I'm back in college to finish my degree, so I haven't had much of a chance to keep up with what's been going on here. Soooo, perhaps this one has already made the rounds. If not, enjoy.

I got a score of 6, so I guess I still have a bit to work on.

http://franz.org/quiz.htm

7

9

9

10

Now, now... (s)Hillary isn't the only "10" out there. First there was "Bo", now we have Rousseau.

Damn it, y'all, now I'm gonna hafta join the GOP....just like Hillary and that nice Mr Joe.....

these questions seem to be rigged

Damn that Diebold !!

LIB (that's Texan for well I'll be), I'm surrounded by liberals. Good job (and scores) guys.
I guess I'll just have to admit that I am a "flaming liberal." No problemo, I'll take that handle any day of the week.

btw, I'm NOT from Texas.

I got 10 too and I'm essentially an anarchist. The questions are far to simplistic and failed to ask if government is a good thing! (They Always leave that one out )
Peace and Love and Power to the people man!

The questions only gave two options. Agree or not.
The questions than can be designed with specific intentions and predictable outcomes.

7

Ok, that's it. I want a new questionair!
One designed with an appreciation of the subtle and not so subtle differences between participants.
One that has no hidden agenda!
One that isn't rigged to make me look foolish!

Jeez, I got a 1.

I came in at a 4. Once I saw the graphic scale, I'm not surprised. My personal opinions align best with Dennis Kucinich, but I don't really believe he's electable.

I still like the libertarians' model better.

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

Oh, I got an ?~11~?!?

Me too! Much better!
Turns out I'm not a 10, I'm a Libitarian!

"ACCORDING TO YOUR ANSWERS,
The political description that
fits you best is...

LIBERTARIAN

LIBERTARIANS support maximum liberty in both personal and
economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one
that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.
Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose
government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate
diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties."

I can live with that.

I think I like Thomm Hartmann's definition better. Libertarians are Republicans that want to smoke dope and get laid (since they're against regulating drugs and prostitution).

Okay, tried that one. And it said:
ACCORDING TO YOUR ANSWERS,

The political description that
fits you best is...

LIBERAL

I got a 13.

Many of those questions are biased and the test seems to purposefully push you towards ether extreme. It provided little in the way of balanced questions.

ACCORDING TO YOUR ANSWERS,

The political description that
fits you best is...

.

LIBERAL


LIBERALS usually embrace freedom of choice in personal
matters, but tend to support significant government control of the
economy. They generally support a government-funded "safety net"
to help the disadvantaged, and advocate strict regulation
of business. Liberals tend to favor environmental regulations,
defend civil liberties and free expression, support government action
to promote equality, and tolerate diverse lifestyles.

Well, I stopped taking drugs a long time ago (I'm talking years, not hours! ) and I never was a prostitute. But I do fully support your right to be whatever you want to be, to do whatever you want to do.
One rule and one rule only. DO NO HARM. *insert rainbow here*

Peace and love and power to the people man! (Did I already say that? )

Damn....though we were dealing with a 15 point scale here and I got a 32. Do I win?

Yuu say that like....there is something wrong with Texans?

I'm a 10 and a librul.

Libertarians are closet Republicans.

Libertarians are Republicans who smoke dope.

Libertarians are anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.

Libertarians are Republicans who took full advantage of public roads, schools, etc - who want to make sure others don't have the same opportunity.

Oh I just knew I'd catch some crap for that. It was a Dixie Chick moment.
Naw, I've spent some time in the Dallas area, and have no problems with you guys. It can't be all bad if you have Alex Jones, right?
Maybe its just the current transiant occupant of the White House that gives the state a less than stellar reputation for us up north.

Quote some good old blues to describe the libertarian party......

Nice tone Maxanne.... not in the slightest confrontational!
In responce to your... lets call them 'observations'...

THIS Libertarian is no closet rebublican. I believe in each indiviuals capacity to make dessisions for themselves without doing harm to others. I believe that we are perfectly capible of living in harmony with eachother and with the planet.
THIS liberterian does not smoke dope, but I FULLY support your right to decide if it's something you wish to do. If you're not hurting me or my loved ones why should I interfere with your choices?
THIS libertarian is an anarchist who is perfectly capable of protecting herself if needs be. And should the occasion arise I got a man with a black belt in karati and a rugby playing brother (not to mention two cousins in the police force) to call if I need them. But from whom spesifically do I need this protection? In this case it seems my slaves!!!!! (What slaves? Where do you get this from?) Personally I'm just a working class woman making my way along the journey of life.
THIS libertarian believes that every individual on this planet has an absolute right to education. But you're right about one thing, I think the school systems we have in Britain, and I dare say America, leave a lot to be desired. They stamp out individuality and AIM to produce clones for the machine. They, for the best part, are equal to this task it seems.
There are many ways to teach and to learn. Regurgitating text isn't all that helpful to the developement of the individual as far as I'm concerned, though knowledge/education, paves the road to freedom.
Speaking of roads. If I walk a path regularly enough I create a track! Feel free to use that track or to create your own.

