Senate Chaplain makes a stand

[Gerr]

No. your point is that they don't get their news from Fox but far the most popular news outlet for conservatives is Fox. If that is not true where would you say most get their news from?

Is it your world view that all  those with a conservative bent has only FOX as  their only source of news?  I strive for objectivity, so  while I do listen to FOX, I also listen to CNN, Brian Williams in NBC, but I get most of my news information from the Internet with my computer and now my iphone.  The news in the internet seem to be less tainted with the bias of the reporter.  I also subscribe/read TIME.  The articles there are usually long editorials  I also go to the library now and then and read the various newspapers there.  .   

[lazarus]

And what about Johnson, Brown's friend who claimed Brown had his arms up, was he not discredited because he lied?  Are you not focusing on the one  that was discredited because it  supports your own bias that the Brown incident was another case of racism, police brutality and war against the black man?

 

And no, I'm not a scared white man.  I'm a concerned brown minority who is concerned for the truth, the lives and property of people of all races.

 

Who told you that he lied? The prosecutor did not. The witness that we know for sure lied is the one that is central to the narrative that you believe. It's the one that Sean Hannity on fox repeatedly referred to. We don't what the grand jury believe. What we do know is that they decided not to vote for an indictment. 

[lazarus]

So if you would rather take the word of one and disregard that of the 59, who is prejudging?

 

You may be misunderstanding the situation here. The 60 all testified but did not all agree in their testimonies. In fact the majority of key witnesses said that Michael Brown had his hands up.

 

We now have a Grand Juror who is suing the prosecutor.

[lazarus]

Is it your world view that all  those with a conservative bent has only FOX as  their only source of news?  I strive for objectivity, so  while I do listen to FOX, I also listen to CNN, Brian Williams in NBC, but I get most of my news information from the Internet with my computer and now my iphone.  The news in the internet seem to be less tainted with the bias of the reporter.  I also subscribe/read TIME.  The articles there are usually long editorials  I also go to the library now and then and read the various newspapers there.  .   

 

You didn't read my post that you quoted. The words "all"or "only' did not appear. Survey's show that most popular source for conservatives is Fox news. It's weird that conservatives are uncomfortable with that fact.

[Gerr]

You didn't read my post that you quoted. The words "all"or "only' did not appear. Survey's show that most popular source for conservatives is Fox news. It's weird that conservatives are uncomfortable with that fact.

I just learned about the juror suing the prosecutor, not from Fox but from the Internet.  If FOX is a more popular source of information for conservatives, has it ever occurred to you that perhaps it's because it is a little more objective? 

[bonnie]

I just learned about the juror suing the prosecutor, not from Fox but from the Internet.  If FOX is a more popular source of information for conservatives, has it ever occurred to you that perhaps it's because it is a little more objective? 

How is it that those that accuse conservatives only listen to Fox News and yet seem to know more of what is on Fox news than those they are accusing?  They must be part of the numbers that make Fox News far more popular than any liberal opinion news. 

Considering that several here frequently post from Media Matters,Salon and Huffington Post ,without a doubt liberal bias, how does it work?

[Tom Wetmore]

I just learned about the juror suing the prosecutor, not from Fox but from the Internet.  If FOX is a more popular source of information for conservatives, has it ever occurred to you that perhaps it's because it is a little more objective? 

 

Repeated analysis of various news sources show that Fox is among the least objective sources of news...   (Actually the worst are many of the internet "news" sources.) A major problem with Fox News is their constant blurring of the line between commentary and simply reporting the news.  And a serious journalistic error in which they have repeatedly been caught is news reporting of "sources say" or more obliquely, "some people say" while "reporting" the news when in fact the only "source"  is " some people"  that were hired Fox commentators offering their opinion and spin on the news in another Fox program.

 

The reality is that Fox News is popular among conservatives precisely because it is dominated by those conservative commentators putting the spin on current events.  Simply put, it is what they want to hear, and confirms what they believe to be the "reality" of the world around them.  It reflects their world view and reinforces it in an endless propaganda indoctrination loop.

[Tom Wetmore]

Who are the best informed individuals on current events?  Regular NPR listeners and believe it or not, regular Daily Show viewers.

 

Who are consistently ranked at the bottom in objective testing of current events knowledge?  Regular Fox News viewers.

