<p>papai^thats such a dumb idea on so many levels</p>
<p>-4 on the March SAT Reading last year. I studied a lot since then though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>papapia, why wasn’t it analogy? What was your score?</p>
<p>alihaq, what do you think about this one?</p>
<p>@papapia The question didn’t mention financial resources. It asked if the actions described were inadequate or wasteful. The author certainly wouldn’t think educating African people about conservation is “wasteful,” but he/she would think it’s inadequate in comparison to his idea.</p>
<p>After rereading a bit of P1, the people for inevitable, do you still think it’s inevitable? ):</p>
<p>100% the answer was not exaggeration, it was analogy.</p>
<p>what did you guys get about the one for the critic passage, where’s its like: in the whole passage, what was implied by the author or something like that? I put that she had some disagreement. Is that right?</p>
<p>alihaq, what do you think about the critic and the two names, the ones the critic admired, that were mentioned?</p>
<p>I got analogy too, for that question. How is it exaggeration? it was comparing it to flying or something.</p>
<p>mine is around a 710-720. </p>
<p>I can’t remember my exact reason for crossing analogy because i don’t remember the passage. But at the time, I do remember that i had a very specific reason for cancelling analogy.</p>
<p>I thought those two critics were examples of a more direct/formal style that the critic also used.</p>
<p>it’s not that question.</p>
<p>the question is “NO! We shouldn’t pay for a government newspaper. We shouldn’t pay for government tv either. We shouldn’t pay for government radio either.” </p>
<p>Something like that</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It was analogy. It compared two things, regardless of whether you had a reason to cancel it off, you are wrong.</p>
<p>hmm, i thought the last CR passage-the critic one was difficult</p>
<p>Also, it was DEF NOT antidote. That makes no sense at all.
Antidote is
a remedy that stops or controls the effects of a poison
Whereas, stimulant is something that rejuvinates you. The passage said his blood started pumping or something. It is 100 percent stimulant</p>
<p>It’s an analogy because tv is being compared to another medium (newspaper). Its a little exaggerated but a government newspaper isn’t implausible</p>
<p>kbbm: general consensus was antidote</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>YES!!! that is what im talking about. How is that ^ not an exaggeration???</p>
<p>Papapia, this is especially for you. (:</p>
<p>"Thank you for the opportunity to testify on taxpayer funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by extension for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting System. I shall argue that Americans should not be taxed to fund a national broadcast network and that Congress should therefore terminate the funding for CPB.</p>
<p>We wouldn’t want the federal government to publish a national newspaper. Neither should we have a government television network and a government radio network. If anything should be kept separate from government and politics, it’s the news and public affairs programming that informs Americans about government and its policies. When government brings us the news – with all the inevitable bias and spin – the government is putting its thumb on the scales of democracy. Journalists should not work for the government. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize news and public-affairs programming."</p>
<p>([Ending</a> Taxpayer Funding for Public Broadcasting – July 11, 2005](<a href=“http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-db071105.html]Ending”>http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-db071105.html))</p>
<p>Hopefully, the analogy is obvious to you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>antidote - something that prevents or counteracts injurious or unwanted effects.</p>
<p>it was antidote</p>
<p>it looks like an analogy. i picked exaggeration too 
:(</p>
<p>The blood pumping wasn’t the only thing described, though. It also said that he became less confused. Stimulation wouldn’t fix confusion.</p>