"大洋彼岸之风" Virtual_Pro的第二次作业

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

Title

1. "We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own; disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning."

提纲

Keywords

1.Learn from people (whose views we share V.S. whose views we contradict),
2.disagreement

核心提炼
在收获上，不同观点是否大于相同观点？

进一步分析和限定

1.看法不同包括很多个方面，既包括观点根本是相反的，也包括观点仅仅是对于一个问题的不同角度的看法。这里将其限定为观点相反，这样方便论述，而不同的角度的看法本质上可以视为观点相同，至少是相通。

2.注意到本题目有个分号将其划分为两个部分，第二部分并没有比较性，只是陈述一个命题，而这个命题与第一部分有内在联系。

本文的论证结构展开

采用正——反——总——补的结构。

首先论证不同的观点带来的压力和深入思考。对于此观点我持赞同态度。首先分析人在认知上的差异，人对于不同的事情的关注程度总是大于相同的事情。这里可以给出医学上的论证。其次，对于不同观点的关注，可以帮助人找到问题的关键点，从而引发深入思考。这可以举例论证，如物理史上的三次著名的争论带来的人类关于物理的深入认识。

第二部分论述相同观点的作用。相同的观点可以聚集一些人一起深入研究同一个问题，能激发研究的兴趣，也能够引发深入的思考。可以举例，Karl Max和Friedrich Engels，出于对于资本主义的共同的观点，互相帮助，深入研究，终于创立的科学社会主义，为世界上很多国家的革命事业指出了出路。

第三部分，对相同观点和不同观点带来的收获进行比较，不同的观点容易引起注意，产生争论焦点，并从此引发深入思考，而相同的观点可以使人们找到共同的兴趣点，进行深入思考，长期研究。因此不能简单的说能从持不同观点的人那里学到更多的东西，这是一个问题的两个不同的发展方向。

第四部分，补充。既要重视不同的观点带来的争论点，促进深入思考，也要重视相同观点带来的深入研究的机会。

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

Title

7、"The video camera provides such an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life that it has become a more important form of documentation than written records."总频99 科技类

Outlines

Keywords:

1.Video camera V.S. written records

2.Important?

3.Form of documentation

核心提取

Video camera相比于written records是否是一种更重要的documentation的方式

进一步限定
首先是documentation的问题。字面理解是记录，查了goggle的字典，发现只有一个意思比较贴近：凭证，史实。对应于contemporary life，就取史实这个意思好了。

本文论证结构展开

采用正——正——延伸——让步的论证方式。

第一部分首先论证Video Camera的优点：包括精确性和可信服性。可用youtube举例，说明video camera能够大量、快速、准确记录当代的事件。

第二部分论证比较优势，包括信息容量、场景的可复原性等。可用的素材包括：用一千个人心中有一千个哈姆雷特，但如果是视频文件，就会准确的多。还可以拿汶川大地震中，有人用手机拍摄的珍贵视频资料带给我们的震撼作为例子。

第三部分，延伸。Video Camera技术属于虚拟现实技术中的一个小的方面。随着科技的进步，促使的虚拟现实技术的发展，可以让人在某种程度上回到过去，去领略历史当年的风景。如圆明园的数字重建技术。（PS：我是虚拟现实方向的，所以有这个联想，但不确定放在这里是否合适，请指正。）

第四部分，让步。Writen records在记录的抽象性和总结性上有一定优势，不可完全忽视。可用的材料包括一些珍贵的日记资料，记录了内心的变化情况。这是video camera一般不能够媲美的。

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

Title

8、"It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public." 总频69 政治类

Outlines

Keywords:

1.Political leaders
2.Withhold information
3.The public

核心提炼

政治人物是否需要经常向公众隐瞒信息

进一步限定

1.政治人物多如牛毛，有主政的，有参政的，有职业的，有业余的。这里为了方便论述，将其限定为主政的人物，也就是在政府机构工作的政治人物。

2.Information也有很多种，这里将其限定为重大的新闻性或者政策性消息。

3.公众人物，指所有社会民众。

本文论证结构展开

采用让步——转折——延伸的论证方式。

1.诚然，政治人物需要在一些问题上需要对公众隐瞒信息。从原因上分析，可能涉及国家安全（如军事安排和布置），社会稳定的需要，等等。举例可包括诺曼底登陆。

2.转折。但是，在绝大多数情况下，政治人物不能够向公众隐瞒消息，因为这会由于信息的不公开，公众的不知情，产生社会反应不及时，导致严重的后果。如Sars开始的时候，北京市政府隐瞒消息，导致大量传播，死亡人数剧增。

3.延伸。信息的透明化，涉及到社会的民主问题，能够有效的遏止腐败、不作为等政府弊病，帮助公众参与政治决策，使得政府更加廉洁有效。可以拿中国政府这几年的信息透明化成果举例。

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

Title

28. “Students should memorize facts only after they have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts. Students who have learned only facts learned very little.”

Outlines

Keywords

Part one

【主】students
【谓】memorize
(限定:only after they have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts)
【宾语】facts

Part two

【主】students
(限定:who have learned only facts)
【谓】learned very little

核心提取

学生应该只在研究了事实后才记住它们。仅仅记住事实学到的东西很少。

进一步限定

本题目的students泛指一切学生，不需要限定。

Facts需要限定，M-W解释为something that has actual existence。也就是说，这里是指已经存在的事实。

扣题阐述

学生不仅仅需要在研究过其背后的思想、趋势和概念，能够进行解释的事实，也要记住一些表面的未经过研究的事实，因为这两种事实各有各的作用。

进一步升华

信息爆炸，使得学生需要记住的信息量远远超出了能够去研究和理解的部分。
知识分为间接知识和直接知识。
一转多长，博闻强识是一个优秀人才的好的典型。

本文论述框架

采用正——反——总——延伸的论证架构。

第一部分，事实可以分为专业领域和非专业领域。对于专业领域的事实，论证深入研究facts背后的思想、趋势和概念对于记住事实和进一步深入理解的作用。

第二部分，记住一些非专业领域的事实，而不去研究其背后的深入背景，对于扩大知识面，锻炼发散性思维的好处。

第三部分，专业领域的事实还是非专业领域的，虽然处理方式不同，但是两者之间在一定条件下是可以转化的。根据实际需要，对一些非专业事实进行研究，可将其变为专业事实；而相对的一些专业事实，由于长期不使用，会部分被遗忘，成为非专业事实。总结，无论专业领域的事实还是非专业领域的都是构成知识体系和思维体系的重要组成部分，students需要采用不同的方式去记住他们。

第四部分，延伸到信息爆炸带来的挑战和复合型人才的培养。

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

Title

30"The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that everyone has more leisure time."

Outline

Keywords

【主】primary goal
（限定: technological advancement）
【谓】be
【宾】increase people's efficiency
【目的】everyone has more leisure time

核心提取

科技进步的主要目标是增加人的效率，使得每个人有更多的闲暇时间。
本文的主题分为两个部分，一是科技的主要目标，二是这个主要目标的原因。

进一步限定

1.Advancement: promotion or elevation to a higher rank or position(M-W)
2.effective operation as measured by a comparison of production with cost (as in energy, time, and money) (M-W)
狭义上的技术进步主要是指生产工艺、中间投入品以及制造技能等方而的革新和改进。具体表现为对旧设备的改造和采用新设备改进旧工艺,采用新工艺使用新的原材料和能源对原有产品进行改进研究开发新产品提高工人的劳动技能等。从广义上讲，技术进步是指技术所涵盖的各种形式知识的积累与改进。（百度百科）参照本题目，这里的技术进步指的应该是广义上的意义。
效率有多个意思，这里应该指的是单位时间内的工作量。相应地，人的效率指的就是人在单位时间内的完成的工作量。