 

And that has been confirmed by repeated studies.

[bonnie]

Who are the best informed individuals on current events?  Regular NPR listeners and believe it or not, regular Daily Show viewers.

 

Who are consistently ranked at the bottom in objective testing of current events knowledge?  Regular Fox News viewers.

 

And that has been confirmed by repeated studies.

There is a little more to the studies. Fox is opinion "news" as most cable shows of that type are. You keep making the assumption that if you watch Fox  that is all you watch.Not sure I even know anyone that watches Fox or any other cable show for their only news  source.

Like some have said mine generally comes locally or in my AOL news page. You and those that like to ridicule seem to know far more what is on Fox cable than those of us being ridiculed. Couldn't be that some are just mindlessly repeating what others are saying.  

[CoAspen]

When stepping out into the cow pasture, you only have to step into something once to know what it is.

[phkrause]

 

Repeated analysis of various news sources show that Fox is among the least objective sources of news...   (Actually the worst are many of the internet "news" sources.) A major problem with Fox News is their constant blurring of the line between commentary and simply reporting the news.  And a serious journalistic error in which they have repeatedly been caught is news reporting of "sources say" or more obliquely, "some people say" while "reporting" the news when in fact the only "source"  is " some people"  that were hired Fox commentators offering their opinion and spin on the news in another Fox program.

 

The reality is that Fox News is popular among conservatives precisely because it is dominated by those conservative commentators putting the spin on current events.  Simply put, it is what they want to hear, and confirms what they believe to be the "reality" of the world around them.  It reflects their world view and reinforces it in an endless propaganda indoctrination loop.

The problem I see with Fox News, is after watching for so many years, is they are not "conservative" at all. They are so "liberal" as to what they say it's ridiculous. I started watching them back when 9/11 happened. I thought at that time they did a great job of covering the event, better than the rest. But as time went on and I started listening to NPR, I was able to see a big difference. At NPR they allowed all sides to speak, but at FOX if you differed at all with there agenda they cut you right off. My wife who is considered by most as very "conservative" loved O'Reilly, but no longer, she see's him as very pompous. I used to like him also, still kind of do. The one that I liked the most was Megan, most of the time she gave each side an ample time to speak, and pretty much from what I recall never cut anyone off when she obviously disagreed with them.

[lazarus]

St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch and his two assistants are accused of ”negligence and intentional acts of gross irresponsibility” in a misconduct complaint filed this week over their handling of the grand jury that investigated the shooting death of Michael Brown.

 

Seven Missouri citizens filed the complaint Monday with the state’s Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel. All told, McCulloch and his two assistants, Kathi Alizadeh and Sheila Whirley, – who were tasked with presenting evidence before the grand jury – are accused of violating nine rules of conduct and for their “gross failure to vigorously represent their client – the citizens of St. Louis, Missouri, in their capacity as prosecutors.”

 

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/prosecutors-michael-brown-case-slapped-ethics-complaints

[Kountzer]

Yet another case of america's finest, caught in action.

 

[Dr. Shane]

It seems odd that so many political disagreements seem to take a turn and start focusing on FOXNews instead of the acutal topic being discussed.  Of course, we are being told repeatedly this isn't a political subject...

 

I don't know any conservatives that are uncomfortable with FOXNews.  The ones I know seem to beat their chest and brag about how much they love it.  I haven't had cable for several years now but use to watch FOXNews and Al Jazzera English and I felt the two combined provided a good coverage of the news.  Within the past few years I am doing good to watch the weather report.  The kids are getting older and helping out more so in a couple of years I should be able to even watch football on Sunday.

[lazarus]

I got a sense that some of the posters here wanted to suggest that Fox was not the main source of news for conservatives. Fox's success has occurred because it realized that there was a strong market for news that comes from a right wing perspective. MSNBC is trying to do it from the other side. I'm not a Fox fan but it's good at meeting the needs of conservatives.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

sometimes I want to reach into the television screen and poke a carrot into the mouths of the FOX news reporters, as well as the CNN reporters... 

[bonnie]

I got a sense that some of the posters here wanted to suggest that Fox was not the main source of news for conservatives. Fox's success has occurred because it realized that there was a strong market for news that comes from a right wing perspective. MSNBC is trying to do it from the other side. I'm not a Fox fan but it's good at meeting the needs of conservatives.

