Or rather, the part of rest of the world that is dumb enough to take the Slate news quiz — which as we know is a terrible test, because I seldom do well on it.
I had to be especially dumb to turn there for validation after doing particularly badly on the weekly NYT quiz. Sometimes I do well on that, but usually not.
I had already tried making myself feel better by taking the latest Flashback quiz, also at NYT. I love that one because it tests whether you have a clear sense of the overall flow of history, rather than happening to know random facts of the moment. I was in luck, in that I had two I hadn’t done yet — the one for Oct. 29, and the one for Nov. 4, which had been released early for some reason.
Trouble is, I got one wrong on the 29th, which seldom happens. Getting a perfect score on the one for Saturday didn’t make me feel all that much better, since I’ve grown to expect that, proud so-and-so that I am.
So, weakly, I turned for solace to the Slate quiz, which overall is the worst place to seek it. And unsurprisingly, I did particularly badly.
But you know what? Everybody else did worse.
Maybe at some point, those Slate people will see that their test is seriously lacking. Maybe not. Anyway, g’day, mates…
Related Posts
Quiz complete!
You answered 8 out of 12 questions correctly and received 339 points.
Good job!
Pure guess on 1 or 2 that I somehow got right.
7/12 for 307. It was ugly.
Well, we got the same number right, but you obviously did it quicker.
That’s what always gets me…
This one was difficult. Only got 6 right.
Yes, it was!
Observations
1)
It’s interesting to listen to politicians decry things being political. Politicians often accuse people they don’t like of “being political” as a way to dismiss their concerns or opinions.
Of course, a politician’s entire existence is political. Everything they do, every decision they make in their public or personal life can be attributed to politics and politically based decisions.
Politicians value politically based decisions so much they stake their careers on it, but in typical hypocrite fashion, complain that anyone else would dare make a politically based decision.
Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
2)
The story in The Post, co-written by our own University of South Carolina alum Josh Dawsey, about Trump’s plans for a 2nd term was interesting.
Trump’s 2nd term plans are focused on political retribution, directly going after his perceived political enemies. (BTW0- It would be an honor to be considered a political and personal enemy of Donald Trump and his supporters).
Per the story, Trump’s goal for his Department of Justice will be one that is tied at the hip to the White House and one that takes direct orders from Trump himself. The focus would be prosecuting people that have disagreed with Trump and targeting them.
The story mentions that Trump advisors have publicly admitted that they see no reason for the DOJ to even be perceived as independent from the White House.
I actually like this because it will be a lot easier to put them in jail after any 2nd Trump term.
It will be interesting to watch our very own fake “Constitutional Conservatives” rationalize the use of government power in this fashion.
of course, we know they will do it, especially our “esteemed” Conservative attorneys who like to pull justifications out from under the seat cushions when it benefits them.