题目内容
Here in the U. S. a project of moving the government a few hundred miles to the southwest proceeds apace, under the supervision of Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia. Apart from the usual highways and parks, Byrd has taken a special interest in transplanting pieces of federal agencies from metropolitan Washington to his home state. Strangely, Byrd’s little experiment in de-Washingtonization has become the focus of outrage among the very people who are otherwise most critical of Washington and its ways. To these critics, it is the very symbol of congressional arrogance of power, isolation from reality, contempt for the voters, and so on, and demonstrates the need for term limits if not lynching. Consider the good-government advantages of (let’s call it) the Byrd Migration. What better way to symbolize an end to the old ways and commitment to reform than physically moving the government What better way to break up old bureaucracies than to uproot and transplant them, files and all Second, spreading the government around a bit ought to reduce that self-feeding and self regarding Beltway culture that Washington-phobes claim to dislike so much. Of course there is a good deal of hypocrisy in this anti-Washington chatter. Much of it comes from politicians and journalists who have spent most of their adult lives in Washington and wouldn’t care to live anywhere else. They are not rushing to West Virginia themselves, except for the occasional quaint rustic weekend. But they can take comfort that public servants at the Bureau of the Public Debt, at least, have escaped the perils of inside-the-Beltway insularity. Third, is Senator Byrd’s raw spread-the-wealth philosophy’ completely illegitimate The Federal Government and government-related private enterprises have made metropolitan Washington one of the richest areas of the country. By contrast, West Virginia is the second poorest state, after Mississippi. The entire country’s taxes support the government. Why shouldn’t more of the country get a piece of it As private businesses are discovering, the electronic revolution is making it less and less necessary for work to be centralized at headquarters. There’s no reason the government shouldn’t take more advantage of this trend as well. It is hardly enough, though, to expel a few thousand midlevel bureaucrats from the alleged Eden inside the Washington Beltway. Really purging the Washington Culture enough to satisfy its noisiest critics will require a mass exodus on the order of what the Khmer Rouge instituted when they took over Phnom Penh in 1975. Until the very members of the TIME Washington bureau itself are traipsing south along 1-95, their word processors strapped to their backs, the nation cannot rest easy. But America’s would-be Khmer Rouge should give Senator Byrd more credit for showing the way. It can inferred from the text that government bureaus
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
To be successful in a job interview, one should demonstrate certain personal and (36) qualities. There is a need to create a good (37) in the limited time available. Furthermore the impression made should be one that the interviewer will (38) while he sees other applicants. At all times, the applicant should present his most attractive qualities during an interview. One should, for example, take care to appear well-groomed and modestly dressed, avoiding the (39) of too elaborate or too casual attire. On the (40) side, clothes may be an effective leveler, putting one on par with other applicants and requiring the interviewer to consider more important (41) On the other hand, clothes which are too informal may convey the impression that the job is not being taken seriously, or that the interviewee’s (42) to work is as casual as his dress. Clothes which are too elaborate, too colorful or too expensive suggest a lack of (43) as to what behavior is appropriate for the job. (44) It may not be true that "clothes make the man" but the first and often the lasting impression may be determined by the clothes one wears. (45) Since speech is a reflection of personality, it is a good idea to reflect confidence by speaking in a clear voice, loud enough to be heard, without being aggressive or overpowering. (46) .
