I am a registered Republican who voted for Kerry in the last election, but chose Bush over Gore in 2000. I don't like Delay, Rumsfeld, or Condie Rice.
However, I do like Colin Powell, McCain, Mitt Romney, etc. IMHO, we need these guys to wrest control of the Republican party from the "Bushies".
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yay! I got a 10 on the Democratic Loyalty tests! I don't really think the quiz tests actual democratic ideals, but opinions on current affairs instead, but still, yay! I won! And I do believe everything in the summary at the end...
Your score is 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. You are a pure, unabashed, die-hard Democratic loyalist. You are appalled by the way Republicans are turning America into a theocratic, corpo-fascist police state, and you'd gladly walk through a furnace in a gasoline suit to elect a Democratic president. In your view, there is no higher form of patriotism than defending America against the Republican Party and every intolerant, puritanical, imperialistic, greed-mongering, Constitution-shredding ideal for which it stands.
And anyone who answered this question:
quote:Was the Iraq war worth it?
with this answer:
quote:Yes, they attacked us on 9/11 and payback is a bitch
needs to seriously reconsider their plans to not cut their tongue out of their head.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The whole idea of being loyal to a political party strikes me as humorous. It's hard to see where a critical person could not find numerous problems with any political party.
Posts: 291 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know, Jay. I would have expected you to score at least a 15 on an out of 10 Bush loyalty quiz.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, almost none of the answers worked for me. So I'm doing my own.
Q: What's the greatest threat to American democracy?
The gradual removal of the power of the vote.
Q: Michael Moore once said, "I would like to apologize for referring to George W. Bush as a 'deserter.' What I meant to say is that George W. Bush is a deserter, an election thief, a drunk driver, a WMD liar, and a functional illiterate. And he poops his pants." What's your opinion of the remark?
An incredibly stupid thing to say since it casts doubt on him as any kind of objective observer and plants him firmly in the "extremist frothing commentator who can safely be ignored" camp.
Q: Which bumper sticker would you be most likely to put on your car?
None of 'em. I don't do political bumper stickers.
Q: Was the Iraq war worth it?
Worth what? The money? The lives lost? The worldwide good will from 9/11 squandered? I think it's a good thing that Saddam is out of power. I don't think this was the right time, or the right way.
Q: What statement best describes your opinion of Bill Clinton?
Brilliant at getting elected, decent at governing, not good at working with Congress, terrible at keeping it in his pants, worse at spin control.
Q: In a perfect world, America would be ____
Respected for our values of honesty, strength, dependability, scientific advance, and human rights.
Q: Fox News Channel can best be described as ____
A channel that discovered the vast market waiting for someone positioned against the perceived liberal media and pounced on it.
Q: Which of the following do you find most offensive?
Any public statement that twists someone's words into an easy straw man target, which is to say most of those.
Q: President Bush's tax cuts ____
Are an ill-conceived way to artificially bump the economy while hastening the goal of no government handouts, ever, to anyone who doesn't contribute to a political campaign.
Q: The best way for Democrats to regain power is to ____
Ignore Bush entirely, get a candidate that looks human, stop campaigning on the "we're not him" and "isn't it obvious how evil he is" platforms, and come up with a consistent, compelling message.
Q: Ann Coulter once said, "We need to execute people like (John Walker Lindh) in order to physically intimidate liberals." What's your opinion of the remark?
An incredibly stupid thing to say since it casts doubt on her as any kind of objective observer and plants her firmly in the "extremist frothing commentator who can safely be ignored" camp.
Q: What statement best describes your opinion of President Bush?
Dedicated man with strong values and a firm idea of how things should be who believes that the end justifies the means, a belief that scares the crap out of me.
Q: The best way for Republicans to retain power is to ____
Do what they've been doing and appeal to their base, but avoid vicious attacks on opponents.
Q: The biggest mistake Bush ever made was ___
Isolating himself from opinions that don't support his.
Q: Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream.
I'd agree. I probably have different ideas of what constitutes a family than some people here, though.
Q: Complete the following statement: George W. Bush belongs ___
Advisor to a Democratic president.
Q: What has been the most defining moment of Bush's presidency?
"I'm a decider, and I decide what is best." This one statement perfectly sums up what some people love and some people hate about President Bush.
Q: What label best describes Bush?
Believer.
Q: What's the best explanation for the failure to find WMD in Iraq?
Saddam lied about what he had to look more powerful, and supporters of the war cherry-picked the intelligence that backed their case even if it was discredited.
Q: Complete the following statement. George W. Bush won the 2000 election because ___
Gore was a robot, Bush looked like an OK guy who promised to be a uniter and a compassionate conservative, and people wanted someone in the office who wouldn't be getting hummers and lying about them.
Q: Complete the following statement. History will regard George W. Bush as ___
A well-meaning disaster who let his personal beliefs and isolation from anyone who didn't support him lead him into poor decisions.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes, they attacked us on 9/11 and payback is a bitch
needs to seriously reconsider their plans to not cut their tongue out of their head.
