Sarah's Back!

[Travel]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/13/sarah-palin-fox-news-contributor-roger-ailes/2420935/


Just five months after Sarah Palin (who has since been a gigantic hit with her CPAC and NRA speeches among many others; and successful in endorse-electing several more Republican senators) declined FOX News Chairman and President Roger Ailes' offer to renew her million dollar a year contract, Roger's back! And this time he obviously must have met Sarah's terms (big bucks).

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/01/25/Palin-Fox-News


.................................................
Even Politico reports that Sarah Palin has received as much coverage by the media during these five months since she quit FOX, as she received while with FOX.

From this article (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/06/13/Report-Palin-Back-To-Fox-News):

"According to a Politico analysis, Palin "still garnered much of the same coverage in the first four months of this year as she did in 2012" without a Fox News contract:
From January 2012 to May 2012, Palin received 223 mentions in newspapers; 69 in Web-based publications, such as CNN.com, Washingtonpost.com, POLITICO and USNews.com; 563 in blogs; and her name appeared in 46 news transcripts, for a total of 901 mentions. During the same period this year, in her post-Fox News life, Palin’s still very much in the conversation, with 118 mentions in newspapers, 55 in Web-based publications, 726 in blogs and 12 in news transcripts, for a total of 911 mentions, and she also wrote an op-ed for the conservative website Breitbart"
........................................

http://rewired.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/sarah-palin-rejoins-fox-news-568406

[Clave]

"Travel" <trave...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:66185f0b-a981-4d09...@googlegroups.com...
>
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/13/sarah-palin-fox-news-contributor-roger-ailes/2420935/

With an 80% pay cut.

LOFL

[Travel]

Now, prove it. LOFL.

She already turned them down once. Obviously, Roger blinked.

We know how much it must it sucks for you to see Sarah get richer and richer.

[risky biz]

On Jun 14 2013 7:52 PM, Travel wrote:

You're an utter clown. The Constitutuion is being destroyed and all you
can undertake is a Repub-A-Mommy masturbation fantasy.

>
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/13/sarah-palin-fox-news-contributor-roger-ailes/2420935/
>
>
> Just five months after Sarah Palin (who has since been a gigantic hit with
her CPAC and NRA speeches
> among many others; and successful in endorse-electing several more
Republican senators) declined FOX
> News Chairman and President Roger Ailes' offer to renew her million dollar a
year contract, Roger's
> back! And this time he obviously must have met Sarah's terms (big bucks).
>
> http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/01/25/Palin-Fox-News
>
>

> ..................................................

> Even Politico reports that Sarah Palin has received as much coverage by the
media during these five
> months since she quit FOX, as she received while with FOX.
>
> From this article
(http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/06/13/Report-Palin-Back-To-Fox-News):
>
> "According to a Politico analysis, Palin "still garnered much of the same
coverage in the first four
> months of this year as she did in 2012" without a Fox News contract:
> From January 2012 to May 2012, Palin received 223 mentions in newspapers; 69
in Web-based
> publications, such as CNN.com, Washingtonpost.com, POLITICO and USNews.com;
563 in blogs; and her
> name appeared in 46 news transcripts, for a total of 901 mentions. During
the same period this year,
> in her post-Fox News life, Palin’s still very much in the conversation, with
118 mentions in
> newspapers, 55 in Web-based publications, 726 in blogs and 12 in news
transcripts, for a total of
> 911 mentions, and she also wrote an op-ed for the conservative website
Breitbart"

> .........................................
>
>
http://rewired.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/sarah-palin-rejoins-fox-news-568406

[Clave]

"Travel" <trave...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:c5749b71-fb71-4a36...@googlegroups.com...

> On Friday, June 14, 2013 10:57:00 PM UTC-4, Clave wrote:
>> "Travel" <trave...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:66185f0b-a981-4d09...@googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/13/sarah-palin-fox-news-contributor-roger-ailes/2420935/
>
>>
>>
>>
>> With an 80% pay cut.
>>
>>
>>
>> LOFL
>
> Now, prove it. LOFL.
>
> She already turned them down once. Obviously, Roger blinked.

