<p>Let's discuss the US History test here. Any thoughts on the exam overall?</p>
<p>not too bad, i didn’t think so at least.</p>
<p>I didn’t think it was too too bad either. Probably easier than some of the practice tests I’ve taken over the past week. Obviously though there were some things I had NO IDEA about.</p>
<p>Eh, not too bad. Anyone else put (A) for the Senator Joseph McCarthy question?</p>
<p>Are we allowed to discuss questions now? And whartonkid, do you remember what A said? I’m drawing a blank right now</p>
<p>OH was it about finding communists in the administration? I put that one.</p>
<p>what did you you put for “it’s the right for every man” or something like that? I remember the choices are Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and something else…</p>
<p>does anyone remember what they put for the question on the difference between Taft and Roosevelt’s presidencies?</p>
<p>yanksknicks, that question is hard…and it was the only one I omitted…</p>
<p>For McCarthy I think I put down that he was repudiated by Eisenhower, but that’s not correct. I’m almost entirely sure now that the correct answer was the one dealing with investigating the Army.</p>
<p>I’m also pretty sure the correct answer for the question vicky_ltn is referencing is the Declaration of Independence. It was referencing the “that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” part in the preamble.</p>
<p>And yanksnicks, it was that Taft focused more on America’s economic power. Think “Dollar Diplomacy.”</p>
<p>Everyone should write down any question they remember, the number it was, and the answer it had for all the questions they can remember then maybe we could get the whole test together.</p>
<p>Lets start with 1. Any one remember what it was? haha</p>
<p>I put Bill of Rights for vick’s question, but in hindsight that seems incorrect. the question mentioned “natural” rights or something of that nature.</p>
<p>Yeah ^ I had the same answers for the last two, but I really don’t think that the army one is right. Didn’t it say he collaborated with the Army to do something? I don’t remember that happening.</p>
<p>I think the taft vs roosevelt question had to do with money instead of military? and for mccarthy, I’m pretty sure it was the one about truman administration officials because McCarthy ended up proposing an investigation of the army, not investigating with the army. Of course, I got that wrong though. I chose the Eisenhower answer as well.</p>
<p>Wikipedia mentions collaborating with/investigating the Army to an extent that it seems right, but that’s still kind of an obscure answer.</p>
<p>I really didn’t like all those quotes it had. And who was that Johnathan guy that it asked about (right after the City on a Hill quote)? I’d never heard of him.</p>
<p>Straight from Wiki:</p>
<p>“During the 1952 Presidential election, the Eisenhower campaign toured Wisconsin with McCarthy. In a speech delivered in Green Bay, Eisenhower declared that while he agreed with McCarthy’s goals, he disagreed with his methods. In draft versions of his speech, Eisenhower had also included a strong defense of his mentor, George Marshall, which was a direct rebuke of McCarthy’s frequent attacks.”</p>
<p>That would constitute a ‘repudiation’ of McCarthyism right?</p>
<p>Plus, I’m quite certain that McCarthy “investigated” the Army, not work with them.</p>
<p>Jonathon Edwards? He was a preacher during the Great Awakening, and I only know that because I had to read one of his sermons in English in like sophomore year.</p>
<p>I think it was that McCarthy was unable to prove the Communists in the Truman State Department?</p>
<p>carbon, that’s what I put too, and I’m pretty sure it’s right</p>
<p>sivilized–Keep reading. He took out the “strong defense” of George Marshall from his final speech in order to avoid upsetting McCarthy/losing support. In fact, I’m pretty sure the article quotes him about privately saying a repudiation by the President would be just what McCarthy wanted. For the Army, I think they worked with him on that to a pretty significant extent. I could be wrong.</p>