I'm sensing that you, Maxanne 'the liberal' are a bit sick and tired of being attacked as a liberal, possibly of defending your position against such attacks. Maybe that's why you choose to attack libertarians... makes you feel better because your 'group's' bigger than my 'group'. Classic bullying tactics repeated by scared, angry, powerless people the world over. I'll remember you in my meditations, hopefully send a more uplifting vibe' your way.

Peace.

Gee, what was the name of that minority party which opposed the Iraq war from the beginning?
And the PATRIOT act?

It wasn't the Democratic Party. It was the Libertarians.

They are also pro-choice and anti-marriage-discrimination (i.e. pro-gay-marriage). In fact, they are pretty dead-on "progressive" until you start talking about spending government money.

Karen,

I tend to agree with Maxanne, except for one aspect.
Libertarians are a pretty small minority, and if having them there will help pull a few conservatives to the left, then fine.
However, as a Liberal I to might be a bit defensive, because I don't have a black belt nor do I have a weapons cache and I am not willing to become physically confrontational when someone attacks my liberalism, which they do because THEY are insecure.

I have lived in Central Montana, a haven for Libertarians. Sorry, nice people with really fucked up social values.
They will not pay taxes, and will go to jail for it. The taxes they would not pay, pays for the jail they get to sit in, and bitch about the system that keeps them warm and healthy. They will not get a drivers licence, or pay the taxes on their cars. Yet, they bitch long and loud about the quality of the roads. They bitch about the schools. They demand to be independant, until the get hurt and then they want hospital care for free! I've even heard them complain about the local police force NOT doing their part to keep people off their property, that they refuse to pay property tax on.

They also, rather naturally, tend to be highly suspicious of strangers and outsiders. See above and you can imagine why?
You don't even want to talk about what goes on in their homes. To them that's absolute. Incest, physical abuse, suicide, and all other sorts of social ills. But you step on their property to protect their 13 year old daughter, and you might get shot! Literally.


Now I'm certainly not saying any of this is you, or anyone you know. I'm saying this is the Libertarinism I have known.
Can you say, "Ruby Ridge?"

Those people sound like anarchists, not Libertarians.

Ruby Ridge was a tragedy caused by excessive government force. Nothing to do with Libertarians.

I'll repeat what I said before: They are pretty dead-on "progressive" until you start talking about spending government money.

Well **** me sideways! I had no idea.
I honestly thought Maxanne was having a go at my political idealology. I take it her reference to 'slaves' was something to do with how those people live? That's where the talk of defending myself came from. Se said libertarians had to defend themselfs from their slaves! I thought that was kind of off the wall!
I'm an anarchist, plain and simple. I had no idea there were such factions in America, twisting a fine idealology to suit their own selfinterestedness!
Looks like I've got some googling to do tomorrow!
Right now it's 1.30 in the morning I'd I'm up at 7.30, so I'll bid you good night, and thanks for the info. Much apreciated.

Oh, and Maxanne, I take back what I said about bullying. A missunderstanding! Sorry.

Well Spud, you weren't there.
Other then that, we'll have to agree to disagree.




Karen,

Generally speaking, it seems from my observations that people are quite often drawn to the Libertarian party, because the rhetoric does sound good.
But when they get there and they see and live the Libertarian truth, quite a few discover they want nothing to do with all that.
What remains, as Spud pointed out, are the anarchists. You youself said you were both, libertarian and anarchist, and frankly in the real world they are interchangable, no matter how idealistic the rhetoric might sound.

Gee, you already said you agreed with Maxanne about Libertarians being the same as Republicans. Now they're the same as Anarchists too? So I guess Anarchists and Republicans are the same...

You are misrepresenting the Libertarian Party. They are not about lawlessness. Law enforcement, jails, courts and taxes all exist in the Libertarian plan.

Now spud, exactly what did Maxanne say?



Spud. There have been several Librarians on this forum. All of them were against all the things you just listed.
The fact is, they tell us the government has no legal authority to tax it's citizens.
And I ask, if the Government doesn't have a tax, how do we pay for these things, including the government it's self?

Oh that's right. Let the market regulate it's self. Nah, that's too much like the Neo's.

