Test of civic literacy
(Note: As responses come in on the VFR survey, along with some justified complaints, several of the more difficult/unfair/tricky test questions are discussed below.)
Want to test your civic knowledge of the United States? Here’s a 33 question multiple choice test you can take in a few minutes.
The survey was prepared by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute as part of its effort to revive an understanding of the importance of civic knowledge. Deroy Murdock has an article about how poorly people have done on the test.
WARNING: STOP READING HERE IF YOU HAVE NOT TAKEN THE TEST AND THINK YOU MIGHT DO SO, BECAUSE THE TEST QUESTIONS ARE DISCUSSED BELOW.
Update: Here are ISI’s explanations of the test results and of the survey methodology.
Of 2,508 randomly selected telephone respondents who took the test last spring, 71.4 percent got fewer than 60 percent of the answers correct (which is called an F), 17.8 percent got 60-70 percent correct (a D), 7.4 percent got 70-80 percent correct (a C), 2.6 percent 80-90 percent correct (a B), and 0.8 percent got over 90 percent correct (an A), meaning they got 30 or more answers correct.
The mean score was 49 percent.
By the way, if 21 people got between 30 and 33 answers correct, then out of 2,508 respondents at most five people got all 33 answers correct.
REPEAT: DO NOT READ FURTHER IN THIS ENTRY IF YOU HAVE NOT YET TAKEN THE TEST. IF YOU READ FURTHER, AND THEN TAKE THE TEST, PLEASE DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE VFR SURVEY.
However, I am not as appalled by the results of this test as I have been by many similar stories about the ignorance of Americans. For one thing, this was a random test by telephone of the whole population, and I expect most people to be pretty ignorant. Second, many of the questions on this test were not “gimmes.” You had to think about them. In several instances, when I had a worm of doubt that the seemingly correct answer really was correct, the only way to make sure was to eliminate all the other answers.
Also, some questions go beyond basic knowledge. That the “wall of separation” between church and state comes from a letter by Thomas Jefferson is not basic knowledge. You would not expect or require the average informed American citizen to know about that. You would expect people who follow such issues to know that. I think I first learned the source of the “wall of separation” phrase in a lengthy article in National Review perhaps 15 years ago that explained the falsity of the liberal notion of a complete separation of religion and state in the U.S. But how many people read National Review? Further, it would be in the interest of the liberal media and education establishments not to tell people that “wall of separation” comes from a private letter, rather than from an official government document, as such knowledge would undermine the quasi-sacred status that the “wall of separation” doctrine enjoys.
The upshot is that the low average score on the test is not as automatically disturbing to me as, say, the fact that Harvard students show an astonishing lack of basic knowledge.
As alluded to above, the reason Americans lack basic civic and historical knowledge is not that there is anything wrong with them, but that the schools simply don’t teach it or require it of them.
A related factor is the systematic failure of the news media to provide the most basic, structural facts underlying the facts in the news.
Here’s an example. Answer this question: What is United States Central Command? I did not know the answer until about seven years ago, when, becoming aware of my ignorance, I looked it up on the Web. Even though I had read or heard of Central Command and of its then-commander, Gen. Schwartzkopf, probably thousands of times in the period leading up to and during the Gulf War in 1991, I suddenly realized, when Central Command and its commander Tommy Franks re-entered the news again at the time of the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, that I did not know what it actually meant. I had inchoately assumed that Central Command was somehow “central” to the U.S. military. But, as I learned, it didn’t mean that at all, as you can see here and here. Neither the nature of Central Command, nor the nature of the joint command structure of the U.S. military of which Central Command is a part, had ever been explained in the news media, even though the media constantly mentioned “Central Command,” “Central Command,” “Central Command,” along with its commander.
Now apply that principle to other areas of knowledge, and the general ignorance of the American people about their system of government ceases to be surprising.
* * *
But maybe I’m being too easy on people. Let’s look at the “wall of separation” question again:
15) The phrase that in America there should be a “wall of separation� between church and state appears in:
A. George Washington’s Farewell Address
B. the Mayflower Compact
C. the Constitution
D. the Declaration of Independence
E. Thomas Jefferson’s letters
Now let’s say that I had never heard of Jefferson’s letter about the wall of separation. Even without that knowledge, I would still have known that there was nothing about it in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Even if I didn’t know much about Washington’s Farewell Address, I would have “sensed” that such a subject did not come up there. And, of course, the Pilgrims on the Mayflower, who came to New England to set up their own religious society, would not want a separation of church and state, but the opposite. That would have left me with Jefferson’s letters.
