gaussalgo/Canard_Wiki-augmented huggingface dataset:
Plato

Context: The precise relationship between Plato and Socrates remains an area of contention among scholars. Plato makes it clear in his Apology of Socrates that he was a devoted young follower of Socrates. In that dialogue, Socrates is presented as mentioning Plato by name as one of those youths close enough to him to have been corrupted, if he were in fact guilty of corrupting the youth, and questioning why their fathers and brothers did not step forward to testify against him if he was indeed guilty of such a crime (33d-34a). Later, Plato is mentioned along with Crito, Critobolus, and Apollodorus as offering to pay a fine of 30 minas on Socrates' behalf, in lieu of the death penalty proposed by Meletus (38b). In the Phaedo, the title character lists those who were in attendance at the prison on Socrates' last day, explaining Plato's absence by saying, "Plato was ill". (Phaedo 59b) Plato never speaks in his own voice in his dialogues. In the Second Letter, it says, "no writing of Plato exists or ever will exist, but those now said to be his are those of a Socrates become beautiful and new" (341c); if the Letter is Plato's, the final qualification seems to call into question the dialogues' historical fidelity. In any case, Xenophon and Aristophanes seem to present a somewhat different portrait of Socrates from the one Plato paints. Some have called attention to the problem of taking Plato's Socrates to be his mouthpiece, given Socrates' reputation for irony and the dramatic nature of the dialogue form. Aristotle attributes a different doctrine with respect to Forms to Plato and Socrates (Metaphysics 987b1-11). Aristotle suggests that Socrates' idea of forms can be discovered through investigation of the natural world, unlike Plato's Forms that exist beyond and outside the ordinary range of human understanding. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How was Plato corrupted?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Plato

Context: The precise relationship between Plato and Socrates remains an area of contention among scholars. Plato makes it clear in his Apology of Socrates that he was a devoted young follower of Socrates. In that dialogue, Socrates is presented as mentioning Plato by name as one of those youths close enough to him to have been corrupted, if he were in fact guilty of corrupting the youth, and questioning why their fathers and brothers did not step forward to testify against him if he was indeed guilty of such a crime (33d-34a). Later, Plato is mentioned along with Crito, Critobolus, and Apollodorus as offering to pay a fine of 30 minas on Socrates' behalf, in lieu of the death penalty proposed by Meletus (38b). In the Phaedo, the title character lists those who were in attendance at the prison on Socrates' last day, explaining Plato's absence by saying, "Plato was ill". (Phaedo 59b) Plato never speaks in his own voice in his dialogues. In the Second Letter, it says, "no writing of Plato exists or ever will exist, but those now said to be his are those of a Socrates become beautiful and new" (341c); if the Letter is Plato's, the final qualification seems to call into question the dialogues' historical fidelity. In any case, Xenophon and Aristophanes seem to present a somewhat different portrait of Socrates from the one Plato paints. Some have called attention to the problem of taking Plato's Socrates to be his mouthpiece, given Socrates' reputation for irony and the dramatic nature of the dialogue form. Aristotle attributes a different doctrine with respect to Forms to Plato and Socrates (Metaphysics 987b1-11). Aristotle suggests that Socrates' idea of forms can be discovered through investigation of the natural world, unlike Plato's Forms that exist beyond and outside the ordinary range of human understanding. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Besides being about Greek philosophy, are there any other interesting aspects about the article on Plato and Socrates?
Answer: Plato never speaks in his own voice in his dialogues.
Plato

