text:
"You fell in love with another bimbo, didn't you?" I stopped hugging him.

Becky was far from a bimbo though I'm sure her ability to keep my boyfriend up until dawn trying to understand the fourth dimension was hampered by whatever she was on half the time. Still, here we were again.

"She was... unexpectedly inspiring," he told me. I wondered how much the writer in him worked on that stupid euphemism because it wasn't enough.

He couldn't lie to me. I saw the spark of another she in his eyes. Her taste wasn't on his lips, and not just because he used mouthwash. Her scent wasn't in my favorite spot on his chest on that shirt he wore too much. Her fingerprints weren't on the belt buckle he never cleaned. But Becky was inside him.

"I'm not in love," he whispered.

I tilted my head toward him and started with wide, unconvinced eyes.

"Love's not a binary thing," he said. "I'm not sure what it is exactly, or how I feel now but this is something new, something unexpected."

"I don't care how you define or rationalize it inside yourself, the point is you're not completely mine again!"

"Oh, I didn't realize you owned me."

"You know what I mean!" He didn't. He never knew what it was like to be fully in love. Or emotionally faithful.

His words were Becky's words. There was the meaning of things, then the attempts at better definitions, followed by logical pandering. I never understood how she could major in philosophy or how they accomplished anything when they talked. Our conversations were mental sprints and I was cramping up.

I met him in the middle of a three-year-stretch of getting over his first love. Or was it his first girlfriend? His first "true" inspiration? Whatever. They're all romantic semantics that mean the same thing to me: there's rarely one person in his heart.

"Why does this keep happening, just tell me, why?" I said.

"I... I don't know."

"What part of me is not enough?"

Nothing.

"Is it that I keep forgiving you?"

Nothing.

"Is it that I'm not inspiring enough?"

Nothing.

"Am I not blonde enough? Are my boobs the wrong size? Am I so far from your dream girl that you have to keep looking for her regardless of how much faith I blindly invest in you?"

He shook his head but wouldn't look up.

My temples throbbed at a thousand beats per minute. The same thousand beats that I wanted to pound into his chest just to stop that wandering heart. But no, that'd be too easy. He hadn't earned that kind of peace.

"There's nothing I'd change about you. You're... perfect," he mumbled.

"If I'm so damn perfect, then tell me why this keeps happening! Why do you keep searching for someone else?"

"I'm not searching. I'm really not." He sat down on my briefcase and covered his face. He said something I couldn't make out.

"Stop mumbling!" I said.

"I don't want this to happen. I hate it when it happens. I hate feeling torn."

"You're torn? Oh you poor baby! You're torn between every smart, pretty semi-blonde that jiggles her intellectual hips before fading through your life. Torn between all of them and me. Me. Me! The one girl who stays with you despite all of this. And do you know why, stupid?"

"...because you love me," he answered.

"That's right! That's..." I tried to picture him with Becky but I couldn't. It didn't happen. It was all in his head or his heart or wherever it comes from. Could I really be this hurt by his thoughts? "Maybe I shouldn't judge you or call you stupid. I'm the one too dumb to just end it."

"You're not du--"

"No! No. Why am I even beginning to doubt myself? You're the one who goes around continuously falling for girls other than me and I shouldn't judge you? Ha!"

"I'm not proud of it."

"Is that supposed to make it better?" I said.

"Of course not. I just..."

"What?"

His eyes were fixated on the ground, like he was trying to make sense of the scuffmarks in the pavement.

"What?" I repeated.

Nothing.

"Don't stop being honest now. You just what?"

"I just don't," he started, "I just don't understand. They tell you to follow your heart, right? They say it'll never lead you wrong. That's all I ever do. I follow my heart but I feel like the world keeps punishing me for it."

"They? Who are they? Your muses? Your single friends? Your family that couldn't keep a single relationship from failing?"

"You know what I mean." I didn't.

I'm sure Becky did. Becky or Sarah. Or Lindsey. Or Isabel. The philosophy major or the physics one. The first love or the one he wrote the most about. The one who left for New York years ago. Or someone he didn't even bother telling me about. Maybe they all knew. Maybe that's what separated us.

"You follow your heart too." He looked up at me. "And you're punished for it too."

He was right, for once. I loved him and that never changed. It didn't fluctuate with my moods or based on inspiration. It wasn't subject to a quarter-life crisis or nostalgia from seeing where I grew up. It was honest and constant and raw and kept me by his side. But he was right.

He broke the silence: "I'm sorry this keeps happening. I'm sorry I keep hurting you."

"I've always followed my heart and I always will," I said.

I noticed the car was still running, trunk still open. One suitcase was already inside while he sat on the other. I turned my back to him and stepped off the curb, past the other cars. I didn't even have to raise my hand. One of the cab drivers made eye contact and pulled over.

"What are you doing?" he asked as he finally got off the suitcase.

I walked over to the trunk and yanked my things out.

"Wait." He touched my shoulder in the humble way he used to.

The cab driver followed my finger to the suitcase he sat on. Soon both were in the new trunk. His hand was still on my shoulder.

"You follow your heart, I'll follow mine," I said.

For the first time since our first kiss on that cold night four and a half years ago, his touch wasn't enough to hold me. We followed our hearts but kept coming back to this honest place neither of us could understand.

He came to pick me up but I wouldn't leave with him.

I'd see him at home within the hour.

The cab door slammed shut.

I left the airport that day a beautiful hypocrite.

title: Beautiful Hypocrite

question: Summarize the feelings the narrator goes through as she questions her boyfriend.

answer: The narrator is upset her boyfriend is consorting with another lady. The boyfriend justified spending time with Becky by saying that she was inspiring and that they spent time discussing intellectual stuff. He tells the narrator that he is not in love with Becky. The narrator was not interested in her boyfriend's definition of love. She was frustrated and asked her boyfriend about any possible shortcomings of hers - she wants to know whether she is not inspiring enough, blonde enough, physically unattractive, etc. The narrator was ultimately not satisfied with her boyfriend's answer about her being perfect. She acknowledges that she loves him, but she seems to be incredibly tired of seeing him enjoy the company of other girls a lot more than hers.

question: What kind of education does the narrator have?


split: test

text:
[]

EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, and the president in happier times.Handout/Planet Pix via ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the _Mother Jones Daily_ newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Today is beyond nuts. The president’s lawyer has admitted that the president paid off a porn star to keep her quiet during the campaign and has been lying about it ever since. He also admitted that the president fired the FBI director because he had refused to publicly state that the president wasn’t under investigation. He also thinks that pretty much everyone in the Justice Department should be fired in order to bring the current investigation of the president to a halt. And they should probably all be investigated themselves. Oh, and we also learned that the president’s bagman/fixer has been under a wiretap for at least the past several weeks, which might explain some of the panic emanating from the White House. _[UPDATE: It was a pen register, not a wiretap. In other words, just a record of incoming and outgoing calls, not recordings of conversations.]_

Meanwhile, the president’s most corrupt underlings are engaged in a brutal war of all-against-all. Over at the _Atlantic_, Elaina Plott reports that an aide to Scott Pruitt tried to push a damaging story about Ryan Zinke in order to get the spotlight off of Pruitt’s own massive corruption problems:

  In the last week, a member of Pruitt’s press team, Michael Abboud, HAS BEEN SHOPPING NEGATIVE STORIES ABOUT ZINKE TO MULTIPLE OUTLETS, according to two sources with direct knowledge of the efforts, as well as correspondence reviewed by _The Atlantic_….THE STORIES WERE SHOPPED WITH THE INTENTION OF “TAKING THE HEAT OFF OF PRUITT,” the sources said.

  ….Abboud alleged to reporters that AN INTERIOR STAFFER CONSPIRED WITH FORMER EPA DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF KEVIN CHMIELEWSKI TO LEAK DAMAGING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EPA, as part of a rivalry between Zinke and Pruitt. The collaboration, Abboud claimed, allowed the Interior staffer to prop up Zinke at the expense of Pruitt, and Chmielewski to “get back” at his former boss.

  ….IT IS UNCLEAR THE EXTENT TO WHICH PRUITT WAS AWARE OF THESE EVENTS. Even so, the message from PPO, according to the senior official, was: “Basically, y’all are in trouble.” A White House official with knowledge of the events added: “ABSOLUTELY NOTHING SCOTT PRUITT DID WOULD SURPRISE ME.” Heather Swift, a spokeswoman for Interior, and Raj Shah, a spokesman for the White House, both declined to comment.

In case you’re confused, the story is that Zinke planned to leak damaging information about Pruitt. So Pruitt then leaked _that_ story in order to damage Zinke.

As for whether Pruitt was aware of these events, give me a break. Hell, it was probably his idea. Pruitt is now at the center of so many corruption allegations that I can’t even keep track of them, and his defense for every one of them has been that it was somebody else’s fault and he had no idea what was going on. Nobody with two brain cells to rub together believes him. Why believe him this time?

But wait. I forgot. Let’s get back to the president for a minute. The president’s lawyer _also_ said that he opposed having the president talk to the special counsel because he didn’t want the president walking into a perjury trap. But a perjury trap only works if the target has done something wrong and gets blindsided during an interview. That’s how Ken Starr bagged Bill Clinton. It _doesn’t_ work if either (a) the target has done nothing wrong or (b) the target knows a perjury trap is coming. Since Donald Trump insists he’s done nothing wrong and his lawyer has obviously warned him about a perjury trap, then he should have nothing to worry about.

Just a wild guess here, but I’m thinking that Trump has not only done something wrong, but he’s done so many things wrong that he can’t even keep them straight. Thus a perjury trap remains a live possibility.

Anyway, it’s kind of funny that Republicans are so disturbed by perjury traps these days. They seemed to think they were great fun back in 1998.