扣题阐述

技术进步的主要目标包括两个方面，一是提高人类改造自然和自身的能力，帮助人类实现更好的发展，二是改善人类的工作效率，给人更多的时间可以做出更多的事情，而不是有更多的闲暇时间。

进一步升华

技术的进步并没有导致人类的生活的安逸舒适，相反地，越是在技术发达的大城市里，人的生活节奏更加紧张，闲暇时间更少。这说明了技术进步的目的不是使人获得更多的闲暇时间，而是使人能够让人完成更多强度更大的工作。
本文论证结构展开

采用正——补——反——总——延伸的论证架构。
第一部分论述技术进步确实可以改善人类的工作效率，但这仅仅是其主要目标中的一个。
第二部分论述技术进步的其他目标，包括提高人类的改造自然和自身的能力。
第三部分论述技术进步对人的效率的改善不是为了给人更多的闲暇时间。
第四部分总结，技术进步的目标包括两方面，但是都不能给人更多的闲暇时间。
第五部分，延伸到现代的技术带来的生活节奏的加快，压力的增大。要注意技术进步的负面效应。

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

Title

43"To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."

Outline

Keywords

【主】a public official
【谓】maintain
【宾】highest ethical and moral standards
【目的】to be an effective leader

核心提炼

为了做一个有效的领导人，一个公共官员必须持有最高的伦理道德标准。
进一步分析和限定

Effective: producing a decided, decisive, or desired effect (M-W)
Leader: a person who has commanding authority or influence (M-W)
Ethical: involving or expressing moral approval or disapproval (M-W)
Moral: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior (M-W)

有效的领导人应该是指能够做出很好的工作成绩的领导人。最好的伦理和道德标准指的是一个人应该具有最好的道德榜样。公共官员指的是在政府或者其他公共机构工作的官员。这个题目的概念都相当的清楚，不需要再限定。

扣题阐述

为了做一个有效的领导人，对于一个公共官员的伦理道德是有要求的，但并不要求其持有最高的道德标准，同时也不能因为要求高的道德标准而忽略其他方面。

进一步升华

领导人最重要的才能当然是其的领导才华，而不是其伦理道德标准。简单的来说，伦理道德标准只是对有效的领导人的必要而非充足条件。另一个方面，最高的道德标准是完全没有必要的，领导人不是圣人。

本文论证结构展开

采用正——反——延伸——总结的论证架构。
第一部分，首先论证伦理道德对于成为一个有效的领导人的必要性。
第二部分，论证为什么对领导人的伦理道德只要求合格而不强求最高。原因包括有效的领导人的要求的多样性，道德水平并不是其最重要的方面，不能因小失大。
第三部分，人的伦理道德观对于人的发展的作用，从长远来看较高的伦理道德水平有助于一个有效的领导人的长期发展。（欢迎讨论此点是否离题）
第四部分，总结，伦理道德的必要非充分性。

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

     As a political leader of a government or a party, there is obviously much information that could not be shown to the public, such as the configuration and distribution of the military strength, the development strategies under the competition pressure between nations. One reason for withhold the information mentioned above is it may contain the contents concerning the competition contents. If it is illustrated to the public, simultaneously it is shown to the competitors and that will consequently do harm to the government or nation. The other principal reason is the hidden of information will not impair the benefits of the public. In the 1980s, the Reagen-adminstration proclaimed the strategic defense initiative to deal with the nuclear deterrence from the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). However, as a political leader, President Reagan concealed the purpose of to exhaust the economical power of USSR by the arms race. Until the disintegration of USSR, the public could not be aware of the information that had been hidden for years. The case demonstrates obviously that sometimes withhold information from the public is of great necessity.

