Comments on: WSJ takes a look at Go Fish

By: umustbekidding

umustbekidding — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:12:55 +0000

Both set of my grandparents were born here. Bad grammar. Not terrible, just not proper.
I say things like “landed up” – it drives my husband nuts. He says “you END up, you don’t land up!”
Got it from my mom.

By: Bill Simon

Bill Simon — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:54:30 +0000

Yes, she was born in Georgia. She knows her grammar, though.

By: umustbekidding

umustbekidding — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:49:34 +0000

Bill
Was she born in GA?
You know we’re behind here.

By: North Ga Indy

North Ga Indy — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:47:12 +0000

you’re in the south, no one uses “whom”.

This is another reason why I like you. You are serious about correct Grammar, like me.

By: Bill Simon

Bill Simon — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:43:21 +0000

you’re in the south, no one uses “whom”.

At last! I can tell my southern-bred mom a good excuse!

By: Daniel N. Adams

Daniel N. Adams — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 14:45:14 +0000

Bill,

I understood the annoying “tongue in cheek” sidebar argument between “who/that.” I just took the opportunity to make or clarify a point.

And umbk is correct, only pretentious Yankee a**holes use “whom.” I know, I married into a family of them.

By: umustbekidding

umustbekidding — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:18:24 +0000

you’re in the south, no one uses “whom”.

By: Bill Simon

Bill Simon — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:35:54 +0000

Is there a mnemonic way to know when to use “whom” over “who”?

By: Bill Simon

Bill Simon — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:34:58 +0000

(loves it when people like Adams jumps in thinking we are dead serious on an alternate thread within a thread)

By: rugby fan

rugby fan — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 03:56:30 +0000

Well if he had a problem with “whom” not being used, he needs to learn when it is appropriate to use “whom”.

In this instance, it was not.

By: Daniel N. Adams

Daniel N. Adams — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 03:29:24 +0000

Geez people!

If it was a single word that Jason had a problem with, he most likely had a problem with “allow”, not “that”, “who” or even “whom.” But most likely it was the entire statement that posed the socialist argument that something is needed for someone because they “deserve” it or it’s only “fair” that they have it and we need to use the force of government to take money away from those that “earned” it so the item can be provided to those “less fortunate” who could have “earned” it but haven’t, didn’t or won’t.

That being said. I agree with Jason that I don’t like how it was worded but in the context of the statement… I believe veterans have “earned” just about everything we give them. But then again, I’m a little prejudice when it comes to veterans.

By: Bill Simon

Bill Simon — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:29:18 +0000

“That” is nonsense, Rugby.

By: Icarus

Icarus — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:38:28 +0000

“They can not be freely exchanged.”

Thanks to Lincoln, Grant, Sherman, et al.

By: rugby fan

rugby fan — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:37:18 +0000

Bill:

“Who” refers to people, “that” does not.

They can not be freely exchanged.

By: Bill Simon

Bill Simon — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:23:37 +0000

“that” is a wild card that can be freely exchanged with “who”.

Jason: No, you are not the only one POed about that statement. It’s the same line of reasoning Senator Jack Hill used last year to defend the state’s ownership and maintenance of golf courses like the one at Hard Labor Creek. I think his wording was on the order of: “Rural people deserve recreation too.”

By: Jason Pye

Jason Pye — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:23:16 +0000

Not what I’m talking about.

By: rugby fan

rugby fan — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:31:13 +0000

“Am I the only person that has a problem with they way that is worded?”

Yes.

It should be “people who” not “people that.”

By: Jason Pye

Jason Pye — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:03:36 +0000

“Revenue is important, but taking care of the people that allow us to be free is, to me, more important.”

Am I the only person that has a problem with they way that is worded?

By: Icarus

Icarus — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:22:06 +0000

Buzz, this is a self inflicted wound. Telling all state agencies that it is vital that they cut their budget, but keep your own superfluous pet project, invites exactly these kinds of comparisons.

By: Rick Day

Rick Day — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:07:09 +0000

Buzz, the Republican serve up the same Red Herring when they try to connect gay marriage with diseases, pedophelia and rampant masturbation orgys.

The only thing the veteran and the fishing thing have in common is they are taxpayer funded. On that, we agree.

I also agree with your point that just because it is the ‘new common way’ of bizarre political communication is used by both sides does not make it right.

Just make sure you point that out the next time them Repubs use the same tactic to connect two formerly unconnected thingies…