Were there other factors behind favoring Geithner over Summers? After all, if Obama wasn't hesitant in selecting Clinton, then Summers' tenure at Harvard shouldn't have deterred Obama from selecting Larry (if indeed he was the optimum choice).

The reason I ask is that it seems as if strategic leaks are the ones we preceive as planned and unplanned ones are those that we perceive as sloppy.

Does perceive ultimately = guesswork?

In thinking about my mindset while I was taking the quiz, I realize that it didn't even occur to me to evaluate the motives behind the economics questions (especially, as pointed out, question 27).

Two reasons occur to me about why I was not fazed:
1) since 1980, we have been led by Presidents who were wary of economic regulations, and 2) last year, my wife took a microeconomics course and, out of curiosity, I read the text and did the problem sets as if I were a student.

There needs to be more school time devoted to practical knowledge. In addition to science and math, kids should be taught things like practical finance, cooking and the skills that y'all mentioned. (Oh yes, there should also be a course on how to think critically.)

I do think that part of practical knowledge includes basic civics. Knowing the basics on one's government is essential to citizenship.

Too bad your school did not teach civics. I was shocked to learn that some of my college-educated peers did not know of the Electoral College.

It makes sense that performance is a combination of knowledge and test taking ability. There were some questions for which I knew the correct answer and others for which I knew the incorrect responses.

I think that a requirement for graduating high school should be passing a civics test. Shouldn't Americans have more than a basic idea of how our government runs? Naturalized citizens have to pass a citizanship test in order to become an American. Something should be required of those who are born here.

Legislative
Judicial
Executive
Shadow

:)

I missed two questions myself. One of the ones I missed was the last one:

If taxes equal government spending, then:
A. government debt is zero
B. printing money no longer causes inflation
C. government is not helping anybody
D. tax per person equals government spending per person
E. tax loopholes and special-interest spending are absent.

The "correct" answer is supposed to be D, which makes sense mathematically, but doesn't make sense to me when a) income tax is progressive and b) government spending does not benefit everyone equally.

Regardless, I think that it is appalling that the average score amongst Americans is 49% and college educators only scored 55%.

This question is for those who have kids in school: Do they currently teach civics? I don't think that I had an official couse, but y 9th grade Social Studies teacher took it upon himself to review the Constitution with us for an extended period of time.

I think that she will take SoS because she is looking for a way to make an impact sooner rather than later (i.e., power in the Senate is mostly seniority driven).

2) Bill and Hill may like drama, but my analogy to Brad and Angelina was more about the fact that both couples draw media attention merely by their presence. Like dirt to Pig Pen...

When he makes his announcements, he should scramble the nominees and their posts, just to see how the press will react:

"I am moving Robert Gates from Defense to Secretary of State; I will be putting Tom Daschle in at Defense; Hillary Clinton will be my Attorney General..."

In addition, I think that the media is trying to animate the No Drama team. Morning Joe talks about how poorly the Cabinet process has been running so far, citing the kerfluffle surrounding Rahm and Hillary as examples. I actually think that these two instances demonstrate Obama's steady hand in the face of rumors and sensationalism.

Obama promised to change Washington, not the Fourth Estate.

Things can change in time. After all, who thought that Ronald Reagan would ever become President in 1980 after he lost previous attempts to be the GOP nominee?

Some observations based on the recent round of Palin interviews:

- She didn't totally suck (not the most glowing compliment...)
- Some may sympathize with her new role as candidate/victim.

If she studies up over the next few years, who knows. If Dubya was able to become POTUS, anything is possible.

Attending the summit would give Obama the chance to hold low-key unofficial meetings with the European leaders directly, as opposed to hearing second hand reports from surrogates.

The Dems should set the example for tolerance of diverse views within a single party. Kicking Joe from the chairmanship would send the signal that there will be politics as usual in Washington.

Harry Reid should leave the decision up to Joe. He should clearly state to Joe that he needs to think about his decision and then make some public statement to clear the air.

There is too many other more important things to deal with in this country than Joe's affiliation and chairmanship.

Let me emphasize that I was thinking aloud and was not making an outright endorsement of Rice.

I do believe that she has gotten positive reviews about her tenure at State. I am trying to find articles that verify this.

As for any contentiousness during her confimation hearings, Condy deserved it given what a crappy job she did as NS Advisor.

Thoughts on other appointments: I don't think that Summers should be named Treasury Secretary. I cannot imagine Kerry as Secy of State. I think it would be interesting and bold if he kept Condy in that position.