     

     However, in more general cases, withhold information from the public is considerably risky. When the Sars viruses start to be spread in Beijing, the government withholds the information from the public and still declared it is safe to travel in Beijing. The consequence is the widespread infections of the Sars and the resign of the major of Beijing. We can easily infer that withhold the information from the public could lead to the lack of preparation of serious situations. As in the Sars case, the early preparation is extremely significant in dealing with some tough issues, and withhold the information from the public will cause missing the best chance to fix the problem. In addition, there are some other disadvantages of hiding information from the public. For example, withhold the financial information of public official could make the supervision more difficult and lead to the corruptions happen more easily.

     In the contrast, the disclosure of some public information could promote the social democracy and increase the efficiency of the government. After China’s reform and opening-up, and especially in the recent years, the policy transparency of the Chinese government has been improved a lot, and results in the promotion of the effiects of the policies.

     In conclusion, sometimes the political leaders have to withhold information from the public as the information is sensitive for the national or social interest. But in general if the disclosure of the information will do not impair the citizens' benefits, it should be shown to the public for several reasons that have been mentioned above.

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

阅读的作业我不想去读ECO了，改做范文分析吧，我觉得这个比较速成。

The speaker would prefer a national curriculum for all children up until college instead of allowing schools in different regions the freedom to decide on their own curricula. I agree insofar as some common core curriculum would serve useful purposes for any nation. At the same time, however, individual states and communities should have some freedom to augment any such curriculum as they see fit; otherwise, a nation's educational system might defeat its own purposes in the long tenn.

A national core curriculum would be beneficial to a nation in a number of respects. First of all, by providing all children with fundamental skills and knowledge, a common core curriculum would help ensure that our children grow up to become reasonably informed, productive members of society. In addition, a common core curriculum would provide a predictable foundation upon which college administrators and faculty could more easily build curricula and select course materials for freshmen that are neither below nor above their level of educational experience. Finally, a core curriculum would ensure that all school-children are taught core values upon which any democratic society depends to thrive, and even survive--values such as tolerance of others with different viewpoints, and respect for others.

However, a common curriculum that is also an exdusive one would pose certain problems, which might outweigh the benefits, noted above. First of all, on what basis would certain course work be included or excluded, and who would be the final decision- maker? In all likelihood these decisions would be in the hands of federal legislators and regulators, who are likely to have their own quirky notions of what should and should not be taught to children--notions that may or may not reflect those of most communities, schools, or parents. Besides, government officials are notoriously susceptible to influence-peddling by lobbyists who do not have the best interests of society's children in mind.

Secondly, an official, federally sanctioned curriculum would facilitate the dissemination of propaganda and other dogma which because of its biased and one-sided nature undermines the very purpose of true education: to enlighten. I can easily foresee the banning of certain text books, programs, and websites which provide information and perspectives that the government might wish to suppress--as some sort of threat to its authority and power. Although this scenario might seem far-fetched, these sorts of concerns are being raised already at the state level.

Thirdly, the inflexible nature of a uniform national curriculum would preclude the inclusion of programs, courses, and materials that are primarily of regional or local significance. For example, California requires children at certain grade levels to learn about the history of particular ethnic groups who make up the state's diverse population. A national curriculum might not allow for this feature, and California's youngsters would be worse off as a result of their ignorance about the traditions, values, and cultural contributions of all the people whose citizenship they share.

（颜色标注：红色-好的小结构性词语，使行文连贯；蓝色-生词；绿色-好的动词，使文章生动；黄色-好的形容词，精确的修饰；暗红色-好的句子或短语，值得模仿）

结构分析

本文采用的是总——正——反的论证架构。首段给出观点，说明应该有全国性的核心课程和不同的地区性辅助课程。第二部分说明核心课程的作用，以及为什么要有全国性的核心课程。部分内分为三个层次论述。第三部分三段阐述为什么要有地区性课程。值得注意的是最后并没有总结的部分。

