Quiz

As “Arguing Freedom With a Communist”, has got a good response and totalitarianism is a subject at the forefront I thought I would post a quiz to test whether you have paying attention I found this on Neal Boortz.

(1) “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

 A. Karl Marx

B. Adolph Hitler

C. Joseph Stalin

D. None of the above

 (2) “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few…and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity.”

 A. Lenin

B. Mussolini

C. Idi Amin

D. None of the Above

 

 (3) “(We)…can’t just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people.”

 A. Nikita Khrushev

B. Jose f Goebbels

C. Boris Yeltsin

D. None of the above

 (4) “We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own…in order to create this common ground.”

 A. Mao Tse Dung

B. Hugo Chavez

C. Kim Jong Il

D. None of the above

 (5) “I certainly think the free-market has failed.”

 A. Karl Marx

B. Lenin

C. Molotov

D. None of the above

 (6) “I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched.”

 A. Pinochet

B. Milosevic

C. Saddam Hussein

D. None of the above

 

Answers:

 (1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004

(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007

(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007

(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007

(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007

(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005

 

Neal finished withBe afraid. Be very, very afraid!”

  

28 thoughts on “Quiz

  1. Hmmm… don’t know what I was thinking with that last comment. It’s not a stupid post, but a scary post. This is the woman who will (most probably) be the next President!

  2. We can always hope that Ron Paul’s “Freedom is popular” message will be successful. I’d suppose US Libertarians could always try the: “if Chillary is elected, I’ll emigrate to Australia,” as the DNC loyalists’ did in ’04 when G.W.B won. But there’d likely be little difference as Australia cycles from freedom to socialism a bit too.

    It’s really a shame that the first female with a better than 50/50 shot at PotUS has to be a card-carrying communist. Liberty lovers may once again loose to the tyranny of the majority. In any case, it’s still nice to see Dr. Paul out there competing, representing the only “actually different,” choice we’ve had in a long while.

  3. Oh my god! There’s no way the people of this country can fall for this. If they do, than its the Department of Eductaion that has failed.

  4. Wes, what is a Department of Eductaion? Is it like a Department of Education? Where did you learn to spell?

  5. Pingback: Hoax quote collections: Quote mining Hillary Clinton « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub

  6. The above comment reminds me of my sister’s left wing semantics — if this person is seen in the company of Mao and Stalin, they must be bad, right? Sen. Clinton doesn’t have any association with these characters of history — it’s indictment by falsely alleged fellowship. The fellowship is in the language, what is common good? Can we actually have some sort of collectivist perception of what is good for all of us? Who decides what such a good is? Oh yeah Hillary.

    1) This is entirely in context; she is talking of taking away tax cuts and adds “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

    2)When she says that free markets are the greatest force for economic growth, shouldn’t the quiz creator acknowledge that? No, It’s a platitude, she goes on to talk of setting rules for the free market, it is you who is out of ‘context’.

    3) 4) & 5) Semantics, at no time in the post did I say that these statements came from a speech. Notice the long text strings between the quoted materials. The whole truth?
    You Mean: – The same with energy — you know, we can’t keep talking about our dependence on foreign oil, and the need to deal with global warming, and the challenge that it poses to our climate and to God’s creation, and just let business as usual go on.” So, what do we do?
    Your assertion that she was talking “government business” and not private business is just conjecture, she may be but that seems to indicate that her perception of “government business” is going to regulate private business anyway.
    Or
    We have to build a political consensus. And that requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf, in order to create this common ground. doesn’t seem to be much outside the quote here.
    Or
    CLINTON: And that means something has…
    (APPLAUSE)
    CLINTON: … to be taken away from some people. Is the absence of the (applause) a problem – Should it have read; “And that means something has…” clap, clap, clap, yeah, good onya Hillary babe “to be taken away from some people.”
    Or
    And I certainly think the, you know, free market has failed. We have all failed. Not a lengthy omission.

