If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:54:25 +0000, Chris H wrote:
: In message , J. Clarke : writes : Under what US statute do you believe that Clive Ponting could even have : been given a ticket, let alone arrested? : : The ones used for Quntanamo? You denounce the Bill of Rights, although you obviously haven't read it; and you can't spell "Guantánamo", even it's one of the most quoted Spanish names in the world today. Why don't you go do some research and come back when you've finally acquired a clue? Bob |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 02:48:21 +1100, "DRS" wrote:
: "HEMI-Powered" wrote in message : : You have allowed your country to become a vast Socialist nanny : state where everything is "free" and everything is controlled. So, : why are you so surprised that the State now wants to chip away at : your freedoms one by one? Your country has never had a formal : consitution which states all of your freedoms, rights, and : protections as does the US Constitution and Bill of Rights which : leads me to believe you got just what you deserved. The fix? Vote : the Socialists clowns out of office, elect some representatives : that will do what the people want them to do and NOT do what the : people don't want them to do, write a formal document defining your : rights, and take back your country from the Socialists. : : You first. Get rid of the Patriot Act, the warrantless wiretapping and all : the rest and then you can talk. We have, at least, finally gotten rid of the worst of the clueless goobers who foisted those outrages on us (which, I guess, is one of the things that has made Jerry so apoplectic). So please cut us some slack while the new guys try to shovel the place out. Bob |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
"jaf" wrote:
So your stating that the democratic controlled congress during the Bush administration never passed an intelligent bill? I am pretty sure none of what he has been stating has passed any bill. jue |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
jaf wrote:
Hence the proliferation of spell checkers. Now if I could only get the grandma checker to kick in. 8) John "Twibil" wrote in message ... On Feb 20, 10:44 am, "jaf" wrote: So your stating that the democratic controlled congress during the Bush administration never passed an intelligent bill? I have no problem believing that! And we have no problem believing that you never learned in grade school what the contraction "you're" means (it means "you are") as opposed to "your", meaning "belonging to you". BTW: while you're looking things up, check out procedural stalling tactics and Presidential veto powers. There are so many people who don't understand the difference between "your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
Ron Hunter wrote:
jaf wrote: Hence the proliferation of spell checkers. Now if I could only get the grandma checker to kick in. 8) John "Twibil" wrote in message ... On Feb 20, 10:44 am, "jaf" wrote: So your stating that the democratic controlled congress during the Bush administration never passed an intelligent bill? I have no problem believing that! And we have no problem believing that you never learned in grade school what the contraction "you're" means (it means "you are") as opposed to "your", meaning "belonging to you". BTW: while you're looking things up, check out procedural stalling tactics and Presidential veto powers. There are so many people who don't understand the difference between "your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh. Tihs is uenest, sleiplng dsoen't mtetar. -- -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. -- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote: jaf wrote: Hence the proliferation of spell checkers. Now if I could only get the grandma checker to kick in. 8) John "Twibil" wrote in message ... On Feb 20, 10:44 am, "jaf" wrote: So your stating that the democratic controlled congress during the Bush administration never passed an intelligent bill? I have no problem believing that! And we have no problem believing that you never learned in grade school what the contraction "you're" means (it means "you are") as opposed to "your", meaning "belonging to you". BTW: while you're looking things up, check out procedural stalling tactics and Presidential veto powers. There are so many people who don't understand the difference between "your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh. You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote: jaf wrote: Hence the proliferation of spell checkers. Now if I could only get the grandma checker to kick in. 8) John "Twibil" wrote in message ... On Feb 20, 10:44 am, "jaf" wrote: So your stating that the democratic controlled congress during the Bush administration never passed an intelligent bill? I have no problem believing that! And we have no problem believing that you never learned in grade school what the contraction "you're" means (it means "you are") as opposed to "your", meaning "belonging to you". BTW: while you're looking things up, check out procedural stalling tactics and Presidential veto powers. There are so many people who don't understand the difference between "your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh. You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas. I usually use too many commas. Did you find it hard to understand? Comma rules are a bit 'fuzzy', and greatly different than they were 55 years or so, when I learned English. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
