TASK DEFINITION: Write the right answer to the question based on the context passage.
PROBLEM: Trying to drive up a very small street with cars parked on both sides so only one car at a time could get by, individual sees me already entered the roadway, got in the car backs out of his driveway, intending to for me to back all the way out. I was about half in. I wait thinking he will realize it was a not so smart action and he will pull back in to let me pass since forward is an easier safer plan. He doesn't do that we sit for anout 30 seconds and he is determined to stay. I was a fairly new driver in my first car. I get irritated and shut my motor off basically saying, buddy I entered the street first you were parked never looked before you hurriedly pulled forward. So he shuts off his motor and smiled good as to say stalemate. I'm thinking I have no place I have to be, I'll wait rather than trying to back up half the block without hitting somebodies car. We wait, he gets out of his car goes into his house, no cell phone back then it was the pager (beepers) era. I wasnt sure why he was going in, but probably nit good outcome for me. So I happened to have a small bottle of Keri Lotion (thick, oily lotion for extremely dry skin) in the cup holder. I jump out of my car run to his squirted the whole bottle all over his windshield ran back to my car and DID manage to back up rapidly without damaging my car or anyone! He ran out of the house and I saw by his facial expression was livid! I was thinking as I drove away I hope he doesn't try to use the wipers, that's going to make a really smear mess. He's not going anyplace for a while. Years later I regretted having done that, letting a stranger provoke me, and second felt guilty about the sheer gleeful triumph of seeing his face. I won! Question: Whose lotion is used?

SOLUTION: The author

PROBLEM: I am currently waiting for peer reviews of two books I've worked on: one sole-authored, one co-authored. We don't talk much about the experience of waiting for reviews, and it's not something that appears to have been researched. Yet it's something everyone doing academic work has to go through and it may be bad for our mental health.
I'm finding it particularly difficult at the moment because a lot rides on these reviews. The sole-authored book, which is on a contentious topic, has already had one set of reviews. Reviewer 1 was utterly damning, saying "I couldn't find anything to praise". Luckily, Reviewers 2 and 3 were more measured, offering both praise and constructive criticism, and their input helped me to revise and strengthen the typescript. However, in the process, my editor and I realised that we needed further reviews from people with a particular kind of specialist knowledge. My editor approached around ten potential reviewers, but only one agreed to do the job. So I'm gibbering what if that person agrees with Reviewer 1?
The co-authored book is in a contentious format. My co-authors and I decided that I would be the person to liaise with publishers, as I have form in this process. The last time I liaised with academic publishers for a co-authored book was in the early 2000s, and I'd forgotten how heavily responsible it makes me feel. Fortunately, I've found a publisher that is interested and has sent the book out for reviews, to two professional academics and two students. This is great and terrifying but at least there are four reviewers. Even so, what if they all think it's rubbish?
In many ways I love the peer review system. I welcome feedback on my writing, and I'm not at all averse to constructive criticism. I am by no means arrogant enough to think I can write a good book without input from others. Yet peer review, as a process, is fraught with uncertainty. Comments may not be constructive, or may not come at all. They may be positive, or negative, or in between, or a mixture. Question: Who said "I couldn't find anything to praise"?

SOLUTION: Reviewer 1

PROBLEM: One day after a mass shooting killed 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump reiterated his support for a plan to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the United States.
At a campaign rally in New Hampshire Monday, Trump promised his supporters that, if elected, he would use the executive powers to "suspend immigration from areas of the world where there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we fully understand how to end these threats."
Although the suspected Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen, was an American citizen, Trump suggested immigrants from the Middle East can come to the U.S. and radicalize people who are already here, or work to convince them online.
"The media talks about homegrown terrorism," Trump said. "But Islamic radicalism ... and the networks that nurture it are imports from overseas whether you like it or don't like it."
Refugees and immigrants from conflict ridden Middle Eastern countries like Syria, Iraq and Libya could "be a better, bigger more horrible version than the legendary Trojan horse ever was," Trump said.
But a recent Brookings Institution survey found Americans are far more welcoming of refugees than the billionaire candidate. Of those surveyed, 59 percent support accepting refugees, while 41 percent oppose it.
Those views are split right down party lines, with just 38 percent of Republicans supporting taking in refugees from Syria and the Middle East, compared to 77 percent of Democrats. But among Trump supporters, an overwhelming 77 percent said they oppose taking in refugees.
The Obama administration has set a goal of admitting as many as 10,000 Syrian refugees to the United States by the fall.Respondents of the surveys also were sharply divided on whether they would be willing to accept refugees from Syria in particular, with 61 percent of Republicans saying the U.S. should not accept Syrian refugees, compared to 27 percent of Democrats.
Trump supporters again overwhelmingly opposed accepting Syrian refugees, with 52 percent of them citing fear of terrorism as their biggest concern. Question: Who promised to use executive powers to suspend immigration to the US from terroristic countries?

SOLUTION:
Trump