Living in your major metropolitan areas such as Chicago and all for my livelong except for 2 really fun married with a darling baby daughter years in Cumberland, Md., a beautiful little town (where you can have more fun if you're young and have no money than anyplace else I've ever lived) I can't say for sure, but I do THINK this song's account of small town life is not only brilliant but also correct sir! That is, I think it's correct not from personal experience but because when I can, I always go to my family reunion in Brunswick, Mo., my momma's home town. Really good people there as they say and/but you better believe they know everybody else's share of ups and downs.
Now about this song here, has it got a great bass line running along at the appropriate times on the 6 string? Why yes, i think it does. But can the guy play harmonica just right? Wellll ... i believe he can. OK, but does it include a great Steve Earle kinda "hup!" just when you need it? Hell yes it does! All right then, fine, but here's the deal: Does the very last line of the song put a precise and this time I mean precise, silver dagger in your heart EVERY single time?
Friday, June 14, 2013
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Death to all modifiers!
There are a number of wacky things about this here story of the Zimmerman trial, but if you guessed that what really and truly bothers me is the inappropriate use of the adverb "strongly" in the NBC News "Editor's Note," you would be correct sir!
Here is the offending usage, in context:
Editor’s note: George Zimmerman has sued NBCUniversal for defamation. The company has strongly denied his allegations.
Now that is pathetic.
"Strongly" denied?
Look. Giving the benefit of the doubt to the author, who for the sake of argument is an actual anonymous old school "editor" rather than a corporate flunky butting in for the joy of it, what she means to say is that in the company's opinion the defamation action is unfounded. Perfectly fine.
So just say that!
Say "the company has denied Zimmerman's allegations."
To insert "strongly" so as to say "My employer has STRONGLY denied Zimmerman's allegations" is what we back in the Baltimore day used to call "a cheat."
Because, exactly why does that adverb "strongly" have any reason whatsoever to live in that editor's note?
Is it there to convey that unlike the company's usual weak, sniveling and unbelievable denials, this time they really mean it?
Come on. Don't try to give the company's denial more weight than it has earned by pumping it up with cheap, unproven modifiers.
I the reader will be the judge of how "strongly" your employer has denied the charges, thank you very much. If, that is, you should deem it convenient or relevant to specify the charges and your employer's response, which you don't.
― Joseph Heller, Catch-22
Bring me all that I ask!
Here is the offending usage, in context:
Editor’s note: George Zimmerman has sued NBCUniversal for defamation. The company has strongly denied his allegations.
Now that is pathetic.
"Strongly" denied?
Look. Giving the benefit of the doubt to the author, who for the sake of argument is an actual anonymous old school "editor" rather than a corporate flunky butting in for the joy of it, what she means to say is that in the company's opinion the defamation action is unfounded. Perfectly fine.
So just say that!
Say "the company has denied Zimmerman's allegations."
To insert "strongly" so as to say "My employer has STRONGLY denied Zimmerman's allegations" is what we back in the Baltimore day used to call "a cheat."
Because, exactly why does that adverb "strongly" have any reason whatsoever to live in that editor's note?
Is it there to convey that unlike the company's usual weak, sniveling and unbelievable denials, this time they really mean it?
Come on. Don't try to give the company's denial more weight than it has earned by pumping it up with cheap, unproven modifiers.
I the reader will be the judge of how "strongly" your employer has denied the charges, thank you very much. If, that is, you should deem it convenient or relevant to specify the charges and your employer's response, which you don't.
“Death to all modifiers, he declared one day, and out of every letter that passed through his hands went every adverb and every adjective.”
― Joseph Heller, Catch-22
Bring me all that I ask!
Tuesday, June 11, 2013
One of them must be wrong
2 Men Say They're Jesus
(Episode 1: The President)
Obama at his 2009 inaugural, and even earlier, at the Wilson Center in 2007, teeing off on the Bush surveillance policy ("it's a false choice!") ...
(Episode 1: The President)
Obama at his 2009 inaugural, and even earlier, at the Wilson Center in 2007, teeing off on the Bush surveillance policy ("it's a false choice!") ...
Obama this week, defending his decision to not only continue but greatly expand that very same evil Bush surveillance policy (it's a true choice!) ...
2 Men Say They're Jesus
(Episode 2: The American People)
The Pew Research Center points out that ...
In January 2006, with Bush in office and a few weeks after initial news reports of the Bush administration’s surveillance program:
- a lopsided majority of Democrats (61% to 36%), said it was unacceptable for the NSA to scrutinize phone calls and emails of suspected terrorists
- while an equally lopsided majority of Republicans (75%) said the policy was A-OK
But in June 2013, with Obama in office:
- the almost exact same lopsided majority of Democrats who were shocked, nay appalled, by Bush's surveillance policy say (64% to 34%) that the even bigger Obama war on privacy is now miraculously A-OK. Because, Bush!
- while only about half of Republicans (52%) still say the same sort of policies that were A-OK under Bush are still A-OK under Obama. Because, Obama!
Monday, June 10, 2013
Once Again!
... I side with the Judge.
God I must be old as dirt. Oh wait, I AM old as dirt. Even a mere TEN years ago people might have responded to that by saying, "Oh, Mr. Who, you're not THAT old." But now they look at me -- if they look at me at all, which increasingly they don't and who can blame them -- and say ... "And your point is?"
But I mean come on! I know I've said it before. I'm not THAT senile.
Puh-lease show some ... tiny ... little ... bit ... of respect for the US of A courts, which for all their faults are still the envy of ... etcetera. You're up for domestic violence charges for beating on your wife, you get a plea bargain saving you from any jail time & your response is to slap your lawyer in the butt in front of the judge? Oh, you go to jail, Mister -- and that is my ruling too.
I mean, from all accounts the house was rocking. "He said, she said: it's bad for the children ... heavy, heavy, heavy problems." That's from a band that's in the Who Am Us Anyway Field Guide to Pop Music's Top Ten Criminally Underrated Rock Bands but I won't tell you who that is.
God I must be old as dirt. Oh wait, I AM old as dirt. Even a mere TEN years ago people might have responded to that by saying, "Oh, Mr. Who, you're not THAT old." But now they look at me -- if they look at me at all, which increasingly they don't and who can blame them -- and say ... "And your point is?"
But I mean come on! I know I've said it before. I'm not THAT senile.
Puh-lease show some ... tiny ... little ... bit ... of respect for the US of A courts, which for all their faults are still the envy of ... etcetera. You're up for domestic violence charges for beating on your wife, you get a plea bargain saving you from any jail time & your response is to slap your lawyer in the butt in front of the judge? Oh, you go to jail, Mister -- and that is my ruling too.
I mean, from all accounts the house was rocking. "He said, she said: it's bad for the children ... heavy, heavy, heavy problems." That's from a band that's in the Who Am Us Anyway Field Guide to Pop Music's Top Ten Criminally Underrated Rock Bands but I won't tell you who that is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
