Attacks on Jose Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission, have intensified before the European election held between June 4th and 7th, and ahead of a European Union summit when national leaders will discuss his reappointment to a second five- year term. On the left, the Party of European Socialists (PES) calls Mr. Barroso a conservative who "puts markets before people". Should the PES emerge as the largest group in the European Parliament, it will try to block him.
But prominent federalists are also unimpressed. Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister, speaks for many in Brussels when he denounces Mr. Barroso for a lack of ambition for Europe. Mr. Verhofstadt invokes the memory of Jacques Delors, the pugnacious Frenchman who ran the commission from 1985 to 1995.Mr. Delors proposed many ambitious plans, he says, and got 30% of them: that 30% then became the European internal market. Mr. Verhofstadt thinks that last autumn Mr. Barroso should have proposed such things as a single EU financial regulator, a single European bad bank, or a multi-trillion issue of "Eurobonds". That would have triggered a " big fight" with national governments, he concedes. But "maybe the outcome would have been 10%, 20% or 30% of his plan. "
The French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, has endorsed a second tenn for Mr. Barroso, a former centre-right prime minister of Portugal. Yet he seems keen to make him sweat. French officials have briefed that the decision on Mr. Barroso’s future taken at the June 18th-19th summit should be only political, leaving a legally binding nomination for later.
Yet the attacks on Mr. Barroso are unlikely to block him. No opinion poll shows the PES overtaking the centre-right European People’s Party in the European Parliament. The centre- right leaders who hold power in most of Europe have endorsed Mr. Barroso, as have the (nominally) centre-left leaders of Britain, Spain and Portugal. This helps to explain why the PES, for all its bluster, has not fielded a candidate against Mr. Barroso.
It is equally wrong to pretend that Europe was ready for a federalist big bang last autumn. Officials say Mr. Barroso spent the first weeks of the economic crisis bridging differences between Britain and France on such issues as accounting standards and the regulation of rating agencies. Later, he kept the peace between Mr. Sarkozy and the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, after the French president pushed for summits of EU leaders from euro-area countries (Ms Merkel thought that sounded like a two-speed Europe). In any case France has no veto over Mr. Barroso’s reappointment: the decision is now taken by majority vote. Some diplomats suggest that France’s stalling tactics are meant to extract such concessions as a plum portfolio for its commissioner.
Those calling for "European" action often talk as if they are describing an elegant mechanism, needed to make the union work properly. They argue that only a single financial regulator can police Europe’s single market, or complain that 27 national bail-out plans lack "coherence". In fact, these apparently structural calls for "more Europe" are pitches for specific ideological programmes. Thus, in a joint statement on May 30th Mr. Sarkozy and Ms Merkel announced that "Liberalism without rules has failed. " They called for a European economic model in which capital serves "entrepreneurs and workers" rather than "speculators", and hedge funds and bankers’ pay are tightly regulated. They added that competition policies should be used to favour the "emergence of world-class European companies", and gave warning against a "bureaucratic Europe" that blindly applies "pernickety rules". If all this sounds like Europe as a giant Rhineland economy, that is no accident.
Mr. Verhofstadt, a continental liberal, means something different by "Europe" He agrees that the crisis "represents the crash of the Anglo-American model". But he is not keen on heavy regulation. When he calls for economic policies to reflect Europe’s " way of thinking", he means things like raising savings. Above all, he considers the nation-state to be incapable of managing today’s "globalised" economy, so Europe must take over. This is fighting talk. Britain, notably, does not accept that everything about the Anglo-Saxon model has failed, nor is it about to cede more power to Brussels. And it has allies, notably in eastern Europe.
What does PES mean by attacking Mr. Barroso "puts markets before people" (Para 1, Line 5)

A:Barroso adopts policies that are in favour of market economy rather than social welfare. B:Barroso does not care about European people. C:Barroso suggests EU establish more markets for the convenience of European people. D:Barroso is the owner of many markets in Europe.