Oh, and one other thing. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who was so affronted at being called a liar at the WHCD last weekend, has been lying about Stormy Daniels all along too. Or maybe Trump has been lying to her. Who knows? In any case, she’s refusing to comment about it. I think this is probably a smart move.

question: Describe the main point being discussed in this article.

answer: The main point being discussed in this article is that the president's lawyer has admitted that the president paid off a porn star to keep her quiet during the campaign and has bene lying about it. The president's lawyer also stated that the president fired the FBI director because wouldn't state that the president was not under investigation. With this investigation going on, all parties involved are being investigated and a lot of panic seems to be coming from the White House.

question: What did the president's lawyer cousel the president?

answer: The president's lawyer stated he told the president to oppose talking to the special counsel. He stated this because he didn't want the president walking into a perjury trap. This advice seemed suspicious because a perjury trap only would happen if someone has done something wrong.

question: What occupation must the president's lawyer have in today's time?


text:
To set the stage, I grew up on a dairy farm.

My job before school was to bottle feed the baby cows. There was always a generation of babies with us, although they did not stay with us for long. I’m sure my dad could have had one of the Mexicans do it; there were plenty of people working the farm at that hour. But this made me feel more connected to the farm. When I was younger, I had happened to be there on one of the days that the calves are moved away from their mothers, and it was kind of traumatizing. Feeding the calves milk replacer myself made me feel like at least someone was checking up on them, if not their moms.

When I was about ten, my parents signed me up for the 4-H program. Google “4H pledge to greater loyalty” and you’ll get an idea of what this is about. It’s basically a way for sensitive kids like me to be inducted into the farming lifestyle. We were unlike city kids, who can keep their childish view of animals their whole lives. You can’t go your life looking at cows and hogs and thinking “Oh, that’s cute,” without running the risk of PTSD in this community.

The 4-H program pairs a student with a baby animal to feed, vaccinate, teach to walk with a halter, and by and large care for until it’s big enough to go to auction. At the end of the year, there’s a multi-day fair where people (adults too) show prize animals, eat deep fried sweets, and generally have a good time. The last day of the fair, the 4-H kids say goodbye to their animals and auction them off as meat. Learning how to raise an animal and how to let go is important.

My father bought me a Holstein calf, different from the veal calves I was used to feeding.  This relationship was different—he didnt live in a hutch, nor was he an impersonal part of a herd to be sold all at once. I named him Crumbles, and I spent a lot of one-on-one time with him. I fed him, washed him, clipped him, and gave him medicines, and watched him grow into a towering animal! On the day of the fair, I walked him around the ring myself and listened as people bid on him.

As I was saying goodbye, I was surrounded by other kids and their parents who were going through the same thing. It was kind of a rush—that intense sadness paired with my parents saying they were so proud of me, and the strong sense of community and understanding from the people around me. *This is how food is made, this is what we do to survive.*

Later that week, my parents took me to the Golden Corral buffet. We didn’t eat out often, so this was a special meal. We filled our plates up with beef and fixings, and we even said our prayers at the table, which wasn’t out of place in a rural town like ours.

That’s when I smelled it. As someone walked by, the scent of unwashed sickness rolled over our table. I looked up to see the fattest woman I had ever seen. She had short blond hair in tight curls at the top of her head. Her lips were painted bright red against a too-pale foundation. Her chin drooped from her face like a hanging udder. But the most horrifying thing was her butt. It was double butt. Not only was it parted vertically in her threadbare sweatpants, it was also parted horizontally, as if God had melted one butt and dolloped it atop a pair of saggy beanbags.  I watched as she and her family of smaller fat people  waddled to the same trough I had eaten from and pull out slices of glistening, gray beef.

I looked down at my own plate, and in doing so, felt my own childhood pudge push against my chin. The food looked disgusting to me. This wasn’t for survival. Crumbles had died so fatasses like her could stuff themselves with too many portions, make themselves sick, and shit out the rest. How was this fair, or right, or “important” as my community had told me again and again? Why did pudgy little me get to eat icecream, when the calves at home didn’t get to drink the milk that was made for them, or even spend time with their moms?

After that, I wasn’t able to eat animals anymore. If I had never seen that hideous woman, I would have molded my education to prepare to take over the farm from my parents, participated in more 4-H and agricultural clubs, and spent my hours on the farm instead of doing calculus homework. If I had never seen that woman, I’d probably have a better relationship with my parents, who take my rejection of the animal farming lifestyle as a rejection of them, and the 16 hour days they once worked to keep clothes on my back. In the end, there wasn’t a place for me in that world anyway. When I was 18, my parent’s farm went under due to the unstable price of milk, meaning only the big factory farms could afford to ride the bad years and stay open.  If I had never seen that woman, I would have gone down with them. Instead, I had prepared myself to pursue a college degree in engineering.

The whole course of my life was changed by a fat person.

**tl;dr** double butt made me choose a different profession and moral philosophy than my community

title: [NF] My community doesn't understand me anymore

question: Why does the narrator feed the calves

answer: The calves were taken away from their mothers while still suckling. The narrator felt sad for the cows. It made him feel that someone was checking up on them so although the family had farmworkers, the narrator fed the calves each day.

question: Why did the narrator's parents sign him up for the 4-H program?

answer: The narrator was born into a farming community. He was also a sensitive child. The objective of the 4-H program was to teach children how to nurture and care for a baby animal and then give up to slaughter.

question: Did the 4-H program work for the narrator?

answer: It was an abject failure for the parents. The narrator became a vegetarian and decided he didn't want to farm. From the narrator's point of view, it was a success because he went on to prepare himself for a college degree. When the farm went under he was already planning a career elsewhere.


text:
The BATTLE OF MARSHALL'S ELM was a skirmish that took place near Street, in the county of Somerset, South West England, on 4 August 1642. The engagement occurred during the build-up to formal beginning of the First English Civil War on 22 August, while the Royalists and Parliamentarians were recruiting men in the county. The Royalists had established their regional headquarters in Wells, but were threatened by superior Parliamentarian numbers in the vicinity. The Royalist commander sent out a mounted patrol consisting of 60 to 80 cavalry and dragoons, which came across a force of between 500 and 600 Parliamentarian recruits travelling north across the Somerset Levels under the command of Sir John Pyne.

The Royalists set an ambush at Marshall's Elm, where the road rose out of the Levels into the Polden Hills. After a parley between the leaders was unsuccessful, the Parliamentarians were caught in the ambush. Facing musket fire from the hidden dragoons, and being charged at by the Royalist cavalry, they were routed. The Royalists killed around 27, and took 60 prisoners, including two of the Parliamentarian officers. Despite their victory, the Royalists were forced to withdraw from Wells, and later from Somerset altogether, due to their inferior numbers.

Background

Conflict between the English Parliament and its monarch on religious, fiscal and legislative matters had been ongoing since at least 1603. The tension between Parliament and King Charles escalated sharply during 1642 after the King had attempted to arrest five Members of Parliament, who he accused of treason. In preparation for the likelihood of conflict with Parliament, Charles appointed the Marquess of Hertford as commander of his forces in the West Country, supported by Sir Ralph Hopton, a local Member of Parliament (MP) and an experienced army officer. Both sides were attempting to recruit the existing militia and new men into their armies. Parliament passed the Militia Ordinance in March 1642 without royal assent, granting themselves control of the militia. In response, Charles granted commissions of array to his commanders, a medieval device for levying soldiers which had not been used since 1557. One such commission was issued to Hertford, for the levying of troops in south-west England and south Wales.

Hertford chose Wells in Somerset as the Royalists' headquarters in the West Country, and they arrived in the city on 28 July. The decision was based on the fact that Wells housed the county magazine, had Royalist sympathies, and was geographically central within the area. In his 1973 book, _Somerset in the Civil War_, the historian David Underdown criticises the decision, citing Wells' vulnerable position in the Mendip Hills, and the strong Parliamentarian views held by the majority of Somerset's rural population. Hopton had previously acted as one of the deputy lieutenants for Somerset, making him responsible for training and leading the county's militia. Hopton's standing helped the Royalists' recruiting, but the general population of the county, many of whom were Calvinist Protestants, or worked in industries depressed by royal policies, was more sympathetic towards Parliament than the King. Broadly speaking, the Royalists were more successful in recruiting cavalry and members of the gentry; Hopton, John Digby and Francis Hawley each brought a troop of horse, but attempts to raise an infantry regiment were unsuccessful. In contrast, the Parliamentarians signed up more men, but many of these were untrained and unarmed countrymen.

On 30 July 1642, the Parliamentarians, led by William Strode, one of Parliament's deputy lieutenants in Somerset, held a meeting to collect arms at Shepton Mallet, around east-southeast of Wells. Hertford sent Hopton with his cavalry to Shepton on 1 August to confront the Parliamentarians, but he had orders to avoid conflict. When Hopton arrived in Shepton, Strode refused to listen to him, and the two scuffled. A crowd of over 1,000 had gathered, and Hopton withdrew and rejoined his cavalry outside the town. There, the Royalists and the countrymen sympathetic to the Parliamentarians faced off without fighting for several hours before the Royalists pulled back to Wells.

Prelude

thumb|right|upright=1.2|The view from Collard Hill, towards Marshall's Elm. The Parliamentarian force approached from the left, while the Royalists positioned themselves on the hills.|alt=A grassy hill with trees in the background. The hill falls away steeply to the left of the image, and less so to the right. The success of the Parliamentarians' recruiting left the Royalists in danger of being surrounded in Wells. Sir John Pyne, an MP who had also been appointed as a deputy lieutenant of Somerset by Parliament in March, and Captain John Preston recruited around 400 men from Taunton (around south-west of Wells), while Captain Sands brought a further 200 from South Petherton. Pyne had orders to bring the men, described as “a few hundred farmers” by Underdown, to Street, where they would rendezvous with Strode. Hertford was wary of his weak position, and on 4 August he sent a mounted patrol out under the command of Sir John Stawell, composed of three troops of cavalry and some dragoons, numbering around 60 to 80 in all. The patrol, which also included several of the Royalist gentry and the experienced soldier Henry Lunsford, rode south through Glastonbury into the Polden Hills. On reaching the village of Marshall's Elm, just over south of Street, and around south of Wells, the patrol spotted Pyne's force marching through cornfields about away.