    6) ”I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in our entire economy that they’re being watched.” Then going on to say that she thinks human nature left to itself is going to push the limit as far as possible, and that you need a government regulatory system to keep an eye on people to make the rules of the game fair, to make a level playing field and not give anybody some kind of undue advantage.

    This only makes the statement worse – What is Hillary – (some sort of god perhaps) that she sees fit to judge disparagingly, human nature? Well perhaps lesser human nature (other than hers). What sort of regulatory system will she have keeping what sort of eye on just who? Who’s perception of a level playing field, and how far will she take it down to get the level? What is an ‘undue advantage’ and who will be assessing it?

  7. Taking a quote about limiting abortion and claiming it’s instead about limiting businesses is about as bizarrely dishonest as is possible to get.

    Just disown the thing. It’s dishonest. It’s weasels-fighting-in-the-mud tactics. It’s creationism without the wit, charm, and scientific backing.

    The quiz makes Hillary’s claim about a “vast right wing conspiracy” look like she was giving too much credit for intelligence to the right wing.

  8. Now ask yourself: Would you contradict her on this point? Can you make an argument that the free market has done all it could, and all that is necessary, to reduce demand for abortion? Unless you think abortion rates are as low as they can go, you agree with Sen. Clinton.

    I would certainly contradict her on the suggestion that the free market has a responsibility for the abortion rate,as well as most of the rest of the statement. Hillary is playing for the conservative christian vote from a nanny state perspective and both of you are not making any sense. What the hell does business have to do with the abortion rate.

    Abortion is a personal moral decision, abortion clinics don’t make women pregnant, my information is that they do the exact opposite and would not exist except for the demand for their product. Her statement is a ‘blame everyone else’, while offering nothing except a perceived threat of government intervention.

    It seems that she can find no reason why those having the abortions should shoulder any responsibility themselves.

  9. I think the problem people really have with Hilary is they really don’t know where she stands.

    Compare her politicking vs what she wrote in her college dissertation.

    I know people change, but she occasionally makes signals that she is still like that.

  10. Then please explain why if she has no antibusiness bias why she is blaming the free market for the abortion rate.

    This reminds me of the sort of people who wish to socialize health care, then use the excuse of cost to society to legislate against hazardous personal choices.

  11. It was obvious that the quiz quotes were out of context. This is not really a major issue although it’s good of the Hillary loving Ed to point out the inappropriate Michael Moore style extent of this context dropping.

    Hillary Clinton has and has had very socialist view points. She also often changes her message depending on who she is addressing. Like Bill Clinton she’ll pretend she’s not all left but while you can probably fool the right wingers (who these days support statism), you can’t fool libertarians.

    There is no doubt about her left wing tendancies. eg/ Her universal health insurance plan.

  12. I love Tim R’s comments. You guys have to hoax up quotes to make it appear Clinton “has had very socialist viewpoints.” But, “there is no doubt about her left wing tendencies.”

    What garbage. If you have to make up stuff to try to prove it, of course it’s not true.

    No insurance plan that leaves insurance companies standing and making a profit is socialist, or left-wing. Hillary’s plan is, if anything, much too trimmed to meet crazy objections from misanthropes like y’all who think health care should be rationed to “them,” whoever you think “them” is.

    Clinton isn’t blaming abortions on the free market. The Bush administration policy is to use the free market place of ideas to convince kids to stop having sex, thereby reducing abortion rates, STD rates, teen-age pregnancy rates, and bring back poodle skirts. In the free market of ideas, “just say no” hasn’t worked well. It has failed.

    But of course, her accurate analysis of that situation, couched as it is in the language of serious policy discussion, isn’t crass enough to make you guys think. When some lying hack butchers the quote to try to make it appear Clinton was talking about economics, you go daft at both ends of the lie.

    Facts are stubborn things indeed, as Uncle Ronnie used to say — and often too subtle for those who wish to paint good people as bad ones for their own nefarious reasons.

