B: a former slave. because of frederick being a slave in the 1800’s he isn’t ancient. C doesn’t make sense. therefor B is the answer
Answer:
Twelve years ago, Barack Obama introduced himself to the American public by way of a speech given at the Democratic National Convention, in Boston, in which he declared, “There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America, an Asian America; there’s the United States of America.” Few of us believed this to be true, but most, if not all of us, longed for it to be. We vested this brash optimist with our hope, a resource that was in scarce supply three years after the September 11th terrorist attacks in a country mired in disastrous military conflicts in two nations. The vision he offered—of national reconciliation beyond partisan bounds, of government rooted in respect for the governed and the Constitution itself, of idealism that could actually be realized—became the basis for his Presidential campaign. Twice the United States elected to the Presidency a biracial black man whose ancestry and upbringing stretched to three continents.
At various points that idealism has been severely tested. During his Presidency, we witnessed a partisan divide widen into an impassable trench, and gun violence go unchecked while special interests blocked any regulation. The President was forced to show his birth certificate, which we recognized as the racial profiling of the most powerful man in the world. Obama did not, at least publicly, waver in his contention that Americans were bound together by something greater than what divided them. In July, when he spoke in Dallas after a gunman murdered five police officers, he seemed pained by the weight of this faith, as if stress fractures had appeared in a load-bearing wall.
It is difficult not to see the result of this year’s Presidential election as a refutation of Obama’s creed of common Americanism. And on Wednesday, for the first time in the twelve years that we’ve been watching him, Obama did not seem to believe the words he was speaking to the American public. In the White House Rose Garden, Obama offered his version of a concession speech—an acknowledgement of Donald Trump’s victory. The President attempted gamely to cast Trump’s victory as part of the normal ebb and flow of political fortunes, and as an example of the great American tradition of the peaceful transfer of power. (This was not, it should be recalled, the peaceful transfer of power that most observers were worried about.) He intended, he said, to offer the same courtesy toward Trump that President George W. Bush had offered him, in 2008. Yet that reference only served to highlight the paradox of Obama's Presidency: he now exists in history bracketed by the overmatched forty-third President and the misogynistic racial demagogue who will succeed him as the forty-fifth. During his 2008 campaign, Obama frequently found himself—and without much objection on his part—compared to Abraham Lincoln. He may now share an ambivalent common bond with Lincoln, whose Presidency was bookended by James Buchanan and Andrew Johnson, two lesser lights of American history.
Explanation:
It really depends on the person and what they think is more important -
A: You could show that the 2008 Olympics was Michael Phelps' "last hurrah" as it were, as he did not do as well in the 2012 games, BUT the paper is on the 2008 games and not Phelps himself
B: The proof of the use of steroids could be used to make a point that perhaps the security needs to be stepped up, or that in the modern world, sport is becoming too unfair as new drugs are invented because people feel the need to cheat for the cash prizes.
C: This is not really an essay topic, but perhaps you could combine it with B as a controversial point.
D:You could use this point as proof that the bar is being raised every year, and that talent is being found everywhere, better talent, even from poorer countries that you wouldn't expect. You could also tie in Jesse Owens.
Personally, I would use B as drugs is a hot topic around the world, but it is ultimately up to Jacob.
Answer:
(B) He called colonialism " a flabby devil".
Explanation:
Charles Marlow is the protagonist of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness - who visited the Congo Free States and saw the exploitation of the African natives for the acquisition of ivory. As he arrived, one of his pointed remarks of colonialism, as he saw how the Company's outpost was in a horrendous state, was how the greed of colonialism was like: "the labby, pretending, weak-eyed devil of a rapacious and pitiless folly.”
No, the word <em>eat </em>is always used as a verb.
There are two nouns in this sentence - frogs and bugs.