My suggestion to you, Karen is to wait to get to know who people are and where they live before you start jumping on them. Many of us know each other a bit. As a newbie you don't know us, and you don't know board relationships.

Now, on to the real stuff:

You don't live in my country - and obviously you don't know fuck all about libertarians in the USA. As it happens I live in NH, a
state that libertarians are attempting to invade and take over.

Libertarians don't believe in public anything. They don't believe in state or national forests. As it happens, babydoll, I live in the northern part of the state. We have a great deal of national forest land here - used by hikers, skiers, etc. It's beautiful, it's clean - and if the libertarians have their way, it won't exist any more. I don't want to watch the forest sold to the highest bidder and paved over.

Libertarians are all happy to have benefitted from public schools, libraries, and roads - but eager to do away with all of them. As far as I'm concerned, Karen - we are NOT all in this alone.

I'm sensing that you are a rather pious and prissy little princess, who enjoys amateurish attempts at analyzing people she doesn't know - especially if she thinks she can use those rather shopworn tactics to engratiate herself with the boys of the forum. Save your prayers and your uplifting messages, honeybunch. I don't fuckin' need that condescending crap.

Maxanne,

Though the tone is pretty harsh, that's your business and your call.
As to the boys of the forum, lets not be too terribly sexist, let's not assume for all those boys, let's not generalize those boys,
and because some of those boys are full on men, we will make our own decisions, right or wrong, even if the girls of the forum might complain.

Protection from force and fraud, that's the legitimate job of government in Libertarian dogma. Taxes are required to fund it. Maybe I should talk to this misguided Librarian and bring him around.

The thing is, if the top level of government is Libertarian, people still have the freedom to form smaller Socialist units. At any level.

Maxanne said:

Maxanne is Bill O'Reilly in drag!

I would hope that were to Spud. However, and I'm sorry, but that hasn't been the observations of my experience.
None the less, I haven't yet met ALL Librarians, so I spose anything is possible.
Although, until observations prove other wise, I'll trust the previous experience.


As I have said before, I ain't a scared a no girls. When they start acting like women, then I pay attention.
The same truth holds just as well for boys.

That's an awesome reply. It's -- no, there's nothing I can say.
Wow.
I'm gonna stay out of this.

Maxanne,

You suggest that I wait to know people before jumping on them. You then proceed in a full on personal attack on me, someone you don't know. Contradictory to say the least but the contradictions don't end there. (See below)

I took part in a 'fun' internet quiz, the result of which suggested, rightly, that I am a libertarian in my political leanings, (liberty being the root word of libertarian and all).
I did not, however, have any idea that there was a sect or group of people living outside of mainstream society in America going by the name 'libertarians'. That was my mistake. MY ONLY MISTAKE!
My response to your attack on 'libertarians' (that sect in your country) had nothing what so ever to do with 'board relationships' as you call them, but was mearly me explaining my own position and defening myself against what I saw as a personal attack on me and my belief system. (My original suspission that I had encountered the 'pack female's teritorial pissings' have been born out, but more on that shortly.)

You say:
"You don't live in my country - and obviously you don't know fuck all about libertarians in the USA. As it happens I live in NH, a
state that libertarians are attempting to invade and take over."
And you are correct. I knew nothing of libertarians in the USA until last night. Before long I will make it my business to find out what information I can on the topic, as here I am encountering personal attitudes and predudice which do very little to share or communicate knowledge.

You say:
"I'm sensing that you are a rather pious and prissy little princess, who enjoys amateurish attempts at analyzing people she doesn't know - especially if she thinks she can use those rather shopworn tactics to engratiate herself with the boys of the forum. Save your prayers and your uplifting messages, honeybunch. I don't fuckin' need that condescending crap."
Oh the contradictions in terms! The mind boggles!
I attempt to analyse people I don't know you say in an attempt to analyse me. Oh, your wrong by the way, there's no prissy princess her, but if your lack of self worth and self confidence means you need to call people names to feel better I believe that reflects more on you than it ever will on me. Just so you know, I'm no prissy princess 'honeybunch', more of a smart arse bitch.
You suggest that I defended myself against a percieved attack in an effort to ingraciate myself with the 'boys' of the forum. I say, honey, if you wish to spread your terrotorial piss in there direction it's perfectly fine by me. I'm happy and secure in my relationship with myself and my man.