Ok. However, for a person to get to the correct answer by the above process of elimination, he would still have had to have some substantive knowledge of, and even a “feel” for, American history. So this is a tough question, and we cannot expect that a majority of even reasonably well-informed, college-educated Americans would get it right.
- end of initial entry -
Several readers have sent in their scores, but I don’t want to turn this into a competition, so I’ll just post comments that are about the test itself or about the difficulty of individual questions.
Paul Nachman writes:
Well, but … look at how well people do on three of what you called “gimmes,” the ones I’ve bolded:
- Less than half can name all three branches of the government.
- Only 21 percent know that the phrase “government of the people, by the people, for the people� comes from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. [LA replies: That is particularly appalling. And the paleocons think that too much is made of Lincoln!]
- Although Congress has voted twice in the last eight years to approve foreign wars, only 53 percent know that the power to declare war belongs to Congress. Almost 40 percent incorrectly believe it belongs to the president.
- Only 55 percent know that Congress shares authority over U.S. foreign policy with the president. Almost a quarter incorrectly believe Congress shares this power with the United Nations.
[LA replies: I wouldn’t call this a gimme. The question is stated in abstract language that does not correspond to the specific provisions in the Constitution. The Constitution says, e.g., that Congress shall declare war, and that treaties require the advice and consent of the Senate, and that the President shall appoint ambassadors with the approval of the Senate. But there is nothing in the Constitution about “foreign policy” per se. So I wouldn’t call this a gimme.]
- Only 27 percent know the Bill of Rights expressly prohibits establishing an official religion for the United States.
- Less than one in five know that the phrase “a wall of separation� between church and state comes from a letter by Thomas Jefferson. Almost half incorrectly believe it can be found in the Constitution.
Terry Morris writes:
You wrote:
The upshot is that the low average score on the test is not as automatically disturbing to me as, say, the fact that Harvard students show an astonishing lack of basic knowledge. (emphasis mine)
Here’s a recent VFR article in which commenter A. Zarkov points out this astonishing lack of basic knowledge:
In the 1980s a team found that something like a third of graduating Harvard seniors did not understand the cause of the seasons.
LA replies:
Yeah, that’s rough. That’s hard to take.
Clayton R. writes:
I find it ironic that in a test of civic literacy ISI misquotes the Gettysburg Address in question number seven. At least, I assume they consider the Gettysburg Address to be the correct answer!
LA replies:
You’re right, I noticed that in passing as I was taking the test, but didn’t stop to think about it. However, I did have the passing thought that my own memory was wrong and that the test’s quotation of the phrase was correct.
Hannon writes:
I’m glad you expanded this entry. In light of what has been said here about Americans—from Harvard graduates to regular citizens—it may be a fair assertion to say that it is more a matter of what our society values in general than what is taught and valued in the schooling phase.
Why should students feel any need to memorize facts and build understandings in the midst of (or in lieu of) the constant pressure to succeed in the world of people and money, whether by hustling or legitimate professional development? Success in the latter or “real life” need not retain the lessons of U.S. history or even competence in math and reading and writing.
Chris L. writes:
I found question #9 to be questionable. Yes, income taxes are not allowed by the original Constitution, but are allowed by the 16th amendment. Also, I found some of the economics questions near the end to be either poorly worded (#29) or somewhat subjective (#31). Lastly, questions like #26 use the old multiple choice trick of reversing one of the answers to trip people up. Answer A has its opposite in C. While that is fine for an academic exam, for sampling people over the phone or even online, it does not really provide a good gauge of how well people know their civics.
While I believe civic literacy in this country is abysmal, this test really is not a good gauge of that situation.
LA replies:
On the income tax, you are absolutely right. That’s an astonishingly flawed question. Fortunately for me, I didn’t think of the constitutional amendment allowing the income tax but only thought of the original Constitution, so the question didn’t create a problem for me.
On number 29, I agree it’s tough, and indeed the correct answer uses phraseology that I’ve never heard before, but you just have to eliminate the weaker answers until you’re left with the best.
