The correct answer is A. Brief in-text citations connected to a works cited page
Explanation:
MLA stands for Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing and consist on a manual with guidelines for edition and publishing of documents with an academic style, according to this manual when using other sources whether this occurs as direct citations or paraphrasing, information about the author should be provided, in the case of in-text citations the last name of the author, date of publication, and in some cases page is included before or after being cited in a brief citation, however, all the information related to the source should be included at the end of the document in a reference list, which is a list of all the works cited or used during the text, in this list wider information of the source is provided such as the title of the source, where was it publish, among other. Thus, according to MLA citation information about source should be included through brief in text-citation (last name of author and date) and a list of all the sources with the complete information of the source.
Answer:
the first one because it uses a quote from the text correctly and reading that answer gave me more information than the rest.
McCarthyism is nothing more than a witch hunt. A lot of finger pointing and not a lot of proof. Both parties (Democrat & Republican) in the United States use this in todays world. Ill give examples of both and follow up with how it can be beneficial to each party.
Democrats: Accuse other politicians of being "racist" or "bigoted" just from political ideas and from certain members of the base. While it is not fact or true that Republicans are by policy racist, it is a word that is hated by people and has a negative connotation to it, forcing some to keep distance from said person
Republicans: Accuse other politicians of being "muslin lovers" or "muslins" themselves. We saw this for the entire Obama presidency. Congress and some Republican supporters would use the word "muslin" to describe the president in order to give a negative connotation towards Obama. This has some strong effectiveness due to the recent events (September 11th, 2001).
Both parties are trying to stick a negative idea/precedent/description about the opposition in order to sway votes. This tactic is very effective because not only will you sway votes, theres little repercussion in doing so because the people who disagree with you are not going to be swayed, but that voter in the middle who cares about one issue over the other (in this case racism over fear of muslims or vice versa fear of muslims over racism).
Either someone is intelligent enough to know the rhetoric between the two parties and votes by policy (unaffected / no positive or negative response), they don't care about either issue (unaffected / no positive or negative response), or someone is strongly in favor of one or the other (strong positive or negative response).
While there are some attempts that have been made and can be made that would be so egregious that most people have a negative response, but that rarely happens and would be deemed political suicide.
Hope this helps.
True. the very first step is to determine your topic
