<p>“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.”
Adolf or Ann?
*
“Hence it is that at the present time the liberal is the great agitator for the complete destruction of America. Whenever we read of attacks against America taking place in any part of the world the liberal is always the instigator.”*</p>
<p>I got three wrong. What is the point? Do I get any extra credit points for recognizing that what was called a “liberal” in early 20th-century Europe is quite different from what we call a liberal today? See: F.A. Hayek, who pegged this difference back in the 1930s.</p>
<p>We could play this game with virtually any hero/villain. It’s called sophistry. (I’m referring to the creator of the “test” , not you, EK4).</p>
<p>Funny, at first glance I thought these were Howard Dean’s talking points to the DNC. To the effect, "side with the enemy my minions [insert evil laugh] " :)</p>
<p>This does remind me - a bit - about the quiz where you pick your national leader based on his characteristics. The non-drinking (pseudo) vegetarian is Hitler; Churchill apparently loved his booze; JFK was a womanizer.</p>
<p>I got 7 wrong- because I am not actually familar with either Coulter or Hitler to be able to indentify common threads- but I did think it is was educational- so I suppose tht ws my * point*
It made me think about language and the way we use it- to either inform or distort</p>
<p>a quote that i recently read:
“The minute you take her seriously, you lose grip on her reality. She’s not a social or political commentator. She’s a drag queen impersonating a fascist. I don’t even begin to believe she actually believes this stuff. It’s post-modern performance-art.”
-andrew sullivan</p>
<p>well I disagree with that
bcause I beleive that we * are* what we do & what we think about.
We may think we are a “hippie”
But if we talk and act like Pat Robertson- we aren’t
People that live their lives saying things and doing things they don’t believe in- are caricatures of human beings</p>
<p>1 wrong - mistook a Hitler quote for one of Ann’s.</p>
<p>I think the trick is the style of delivery: Ann just spits it out while Hitler dwaddles to his point. The message, tone, and degree of the quotes are pretty indistinguishable.</p>
Only if you have a tin ear. The supposed beauty of this kind of sophistic “test” is that you either mistake the subject’s words for Hitler’s, or you mistake Hitler’s words for the subject’s. You do understand this, yes?? Heads I win, tails you lose. You could do the same thing with virtually any public figure, with selective quotations.</p>
<p>That’s a bit disingenuous, Driver, since it is pretty doubtful you could put Hitler head to head with…say, Ghandi…and anyone could mistake the two.</p>
<p>It would have to be two equal bigots. This caveat provides plenty of potential other public figures to be compared to Hitler or to Coulter, but they must share xenophobia, hatred and bigotry as personal beliefs.</p>
<p>“Many of the native prisoners [South African blacks] are only one degree removed from the animal and often created rows and fought among themselves”</p>
<p>“raw kaffir, whose occupation is hunting and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with, and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness”</p>
<p>Both quotes by Gandhi. You can play this game with any political figure…</p>
<p>I suppose it wouldn’t hurt if they had also killed millions of innocent human beings. Just a thought. I find this very distasteful and disrespectful. </p>
<p>One is a mass murder
The other is a liberal thermometer…not sure if its application is oral or elsewhere.</p>
<p>In any case, I’d say many of the posters above have very high temperatures.</p>
^^^Well now that’s just kinky. I’d like to keep Ann Coulter separate from all my bodily orifices, but whatever works for you, big guy. ;)</p>
<p>I’ll concede though that while Hitler was a blight on humanity, Ann Coulter is mostly just bad gas - a faintly unpleasant odor in a long line of obnoxious but ultimately forgettable stinkers. The fact that she relies entirely on shrill diatribes to make her millions is what lends her quotes to this exercise, with no slight of hand needed.</p>
<p>I hope nobody is trying to use this to make any sort of truly valid argument, and I’m pretty sure that nobody is trying. This isn’t about proving that Ann is just like Hitler, it’s just poking fun at her more radical rhetoric. </p>
<p>I’m a liberal, and I’ve read her book Slander, and I have to say that some of the things she says are just so out there that one has a hard time understanding her popularity. The same can be said about some liberal icons, I’m sure, but her rhetoric is just insane at times.</p>