Oh, please. She couldn't get an audience at a Fairbanks garage sale on her
own, and now she's doing the Walk of Shame back to Ailes and taking whatever
he's handing her.

I'd ask you to think seriously about who needs who more in this situation if
it weren't for the phrase "think seriously".

Jim

[da pickle]

On Jun 14, 7:52 pm, Travel <travel9...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/13/sarah-palin-fo...

>
> Just five months after Sarah Palin (who has since been a gigantic hit with her CPAC and NRA speeches among many others; and successful in endorse-electing several more Republican senators) declined FOX News Chairman and President Roger Ailes' offer to renew her million dollar a year contract, Roger's back! And this time he obviously must have met Sarah's terms (big bucks).
>
> http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/01/25/Palin-Fox-News
>
> .................................................
> Even Politico reports that Sarah Palin has received as much coverage by the media during these five months since she quit FOX, as she received while with FOX.
>

> From this article (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/06/13/Report-Palin-Back-...

>
> "According to a Politico analysis, Palin "still garnered much of the same coverage in the first four months of this year as she did in 2012" without a Fox News contract:
> From January 2012 to May 2012, Palin received 223 mentions in newspapers; 69 in Web-based publications, such as CNN.com, Washingtonpost.com, POLITICO and USNews.com; 563 in blogs; and her name appeared in 46 news transcripts, for a total of 901 mentions. During the same period this year, in her post-Fox News life, Palin’s still very much in the conversation, with 118 mentions in newspapers, 55 in Web-based publications, 726 in blogs and 12 in news transcripts, for a total of 911 mentions, and she also wrote an op-ed for the conservative website Breitbart"
> ........................................
>

> http://rewired.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/sarah-palin-rejoins-fo...

Sarah Palin Takes A Pay Cut and Does the Walk Of Shame Back to Fox
News
========================================================

By: Jason Easley Jun. 13th, 2013

After getting dumped by Fox News, and promptly falling flat on her
face and into oblivion, Sarah Palin went crawling back to Roger Ailes
and got her old job back a lot less pay.

The press release made it all sound like sunshine and kittens. Roger
Ailes said, “I’ve had several conversations with Governor Palin in the
past few weeks about her rejoining FOX News as a contributor. I have
great confidence in her and am pleased that she will once again add
her commentary to our programming. I hope she continues to speak her
mind.” (Translation: Palin was out of work and getting desperate for
attention, so Ailes did a little bargain hunting.)

Sarah Palin said, “The power of FOX News is unparalleled. The role of
FOX News in the important debates in our world is indispensible. I am
pleased and proud to be rejoining Roger Ailes and the great people at
FOX.” (Translation: Look at me!! Look at me!! Look at me!! I’m back on
the TEE-VEE.)

Howard Kurtz reported in January that, “The new contract offered by
Fox, say people familiar with the situation, would have provided only
a fraction of the million-dollar-a-year salary. It was then, they say,
that Palin turned it down and both sides agreed to call it quits.”

Sarah Palin desperately needed to be back on Fox News. She had fallen
completely off the right wing map. Palin was starting to get a taste
of former failed vice presidential nominee obscurity, and she didn’t
like it. Sarah Palin is incapable of feeling shame.

source:
http://topsy.com/www.politicususa.com/2013/06/13/sarah-palin-takes-pay-cut-walk-shame-fox-news.html

[fffurken]

On Jun 15, 4:13 am, Travel <travel9...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > With an 80% pay cut.
>
> > LOFL
>
> Now, prove it. LOFL.
>
> She already turned them down once. Obviously, Roger blinked.

What the fuck is this now.

In that very short passage you managed to use a (highly debatable)
comma in TWO three word sentences. What is it with you and commas?
Like take that last one, would you say it like that out loud? Would
you say, "Obviously" [..pause..] "Roger blinked" if you were talking
to someone? Are you that dramatic? Would you not just say "Obviously
Roger blinked"? Do you think people are happy hanging around
unnecessarily waiting for you to finish your sentences, Travel?

[VegasJerry]

The comma here is indicative of being able to reverse the sentence portions. i.e. "Rover blinked, obviously." (From my Writer's Manual).