Context: The precise relationship between Plato and Socrates remains an area of contention among scholars. Plato makes it clear in his Apology of Socrates that he was a devoted young follower of Socrates. In that dialogue, Socrates is presented as mentioning Plato by name as one of those youths close enough to him to have been corrupted, if he were in fact guilty of corrupting the youth, and questioning why their fathers and brothers did not step forward to testify against him if he was indeed guilty of such a crime (33d-34a). Later, Plato is mentioned along with Crito, Critobolus, and Apollodorus as offering to pay a fine of 30 minas on Socrates' behalf, in lieu of the death penalty proposed by Meletus (38b). In the Phaedo, the title character lists those who were in attendance at the prison on Socrates' last day, explaining Plato's absence by saying, "Plato was ill". (Phaedo 59b) Plato never speaks in his own voice in his dialogues. In the Second Letter, it says, "no writing of Plato exists or ever will exist, but those now said to be his are those of a Socrates become beautiful and new" (341c); if the Letter is Plato's, the final qualification seems to call into question the dialogues' historical fidelity. In any case, Xenophon and Aristophanes seem to present a somewhat different portrait of Socrates from the one Plato paints. Some have called attention to the problem of taking Plato's Socrates to be his mouthpiece, given Socrates' reputation for irony and the dramatic nature of the dialogue form. Aristotle attributes a different doctrine with respect to Forms to Plato and Socrates (Metaphysics 987b1-11). Aristotle suggests that Socrates' idea of forms can be discovered through investigation of the natural world, unlike Plato's Forms that exist beyond and outside the ordinary range of human understanding. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Aside from Socrates idea of forms, did Aristotle have any other philosophies that related to Socrates?
Answer: Some have called attention to the problem of taking Plato's Socrates to be his mouthpiece, given Socrates' reputation for irony
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: What is the Franken amendment?
Answer: would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: How did Franken amendment proceed?
Answer: The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: What was interesting about the Franken amendment?
Answer: Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration.
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: What did Vitter do next?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: Who supported the bill?
Answer: all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: Besides the Republicans and the White House any other supporters or people against the Franken amendment?
Answer: Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration.
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: Was Democrats voting for passage considered controversial?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: How did the public feel about Franken amendment?
Answer: The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing,
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: In addition to been a bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration anything else notable about the Franken amendment?
Answer: Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting
David Vitter

Context: In October 2009, the Senate passed Democratic Senator Al Franken's amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would forbid federal contractors from forcing victims of sexual assault, battery and discrimination to submit to binding arbitration (where a third-party typically chosen by the contractor adjudicates) and thereby prohibiting them from going to court. The impetus for the amendment came from the story of Jamie Leigh Jones who alleged that she was drugged and gang-raped by employees of Halliburton/KBR, a federal contractor. The amendment passed 68 to 30 with all opposition coming from Republicans including Vitter (all four female Republicans, six other Republicans and all present Democrats voted for passage). Vitter's 2010 Democratic Senatorial opponent Charlie Melancon criticized Vitter for his vote saying, "David Vitter has refused to explain why he voted to allow taxpayer-funded companies to sweep rape charges under the rug. We can only guess what his reasons were." However, The Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker argued that the 30 senators were being "unfairly smeared for doing the harder thing, maybe even for the right reasons." Republican senators said they voted against it because it was unenforceable, a position also taken by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Obama administration. However, the DOD and the White House stated they agreed with the intent of the legislation and suggested it would be better if it was broadened to prohibit the use of arbitration in cases of sexual assault for any business contract, not just federal contractors. Senators explained their vote against the legislation by saying it was a political attack on Halliburton and that the Senate shouldn't regulate contracts. The latter argument is countered with many examples of similar restrictions on contractors such as discrimination, bonuses and health care. Others felt it was unconstitutional and that arbitration is useful in resolving disputes, often faster, privately and cheaper. Later, a Baton Rouge rape survivor confronted Vitter at a town hall meeting saying, "[it] meant everything to me that I was able to put the person who attacked me behind bars ... How can you support a law that tells a rape victim that she does not have the right to defend herself?" Vitter replied, "The language in question did not say that in any way shape or form." CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did the Franken amendment affect Vitter's political career?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Simple Minds

