Based on the text, the conflict is based on the characters difference in opinions. The first four words " For unlike my mother," indicate an immediate difference in both of their opinions. The main character does not believe she could do anything she wanted to be, as this is stated in the past tense this could refer to a change in her mind. Emotionally this character is pessimistic, where as the mother is open minded and optimistic making her the winner. Overall this is a emotional conflict between a parent and a child who does not believe in themselves.
In this excerpt from <span><em>Old Times on the Mississippi </em>by Mark Twain, he tells the story of how he began training as a riverboat pilot. In it, he introduces the character of the "cub-engineer". Here, Twain uses his characterization (the way he presents the character) to let us know how much he dislikes this dude. There are many ways in which to describe hair grease, but Twain chose "Oil-hair" (not nice to say). That and his "ignorant silver watch and a showy brass watch-chain" give us more details about how the author perceived this person (not very positively, of course).</span>
Odysseus' journey because he went through the cyclops, monsters, and so many feats just to get home to his wife. He only arrives home for love and he doesn't get much tangible reward. He learns lessons through the journey as he lost all of his crew who gave their lives for his.
Answer:
Explanation:
What is he actually saying? Is he saying that he took 18000 dollars and that is not only legally or morally wrong? Is he saying that he took 18000 dollars and that it was secretly given and secretly handled and that in return, he granted special favors to the people who gave him the money? Is he actually admitted doing that?
From this part of the speech, we don't know. Nixon was so slimy that you need the rest of the speech to know what he did and what he's admitting to. But what he is saying is that if he could buy a new GM product with the money and not declare what he had done, then he was wrong both morally and legally.
So what's wrong? The problem is if his next statement is that it was for expenses occurred and he can flap a receipt in the face of his accusers, he has shown them to be rats and much worse than he is.
And if he actually did take the 18000 for personal reasons, then he is on his way to getting the sympathy he needs to beat the charge. And the Democrats loose even if they are right. He shows himself to be a decent honorable man no matter which answer is true.
Answer:
what's your question though
Explanation:
