B-Man Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 And what does this have to do with a quote from Pelosi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 (edited) How, so? I'm not real clear on what you're getting at. And what does this have to do with a quote from Pelosi? Nothing. It was just an observation. If you think about it though, it's not that much different than W invading Iraq because god told him to. At least the 5-year-old is real. Edited September 3, 2013 by Gene Frenkle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 I'm not real clear on what you're getting at. You're assuming that the adverb modifies the adjective, as opposed to being two separate adjectives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 You're assuming that the adverb modifies the adjective, as opposed to being two separate adjectives. In that case, I would expect some punctuation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 In that case, I would expect some punctuation. If it was on the same line, perhaps. Artistic license to place the words on separtae lines eliminate the absolute need for the commas. Never mind the havoc commas have on URLs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Use commas to separate two or more coordinate adjectives that describe the same noun. Be sure never to add an extra comma with non-coordinate adjectives. In either case, your bizarre attempt at deflection was transparent. I find it fitting that a "news" site which is mainly frequented by undereducated lemmings has a name that is grammatically incorrect. Just sayin'... Incorrect...............just sayin . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 If it was on the same line, perhaps. Artistic license to place the words on separtae lines eliminate the absolute need for the commas. Never mind the havoc commas have on URLs I never suggested they put it in the URL. Are you an editor there or something? Why do you feel the need to make excuses for them? Am I unknowingly disparaging your homepage? "Less artsy, more fartsy" - Homer Use commas to separate two or more coordinate adjectives that describe the same noun. Be sure never to add an extra comma with non-coordinate adjectives. In either case, your bizarre attempt at deflection was transparent. Incorrect...............just sayin . No matter how you want to spin it, the site is trash. Just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 I never suggested they put it in the URL. Are you an editor there or something? Why do you feel the need to make excuses for them? Am I unknowingly disparaging your homepage? "Less artsy, more fartsy" - Homer Not an editor. Just countering your usual non contributions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Not an editor. Just countering your usual non contributions. Falling back on "artistic license" is not really all that great of a counter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 No matter how you want to spin it, the site is trash. Just sayin' No matter how much you try to distract................your statement about "grammatically incorrect"...was incorrect. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 If you think about it though, it's not that much different than W invading Iraq because god told him to. At least the 5-year-old is real. And what does this have to do with whether or not we should conduct military strikes against Syria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 And what does this have to do with a quote from Pelosi? Romney's wife has a horse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Falling back on "artistic license" is not really all that great of a counter. Except that it is not just an argument over artistic license. You misinterpreted the meaning and are now backpedaling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 (edited) sure it's just propaganda but what if they could prove that it was the rebels that launched the chemical attacks with help from Saudi Arabia and Qatar - does that mean that I'd be OK for the Russians and Chinese to launch strikes against Saudi Arabia and Qatar? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Iqns5xeoYk Edited September 3, 2013 by ....lybob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 Great news guys, the US has support to attack Syria from literally dozens of countries. But we're just not allowed to know who they are http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/03/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dozens-of-countries-back-obama-in-syria-i-just-cant-tell-you-who-they-are/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 sure it's just propaganda but what if they could prove that it was the rebels that launched the chemical attacks with help from Saudi Arabia and Qatar - does that mean that I'd be OK for the Russians and Chinese to launch strikes against Saudi Arabia and Qatar? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Iqns5xeoYk On what planet is that considered "evidence?" It's a WMD because it's blue? Priceless. In answer to your question: no. Great news guys, the US has support to attack Syria from literally dozens of countries. But we're just not allowed to know who they are http://www.theblaze....u-who-they-are/ The Coalition of the Shyly Willing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 So at some point next week the UN announces that they confirmed the "question of use." Then they debate who did it? When they debate who did it, the UN may cease all illusion of meaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 kerry said today that this is not about obama's red line but about the world's red line. he's absolutely correct. i wonder how many debating this at the water cooler know anything about syria; it's population, geography, ethnic and religious make up, casualties, economic impact, displaced people etc. thank goodness there's pbs: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/09/your-cheat-sheet-to-the-syrian-conflict.html. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 kerry said today that this is not about obama's red line but about the world's red line. he's absolutely correct. Then why did Someguy Moon, or whatever his name is, Secretary General of the UN state that any US attack without UN approval would be an illegal attack? thank goodness there's pbs: http://www.pbs.org/n...n-conflict.html. Yes, nothing like state run media for an unbiased opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts