题目内容
What is the purpose of Professor McKay’’s report
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
What accounts for the astounding popularity of Dr. Phil McGraw Why have so many TV viewers and book buyers embraced this tough warrior of a psychologist who tells them to suck it up and deal with their own problems rather than complaining and blaming everyone else Obviously, Oprah Winfrey has a tot to do with it. She made him famous with regular appearances on her show, and is co-producing the new "Dr. Phil" show that’s likely to be the hottest new daytime offering this fall. But we decided to put Dr. Phil on the cover not just because he’s a phenomenon. (1) We think his success may reflect an interesting shift in the American spirit of time. Could it be that we’re finally getting tired of the culture of victimology This is a tricky subject, because there are very sad real victims among us. Men still abuse women in alarming numbers. Racism and discrimination persist in subtle and not-so-subtle forms. (2) But these days, almost anyone can find a therapist or lawyer to assure them that their professional relationship or health problems aren’t their fault. As Marc Peyser tells us in his terrific profile of Dr. Phil, the TV suits were initially afraid audiences would be offended by his stern advice to "get real!" In fact, viewers thirsted for the tough talk. Privately, we all know we have to take responsibility for decisions we control. It may not be revolutionary advice (and may leave out important factors like unconscious impulses). (3) But it’s still an important message with clear echoing as, a year later, we contemplate the personal lessons of September 11. Back at the livestock farm—the one in Crawford, Texas—President Bush continued to issue mixed signals on Iraq. (4) He finally promised to consult allies and Congress before going to war, and signaled an attack isn’t coming right now ("I’m a patient man"). But so far there has been little consensus-building, even as the administration talks of "regime change" and positions troops in the gulf. Bush’s team also ridiculed the press for giving so much coverage to the Iraq issue. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld called it a "frenzy", and Press Secretary Ari Fleischer dismissed it as "self-inflicted silliness". But as Michael Hirsh notes in our lead story, much of the debate has been inside the Republican Party, (5) where important voices of experience argue Bush needs to prepare domestic and world opinion and think through the global consequences before moving forward. With so much at stake, the media shouldn’t pay attention Now who’s being silly
The fox really exasperated them both. As soon as they had let the fowls out, in the early summer mornings, they had to take their guns and keep guard; and then again as soon as evening began to mellow, they must go once more. And he was so sly. He slid along in the deep grass; he was difficult as a serpent to see. And he seemed to circumvent the girls deliberately. Once or twice March had caught sight of the white tip of his brush, or the ruddy shadow of him in the deep grass, and she had let fire at him. But he made no account of this. The trees on the wood-edge were a darkish, brownish green in the full light―for it was the end of August. Beyond, the naked, copper-like shafts and limbs of the pine trees shone in the air. Nearer the rough grass, with its long, brownish stalks all agleam, was full of light. The fowls were round about--the ducks were still swimming on the pond under the pine trees. March looked at it all, saw it all, and did not see it. She heard Banford speaking to the fowls in the distance--and she did not hear. What was she thinking about Heaven knows. Her consciousness was, as it were, held back. She lowered her eyes, and suddenly saw the fox. He was looking up at her. His chin was pressed down, and his eyes were looking up. They met her eyes. And he knew her. She was spellbound--she knew he knew her. So he looked into her eyes, and her soul failed her. He knew her, he was not daunted. She struggled, confusedly she came to herself, and saw him making off, with slow leaps over some fallen boughs, slow, impudent jumps. Then he glanced over his shoulder, and ran smoothly away. She saw his brush held smooth like a feather, she saw his white buttocks twinkle. And he was gone, softly, soft as the wind. She put her gun to her shoulder, but even then pursed her mouth, knowing it was nonsense to pretend to fire. So she began to walk slowly after him, in the direction he had gone, slowly, pertinaciously. She expected to find him. In her heart she was determined to find him. What she would do when she saw him again she did not consider. But she was determined to find him. So she walked abstractedly about on the edge of the wood, with wide, vivid dark eyes, and a faint flush in her cheeks. She did not think. In strange mindlessness she walked hither and thither... As soon as supper was over, she rose again to go out, without saying why. She took her gun again and went to look for the fox. For he had lifted his eyes upon her, and his knowing look seemed to have entered her brain. She did not so much think of him. she was possessed by him. She saw his dark, shrewd, unabashed eye looking into her, knowing her. She felt him invisibly master her spirit. She knew the way he lowered his chin as he looked up, she knew his muzzle, the golden brown, and the greyish white. And again she saw him glance over his shoulder at her, half inviting, half contemptuous and cunning. So she went, with her great startled eyes glowing, her gun under her arm, along the wood edge. Meanwhile the night fell, and a great moon rose above the pine trees. As the story proceeds, March begins to feel under the spell of
(1) "I don’t know any successful women who haven’t had a powerful sponsor in their organization to give them their first big break," says Avivah Wittenberg-Cox, the boss of 20-first, a consultancy that helps companies put more women into senior jobs. That sentiment is echoed by many people who work in this field. But why do women need so much help Many men who climb the corporate ladder have sponsors, too. Indeed, they find it easier than women to persuade a senior colleague to sponsor them. But women need help more because they are generally more reluctant to promote themselves. They are also less likely to build up useful networks of contacts. (2) That may help to explain why women, although they now enter white-collar jobs in much the same numbers as men in many countries, still find it so hard to get anywhere near the executive suite. A new report, "Sponsor Effect: UK", produced by the Centre for Talent Innovation (CTI), a New York think-tank, offers a detailed picture of the female talent pipeline in Britain, based on a survey of about 2,500 graduate employees, mostly of large companies. (3) It notes that although women in Britain account for 57% of new recruits to white-collar jobs, they make up just 17% of executive directors and a mere 4% of chief executives of the FTSE’s 100 biggest companies. It is not that the women lack ambition, says the report. No less than 79% of senior women in the sample said they aspired to a top job and 91% were keen to be promoted. (4) Nor, say the authors, are they necessarily held back by family responsibilities: nearly two in five of those aged 40 or over had no children. Three in five of the over-40s did have children, and talented women who quit work to raise kids are not included in the sample. Still, the survey’s main finding is striking. (5) Only 16% of the sample had sponsors, defined as people several levels above them who give them career advice, introduce them to contacts and help them get promotions. Having a sponsor dramatically improves a woman’s career prospects.
At the start of the year, The Independent on Sunday argued that there were three over-whelming reasons why Iraq should not be invaded: there was no proof that Saddam posed an imminent threat; Iraq would be even more trustable as a result of its liberation; and a conflict would increase the threat posed by terrorists. (1) What we did not know was that Tony Blair had received intelligence and advice that raised the very same points. Last week’s report from the Intelligence and Security Committee included the revelation that some of the intelligence had warned that a war against Iraq risked an increased threat of terrorism. Why did Mr. Blair not make this evidence available to the public in the way that so much of the alarmist intelligence on Saddam’s weapons was published (2) Why did he choose to ignore the intelligence and argue instead that the war was necessary, precisely because of the threat posed by international terrorism There have been two parliamentary investigations into this war and the Hutton inquiry reopens tomorrow. (3) In their different ways they have been illuminating, but none of them has addressed the main issues relating to the war. The Foreign Affairs Committee had the scope to range widely, but chose to become entangled in the dispute between the Government and the BBC. The Intelligence Committee reached the conclusion that the Government’s file on Saddam’s weapons was not mixed up, but failed to explain why the intelligence was so hopelessly wrong. The Hutton inquiry is investigating the death of Dr. David Kelly, a personal tragedy of marginal relevance to the war against Iraq. Tony Blair has still to come under close examination about his conduct in the building-up to war. Instead, the Defence Secretary, Geoff Hoon, is being fingered as if he were master-minding the war behind everyone’s backs from the Ministry of Defence. Mr. Hoon is not a minister who dares to think without consulting Downing Street first. At all times he would have been dancing to Downing Street’s tunes. Mr. Blair would be wrong to assume that he can draw a line under all of this by making Mr. Hoon the fall-guy. (4) It was Mr. Blair who decided to take Britain to war, and a Cabinet of largely skeptical ministers that backed him. It was Mr. Blair who told MPs that unless Saddam was removed, terrorists would pose a greater global threat—even though he had received intelligence that suggested a war would lead to an increase in terrorism. Parliament should be the forum in which the Prime Minister is called more fully to account, but lain Duncan Smith’s support for the war has neutered an already inept opposition. (5) In the absence of proper parliamentary scrutiny, it is left to newspapers like this one to keep asking the most important questions until the Prime Minister answers them.
微信支付 
支付宝支付