4. Jimmy and Eric were huddled by the tire swing. "Why did Scott have to take the kickball? He knows we play kickball at recess." Jimmy whined. "Maybe we could just do something else." Eric suggested.
"No, I'm going to get back our kickball," countered Jimmy. Scott was bouncing the kickball against the
wall by himself when Jimmy approached him. "Give us back our kickball, Scott!" Jimmy shouted. Scott
looked
up
and down at Jimmy and then continued bouncing the ball against the wall. Jimmy ran up to
Scott and tried to snatch the ball as it passed from the wall back to Scott, but he was too slow. He missed
and fell onto the gravel and cried out, "Ow! See what you did, Scott!" By now Eric had joined the other
two boys and he made a suggestion: "Hey, Scott, maybe we could all play together." Scott looked at him
skeptically, but Eric's warm expression convinced him of his sincerity. "Ok," Scott muttered as he
helped Jimmy back to his feet and asked, "What do you want to play?" The boys agreed on kickball and
used the remaining recess time to play. Jimmy and Eric agreed that it was a lot more fun to play with
three people and Scott became a regular addition to their recess activities.
What is the theme of the story?
What happens in the story that leads you to believe this?

Hey student is writing a conclusion for his research based informative essay on the possibility of exploring and having mars where should he including his conclusion select two options

Which of the following sentences requires a colon to be correct? a. in his vacation suitcase, jonathan packed two pairs of pants, four shirts, his swimsuit, and his favorite pajamas. b. when she decided to write a letter, she grabbed her pen, paper, stamps, and address book. c. the new dessert recipe called for equal parts of sugar, cream, peanut butter, and crushed pecans. d. she gathered all of her ingredients to make a smoothie strawberries, blueberries, bananas, and yogurt.

Read the passage from the opinion of the court in dred scott v. sandford, written by justice taney. the question then arises, whether the provisions of the constitution, in relation to the personal rights and privileges to which the citizen of a state should be entitled, embraced the negro african race, at that time in this country, or who might afterwards be imported, who had then or should afterwards be made free in any state; and to put it in the power of a single state to make him a citizen of the united states, and endue him with the full rights of citizenship in every other state without their consent? does the constitution of the united states act upon him whenever he shall be made free under the laws of a state, and raised there to the rank of a citizen, and immediately clothe him with all the privileges of a citizen in every other state, and in its own courts? the court thinks the affirmative of these propositions cannot be maintained. and if it cannot, the plaintiff in error could not be a citizen of the state of missouri, within the meaning of the constitution of the united states, and, consequently, was not entitled to sue in its courts. what claim does justice taney make in this passage? that sanford has the right to enslave scott that scott has the right to be emancipated that scott is not a citizen of missouri that sanford cannot sue because he is not a citizen