Text 4
The city of Venice may not be the obvious place for a call for the moral revival of Europe. This is where Lord Byron used to swim naked down the Grand Canal between pink palaces and swaying gondolas in the early morning hours after nights of carousing. This is where Thomas Mann a century later celebrated the beauty of decline in "Death in Venice".
For the past four years, however, Venice has also been home to the "Venice Colloquium", sponsored by the Fondazione Liberal, an Italian free-market group, headed by member of parliament Ferdinando Adornato. The purpose of the event is to bring likeminded Europeans and Americans together in an effort to bridge the transatlantic divide. It is a call to common values, mostly perhaps directed at Europeans, for whom values these days seem like archaic encumbrances.
Americans are therefore a great puzzle to many Europeans. So are President Bush and his newly nominated secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice. Many Europeans cannot get over the fact that 22 percent of American voters in the presidential election stated that they considered "moral values" their most important issue, and the reaction here has greatly resembled the hysterical hyperventilating of the Hollywood-New York elite after the US election.
"In Europe, people are embarrassed to talk about moral values," says Tessa Keswick of the Center for Policy Studies in London. Or if they do, it is a new kind of moral value, closely identified with political correctness, which can be "frighteningly intolerant". The need for Europe to re-establish its moral identity is becoming evident to people here, even if this is still a minority view. While 40 percent of Americans attend church at least once a week, on average 4 percent of Europeans do. Outbreaks of anti-Semitism and xenophobia keep cropping up in large part because of growing Muslim immigrant populations that have not been socially integrated.
And there is an overall reluctance to accept the global war on terror as an actual war. Europe’s resident troublemaker, French President Jacques Chirac, speaks of the European Union as a multilateral model for the world, yet this model is incapable of defeating terrorism. Therefore, politicians here, with the exception of Britain’s Tony Blair, like to pretend that police action is all we need to take care of al Qaeda.
But not all Europeans are resigned to the decline in values and vigor that they see around them. If 70 percent of Frenchmen, for instance, would have preferred Sen. John Kerry to win the 2004 election, then 30 percent supported George Bush.
What kind of values are we talking about More than family values per se, many are worried about the fundamental values of the Western, Judeo-Christian tradition, from which spring our concepts of human, political and religious rights.
The fact is that Europe needs the United States, more than the other way around, to exert global influence. And while the French love to talk about counterbalancing the United States on the world stage, the Italian government has no such desire.

The purpose of the author in writing the text is to()

A:introduce the purpose of "Venice Colloquim". B:compare the differences of moral values between Americans and Europeans. C:illustrate that Europe needs to learn from the US about the moral values. D:criticize the decline of values and vigor in Europe.

Text 4 The city of Venice may not be the obvious place for a call for the moral revival of Europe. This is where Lord Byron used to swim naked down the Grand Canal between pink palaces and swaying gondolas in the early morning hours after nights of carousing. This is where Thomas Mann a century later celebrated the beauty of decline in "Death in Venice". For the past four years, however, Venice has also been home to the "Venice Colloquium", sponsored by the Fondazione Liberal, an Italian free-market group, headed by member of parliament Ferdinando Adornato. The purpose of the event is to bring likeminded Europeans and Americans together in an effort to bridge the transatlantic divide. It is a call to common values, mostly perhaps directed at Europeans, for whom values these days seem like archaic encumbrances. Americans are therefore a great puzzle to many Europeans. So are President Bush and his newly nominated secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice. Many Europeans cannot get over the fact that 22 percent of American voters in the presidential election stated that they considered "moral values" their most important issue, and the reaction here has greatly resembled the hysterical hyperventilating of the Hollywood-New York elite after the US election. "In Europe, people are embarrassed to talk about moral values," says Tessa Keswick of the Center for Policy Studies in London. Or if they do, it is a new kind of moral value, closely identified with political correctness, which can be "frighteningly intolerant". The need for Europe to re-establish its moral identity is becoming evident to people here, even if this is still a minority view. While 40 percent of Americans attend church at least once a week, on average 4 percent of Europeans do. Outbreaks of anti-Semitism and xenophobia keep cropping up in large part because of growing Muslim immigrant populations that have not been socially integrated. And there is an overall reluctance to accept the global war on terror as an actual war. Europe’s resident troublemaker, French President Jacques Chirac, speaks of the European Union as a multilateral model for the world, yet this model is incapable of defeating terrorism. Therefore, politicians here, with the exception of Britain’s Tony Blair, like to pretend that police action is all we need to take care of al Qaeda. But not all Europeans are resigned to the decline in values and vigor that they see around them. If 70 percent of Frenchmen, for instance, would have preferred Sen. John Kerry to win the 2004 election, then 30 percent supported George Bush. What kind of values are we talking about More than family values per se, many are worried about the fundamental values of the Western, Judeo-Christian tradition, from which spring our concepts of human, political and religious rights. The fact is that Europe needs the United States, more than the other way around, to exert global influence. And while the French love to talk about counterbalancing the United States on the world stage, the Italian government has no such desire.

The purpose of the author in writing the text is to( )

A:introduce the purpose of "Venice Colloquim". B:compare the differences of moral values between Americans and Europeans. C:illustrate that Europe needs to learn from the US about the moral values. D:criticize the decline of values and vigor in Europe.

