Coulter or Hitler Quiz

[Idaho]

Is it Hitler or Coulter?

Let us all know how you get on

[whyidie]

12 of 14 correct!

[Kralizec]

2 wrong.

[Csargo]

9/14

[Craterus]

11 right.

[Kralizec]

They really should have replaced "America" in some of those questions with "America/Deutschland".

[Crazed Rabbit]

Really. Somewhat dishonest this way, I wasn't expecting Hitler to talk about America being borne down by liberals.

Crazed Rabbit

[Xiahou]

12/14

[IrishArmenian]

I got 7/14. Pretty funny though.

[Kralizec]

12/14

You just scored so well because you read all her books

[whyidie]

They really should have replaced "America" in some of those questions with "America/Deutschland".

I went off that and the language.

[Xiahou]

You just scored so well because you read all her books

Nah, I can barely sit thru a TV interview with her- let alone actually reading a book by her.

The trick was to determine whether the statement was bombastic headline grabbing hooey (Coulter) or whether it was flat out fanatical propaganda (Hitler). Ya, I know- it's a fine line... I did get 2 wrong afterall.

[scotchedpommes]

12 out of 14 also, based mostly on use of language. Would have been 13, but
for a last second change.

[ScionTheWorm]

Damn 8 right... thought I knew Coulter better

[Aenlic]

I just marked them all Coulter. Didn't count the results. There is little difference between the two. They both spout the same nonsense, and they both used to be men.

[Ronin]

uhmm......that suicide story always seemed kinda fishy....

OMG!!!! It´s HITLER!!!

[rotorgun]

Well....only four right. I must admit that I was surprised how very much her ideas seemed to be classic Adolf Hitler to me! She is one scary individual.

[Duke of Gloucester]

I went off that and the language.

Agreed. Hitler had a better prose style.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

10/14.

I just gained alot of respect for Hitler

[AntiochusIII]

10/14!

It's scary how much of a similarity those two share in their bombastic demagoguery. Though, like others said, Hitler is a more prosaic of the two; he likes to present himself as a philosopher, after all - as in Mein Kampf - whereas the best Coulter could do is repeat the worst stereotypes - the slanders of cheap headlines, like other said - on liberals for cheap favor with her followers.

One more reason to despise the poor...erm, rich...woman.

[Zalmoxis]

You got 6 citations correct!

Total guess.

[InsaneApache]

Is it just me, but who else thinks Herr Hitler sounds more liberal than Mr. Coulter.

[Keba]

Okay, my test results of 8/14 officialy declare that I have them confused. They both sound pretty much the same to me ... well, actually, Hitler sounds a bit better than her, as IA said.

And they really should not have inserted America into there. Half the answers I got wrong were because of the America thing.

[mercian billman]

12/14 based mostly on language and historical content, some of the quotations obviously could not have been made by Hitler, based on the historical content. You'll also notice that Hitler tends to use the word liberal in the singular while Ann Coulter tends to use the word in the plural.

[Dutch_guy]

Well....only four right. I must admit that I was surprised how very much her ideas seemed to be classic Adolf Hitler to me! She is one scary individual.

Yes indeed, however I managed to get a score of 7 right...

[Divinus Arma]

Classic Debate Tactics:
1) Attack The Messenger: Instead of addressing the argument that has been made, people using this method attack the person making it instead. This is particularly easy for many delusional people on the left who believe that almost everyone on the right is a racist, sexist, homophobic, Fascist who longs for the return of the Confederacy and is planning to start throwing leftists in prison camps if they let their guard down for five minutes. The charge made doesn't even have to be accurate, in fact it's better in some ways if it's off target. That's because the more whacked out the charge is, the more compelled your opponent will feel to spend his time defending himself while you continue to make your points.

So instead of attacking Coulter as Hitler, why don't we instead discuss the merits of the arguments within the context they are being used? Let's attempt to at least see the diffierences in American Democratic society and the intent of Ann Coulter, versus that of whom she is being attacked as; namely Adolf Hitler.

I just kind of browsed the site. I tend to agree with most of the statements.

For Example:
"Liberals have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of treason...Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy."

Granted, this is not always the case, nor is it usual. Lieberman is a stand-up guy who has understood the seriousness of the threat of terrorism and the strategic value of victory in Iraq in the GWOT.

However, there are very loud voices on the left which tend to undermine our efforts and give aid to the enemy in the form of supporting propoganda.


AIDING ENEMY PROPOGANDA AGAINST AMERICA

May 28, 2006 — Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., told "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" in an exclusive appearance that reports a group of U.S. Marines may have killed 24 Iraqi civilians following an IED explosion in Haditha, Iraq, was "worse than Abu Ghraib," calling their actions war crimes committed "in cold blood."