Another thing: With a tough question like 29, how could people be expected to evaluate the answers on the phone? It’s something one would need to look at and ponder. To administer a question like this on the phone would be like giving an SAT test over the phone.
A. Zarkov writes:
The test is easy. [LA replies: That’s also what Paul Nachman said, who told me about the test earlier today; I’ve given my reasons why I don’t agree.] I can see people not knowing if the answer to question 13 was “a” or “e.” Questions 29 and 33 are slightly technical. I really wouldn’t expect Harvard seniors to miss more than five questions. Another interesting outcome: The students at the higher ranked schools did worse. This result did not surprise me as they most likely feel that they don’t have to teach their elite students the basics because they assume they come in already knowing them. They need to wake up.
Bill W.writes:
I think the following questions are ambiguous.
Question 9: I answered: levy taxes, but the answer was “make treaties.” Clearly the constitution gives the federal government the power to do both.
question 29: definition of “public good.”: I answered e. government pays for it, rather than b. a citizen can benefit from it without directly paying for it.
Seems to me that these two questions were made up on the spot …
Roger G. writes:
On No. 30, I knew that church/state separation came from something called “The Kentucky Resolutions,” written by Jefferson, but I didn’t know this was correspondence.
I would not have gotten several of the later questions correct if I had received them and the multiple choices by ear. I was only able to get these because I could read the questions and answers, and think about my response.
LA replies:
The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions were in the 1780s, before the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment, and concerned the end of religious establishment in those states. The famous Jefferson letter on “wall of separation” was written when he was president.
I also would have had more difficulties if this were on the phone.
[LA note November 30:
[Above I misspoke and I apologize to Roger. Because he mentioned religious freedom and the “Kentucky Resolutions,” which made me think of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolves, I mixed up the Virginia and Kentucky Resolves with the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which Jefferson as governor of Virginia proposed in 1779 and which was passed in 1786. The Virginia and Kentucky Resolves, written respectively by Madison and Jefferson and passed in 1798 and 1799, were in protest again the Alien and Sedition Acts and stated that the states had the power to nullify any federal law they considered unconstitutional.]
* * *
November 23, 2008
Several test questions discussed
A reader writes:
Score me 30, Lawrence. I missed 29, 30, and 33, and am glad to do so. So I’ll give the test a 90 percent—How’s that?
29) All answers are wholly inadequate describing the public good
30) It is probably true that a government would be likely to decrease taxes and increase spending in recession—although that is by no means certain at this moment—but it should decrease spending as well. Gotcha question.
33) Weak question, weak choices. I can’t pick a winner if the nag won’t cross the finish line.
One could provide a legitimate test with which I would struggle to score 50%, I’ve not a doubt. So this is not a test for knowledge, but for ignorance. In that it succeeds.
LA replies:
I agree some of the questions are imprecise, tricky and not fair. Let’s look at the three ones you got wrong, starting with 29:
29. A flood-control levee (or National Defense) is considered a public good because:
A. citizens value it as much as bread and medicine
B. a resident can benefit from it without directly paying for it
C. government construction contracts increase employment
D. insurance companies cannot afford to replace all houses after a flood
E. government pays for its construction, not citizens
A. is silly and obviously wrong.
C. is possible, but is this what defines a public good? No.
D. is a side point and obviously not the answer.
Leaving B and E.
As for E., is it true that if citizens pay for something, it is therefore not a public good? No. Also, if government is paying for something, then the taxpayers—the citizens—are paying for it. So E. is wrong on two counts: if citizens were paying for some public benefit out of their own money, in a charitable way, it would still be a public good, and there’s no distinction between government and citizens (i.e. taxpayers) paying for something.
B. seems to come closest. People are benefiting from something that they themselves have not directly paid for. That would handle government expenditures, as well as things provided by private charities, foundations, etc., which the beneficiary has not paid for indirectly or at all.
So B. is the best answer.
But the question is scandalously sloppy and imprecise. It becomes a test of one’s ability to work one’s way through a trick answer, rather than of one’s actual knowledge.
Also, offhand, I don’t know what the correct definition of a public good is.
Now let’s look at 30.
