a whirlwind couple of weeks it's been! I had the privilege of traveling to Potomac, MD for some training for my work, and it appears that I've finally recuperated. It was a great class, held at an established facility and attended by many wonderful people. The best part? The food, of course!! How can anyone turn down real Maryland crab cakes and all-you-can-eat steamed snow crab? *grin* But the best part of all? Wheeeee!!!! I got to spend the weekend with my brother and his family at their new home in south Jersey! I am truly blessed.

It looks as if work will be starting soon on my house, I'm excited to get that new covered front porch so I can spend the autumn days out front enjoying the neighborhood from my rocking chair. All that will be missing is the white picket fence, which isn't on the list of things to be done. I have to sacrifice that in favor of a new garage roof, and finishing the interior of the garage. Sometime this winter the bathroom will undergo a total renovation, as well. If I hadn't wanted this house so badly (because it was otherwise perfect), the condition of the bathroom might have been a deal-breaker.

The big news on this side of the world is that Washington state is beginning a new program through which prisoners eligible for early release are being "paroled" and given housing vouchers worth 3 months' rent. The savings to the taxpayers with this program is estimated to be several million, and as long as they're being selective in their choices about who should be released, I'm all for it. Not everyone who is in prison is a high risk to reoffend, and if it opens up prison beds for those who absolutely should be there, it's a good thing. I hope those released under this program are able to receive and benefit from outside support to help them reintegrate as productive citizens.

The other big news is that Idaho has now approved controlled wolf hunts, due to the dangerous increase in population of the Canadian Gray Wolf that was introduced awhile back as an attempt to prevent wolves from going extinct. The current problem is that previously Idaho forests were populated by the smaller Timber Wolf, and the Canadian Grays (while both being wolves) are much larger and considerably more aggressive. The Timber wolves generally weigh around 50-75 lbs, and the Canadian Grays are weighing in at between 130-170 lbs. Some research on my part led me to the understanding that while these are the same species, the differences in sizes are related to the areas where they're from. The problems in Idaho and eastern Washington are that the wolves are becoming more aggressive, less wary of humans, and are preying at the outskirts of towns. See the following links:

http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-may1508-wolf_attack.10298c47a.html

http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-feb2308-wolf_attack.202c7783.html

http://www.nwcn.com/statenews/idaho/stories/NW_030209IDN-AP-wolf-attack-LJ.1bcf8b45.html

http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/nov_2006/28/wolves.html

Now... I DO NOT hate wolves. My issue is that once again, "man" has decided to play God with our environment and our ecosystems, making decisions about what animals "should" live where and assuming that their studies and assumptions are the best answers to the problems caused by "man." I support population reduction, not population elimination, and I also support that sometimes nature should be allowed to take its course without US jumping in and trying to make it be what we think it should be. What next... will "man" decide that we should reintroduce the mammoth too, just because pretty soon we'll be able to create one from the DNA remains of fossils?

At any rate, those are the big news pieces from this side of the Continental Divide. Any comments agreeing or disagreeing are of course always welcome :)