Battle

Having approached from the north, the Royalists had the advantage of higher ground, coming down off the Poldens. Marshall's Elm is located in a depression that acted as a pass between Ivy Thorn Hill and Collard Hill, where the road rose out of the Somerset Levels to climb into the hills. Stawell parleyed with the Parliamentarians, telling them that they could avoid conflict if they aborted their march, but to no effect. While Stawell was engaged in his discussion with the Parliamentarians, Lunsford arranged the Royalist troops; the cavalry were behind the brow of the hill, leaving just their heads and weapons visible, to disguise their numbers; fourteen dragoons dismounted and were hidden in quarry pits lower on the hill by the road. He ordered all the men to hold their fire until he led the attack with the dragoons.

Pyne initially continued the Parliamentarian march, but then changed his mind. His order to stop was met with complaints from his men, who said that the Royalist force “were but a few horse and would run away”, and they continued up the hill. Pyne's men halted occasionally to fire, but Lunsford held the Royalists' fire until the enemy were within 120 paces, when the dragoons returned fire with their muskets and killed the leader of the Parliamentarian vanguard. The Parliamentarians hesitated, unsure of where the attack had come from, and Stawell led the cavalry charge down the hill. The Parliamentarians were routed; seven were killed at Marshall's Elm, and the Royalists chased some of the fleeing men for , as far as Somerton. They captured sixty prisoners, who they left in Somerton. Among those captured were the two officers, Preston and Sands. As well as the seven killed at the battle, roughly another twenty died of their wounds.

Aftermath

The battle provided both a tactical and strategic victory for the Royalists, leaving Hertford with an escape route from Wells should it be needed. Underdown credits their cavalry strength and leadership for the victory, highlighting that their leaders were “accustomed to command and confident of their ability to defeat larger forces of poorly officered farmers”. He was particularly complimentary of Lunsford, and the experience he brought. One of the region's Parliamentarian leaders, John Ashe, said that the battle “very much daunted the honest countryman”.

Despite their defeat at Marshall's Elm, the Parliamentarians continued to gather men around Wells. Groups congregated from Bristol, Gloucester, Wiltshire and throughout north-east Somerset; a range of cavalry, musketeers and countrymen wielding makeshift weapons such as pitchforks. The force, which numbered around 12,000, crossed the Mendip Hills and reached a slope overlooking Wells on the evening of 5 August. Pyne held joint command of part of the force with Strode. Hertford sent his cavalry to face them, and both groups agreed to a ceasefire until the next day. Overnight, the Parliamentarians' numbers were swelled by further recruits and reinforcements, and Hertford made a sham of negotiating in the morning to cover his retreat; while the Parliamentarian messengers were riding north out of Wells with his 'offer', his men fled south, covered by a cavalry rearguard led by Hopton. After spending two nights in Somerton, the Royalists withdrew out of Somerset altogether, garrisoning Sherborne Castle in Dorset.

The First English Civil War formally began on 22 August, when Charles I raised his royal standard in Nottingham. The battle at Marshall's Elm was not the only engagement to predate the formal start of the war, but the historian Peter Gaunt suggests that it was the bloodiest, while another, Charles Carlton, said that Marshall's Elm was the “first real confrontation” of the war.

Notes

Citations

title: Battle of Marshall's Elm

question: What war was the battle a part of?

answer: It occurred just before the First English Civil War

question: Who won the battle?

answer: The Royalists

question: How many died in the battle?

answer: Around 27 Parliamentarians, but it is unclear if any Royalists died

question: When did the battle take place?

answer: August 4, 1642

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: The Battle of Marshall's Elm was an ambush set by Royalists against the Parliamentarians in the build up to the First English Civil War. The Royalists were successful and killed around 27 Parliamentarians and took 60 prisoners.


text:
In 1706, mathematics teacher William Jones is credited with first using the symbol of π to represent the concept of the ratio between a circle's circumference and diameter. The mathematical formula itself has been recognized as a universal ratio for several thousand years. Pioneers in mathematics like the Sumerians and Greeks believed that no matter how large or small a circle was, the ratio of 3.14159265 was a constant.

They formed whole schools of math philosophy with Pi as it’s foundation and core. Uncovering a universal law that could be applied to all size circles seemed like a secret stolen from the gods. Somewhere along the line, scholars stopped doubting the dependability of the ratio. It was eventually accepted as a universal point of reference. From then on, the principle of Pi passed from theory into accepted fact.

As with many things, a healthy level of skepticism has its uses. It was too easy to think that our predecessors had been flawless in their research. Such a trusting level of romanticism could lead to the dangerous idea that past mathematicians never made mistakes in their calculations. Those who blindly accept any ‘truth’ or theorem, risk boxing themselves into limitations of thought, and making critical errors in conclusions.

One individual was determined to do his own independent research on the sacred laws of Pi; flying in the face of its universal acceptance. His stubborn determination to ignore millions of previous confirmations of its dependability was either pure idealism or exceptional stupidity; depending on how you looked at it. Over the lengthy course of his efforts, he personally measured thousands of circles. Despite them all adhering to the well-documented ratio, he remained resolute in his furious desire to find a meaningful exception. The effort to find base flaws in universal laws of physics is often referred to as ‘chaos theory’. He even considered the theory of a collapsed star as possible evidence of circles or spheres which ignored the laws of Pi.

The young man experimented with sophisticated math algorithms and controversial new research data. He cross-multiplied base integers in intricate ways. He applied square and cubed roots to each part of his equations to see if it might affect the never-changing outcome. Try as he might, the long-forgotten gods who invented quantum physics were determined to foil his efforts to find a flaw in their system. The exception to the rule of Pi remained elusive.

Spurned on by historical examples of those who had refused to accept failure, he carried on where wiser men threw in the towel. Much of his precious youth was exhausted on this questionable endeavor. So much of his formative years had been focused on these myopic goals that it left no time for a personal life.

One day he bemoaned his wasted years chasing chaos theory, to an older peer in experimental physics. The elderly colleague smiled and made a startling statement. “You can bring your life’s work to an end now and start living, my determined friend. There is already a singular exception to the universal reliability of Pi. It’s based on the ‘4 units’ system when inverted with the ‘no complications’ equation.”

The chaos-seeking physicist looked at his older friend with exasperated surprise. “What do you mean? I’ve tried every variable and formula known to humanity to shake up those damned numbers! I’ve never even heard of a ‘no complications equation’ or a ‘4 units’ system. For heaven’s sake. Please tell me! How does it work?”

“When you think of the rewards of a fulfilling life as being similar to a desert metaphor, you must place the ‘no complications’ equation in the very forefront. To bookend this theorem you add the four units to the end of the formula for balance. Properly sequenced, it reads: ‘No more Pi 4u’. Given a few minutes to absorb this simple formula, I hope you can soon see the wisdom in it.”

title: [MF] Refuting the Pi principle

question: What is the Pi principle?

answer: That the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter is equal to pi.

question: What is the 'no complications equation'?

answer: There is insufficient information to answer the question.

question: What was the young scholar's goal?

answer: To find a counterexample to the Pi constant.

question: Why did the elderly colleague say "No more Pi 4u?"

answer: It's based on a pun conflating Pi with "pie". the story is a setup for a joke.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: This story describes a young skeptic who spends their life trying to refute the Pi ratio. This ends up being the setup for a pun, as revealed by later dialogue with another character.


text:
[Biden honors Heather Heyer: She is 'in every person who stands up to reject hatred and bigotry']

© Greg Nash

Former Vice President Joe Biden[]Joe BidenBiden and Harris named Time's 2020 'Person of the Year' US to sanction Turkey over Russian defense system: report Federal government executes Brandon Bernard despite last-minute appeals MORE honored Heather Heyer on the first anniversary of her death in the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., calling on the U.S. to fight against “hatred and bigotry.”

Biden tweeted Sunday that Heyer's spirit is "in every person who stands up to reject hatred and bigotry."

“Make no mistake: this fight goes on,” he continued. “The battle for the soul of this nation rests with each of us, everyday.”

  Today we honor the memory of Heather Heyer, whose spirit we see in every person who stands up to reject hatred and bigotry. Make no mistake: this fight goes on. The battle for the soul of this nation rests with each of us, everyday.

  — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) August 12, 2018

Heyer was killed when a man drove his car into a crowd of people protesting the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville last year. The suspect, James Fields, was later charged with federal hate crimes.

Biden condemned the violent rally at the time, saying that “racism and hate have no place” in the U.S.

He also criticized President Trump[]Donald TrumpBiden and Harris named Time's 2020 'Person of the Year' US to sanction Turkey over Russian defense system: report Federal government executes Brandon Bernard despite last-minute appeals MORE for his reaction to the rally in Charlottesville, calling it "reprehensible."

Trump faced intense backlash for his comments following the rally, during which he said blame was on "both sides" for the violence that broke out during the event.

A second “Unite the Right” rally was held in Washington, D.C. on Sunday on the original rally’s second anniversary; About 20 people attended the white supremacist rally and departed hours before it was scheduled to end.

Hundreds of counterprotesters gathered in the city, vastly outnumbering the attendees.

[TheHill.com]

The Hill 1625 K Street, NW Suite 900 Washington DC 20006 | 202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax

The contents of this site are ©2020 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.

question: Who did former Vice President Joe Biden and Harris named as Time's 2020 "Person of the Year"?

answer: Heather Heyer, the woman who was killed by white supremacists in Charlottesville.

question: How did Heather Heyer die?

answer: She died when a man drove his car into a crowd of people protesting the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville.

question: What did Joe Biden say about President Trump's reaction to the rally in Charlottesville?

answer: He called it reprehensible.

question: Write a ~4 sentence summary.

answer:
Former Vice President Joe Biden and Kamala Harris named Heather Heyer as Time's "Person of the Year" for 2020. Heather Heyer died at the hands of one James Field at a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville where he rammed a car into a crowd protesting the rally. James Field has since been charged with hate crimes.