30) Which of the following fiscal policy combinations would a government most likely follow to stimulate economic activity when the economy is in a severe recession?
A. increasing both taxes and spending
B. increasing taxes and decreasing spending
C. decreasing taxes and increasing spending
D. decreasing both taxes and spending
This is somewhat tricky, and seems to require that the respondent have certain views about economics. It even seems to require that one be a Keynesian, believing in deficit spending to stimulate economic activity. In any case, the basic idea is that one would want more, rather than less money available to be spent. Therefore
A. is wrong, since increasing taxes reduces available money people have.
B. is even more wrong, since it decreases money in the economy both at the taxing end and the spending end.
D. Decreasing taxes would be good, but decreasing spending goes against the implicit Keynesian premise of the question.
C. Leaves more money in people’s hands, and pumps the economy by government spending. So C. is the correct answer.
You were not hep to the Keynesian expectations that were being placed on you, so you got the question wrong. But should a respondent have a certain ideological view in order to get the right answer? It doesn’t seem fair.
As for 33, I’ve replied to another commenter who felt he had the right answer, but was told it was wrong.
As I see it, D. is the only possible correct answer on 33. Let’s go through it.
33) If taxes equal government spending, then:
A. government debt is zero
B. printing money no longer causes inflation
C. government is not helping anybody
D. tax per person equals government spending per person
E. tax loopholes and special-interest spending are absent
A. is not right because debt refers to total accumulated debt owed by the federal governemnt, as distinct from the deficit, the amount by which expenditures exceed revenues, in any given fiscal year.
B. is wrong because if the government began to print money it would cause inflation.
C is wrong because absence of a deficit does not mean that money was not spent helping anyone.
E. is irrelevant. There is no connection between the existence or non-existence of tax loopholes and special interest spending, and whether taxes equal spending
D. is right because the number of persons in the U.S. is the same in both halves of the sentence. So total taxes equal total spending.
So it seems to me the one catch here is that the respondent needs to know the difference between debt and deficit. And not everyone knows that. The words represent similar concepts and even sound alike yet are different. So it’s a bit tricky. All kinds of people who may have good civic knowledge of the Constitution and U.S. history might not know the difference between debt and deficit. At the same time, this is a test of civic knowledge, and people are supposed to be aware of the problem of the federal deficit and the federal debt, so the question is not unfair.
Reader replies:
On 33, you will not pry “none of the above” out of my cold, dead hands.
“Tax per person equals government spending per person” is far too misleading and presumptuous to be of use. All people do not pay taxes; in fact, most people do not pay taxes. And government does not spend equally on persons.
You may deduce the only possible answer is “D,” but should not qualify it as the correct answer. If you were writing the test, that is certainly not the correct answer you would have provided. But I think you are correct in thinking that it evolves into an IQ test as it goes on.
LA replies:
Tax per person obviously means average tax per person, so answer D. is intelligible and correct. But I agree with you that the correct answer is still very strange. It’s as though they deliberately used odd phraseology—not the wording normally associated with these concepts—to throw people off. In such questions, the test ceases to be a test of civics knowledge, and becomes a test of thinking ability. It’s odd and inappropriate that they did that, and I wonder what their aim was.
If you’re going to test people’s civics knowledge, you use the language that is normally used to express those ideas and facts. You don’t make up idiosyncratic expressions that no one ever ever heard before.
LA continues:
So far, the most complaints have been about question 33.
Also, quite a few people did not recognize the phrase from the Gettysburg address. That’s surprising, but perhaps they were thrown by the fact that test reversed the order of the second and third phrase, which is shocking. In a test developed over many months, worked on by all kinds of scholars, how could such a mistake occur?
A reader writes:
I correctly answered all of the questions except number eight, which I can only attribute to ignorance. I simply didn’t know what FDR threatened to do when the Supreme Court declared parts of the New Deal unconstitutional.
LA replies:
Yes, that’s an example of something you either know or don’t. When I was in high school, FDR’s court-packing scheme was one of the best known moments in the story of the New Deal: FDR was highly admired, but it was the agreed view that he had overreached himself. In more recent years, that particular chapter of history probably gets much less play, and it’s not surprising that it’s not as well known.
It’s an interesting question. Is Roosevelt’s court packing scheme a basic part of civic knowledge that Americans should be expected to have, or is it just one historical fact among thousands of others?