Context: The next record, Sparkle in the Rain, was produced by Steve Lillywhite and released in February 1984. It gave rise to successful singles like "Waterfront" (which hit No. 1 in a few European countries) and "Speed Your Love to Me" and "Up on the Catwalk". Sparkle in the Rain topped the charts in the UK and hit the Top 20 in several other countries (including Canada, where it reached No. 13). In 1984, Jim Kerr married Chrissie Hynde from the Pretenders (who renamed herself Christine Kerr). Simple Minds did a North American tour where they played as headliners supported by China Crisis during the Canadian leg and in support of the Pretenders in the US while Hynde was pregnant with Kerr's daughter. The marriage lasted until 1990. Despite the band's new-found popularity in the UK, Europe, Canada and Australia, Simple Minds remained essentially unknown in the US. The band's UK releases on Arista were not picked up by Arista USA who had 'right of first refusal' for their releases. The 1985 film The Breakfast Club broke Simple Minds into the US market, when the band achieved their only No. 1 U.S. pop hit in April 1985 with the film's closing track, "Don't You (Forget About Me)". The song was written by Keith Forsey and Steve Schiff; Forsey offered the song to Billy Idol and Bryan Ferry before Simple Minds agreed to record it. The song soon became a chart-topper in many other countries around the world. At around this point, the camaraderie that had fuelled Simple Minds began to unravel, and over the next ten years the band's line-up underwent frequent changes. Jim Kerr subsequently recalled "We were knackered. We were desensitized. The band started to fracture. We were lads who had grown up together, we were meant to grow together, politically, spiritually and artistically. But we were getting tired with each other. There was an element of the chore creeping in. We were coasting and this whole other thing was a challenge." The first casualty was bassist Derek Forbes, who was beginning to squabble with Kerr. Forbes began failing to turn up for rehearsals, and was dismissed. Forbes remained in touch with the band (and soon reunited with another former Simple Minds bandmate, drummer Brian McGee, in Propaganda). Forbes was replaced by former Brand X bass player John Giblin (who owned the band's rehearsal space and was a session musician who had worked with Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush). Giblin made his debut with Simple Minds at Live Aid in Philadelphia, where the band performed "Don't You (Forget About Me)", a new track called "Ghost Dancing" and "Promised You a Miracle". Simple Minds were the first band to be approached to play the Philadelphia leg of Live Aid. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What is the story of the song Sparkle in the Rain?
Answer: Sparkle in the Rain, was produced by Steve Lillywhite and released in February 1984.
Simple Minds

Context: The next record, Sparkle in the Rain, was produced by Steve Lillywhite and released in February 1984. It gave rise to successful singles like "Waterfront" (which hit No. 1 in a few European countries) and "Speed Your Love to Me" and "Up on the Catwalk". Sparkle in the Rain topped the charts in the UK and hit the Top 20 in several other countries (including Canada, where it reached No. 13). In 1984, Jim Kerr married Chrissie Hynde from the Pretenders (who renamed herself Christine Kerr). Simple Minds did a North American tour where they played as headliners supported by China Crisis during the Canadian leg and in support of the Pretenders in the US while Hynde was pregnant with Kerr's daughter. The marriage lasted until 1990. Despite the band's new-found popularity in the UK, Europe, Canada and Australia, Simple Minds remained essentially unknown in the US. The band's UK releases on Arista were not picked up by Arista USA who had 'right of first refusal' for their releases. The 1985 film The Breakfast Club broke Simple Minds into the US market, when the band achieved their only No. 1 U.S. pop hit in April 1985 with the film's closing track, "Don't You (Forget About Me)". The song was written by Keith Forsey and Steve Schiff; Forsey offered the song to Billy Idol and Bryan Ferry before Simple Minds agreed to record it. The song soon became a chart-topper in many other countries around the world. At around this point, the camaraderie that had fuelled Simple Minds began to unravel, and over the next ten years the band's line-up underwent frequent changes. Jim Kerr subsequently recalled "We were knackered. We were desensitized. The band started to fracture. We were lads who had grown up together, we were meant to grow together, politically, spiritually and artistically. But we were getting tired with each other. There was an element of the chore creeping in. We were coasting and this whole other thing was a challenge." The first casualty was bassist Derek Forbes, who was beginning to squabble with Kerr. Forbes began failing to turn up for rehearsals, and was dismissed. Forbes remained in touch with the band (and soon reunited with another former Simple Minds bandmate, drummer Brian McGee, in Propaganda). Forbes was replaced by former Brand X bass player John Giblin (who owned the band's rehearsal space and was a session musician who had worked with Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush). Giblin made his debut with Simple Minds at Live Aid in Philadelphia, where the band performed "Don't You (Forget About Me)", a new track called "Ghost Dancing" and "Promised You a Miracle". Simple Minds were the first band to be approached to play the Philadelphia leg of Live Aid. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Sparkle in the Rain win any awards?
Answer: Sparkle in the Rain topped the charts in the UK and hit the Top 20 in several other countries
Simple Minds