There is a major difference between "news" and opinion on the news. When I want to listen to the news I tune into our local newscasters.Both for local and world news. I don't read Huffington Post,Salon or Media Matters anymore than I tune into Bill O"Reilley" for news.

[Gerr]

Who told you that he lied? The prosecutor did not. The witness that we know for sure lied is the one that is central to the narrative that you believe. It's the one that Sean Hannity on fox repeatedly referred to. We don't what the grand jury believe. What we do know is that they decided not to vote for an indictment. 

Johnson lied.  Or perhaps you only listened to the left-wing media? 

[Gerr]

Who are the best informed individuals on current events?  Regular NPR listeners and believe it or not, regular Daily Show viewers.

 

Who are consistently ranked at the bottom in objective testing of current events knowledge?  Regular Fox News viewers.

 

And that has been confirmed by repeated studies.

By whose opinion?  Some very objective reporter? 

[Tom Wetmore]

Not a matter of opinion.  It was based on objective questions about knowledge of current events.  The testing was on information, not opinion nor commentary or interpretation of current events.  The studies tested individuals on that knowledge along with questions to determine what news sources that individual viewed/read/ listened to and how much.  

[Gerr]

I sure would like to see the design of the study.  Many so-called research out there are, upon closer examination, not worth the paper they are written on.  Not too long ago, there was a "study" done by, as I recall, two PhD's from a reputable university claiming that religious people did not live/behave significantly better than non-religious people.  It turned out they just sent out a questionnaire and made conclusions based on that questionnaire alone.  There was no verification as to how religious those who claimed they were religious really were, 

[bonnie]

Just Facts

Poll reveals voters misinformed about key issues

 

By James D. Agresti
December 20, 2013
Correction appended

What do voters truly understand about public policy issues? To scientifically measure this, Just Facts, a non-profit research and educational institute, commissioned a nationwide poll of people who say that they vote “every time there is an opportunity” or in “most elections.” The poll consisted of 20 questions, one concerning voters’ political leanings and 19 dealing with their knowledge of public policy issues.

The questions were designed to identify disconnects between perception and reality across the political spectrum. Covering a wide range of issues, the poll consisted of questions about government spending, the national debt, taxes, healthcare, hunger, global warming, pollution, energy, and Social Security. Each question focused on a central aspect of each issue. For example, voters were asked:

Do you think the federal government spends more money on social programs, such as Medicare, education, and food stamps – or does the federal government spend more money on national defense, such as the Army, Navy, and missile defense?

The poll found deep partisan divides, with both Democrats and Republicans being relatively more or less knowledgeable depending upon the questions. Overall, a majority of voters gave the correct answer to only four of the questions, such as these:

Over the past 5 years, which has grown at a faster rate, the U.S. economy or the national debt? 

(Correct answer given by 87% of all voters

.

)

In 1960, governments paid for 24% of all healthcare costs in the U.S. Do you think government now pays a greater portion or a lesser portion of all healthcare costs in the U.S.? 

(Correct answer given by 57% of all voters.)

Conversely, two examples of questions that voters seldom answered correctly are:

On average, who would you say pays a greater portion of their income in federal taxes: The middle-class or the upper 1% of income earners? 

(Correct answer given by 18% of all voters.)

On an average day, what portion of U.S. households with children have at least one child who experiences hunger? Less than 1%, 1% to less than 10%, 10% to less than 20%, or more than 20%? 

(Correct answer given by 9% of all voters.)

On average, all voters answered 39% of the questions correctly. Separating voters into subgroups, those who said they would probably vote for a Democrat if the U.S. presidential election were held today got an average of 30% correct, probable Republican voters got 45% correct, probable third-party voters got 41% correct, and undecided voters got 39% correct. All of the questions, results, and correct answers are provided below.

Although journalists, commentators, politicians, educators, and advocacy groups regularly inundate Americans with information about public policy issues, this poll provides evidence that voters are often ill-informed and may be casting their ballots based upon misconceptions. Just Facts works to improve this situation by empowering voters with verifiable facts that help them to make truly informed decisions.
______
This is the second annual poll of voter knowledge commissioned by Just Facts. The poll was conducted by Conquest Communications Group, a professional polling firm. The results were obtained through live telephone surveys of 500 likely voters across the continental United States on December 16, 2013.

