Two-Headed Blog

Saw this over at Dustbury, and as I’m a total sucker for all things of a quiz or meme-type nature, I had to do it.

Oddly enough, I just read a few weeks ago about this particular personality test. It was discussed in one of the readings for my Organizational Behavior class as a tool for predicting job performance.

Basically, the Big Five model suggests that five basic personality dimensions (extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience) underlie all others. While this Big Five model has a decent amount of evidence to back it up, I’m always somewhat skeptical of personality tests in general. I can answer the questions in drastically different ways, simply depending on what mood I happen to be in at that moment. Also, I tend to find human personality to be weirder and more complex than any model (even a reasonably robust model like this one) could accurately describe or predict.

Then again, all of this sniping could simply be a self-defense mechanism to help alleviate the subtle sting of my score – because, you see, I apparently suck all the way around. I’m closed-minded, introverted, disagreeable and high-strung. Even the one dimension I thought I’d do well on, Conscientiousness, showed me to be neither particularly organized nor disorganized.

My results can be seen here:

 I’m a O35-C47-E12-A22-N93 Big Five!!

Click here to find out more about the Big Five personality test, or to take it yourself. Good luck.

I’ve always enjoyed the Bernard Pivot questionnaire. I just realized, however, that this questionnaire is derived from a (much lengthier) version that was popularized by Marcel Proust. I dug up the Proust version, and thought it might be kind of fun to go through it, one question at a time. So, let’s get started:

What is your idea of perfect happiness?

Okay, all of you church-going, Two-Headed Blog readers – I need your help.

My research paper for my Nonprofit-Public Sector Relations class compares faith-based organizations to secular, community-based organizations. How do they differ in their delivery of social services? If there are differences, to what extent can they be attributed to the type of organization (faith-based or secular, community-based)?

Specifically, I’m looking at welfare-to-work type services (programs including, but not limited to, food pantries, housing and utility assistance, job-finding programs, life skills training, etc.) in and around the OKC metro. Please let me know of any faith-based programs like these you might be involved with, or are otherwise aware of. It doesn’t matter if they’re affiliated with a particular church or not.

Additionally, if anyone knows of any similar, secular, community-based programs, I’d love that information, as well.

Thanks for your help, y’all!

I’m kind of peeved at the Senate Democrats right now.

Apparently, Rogue Senator Joe Lieberman got called into the principal’s office for speaking poorly of Obama at the Republican convention, and may lose his committee chairmanship as a result. This really bugs me.

If he did a poor job as Chairman, then the Democratic leadership may have a valid reason to take it away from him. But to punish him for simply speaking his mind and/or not being “Democrat” enough, well – that’s just plain vindictive.

And you know what? Even if Lieberman does decide to go caucusing with the Republicans (as he’s rumored to be contemplating), I think the Democrats should still keep him as Chairman of Homeland Security. It would send the message that for once, someone’s going to do something about this bipartisanship thing.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I enjoy a little spite and retaliation as much as anyone – but it’s time for these people to put their money where their mouth is. Everyone goes on and on about how great it is to be independent and reach across party lines and all that crap, but apparently party loyalty is still what matters most. Besides – I keep thinking about how if this was happening to some Republican senator, I’d be disgusted with the Republican Party for punishing someone who didn’t keep in line. No reason it should be any different for the Democrats.

Sooner or later, someone’s got to stop just talking about bipartisanship and actually do something about it. I really hope it begins with this crowd.

Come on, people. Get crazy up there on the Hill. Break the cycle.

Every now and then, it’s much more fun to fill your head with useless trivia than with useful information. Here’s what I’ve learned so far about Obama’s new Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel:

He used to be a ballet dancer.

His brother Ari was the inspiration for the character of Ari Gold on the HBO series, Entourage. 

He once sent a dead fish to a pollster who pissed him off.

He swears. A lot.

His nickname is “Rahmbo”.

All in all, I don’t think too much should be made of this appointment. The whole Director-of-Freddie-Mac-in-2002 thing makes me gag a little, but it’s not like he’s going to be Treasury Secretary or anything. Furthermore, Robert’s Rules of Bipartisanship don’t necessarily call for your Chief of Staff to be of the other party, do they? There are still plenty of appointments to be made. And from what I’ve read, even if Emanuel is fiercely partisan and even a bit, well, dickish - many observers (of both parties) agree that the guy knows his shit, and knows how to get things done.

Besides – I like profanity. When used creatively and with gusto, of course. It makes one slightly more interesting.