Jana Tellez
Eng. 101
Monday, September 26/27, 2011
Ken Monfort stated explaining although he lost to the Supreme Court he gained $270 million in stock when ConAgra asked him to become a top executive, he became a part of what he tried to prevent. “There should be at least three large players instead of just two” (Schlosser 158). He joined them after he realized he couldn’t beat them. Monfort tried to beat the courts but couldn’t so he took the money and job position offered to him by ConAgra instead of receiving nothing. Ken Monfort became a hypocrite. He became a hypocrite because all this time he was pointing the finger at the two merging companies and in the end after losing he figured he can win by accepting the deal with ConAgra. Money can change a person’s perspective, Monfort joined the two merging companies when he realized he lost the battle but gained because he became a part of what he tried to prevent. The second he was offered a large amount of stock he was not hesitant to change his views. Ken Monfort would become a very rich man like the two company owners would when they merged and he figured if they can get why can’t I? So he did except ConAgra’s deal. Survival of the fittest! Monfort switched sides thinking of himself and his well being.
I like how you stuck to your main idea and did not drift off into another subject; it makes it clear on whom and what you are talking about. I would suggest you proofread your sentences and make sure to paraphrase when you cite and not end your sentence on a quote. Although you did write what it meant to you in a new sentence. Some of your language seems vague because you end sentences early instead of explaining what it would mean. The reader may feel lost at times. But you’ve made awesome points and stuck to your main idea. And here’s a little example on a cite; xyzxyz “direct quote” paraphrase (author page#).
ReplyDelete