Analysts have their go at humor, and I have read some of this interpretative literature, (1) without being greatly instructed. Humor can be (2) , (3) a frog can, but the thing dies in the process and the innards are (4) to any but the pure scientific mind.One of the things (5) said about humorists is that they are really very sad ’people clowns with a breaking heart. There is some truth in it, but it is badly (6) . It would be more (7) , I think, to say that there is a deep vein of melancholy running through everyone’s life and that the humorist, perhaps more (8) of it than some others, compensates for it actively and (9) Humorists fatten on troubles. They have always made trouble (10) They struggle along with a good will and endure pain (11) , knowing how well it will (12) them in the sweet by and by. You find them wrestling with foreign languages, fighting folding ironing hoards and’ swollen drainpipes, suffering the terrible (13) of tight boots. They pour out their sorrows profitably, in a (14) of what is not quite fiction nor quite fact either. Beneath the sparking surface of these dilemmas flows the strong (15) of human woe.Practically everyone is a manic depressive of sorts, with his up moments and his down moments, and you certainly don’t have to be a humorist to (16) the sadness of situation and mood. But there is often a rather fine line between laughing and crying, and if a humorous piece of writing brings a person to the point (17) his emotional responses are untrustworthy and seem likely to break over into the opposite realm, it is (18) humor, like poetry, has an extra content, it plays (19) to the big hot fire which is Truth, and sometimes the reader feels the (20) . 1（）
Here in the U. S. a project of moving the government a few hundred miles to the southwest proceeds apace, under the supervision of Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia. Apart from the usual highways and parks, Byrd has taken a special interest in transplanting pieces of federal agencies from metropolitan Washington to his home state. Strangely, Byrd’s little experiment in de-Washingtonization has become the focus of outrage among the very people who are otherwise most critical of Washington and its ways. To these critics, it is the very symbol of congressional arrogance of power, isolation from reality, contempt for the voters, and so on, and demonstrates the need for term limits if not lynching. Consider the good-government advantages of (let’s call it) the Byrd Migration. What better way to symbolize an end to the old ways and commitment to reform than physically moving the government What better way to break up old bureaucracies than to uproot and transplant them, files and all Second, spreading the government around a bit ought to reduce that self-feeding and self regarding Beltway culture that Washington-phobes claim to dislike so much. Of course there is a good deal of hypocrisy in this anti-Washington chatter. Much of it comes from politicians and journalists who have spent most of their adult lives in Washington and wouldn’t care to live anywhere else. They are not rushing to West Virginia themselves, except for the occasional quaint rustic weekend. But they can take comfort that public servants at the Bureau of the Public Debt, at least, have escaped the perils of inside-the-Beltway insularity. Third, is Senator Byrd’s raw spread-the-wealth philosophy’ completely illegitimate The Federal Government and government-related private enterprises have made metropolitan Washington one of the richest areas of the country. By contrast, West Virginia is the second poorest state, after Mississippi. The entire country’s taxes support the government. Why shouldn’t more of the country get a piece of it As private businesses are discovering, the electronic revolution is making it less and less necessary for work to be centralized at headquarters. There’s no reason the government shouldn’t take more advantage of this trend as well. It is hardly enough, though, to expel a few thousand midlevel bureaucrats from the alleged Eden inside the Washington Beltway. Really purging the Washington Culture enough to satisfy its noisiest critics will require a mass exodus on the order of what the Khmer Rouge instituted when they took over Phnom Penh in 1975. Until the very members of the TIME Washington bureau itself are traipsing south along 1-95, their word processors strapped to their backs, the nation cannot rest easy. But America’s would-be Khmer Rouge should give Senator Byrd more credit for showing the way. Which of the following cannot describe the public’s opinions the government
Analysts have their go at humor, and I have read some of this interpretative literature, (1) without being greatly instructed. Humor can be (2) , (3) a frog can, but the thing dies in the process and the innards are (4) to any but the pure scientific mind.One of the things (5) said about humorists is that they are really very sad ’people clowns with a breaking heart. There is some truth in it, but it is badly (6) . It would be more (7) , I think, to say that there is a deep vein of melancholy running through everyone’s life and that the humorist, perhaps more (8) of it than some others, compensates for it actively and (9) Humorists fatten on troubles. They have always made trouble (10) They struggle along with a good will and endure pain (11) , knowing how well it will (12) them in the sweet by and by. You find them wrestling with foreign languages, fighting folding ironing hoards and’ swollen drainpipes, suffering the terrible (13) of tight boots. They pour out their sorrows profitably, in a (14) of what is not quite fiction nor quite fact either. Beneath the sparking surface of these dilemmas flows the strong (15) of human woe.Practically everyone is a manic depressive of sorts, with his up moments and his down moments, and you certainly don’t have to be a humorist to (16) the sadness of situation and mood. But there is often a rather fine line between laughing and crying, and if a humorous piece of writing brings a person to the point (17) his emotional responses are untrustworthy and seem likely to break over into the opposite realm, it is (18) humor, like poetry, has an extra content, it plays (19) to the big hot fire which is Truth, and sometimes the reader feels the (20) . 14（）
微信支付 
支付宝支付