GRE寫作成為橫在中國學(xué)生的理想和現(xiàn)實之間的一大障礙，因此，如何攻克寫作這道屏障，成為擺在我們面前的首要任務(wù)。
On the one hand are three compelling arguments that a political leader must sometimes be
less than truthful in order to be effective in that leadership. The first argument lies in the fact
that politics is a game played among politicians--and that to succeed in the game one must
use the tools that are part-and-parcel of it. Complete forthrightness is a sign of vulnerability
and naivete, neither of which will earn a politician respect among his or her opponents, and
which those opponents will use to every advantage against the honest politician.
Secondly, it is crucial to distinguish between misrepresentations of fact in other words,
lies--and mere political rhetoric. The rhetoric of a successful politician eschews rigorous factual
inquiry and indisputable fact while appealing to emotions, ideals, and subjective interpretation
and characterizations. Consider, for example, a hypothetical candidate for political office who
attacks the incumbent opponent by pointing out only certain portions of that opponent's
legislative voting record. The candidate might use a vote against a bill eliminating certain
incentives for local businesses as "dear evidence" that the opponent is "anti-business," "bad
for the economy," or "out of touch with what voters want." None of these allegations are
outright lies; they are simply the rhetorical cant of the effective politician.
Thirdly, politics is a business born not only of idealism but also of pragmatism; after all, in
order to be effective a politician must gain and hold onto political power, which means winning
elections. In my observation some degree of pandering to the electorate and to those who
might lend financial support in reelection efforts is necessary to maintain that position. Modern
politics is replete with candidates who refused to pander, thereby mining their own chance to
exercise effective leadership. 感謝您閱讀《GRE作文范文大全（36） 》一文，出國留學(xué)網(wǎng)(liuxue86.com)編輯部希望本文能幫助到您。
On the one hand are three compelling arguments that a political leader must sometimes be
less than truthful in order to be effective in that leadership. The first argument lies in the fact
that politics is a game played among politicians--and that to succeed in the game one must
use the tools that are part-and-parcel of it. Complete forthrightness is a sign of vulnerability
and naivete, neither of which will earn a politician respect among his or her opponents, and
which those opponents will use to every advantage against the honest politician.
Secondly, it is crucial to distinguish between misrepresentations of fact in other words,
lies--and mere political rhetoric. The rhetoric of a successful politician eschews rigorous factual
inquiry and indisputable fact while appealing to emotions, ideals, and subjective interpretation
and characterizations. Consider, for example, a hypothetical candidate for political office who
attacks the incumbent opponent by pointing out only certain portions of that opponent's
legislative voting record. The candidate might use a vote against a bill eliminating certain
incentives for local businesses as "dear evidence" that the opponent is "anti-business," "bad
for the economy," or "out of touch with what voters want." None of these allegations are
outright lies; they are simply the rhetorical cant of the effective politician.
Thirdly, politics is a business born not only of idealism but also of pragmatism; after all, in
order to be effective a politician must gain and hold onto political power, which means winning
elections. In my observation some degree of pandering to the electorate and to those who
might lend financial support in reelection efforts is necessary to maintain that position. Modern
politics is replete with candidates who refused to pander, thereby mining their own chance to
exercise effective leadership. 感謝您閱讀《GRE作文范文大全（36） 》一文，出國留學(xué)網(wǎng)(liuxue86.com)編輯部希望本文能幫助到您。