Joe Biden also referred to President Trump's comment about the situation as reprehensible.


text:
I've delivered mail on this route for a year now. At this point I know everyone by name. Not many faces, just names floating around in my head from the countless times I delivered their letters. Nothing interesting occurs along my route. Except for the House at least. The House itself is nothing out of the ordinary for this area. A large, two-story building with a wrought iron fence surrounding it.  Something was off though. I don't know why it took me so long to realize it, I mean I've delivered mail on this route for a few years now. They never got any mail. The House never got anything. No bills, no flyers, no spam mail, nothing. I chalked it up to being empty or abandoned, but the lawn was always perfectly kept. Sometimes the lights were on too. I could see into some of the rooms then, they all looked blank and empty. Oh well, it's none of my business.

I pushed the House out of my mind for a few months. Then one day I saw someone. First time I ever saw anyone here in 10 years of working this route. My curiousity got the best of me and I went up to talk to him.

"Excuse me." I said, "Do you work here?"

"Yes I do, sir! How may I assist you today?"

"What is this place?"

"Oh just a House like any other, sir" he replied.

"But why don't you get any mail?"

"Well most people forget we're even here, sir. Have a great day!"

That made me more confused than before. Maybe they have their mail forwarded somewhere? No no no. I had already checked for that. What if I sent them mail and saw how it was delivered? But that wouldn't work, I'd be the one delivering it. I've delivered mail on this route for over 20 years now. I should try to get into the House, see what's inside. No one just doesn't get mail.

It finally happened! The House got a letter! I don't know what it says. But I want to know. If only I could open it. But no. I'd get in trouble. I'd lose my job. I've delivered mail on this route for my whole life. I can't give it up now. But I have to know. This is the first letter the House has received. Maybe it's worth the risk. *I need to know what's in the letter.*

"Look at this, Mr Casey" the nurse says. "You got a letter! Isn't that exciting? It's from your Grandson. I know it's been a while since you have heard from him but you remember him, right? Here, I'll read it to you!"

> Dear Grandpa,

> I know it's been a long time since I've written you, and even longer since I've visited. Dad and I found it too hard to see you like that. After everything, it breaks my heart knowing you don't even know who I am anymore. This letter may not mean anything to you but it means a lot to me. All of the stories you told me have had such a significant impact on my life. Your relationship with Grandma taught me true love lasts forever. Your stories about the war taught me courage. Your stories about working overtime delivering mail just to put my dad through college taught me perseverence. You have changed my life in so many ways and I don't know how to thank you enough. I wanted to follow in your footsteps so I enlisted in the Army. If I can be half the man that you are, I'll have lead a successful life. If you don't understand anything I've said so far, just know that you are loved.

> Love,
Andrew

title: [MF] The Mailman

question: Explain the story's ending.

answer: For as long as he could remember, the mailman had been intrigued about a particular house in a familiar neighborhood that had stopped receiving deliveries. However, the house received mail one day, and he was eager to see what was inside. In reality, the mailman is Mr. Casey, the elderly resident of the house, who believes he is still employed as a mailman. A nurse was taking care of him in his residence too. His son and grandson were heartbroken to learn of his deteriorating mental health. His grandson wrote to him to express his grief at losing him in the letter he received.

question: What are the signs that show the mailman might be senile?

answer: The mailman knows he has been working the route for years, but he keeps forgetting. He first says he has been doing that route for a year. Then, while figuring out why a certain house never got mail, he said he had delivered mail on that route for years. He then mentioned working on that route for ten years when he discovered the house never got mail. Then he mentioned delivering mail on that route for twenty years. The mailman was excited when the house finally received a letter and wanted to read it but feared he would lose his job because he believed he was still a mailman. He said he'd been delivering mail on that route his whole life. The mailman was Mr. Casey, and his grandson wrote him, saddened that he couldn't remember him. Mr. Casey's inconsistencies about his work history show his mental decline.


text:
A statue of American Revolutionary War hero William Prescott by William Wetmore Story is installed next to the Bunker Hill Monument in Charlestown, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.

Description and history

The bronze sculpture was cast in 1880 in Rome by the founder Alessandro Nelli and dedicated in 1881. It measures approximately 8 ft. x 4 ft. x 5 ft. 10 in., and rests on a red and grey Quincy granite base that measures approximately 6 ft. 2 in. x 5 ft. 4 in. x 5 ft. 10 in. The work was surveyed by the Smithsonian Institution's “Save Outdoor Sculpture!” program in 1994.[1]

[1]

title: Statue of William Prescott

question: Who is William Prescott?

answer: He is an American Revolutionary War hero

question: Who was the artist who did Prescott's statue?

answer: William Wetmore Story

question: Where is Prescott's statue installed?

answer: Next to the Bunker Hill Monument in Charlestown, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.

question: When and where was the sculpture cast?

answer: It was cast in Rome in 1880.

question: Write a ~4 sentence summary.

answer: William Prescott is an American Revolutionary War hero. in 1880. his bronze sculpture was cast in Rome by Alessandro Nelli and dedicated in 1881. It is now installed next to the Bunker Hill Monument in Charlestown, Boston, Massachusetts, United States. Artist William Wetmore Story sculpted the original statue.


text:
The President again accuses the country of funding terrorism as diplomats try to broker a deal to end the Gulf crisis.

Fill 2 Copy 11
Created with Sketch.
Saturday 1 July 2017 18:23, UK

-   Donald Trump
-   QATAR
-   United States

President Trump has once again complicated the Qatar crisis.

The small but rich Gulf kingdom may be home to the biggest US military base in the Middle East.

But that has not stopped Donald Trump mocking its name and accusing it again of funding terrorism in comments made to Republican fundraisers.

Press were barred from the event but his comments were secretly recorded at the $35,000 a head jamboree at Trump's own hotel in Washington.

[Trump International hotel]

Image: Trump International hotel

"We're having a dispute with Qatar - we're supposed to say Qatar," he said mockingly pronouncing the country's name in two different ways.

"It's Qatar, they prefer. I prefer that they don't fund terrorism."

Three diplomatic clangers in one outburst.

More from Donald Trump

-

    US election result: Trump says he will respect Electoral College vote, but warns it will be a 'very hard thing to concede'

-

    Donald Trump pardons former aide Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI

-

    Donald Trump to pardon former aide who was guilty of lying to the FBI - reports

-

    Twitter is warning users when they attempt to 'like' misinformation

-

    No mea culpa for all the bad blood, but Trump has bowed to public pressure

-

    Trump tells his team to cooperate with transition but vows to keep up fight

Firstly US presidents have in the past avoided ridiculing countries where 10,000 US military personnel are based.

Secondly American diplomats are working furiously behind the scenes to broker a resolution that threatens to rip apart the Gulf Cooperation Council and undermine prosperity and stability in this part of the Middle East.

They say the US is an honest neutral broker. Donald Trump apparently thinks America is having a dispute with Qatar.

And thirdly in his comments he is once again taking the side of Qatar's rivals, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE and Bahrain. The quartet has isolated Qatar diplomatically and economically accusing it of funding and supporting terrorism.

[Rex Tillerson]

Image: Rex Tillerson said to be exhausted from clearing up after Mr Trump's blunders

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is reportedly 'exhausted' from the job of clearing up after every diplomatic faux pas committed by his boss almost daily.

He was thought to be furious the last time Trump sabotaged US diplomatic efforts to resolve the Qatar crisis by accusing it of funding terrorism 'at a very high level' in one of his outspoken Twitter outbursts.

Tillerson reportedly blamed that on the influence of UAE ambassador to the US Yousuf al Otaiba on Donald Trump's young son in law, Jared Kushner.

[Jared Kushner is not only family, he's also the US President's senior aid]

Image: Jared Kushner is not only family, he's also the US President's senior aid

A source close to Tillerson reportedly said the Secretary of State 'concluded that this absolutely vacuous kid was running a second foreign policy out of the White House family quarters'.

There has been concern voiced within the administration at the influence being wielded by Otaiba on the Trump administration's Middle East policy.

We await the response of Tillerson and other older members of the Trump administration to their boss's latest bout of ham-fisted diplomacy.

question: What is Qatar being accused of?

answer: President Donald Trump has been mocking the country's name and accusing it again of funding terrorism in comments made to Republican fundraisers.

question: Who is Rex Tillserson?

answer: Rex Tillerson is the US Secretary of State. He is "exhausted" by the job of cleaning up after every diplomatic faux pas committed by his boss almost daily.


text:
For me, it’s a guilty pleasure to waste time on Sunday morning reading the _New York Times_ wedding announcements.  I used to indulge myself in this habit to see if I knew any of the couples or went to the same schools they had attended.  Now, as I have gotten older, and have passed the age that is typical for first marriages, I find that I rarely know the people whose weddings are described in the announcements.  But I still read them, in part as a barometer of changes in marriage practices, which interest me as a feminist and a family law scholar.

How many, and which kinds of, women keep their names? How many retain their names professionally? How many couples have had previous marriages that ended in divorce?  At what age do people marry the first, second, or even third time?  And now, since the _Times_ made the decision a few years back to start including same-sex marriages, how many couples are made up of two men or two women?  And how do the marriage practices of same-sex couples vary from those of straight couples?

Now, I have added another question to my completely unscientific, anecdotal wedding-data collection project: What type of officiant solemnized the marriage?  In the case of clergy (as opposed to judges, village justices, city clerks, and assorted other secular officials who might be authorized to conduct marriages in a particular jurisdiction), the announcements identify the officiant by both the name and the denomination:  A Jewish Rabbi, a Roman Catholic Priest, a Hindu Priest, a Presbyterian minister, and so on.

Then there are those announcements that say something like this:  The couple was married by “a friend of the couple who was ordained by the Universal Life Church for the event.”  Or by the Church of Spiritual Humanism, or by the American Marriage Ministries.  The number of marriages officiated by such ministers seems to be growing, and many of them take place in New York.  This is curious given that there is good reason to believe such officiants do not have the authority to solemnize marriages under New York marriage law.

