题目内容
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（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
That low moaning sound in the background just might be the Founding Fathers protesting from beyond the grave. They have been doing it when George Bush, at a breakfast of religious leaders, scorched the Democrats for failing to mention God in their platform and declaimed that a President needs to believe in the Almighty. What about the constitutional ban on "religious test(s)" for public office the Founding Fathers would want to know. What about Tom Jefferson’s conviction that it is possible for a nonbeliever to be a moral person, "find (ing) incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise" Even George Washington must shudder in his sleep to hear the constant emphasis on "Judeo- Christian values." It was he who wrote, "We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land ... every person may here worship God according to the dictates of his own heart." George Bush should know better than to encourage the theocratic ambitions of the Christian right. The "wall of separation" the Founding Fathers built between church and state is one of the best defenses freedom has ever had. Or have we already forgotten why the Founding Fathers put it up They had seen enough religious intolerance in the colonies: Quaker women were burned at the stake in Puritan Massachusetts; Virginians could be jailed for denying the Bible’s authority. No wonder John Adams once described the Judeo-Christian tradition as "the most bloody religion that ever existed," and that the Founding Fathers took such pains to keep the hand that holds the musket separate from the one that carries the cross. There was another reason for the separation of church and state, which no amount of pious ranting can expunge: not all the Founding Fathers believed in the same God, or in any God at all. Jefferson was a renowned doubter, urging his nephew to "question with boldness even the existence of a God." John Adams was at least a skeptic, as were of course the revolutionary firebrands Tom Paine and Ethan Allen. Naturally, they designed a republic in which they themselves would have a place. Yet another reason argues for the separation of church and state. If the Founding Fathers had one overarching aim, it was to limit the power not of the churches but of the state. They were deeply concerned, as Adams wrote, that "government shall be considered as having in it nothing more mysterious or divine than other arts or sciences.’ Surely the Republicans, committed as they are to "limited government," ought to honor the secular spirit that has limited our government from the moment of its birth. The author’s attitude toward the Founding Fathers’ ideas is one of
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) . 10（）
It was a fixing sight: there, in the Capitol itself, a U.S. Senator often mocked for his halting, inarticulate speaking, reached deep into his Midwestern roots and spoke eloquently, even poetically, about who he was and what he believed, stunning politicians and journalists alike. I refer, of course, to Senator Jefferson Smith. In Frank Capra’s classic Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Jimmy Stewart plays this simple, idealistic small-town American, mocked and scorned by the big-moneyed, oh-so-sophisticated power elite--only to triumph over a corrupt Establishment with his rock-solid goodness. At root, it is this role that soon-to-be-ex-Senator Bob Dole most aspires to play: the self effacing, quietly powerful small-town man from Main Street who outwits the cosmopolitan, slick-talking snob from the fleshpots. And why not There is, after all, no more enduring American icon. How enduring Before Americans had a Constitution, Thomas Jefferson was arguing that the new nation’s future would depend on a base of agrarian yeomen free from the vices inherent in big cities. In 1840 one of the classic, image-driven presidential campaigns featured William Henry Harrison as the embodiment of rural virtues, the candidate of the log cabin and hard cider, defeating the incumbent Martin Van Buren, who was accused of dandified dress and manners. There is, of course, a huge disconnect between this professed love of the simple, unspoiled life and the way Americans actually live. As a people, Americans have spent the better part of the 20th century deserting the farms and the small towns for the cities and the suburbs; and are torn between vacationing in Disney World and Las Vegas. U.S. politicians too haven’t exactly shunned the temptations of the cosmopolitan life. The town of Russell, Kansas, often seems to be Dole’s running mate, but the candidate spends his leisure time in a luxury condominium in Bal Harbor, Florida. Bill Clinton still believes in a place called Hope, but the spiffy, celebrity-dense resorts of Martha’s Vineyard and Jackson Hole are where he kicks back. Ronald Reagan embodied the faith-and-family pieties of the front porch and Main Street, but he fled Iowa for a career and a life in Hollywood. Still, the hunger for the way Americans believe they are supposed to live is strong, and the distrust of the intellectual hustler with his airs and his high-flown language runs deep. It makes sense for the Dole campaign to make this a contest between Dole as the laconic, quiet man whose words can be trusted and Bill Clinton as the traveling salesman with a line of smooth patter but a suitcase full of damaged goods. It makes sense for Dole to make his campaign song Thank God I’m a Country Boy--even if he is humming it 9,200 m up in a corporate jet on his way to a Florida condo. It seems that many people pretend to choose to live a rural life characterized by
1 The doctor is fully booked from (5) till (6) .2 office hours are from (7) until 5:30.3 He will see the doctor on next (8) . 7（）
微信支付 
支付宝支付