The margin of sampling error for all voters is +/- 4.5% with a 95% level of confidence. The margin of error for Republican voters is +/- 7.3%, for Democratic voters is +/- 8.3%, for undecided voters is 9.8%, and for third-party voters is 13.0%.

Question 1: The average U.S. household spends about $25,000 per year on food, housing, and clothing combined. If we broke down all combined federal, state, and local taxes to a per household cost, do you think this would amount to more or less than an average of $25,000 per household per year?

Correct Answer: Taxes are more than $25,000 per household per year. In 2012, federal, state and local governments collected a combined total of $3.997 trillion in taxes or an average of $33,006 for every household in the U.S. Correct answer given by 39% of all voters, 35% of Democratic voters, 38% of Republican voters, 51% of third-party voters, and 40% of undecided voters.

Question 2: On average, who would you say pays a greater portion of their income in federal taxes: The middle-class or the upper 1% of income earners?

Correct Answer: The upper 1% of income earners. Per the Congressional Budget Office’s latest estimates of federal tax burdens, households in the middle 20% of the U.S. income distribution paid an average federal tax rate of 11.5%, as compared to 29.4% for the top 1% of income earners.Correct answer given by 18% of all voters, 4% of Democratic voters, 31% of Republican voters, 8% of third-party voters, and 20% of undecided voters.

Question 3: Now, changing the subject from taxes to spending, suppose we broke down all government spending to a per household cost – do you think the combined spending of federal, state and local governments amounts to more or less than $40,000 per household per year?

Correct Answer: Government spending is more than $40,000 per household per year. In 2012, federal, state and local governments spent a combined total of $5.788 trillion or an average of $47,802 for every household in the U.S. Correct answer given by 46% of all voters, 37% of Democratic voters, 48% of Republican voters, 54% of third-party voters, and 52% of undecided voters.

Question 4: Do you think the federal government spends more money on social programs, such as Medicare, education, and food stamps – or does the federal government spend more money on national defense, such as the Army, Navy, and missile defense?

Correct Answer: Social programs. In 2010 (later data not available), 61% of federal spending was on social programs, versus 22% for national defense. Half a century ago, the opposite was true, and 53% of federal spending was for national defense, versus 23% on social programs. Correct answer given by 41% of all voters, 18% of Democratic voters, 58% of Republican voters, 49% of third-party voters, and 36% of undecided voters.

Question 5: What about federal government debt? The average U.S. household owes about$107,000 in consumer debt, such as mortgages and credit cards. Thinking about all federal government debt broken down on a per household basis, do you think federal debt amounts to more or less than $107,000 per U.S. household?

Correct Answer: Federal debt is more than $107,000 per household. As of December 2, 2013, the federal debt was $17.2 trillion or $140,741 for every household in the U.S. Correct answer given by 65% of all voters, 48% of Democratic voters, 75% of Republican voters, 78% of third-party voters, and 62% of undecided voters.

Question 6: Over the past five years, which has grown at a faster rate, the U.S. economy or the national debt?

Correct Answer: The national debt. Over the past five years, the national debt grew by 62%, while the U.S. economy grew by 14%. Correct answer given by 87% of all voters, 70% of Democratic voters, 97% of Republican voters, 92% of third-party voters, and 89% of undecided voters.

Question 7: Would you say the earth is generally warmer than it was 30 years ago, cooler than it was 30 years ago, or about the same?

Correct Answer: Warmer. According to satellite measurements and ground-level thermometers, the earth’s average temperature has increased over the past 30 years by about 0.6 to 0.9 degrees Fahrenheit. For context regarding the magnitude of this change, a temperature analysis of a glacier in Greenland found that the location was about 22ºF colder during the last ice age than it is now.Correct answer given by 45% of all voters, 74% of Democratic voters, 23% of Republican voters, 46% of third-party voters, and 46% of undecided voters.

Question 8: Again, thinking about the whole planet, do you think the number and intensity of  hurricanes and tropical storms have increased over the past 30 years, decreased over the past 30 years, or stayed about the same?

