You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


House Republicans are quietly working to insert immigration legislation into the text of the Department of Defense authorization bill that would allow so-called DREAMers to obtain permanent legal residency by joining the military, Breitbart News has learned.

The language, which if successful would mark the first effort by House Republicans to provide any form of amnesty since the GOP took control of the House in 2010, has set off a panic among top immigration hawks that the effort could open an immigration Pandora’s box, paving the way for broader legislation.

Sophomore Republican Rep. Jeff Denham of California, a close ally of GOP Whip Kevin McCarthy, is leading the push to add the text of his “ENLIST Act” into the National Defense Authorization Act, which could come to the House floor as early as next month.

The effort, which has not previously been reported, is fairly advanced, and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte – who killed the proposal as an amendment to last year’s NDAA in a dramatic floor struggle – is weighing whether to approve the maneuver, which would circumvent his committee on one of its key matters of jurisdiction.

“We’re working on it,” Goodlatte said.

Meanwhile, top immigration hawks ripped the proposal as ill-conceived and a clear effort to build momentum for a comprehensive immigration bill.

“If we’re going to put out the bait, which is: come into the U.S., break in, so to speak, smuggle yourself into the military, put on the uniform of the United States, take an oath to uphold our Constitution, which may or may not mean anything to them, and now we’re going to reward you with citizenship — I think it’s just a bizarre thing to do, to reward people for breaking our laws. That’s what amnesty is,” said Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King.

“As soon as they raise their hand and say ‘I’m unlawfully present in the United States,’ we’re not going take your oath into the military, but we’re going to take your deposition and we have a bus for you to Tijuana. That’s the law. Are they going to then suspend the law that requires ICE to place people into removal proceedings that are unlawfully present?” he added.

Key proponents of a comprehensive immigration bill said they support Denham’s effort but that it’s not part of a broader push for amnesty.

“Remember, to get the big things done, we still have to deal with the 800 lb gorilla, which is border security, and the folks that are here. That fact remains. I think that part that he’s dealing with is a very important part but it’s relatively noncontroversial,” Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart told Breitbart News.

At the same time, though, GOP proponents of Gang of Eight-style legislation have recently begun to worry that the window for enacting immigration bills is rapidly closing, causing them to ramp up their behind-the-scenes efforts.

The reason: a growing certainty that President Obama is planning to enact amnesty by executive fiat, blowing up the chances of legislation for the rest of his presidency.

“It’s going to happen. He’s getting a lot of pressure, and he’s already told some people he’s going to. He’s told a bunch of people. I think he will. I think he has to,” said one senior member of Congress who asked that his name not be used.

“I’m hearing that he will do it by August. When that happens, it’s poof! The right will go off the rails, just because it’s unconstitutional — and they’ll be right about that stuff. They’ll fly off the rails, which will then get the Democrats [to close ranks]. And then it’s a presidential election. That’s coming, and as soon as that happens, it’s over,” the lawmaker said.

Denham, who was the first Republican to co-sponsor a Democratic immigration bill modeled after the Senate Gang-of-Eight legislation that passed last year, is pushing to add the language to the “base” NDAA bill – meaning it would not get its own vote.

A House Armed Services Committee aide said Chairman Buck McKeon hadn’t committed to including the language in the bill, which runs through his committee. McKeon, on his way to the House floor to vote, declined to comment.

But Denham has acquired significant support, including from a number of top conservatives that could help insulate him from the inevitable blow-up when the effort becomes public.

For example, a trio of South Carolina lawmakers, Reps. Jeff Duncan, Mick Mulvaney, and Trey Gowdy – the latter of whom is the chairman of the immigration subcommittee in Goodlatte’s Judiciary panel – have cosponsored the bill, as has McKeon.

Overall, the stand-alone bill has 42 cosponsors, including 24 Republicans. Also on the list: key chairmen like Rep. Jeff Miller, chairman of House Veterans Affairs Committee and Darrell Issa, chairman of the oversight panel. Two close allies of Speaker John Boehner, Reps. Devin Nunes (R-CA) and Steve Stivers (R-OH) are cosponsors, as is McCarthy.

The bill says illegal immigrants who have been in the U.S. since 2011 and came to the U.S. before they were 15 years old could enlist in the military, upon which he would receive permanent legal status.

The alien’s status would be revoked if he was discharged from the military on anything but “honorable” terms.

Legal permanent residents can apply for citizenship after residing in the U.S. for five years, or three if they are married to a U.S. Citizen.

“I support allowing children who were brought to this country through no fault of their own to put their lives on the line to serve our nation,” Denham said in an emailed statement to Breitbart News. “As a veteran, I served with immigrants and there is no better way to show your dedication to the United States and earn legal status than through the ultimate act of patriotism and commitment to our great country.”

During the 2013 House floor battle of the NDAA, Denham, with the backing of Majority Leader Eric Cantor, nearly succeeded in bringing the proposal to a vote as an amendment, which had cleared the House Rules Committee.

But at the last minute on the House floor, Goodlatte asserted his jurisdictional prerogative, killing the amendment.

Denham has worked to garner Goodlatte’s support this time around, but whether the Virginia Republican backs his play or not, it is likely to run into a buzzsaw of opposition from amnesty hawks on the lookout for anything that could resurrect a comprehensive bill.

“Amnesty for those illegally here should not be tucked away and hidden within the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA),” Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) said in an emailed statement. “When someone goes into the military they take an oath to protect and defend the United States of America. How can you raise your right hand and promise to defend the U.S. Constitution, while you are breaking the very laws you are sworn to defend?”

Alabama Republican Rep. Mo Brooks, a member of the Armed Services Committee, said the provision would jeopardize his support of the overall bill, which is one of the last “consensus” bills that typically garners a large bipartisan majority of support every year.

“How do you ensure that illegal aliens are loyal to America and not another country? Is it wise to entrust illegal aliens with questionable loyalties with America’s military secrets and weapons, including weapons of mass destruction? Is it enough that illegal aliens join America’s military, or should they be required to be honorably discharged or serve in combat before receiving amnesty for past illegal conduct? If I don’t have satisfactory answers to these and other questions, I will not support the National Defense Authorization Act that provides amnesty for illegal aliens,” Brooks said in a phone interview.

Brooks added that this could be a part of a bigger play by the amnesty activist community to either revive the Senate-passed “Gang of Eight” immigration bill, the similar “principles” from Speaker John Boehner, or something else like either of those.

“Everything by the illegal alien allies is part of a bigger play,” Brooks said, adding “There is always the risk that those in Washington that wish to betray the American people on behalf of illegal aliens will slip some language into some place that opens the floodgates to the detriment of American workers.”

Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, added in an email to Breitbart News that this could be a “Trojan Horse” for a larger amnesty.

“Harry Reid hasn’t even sent the Gang of Eight bill to the House, because he knows it would be struck down on procedural grounds alone – it raises revenue and only bills that start in the House can do that,” Krikorian said in an email. “By including an amnesty provision – however small – in the defense bill, the House leadership would create the opportunity for Reid to insert the Senate bill and send it to the House. It would become a Trojan Horse for amnesty.”

King, who came to learn of the secretive effort in an interview, said he will offer an amendment to the NDAA bill to strip it of the immigration provisions and work diligently to kill the proposal.

“I can’t let something like this happen. I can’t let it happen,” King said.