Jerry (but who gives a shit? We're talking about Travel) 'n Vegas

[fffurken]

> Jerry (but who gives a shit? We're talking about Travel) 'n Vegas- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

What?

Your Writer's Manual? Well then you must have the same fucking
Writer's Manual Travel has.

Indicative of being able to reverse the sentence portions.. have you
ever heard such nonsense.

--
"I'm an extremly bright, self aware individual".


Beldope, 15/06/2013

[VegasJerry]

On Saturday, June 15, 2013 6:53:01 AM UTC-7, fffurken wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2:29 pm, VegasJerry <jerr...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Friday, June 14, 2013 11:30:48 PM UTC-7, fffurken wrote:
> > > On Jun 15, 4:13 am, Travel <travel9...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > With an 80% pay cut.
> >
> > > > > LOFL
> >
> > > > Now, prove it. LOFL.
> >
> > > > She already turned them down once. Obviously, Roger blinked.
> >
> > > What the fuck is this now.
> >
> > > In that very short passage you managed to use a (highly debatable)
> > > comma in TWO three word sentences. What is it with you and commas?
> > > Like take that last one, would you say it like that out loud? Would
> > > you say, "Obviously" [..pause..] "Roger blinked" if you were talking
> > > to someone? Are you that dramatic? Would you not just say "Obviously
> > > Roger blinked"? Do you think people are happy hanging around
> > > unnecessarily waiting for you to finish your sentences, Travel?
> >
> > The comma here is indicative of being able to reverse the sentence portions. i.e. "Rover blinked, obviously." (From my Writer's Manual).
> >
> > Jerry (but who gives a shit? We're talking about Travel) 'n Vegas- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> What?
>
> Your Writer's Manual? Well then you must have the same fucking
> Writer's Manual Travel has.
>

.
.> Indicative of being able to reverse the sentence portions.. have you
> ever heard such nonsense.

Being you haven't, used two periods and no capitalization or question mark, you'd better get yourself one.

No, wait, I like you they way you are…

[Travel]

And, of course, the funny part is all the left wing write-ups' "take" on this; with all their fabricated scenarios of "why she's back."

The facts: one doesn't "crawl back" to a job like that. But Roger Ailes most certainly could have reconsidered accepting Sarah's contract terms.

Fact: Sarah Palin declined Roger Ailes' original "new contract" offer. Negotiations broke down as they say. Five months later, Roger Ailes obviously offered a contract that Sarah can accept. Lol, a major news organization doesn't just hire someone to "carry" them because they "feel bad" for them. Chortle, don't be ridiculous: Roger Ailes wants her, big time.

An 80% cut in her original million dollar a year contract"? Lol, hardly. That would be in the $200,000 a year range. Sarah gets 50,000 a speech; get real.She could make that in four speeches. That's a total of about four hours.



Fact: Sarah Palin generates huge ratings for FOX. And that's why she's back. She'll be enormously influential in the 2014 mid-term elections. Roger Ailes wants her right at FOX for that.

No other commentator on FOX even remotely has the "juice" to get candidates elected or has anywhere near Sarah's influence on the Republican party's 75% conservative voters. And she was giganticly popular at this year's CPAC and NRA conventions. That's why the "other" FOX commentators get the $250,000 contracts and Sarah gets the million a year contracts.

Sarah's a power broker, with the RINO Republican establishment on one side, and the conservatives on the other. This coming mid term elections Republican primaries are going to be a huge fight between the "Rove candidates" and the
"Sarah candidates."

Oh ya, Roger Alies wants her real bad. And you better believe she'll be getting the big bucks.

[fffurken]

The only "Writer's Manual" you need Jerry is a dictionary. So you can
fucking spell words.

It's spelt 'the', t-h-e, not 'they', where'd you get the 'y' from?

Anyway, the two full stops were to indicate a trail and for you to
join the two portions of my sentence (hence no need for
capitalisation) and although it could be read as a question, it was
more of a statement. Case closed.

