Press Secretary: Our critics claim that the president's recent highway project cancellations demonstrate a vindictive desire to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties. They offer as evidence the fact that 90 percent of the projects canceled were in such districts. But all of the canceled projects had been identified as wasteful in a report written by respected nonpartisan auditors. So the president's choice was clearly motivated by sound budgetary policy, not partisan politics.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the press secretary's argument depends?
A. Canceling highway projects was not the only way for the president to punish legislative districts controlled by opposition parties.
B. The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report were not mostly projects in districts controlled by the president's party.
C. The number of projects canceled was a significant proportion of all the highway projects that were to be undertaken by the government in the near future.
D. The highway projects canceled in districts controlled by the president's party were not generally more expensive than the projects canceled in districts controlled by opposition parties.
E. Reports by nonpartisan auditors are not generally regarded by the opposition parties as a source of objective assessments of government projects.
答案选B，但是完全看不懂解释！作者: napoleon 时间: 2013-4-9 21:13
这道题我也郁闷好久，然后在国外论坛上搜索，明白了一些。
把国外的instructor解释贴上来
The press secretary says that the report labeled the canceled
projects as wasteful, but doesn't make any mention of how the
report labeled the non-canceled projects.
For example, if the report identified a total of 200 wasteful
projects, 90 in opposing party districts and 110 in his own party
districts, and the president cancelled all 90 of the opposing and
only 10 of his own, then there would be a strong case for bias.
