Testing, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Ever taken personality or intelligence tests? I've taken lots of them, my first being in college. I tell everyone I flunked the personality test. Sometimes people laugh. Sometimes, they stare at me and say, "You can't flunk a personality test."

Which is sort of a personality test in itself.

So, at 17, I learned the following things about myself:

1) I should never go into the army or be a police officer.

2) I should be a musician, librarian or minister, and my mother, who was a musician/piano teacher, should have been a writer/artist (which were my second highest scores, while my mother's second highest scores were musician/music teacher. I am my mother reversed!).

3) If you answer outside the boxes, which I did by constantly writing, "it depends," you are considered creative.

The student (and it was a student) who analyzed my test, which after a while I figured out was a career aptitude test, told me that I lacked discipline and wasn't good with authority. Hmm, even at the time that I was soaking in the "lack discipline" comment and making it my own, I wondered how you could be a writer, artist or musician without some kind of discipline.

Then there was the authority bit. Being born at the tail-end of the flower-children, "what-are- you-rebelling-against?-whaddya-got?" generation, iconoclasm is sort of a requirement, so that didn't surprise me. What I discovered much later is not only do I have some issues with others authority, I have issues with my own authority. Like, I don't think I have any ...

Personality, intelligence tests, Meyers-Briggs, work styles and so on are interesting and fun, and there have been times when I've been grateful that people take the time to learn what and who you are so they can understand how and why you work and vice-verse. They actually remind me of astrology ...

Astrology? Well, yes. Go have your chart done at www.astro.com and look at the analysis. Most people think astrology is about what's known as the Sun sign (the day/month/year you were born), but astrology, like human nature, is multi-layered with each component shading another component. Most astrology sites and sometimes astrologists just explain what it means if the moon is in Sagittarius or Venus is in the ninth house or whatever as individual things, but it's the the integration of all these things that may help reveal character or aptitudes or interests or, even, who you desire to be.

Actually, I often use astrology to create fictional characters. It's fun.

I've been asked how I can consider myself a Christian and study astrology? No one asks how you can consider yourself a Christian and study Meyers-Briggs.

Want to learn more about your learning styles. Take the VARK assessment. Wonder why tests make you feel stupid? Maybe your intelligence isn't based in verbal or math skills, which are most frequently the skills tested by educational institutions. Try the a Multiple Intelligence assessment. You can even take an IQ test on-line.

Or you can take, "Which Lord of the Ring character are you."

*All tests are for fun and not necessarily a recommendation.

I've never been good at journals. Every writing teacher I've ever had, every book on writing I've ever read insisted that journaling daily was a "must" for writers.

Thing is, without the protection of a story, either fiction or nonfiction, I'm truly not comfortable writing about what I think. Guess it's a generational thing--or an academic thing. Without credentials, you can't have an opinion.

Of course, I have all sorts of opinions, and, to paraphrase Oscar Wilde, I'm happy to pass them on because they're never of use to oneself. Yesterday, I received an e-mail from my sister-in-law asking about my opinion on health care reform.

Poor girl ... I gave it to her.

For me, the answer to health care reform is so simple, so obvious that it's dumbfounding that anyone would think other then me or my husband, who constantly preaches at the TV when someone suggests that health care reform proposals are similar to the Final Solution or will create death panels or whatever dire warning the opposition is offering.

Last night, Rachel Maddow replayed her confrontation with a smug Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperty, over their scare tactics and hate language. In the interview, she said that, while he had the right of free speech, she had the right to ask who was paying his salary, especially as Americans for Prosperty. Fair question.

According to Source Watch, a collaborative project of the Center for Media and Democracy to produce a directory of the people, organizations and issues shaping the public agenda, Americans for Prosperity is a successor to "Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation, an industry-funded think tank" and supported by Koch Industries, whose co-owner sits on the board, as well as Exxon Mobil and other corporations.

It's no secret that as much as 80 percent of a newspaper's stories comes from press releases that promote a product or idea. Nor is it a secret that sources often quoted by the media to "prove" a point are think tanks. There are ultra-conservative think tanks and uber-progressive think tanks and even (gasp!) some autonomous think tanks. Thing is, newspapers rarely if ever identify who backs/funds the think tank or what their agenda might be.

For those of us raised during that time of "objective" and "investigative" journalism, use of think tanks (or in the historic case of Gennifer Flowers and Bill Clinton, tabloid newspapers) as sources of accurate information is horrifying and dishonest. As much as I despise Fox News, and even though I appreciate Rachel and Keith, when I turn on any of these shows I know exactly where they stand and that there will be bias in the reporting. They are all quite honest about it.

With the rise of social media and blogging, people are getting their news and information in all new ways. Anyone can be an expert, anyone can offer an opinion.

So, let's all follow in Rachel's footsteps. The next time someone shares an opinion, disguised as news, or heads a "grassroots" organization or quotes a think tank, or passes on "the truth," make sure you know who these opinion makers and experts are, where the "truth" came from and more importantly, whose money is funding their expertise.