[da pickle]

On Jun 15, 8:22 am, Travel <travel9...@gmail.com> webTVed:

<stupid parts and nonsense snipped>

Poor Sarah. First Biden kicks her butt in the election. Then she quits
the Alaska Governorship in disgrace. Then all the family’s reality TV
shows flop. Then she's fired from or quits Fox Fake News. And now she
quits 'quitting' and crawls back at greatly reduced pay. This is good
news for Kim Kardashian though. Now Kim K can get a job at Fox and not
be the dumb one with bad cellulite.

[Travel A]

Quaaarrk! Quark Quark Quark! I'm Risky Penquin! cellulite! cellulite!
Quaaark! Quark! Quark! Quark!

[Travel A]

On Friday, June 14, 2013 10:52:10 PM UTC-4, Travel wrote:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/13/sarah-palin-fox-news-contributor-roger-ailes/2420935/


Just five months after Sarah Palin (who has since been a gigantic hit
with her CPAC and NRA speeches among many others; and successful in
endorse-electing several more Republican senators) declined FOX News
Chairman and President Roger Ailes' offer to renew her million dollar a
year contract, Roger's back! And this time he obviously must have met
Sarah's terms (big bucks).



http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/01/25/Palin-Fox-News

.............................................

Even Politico reports that Sarah Palin has received as much coverage by
the media during these five months since she quit FOX, as she received
while with FOX.



From this article
(http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/06/13/Report-Palin-Back-To-Fox-News):



"According to a Politico analysis, Palin "still garnered much of the
same coverage in the first four months of this year as she did in 2012"
without a Fox News contract:

From January 2012 to May 2012, Palin received 223 mentions in
newspapers; 69 in Web-based publications, such as CNN.com,
Washingtonpost.com, POLITICO and USNews.com; 563 in blogs; and her name
appeared in 46 news transcripts, for a total of 901 mentions. During the

same period this year, in her post-Fox News life, Palin�s still

very much in the conversation, with 118 mentions in newspapers, 55 in
Web-based publications, 726 in blogs and 12 in news transcripts, for a
total of 911 mentions, and she also wrote an op-ed for the conservative
website Breitbart"

.......................................

[Travel A]

Another well-paid, great speech from uber relevant, Sarah, who reaches
such a vast audience.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Palin-Syria-Intervention-Obama/2013/06/15/id/510128

Cant wait for her well-paid commentaries on FOX: from the governor who
had the best economic record of any governor, and Alaska is still in
surplus because of her economic policies; and because she kicked Biden's
ass in the vice residential debate and gave the greatest convention
speech of all time.

.

[Pepe Papon]

Perhaps there are differences in the use of commas between the
American version of English and the English spoken in other countries.
I was taught to write, "Obviously, the dog blinked." If the sentence
is reversed, then "The dog blinked, obviously" and "The dog blinked
obviously" have slightly different meanings.
--

Pepe Papon

[VegasJerry]

.
.> The only "Writer's Manual" you need Jerry is a dictionary.

> So you can fucking spell words.

Your whiney concession on my factual statement, noted. It is as I said.

Jerry 'n Vegas

[fffurken]

On Jun 16, 7:24 am, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.com> wrote:

> >> > > > With an 80% pay cut.
>
> >> > > > LOFL
>
> >> > > Now, prove it. LOFL.
>
> >> > > She already turned them down once. Obviously, Roger blinked.
>
> >> > What the fuck is this now.
>
> >> > In that very short passage you managed to use a (highly debatable)
> >> > comma in TWO three word sentences. What is it with you and commas?
> >> > Like take that last one, would you say it like that out loud? Would
> >> > you say, "Obviously" [..pause..] "Roger blinked" if you were talking
> >> > to someone? Are you that dramatic? Would you not just say "Obviously
> >> > Roger blinked"? Do you think people are happy hanging around
> >> > unnecessarily waiting for you to finish your sentences, Travel?
>
> >> The comma here is indicative of being able to reverse the sentence portions. i.e. "Rover blinked, obviously." (From my Writer's Manual).
>
> >> Jerry (but who gives a shit? We're talking about Travel) 'n Vegas- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> >What?
>
> >Your Writer's Manual? Well then you must have the same fucking
> >Writer's Manual Travel has.
>
> >Indicative of being able to reverse the sentence portions.. have you
> >ever heard such nonsense.
>
> Perhaps there are differences in the use of commas between the
> American version of English and the English spoken in other countries.

