If you can drink a drink why can't you eat an eat?

Due to English punctuation eating is just an action where a drink is something like a soda and a action. A eat is not a meal or anything that can be consumed.

no,

explanation:

because they are likely to use their corrupted thought process to get what they want. not what is better for the another reason they shouldn't is since they abused their rights as a us citizen they should have certain rights stripped away from them as punishment, such as the right to vote. due to the lack of proper behavior exemplified   from their actions , it would be hard for people to trust them because of their criminal record.   either directly (in the case of a referendum or ballot initiative) or indirectly (by choosing lawmakers and law enforcers). in fact, we do have certain minimum, objective standards of responsibility and commitment to our laws that we require people to meet before they are given a role in the solemn enterprise of self-government. people who have committed serious crimes against their fellow citizens don’t meet those standards. and those crimes can include such “non-violent felonies” as, say, treason and espionage, or voter fraud and public corruption, white-collar crime and felonies merely “concerning drugs” — like trafficking in fentanyl-laced heroin and selling it to minors, for example. if you’re not willing to follow the law, then you should not have a role in making the law for everyone else.

i believe the answer is: b. mr. head had a long, tube-like face with a rounded open jaw and a short depressed nose.

this is because in the un-revised sentence it said that mr. heads face was long and tube-like, and he had a rounded open jaw. this is not a very grammatically correct because of how it seems to drag on with the and, replaced with, with, makes it sound more fluent in the description.