Question:
Do all plants live on the land? Some plants do live in the water. To do this, they have evolved special traits. Plants that live in water are called aquatic plants. Living in water has certain benefits. There is certainly plenty of water! The plant does not need special traits to absorb, transport, or conserve water. They do not need a large root system. They do not need a strong stem to hold up the plant. The plant uses the water for support. Dont think water plants have it easy, though. They also face challenges. Living in water isnt that easy. They do need some special traits to survive. It is tough for the plant to reproduce. Pollination by wind or animals cant happen under water. Sunlight cannot reach very far beneath the waters surface. Some aquatic plants have floating flowers and leaves. After reading the above, is "They have fruits inside water" the correct answer to the question "How is an aquatic plant held up?"?

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 "Creating an Infrastructure Bank, which would guide spending in order to receive the biggest results for the dollars spent" the correct answer to the question "What is the framework to improve transportation spending?"?

Answer:
yes

Question:
The 1933 double eagle, a $20 gold piece with a mysterious history that involves a president, a king and a Secret Service sting operation, was auctioned Tuesday last night for a record price for a coin, $7.59 million, nearly double the previous record. The anonymous buyer, believed to be an individual collector who lives in the United States, made the winning bid in a fiercely contested nine-minute auction at Sotheby's in Manhattan. Eight bidders were joined by 500 coin collectors and dealers in an auction house audience seemingly devoid of celebrity bidders, while an additional 534 observers followed the bidding on eBay. As auction houses prepare for their fall seasons in an uncertain economy, the sale price "suggests that the marketplace for important items is enormously strong," said David Redden, a vice chairman at Sotheby's, who was the auctioneer. "This is an astonishing new record for a coin," he said. In an unprecedented move, the auction proceeds were split by the U.S. Mint and a London coin dealer, Stephen Fenton, who had won that right in court after having been arrested by Secret Service agents for trying to sell the coin in the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in Manhattan in 1996. Henrietta Holsman Fore, the director of the U.S. Mint, who witnessed the sale, said, "The monies we receive will go toward helping to pay down the debt and to fight the war on terrorism." Fenton commented that the double eagle had been on "a long historic journey, with a very satisfying ending." He added, "I am thrilled with the price." The previous numismatic record holder was an 1804 U.S. silver dollar, which sold for $4.14 million in 1999. Sotheby's partner in the one-lot auction was Stack's Rare Coins, with which it shared the customary 15 percent commission. "I have never seen as much interest in the sale of any coin in my 30 years in the business," said Lawrence R. Stack, the company's managing director. "This is the Mona Lisa of coins," said Beth Deisher, editor of Coin World, the largest weekly coin publication in the United States, with a circulation of 85,000. "It is unique. Forbidden fruit." Collectors' Web sites have surged with speculation about the sale price, and enthusiasts even organized betting pools. After reading the above, is "The Price of the sale" the correct answer to the question "What was the astonishing record?"?

Answer:
yes

Question:
Clarifying the Record The defense of U.S. airspace on 9/11 was not conducted in accord with preexisting training and protocols. It was improvised by civilians who had never handled a hijacked aircraft that attempted to disappear, and by a military unprepared for the transformation of commercial aircraft into weapons of mass destruction. As it turned out, the NEADS air defenders had nine minutes' notice on the first hijacked plane, no advance notice on the second, no advance notice on the third, and no advance notice on the fourth. We do not believe that the true picture of that morning reflects discredit on the operational personnel at NEADS or FAA facilities. NEADS commanders and officers actively sought out information, and made the best judgments they could on the basis of what they knew. Individual FAA controllers, facility managers, and Command Center managers thought outside the box in recommending a nationwide alert, in ground-stopping local traffic, and, ultimately, in deciding to land all aircraft and executing that unprecedented order flawlessly. More than the actual events, inaccurate government accounts of those events made it appear that the military was notified in time to respond to two of the hijackings, raising questions about the adequacy of the response. Those accounts had the effect of deflecting questions about the military's capacity to obtain timely and accurate information from its own sources. In addition, they overstated the FAA's ability to provide the military with timely and useful information that morning. In public testimony before this Commission in May 2003, NORAD officials stated that at 9:16, NEADS received hijack notification of United 93 from the FAA. This statement was incorrect. There was no hijack to report at 9:16. United 93 was proceeding normally at that time. In this same public testimony, NORAD officials stated that at 9:24, NEADS received notification of the hijacking of American 77. This statement was also incorrect. The notice NEADS received at 9:24 was that American 11 had not hit the World Trade Center and was heading for Washington, D.C. In their testimony and in other public accounts, NORAD officials also stated that the Langley fighters were scrambled to respond to the notifications about American 77,178 United 93, or both. These statements were incorrect as well. The fighters were scrambled because of the report that American 11 was heading south, as is clear not just from taped conversations at NEADS but also from taped conversations at FAA centers; contemporaneous logs compiled at NEADS, Continental Region headquarters, and NORAD; and other records. After reading the above, is "Destruction" the correct answer to the question "What was overstated in regards to the perceived inadequacy in military response to 9/11"?

Answer:
no