Text 3

Attacks on Jose Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission, have intensified before the European election held between June 4th and 7th, and ahead of a European Union summit when national leaders will discuss his reappointment to a second five- year term. On the left, the Party of European Socialists (PES) calls Mr. Barroso a conservative who "puts markets before people". Should the PES emerge as the largest group in the European Parliament, it will try to block him.
But prominent federalists are also unimpressed. Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister, speaks for many in Brussels when he denounces Mr. Barroso for a lack of ambition for Europe. Mr. Verhofstadt invokes the memory of Jacques Delors, the pugnacious Frenchman who ran the commission from 1985 to 1995.Mr. Delors proposed many ambitious plans, he says, and got 30% of them: that 30% then became the European internal market. Mr. Verhofstadt thinks that last autumn Mr. Barroso should have proposed such things as a single EU financial regulator, a single European bad bank, or a multi-trillion issue of "Eurobonds". That would have triggered a " big fight" with national governments, he concedes. But "maybe the outcome would have been 10%, 20% or 30% of his plan. "
The French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, has endorsed a second tenn for Mr. Barroso, a former centre-right prime minister of Portugal. Yet he seems keen to make him sweat. French officials have briefed that the decision on Mr. Barroso’s future taken at the June 18th-19th summit should be only political, leaving a legally binding nomination for later.
Yet the attacks on Mr. Barroso are unlikely to block him. No opinion poll shows the PES overtaking the centre-right European People’s Party in the European Parliament. The centre- right leaders who hold power in most of Europe have endorsed Mr. Barroso, as have the (nominally) centre-left leaders of Britain, Spain and Portugal. This helps to explain why the PES, for all its bluster, has not fielded a candidate against Mr. Barroso.
It is equally wrong to pretend that Europe was ready for a federalist big bang last autumn. Officials say Mr. Barroso spent the first weeks of the economic crisis bridging differences between Britain and France on such issues as accounting standards and the regulation of rating agencies. Later, he kept the peace between Mr. Sarkozy and the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, after the French president pushed for summits of EU leaders from euro-area countries (Ms Merkel thought that sounded like a two-speed Europe). In any case France has no veto over Mr. Barroso’s reappointment: the decision is now taken by majority vote. Some diplomats suggest that France’s stalling tactics are meant to extract such concessions as a plum portfolio for its commissioner.
Those calling for "European" action often talk as if they are describing an elegant mechanism, needed to make the union work properly. They argue that only a single financial regulator can police Europe’s single market, or complain that 27 national bail-out plans lack "coherence". In fact, these apparently structural calls for "more Europe" are pitches for specific ideological programmes. Thus, in a joint statement on May 30th Mr. Sarkozy and Ms Merkel announced that "Liberalism without rules has failed. " They called for a European economic model in which capital serves "entrepreneurs and workers" rather than "speculators", and hedge funds and bankers’ pay are tightly regulated. They added that competition policies should be used to favour the "emergence of world-class European companies", and gave warning against a "bureaucratic Europe" that blindly applies "pernickety rules". If all this sounds like Europe as a giant Rhineland economy, that is no accident.
Mr. Verhofstadt, a continental liberal, means something different by "Europe" He agrees that the crisis "represents the crash of the Anglo-American model". But he is not keen on heavy regulation. When he calls for economic policies to reflect Europe’s " way of thinking", he means things like raising savings. Above all, he considers the nation-state to be incapable of managing today’s "globalised" economy, so Europe must take over. This is fighting talk. Britain, notably, does not accept that everything about the Anglo-Saxon model has failed, nor is it about to cede more power to Brussels. And it has allies, notably in eastern Europe.
What does PES mean by attacking Mr. Barroso "puts markets before people" (Para 1, Line 5)

A:Barroso adopts policies that are in favour of market economy rather than social welfare. B:Barroso does not care about European people. C:Barroso suggests EU establish more markets for the convenience of European people. D:Barroso is the owner of many markets in Europe.

{{B}}第二篇{{/B}}

{{B}}? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Florence Nightingale{{/B}}
? ?Florence Nightingale was born in Florence, Italy, while her wealthy English parents were traveling in Europe. As a child, she traveled to many places with her family and learned how to speak several languages.
? ?When Nightingale was 17, she told her family that she was going to help sick people. Her parents did not approve, but Nightingale was determined.
? ?She traveled to hospitals all over Europe. She saw that doctors were working too hard. She saw that patients died because they did not get enough care. Nightingale felt that women could be doing more to help doctors take care of sick people.
? ?Nightingale knew that in order for nurses to do more, they needed special training in how to take care of sick people. Nightingale went to a hospital in Germany to study nursing. Then she returned to London and became the head of a group of women called Gentlewomen During Illness. These women cared for sick people in their homes.
? ?In 1854, England was fighting a war with Russia. War reporters wrote about the terrible conditions in the hospitals that cared for the wounded. People demanded that something be done about it. A leader of the government asked Florence Nightingale to take some nurses into the war hospitals. So, in November 1854, Nightingale finally got to work in a hospital.
? ?She took along 38 nurses whom she had trained herself.
? ?At first, the doctors on the battlefields did not want Nightingale and her nurses in their hospitals. They did not believe that women could help. But in fact, the nurses did make a difference. They worked around the clock, tending the sick. Thanks to their hard work, many wounded soldiers survived.
? ?After the war, Nightingale and her nurses were treated like heroes. Finally, in 1860, she started the Nightingale School for Nurses. In time, thanks to Florence Nightingale, nursing became an important part of medicine.
Nightingale’s parents did not approve of her decision