全文结构清晰，是地道的英文论述方式，结构上值得模仿。

语言分析

本文句子之间的衔接非常的好，给人的感觉十分流畅，主要得益于一些句子间的小的结构性连接词的应用，部分已经用红色标出。后面的部分，用词比较有深度。

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

唉，这个掉色的问题，论坛的技术难题啊

juventuslandUID：2631955

As a political leader of a government or a party, there is obviously much information that could not be shown to the public, such as the configuration and distribution of the military strength, the development strategies under the competition pressure between nations. One reason for withhold(withholding,应该没错吧。。后面基本都犯了这个错误，我都怀疑自己了，不过上GOOGLE没找到直接能用原型的） the information mentioned above is it may contain the contents concerning the competition contents. If it is illustrated to the public, simultaneously it is shown to the competitors and that will consequently do harm to the government or nation. The other principal reason is the hidden of information（直接用hidden information不是更简练吗？而且建议在这里限制下范围some information) will not impair the benefits of the public. In the 1980s, the Reagen-administration（Reagan administration小小的拼写错误，话说组长知识面好广）  proclaimed the strategic defense initiative to deal with the nuclear deterrence from the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR)（这人很强大。。。）. However, as a political leader, President Reagan concealed the purpose of to exhaust（exhasuting 这个固定搭配，GOOGLE上没有你这样的用法） the economical power of USSR by the arms race. Until the disintegration of USSR, the public could not be aware of the information that had been hidden for years. The case demonstrates obviously that sometimes withhold information from the public is of great necessity.
     However, in more general cases, withhold information from the public is considerably risky. When the Sars viruses （Sars virus，也是固定用于）start to be（去掉） spread in Beijing, the government withholds（并列但是与后面时态不一致啊，这里用过去式） the information from the public and still declared it is safe to travel in Beijing. The consequence is the widespread infections of the Sars and the resign（resign是没有名次用法的，resignation) of the major of Beijing. We can easily infer that withhold the information from the public could lead to the lack of preparation of（准备严峻的形势？是否应该改成准备应对严峻的形势） serious situations. As in the Sars case, the early preparation is extremely significant in dealing with some tough issues, and withhold the information from the public will cause missing the best chance to fix the problem（很不常用的用法，建议换SOLVE。）. In addition, there are some other disadvantages of hiding information from the public. For example, withhold the financial information of public official（复数） could make the supervision more difficult and lead to the corruptions(WHAT corruptions?写的应该再充分点） happen more easily.
     In the contrast（In  contrast）, the disclosure（泄密？泄露？感觉不是很妥当的词） of some public information could promote the social democracy and increase the efficiency of the government. After China’s reform and opening-up, and especially in the recent years, the policy（political) transparency of the Chinese government has been improved a lot, and results in the promotion of the effiects of the policies（提高政策效应吗？感觉挺突兀的）
     In conclusion, sometimes the political leaders have to withhold information from the public as the information is sensitive for the national or social interest. But in general if the disclosure of the information will do not impair the citizens' benefits, it should be shown to the public for several reasons that have been mentioned above.
     文章结构上比较紧凑和复合逻辑性，先举例论证了有些情况下隐瞒信息的好处，然后反面强调有时不恰当隐瞒信息带来的危害性，然后再次升华。以中国政策透明化的成果强调了有些情况下不能隐瞒信息。感觉这段可以再详述，使更具逻辑性。
    感觉自己只能找到小小的一些语法句式问题吧。。现在的水平有限，很难从思想逻辑方面来推敲文章。。不过这问题应该随着自己水平的提升会解决的。。看的出来组长很认真的写了这篇ISSUE。。感觉到差距了啊。。。。努力努力~~
先贴出来。。

xiaoxiaoWUID：2611108

7# Virtual_Pro Asa political leader of a government or a party, there is obviously muchinformation that could not be shown to the public, such as theconfiguration and distribution of the military strength, thedevelopment strategies under the competition pressure between nations.One reason for withhold the information mentioned above is it maycontain the contents concerning the competition contents. If it isillustrated不确定 是不是用disclose更好？ to the public, simultaneously it is shown to thecompetitors and that will consequently do harm to the government ornation. The other principal reason is the hidden of information willnot impair the benefits of the public这第二个原因出现的很突然 而且后面的事例论证的还不是它 建议再考虑一下第二点的位置. In the 1980s, theReagen-adminstration proclaimed the strategic defense initiative todeal with the nuclear deterrence from the former Union of SovietSocialist Republics (USSR). However, as a political leader, PresidentReagan concealed the purpose of to exhaust the economical power of USSRby the arms race. Until the disintegration of USSR, the public couldnot be aware of the information that had been hidden for years. Thecase demonstrates obviously that sometimes withhold information fromthe public is of great necessity.

