input question: The human capital legislation is one example. If this premise is true, does that tell us:"This is the strongest example."?

OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

output answer: it is not possible to tell

Question:
Based on the premise "Simply by saying, again and again, We must have competition with compassion, efficiency with equity.", can we conclude that "Compassion filled competion and efficiency with equity are things we must have."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
yes

Question: Sentence A: It was more of an enormous lean-to than a true building, but it was the best protection now available.

Sentence B: Truly a building, it was a dangerous prospect to even enter.

If sentence A is true, how about sentence B?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: no

Question: For comparison with earlier benefits analyses, such as the first Section 812 Prospective Analysis, we also include estimates of avoided incidences of premature mortality based on the
Estimates of avoided incidents are included for comparison with earlier analyses
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: yes

Problem: Here is a premise:
Instead, you're still leading with Jacob Weisberg on Clinton's African apology (Sorry Excuse) and Cullen Murphy's discourse on lying (The Lie of the Land).

Here is a hypothesis:
Clinton gave an apology to Africa.

Here are the options: OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: yes

Question:
oh all righty i think we know what we're going to speak about um tell you what i'll start off how's that

Does it follow that "I think I know what we are going to speak about and I'll start off."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
yes