"tony cooper" wrote in message
... There are so many people who don't understand the difference between "your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh. You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas. Please explain the errors. My only comment on the paragraph, is that there are too few commas. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:57:04 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote: tony cooper wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote: jaf wrote: Hence the proliferation of spell checkers. Now if I could only get the grandma checker to kick in. 8) John "Twibil" wrote in message ... On Feb 20, 10:44 am, "jaf" wrote: So your stating that the democratic controlled congress during the Bush administration never passed an intelligent bill? I have no problem believing that! And we have no problem believing that you never learned in grade school what the contraction "you're" means (it means "you are") as opposed to "your", meaning "belonging to you". BTW: while you're looking things up, check out procedural stalling tactics and Presidential veto powers. There are so many people who don't understand the difference between "your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh. You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas. I usually use too many commas. Did you find it hard to understand? Comma rules are a bit 'fuzzy', and greatly different than they were 55 years or so, when I learned English. It's not the number; it's the placement. I would not normally point something like this out in this newsgroup, but you did open the door with your comments about usage. Personally, I attribute the incorrect usage of "you're" and "your" to be a result of fingers flying on autopilot. The writer probably knows the difference, but an errant twitch of the finger sticks the apostrophe in there. The one that bugs me is "loose" and "looser" for "lose" and "loser". I don't think those writers know the difference. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Britain's horrific new photo law
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 23:01:52 -0500, tony cooper
wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:57:04 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote: tony cooper wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote: jaf wrote: Hence the proliferation of spell checkers. Now if I could only get the grandma checker to kick in. 8) John "Twibil" wrote in message ... On Feb 20, 10:44 am, "jaf" wrote: So your stating that the democratic controlled congress during the Bush administration never passed an intelligent bill? I have no problem believing that! And we have no problem believing that you never learned in grade school what the contraction "you're" means (it means "you are") as opposed to "your", meaning "belonging to you". BTW: while you're looking things up, check out procedural stalling tactics and Presidential veto powers. There are so many people who don't understand the difference between "your" and "you're" that I have just about given up on it, except for trying to teach it to my students... One of the errors that seems to be more frequent than it used to be is "then" and "than" being misused, as well as "do" and "due". It seems that modern writers, even those with college degrees subscribe to the theory that if it sounds the same, what's the difference? Sigh. You teach? Not English, I hope. The above paragraph is full of punctuation errors. You need to brush up on the use of commas. I usually use too many commas. Did you find it hard to understand? Comma rules are a bit 'fuzzy', and greatly different than they were 55 years or so, when I learned English. It's not the number; it's the placement. I would not normally point something like this out in this newsgroup, but you did open the door with your comments about usage. Personally, I attribute the incorrect usage of "you're" and "your" to be a result of fingers flying on autopilot. The writer probably knows the difference, but an errant twitch of the finger sticks the apostrophe in there. The one that bugs me is "loose" and "looser" for "lose" and "loser". I don't think those writers know the difference. ....I think the "you're" and "your" is less a result of a typo than not *really* understanding and practicing proper usage...or just what is a contraction, anyhow? Add "it's" and "its" to the list...that's a very easy trap in which to fall (hehehe)...oh, BTW, I know my use of the ellipsis is incorrect, contemporarily, but my professors let it go so WTF...and, just to make this run-on a marathon, the comma is an individual interpretation and is designated to *pause* where the writer intends (and many times the reader doesn't agree with the placement)...one great piece of advice I recieved in a writing class once-upon-a-time was to read whatever I wrote aloud; if it doesn't sound right, it isn't. cg |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A truly HORRIFIC tsunami picture | Mike Henley | Digital Photography | 872 | January 30th 05 12:45 AM |
A truly HORRIFIC tsunami picture | Mike Henley | 35mm Photo Equipment | 234 | January 7th 05 12:13 PM |
A truly HORRIFIC tsunami picture | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | January 4th 05 10:02 PM |
A truly HORRIFIC tsunami picture | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | January 4th 05 01:34 AM |