Context: The next record, Sparkle in the Rain, was produced by Steve Lillywhite and released in February 1984. It gave rise to successful singles like "Waterfront" (which hit No. 1 in a few European countries) and "Speed Your Love to Me" and "Up on the Catwalk". Sparkle in the Rain topped the charts in the UK and hit the Top 20 in several other countries (including Canada, where it reached No. 13). In 1984, Jim Kerr married Chrissie Hynde from the Pretenders (who renamed herself Christine Kerr). Simple Minds did a North American tour where they played as headliners supported by China Crisis during the Canadian leg and in support of the Pretenders in the US while Hynde was pregnant with Kerr's daughter. The marriage lasted until 1990. Despite the band's new-found popularity in the UK, Europe, Canada and Australia, Simple Minds remained essentially unknown in the US. The band's UK releases on Arista were not picked up by Arista USA who had 'right of first refusal' for their releases. The 1985 film The Breakfast Club broke Simple Minds into the US market, when the band achieved their only No. 1 U.S. pop hit in April 1985 with the film's closing track, "Don't You (Forget About Me)". The song was written by Keith Forsey and Steve Schiff; Forsey offered the song to Billy Idol and Bryan Ferry before Simple Minds agreed to record it. The song soon became a chart-topper in many other countries around the world. At around this point, the camaraderie that had fuelled Simple Minds began to unravel, and over the next ten years the band's line-up underwent frequent changes. Jim Kerr subsequently recalled "We were knackered. We were desensitized. The band started to fracture. We were lads who had grown up together, we were meant to grow together, politically, spiritually and artistically. But we were getting tired with each other. There was an element of the chore creeping in. We were coasting and this whole other thing was a challenge." The first casualty was bassist Derek Forbes, who was beginning to squabble with Kerr. Forbes began failing to turn up for rehearsals, and was dismissed. Forbes remained in touch with the band (and soon reunited with another former Simple Minds bandmate, drummer Brian McGee, in Propaganda). Forbes was replaced by former Brand X bass player John Giblin (who owned the band's rehearsal space and was a session musician who had worked with Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush). Giblin made his debut with Simple Minds at Live Aid in Philadelphia, where the band performed "Don't You (Forget About Me)", a new track called "Ghost Dancing" and "Promised You a Miracle". Simple Minds were the first band to be approached to play the Philadelphia leg of Live Aid. CANNOTANSWER

Question: In addition to the chart topping song Sparkle in the Rain, is there anything else interesting about the band that recorded it?
Answer: Simple Minds did a North American tour where they played as headliners
Simple Minds