In this, Part One of this two-part series of columns, I will explain the basic procedural requirements for marriage and the questions raised when weddings are presided over by ministers ordained online, who have no congregation or other trappings of religious power.

Then, in Part Two—which will appear on Justia’s _Verdict_ in two weeks, on November 15—I will provide a detailed jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction analysis of cases in which the validity of online-minister marriages have been challenged.  In that part, I will focus with special detail on New York, where, while online minister weddings are clearly common, there is case law suggesting that the resulting marriages are not valid.

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A VALID MARRIAGE

Marriage law, and especially marriage procedure, is governed by state law.  Every state has a set of statutes governing marriages—resolving questions such as who is eligible to marry, what procedures must be followed to create a marriage, and when and how marriages can be dissolved.

Two people who consent to marry and are eligible to marry—because they are not closely related, not already married to someone else, old enough, etc.—must still follow certain procedures to establish a valid marriage.  (About a dozen states also still recognize common-law marriage, which can be created by the agreement and consent of the parties, without a license or formal ceremony.)  The two basic requirements are a marriage license and the solemnization of the marriage by a valid officiant.

To apply for a license, couples generally need to provide proof of their age and identity.  Both parties also need to personally appear at the clerk’s office to apply for the license, unless special circumstances apply.  A blood test for syphilis or other communicable diseases used to be a standard part of the requirements for a marriage license, but most states have repealed these requirements.

Most states also impose a waiting period of at least 24 hours after the couple applies for the license before the wedding can take place.  This waiting period can be waived in many jurisdictions, though.  The marriage license also has an expiration date: The wedding must take place within 30 or, in some states, 60 days or a new license must be sought.  And, a small fee must be paid.

With the marriage license in hand, couples can proceed to the next step: solemnization.  The statutes generally do not specify any necessary form or content for a wedding ceremony.  Neither The Wedding March nor Pachelbel’s Canon need be played while the bride is walking down the aisle.  Indeed, there doesn’t need to be an aisle at all, nor music for that matter.  The statutes specify only that a recognized officiant must preside over a ceremony during which the parties express their consent to marry and the officiant declares them to be married.  (Thus, the standard “I do” part of wedding ceremonies—or something close to it—is not just a nicety, but also a legal requirement.)

The ceremony must then be finalized by the signature of two witnesses and the officiant on a marriage certificate, which is then filed and kept as a public document.  Contrary to popular myth, the consummation of a marriage is not a formal requirement for a valid marriage to exist, although the inability to consummate can be grounds for an annulment.  And the Catholic Church treats the failure to consummate as an adequate basis for a canonical annulment, though that would have no effect on one’s civil marital status.

WHO HAS THE POWER TO SOLEMNIZE MARRIAGES?

Who can be an officiant at a marriage ceremony? All states allow an array of civil officers to solemnize marriages—mayors, judges, magistrates, court clerks, and others.  They also allow religious figures to solemnize civil marriages.  But who qualifies as an appropriate religious figure?  State statutes generally bestow the power to solemnize on “clergy,” referring to a category of persons that states define differently.  The most common definition of “clergy” or “minister” is an individual who has been ordained by a recognized religious body and has a congregation or following.

Marriage officiant laws also reflect local idiosyncrasies.  In Ohio, for example, the “superintendent of the school for the deaf” can conduct weddings; in New York, leaders of the New York Society for Ethical Culture, a group that provides “non-theistic services in a congregational setting,” can perform marriages.  Many states specifically accommodate Quakers, who believe that every member is a minister, even though the members wouldn’t otherwise meet the typical definition of clergy.

THE UNIVERSAL LIFE CHURCH (ULC) AND ONLINE ORDINATIONS

One recurring question for courts has been whether ministers who have only been ordained through the mail, or more commonly today, on the Internet, count as “clergy”.  The answer has generally been that these ministers do not meet the standard definition of the term.

The largest supplier of online ordinations is the ULC, a non-denominational church founded in Modesto, California in 1962 that claims to have ordained more than 20 million ministers.  According to its own website, the ULC joins together ministers who “come from all walks of life and spiritual traditions”; their “common thread” is “adherence to the universal doctrine of religious freedom: Do only that which is right.”  There is no set doctrine for ministers to accept, nor is there a mandate that ministers must believe in God.  The ULC advocates “religious freedom,” and the pursuit of “spiritual beliefs without interference from any outside agency, including government or church authority.”

In the ULC, ordination is free, accomplished through a click on the website and the filling out of a short online form.  (Other clicks make possible online confessions and prayer requests.)  The ordination request then must be approved, which takes about 24 hours.

I became a minister of the Universal Life Church while writing this column.  In a confirming e-mail, I was informed that my “ordination is for life, without price, and without question of [my] specific beliefs.” In the Church’s eyes, I am authorized to “perform all peaceful rites and ceremonies of the church, including weddings, funerals, baptisms, blessings, and to preach, teach and hold meetings” and “entitled to all privileges and courtesies normally offered to members of the clergy.”  I was offered (but not pressured) to buy various certificates, business cards, books and manuals, robes, stoles and other accoutrements to facilitate my ministerial activities.  The “complete ministry package” even includes a parking placard that says “Minister.”

I was also asked to please note that I was not “ordained ‘by Internet’ or ‘online.’” The ULC, the e-mail explained, is a “regularly established church or congregation” and all ordinations are done as the deliberate, thoughtful, and responsible act of a human being, not by a computer.”  The Internet and e-mail were merely used, I was told, “[a]s is the case with nearly every church, organization and business,” for “administrative communications.”  I was told that it was also important for me to note that I did not ordain myself.

ARE MARRIAGES CONDUCTED BY MINISTERS WHO HAVE BEEN ORDAINED ONLINE VALID? A DIFFICULT QUESTION

The legal validity (or lack thereof) of marriages officiated by ULC ministers, or other similar churches, varies by jurisdiction.

Take a 1988 case from Mississippi, _In re Will of Blackwell_. The case arose when siblings of Cobert Blackwell, who was then deceased, challenged Nadine Fortenberry’s claim for a widow’s elective share of Blackwell’s estate, claiming that Blackwell and Fortenberry’s marriage was invalid because it was solemnized by Claude Clark, a constable and Methodist with “Credentials of Ministry” from the ULC.

At the time the couple had married, Blackwell was a fifty-eight-year-old widower in Walthall County, Mississippi.  He and Nadine obtained a marriage license in November 1984, and, in the court’s words, the “next day, a Friday, our couple set sail for Jackson (of all places) in search of legal blessing for their bliss.”  They were referred by a local judge to Clark, who performed their marriage the following day.

When Blackwell died less than three months later, his seven brothers and sisters stood to inherit everything except the share designated for a surviving spouse under Mississippi law.  They came up with the idea to challenge Clark’s credentials, and thus the validity of the marriage.  No marriage would mean no surviving spouse, and no spouse would mean no elective share for Nadine.

Under Mississippi law, only a minister, rabbi, or “other spiritual leader of any other religious body” could solemnize marriages in Mississippi.  The Mississippi Supreme Court upheld the validity of the marriage.  While the majority conceded that the “ULC is hardly a conventional church by Bible Belt standards,” it was “enough of a religious body,” and Clark was “enough of a spiritual leader,” to validate the marriage.  (One justice concurred only in the result, criticizing the majority’s “enough of” standard as “horseshoe jurisprudence.”)

But courts in some other states have reached different conclusions.  The Virginia Supreme Court, for example, held in 1974, in _Cramer v. Commonwealth_, that the authority of a group of ULC ministers was rightfully rescinded by a lower court given that they did not meet the state’s definition of clergy.

Virginia law requires that, in order to officiate at weddings, a minister must show “proof of ordination and of his being in regular communion with the religious society of which he is a reputed member.” This requirement, the court explained, is not a “religious test,” nor a way of encouraging church marriages.  It is, instead, designed to ensure that a “person of responsibility and integrity and by one possessed of some educational qualifications” would oversee the legal requirements for creating a valid marriage.

Ministers are delegated this power based on the assumption that, in any church, the selection of ministers is a “considered, deliberate and responsible act.”  But the ULC encourages all members to be ministers, and, in this court’s view, a “church which consists of all ministers, and in which all new converts can become instant ministers, in fact has no ‘minister’ within the contemplation of [state marriage law].”  The legislature never “intended to qualify, for licensing to marry, a minister whose title and status could be so casually and cavalierly acquired.”

In Part Two of this series for Justia’s _Verdict_, I will continue looking at cases involving the validity of ULC marriages, with a special focus on the vulnerability of such marriages in the state of New York.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

question: What does the text say about the common requirements for a civil marriage?

answer: The basic requirements are simple. Two eligible people need to express their desire to marry with at least two witnesses present. The eligibility requirement is about not being close relatives, not being already married, and being old enough. This ceremony can be officiated by various groups of people; mayors, judges, magistrates, court clerks, and more. Religious figures are also empowered to officiate religious ceremonies. The usual definition of clergy is an individual ordained by a recognized religious body and has a congregation or following. The couple needs to apply for a marriage license with proof of age and identity and perform the ceremony within a specified time period (usually 30 days but sometimes 60). There is a customary period of a day between the application for a license and the allowance to perform the ceremony, but that can usually be waived. The ceremony is finalized with the signing of the marriage certificate by the witnesses and the officiant.

question: What does the text say about who can officiate marriages?

answer: The most common people who officiate marriages are civil officers like mayors, judges, magistrates, etc. The other common category of people who officiate marriages is clergy from the Catholic Church, Jewish Rabbis, etc. The category of clergy is somewhat vague though, as it requires the person to be ordained by a religious body with a congregation and followers. This allows for New York Society for Ethical Culture or Quakers (who believe every member is a minister) to officiate the marriage ceremony. Another strange idiosyncrasy is in Ohio, where the superintendent of the school for the deaf can conduct weddings. Finally, a legally questionable group who can officiate marriages are the ministers ordained by the Universal Life Church since the process is very easy (it's done online, anyone can apply, and the person becomes a minister by the next day). The UCL ministers can officiate marriages in Mississippi, for example, but they aren't allowed to in Virginia.

question: What does the text say about how to write wedding vows?


text:
 The Goomba's

This will be the year, I just know it. Sparky said this with the same enthusiasm he always did. I’ve got a feeling something great is right around the corner. You know that feeling, don't you Squirt? I don’t really feel much of anything replied his oversized, and slightly overweight friend. Yes, that is exactly it. I don’t feel much of anything right now either, which means…”Something big is coming”

The two continued walking down the brisk street of downtown New York, breathing in the cold winter air. Their innocuous voices repenting clouds of either hot air or cigar smoke. The sky was clear, and the streets were surprisingly dull. It was as if everyone had forgotten that it was the middle of the workweek. Maybe everyone had forgotten to set their alarms?