LA continues:
I would say that the test is in large part unfair, because it is supposed to be a test of people’s civics knowledge, not a test of their ability to scope out trick questions. If the test designers wanted it to be a test of the ability to answer trick questions, they should have labeled it as such.
November 24
LA writes:
Comments and questions about the quiz can be sent here.
Terry Morris writes:
You wrote:
Also, quite a few people did not recognize the phrase from the Gettysburg address. That’s surprising, but perhaps they were thrown by the fact that test reversed the order of the second and third phrase, which was shocking. In a test developed over many months, worked on by all kinds of scholars, how could such a mistake occur?
At the risk of offending your readers who missed that particular question, I think it’s irrelevant what order the phrases were placed in. Put them in any order you wish, I’m still going to identify them with Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, as I would the phrase, “Seven and fourscore years ago.” Incidentally, what year does the preceding phrase put us at? Well, you’d have to know when the phrase was uttered, wouldn’t you. I’d be curious to know what answer they chose, the Declaration, the Constitution, or Dr. King’s speech?
LA replies:
You’re a hard man.
Terry Morris replies:
Yes, but fair I think. If Americans truly care about their history they should know this. Now, had one of the answers to the question been Wycliffe’s translation of the Bible to English, I might then have been confused. (Note: I did not learn of this from the site linked, I simply did a quick Google search on the topic and that’s what I ended up with.)
LA writes:
I said I would not connect individual reader’s names with scores but, some interesting comments include the commenters’ score and don’t make sense without them, so I may have to make an occasional exception to the rule, as I do with Clark Coleman’s comment below.
Clark Coleman writes:
I got a “conservative perfect score” of 32 out of 33 about a week ago on this test. I define a “conservative perfect score” as answering all questions except the Keynesian question #30 correctly, and answering #30 with “cut spending, cut taxes” fully expecting it to be counted wrong but defiantly refusing to answer it the way they wanted me to answer it. Sure enough, when I submitted the test, that one came back as the only “wrong” answer. Fine with me. I will go to the Gulag before they can make me confess something I don’t believe.:-)
A reader writes:
Irritatingly——like one of Al Gore’s incompetent 2000 voters in Broward Co., Fla.——while checking my answers before submitting them, I seem inadvertently to have rolled my computer mouse’s scroll-wheel to change one right answer to a wrong answer. In any case I have scored 31 of 33.
Excepting the mouse glitch (which tells us little other than that I cannot be trusted to handle a computer mouse) the one question I answered incorrectly was 9. Under Our Constitution, some powers belong to the federal government. What is one power of the federal government?” I said “Levy income taxes,” with the 16th Amendment in mind, but ISI believes that “Make treaties” is the better answer. ISI has a point, I think. Personally, I decided against “Make treaties” on the ground that the president and the Senate, not “the federal government,” make treaties; whereas “the federal government” levies (or at least collects) income taxes since the time of the 16th Amendment. However, the power to “levy income taxes” does not belong exclusively to the federal government, whereas the power to “make treaties” most certainly does. The question never actually said “exclusively,” but in case of doubt one might have inferred it.
The test though arguably imperfect is very, very good. I like it.
A. Zarkov writes:
In my opinion some readers are unreasonably critical of question 33.
Let’s say that the number of people = N; government taxes = x, and government spending = y. Therefore the tax per person = x/N and the spending per person = y/N. Since x = y, spending per person = taxes per person.
N could be the total number of taxpayers or the total population, or something else—it does not matter so long as it appears on both sides of the equation.
Taxes per person does not necessarily equal the average tax because some people do not pay taxes. The average tax = (total tax)/(number of taxpayers), while the tax per person = (total tax)/population count. But you do not have to know this, since the average does not enter into the question.
The difference between the deficit and the debt is exactly the difference between a flow and a stock. If I drive my car at 60 mph, that’s a flow and it’s displayed on the car’s speedometer. The total miles driven is a stock (an accumulation), and it’s displayed on the car’s odometer. This distinction is critical to answering the question. But most everyone knows (or should know) that the national debt is huge—around $10 trillion. So the answer can’t be “A.” That leaves “D” as the only answer that makes any sense in the unlikely event that in a particular year taxes exactly matched expenditures.
