As I explained before, there is no right or wrong way to use percentages when comparing rankings on a list-- it is meaningless. So, I have already admitted that I was being sarcastic, there was no "error".
What about Boortz's error about the highest paperback debut in over forty years? Do you like that this man is leading your cause?
I have no idea about what that idiot will say. He's an entertainer. Taking him for more than that is dumb.
Do you like that this man is leading your cause?
Thank goodness he's not. The radio gives tax reform publicity, but boortz does not lead anyone I know.
It's the need for tax reform that has the populace ready to hear about reform proposals. We are primed and ready for a change. It's coming. People hunger to eliminate the beast, which only prepares them to hear options. Boortz often talks about one of them - I don't listen to him nor howard stern nor barbra stresiand nor michael moore. They're all paid entertainers.
Perhaps not, but that is not what was erroneous. Your usage of inclusive and exclusive was wrong.