To Sparky and Squirt it never mattered what day it was. They were the employless types. They made their money through wit and street smarts. They could locate a deal or a "steal" through conversation and prying. They operated within the confines of their environment, much of which was considered illegal. They were taught these lessons at the Liquor store on the corner Weptsworth through life experiences.

Sparky was the lead man of their crew, and Squirt, well Squirt was the muscle. Together they made up quite the dynamic duo, and always felt that they were certainly due for their big break. The rest of their crew of goomba’s acted in similar fashion, just different industries. Collectively they were the suma cum laude of their block. With this came much responsibility for mischief.

“Hey Sparky, would ya look over there.” Both men peered across the street to see the peachy face of non other than Violet. Violet Verona was the daughter of Vincent Verona, tailor and father of 5 of the meanest Italian boys you’d ever met. 3 of which were in jail, 2 on their way up the high road of the mafia. With this came a lot of turmoil for the Verona family. Violet had left 2 summers earlier, and now seemed to be back in the swing of things.

She was dressed in large picot, covering all but the bottom half of her calves. Even in such a cape, anyone with a pencil in their front pocket could make good knowing the surprises sheathed underneath. “Well would ya look at that. Good eye Squirt, looks like Violet is back in the city. Man does she look class”

In awe the two men watched as she flipped the closed sign around, signifying to passerby’s that her fathers store was indeed open. Butterfly’s fluttering in their hearts the two gazed like chimpanzee's with their arms hanging low to their kneecaps, chin hunched over their chests. A gust of wind brought Sparky out of his gaze as their cigar ashes flew upwards burning they're perverting eyes.

Sparky, flinched brushing the black soot from his face, while Squirt lay fixated on Violet and the coffin like garment she wore. Underneath that coat lay weapons that could kill the will of the most confident of men. The two of them would happily lie dead in her trap if given the opportunity.

With exuberance Sparky bellowed out his signature cuckoo cuckoo call across the street. This was a playful thing he would do when growing up and was authentic to only him. To most who knew him, they found this sound amusing, while to others it sounded like that of a duck moaning in morning. Turning her head slowly Violet looked over her shoulder, meeting their gaze. She delivered an ingenious smile with a subtle wave.

In unison the two shmucks waved back to Violet giving her their hearts with a stair. “Violet’s back in town Squirt, things are looking up.” As the two crossed the uneasy streets of New York they approached Mr. Verona’s store with the precariousness you’d expect from two hoodlums in the neighborhood. As their crew motto stood, Goomba's were “always up to something, and never settled for nothing.”

title: [MF] The Goomba's

question: What is the setting of the story?

answer: It is winter in the streets of New York. The streets are cold enough to cause Sparky and Squirt's breath to create mist. The streets are surprisingly quiet for midweek.

question: Where do Sparky and Squirt work?

answer: Sparky and Squirt do not have jobs. They make their money through street smarts. Much of what they do is illegal.

question: What does the story say about the Verona family?

answer: Verona was the daughter of Vincent Verona, tailor and father of 5 of the meanest Italian boys you’d ever met. 3 of which were in jail, 2 on their way up the high road of the mafia. Violet had left 2 summers earlier and now seemed to be back in the swing of things.

question: What does the story say about Violet's mother?


text:
SALT LAKE CITY — Was it a hand wave or a middle finger? Did the bicyclist say "thank you" or something derogatory?

These are issues that are raised in a federal lawsuit filed Friday by a bicyclist who claims a Unified police officer ran him over because he mistakenly thought the cyclist had flipped him off.

Chad S. Lockwood, 53, said he was riding his bicycle about 10:35 a.m. Sunday in the Millcreek area near 2300 E. Evergreen Ave. (3435 South).

[Chad Lockwood and attorney Robert B. Sykes talk to members of the media about a civil rights complaint they are filing against Unified police officer Christopher Schroeder for excessive force and illegal detention or arrest, during a press conference at S]
Chad Lockwood and attorney Robert B. Sykes talk to members of the media about a civil rights complaint they are filing against Unified police officer Christopher Schroeder for excessive force and illegal detention or arrest, during a press conference at Sykes' office in Salt Lake City on Friday, Aug. 2, 2019. Lockwood claims Schroeder hit him with his vehicle while Lockwood was biking.
Kristin Murphy, Deseret News

According to the lawsuit, "Chad switched from the south side of Evergreen to the north side, with the intent of riding through the green light ahead of him on 2300 East, and riding on a bike path on the north side of Evergreen Avenue. Chad rode through the crosswalk area for pedestrians and proceeded through the intersection safely."

Unified police officer Christopher Schroeder was stopped at a red light at the intersection and "appeared to be waiting for Chad to cross and waved at him," the lawsuit states. Lockwood waved back. But because of a prior accident that left him with a deformed hand, Lockwood contends the officer mistook his wave for an obscene gesture.

Lockwood also said he said "thank you," to the officer. But Salt Lake County Sheriff Rosie Rivera said that according to the officer's report, Lockwood said something similar but vulgar. She said the officer's report does not mention anything about a hand gesture.

About 200 feet down the road, Lockwood claims Schroeder pulled up next to him with his patrol car. The next thing Lockwood remembers is being knocked to the ground and the officer out of his car and on top of him, the lawsuit states.

"It was the most shocking thing I’ve ever experienced in my life,” Lockwood said Friday. "That just doesn’t happen. … I was in no way a danger."

Rivera said her officer had turned on his overhead lights, but Lockwood kept going, and then resisted arrest once Schroeder got out of his patrol car. Lockwood crashed when he hit the curb of the sidewalk, according to police.

When Lockwood asked the officer why he hit him, Lockwood said the officer replied, "Bro, you hit the curb and fell off your bike," the lawsuit states.

[Chad Lockwood and attorney Robert B. Sykes talk to members of the media about a civil rights complaint they are filing against Unified police officer Christopher Schroeder for excessive force and illegal detention or arrest, during a press conference at S]
Chad Lockwood and attorney Robert B. Sykes talk to members of the media about a civil rights complaint they are filing against Unified police officer Christopher Schroeder for excessive force and illegal detention or arrest, during a press conference at Sykes' office in Salt Lake City on Friday, Aug. 2, 2019. Lockwood claims Schroeder hit him with his vehicle while Lockwood was biking.
Kristin Murphy, Deseret News

But Lockwood insists he did not hit the curb. He contends that he was wearing headphones and did not purposely ignore the officer, but Schroeder used his patrol car to perform something similar to a PIT manuever on him, knocking him to the ground. And then, he said the 6-foot, 300-pound officer "pounced" on him and hit him because he wouldn't put his hands behind his back.

"You’re breaking me, you’re breaking me, I’m handicapped," Lockwood said he screamed. "'Please, I’ll do anything you say, just get me up, help me.' And there was no having it."

An accident with a train 20 years ago resulted in Lockwood receiving a metal plate in his arm. He said he wasn't resisting arrest, he just could not physically move his arms the way the officer wanted him to, or get himself off the ground.

"I got hit by a train in ’96 and this was by far worse,” he said of the officer landing on him. "He said, ‘You should have stopped.'"

Rivera is backing her officer.

"I’ve read the report, and I stand by my officer. Unless you have some evidence to tell me anything different, I would back my officer in this situation,” she said. "Just because an officer is large doesn’t mean it’s excessive force because they are large. He was doing what he needed to do to take him into custody."

Lockwood and his attorney contend that Schroeder used excessive force by using his patrol car to stop the bicycle.

"He did it on purpose for sure because I ignored him completely and he was upset,” Lockwood said.

[Chad Lockwood waits to make a left-hand turn on State Street on his way home from a press conference at attorney Robert B. Sykes' office in Salt Lake City on Friday, Aug. 2, 2019. Lockwood and Sykes are filing a civil rights complaint against Unified poli]
Chad Lockwood waits to make a left-hand turn on State Street on his way home from a press conference at attorney Robert B. Sykes' office in Salt Lake City on Friday, Aug. 2, 2019. Lockwood and Sykes are filing a civil rights complaint against Unified police officer Christopher Schroeder for excessive force and illegal detention or arrest. Lockwood claims Schroeder hit him with his vehicle while Lockwood was biking.
Kristin Murphy, Deseret News

After being treated for his injuries at a local hospital, Lockwood and Sykes contend Lockwood was booked into the Salt Lake County Jail for investigation of charges related to the incident. Rivera said he was only booked on outstanding warrants. He was released the same day due to jail overcrowding, according to jail records. Rivera said that her officer has forwarded evidence to the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office to be screened for potential charges, including resisting arrest, failing to obey the command of an officer and running a red light.

The warrants were for misdemeanor charges of criminal mischief regarding an ongoing dispute Lockwood is having with his neighbor, according to charging documents. There was also a warrant out for his arrest for failing to appear in court for a speeding ticket, according to court records.

Lockwood claims Schroeder also tried to arrest him for having a stolen bicycle and heroin possession. Rivera said officers are screening possible charges of drug possession, but not for heroin. And the VIN on the bike did initially come back as being stolen out of Arizona, she said, so the officer had to sort that out.

Lockwood admits he may have ran a red light and drove against traffic on his bicycle, but said that did not justify how he was treated.