Murtha, a Marine veteran who six months ago called for the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, added, "There has to have been a cover-up. … There's no question about it."

ABC News
http://i.abcnews.com/ThisWeek/story?id=2013939&page=1

(Keep in mind, this was over accusations where no charges had yet been filed. Consider Murtha's political position and who is international audience will inevitabley be.)


POLITICAL SUPPORT OF ANTI-AMERICAN GOVERNMENTS

"We need the whole world out in the streets again to stop Bush and Blair, and their crazy imperialist dreams." -Cindy Sheehan, Speaking at a Rally with Hugo Chavez

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html


PROVIDING CRITICAL U.S. SECRETS TO THE ENEMY

The Times published a long story the other day exposing a secret government program to track the international bank transfers of terrorist suspects. The story reported that the program is legal, effective and, as far as any Bush antiterror initiative can be in the current poisonous environment, uncontroversial. Nonetheless, Keller defended its publication as “a matter of public interest.” If the program had violated laws or allowed the government to riffle through the routine banking transactions of Americans (it doesn’t on either count), Keller might have had a case. But there is nothing about the program that countervails the clear public interest in limiting terrorist financing.

Every time the press exposes a secret antiterror program, the media’s apologists shrug it off as no big deal, since terrorists already know that they are being tracked and monitored. But clearly not all terrorists knew that the U.S. was tracking cross-border transactions, say, from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan. Otherwise, the program wouldn’t have helped net a couple of major terrorist figures in Southeast Asia, or figured in terrorist prosecutions. Now they know.

National Review:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...FlOWIxNzYzMjA=


Bank Data Is Sifted by U.S. in Secret to Block Terror

WASHINGTON, June 22 — Under a secret Bush administration program initiated weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, counterterrorism officials have gained access to financial records from a vast international database and examined banking transactions involving thousands of Americans and others in the United States, according to government and industry officials.

The program is limited, government officials say, to tracing transactions of people suspected of having ties to Al Qaeda by reviewing records from the nerve center of the global banking industry, a Belgian cooperative that routes about $6 trillion daily between banks, brokerages, stock exchanges and other institutions. The records mostly involve wire transfers and other methods of moving money overseas and into and out of the United States. Most routine financial transactions confined to this country are not in the database.

Viewed by the Bush administration as a vital tool, the program has played a hidden role in domestic and foreign terrorism investigations since 2001 and helped in the capture of the most wanted Qaeda figure in Southeast Asia, the officials said.

New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/23/wa...erland&emc=rss


Not all liberals in America side with the enemy. But all in America who side with the enemy happen to be liberals.

[Aenlic]

Not all liberals in America side with the enemy. But all in America who side with the enemy happen to be liberals.

Yeah, those darn liberals Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh and all the groups like them. Shame on them!

Oh, and while we're fighting all these liberals at home who do bad things like openly discuss our program to track terrorist finances, let's take on that media giant, that horrible liberal who most often discusses the "secret" financial tracking of terrorists:

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/msn...8a_320x240.wmv

That's right. The liberal person or group or organization who has most often openly talked about the "secret" financial tracking is none other than...

wait for it...

George W. Bush.

Those darn liberals.

[Divinus Arma]

Yeah, those darn liberals Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh and all the groups like them. Shame on them!

The motive for the attack was apparently retaliation against the US Government for the bloody end to a siege near Waco, Texas, in which 82 members of the Branch Davidian sect died.
-BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2733321.stm

They ARE the enemy; American domestic terrorists with a personal agenda. Don't try to shift the argument to something unrelated to the Global War on Terrorism and the anti-American sympathizers.

[JAG]

You got 11 citations correct!

Not bad I guess.

[Aenlic]

The motive for the attack was apparently retaliation against the US Government for the bloody end to a siege near Waco, Texas, in which 82 members of the Branch Davidian sect died.
-BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2733321.stm

They ARE the enemy; American domestic terrorists with a personal agenda. Don't try to shift the argument to something unrelated to the Global War on Terrorism and the anti-American sympathizers.

Right, you ignored the part about the American liberal sympathizer who has been leaking information about our "secret" terrorist finance tracking, since... oh... day one. That darn liberal Bush.

Or is that not related enough enough to "the Global War on Terrorism and the anti-American sympathizers" argument you're making which included links to things like the NYT article on the terrorist finance tracking system? I didn't see any links to the Washington Post stories on the same subject. Or any links to the stuff Olbermann talks about in the link I provided. Like the web site the financial tracking outfit has on the web which details its activities. Or the magazine it publishes. Yeah. Those darn anti-American terrorist sympathizers, leaking "secret" information because they support terrorism. (snicker)

I say we should just blame everything the Bush administration doesn't like on space aliens, that way the Bushistas don't even have to pretend to be rational.