Yeah, that one was a weird one. That’s the answer Dems like to say is the GOP answer, but it isn’t the answer anyone who has a hint of current events would answer. Though I figure there are some bozos out that might actually think this.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: The poll also shows that 42 percent of the troops surveyed are unsure of their mission in Iraq, and that 85 percent believe a major reason they were sent into was was "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the Sept.11 attacks."
I think that when the numbers are that high we can assume that, rather than being "bozos", perhaps they were misinformed. Deliberately.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, first off surveys are always a strange beast. Depending on how questions are asked and what not. Now 2nd. Those two statements are different: 1: they attacked us on 9/11 2: Saddam's role in the Sept.11
Not to get into a big debate on this, but it has been shown that Saddam has given to suicide bombers and other terrorists. Now this isn’t a direct connection. But financial support of them is certainly help.
Anyway…. Back to work. See ya all on the flip side.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Seriously, I recommend reading the whole article. It talks about a lot of what the troops are thinking.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:it has been shown that Saddam has given to suicide bombers and other terrorists
No, it hasn't. The "link to terrorism" was that he donated money to the families of suicide bombers.
And, regardless, there's not this connected group of people out there. Aiding one group of terrorists does not mean you've aided all terrorists everywhere. Saddam had, as far as we can tell, no role in Sept. 11th. He didn't give money or any other form of aid to the people who planned or carried it out. This was, however, a Bush administration line for (in the Vice-President's cases) months after we knew conclusively that he had no role in it.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I got a 10 and a 2 respectively for the Dems and Republicans.
Didn't even bother to take the Bush quiz, it'd be like taking a test on whether or not I'm a boy. Answer is pretty obvious.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Democrat: Your score is 7 on a scale of 1 to 10.
Republican: Your score is 3 on a scale of 1 to 10.
quote:Q: What has been the most defining moment of Bush's presidency? Strumming a guitar while New Orleans drowned and telling Brownie he was doing "a heck of a job"
I thought the better moment was when those women came up to him crying because their houses had been destroyed, and he looked around (in the middle of an area of Mississippi that had been entirely flattened) and said, "Isn't there a Red Cross around here somewhere?"
Bush Loyalty: Your score is 0 on a scale of 1 to 10.
posted
Your score is 1 on a scale of 1 to 10. You hate Bush with a writhing passion. You think he is an idiot, a liar, and a warmonger who has been an utterly incompetent, miserable failure of a president. Nothing would give you greater pleasure than seeing him impeached and run out of the White House, except maybe seeing him dragged away in handcuffs.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I scored a 6 on the Democrat test. I scored a 3 on the GOP test. I scored a 3 on the Bush test.
I am actually a registered republican, but only because South Carolina makes you choose a party and I didn't have any party loyalty one way or the other so I just picked one. In Virgina I was a registered Independent and I wish that all states gave you that option.
I disagree with the republican party on subjects regarding social justice and with the democrats on economics.
I think that the conservative right needs to stop claiming that they speak for all "right-minded" Christians and that the democrats need to be willing to admit that they have faith.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I scored mostly Republican but only a 6. As someone mentioned, the quiz is mostly about current events rather than actual political ideology. I'm a registered Republican in a seriously red state (Wyoming) that currently has a democrat for a governor. If the Democrats would put up a decent candidate that has a platform other than "Bush IS Evil" I might actually consider voting for him.
I think I'm going to start identifying myself as an Economic Libertarian. Unfortunataly (sp) the Liebertarian party is largely discredited because they are lead by a bunch of crazy people.
posted
I can't understand being proud of being told by a quiz that you are a political extremist.
I also don't understand why one would consider loyalty to a party or ideology to be a desired trait at all.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The possible answers were so slanted that I'm surprised people scored in the middle ranges. I couldn't pick any answer that I fully supported.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:the democrats need to be willing to admit that they have faith.
Except when we don't. No nitpickery, please.
I'm not saying that all democrats need to claim to have faith. I'm saying the ones that do (and there are a fair number of them sitting in office right now) need to stop pretending that they don't. People of faith (of any religion) would rather have someone in office who shares that faith than not. IMO this is why the republican party has gained ground even among people who don't agree with some of their politics. A good book on the subject is God's Politics: Why the Right Gets it Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It by Jim Wallis.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: People of faith (of any religion) would rather have someone in office who shares that faith than not.
Not all of us - depending, of course, on what you mean by faith. I would much sooner vote for an atheist who has "faith" in the Constitution than for a Catholic who hadn't.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: I can't understand being proud of being told by a quiz that you are a political extremist.
I also don't understand why one would consider loyalty to a party or ideology to be a desired trait at all.
Again, I don't think that the quiz tests any ideology or political affiliations. It asks how you feel about certain current events and gives a very narrow range of answers. Given those answers, the quiz then labels you. I find it very amusing that the quiz will take my answers and label me a staunch democrat when I don't ascribe to either party. But I will celebrate that label regardless because, well, because it amuses me.