"There’s just no reason for the excessive force," he said. "There’s just no maybe. He was wrong, about everything."

"The reality of what happened in this case is that officer Schroeder lost his temper because he probably believed, incorrectly, that Chad had disrespected him by 'flipping him off,' and mouthing a vulgar expletive." the lawsuit says. "Although this did not happen, and what Chad did was quite innocent and considerate, officer Schroeder lost his temper, chased down Chad with his police vehicle and intentionally struck Chad and his bicycle with his vehicle in order to teach Chad a lesson in respect for police officers."

The sheriff noted that the officer remains on active duty, but she said she has asked internal affairs to take a look at the case.

The Unified Police Department does not equip all of its officers with body cameras. Rivera said there was no body camera or dashcam video of the incident.

Rivera said she didn't hear about any of the allegations until Sykes' press conference was announced. She also finds it disconcerting that a lawsuit was filed so quickly.

"For an attorney to be able to file a federal lawsuit within five days of an incident, we have not had enough time to even take a look at it,” she said.

"They have never contacted me. They have never contacted our internal affairs or the chief or the chief over the precinct that he works. So this is the first opportunity we’ve even had to take a look at the case. And that’s what’s kind of frustrating is that anyone can go file a lawsuit and bad-mouth an officer and say things an officer did without actually giving us an opportunity to take a look at the case," she said.

"If the officer did do something inappropriate or used excessive force, he will be held accountable. But we need the opportunity to take a look at it and he needs to be treated fairly. And that’s what frustrated me, too. In society nowadays, anyone can say anything about police."

question: Why was officer Schroeder potentially upset?

answer: He may have believed Lockwood flipped him off and cursed at him.

question: What did the police officer do that may qualify as excessive force?

answer: Used a pit maneuver in his police vehicle against the bicyclist to bring him down.

question: Why might Lockwood's waving of his hand have been interpreted as him flipping the officer off?

answer: Because Lockwood suffered an injury that left his hand mangled and possibly resembling "the bird."

question: Where does Salt Lake County Sheriff Rosie Rivera side in this case?

answer: Unequivocally in her officer's corner

question: Write a ~4 sentence summary.

answer: Chad Lockwood and attorney Robert B. Sykes talk to members of the media about a civil rights complaint they are filing against Unified police officer Christopher Schroeder for excessive force and illegal detention or arrest. Lockwood was riding his bike when he waved at the officer and said "thank you," but apparently was interpreted as flipping him off and saying "f*** you." The police officer conducted a pit maneuver with his vehicle against the bicyclist bringing him down. Because his hand and arm were mangled from an old injury, his gesture might have been misconstrued and his inability to move his arm behind his back seen as resisting arrest.


text:
“Here she is.”

The man stopped in the middle of long hallway and gestured toward a blue, heavy metal door encasing a viewing window at shoulder height and a hatch located slightly below it. I carefully approached the door and cautiously peered inside.

The room was austere with bare, white washed walls and a bedding area tucked into a corner that hardly offered much in terms of privacy. However, given the circumstances, things could be a lot worse as I recalled recent news reporting of immigrants at another nearby border crossing that were housed in an open air encampment under a highway overpass.

She sat on the floor, left off-center, casually grabbing her knees with one arm and the other dangling lazily to the side. She had beautiful round brown eyes, deeply set in a kind-looking but solemn face framed by short black hair. Her eyes glimmered with life reflective of her youth but her gaze itself was dull, staring into the distance far beyond the confines of the interior walls of her current enclosure.

Suddenly she snapped out of her dreamlike state and slowly turned around to pick something up from the floor behind her, and as she turned, I noticed how the profile of her abdomen had a developed a slight yet distinct bulge indicative of gestation.

“I know she’s young. Ten years at the most. Do you think she knows? About the baby, I mean.”

“Oh, she knows alright. Just watch.”

The object she had picked up from the floor appeared to be a bundle of slightly discolored and worn out rags or towels with fuzz and threads protruding in random directions. She tucked the bundle into the fold of one arms and made a soft cooing sound as she nuzzled her face against it.

“What will she do?”

“That is not her decision to make. Besides, even if we allow her to have it, she will not be permitted to keep it.”

I gasped. Horrified by his matter-of-fact statement.

“Don’t worry. She’s young. She can have more. Honestly, all they do is eat, sleep, defecate and copulate.”

I opened my mouth in objection but was instantly interrupted before I could utter a single word.

“Oh, it’s true. Here… Let me show you.”

He retrieved something from his pocket, dropped it into the hatch and closed it. The sound of the hatch closing echoed up and down the surrounding hallway and it instantly got her attention. She immediately dropped her bundle rags to the floor and started for the door. As she approached the door, she noticed our faces peering at her through the viewing window and our eyes connected. She glared back at me with such ferociousness and resentment that I almost expected the very air separating us to spark and ignite. A split second later she abruptly leapt forward grabbing parts of the door, bared her teeth and hissed directly at me, covering the window with condensation from her breath. I recoiled backwards in fear.  I could hear my heart pounding in my ears and felt the rush of adrenaline as I was reminded how absolutely terrifying chimpanzees can be when threatened.

title: [RF] Border Separation

question: Which creature is this story about?

answer: Chimpanzees.

question: How old is the female?

answer: 10 years at the most.

question: What is different about this female?

answer: She is pregnant.

question: What indicates the female chimp would not be a good mother?

answer: She abandons the blanket she's been pretending is a baby and coddling to run after food.


text:
I sat outside of the kitchen door, ass firmly planted on the cold concrete steps that led up to the service entrance. It was raining out, so I had to Macgyver an umbrella against the loose steel railing to protect my cigarette. It had taken a few soaking tries, but I needed this damn thing.

We had just gotten through the Friday night dinner rush. Three hours of nonstop tickets, endless re-makes, shouting, whining, crying. Servers fucking up tickets. Cooks fucking up orders. The manager going red from screaming at us.

I raised a hand to my cheek and wiped some of the rain away.

The fucking manager. I was on fry. We had a bad string of sendbacks: Turns out the middle fryer hadn't been cleaned last night, and shit was coming out black.

I'm not sure how that's my fault. Well, I guess I should have paid attention, but I'm not the one cleaning the damn things.

I had tried to explain that, as eloquently as one can explain something with hot food in one hand, a fryer handle in the other, and a towering kitchen manager shouting and spraying sweat on me from about three inches away.

I took another long pull on my cigarette. The others usually came out here after a rush. Three or four of us, not to mention one or two servers, maybe a bartender, even a manager or two.

But everyone else had stayed inside, and it wasn't just the rain.

I had gotten reamed out pretty fucking hard, and this time I had given some shit back. I had thrown things. I mean, they threw things first, but they were management. We had all seen what Gordon Ramsey does to cooks on TV. The cooks don't get to come back, they just have to take it.

Tonight I hadn't taken it, and my current seclusion was a clue that maybe that wasn't the best option.

Fuck, I was going to get fired.

I tried not to think of it. I brought my cigarette up again and yelped when it burned my fingers.
Felt like I had just lit the fucker.

I reached down to fish another out when my fingers brushed against my phone. My hand froze, time slowing down.

I didn't want to get fired, but...

I pulled the phone out, flicking it on and pulling up the browser. It was still on my bank account, just like it had been the past three days

I re-entered the password, checking my balance.

$47,349.43.

I forced myself to swallow, letting out a shuddering breath. $47 grand.

I checked the deposits again.

Work paycheck, work paycheck, work paycheck. Each one around $900, bi-weekly.

No where in the deposits did it mention the $40,000 I had received three days ago, nor the $10,000 three days before that.

Hand trembling, I tapped the little rectangle to pull away from my bank account. I swiped to my pictures.

Me and my work buddies out drinking last night. One of the servers getting way too close to one of the bartenders. Phil, the dish guy, with a bunch of shots in front of him. Probably spent a week's pay out with us last night.

I kept swiping.

Abigail, her long, dark hair spilling out from a little baseball cap. Her mother, Jane, stood with her, smiling. They were at a baseball game somewhere. Jane hated my guts, but she wasn't going to keep our daughter's happiness from me.

I swiped again.

My brother, holding a fish up in the middle of a big white boat, somewhere in the Atlantic.

A woman I didn't know, her hair short and sandy blonde. An older man with a beer to his lips.

My dad, laying in a hospital bed, making a stupid face as my sister posed solemnly next to him. I couldn't help but grin at that old man.

A few more swipes, mostly photos of people I didn't know. A little guy with big muscles standing by my fryer and grinning, three twenty-something year old women sticking their tongues out, drinks in hand. Two guys with their arms around my neck, all three of us dressed in tuxedos.

The door behind me slammed, announcing a new arrival. I twisted back to look up, hoping it wasn't the kitchen manager.

Somehow, it was worse.

The man behind me was about six feet tall, dressed in a black business suit with a matching bowler. He didn't carry an umbrella but his clothes seemed to be shrugging off the rain, sending it splashing away whenever it touched the fabric.

“Awful day for a smoke, Mr. Wilson.” He noted, coming over to sit beside me.

“Awful day for anything.” I replied, trying to keep the tremor from my voice.

“Were you pleased with our last gift?” He asked casually, moving one white-gloved hand towards my phone and flicking through it. He brought up my account again.

“Yes, sir. Thank you very much. It was quite generous.”

He flashed a toothy smile at me, leaning closer.

“You're taking a lot more pictures lately.”

I swallowed but didn't reply.

“Why is that?” He continued.

“Please...” I whispered, looking down. “I don't need any more. You've been so generous, but... no more.”

“It doesn't work that way, John.”

My fist clenched. I wanted to strike him, but I knew that would be pointless. The rain couldn't touch him. I didn't even know what he was.

“But it's not all bad!” The man said cheerily. He tapped my screen again. “You're going to be rich! Are you ready?”
“No...” But I knew I didn't have a choice.

I felt a hand on my hand, it slid up slowly to the back of my head. There was a white flash. A searing pain in the back of my skull. I whimpered pitifully.

