Q: WHITE HOUSE A debate over patriotism and the right of free expression is continuing in the United States with President Donald Trump extending his criticism of professional athletes who decline to stand for the national anthem. The controversy was on display Tuesday afternoon on the White House South Lawn, where Trump briefly presided over a quickly reformatted celebration after his administration accused America's champion professional football team of attempting to turn the event into a "political stunt." Trump the previous day had disinvited the Philadelphia Eagles from what was to be a celebration of their Super Bowl victory. Many of the Eagles' players had indicated they would not attend in response to Trump's harsh criticism of athletes who have refused to stand during pregame performances of the national anthem even though all the Eagles stood for the anthem last season. Trump relabeled Tuesday's gathering as a "celebration of the American flag." Speaking for 3 minutes, he told flag-waving invited fans of the team that he wanted to explain why "young Americans stand for a national anthem. Maybe it's about time we understood." One attendee shouted at the president to "stop hiding behind the armed services and the national anthem." That prompted booing and the man was escorted from the event. Trump concluded by saying that the celebration turned out to be "even bigger than we anticipated" had the football players attended. Media reports said as few as five to 10 players had planned to attend Tuesday's event. "The vast majority of the Eagles team decided to abandon their fans," the White House said in a statement Tuesday. "The Eagles are the ones who tried to change their commitment at the 11th hour," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters just prior to the event. "If this wasn't a political stunt by the Eagles franchise, then they wouldn't have planned to attend the event and then backed out at the last minute." A White House statement said Trump withdrew the invitation "after... According to the above context, answer the following question. How long did Trump take to discuss the party with the Eagles?

OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- a few minutes
- a few days
- a few months

A: a few days

input: OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- Slawomir
- McPhillips
- USA embassy Now, answer this question: Like many other inventors before him, professor Slawomir Suwak designed only the things he needed himself. He had several patents on his conscience already: an automatic cork opener for wine in the indicative state, a portable set of board games for solving personality problems, a wallet with a mini-device for the duplications of 100 zloty bills, and a piece of equipment "the day after" used to irretrievably eliminate from the time-space continuum days burdened with a hangover. Now came the time for a mini-device preventing the development of symptoms of psycho-motor aggression. The device was really simple. It weighed about a kilo and was the size of a bag of flour. It was to be worn on the right wrist. The fact it had to be the right wrist was very important. Otherwise, the invention didn't work properly, or even worse, it produced results opposite to its intended effect. Each day, its mini-containers had to be re-filled with substances promoting positive processes in the body leading to the return of good mood. There were three containers to re-fill, and the substances were not available on the local market and had to be imported using diplomatic channels from the USA. To operate the device, turning it on stand-by was enough. In that mode, it could be used continuously for one and a half hours. To recharge the batteries, you needed a charger, which was stored in a small suitcase. The device, when it was turned on, made a low murmur (or according to some - a loud growl) designed to keep the owner in a good mood. Professor Suwak called his new baby "mini-anti-aggressor." The McPhilips corporation expressed its interest in the product early on, even when it was still at the drawing-board stage. The company partially financed the purchase of sub-assembly elements from its subsidiary specializing in the productions of components for technologically advanced products. According to the above context, answer the following question. Who liked the invention?
A:
output: McPhillips

Problem:OPTIONS:
- going to become a nurse
- not enough information
- angry with the surgeon
- still in terrible pain

Not as a nurse, but as a patient. I had my appendix removed in about 1970 before keyhole surgery and the surgeon had not properly stitched the inside incision. This meant I was slowly "leaking" blood into the area between my abdominal cavity lining and my skin. I was kept in the hospital for two weeks and every day the same nurse would come along and open the end of the incision in my skin to relieve the pressure caused by the pooling of my blood. That was fine for the first five days, but the weekend came and she was off duty. Apparently, nobody else knew what to do. By Monday morning, I was in agony and when she arrived, she was appalled I had not been drained during the weekend. The other thing that happened during the weekend was the end of the skin incision, which she had opened, had mostly healed meaning there was no convenient hole for the blood to be drained. The nurse used a sharp pair of scissors to reopen one end of the partly-healed incision, but still the blood would not simply drain of its own accord. She used both hands to squeeze downwards onto the swollen blood reservoir. At first, there was no reaction except agonizing pain, but after a few seconds and a very hard squeeze, the stinking, coagulated blood jetted out of the hole she'd made squirting across the ceiling, down the wall and down her full-length coating her face and the front of her uniform. Despite the pain, I couldn't keep myself from laughing loud and long. She then dressed the wound, directed some junior nurses to clean the ceiling and the wall while she went to clean herself. I apologized for laughing the following day when she returned. She told me she appreciated the humor of the situation so there was no "hard feelings." According to the above context, answer the following question. after the story, the patient is probably
****
A:
angry with the surgeon