     

     However,in more general cases, withhold information from the public isconsiderably risky. When the Sars viruses start to be spread inBeijing, the government withholds the information from the public and前后时态不一致still declared it is safe to travel in Beijing. The consequence is thewidespread infections of the Sars and the resign resignationof the major ofBeijing. We can easily infer that withhold the information from thepublic could lead to the lack of preparation of serious situations. Asin the Sars case, the early preparation is extremely significant indealing with some tough issues, and withhold后同 the information from thepublic will cause missing the best chance to fix the problem是前文lack of preparation的重复 此句多余. Inaddition, there are some other disadvantages of hiding information fromthe public. For example, withhold the financial information of publicofficial could make the supervision more difficult and lead to thecorruptions happen more easily.

    In the contrast, the disclosure of some public information couldpromote the social democracy and increase the efficiency of thegovernment. After China’s reform and opening-up, and especially in therecent years, the policy transparency of the Chinese government hasbeen improved a lot, and results in the promotion of the effiects原谅我 不认识 怀疑打错 ofthe policies. 这段的逻辑性 不是很强，disclosure更适合用在前文军事方面的，illustrate更适合用在这段，而且对比观点太笼统，说increase the efficiency后面的例子只是如新闻般喊口号，并没有证明出哪里提升了efficiency 建议例子再仔细斟酌。

    In conclusion, sometimes the political leaders have to withholdinformation from the public as the information is sensitive for thenational or social interest. But in general if the disclosure of theinformation will do not impair the citizens' benefits, it should beshown to the public for several reasons that have been mentioned above.

总的来说段落之间的联系很好，第一个例子很充分，看了两个作文觉得组长的缺点是长句子的失态很容易搞混，本文的用句，嗯 不太地道，有点像China daily 的感觉，都是个人意见啊。我的逻辑也不是很好，找的逻辑错误不一定准确，欢迎和我讨论 给与指点

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

As a political leader of a government or a party, there is obviously much information that could not be shown to the public, such as the configuration and distribution of the military strength, the development strategies under the competition pressure between nations. One reason for withholding the information mentioned above is it may contain the contents concerning the competition contents. If it is illustrated to the public, simultaneously it is shown to the competitors and that will consequently do harm to the government or nation. The other principal reason for hiding information is it will not impair the benefits of the public. In the 1980s, the Reagan-administration  proclaimed the strategic defense initiative to deal with the nuclear deterrence from the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). However, as a political leader, President Reagan concealed the purpose of exhausting the economical power of USSR by the arms race. Until the disintegration of USSR, the public could not be aware of the information that had been hidden for years. The case demonstrates obviously that sometimes withholding information from the public is of great necessity.
     
However, in more general cases, withholding information from the public is considerably risky. When the Sars virus start to spread in Beijing, the government withhold the information from the public and still declared it is safe to travel in Beijing. The consequence is the widespread infections of the Sars and the resignation of the major of Beijing. We can easily infer that withholding the information from the public could lead to the lack of preparation for serious situations. As in the Sars case, the early preparation is extremely significant in dealing with some tough issues, and withholding the information from the public will cause missing the best chance to solve the problem. In addition, there are some other disadvantages of hiding information from the public. For example, withholding the financial information of public officials could make the supervision more difficult and lead to the corruptions generated more easily.
   
