Question:
Taliban and American aid. After the September 11 attacks, it was necessary for conservatives to somehow explain away the fact that the US government gave 245 million dollars to the new evildoers du jour. Never mind the fact that authors such as Robert Scheer warned of aiding the Taliban as early as in May 2001. Never mind that they did so not out of some humanitarian motivation, but because of the Taliban's violent enforcement of the ban on opium poppies. Never mind that in a regime that is controlled by warlords, it does not matter who is authorized to distribute the aid -- the ruling regional warlords will seize control of it and use it to their own advantage. Never mind that this very argument has been used by hawks in opposition to sending humanitarian aid to Iraq's Saddam Hussein. Never mind that the Taliban continued selling opium in spite of the deal. Never mind that this is all documented on Michael Moore's website about the film. Gun homicides. Statistics are Moore's weakest point, and it is surprising that his critics don't dwell on them longer. That's because they know all too well that Moore is correct: The United States have a far greater homicide rate (both gun- and non-gun) than most other first world countries. His main mistake is that he does not use population corrected data, his second mistake is that he does not cite his sources (and, as you correctly point out, he probably uses different reporting methods for the different countries). A good comparison of international homicide rates can be found on the relatively neutral guncite.com website. After reading the above, is "Robert Scheer and Michael Moore" the correct answer to the question "What author warned aiding of the Taliban?"? OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer:
no

Question:
The Legal Services Corp. (LSC), a quasi-governmental agency that provides legal aid for the poor, would receive $329 million in fiscal 2004 under President Bush's proposal - the same amount requested in 2003 and approved for 2002 and 2001. If approved, the hold-the-line request for LSC means its budget would erode with inflation for another year, but it could be worse for the organization: Many conservatives fought for years to do away with the LSC altogether, saying legal services attorneys were spending too much time fighting for liberal causes or pursuing politically charged cases against the government instead of representing the needy. Opposition to the organization has cooled since 1996, when Congress approved restrictions (PL 104-134) on the sorts of cases federally funded legal aid attorneys can take. (1996 Almanac, p. 5-36) Republicans cut the organization's budget deeply in 1996, but its funding has recovered slowly. Last month, in the omnibus spending bill for fiscal 2003, the Senate added a onetime increase of $19 million, which, if approved in the final version, would bring the LSC budget to $348 million. The money would go to help states, such as Michigan and Ohio, that lost money when the organization redistributed its funding based on census counts made in 2000 of poor households. If the extra money survives a conference with the House and makes it to the president's desk, LSC supporters may try to include it in the organization's fiscal 2004 funding. The federal government began funding some programs to provide legal assistance to the poor in the late 1960s; the Legal Services Corporation was created in 1974 (PL 93-355). LSC gives nearly all its money to state and local agencies, which provide civil legal assistance to those whose income is less than 125 percent of the federal poverty level - $11,075 a year for an individual and $22,625 for a family of four. Funding for legal services goes to defend needy clients in domestic violence cases, custody cases and other such matters, according to LSC. Since 1996, lawyers who receive money from Legal Services have been prohibited from such activities as lobbying legislatures, filing class-action suits, participating in political demonstrations or strikes, pursuing abortion-related litigation, representing illegal aliens or prisoners, or defending public housing tenants evicted because they were charged with selling drugs After reading the above, is "The Legal Services Corp" the correct answer to the question "What organization redistributed its funding based on census counts in Ohio and Michigan?"? OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer:
yes

Question:
In 1990, the U.S. Custom House in New York City was renamed after Hamilton. In 1880, his son John Church Hamilton commissioned Carl Conrads to sculpt a granite statue, now located in Central Park, New York City. One statue honoring Alexander Hamilton in Chicago was mired in controversy, at least concerning the surrounding architecture. Kate Sturges Buckingham (1858-1937), of the Buckingham Fountain family, commissioned the monument. Its impetus was that Treasury Secretary Hamilton "secured the nation's financial future and made it possible for her own family to make its fortune in grain elevators and banking. Consequently, John Angel was hired to model a figurative sculpture and the Finnish architect Eliel Saarinen was to create a "colossal architectural setting" for it. The proposed 80-foot tall columned shelter was poorly received. By Ms. Buckingham's death in 1937, the sculpture's setting. location and design were uncertain. Conspiracy allegations surfaced, and the matter became mired in litigation. After the courts ordered the construction to be completed by 1953, the trustees hired architect Samuel A. Marx. The structure was completed, had structural problems, and was eventually demolished in 1993. The statue was gilded, and is still on display. A statue, by James Earle Fraser, was dedicated on May 17, 1923, on the south terrace of the Treasury Building, in Washington. After reading the above, is "Divorce" the correct answer to the question "From 1937 to 1953 what legal proceeding tied up the construction of the statue?"? OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer:
no

Question:
Milwaukee, Wisconsin (CNN) -- President Barack Obama, in a bid to create jobs and boost economic growth, called on Congress on Monday to pass a $50 billion plan to renew the country's transportation infrastructure. His address was the first of two speeches the president is scheduled to make this week to frame his administration's ongoing response to the recession, less than two months ahead of midterm elections in which Democratic majorities in the House and Senate are in jeopardy. "Today, I am announcing a new plan for rebuilding and modernizing America's roads, and rails and runways for the long term," said Obama, who spoke on Labor Day in Milwaukee, Wisconsin -- a state with competitive gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races. "We used to have the best infrastructure in the world. We can have it again," he said to loud cheers from a crowd of union workers. The proposal envisions -- over a six year period -- rebuilding 150,000 miles of roads, 4,000 miles of rail and 150 miles of airport runways. It also would include modernizing the nation's air traffic control system in an effort to reduce delays and travel time. "This will not only create jobs immediately. It's also going to make our economy hum over the long haul," said the president. Obama hopes to work with Congress to enact an up-front investment of $50 billion -- an amount a White House statement said would represent a significant chunk of new spending on infrastructure. The investment would then be paired with what the administration called a framework to improve transportation spending. The long-term plan would include the establishment of an Infrastructure Bank, which would leverage federal dollars and focus on projects that could deliver the the biggest bang for the buck, Obama said. The president stressed the need for Democrats and Republicans to work together on the transportation initiative, which would need to be approved by Congress. After reading the above, is "To work together on his new plan and to support it" the correct answer to the question "What as President Obama asking Congress for to implement his plan to renew the country's transportation infrastructure?"? OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer:
yes