Since Joseph had influence because of his wealth, he could be called a “plutocrat.” Just as an “aristocrat” is said (ideally) to rule from talent or virtue (from the Greek “arist-” prefix meaning “best”), a “plutocrat” rules from wealth from the Greek “plutos” for wealth. To “exert” is to administer force to some end. It is clearly related to the English “exertion,” meaning the act of applying a good deal of force.

The correct answer emphasizes how George Washington is a key example of honesty and personal dignity ("paragon") and as a result, many people have little difficulty in believing that possibly false stories made about him are false ("incontrovertible"). The incorrect answers fail to indicate that the stories are treated as fact beyond reproach. One of the choices comes close ("case . . . indisputable"), but "paragon" serves as a better choice in context by stressing how Washington is an exceptional example.

The key word in the second sentence is “friendly”, and this helps us to focus on the distinct possibility of using “amicable” for the first blank. This word means having a friendly spirit, or even more simply, friendly. It is derived from the Latin words for “friend” and “friendship” and is likewise reflected in the contracted form “amiable.” 

“Effusive” means to express positive affection in an abundant manner. It comes from the Latin prefix “ex-“ (meaning out of, such as in “exit”) added to the word fundere, which has forms that replace the “d” with an “s.” Fundere means to pour, and with the “ex” (which becomes “ef” because it is easier to pronounce), we get to pour out. Fundere has many derived English words such as “effusion,” “profuse,” “foundry,” and “fuse.” These latter words are derived from the second sense of the word fundere, meaning to melt or make by means of melting.

The logic of this sentence requires a word that means “to scatter” or “to disperse” for the first blank; therefore, we can eliminate choices "gathered . . . noisy" and "shouted . . . tranquil." The second clause of this sentence is joined to the first clause by the conjunction “and.” Therefore the meaning of the two clauses should be aligned. Since the crowds were dispersed in the first clause, it follows that the streets were deserted in the second clause.

It is important to remember who is doing these actions—the critics would be completing the action so the verb must relate to the process of critiquing a restaurant—thus only "acclaimed . . . sublime" or "lauded . . . discomfiting" are relevant. The sentence suggests that the conflict in the reviews were between the food and the ambiance, and thus "acclaimed . . . sublime" would not fit, leaving only "lauded . . . discomfiting."

"Camaraderie" means brotherhood or jovial unity, while "cavort" means leap about or behave boisterously. The young boys demonstrated their jovial unity by sharing the privilege of behaving boisterously with the team’s trophy, so "camaraderie . . . cavorting" is the correct answer.

The contrast in this sentence is between Donald, who apparently reads quite a bit, and his father, who cannot read. The second blank does not imply anything about laziness or anything of the like. The most we can say for the second is that it is related to the fact that Donald's father is unable to read; therefore, “illiterate” works well to fill this need, meaning unable to read. The negative “il-” is attached to the base “literate,” which means able to read and is related to other English words like “literature,” “literal,” and “literary.” The word “voracious” well describes Donald’s reading habits. Although the word is often used to indicate a deep desire for food (e.g. “a voracious appetite”), it can more broadly mean that one has a great eagerness for a given activity.

The sentence implies that people are supporting the slaves against an injustice. Although it does not say such, we can at first assume the injustice to be slavery. This is particularly the case based on an investigation of the options provided for the second blank. "Lacerated" means cut open. This would be metaphorical at best. "Notarized" makes no sense here. "Totally questioned" really is a bit of a strange pairing, for the sentence implies that this is a matter of something more than mere questioning. To be "totally inquired" does not fit grammatically. Therefore, the best pair of answers is "emancipation . . . curbed." To "emancipate" is to free. It comes from the word for "hand" in Latin, which we find in words like "manual" (e.g. "manual labor") and manuscript (meaning "handwritten"). To "e-manicipate" is to set free the hands of someone. To "curb" is to restrain or hold back.

To answer this question, it helps to know the meaning of "demagogue". This is a person who tries to lead in political and public matters by using emotions. He or she stirs up the emotions of the people to get them to act in a certain manner. This should lead you to think "exciting" is the correct first word. ("Exciting" can merely mean arousing strong feelings.) Still, you may be tempted to choose "many" for the second blank. However, "exculpatory" means getting out of trouble. That makes no sense here. The best option is "exciting ... disenfranchised". To be "disenfranchised" means to be powerless in a society. This contrasts well enough to the demagogue's "privileged few." To "gain the franchise" means to become able to vote. Voting allows people to have some power in society.

The sentence implies a strengthening of meaning from the first blank to the second. This is indicated by the use of “passing” for the first and “much closer” for the second. An “evaluation” can merely mean a general judgment regarding the worth (or value) of someone or something. A “scrutiny,” on the other hand, is an in-depth examination of something. This fits well with the needed strengthened sense in the second blank.