I doubt it.

> I was taught to write, "Obviously, the dog blinked."   If the sentence
> is reversed, then "The dog blinked, obviously" and "The dog blinked
> obviously" have slightly different meanings.

Fine. I'm not even sure I should do this, but I *will* concede the
second one, for argument's sake.

So how about the first -

"Now, prove it."

Let's see you and Jerry talk Travel's way out of that one!

[da pickle]

Faux pickle is on fire.

[RichD]

On Jun 15, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> ... then "The dog blinked, obviously" and "The dog blinked

> obviously" have slightly different meanings.

"Call me, Ishmael."

PS What does "The dog blinked obviously" mean?

--
Rich

[CDB]

Time for his eyedrops. Dogs know from bitter experience that there's no
use being subtle with humans.

[risky biz]

On Jun 16 2013 2:06 PM, Vince wrote:

> da pickle <jcpi...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:kdGdnQeNu9u...@giganews.com:

> Why don't you change your name here, and that may make it a little
> less confusing. Maybe Risky Bidness. ;-)

He already posts as Risky Biz.

[R H Draney]

RichD filted:

>
>On Jun 15, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> ... then "The dog blinked, obviously" and "The dog blinked
>> obviously" have slightly different meanings.
>
>"Call me, Ishmael."

What is *this* thing called, love?...r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Odysseus]

In article <kpm41...@drn.newsguy.com>,

R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:

> RichD filted:
> >
> >On Jun 15, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> ... then "The dog blinked, obviously" and "The dog blinked
> >> obviously" have slightly different meanings.
> >
> >"Call me, Ishmael."
>
> What is *this* thing called, love?...r

"The wicked flea, when no man pursueth but the righteous, is bold as a
lion." -- Proverbs 28:1, according to Dr. Matrix

--
Odysseus

[Peter Moylan]

On 17/06/13 14:41, R H Draney wrote:
> RichD filted:
>>
>> On Jun 15, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> ... then "The dog blinked, obviously" and "The dog blinked
>>> obviously" have slightly different meanings.
>>
>> "Call me, Ishmael."
>
> What is *this* thing called, love?...r

What, now, my love?

--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.

[Pepe Papon]

That the dog blinked in an obvious fashion.
--

Pepe Papon

[Pepe Papon]

I can't talk my way out of it, as it's been too long since I studied
this sort of thing. I can recall being taught that a comma belongs
there, but I can't recall the correct terminology to explain why.
--

Pepe Papon

[mo_ntresor]

On Jun 14 2013 8:52 PM, Travel wrote:

travels whips and drives the leftwing lemmings with effortless ease ...
they just HAVE to respond.

mo_ntresor

[da pickle]

On Jun 17, 6:51 am, "mo_ntresor" <amontilladofortun...@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Jun 17, 6:51 am, "mo_ntresor" <amontilladofortun...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Oh, that’s so sweet. Travel finally has his own fanboy. lol.

[da pickle]

You could have your own fans if you just used your own name.

[Travel A]

"Now, prove it"

The "now," is what's called "the set-up" in grammar and public speaking.

It's similar to pausing after the word "that," within a sentence.

It's "the set-up." It's like beginning a sentence with "You see,"


Example:
"You see, it's important that, when observing baboons in the wild, you
don't have a lower I.Q. than the baboons."

Note "the set-ups": "You see," and "that,"

[fffurken]

On Jun 17, 6:16 pm, nine...@webtv.net (Travel A) wrote:
> "Now, prove it"
>
> The "now," is what's called "the set-up" in grammar and public speaking.

I think personally it would have been better if you had written it as
-

"Now, prove it!"

You know what I mean? I think a little bit of shazam in your sentence
would have better justified the pause at the beginning.