Correct Answer: About the same. Data published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters shows that the number and intensity of hurricanes and tropical storms is about the same as it was 30 years ago. Likewise, Christopher Landsea, a Ph.D. atmospheric scientist and hurricane specialist for NOAA, wrote in 2005, “All previous and current research in the area of hurricane variability has shown no reliable, long-term trend up in the frequency or intensity of tropical cyclones, either in the Atlantic or any other basin.” Additionally, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported in 2012: “There is low confidence in any observed long-term (i.e., 40 years or more) increases in tropical cyclone activity (i.e., intensity, frequency, duration), after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities.” Correct answer given by 41% of all voters, 23% of Democratic voters, 54% of Republican voters, 42% of third-party voters, and 42% of undecided voters.

Question 9: Now, just thinking about the United States, in your opinion, is the air generally more polluted than it was 30 years ago, less polluted, or about the same?

Correct Answer: Less polluted. Per EPA data, levels of criteria air pollutants have declined significantly over the past 30 years. The same is true for emissions of hazardous air pollutants.Correct answer given by 33% of all voters, 28% of Democratic voters, 41% of Republican voters, 32% of third-party voters, and 27% of undecided voters.

Question 10: If the U.S. stopped recycling and buried all of its trash for the next 100 years in a single landfill that was 30 feet high, how much of the nation’s land area would this cover? Less than 1%, 1% to less than 5%, or more than 5%?

Correct Answer: Less than 1%. At the current U.S. population growth rate and the current per-person trash production rate, the landfill would cover 0.05% of the nation’s land area. More realistically, the actual area in use will be an order of magnitude smaller, because (1) the U.S. recycles 26% of its trash, burns 12% of it for energy, and composts 8% of it; (2) landfills can be more than 200 feet high; and (3) landfills have an average lifecycle of about 30-50 years, after which they are covered and used for purposes such as parks, golf courses, ski slopes, and airfields. Correct answer given by 7% of all voters, 4% of Democratic voters, 11% of Republican voters, 3% of third-party voters, and 4% of undecided voters.

Question 11: Without government subsidies, which of these technologies is least expensive for generating electricity? Wind turbines, solar panels, or natural gas power plants?

Correct Answer: Natural gas power plants. Determining the costs of electricity-generating technologies is complex, but data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows that natural gas is considerably less expensive than wind, and wind is considerably less expensive than solar. Correct answer given by 43% of all voters, 34% of Democratic voters, 54% of Republican voters, 34% of third-party voters, and 42% of undecided voters.

Question 12: Without government subsidies, which of these fuels is least expensive for powering automobiles? Gasoline, ethanol, or biodiesel?

Correct Answer: Gasoline. As calculated with data from the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Energy Information Administration, without federal subsidies, the average nationwide retail price for ethanol in 2013 was 22% more than gasoline, and biodiesel was 41% more than gasoline. Correct answer given by 46% of all voters, 35% of Democratic voters, 57% of Republican voters, 44% of third-party voters, and 44% of undecided voters.

Question 13: Worldwide, which of these technologies generates the most electricity? Solar panels, natural gas power plants, coal power plants, or nuclear power plants?

Correct Answer: Coal power plants. Due to the low cost and widespread availability of coal, coal power plants produced 40% of the world’s electricity in 2010. Correct answer given by 43% of all voters, 35% of Democratic voters, 49% of Republican voters, 39% of third-party voters, and 45% of undecided voters.

Question 14: On an average day, what portion of U.S. households with children have at least one child who experiences hunger? Less than 1%, 1% to less than 10%, 10% to less than 20%, or more than 20%?

Correct Answer: Less than 1%. Per U.S. Census Bureau data, on an average day, less than one fifth of one percent (0.18%) of households with children have a child who experiences hunger.Correct answer given by 9% of all voters, 6% of Democratic voters, 13% of Republican voters, 8% of third-party voters, and 5% of undecided voters.

Question 15: Some people say that Social Security faces financial problems because politicians have looted the program and spent the money on other programs.  Do you believe that statement is true or false?