Context: The next record, Sparkle in the Rain, was produced by Steve Lillywhite and released in February 1984. It gave rise to successful singles like "Waterfront" (which hit No. 1 in a few European countries) and "Speed Your Love to Me" and "Up on the Catwalk". Sparkle in the Rain topped the charts in the UK and hit the Top 20 in several other countries (including Canada, where it reached No. 13). In 1984, Jim Kerr married Chrissie Hynde from the Pretenders (who renamed herself Christine Kerr). Simple Minds did a North American tour where they played as headliners supported by China Crisis during the Canadian leg and in support of the Pretenders in the US while Hynde was pregnant with Kerr's daughter. The marriage lasted until 1990. Despite the band's new-found popularity in the UK, Europe, Canada and Australia, Simple Minds remained essentially unknown in the US. The band's UK releases on Arista were not picked up by Arista USA who had 'right of first refusal' for their releases. The 1985 film The Breakfast Club broke Simple Minds into the US market, when the band achieved their only No. 1 U.S. pop hit in April 1985 with the film's closing track, "Don't You (Forget About Me)". The song was written by Keith Forsey and Steve Schiff; Forsey offered the song to Billy Idol and Bryan Ferry before Simple Minds agreed to record it. The song soon became a chart-topper in many other countries around the world. At around this point, the camaraderie that had fuelled Simple Minds began to unravel, and over the next ten years the band's line-up underwent frequent changes. Jim Kerr subsequently recalled "We were knackered. We were desensitized. The band started to fracture. We were lads who had grown up together, we were meant to grow together, politically, spiritually and artistically. But we were getting tired with each other. There was an element of the chore creeping in. We were coasting and this whole other thing was a challenge." The first casualty was bassist Derek Forbes, who was beginning to squabble with Kerr. Forbes began failing to turn up for rehearsals, and was dismissed. Forbes remained in touch with the band (and soon reunited with another former Simple Minds bandmate, drummer Brian McGee, in Propaganda). Forbes was replaced by former Brand X bass player John Giblin (who owned the band's rehearsal space and was a session musician who had worked with Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush). Giblin made his debut with Simple Minds at Live Aid in Philadelphia, where the band performed "Don't You (Forget About Me)", a new track called "Ghost Dancing" and "Promised You a Miracle". Simple Minds were the first band to be approached to play the Philadelphia leg of Live Aid. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Along with the album that contained Sparkle in the Rain, what other successful albums did the band that recorded that song have?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Simple Minds

Context: The next record, Sparkle in the Rain, was produced by Steve Lillywhite and released in February 1984. It gave rise to successful singles like "Waterfront" (which hit No. 1 in a few European countries) and "Speed Your Love to Me" and "Up on the Catwalk". Sparkle in the Rain topped the charts in the UK and hit the Top 20 in several other countries (including Canada, where it reached No. 13). In 1984, Jim Kerr married Chrissie Hynde from the Pretenders (who renamed herself Christine Kerr). Simple Minds did a North American tour where they played as headliners supported by China Crisis during the Canadian leg and in support of the Pretenders in the US while Hynde was pregnant with Kerr's daughter. The marriage lasted until 1990. Despite the band's new-found popularity in the UK, Europe, Canada and Australia, Simple Minds remained essentially unknown in the US. The band's UK releases on Arista were not picked up by Arista USA who had 'right of first refusal' for their releases. The 1985 film The Breakfast Club broke Simple Minds into the US market, when the band achieved their only No. 1 U.S. pop hit in April 1985 with the film's closing track, "Don't You (Forget About Me)". The song was written by Keith Forsey and Steve Schiff; Forsey offered the song to Billy Idol and Bryan Ferry before Simple Minds agreed to record it. The song soon became a chart-topper in many other countries around the world. At around this point, the camaraderie that had fuelled Simple Minds began to unravel, and over the next ten years the band's line-up underwent frequent changes. Jim Kerr subsequently recalled "We were knackered. We were desensitized. The band started to fracture. We were lads who had grown up together, we were meant to grow together, politically, spiritually and artistically. But we were getting tired with each other. There was an element of the chore creeping in. We were coasting and this whole other thing was a challenge." The first casualty was bassist Derek Forbes, who was beginning to squabble with Kerr. Forbes began failing to turn up for rehearsals, and was dismissed. Forbes remained in touch with the band (and soon reunited with another former Simple Minds bandmate, drummer Brian McGee, in Propaganda). Forbes was replaced by former Brand X bass player John Giblin (who owned the band's rehearsal space and was a session musician who had worked with Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush). Giblin made his debut with Simple Minds at Live Aid in Philadelphia, where the band performed "Don't You (Forget About Me)", a new track called "Ghost Dancing" and "Promised You a Miracle". Simple Minds were the first band to be approached to play the Philadelphia leg of Live Aid. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Along with recording chart topping songs, what else did the band that recorded Sparkle in the Rain do?
Answer: In 1984, Jim Kerr married Chrissie Hynde from the Pretenders