The results of this civics test are extremely disappointing as it indicates there’s no hope the citizens could understand that the U.S. government uses cash accounting instead of accrual accounting, and thus both the reported debt and the reported deficits are significantly under estimated. Cash accounting does not provide the present value of future obligations such as Medicare spending. The U.S. government cannot balance its books even if it taxed everyone at 100 percent. It’s important for citizens to know this because it means they can’t possibly get the future benefits they think they will get.
Civics ignorance matters, it matters a lot.
Posted November 26
Laura G. writes:
A year or two ago, I happened to see a copy of the final test taken by 8th graders graduating from a one-room school house on the prairie in the late 1800’s. The questions were as difficult as the ones here, some more so. Some required an essay on issues of American history. It was a stunning example of the slide our public schooling has taken. I doubt that students currently graduating from the Ivy’s would be able correctly to answer most of the questions from that old schoolhouse.
LA writes:
I don’t follow the issues that Christopher C. raises below, but since he seems to know what he’s talking about, and since there is such interest in Question 33, I’m departing from my usual policy of not posting material that I myself haven’t understood.
Christopher C. writes:
I was going to pass on getting into this, but A. Zarkov expresses exactly why I answered 33 as I did. Tax per person = government spending per person is meaningless because it has and never will exist as a condition. First, what government are we talking about? State, local, federal? Second, even if we limit it to the federal government, there is the timing problem. Children and others pay, and have never paid, tax. But of that group that pays, most if not all receive, indirectly, some benefit of government spending in the form of not only entitlements but more indirectly, national defense. Third, it’s incalculable. If it could be calculated, and people could see that they paid X into government and received value X in return, they’d soon cut out the middle man. Imagine that $500 bonus check exactly equaled all the taxes you paid. You’d wonder: gee, what a waste. Why don’t I just keep the $500 and save the postage etc.? So it is a meaningless concept; it can’t deal with the temporal element or the reality of the human condition. It would only be meaningful in an artificial, gamed environment. Like a season of Survivor.
The only meaningful answer is A, and I thought the test might have been driving to this rather than the meaningless but possibly technically logical answer D. That it may refer to the total accumulated debt is part of the point. That Zarkov mentions accounting is exactly the point to. In accounting as I learned it, economic events create debits and credits WHEN they occur, whether or not the exchanges necessary to rectify the account have or will or will ever occur. E.g., if I perform X numbers of hours of work at Y rate allowing me to bill or send an invoice of $Z, I enter that event in my books as an account receivable as against fees income—hopefully recording it as soon after the event as possible. Later I get paid, and rectify the account with further entries. Major capital investments/purchases can and should be amortized. Loans, loan interest, etc. etc. etc. all have means of being accounted for.
Zarkov writes: “[T]here’s no hope the citizens could understand that the U.S. government uses cash accounting instead of accrual accounting, and thus both the reported debt and the reported deficits are significantly under estimated. Cash accounting does not provide the present value of future obligations such as Medicare spending….”
Exactly! Debt is, in accounting terms as I understand it, a form of spending. If government debt was properly, reasonably, properly amortized, then one might, with a certain reasonable degree of confidence, be able to say that “a” government debt is zero, as the government would be current with a reasonable debt or loan payoff program.
Of course, I have heavily qualified that last part because one can only guess—either reasonably or in some such degree, whether one has a good chance of making future payments. And of course there’s a judgment to be made as what constitutes a reasonable payment schedule or plan.
And of course, my first and second objections up top apply as well to some extent to my answer. However, my third objection, calculability, need not apply, save for the question of what’s reasonable. Of course, insisting on government not accumulating that which need be accounted for beyond tax periods i.e debt e.g. one year, as some of the anti-federalists wished for the federal government, and even, to this day, local, smaller institutions, e.g. families, small businesses, small local governments, adhere to, would make A not merely an answer to be reasonably made, but in fact actually possible.
Once the government takes on multi-tax period debt, e.g. bonds, etc., then, yes, one might be tempted to say, well then, it’s impossible to say there’s no debt. That, however, is false. One could have debt obligations, but also have cash reserves or other assets that could allow one to say, ok, government debt is zero. What a happy situation: taxes equaling spending; all accounted for.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 22, 2008 04:29 PM | Send