ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 911|回复: 0
打印 上一主题 下一主题

S1-2,3

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2006-7-15 22:25:00 | 只看该作者

S1-2,3

Contrary to the charges made by some of its opponents, the provisions of the new deficit-reduction law for indiscriminate cuts in the federal budget are justified. Opponents should remember that the New Deal pulled this country out of great economic troubles even though some of its programs were later found to be unconstitutional.

2.     The author’s method of attacking the charges of certain opponents of the new deficit-reduction law is to

(A) attack the character of the opponents rather than their claim

(B) imply an analogy between the law and some New Deal programs

(C) point out that the opponents’ claims imply a dilemma

(D) show that the opponents’ reasoning leads to an absurd conclusionB

(E) show that the New Deal also called for indiscriminate cuts in the federal budget

3.     The opponents could effectively defend their position against the author’s strategy by pointing out that

(A) the expertise of those opposing the law is outstanding

(B) the lack of justification for the new law does not imply that those who drew it up were either inept or immoral

(C) the practical application of the new law will not entail indiscriminate budget cuts

(D) economic troubles present at the time of the New Deal were equal in severity to those that have led to the present lawE

(E) the fact that certain flawed programs or laws have improved the economy does not prove that every such program can do so

搞不懂答案为什么是B和E?

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-7-1 12:34
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部