balvinder

A recent poll indicates that many people in the United States hold a combination of conservative and liberal political views; i.e., they denounce the big government, saying government is doing too much and has become too powerful, while at the same time supporting many specific government programs for health care, education, and the environment. A) they denounce the big government, saying government is doing too much and has become too powerful, while at the same time supporting B) they denounce big government- they say that government is doing too much and has become too powerful-but supporting at the same time C) they denounce big government, say that government is doing too much and it has become too powerful, while they support at the same time D) while they denounce big government, saying that government is doing too much and has become too powerful, at the same time supporting Please come with explanation ....

In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whiplash injuries sustained in automobile accidents, reports of having suffered such injuries are twice as frequent as they are in countries where whiplash is not covered. Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. Nevertheless, these facts do not warrant a conclusion that has been drawn by some commentators: that in the countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious. Clearly, in countries where automobile insurance does not include compensation for whiplash, people often have little incentive to report whiplash injuries that they actually have suffered. In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles? A. The first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim. B. The first is claim that has been used to support a position that the argument accepts; the second is a position that the argument rejects. C. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is the judgment reached by the argument concerning the accuracy of the finding. D. The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second is the judgment reached by the argument concerning one alleged implication. E. The first is a finding, the explanation of which is at issue in the argument; the second is an objection that has been raised against the explanation that the argument defends

I will vote for A

Imo B They reason that since topexecutives evidently have faith in the bank’s financial soundness....... Clearly (they reason) it is evidence put in front to support the conclusion ( the bank’s depositors.......have been greatly relieved.) They might well be overoptimistic, ( they might ) it is another conclusion based on same evidence (use of word might) make it an ntermediate conclusion

D is the correct answer. E strengthen the conclusion

i think A

A is correct. usage of would have is wrong in D

C is best choice. It maintains parallelism

C D E A.....

B uses correct idiom

OA is D. The reason told by source is idiom "liken.. to" is correct one where as "liken to be" is wrong one. thanks all for putting more light, specially fran.

In 1985, the california supreme court lifted a ban on fortune tellers, which likened them as economic prognosticators and investment counselors who also make predictions for profit. a) which likedned them as b) who have been likened as c) who are likened to be c) likening them to d) which were likened to be

"dout that" is correct idiom. Since we need past tense A is correct answer.

subject is plural so verb should be plural A)- uses singular verb. C) has been is singular and soes not match with his own time D) past perfect tense is not rewquired E) have been does not match with own time. B)- correct answer

A is clear and consice