In contrast, the disclosure of some public information could promote the social democracy and increase the efficiency of the government. After China’s reform and opening-up, and especially in the recent years, the policy transparency of the Chinese government has been improved a lot, and results in the promotion of the efficiency of the policies.

In conclusion, sometimes the political leaders have to withhold information from the public as the information is sensitive for the national or social interest. But in general if the
disclosure of the information will do not impair the citizens' benefits, it should be shown to the public for several reasons that have been mentioned above.

Virtual_ProUID：2560768

绿色——good adj,adv; 这个颜色——good verb;这个颜色——good noun;

I agree with the speaker that it is sometimes necessary, and even desirable, for political
leaders to withhold information from the public. A contrary view would reveal a naivetd about
the inherent nature of public politics, and about the sorts of compromises on the part of
well-intentioned political leaders necessary in order to further the public's ultmaate interests.
Nevertheless, we must not allow our political leaders undue freedom to with-hold information,
otherwise, we risk sanctioning demagoguery and undermining the philosophical underpinnings
of any democratic society.
（论证结构分析：首先提出观点将often改为sometimes。然后论述反方向观点，严谨恰当，不愧为范文）

One reason for my fundamental agreement with the speaker is that in order to gain the
opportunity for effective public leadership, a would-be leader must first gain and maintain
political power. In the game of politics, complete forthrightness is a sign of vulnerability and
naivete, neither of which earn a politician respect among his or her opponents, and which
those opponents will use to every advantage to defeat the politician. In my observation some
measure of pandering to the electorate is necessary to gain and maintain political leadership.
For example, were all politicians to fully disclose every personal foibles, character flaw, and
detail concerning personal life, few honest politicians would ever by elected. While this view
might seem cynical, personal scandals have in fact proven the undoing of many a political
career; thus I think this view is realistic.
Another reason why I essentially agree with the speaker is that fully disclosing to the public
certain types of information would threaten public safety and perhaps even national security.
For example, if the President were to disclose the government's strategies for thwarting
specific plans of an international terrorist or a drug trafficker, those strategies would surely fail,
and the public's health and safety would be compromised as a result. Withholding information
might also be necessary to avoid public panic. While such cases are rare, they do occur
occasionally. For example, during the first few hours of the new millennium the U.S.
Pentagon's missile defense system experienced a Y2K- related malfunction. This fact was
withheld from the public until later in the day, once the problem had been solved; and
legitimately so, since immediate disclosure would have served no useful purpose and might
even have resulted in mass hysteria.
(中间两段从两个原因论述为什么支持作者观点）

Having recognized that withholding informarion from the public is often necessary to serve
the interests of that public, legitimate political leadership nevertheless requires forthrightness
with the citizenry as to the leader's motives and agenda. History informs us that would-be
leaders who lack such forthrightness are the same ones who seize and maintain power either
by brute force or by demagoguery--that is, by deceiving and manipulating the citizenry.
Paragons such as Genghis Khan and Hitler, respectively, come immediately to mind. Any
democratic society should of course abhor demagoguery, which operates against the
democratic principle of government by the people. Consider also less egregious examples,
such as President Nixon's withholding of information about his active role in the Watergate
cover-up. His behavior demonstrated a concern for self- interest above the broader interests of
the democratic system that granted his political authority in the first place.
（补充论述，危害性）

In sum, the game of politics calls for a certain amount of disingenuousness and lack of
forthrightness that we might otherwise characterize as dishonesty. And such behavior is a
necessary means to the final objective of effective political leadership. Nevertheless, in any
democracy a leader who relies chiefly on deception and secrecy to preserve that leadership, to
advance a private agenda, or to conceal selfish motives, betrays the democracy-and ends up
forfeiting the polirical game.
（总结）

全文结构赏析：本文采用了正正补总的结构，不失为一篇完全支持型文章的典范。而且纵览全文可以发现，论点少而集中的文章比较受欢迎，但相应的也比较难写。本文的作者文采不算很好，中上水平吧，不过有一些用法值得模仿（红色）。