I saw something on the edge of my peripheral vision, a glowing green light. It winked out as I turned to look at it.

The man smiled at me warmly, moving his hand back to my phone and tapping on the screen twice.
My balance blurred, then updated.

$247,349.43.

I felt my throat go dry. That was so much money. An unbelievable amount. I could buy Abigail anything she wanted.

Then the panic hit me.

I clicked back to my photos.

Me and my co-workers, the server and bartender, the dishwasher, Abigail and her mother, my brother and the fish. I kept swiping.

More faces I didn't know. The woman with short hair, the man with the beer, my sister posing solemnly next to some goofy old man in a hospital bed.

title: [UR] Equivalent Exchange

question: Summarize the emotions the narrator goes through as he contemplates the assignment he's been performing for the stranger that kept giving him money.

answer:
The narrator was anxious that he was going to get fired for talking back at his manager. He is frustrated that someone else's incompetence and failure to clean the middle fryer at the restaurant has caused a minor incident that hampered his work. He felt angry for having to take the blame for the mishap.
The narrator was apprehensive while looking at the money in his bank account. He was scared when the stranger approached him and asked if he was pleased about the money deposits. He begged the stranger to stop sending him money.

question: Why didn't the narrator report the stranger to the police?


text:
DILLON COUNTY is a county located in the U.S. state of South Carolina. As of the 2010 census, the county's population was 32,062.[1] The county seat is Dillon.[2] Founded in 1910 from a portion of Marion County, both Dillon County and the city of Dillon were named for prosperous local citizen James W. Dillon (1826-1913), an Irishman who settled there and led a campaign to bring the railroad into the community. The result of this effort was the construction of the Wilson Short Cut Railroad, which later became part of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad, and brought greater prosperity to the area by directly linking Dillon County to the national network of railroads.[3]

Geography

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the county has a total area of , of which is land and (0.4%) is water.[4] It is the fifth-smallest county in South Carolina by area.

Adjacent counties

-   Robeson County, North Carolina - north
-   Columbus County, North Carolina - north
-   Horry County - east
-   Marion County - south
-   Florence County - southwest
-   Marlboro County - west

Major highways

-   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -

Demographics

2000 census

As of the census[5] of 2000, there were 30,722 people, 11,199 households, and 8,063 families living in the county. The population density was 76 people per square mile (29/km²). There were 12,679 housing units at an average density of 31 per square mile (12/km²). The racial makeup of the county was 47% White, 49% Black or African American, 2.21% Native American, 0.34% Asian, 0.03% Pacific Islander, 0.99% from other races, and 0.70% from two or more races. 1.75% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race.

There were 11,199 households, out of which 34.60% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 44.80% were married couples living together, 22.30% had a female householder with no husband present, and 28.00% were non-families. 25.10% of all households were made up of individuals, and 9.90% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.71 and the average family size was 3.24.

In the county, the population was spread out, with 29.10% under the age of 18, 9.50% from 18 to 24, 27.50% from 25 to 44, 22.40% from 45 to 64, and 11.50% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 34 years. For every 100 females there were 87.40 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 81.60 males.

The median income for a household in the county was $26,630, and the median income for a family was $32,690. Males had a median income of $26,908 versus $18,007 for females. The per capita income for the county was $13,272. About 19.40% of families and 24.20% of the population were below the poverty line, including 33.30% of those under age 18 and 26.60% of those age 65 or over.

2010 census

As of the 2010 United States Census, there were 32,062 people, 11,923 households, and 8,342 families living in the county.[6] The population density was . There were 13,742 housing units at an average density of .[7] The racial makeup of the county was 48.0% white, 46.1% black or African American, 2.5% American Indian, 0.2% Asian, 1.5% from other races, and 1.6% from two or more races. Those of Hispanic or Latino origin made up 2.6% of the population.[8] In terms of ancestry, 13.5% were American, 6.5% were English, and 5.4% were Irish.[9]

Of the 11,923 households, 36.5% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 40.2% were married couples living together, 23.9% had a female householder with no husband present, 30.0% were non-families, and 26.5% of all households were made up of individuals. The average household size was 2.65 and the average family size was 3.20. The median age was 36.7 years.[10]

The median income for a household in the county was $26,818 and the median income for a family was $34,693. Males had a median income of $31,973 versus $22,100 for females. The per capita income for the county was $14,684. About 26.2% of families and 30.5% of the population were below the poverty line, including 43.8% of those under age 18 and 23.7% of those age 65 or over.[11]

Communities

Cities

-   Dillon (county seat)

Town

-   Lake View
-   Latta

Unincorporated communities

-   Bass Crossroads
-   Berrys Crossroads
-   Bingham
-   Bronson Crossroads
-   Bunker Hill
-   Carmichael Crossroads
-   Carolina
-   Carter Landing
-   Centerville
-   Cotton Valley
-   Dalcho
-   Dothan
-   Dunbarton
-   Five Forks
-   Floydale
-   Fork
-   Forrest Hills
-   Gaddys Crossroads
-   Gaddys Mill
-   Galavon
-   Hamer
-   Hayestown
-   High Hill Crossroads
-   Judson
-   Kemper
-   Kentyre
-   Linkside
-   Little Rock
-   Mallory
-   Mallory Beach
-   Manning Crossroads
-   May Hilltop
-   McCormick Crossroads
-   Minturn
-   Mount Calvary
-   Newtown
-   Oak Grove
-   Oakland Crossroads
-   Oliver Crossroads
-   Pittman Corner
-   Riverdale
-   Selma
-   Sinclair Crossroads
-   South of the Border
-   Squires
-   Squires Curve
-   Temperance Hill

Attractions

-   South of the Border
-   Little Pee Dee State Park
-   Dillon County Museum

Politics

  Year                               Republican                                  Democratic                                  Third parties
  ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
  style=“text-align:center;” |2016   style=“text-align:center;” |48.2% _5,637_   style=“text-align:center;” |49.9% _5,834_   1.9% _227_
  style=“text-align:center;” |2012   style=“text-align:center;” |41.6% _5,427_   style=“text-align:center;” |57.7% _7,523_   0.7% _85_
  style=“text-align:center;” |2008   style=“text-align:center;” |43.8% _5,874_   style=“text-align:center;” |55.2% _7,408_   1.0% _135_
  style=“text-align:center;” |2004   style=“text-align:center;” |46.6% _4,301_   style=“text-align:center;” |52.3% _4,832_   1.1% _102_
  style=“text-align:center;” |2000   style=“text-align:center;” |44.2% _3,975_   style=“text-align:center;” |54.8% _4,930_   0.9% _85_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1996   style=“text-align:center;” |39.3% _2,774_   style=“text-align:center;” |56.5% _3,992_   4.2% _295_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1992   style=“text-align:center;” |38.1% _3,575_   style=“text-align:center;” |52.8% _4,953_   9.2% _862_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1988   style=“text-align:center;” |53.7% _3,793_   style=“text-align:center;” |46.0% _3,251_   0.4% _25_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1984   style=“text-align:center;” |57.7% _4,646_   style=“text-align:center;” |41.7% _3,360_   0.6% _44_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1980   style=“text-align:center;” |42.3% _3,385_   style=“text-align:center;” |56.5% _4,518_   1.2% _97_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1976   style=“text-align:center;” |33.1% _2,527_   style=“text-align:center;” |66.6% _5,089_   0.3% _23_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1972   style=“text-align:center;” |72.3% _4,364_   style=“text-align:center;” |26.6% _1,604_   1.1% _66_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1968   style=“text-align:center;” |35.7% _2,396_   style=“text-align:center;” |32.5% _2,178_   31.8% _2,132_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1964   style=“text-align:center;” |49.7% _2,742_   style=“text-align:center;” |50.3% _2,773_   style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1960   style=“text-align:center;” |35.2% _1,439_   style=“text-align:center;” |64.8% _2,652_   style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1956   style=“text-align:center;” |10.5% _313_     style=“text-align:center;” |63.0% _1,879_   26.5% _792_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1952   style=“text-align:center;” |48.3% _1,473_   style=“text-align:center;” |51.7% _1,578_   style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1948   style=“text-align:center;” |1.3% _24_       style=“text-align:center;” |44.9% _808_     53.8% _968_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1944   style=“text-align:center;” |2.7% _27_       style=“text-align:center;” |86.1% _864_     11.3% _113_
  style=“text-align:center;” |1940   style=“text-align:center;” |2.8% _25_       style=“text-align:center;” |97.2% _868_     style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1936   style=“text-align:center;” |0.5% _5_        style=“text-align:center;” |99.6% _1,104_   style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1932   style=“text-align:center;” |2.0% _20_       style=“text-align:center;” |98.0% _998_     style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1928   style=“text-align:center;” |3.6% _21_       style=“text-align:center;” |96.4% _558_     style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1924   style=“text-align:center;” |0.5% _3_        style=“text-align:center;” |99.5% _598_     style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1920   style=“text-align:center;” |0.5% _5_        style=“text-align:center;” |99.5% _1,003_   style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1916   style=“text-align:center;” |0.0% _0_        style=“text-align:center;” |100.0% _972_    style="text-align:center;|
  style=“text-align:center;” |1912   style=“text-align:center;” |0.3% _2_        style=“text-align:center;” |98.1% _680_     1.6% _11_

  : PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS RESULTS[12]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

title: Dillon County, South Carolina

question: What does the text say about local tourist attractions?

answer: The text lists three attractions: South of the Border, Little Pee Dee State Park, and Dillon County Museum. The tourism value of these locations is not addressed.

question: What does the text say about South Dakota?

question: What does the text say about the names of major highways?

question: Summarize the founding of Dillon County.

answer: Dillon County, along with the city of Dillon within, were founded in 1910 from part of Marion County. It was named for a local citizen, prosperous Irish settler James W. Dillon. Dillon, who died in 1913, spearheaded the construction of the local railroad, which brought greater prosperity to the area by directly linking Dillon County to the national network of railroads.