Ever lie awake thinking about how great Richard Perle is? Or find yourself rolling on the floor at the wicked, rapier-like wit of Rummy? You could just have insomnia – or indisgestion. On the other hand, you too could be a neocon. The Christian Science Monitor (kooky religion, great read) has developed this short quiz. Take it and all may be revealed……
I’m a realist apparently.
Me too. I always come up in the middle of the road with these things – just like the proverbial dead skunk. Or armadillo…..
Ditto.
The weirdest thing about Christian Science (apart from Mary Baker Eddy – I think she was the richest woman in the USA at one time ) is that it attracted some seemingly sensible people. Though maybe not dead skunk types. (We once had a cat called Louden. Unfortunately deceased – hit by a car, of course)
Loudon.
Tho maybe he preferred to spell it with an ‘e’.
Never asked.
Liberal.
No surprises there.
I came up a neo-con on the test but when I saw
the definition below the quiz;
*Want the US to be the world’s unchallenged superpower
*Share unwavering support for Israel
*Support American unilateral action
*Support preemptive strikes to remove perceived threats to US security
*Promote the development of an American empire
*Equate American power with the potential for world peace
*Seek to democratize the Arab world
*Push regime change in states deemed threats to the US or its allies
I realise why the warning about unscientific results was prominent. I don’t support most of the above at all and the remainder with a great deal of qualification.
I’m sure it’s only expected to be a bit of fun but maybe I need some help…..
I’m a realist/armadillo too. What a surprise (not).
I remember blogging this not long ago. Realist, not surprisingly. How can anyone not be?:-)
I was a neo-con then and I’m still one now. And, I’m not ashamed to say that I do find Rummy rather humorous.
Realist.
And I find Rummy humorous too, in a “my God, that man is fobbing off good questions with jokes and they’re letting him get away with it!” sort of way.
I liked his quote re: Afghanistan.
“Mr Rumsfeld, why did you use such big bombs?”
Rumsfeld: “Basically we used big bombs so we could drop them on terrorist bases in an attempt to kill them. Any more questions?”
Pure Gold.
I thought it was “why are you using cluster-bombs?” “we’re trying to kill people”. Simple and succinct, although one gets the feeling if the journalist asking was a little smarter they’d have phrased their question somewhat better.
Realist for me too. I’m relaxed about this.
Why are we being asked if we are ‘neo’ conservative? The label ‘neo conservative’ is carries the implication that there is something wrong with being even partly conservative. It’s insulting. What’s wrong with plain ‘conservative’?
Herbert – nothing. Though “good-looking conservative” would probably be preferable.
“Neo” is simply shorthand for “I don’t like you lot”.
I was under the impression “neo-conservative” was their own word.
Something about wanting to be seen as right-wing (hence “conservative”), but different from you wicked, isolationist types who’d let France continue to suffer under the terrible regime of a brutal electee…
(ahem)
I came out as an isolationist which indicates to me I was having a bit too much fun with the test.
I skipped all the questions, went straight to the results page and came out as an isolationist too. As they say, the results aren’t exactly scientific.
C’mon Herbert … get with the program … ‘neoconservatives’ are different to traditional conservatives, who are as likely as not to be in opposition to the ‘neocons’ … more reading recommended.
Chris, you obviously have no idea of how patronising that last comment comes across. Besides I dare say Herbert has more interesting reading on his agenda than to bone up on leftys’ definitions of the various neos they seem to be preoccupied with. (Or up with which they seem to be preoccupied!)
Well I don’t get it Ron. The neocons themselves call themselves neocons, the neocons write books on what it means to be a neocon, others then also write books on neocons, the world’s press calls them neocons, the world’s magazines and acadamic journals call them neocons … middle of the road joints like the Monitor run quizzes on whether you are a neocon … and you think it’s all about “leftys’ definitions of the various neos they seem to be preoccupied with”.
This beats me, I tell ya. Buggered if I know your problem. What’s your hang-up with the term? I suppose you can have whatever term you want, even if it reduces you to talking to yourself. I guess you can also think that the world’s flat if you want to, and all this stuff about it being round is just some lefty proccupation. Freedom includes the freedom to behave like an ostrich … suit yourself Ron … just trying to help … but it’s your choice at the end of the day … sorry I bothered … I wonder if water can run uphill … gravity is probably just another bloody lefty conspiracy …
Hey, that’s quite a splutter you have there, Chris.
Considering the degree of ‘droop’ with which I’m confronted daily – I really wish gravity was somebody’s bloody conspiracy….
Daily? Wendy. maybe you’re being a trifle ambitious… (or hopeful???)
Oh dear – I meant my own droop, Ron. Bum, breasts, jowls… the sort of gravity-induced droop that only radical surgery (or maybe some serious corsetting) can remedy.
Geoff – I did reply to Ron’s comment – the front comment indicator says I did too, but it seems to have disappeared. This has happened a few times – is it just me?
Sorry for the misunderstanding, Wendy. My one-track mind associates the word “droop” with the sort that is usually induced by the product of breweries.
Wendy,
They can take a while to appear – comments I mean, not Ron’s thingo. You can try hitting “Refresh.”
For some reason it’s currently taking a long time for my comments to load as well……..
Troppo droop?