A:towork as a doctor, B:to care for sick people. C:to fight in thewar with Russia. D:to travel to hospitals all over Europe.

{{B}}第三篇{{/B}}

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?{{B}}Florence Nightingale{{/B}}
? ?Florence Nightingale was born in Florence, Italy, while her wealthy English parents were traveling in Europe. As a child, she traveled to many places with her family and learned how to speak several languages.
? ?When Nightingale was 17, she told her family that she was going to help sick people. Her parents did not approve, but Nightingale was determined.
? ?She traveled to hospitals all Over Europe. She saw that doctors were working too hard. She saw that patients died because they did not get enough care. Nightingale felt that women could be doing more to help doctors take care of sick people.
? ?Nightingale knew that in order for nurses to do more, they needed special training in how to take care of sick people. Nightingale went to a hospital in Germany to study nursing. Then she returned to London and became the head of a group of women called Gentlewomen During Illness. These women cared for sick people in their homes.
? ?In 1854, England was fighting a war with Russia. War reporters wrote about the terrible conditions in the hospitals that cared for the wounded. People demanded that something be done about it. A leader of the government asked Florence Nightingale to take some nurses into the war hospitals. So, in November 1854, Nightingale finally got to work in a hospital.
? ?She took along 38 nurses whom she had trained herself.
? ?At first, the doctors on the battlefields did not want Nightingale and her nurses in their hospitals. They did not believe that women could help. But in fact, the nurses did make a difference. They worked around the clock, tending the sick. Thanks to their hard work, many wounded soldiers survived.
? ?After the war, Nightingale and her nurses were treated like heroes. Finally, in 1860, she started the Nightingale School for Nurses. In time, thanks to Florence Nightingale, nursing became an important part of medicine.
Nightingale’s parents did not approve of her decision

A:to work as a doctor. B:to care for sick people. C:to fight in the war with Russia. D:to travel to hospitals all over Europe.


? ?下面有3篇短文,每篇短文后有5道题,每道题后面有4个选项。请根据文章的内容,从每题所给的4个选项中选择1个最佳答案
{{B}}第一篇{{/B}}

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? {{B}}Florence Nightingale{{/B}}
? ?Florence Nightingale was born in Florence, Italy, while her wealthy English parents were traveling in Europe. As a child, she traveled to many places with her family and learned how to speak several languages.
? ?When Nightingale was 17, she told her family that she was going to help sick people. Her parents did not approve, but Nightingale was determined.
? ?She traveled to hospitals all over Europe. She saw that doctors were working too hard. She saw that patients died because they did not get enough care. Nightingale felt that women could be doing more to help doctors take care of sick people.
? ?Nightingale knew that in order for nurses to do more, they needed special training in how to take care of sick people. Nightingale went to a hospital in Germany to study nursing. Then she returned to London and became the head of a group of women called Gentlewomen During Illness. These women cared for sick people in their homes.
? ?In 1854, England was fighting a war with Russia. War reporters wrote about the terrible conditions in the hospitals that cared for the wounded. People demanded that something be done about it. A leader of the government asked Florence Nightingale to take some nurses into the war hospitals. So, in November 1854, Nightingale finally got to work in a hospital.
? ?She took along 38 nurses whom she had trained herself.
? ?At first, the doctors on the battlefields did not want Nightingale and her nurses in their hospitals. They did not believe that women could help. But in fact, the nurses did make a difference. They worked around the clock, tending the sick. Thanks to their hard work, many wounded soldiers survived.
? ?After the war, Nightingale and her nurses were treated like heroes. Finally, in 1860, she started the Nightingale School for Nurses. In time, thanks to Florence Nightingale, nursing became an important part of medicine.
Nightingale’s parents did not approve of her decision

A:to work as a doctor. B:to care for sick people. C:to fight in the war with Russia. D:to travel to hospitals all over Europe.

微信扫码获取答案解析
下载APP查看答案解析