Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 16 Sep 2014, 07:31

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Oct 2012
Posts: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 1

CAT Tests
The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been [#permalink] New post 20 Oct 2012, 08:20
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

42% (03:05) correct 58% (01:53) wrong based on 183 sessions
The president’s nominees to federal circuit courts have been judged conservative for their stands on hot-button issues. But a review of their financial disclosure forms and Senate questionnaires reveals that the nominees are more notable for their close ties to corporate and economic interests, especially the energy and mining industries. Some of them were paid lobbyists for those same interests. Further, the nominees with industry ties were overwhelmingly appointed to circuit courts regarded as traditional battlegrounds over litigation affecting these industries. Independent observers who follow the federal bench believe that the extensive corporate involvement among so many of the nominees is unprecedented.


In the argument above, the two portions in boldface pay which of the following roles?

A)The first is a generalization that the author aims to attack; the second is that attack.

B)The first is a pattern that the author acknowledges as true; the second is the author’s conclusion based on that acknowledgment.

C)The first is a phenomenon that the author accepts as true; the second is evidence in support of the author’s conclusion.

D)The first is the author’s position based on the evidence cited; the second is a pattern presented in support of that position.

E)The first is an exception to a rule introduced in the argument; the second provides the reasoning behind the exception.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 May 2012
Posts: 30
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Re: Please explain your answers. [#permalink] New post 20 Oct 2012, 12:42
nitzz wrote:
The president’s nominees to federal circuit courts have been judged conservative for their stands on hot-button issues. But a review of their financial disclosure forms and Senate questionnaires reveals that the nominees are more notable for their close ties to corporate and economic interests, especially the energy and mining industries. Some of them were paid lobbyists for those same interests. Further, the nominees with industry ties were overwhelmingly appointed to circuit courts regarded as traditional battlegrounds over litigation affecting these industries. Independent observers who follow the federal bench believe that the extensive corporate involvement among so many of the nominees is unprecedented.


In the argument above, the two portions in boldface pay which of the following roles?

A)The first is a generalization that the author aims to attack; the second is that attack.

B)The first is a pattern that the author acknowledges as true; the second is the author’s conclusion based on that acknowledgment.

C)The first is a phenomenon that the author accepts as true; the second is evidence in support of the author’s conclusion.

D)The first is the author’s position based on the evidence cited; the second is a pattern presented in support of that position.

E)The first is an exception to a rule introduced in the argument; the second provides the reasoning behind the exception.


A: BF1 can be a generalization, but it's certainly not being attacked by the author.
B: BF2 is not the author's conclusion. It's a supporting evidence.
C: Correct, although I don't think BF1 is necessarily a phenomenon that the author "accepts." It's the opinion of others that he merely restates.
D: BF1 is not the author's position. BF2 is not related to BF1.
E: Nothing in this passage suggests there's anything that can be interpreted as an exception to a rule, with perhaps the .. ahem, exception of the last sentence (the level of extensive corporate involvement among so many of the nominees *may* be a historical exception since it's deemed to be "unprecedented").
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Oct 2012
Posts: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 1

CAT Tests
Re: Please explain your answers. [#permalink] New post 21 Oct 2012, 02:27
Since BF1 is not a phenomenon, i eliminated it first up,picking up the wrong answer choice :(
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Posts: 4
WE: Business Development (Consulting)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 8

Re: The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been [#permalink] New post 25 Oct 2012, 08:03
I couldn't find any other option better than C...Hence I chose C..
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 293
Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V33
WE: Consulting (Telecommunications)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 75

Re: The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been [#permalink] New post 19 Feb 2013, 20:27
Can anyone explain the process of elimination for this question?

thanks
_________________

YOU CAN, IF YOU THINK YOU CAN

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 May 2012
Posts: 30
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Re: The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been [#permalink] New post 19 Feb 2013, 22:17
greatps24 wrote:
Can anyone explain the process of elimination for this question?

thanks


A: The second is *not* an attack. It's an evidence supporting the first boldface.
B: The second BF is *not* a conclusion.
C: Let's say maybe correct.
D: The first may or may not be the author's position. The author doesn't claim that this is his or her observation. He merely states that the judges "have been judged" to be too conservative.
E: The first is not an exception to anything.

SO it's C.
1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Dec 2012
Posts: 6
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [1] , given: 1

Re: The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been [#permalink] New post 19 Feb 2013, 23:04
1
This post received
KUDOS
The BF1 states "The president’s nominees to federal circuit courts have been judged conservative for their stands on hot-button issues"
It is followed by author's statement : But a review of their financial disclosure forms and Senate questionnaires reveals that the nominees are more notable for their close ties to corporate and economic interests

I concluded with option A because this is the closest choice where author opposes the stated passage. In BF2, he continues to indicate that these judges are appointed in the courts which are very critical.
Also in the BF2 : Further, the nominees with industry ties were overwhelmingly appointed to circuit courts regarded as traditional battlegrounds over litigation affecting these industries
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 367
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 291

Re: The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been [#permalink] New post 19 Oct 2013, 02:25
The sweet smell of success when u get a BOLD FACE CR right!!! Oh Yea!!! :D
Re: The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been   [#permalink] 19 Oct 2013, 02:25
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
11 Experts publish their posts in the topic The president’s nominees to federal circuit courts have been rohitgoel15 5 31 Jan 2012, 05:01
The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been IEsailor 12 17 Oct 2009, 11:47
The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been MamtaKrishnia 9 30 Jul 2008, 10:33
The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been pmenon 1 03 Feb 2008, 20:33
The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been Juaz 13 19 May 2007, 16:24
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The president s nominees to federal circuit courts have been

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.