Correct Answer: False. By law, all Social Security income can be used only for the Social Security program. Since the outset of Social Security, the law has required that all of the program’s surpluses be loaned to the federal government, but the law also requires that the federal government pay back this money with interest, and the federal government has never failed to do this. Social Security faces financial problems not because it has been looted but because of other factors such as (1) increases in life expectancy without a comparable increase in the retirement age; (2) the higher birth rate of the baby boom generation compared to other generations, and (3) the increasing number of people receiving disability benefits. Correct answer given by 19% of all voters, 37% of Democratic voters, 10% of Republican voters, 14% of third-party voters, and 15% of undecided voters.

Question 16: Some policymakers are proposing that individuals be allowed to save and invest some of their Social Security taxes in personal accounts instead of paying these taxes to the Social Security program. In your view, do you think such proposals generally improve or harm the finances of the Social Security program?

Correct Answer: Improve. As evidenced by analyses conducted by the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration and a bipartisan presidential commission, proposals to give Social Security an element of personal ownership are generally structured to strengthen the program’s finances. Although some tax revenues that would have gone to the program instead go to people’s personal retirement accounts, these tax revenues are more than offset by the savings of not paying these individuals full benefits. Correct answer given by 25% of all voters, 11% of Democratic voters, 35% of Republican voters, 30% of third-party voters, and 23% of undecided voters.

Question 17: In 1960, governments paid for 24% of all healthcare costs in the U.S. Do you think government now pays a greater portion or a lesser portion of all healthcare costs in the U.S.?

Correct Answer: A greater portion. Between 1960 and 2009, the portion of U.S. healthcare expenses paid by government increased from 24% to 48%. Correct answer given by 57% of all voters, 45% of Democratic voters, 64% of Republican voters, 59% of third-party voters, and 59% of undecided voters.

Question 18: When health insurance copayments are high, people tend to spend less on healthcare. Does this reduced spending typically have a negative impact on people’s health?

Correct Answer: No. Multiple studies have shown that when copayments are high, people generally spend less money on their healthcare without negatively impacting their health. This is because when people directly pay for more of their healthcare bills, they are more likely to be responsible consumers and use only those services that actually benefit their health. An exception to this rule is the poorest 6% of the population, who do experience negative effects when copayments are increased. Correct answer given by 16% of all voters, 10% of Democratic voters, 20% of Republican voters, 19% of third-party voters, and 15% of undecided voters.

Question 19: In 2010, Congress passed and President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, also known as “Obamacare.” This law uses price controls to save money in the Medicare program. Do you think these price controls will affect Medicare patients’ access to care?

Correct Answer: Yes. As explained by Medicare’s actuaries, the price controls in the Affordable Care Act will cut Medicare prices for many medical services over the next three generations to “less than half of their level under the prior law.” The program’s actuaries have been clear that this will likely cause “withdrawal of providers from the Medicare market” and “severe problems with beneficiary access to care.” Correct answer given by 64% of all voters, 32% of Democratic voters, 83% of Republican voters, 73% of third-party voters, and 71% of undecided voters.

The poll results for all voters are available here, and the results broken down by political preferences, age, and gender are available here.

Correction (3/14/2014): This article originally stated that without federal subsidies, ethanol and biodiesel were respectively 42% and 64% more expensive than gasoline. As shown in the corrected article above, these figures are actually 22% and 41%.

• Post to Facebook
• Post to Twitter
• Add to LinkedIn

[Tom Wetmore]

I sure would like to see the design of the study.  Many so-called research out there are, upon closer examination, not worth the paper they are written on.  Not too long ago, there was a "study" done by, as I recall, two PhD's from a reputable university claiming that religious people did not live/behave significantly better than non-religious people.  It turned out they just sent out a questionnaire and made conclusions based on that questionnaire alone.  There was no verification as to how religious those who claimed they were religious really were, 

I think there have been several studies of this sort by different organizations.  One that I had in mind was conducted by Pew Research.  Go to their website and read all about it.  I believe they have an ongoing study along these lines.  You can take a sample quiz that the type of questions asked in their studies - http://www.pewresearch.org/quiz/the-news-iq-quiz/ .  The link will give you questions from their most recent knowledge project current events testing.  (For those here who may think I don't seem to know what I am talking about when it comes to such matters, am out of touch with reality, or at least with current events, I would invite you to take it and compare your score to mine.  Most recently I have taken Pew Research's current events quiz twice about a month apart and have scored each time in the top 1% - perfect score.)

[Gerr]

I was a few notches below yours at 4 percent.