It's kind of like astrology, you take your birthdate, look it up in a book and find out exactly what kind of person you are. It isn't necessarily true, but it can be good fun anyway.
This test, to me, seems more ideologically sound (although maybe the questions are a bit directed to make a Libertarian result more likely).
Posts: 484 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
According to that one I'm a centerist, which isn't terribly surprising to me. I'm at the corner of left liberal and big statist.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hahaha! On the OKCupid quiz, I'm a Democrat ... a social liberal, and an economic moderate Would you have picked that one from my stances on the debates here at Hatrack?
Thing is, they're right. When you look at the broad range of issues, I AM just what it says. It's just that the political landscape these days is so mucked up and focused on extremely narrow arguments between stringently-defined "sides" that it's easy for someone not to fit in anywhere, and to look like "the opposition" to people on either side Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's the list of "laws" people suggested at the time I took the quiz. Quite a spectrum there:
quote:"No more idiotic, showboating, unenforceable, unPASSable laws about censoring video games. Seriously, stop acting like your grandparents when Jazz was new and scary, and focus on something important." —MGC from Bothell, WA
"I would dictate that...the governement should make sure everyone has something to live (everyone on Earth if that's possible)" —AD from laval, canada
"I would dictate that...Everyone gets 10 paid holidays a year. And no more stupid wars" —MM from Portland, OR
"free public transport" —grc from edinburgh, scotland, uk
"Everybody is entitled to their opinion, unless that opinion causes harm to those who do not deserve it." —ETW from Portland, OR
"You can murder a murderer" —host from boo a g
"no welfare and no social security, you work to make money, then you save your own money" —jpe from new orleans, louisiana
"I would dictate that... nobody could ever abuse children in any way whatsoever - whether physical or mental." —EJB from Denver, CO
"I would dictate that people should be able to believe whatever they want without risk of ridicule from their peers." —JMS from Abilene, TX
"I would dictate that...under age sex would be allowed" —m from jacksonville
quote:Originally posted by Jay: Well, first off surveys are always a strange beast. Depending on how questions are asked and what not. Now 2nd. Those two statements are different: 1: they attacked us on 9/11 2: Saddam's role in the Sept.11
Not to get into a big debate on this, but it has been shown that Saddam has given to suicide bombers and other terrorists. Now this isn’t a direct connection. But financial support of them is certainly help.
Anyway…. Back to work. See ya all on the flip side.
No!! This has been claimed and thoroughly discredited. There is no evidence that Saddam ever provided money to suicide bombers or any terrorist acts and substantial evidence that he did not. Although he made bragging statements that he would give money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, he never did. There isn't even any evidence that any terrorist was ever motivated by Saddam's empty promises of reward.
It was pretty clear to anyone who knows thing one about the mid-east that this pure bravado on the part of Saddam with absolutely no substance. It should be compared to Bush's "Bring it on" statement.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow…. You guys make this almost too easy. There is tons of stuff out on the net about this and even a nice big block in the 9-11 commission. Here I was thinking I wouldn’t have time to counter with anything, but the internal network went down here at work today so I had a spare five minutes to look this stuff up. Enjoy.
By the way, I know this won’t convince you die hard Bush haters, but this is more for those who are reading the silly stuff people are claiming and starting to doubt. Enjoy.
So basically you can go with the where there’s smoke there’s generally a fire. And there appears to be plenty of smoke to go around. And this isn’t stuff you’d have out there so it can be traced.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
None of what you posted says that Saddam or Iraq had anything to do with the 9/11 attack. In fact, much of what you posted specifically said that there was no link between the two. So... maybe I'm a "bush-hater" or 'wacho-extremist' who you can completely disregard because I disargree with you on certain current affairs, but that still doesn't make Saddam or Iraq responsible for what happened on 9/11.
Ruport Murdock News Co. did say there is a possible link, but I would rather expect them to say that, wouldn't you?
The last link does say that there is a possibility that Saddam's regime may have helped support a group of terrorists lead by Osama's brother-in-law, and that a fax was sent from the Phillipines about the al-qaida to Saddam administration. But in my mind, that isn't really damning evidence.
Now, I'm not saying Saddam is a good guy or anything, far from it. But I think that using 9/11 as an excuse to attack, rather than the real, good reasons that are evident is flimsy at the least.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Finances? Giving money to the cause. I have not made any claim that Saddam was involved in Sept 11th. I’m saying that he gave money to terrorists and terrorists did 9-11.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
But these two facts are completely seperate. It's like saying "You give food to dogs, and dogs attacked my cousin two states over, so you hold some responsibility for the attack."
Terrorist groups are many, with many different goals. To catagorize all terrorists in one group and hold all of them responsible for the actions of some is not the most enlightened approach, and probably ends up letting the ones responsible off a lot easier.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Would you have picked that one from my stances on the debates here at Hatrack?
