user: (Q).
WHITE HOUSE — U.S. President Donald Trump told a group of Republican lawmakers at a meeting Tuesday he backs a pair of their immigration bills under consideration in the House of Representatives. The meeting came as criticism continued over the Trump administration's policy of separating children from their parents and other adults at the southern border with Mexico as they illegally enter the United States. In his remarks to lawmakers, according to White House principal deputy press secretary Raj Shah, Trump "endorsed both House immigration bills that build the wall, close legal loopholes, cancel the visa lottery, curb so-called "chain migration," and solve the border crisis and family separation issue by allowing for family detention and removal." Republican Rep. Mark Meadows said Trump told the lawmakers they need to get something done on immigration "right away." House Homeland Security chairman Michael McCaul described the meeting with Trump as excellent, and confirmed that the president embraced the bill he and Congressman Bob Goodlatte are pushing. "The president is a thousand percent behind it," McCaul said. Asked whether the legislation would end the family separations, he responded, "They will not be separated if the bill passes," which he explained includes $18 billion for a border wall Trump desires. The House is set to vote later in the week on the two bills. It is not clear that either piece of legislation has enough votes to win passage. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday "all of the members of the Republican conference support a plan that keeps families together," adding he intends to ask Democrats to support the measure. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Tuesday, 28 percent of people said they support the policy, while 57 percent opposed it and the other 15 percent said they did not know. Trump administration officials have defended the policy. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pushed back at the negative media coverage in a Monday briefing, asserting... How will the bill's approval change after the end of the story? - More people will support it - not enough information - People will be against it - The bill may not have enough votes to pass
(A).
People will be against it


(Q).
Emily Nagoski is a badass Ph.D. who teaches human sexuality. She wrote a book – Come As You Are. Here’s a secret: the entire sexology community was eager to get their mitts on her book, it was very exciting. I can’t recall the last time there was that much hullabaloo about one book. In this important book, Dr Nagoski explains the interplay between sexual desire and stress — a concept that gives us a unique insight into what is going on in women’s sex lives. THE ACCELERATOR AND THE BRAKES This concept is a big deal. Think of the accelerator and the brake of a car. Each pedal acts independently from one another; you can press on the accelerator and you can stomp on the brakes. You can even press both at the same time. We don’t often press them at the same time – in fact, I was specifically told NOT to do that in driver’s ed – but anyhow, pretend you do. If you press both pedals all the way to the floor of the car, do you stop or go? That’s right, you STOP! Ok, now get this, your brake pedal is all the stress you have and your accelerator is your sexual desire. In the same way that the brake and accelerator of a car are two separate pedals yet also inextricably linked, so are your stress and your arousal. They are not the same things, yet have everything to do with one another. If your stress level is high, the majority of women have brakes that turn on, meaning, no matter how much sexy stuff is going on around her, she does not want sex at all. It is like she is pressing down the brakes and the accelerator at the same time. This isn’t the case for all women; some women have extremely sensitive brakes or extremely sensitive accelerators. And as Nagoski has found, while this correlation between stress and sexual desire is more common for women, men experience it too (just not quite as often). What happened after Emily Nagoski wrote her book? - The community was indifferent to it. - not enough information - The community hated it. - The entire sexology community loved it.
(A).
The entire sexology community loved it.


(Q).
When I was a patrolman working the 11PM to 7AM shift we received a phone call from a police department about 200 miles away in a neighboring state. It seems that department was holding one of our elderly residents who suffered from Alzheimer’s disease. Earlier in the day this gentlemen got the keys to his wife’s car and went for a ride. He quickly became confused and lost, so he just kept driving. The last 60 miles of his journey consisted of a low speed police chase. This poor man was scared to death and only pulled over when his vehicle ran out of gas. A request was made for us to send an officer to transport this gentleman the 200 miles back to his home. Because we were at minimum shift strength, the Sergeant determined that a family member would have to go and get him. I returned to work the following night and at nightly briefing, I asked if anyone had an update on the man’s transport. The sergeant said he hadn’t heard anything, which is when a junior patrolman spoke up. He said that man is from my neighborhood and after I got home from work this morning, I drove the 400 mile round trip and picked up my neighbor and returned him home to his wife. I just got back into town about an hour ago, so I changed into my uniform, and I’m here for my shift! I learned later that this patrolman had taken it upon himself to contact the man’s wife and the only vehicle they owned was out of gas 200 miles away. So this officer stayed up all day after a working the midnight shift and used his own car for the 400 mile trip. The officer said when he picked the man up at the station; he looked at the officer and smiled. He recognized his neighbor. This frail elderly man surely did not remember this selfless act of kindness. But it made a lasting impression on me, and on what it means to be a good cop. Who became confused and lost? - A man with Alzheimer's - The junior patrolman - The man's wife - not enough information
(A).


assistant: A man with Alzheimer's