Posted on 07/21/2004 6:09:04 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Sign me up, please.
Well-written! Very effective parallel that skewers Kerry in his weakest spot.
1) We won WWII with the help of technical advances, but we won it because the American people as a whole were united behind the war effort, and we knew we were fighting on the right side, for the right cause. We understood what the long-term, global consequences would be if the enemy were to win. [Something the Dems do NOT understand today]
2) The technological advances were made out of necessity and desperation only once the fighting was underway. Only after the enemy attacked did we have a clear sense of how unprepared we were. Which fact should have proven to the nation that we must strive to maintain technical and military supremacy during peacetime, so as not to be caught flatfooted again. Kerry fails to understand this crucial lesson of history, and I think that is what Mr. Silverback demonstrates most admirably in his column.
Great article! I am very impressed.
Please put me on this ping list also. (Don't take me off the other one though!)
LOL
Congrats, Mr. Silverback!
Please include me in your ping list for the future articles. :-)
Which really costs more, defense or tribute? If you doubt the answers, consider that we can’t ask Lt. Commander John Waldron. He and his men lie somewhere northwest of Midway Island, a grave they were brought to by their own valor and other men’s wishful thinking.
I had an opinion column published here about 6 weeks ago in our local paper (a NYT affiliate) on abortion. They published it, but beat the bushes for an alternative view. It was written, incidently, by a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage unitarian univeralist reverend. They published our opinions side by side.
At first, I was a little miffed, but then I decided I must have hit a nerve, otherwise an alternative view would not have been necessary.
Congratulations! I'm very impressed. You were paid! And even better, right about Kerry.
Almost forgot. Please add me to your ping list.
Congrats!!!!
Congratulations. That was a good read and I'll look forward to more from you. Please keep me on your list(s).
It's goood to have a friend in the media!
YOU DONE GOOD MAYNARD
Keep 'em coming.
Good article. Remember us little folks when you are a big famous writer.
PBBBTTT!!!
The use of a comma there is optional.
"We had ham, eggs, and cheese" is every bit as correct as "We had ham, eggs and cheese," although the former now seems archaic.
Although the increasing complexity of the English language has led to commas having certain very formal roles, such as breaks between clauses, a comma initially simply indicated an appopriate place to breathe when reading out loud. That initial purpose is a perfectly acceptable reason to use the less common of the two uses of commas in a list.
Congratulations, but this better not cut into the Caption-O-Rama.... :)
OK, I was just reminded of inappropriate use of a comma:
Best pa.in re,liever ev er G.et cod,eine an.d oth.er pop,ula-r me,ds half o.ff
You said:
"The use of a comma there is optional.
'We had ham, eggs, and cheese' is every bit as correct as 'We had ham, eggs and cheese,' although the former now seems archaic."
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but you are misunderstanding my reason for saying that a comma should not be in the author's sentence (which I quoted in my post). In your example a comma is used to separate objects in a list, and you are right about it being optional in that situation.
But the sentence I was referring to in the article is the following:
"It could only make about 100 knots when loaded, and had an awful rate of climb."
In this case the subject of the sentence ("It") has two verbs ("could make" & "had"). The grammar rule is that you don't use a comma to separate the subject from either verb.
(The following information is quoted from Purdue University Online Writing Lab at this link: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_comma.html)
"Don't put a comma between the two verbs or verb phrases in a compound predicate.
We laid out our music and snacks, and began to study. (incorrect)
I turned the corner, and ran smack into a patrol car. (incorrect)"
I hope this explains the situation better for you. Guess I should have included the grammar rule in my first post to make it absolutely clear. But as I said in that post, I hesitated to say anything at all-- because I make mistakes in writing too. But the author had asked for some constructive criticism. Since the author is writing now for a published paper, I thought it would be good to bring that correction to the author's attention.
Personally, it doesn't matter that much to me. But I know there are some people who get really upset when published writers make grammar mistakes. So I was just trying to help the author's writing career!
Sorry, that link won't work with the parentheses added on the end.
Here is the link:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_comma.html
Great piece and right on target.
The problem is the conception of peace. The lefties concieve peace as the permanet condition. Peace is actually the rebuilding period between wars. War is the normal condition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.