The U.S. Congress is one step closer to averting a government shutdown Thursday after the U.S. House easily passed a $1.3 trillion spending plan that would end months of the government operating under short-term spending bills. The measure, approved by a 256-167 vote, now goes to the Senate, which has until midnight Friday to approve it and avert the year's third government closure. The massive bipartisan bill would keep the government funded until the end of September. Lawmakers had just hours to read the nearly 2,200-page bill released Wednesday night. Under Senate rules, a single senator can delay the vote but not stop it entirely. Senator Rand Paul has objected to the short time given to members to read the lengthy legislation. As of Thursday afternoon, the Senate was waiting to see how the vote would proceed, raising the prospect of another brief government shutdown. With midterm elections looming in November, the bill likely marks the final time Capitol Hill will consider major legislation this year. The measure would fulfill President Donald Trump's vow to boost military funding but provides funding for limited parts of his immigration agenda. The bill, which the White House said Trump supports, would give Trump a huge budget increase for the military, including a 2.4 percent pay raise for military personnel. "Today marks the beginning of a new era for the United States military," House Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement Thursday. "This legislation fulfills our pledge to rebuild the United States military." After extensive negotiations between Republicans and Democrats, the bill also provides $1.6 billion for physical barriers and 150 kilometers (93 miles) of a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border, short of the $25 billion Trump requested for the project he repeatedly touted on the campaign trail while pledging Mexico would pick up the cost. When did the house move closer to avoiding a stoppage? A. after a short break B. after approving a budget plan C. not enough information D. after meeting and discussion spending
B

(Question)
When people are huddled at a conference or professional event, the subject often turns to the value of failure and embracing feedback. "It is the key to self improvement!", many chant, channeling their inner self-help gurus, Sadly, many don't quite practice what they preach. Seeing the value in critical feedback and the lessons that failure can offer is a tough pill to swallow. For those confident in their capabilities, their social standing (in their companies/communities etc), and their abilities, the pill goes down a little easier. For those who experience imposter syndrome, feel insecure about their work, or are new in their careers, it is more difficult. Here's the thing: these are not binary personalities. While some people are overly confident about themselves, and some people are overly insecure about themselves, most people have a blend of both. As such, even the most confident people can feel the sting when they get critical feedback or screw something up. This is a guide with some things I have learned over the years about how to turn feedback and failure to your advantage. In my not-so-humble opinion, the perfect blend of a human being is confidence in their ability to execute and accomplish their goals, but with a healthy dose of awareness of their current limitations. Let's face it, overly confident people are often not just at risk of being swallowed up by ego, but can also lack the empathy to understand other folks they need to work with who don't share the same confidence. An understanding of our current limitations is healthy. When we understand we are not great at something, but we are eager to learn and improve, it opens us up to counsel and tuition. The confidence piece plays an important role in helping us to remember: "I might suck now, but I am going to learn and get better". When we have this in our heads it makes the journey more palatable: we know that our failure to succeed right now is temporary and it will improve. what is true about the writer? A. writer writes alot B. writer likes feedback C. not enough information D. writer is creative
(Answer)
B

Ques: Out of boredom, two scientists from the New Contagious Diseases Research Centre devised themselves a new game. One day, as a result of the suspension of a research project dealing with a dynamically mutating vaccine following the pattern of the eyesocket flu bacillus, they had absolutely nothing to do until the end of the day, because the boss didn't order them to wash test-tubes. They decided to play a game of hockey under the microscope. For a puck they used one of the millions of experimental bacillus, and one-arm pincettes, which as it happened also resembled hockey sticks, served as sticks. The bacillus was not happy with it at all. It wanted to rest after an exhausting task involving vaccine discouragement, and these whitecoats here planned to put it to work yet again. And this time the work was much more labor-intensive and even more exhausting than before, but the condition and health of the tired bacillus not as good as in the times of youth, about two hours ago. The scientists got excited. On a microscope slide they etched a hockey rink with laser, agreed on the rules, connected the microscope's camera to the big screen display and played until the morning. They had to change pucks several times, but that was fine, they had millions of them in stock. The next day they didn't have anything to do either and they continued to play. They even invited other colleagues and the popularity of the game was so huge they could afford to play it in a championship system. Soon, the games were joined by the guys from the car-repair garage next door. They were tough opponents and even tougher fans - they took from the lab and carried away with them several flasks and some equipment, as it turned out - to set up their own game station in pit number 5. The bacillus believes that A. The game was exhausting B. not enough information C. It is going to rest D. It will get to live back in nature
Ans: A

Yes. I had a stress heart attack five years ago. My step-son is a heroin addict. He will be on an opioid agonist for the rest of his life. His behavior mirrored the worst of what addicts do to a family. I was desperate to make a change, and my husband was desperate to save his son's life. That meant having to watch my husband support my step-son as he abused me and my children. Multiple criminal behaviors, many times the police came to the house, two convictions, long-term parole. Watching him threaten to kill me, kill his father, and kill his younger brother and sister. Add to that a very stress job situation with a new boss who decided he needed a new VP, but had no basis to terminate my employment, so instead was determined to make my work life a living hell on earth. So, yep, I had a heart attack. I'm still angry at everything that led up to the heart attack. I'm working really hard on forgiving my husband, forgiving my step-son, and the overwhelming guilt of my children seeing me as an accomplice to their abuse. I found a new job, and then had the pleasure of seeing my former boss fired by the Board of Directors. Since then I find I'm hyper-vigilant in issues of child abuse, worker abuse, addiction, lying and deceit (Trump trigger), and feeling somewhat betrayed by my husband. I honestly think if it had been one of my children doing the abusing, I would have found a way to put my child into long-term rehab. I would not have pretended it wasn't happening, or "not that bad" or other form of denial. As is, I lived through this hell for two years, and a part of me will never forgive for how it all came about. Probably TMI, sorry. Becky Becky found a new job: A. After she had a heart attack. B. not enough information C. Before she had a heart attack. D. While she was recovering from the heart attack.
A