I'm not good at these

A few hints here. Try to break down the first premise so you can isolate the "E" proposition as much as possible. Then "connect" it with the second premise. You'll have transform the second premise to get what you want out of it. Then try and work backwards from the conclusion to make sure what you're doing is gonna get you the right result. You will use the distribution rule a few times to get what you want.

Distributing is important, but they don't seem to give you any way of distributing the ⊃ in your list of rules.

So... remember that "material implication" can allow you to turn a nasty ⊃-statement into a statement that is entirely in terms of and's, or's and not's.