I think your suggestion that I somehow attempted to analise you was based on the fact that I implied you were using bullying tactics, (an implication I then appologised for as soon as it was clear I'd miss-understood) as that was my ONLY personal observation of you in that initial response.
I will now take it one step further, based on your diatribe of hatefulness quoted here.
You are an insecure and frightened adolecent (on the inside of course, I have no idea how old you are in years, nor am I all that interested) who needs and craves the affermation of the males she encounters in her life. Your 'alfer female' posturings are just that - posturings. Maybe when you've grown up a little they will become more substancial but, for now, keep practising.

I came here, to this forum, in peace with a view to engaging with like minded people (of BOTH gendres) and sharing knowledge and information. And I participated in this particular thread as a little light-hearted relief from the constant grind of bad news we're subjected to daily (even the so called 'sheeple' get sick of it I'm sure).

So, thank you Maxannne, for such a warm welcome and for such insight and widom. (That's called sarcasm, just to be clear.)I'm only sorry you feel so threatened by my pressence here you feel the need to attack me personally.
Luckily I have an abundance of supportive females in my life, and I have the full respect of the men and women I encounter daily.
Next time you decide to try to intimidate a stranger I suggest you pick your mark better as I remain sigularly unimpressed.

I do wish you peace however, and I do hope for your sake, that wisdom is not far behind.

This has evolved into something other than the fun little quiz I started with into a heated political ideology debate. But, I find it all very interesting. I'm a firm believer that we each need to understand just what it is we not only believe, but know. To that end I have always advocated studying not only the ideology we most identify with, but others as well, both to further our own beliefs, and to question those beliefs.

___________________________________________

From an article I wrote last month:
I believe there are two important characteristics to growth. First is a constant search for the facts and ideas that help one to better understand their beliefs; to further those beliefs. Second, to understand the opposition to those beliefs. If, in this endeavor, one's beliefs are challenged, and finds that the previous beliefs were founded on false pretenses or ideas, and one concludes that in fact, the opposition is correct, then growth may also include change, though this need not be the case. The point is not to grow so that you may challenge the belief of others, nor to convert others to your manner of thinking, but to challenge yourself and become more competent and firm in those beliefs to which you wholeheartedly hold to be true. Without growth all that remains is stagnation, or as in wishing for the "good old days", regression.

___________________________________________

Wiki lists three different types of Libertarians. George Lakoff's book "Don't Think of an Elephant" lists (I think) six different types of Liberals. Conservatives? Who knows how many types. If anyone has acess to Lakoff's book, maybe they can list them. All I remember is I was an Anti-authoratarian Liberal

I'm a staunch anti-liberal liberal.

6 types of Progressives


1. Socioeconomic progressives think that everything is a matter of money and class and that all solutions are ultimately economic and social class solutions.

Socio-economic: All issues are a matter of money and class.

2. Identity politics progressives say it is time for their oppressed group to get its share now.

Identity Politics: Our group deserves its share now.

3. Environmentalists think in terms of sustainability of the earth, the sacredness of the earth, and the protection of native peoples.

Environmentalists: Respect for the earth and a healthy future.

4. Civil liberties progressives want to maintain freedoms against threats to freedom.

Civil Libertarians: Freedoms are threatened and have to be protected.

5. Spiritual progressives have a nurturant form of religion or spirituality, their spiritual experience has to do with their connection to other people and the world, and their spiritual practice has to do with service to other people and to their community. Spiritual progressives span the full range from Catholics and Protestants to Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Goddess worshippers, and pagan members of Wicca.

Spiritual progressives: Religion and spirituality nurture us and are central to a fulfilling life.

6. Antiauthoritarians say there are all sorts of illegitimate forms of authority out there and we have to fight them, whether they are big corporations or anyone else.

Anti-authoritarians: We have to fight the illegitimate use of authority.

According to Lakoff, Libertarianism is a form of Progressivism.
I would suspect that most of us are a blend of these six types, and that few of us are only one.

Splain that.....



Still laughing on this one....doesnt need any "splaining"...........

Note to self: Buy plastic cover for keyboard and Fluid deflector screen, 1 each, clear in color....

Karen, dear - thanks for proving exactly what I was saying.

Clearly you are eager to employ sarcasm, but you aren't so good at picking up on it when it's aimed at you.
People who seldom engage in self reflection often believe they are gifted with special insights.

They are always wrong.

Oh, Spud - why do you want to give poor Bill O'Reilly a heart attack?

Are you familiar with the Free State Project?

Agreed Sky. And very refreshing that some-one brought a degree of insight and knowledge to this 'debate'.
I most cetainly concider myself a combination of all 6 but with strong leanings towards 3, 5 and 6.




Sure thing Maxanne, whatever you say. Pitty your words are without merrit or substance. Still, never mind... you are what you are.