Recent Comments

1. about 14 hours ago on Phoebe and Her Unicorn

   Tigressy, print the cartoon and your and my comments. Take them to an employed English teacher @ a local university or a well regarded high school. Ask that teacher to vet the cartoon based on the correct use of gerunds. Ask yourself whether you would have understood the cartoon if, instead of “him being there” and “me being there,” the dialog had been “his presence” and “my presence.” Also, NOT “uneducated,” but “poorly educated”—quite, quite different, both of which give rise to ignorance, not stupidity, which seems to be what you think I’ve implied. As for “lazy, sloppy” speakers, such folks surround us. Just a few minutes ago, I heard an NPR on-air journalist—a professional communicator—report that a political figure “got asked” rather than “was asked” a question. That’s lazy, that’s sloppy, that’s unacceptable. My overarching concern is that, whenever we debase English, we lower the standard our teachers ask pupils and students to learn and to use. It’s as if we have two English languages, the correct one which gives rise to thoughtful communication, be it fiction or non-fiction, and the debased one, which gives rise to lazy, sloppy speech and writing. Why have two languages when the correct language meets all our needs? Ignorance, laziness, and sloppy disregard for the intelligence, education, and experience of listeners and readers insult each of us. That is not the standard we should tolerate, much less applaud.

2. about 15 hours ago on Robert Ariail

   The car is certainly mislabeled. It should be REMOVE FROM OFFICE, not IMPEACHMENT. The House has impeached the SOB. That’s a done deal. The Senate’s relationship with impeachment is the same as a jury’s relationship with indictment. The issue at hand is “Guilt/Innocence,” (“Remove from Office”/“Don’t Remove from Office”) NOT impeachment. Onlookers are ignorant enough (not to mention those following events in the media). We should not confuse them further, particularly as they decide how to vote.

3. about 15 hours ago on Jack Ohman

   You are annoyingly inarticulate. It’s “If she WERE a Democrat,” NOT “If she WAS a Democrat.” What in God’s name is a so-called fake liberal? If you use a silly term, at least be polite enough to let readers know what you THINK it means. Try to use subjects & predicates, if they’re not unduly challenging for you. Get an adult to help. Also, you don’t seem to understand the the Roman god Janus was linked to doors, gates, and beginnings. The term you struggled so mightily to use—but failed pathetically—is “Janus-faced,” i.e., two-faced, deceitful. If you’re bound and determined to lumber comments with your erratic and aimless thoughts, please have the courtesy to make them readily understandable. Thanks

4. about 15 hours ago on Tom Toles

   When you’re sober, you should read all about the religious wars in the 16th-17th centuries, of being told what to believe, not because it’s true, but because that’s what the local feudal lord believes. Free thought, if you’re actually capable of thought, is clearly not something with which you’d ever be comfortable. Also, it’s “1600s,” NOT "1600’s"—unless, of course, YOUR feudal lord decrees that “apostrophe s” pluralizes a noun. Time for you to run for public office in order to begin your campaign to repeal all our pesky human rights amendments and impose a theocracy à la Iran & Saudi Arabia.

5. about 15 hours ago on Clay Jones

   So, Stan, your trenchant rebuttal boils down to your assertion that Clay simply didn’t have room in his political cartoon to put an “s” in his dialog balloon. The balloon looks roomy enough for an “s” to me. Tell us, if you HAD to do it all over again, would you STILL fall in love with yourself?

6. about 16 hours ago on Phoebe and Her Unicorn

   Tigressy, it’s a gerund. It might sound better to you not because it is better, but because it’s more familiar to you, possibly because people with whom you speak are ignorant of how gerunds work and how they should be treated. Even if people misuse gerunds as Phoebe does, it doesn’t preclude their being understood by listeners; however, those same listeners are simultaneously made aware that the speaker is either poorly educated or a naturally lazy, sloppy speaker. If you have any interest in the proper use of gerunds, go to https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/mechanics/gerunds_participles_and_infinitives/index.html. Good luck!

7. about 16 hours ago on Phoebe and Her Unicorn

   Stephen, it’s a gerund. The focus of Phoebe’s concern is not “him” or “me,” but “his presence,” i.e., “his being there,” and “her presence,” i.e., “her being there.” If you’re genuinely interested in how gerunds work and how they should be handled, check out https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/mechanics/gerunds_participles_and_infinitives/index.html. Good luck!

8. 1 day ago on Jack Ohman

   Her concern was so deep that she got some not only on herself, but also on innocent passersby. Wipe your shoes; better still, take them off before you come into the Senate chamber.

9. 1 day ago on Tom Toles

   Nostalgia for the 16th-17th centuries has taken hold. Serfs UP!

10. 1 day ago on Clay Jones

    It’s “says,” NOT “sez.” Once you grasp spelling, diction, grammar, punctuation, etc., you can comment on the constructive comments of those who are better educated and more experienced than you. In the meantime, sit back, read, and learn that, while you’re technically a know-it-all, you DON’T know it all.