  13. You are starting to remind me of the Ron Paul groupies who trawl the net looking for something to not like. While I am prepared to accept that the free market/abortion comment is out of context the fact that she mentioned the free market (not free market place of ideas) indicates to me a bias against the free market.

    I note that Democrats like yourself seem to expect fair treatment from the other side, and while you mention the inappropriate Michael Moore style extent of this context dropping it is of note that the Democrats have not repudiated him, as slippery, deceitful, spiteful, and ‘up himself’ as he is, he is too handy for you to have around.

    Hillary is more than a socialist, she is an authoritarian who has no concept of individual sovereignty, and who I believe considers rights as something that come from the state, not the other way around.

  14. Well, I had assumed it was a point of personal honor. That is, if Michael Moore tells lies (I don’t know — I’ve never seen his movies), that’s not a license for you to tell lies.

    My experience is that Democrats generally consider it a point of honor to tell the facts regardless whether Republicans lie. Certainly Gore got nowhere doing that against Bush, but there is hope that somewhere there is a Republican who is a Boy Scout and has personal honor, and who thinks telling the truth is important.

    If you think that someone else telling a whopper is license for you to do the same, the nation’s already lost if we have to depend on you.

  15. While I am prepared to accept that the free market/abortion comment is out of context the fact that she mentioned the free market (not free market place of ideas) indicates to me a bias against the free market.

    I assumed that I was talking to someone of reasonable intelligence however for anyone to claim, My experience is that Democrats generally consider it a point of honor to tell the facts regardless whether Republicans lie. indicates to me that that person is utterly dishonest, naive or delusional.

    Stop wasting my time.

  16. “My experience *is* that Democrats generally consider it a point of honor to tell the facts regardless whether Republicans lie. ”

    Well, that depends on what your definition of *is*, is.

  17. Ed are you denying that Hillary is left wing?

    I wasn’t basing my assessment on the above post as you imply.
    And no one at this site “made up a hoax” as you allege.

    Perhaps you should let your emotions die down so you can think straight before you make further comments. I have already noted that the comments were out of context.

  18. 1. Clinton is really quite middle of the road, perhaps slightly to the left. Calling her a “leftist” rather avoids any serious discussion. Is she socialist? No. Is she pacifist? No. Does she advocate socialized medicine? No.

    On what basis would you call her leftist?

    My emotions? I’m cool. It does irritate me when people claim that someone else’s fib is a license for them to lie.

    If the quiz is out of context, fix it.

    And I love the old Ken Starr line, that “is” means “was,” and “maybe.” The judge agreed with Clinton in that deposition. It does indeed depend on what the definition of “is” is. Starr was not allowed to stretch the definition.

    Perhaps, Tim, you should tell Fryar to let his emotions settle. He’s the one defending the hoax quiz, in all of his political inexperience.

    The quiz is a hoax. An honorable person would note it, and apologize.

  19. “The quiz is a hoax. An honorable person would note it, and apologize.”

    As in, this isn’t an honorable way to engage in responsible discussion about politics and society, so just admit that or be seen as a juvenile (no other option available).

    If ALS desires to be the Rush Limbaugh of the blogosphere, that’s another matter. In that case, I see this post as a good start.

  20. The idea that people (especially politicians) are truthful on the basis of political association *is* about as brilliant as electoral franchise by brithright or race.

    (Well, that depends on what your definition of what “as” is.)

    it is plain dumb, no matter how you spin it.

    Okay, let’s spin it in the direction of the “natural liars”.

    Sen Kennedy: “President Nixon, is it true that you instigated the Watergate robbery?”

    “(Well)..it depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the–if he–if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not–that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement….Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you engaging in criminal conspiracy of any kind, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”

    “Hilary isn’t socialist”….

    I agree. Who knows what she really believes in. She has a lot in common with the neoconservatives in that (I reckon) she will say and subsidise anything to get power. That’s scary, left or right wing.

    A little bit like John Howard, actually.

Comments are closed.