> It's similar to pausing after the word "that," within a sentence.
>
> It's "the set-up." It's like beginning a sentence with "You see,"
>
> Example:
> "You see, it's important that, when observing baboons in the wild, you
> don't have a lower I.Q. than the baboons."

You know what we could do there? We could shave a whole comma off the
sentence, look -

"You see, it's important when observing baboons in the wild, that you

don't have a lower I.Q. than the baboons."

Hey Travel, did you notice a few strangers wandering around this
thread recently? Well I did, ever since RichD crossposted to a couple
of other groups (I think it was RichD). But it wasn't any old groups
he crossposted to and they're probably not any old strangers either.

For example, with due diligence, I had a quick inspection of CDB's
profile and one of the groups crossposted to is where he is most
prolific (i.e. that's his favourite group) - alt.usage.english. And he
is third most prolific at, yeah, you guessed it, alt.english.usage!
sci.lang was in the middle.

lol I bet the likes of those folks from those groups could teach us
both a thing or two about a thing or two when it comes to the use of
language, huh?

Which is why I included them again in this post.

[Skitt]

Well, alrighty, then. I am not a great fan of your shaving technique.
I'd rather do it all the way, removing the comma after the "wild" also.
If not, the original is better. Half a shave looks a bit odd.

--
Skitt (SF Bay Area)
http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/main.html

[fffurken]

On Jun 17, 10:05 pm, Skitt <skit...@comcast.net> wrote:

> > lol I bet the likes of those folks from those groups could teach us
> > both a thing or two about a thing or two when it comes to the use of
> > language, huh?
>
> > Which is why I included them again in this post.
>
> Well, alrighty, then.  I am not a great fan of your shaving technique.
> I'd rather do it all the way, removing the comma after the "wild" also.

So would I but I'm trying to wean Travel off commas, not make him go
cold turkey.

>  If not, the original is better.  Half a shave looks a bit odd.

So you prefer the original clumsy version of the sentence over mine do
you? Yeah well, I didn't think you were ALL geniuses.

Btw, welcome aboard Skitt! Now take your name badge and STFD and STFU.

[Skitt]

fffurken wrote:

Oh, man! You do need a lot of help with your commas, innit?

Besides, I'll stay right here -- in good ole AUE. We don't need no
stinkin' badges here.

[fffurken]

On Jun 17, 10:30 pm, Skitt <skit...@comcast.net> wrote:

> Oh, man!  You do need a lot of help with your commas, innit?

I'm on a one man mission to eradicate the unnecessary use of commas
pal, innit.

> Besides, I'll stay right here -- in good ole AUE.  We don't need no
> stinkin' badges here.

Did you even fill out the registration form for RGP?

[RichD]

On Jun 17, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> ... then "The dog blinked, obviously" and "The dog blinked
> >> obviously" have slightly different meanings.
>
> >"Call me, Ishmael."
>
> >PS  What does  "The dog blinked obviously" mean?
>
> That the dog blinked in an obvious fashion.

How does that differ from "The dog blinked, obviously" ?

--
Rich

[CDB]

The comma breaks the expected close connection between the verb and the
adverb, and allows the adverb to modify the whole statement as a
"sentence adverb".

Without a comma, it's the dog's way of blinking that's obvious; with a
comma, it's the fact that the dog is blinking.

[fffurken]

On Jun 17, 11:58 pm, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > How does that differ from "The dog blinked, obviously" ?
>
> The comma breaks the expected close connection between the verb and the
> adverb, and allows the adverb to modify the whole statement as a
> "sentence adverb".

Good, sciency.

> Without a comma, it's the dog's way of blinking that's obvious; with a
> comma, it's the fact that the dog is blinking.

Good English translation too!

And you already did an excellent metaphorical description of the
difference -

"Time for his eyedrops. Dogs know from bitter experience that there's
no use being subtle with humans."

Obviously, obviously.

No wonder I picked you out for investigation, you seem on the ball to
me, a *real* language expert. I'm not at all sure about that Skitt guy.

[CDB]

Skitt is famous for his contributions to these discussions. His name
will be remembered by people who, tomorrow as today, would say "CDWho?"

I solemnly declare that Citizen fffurken is not associated in any way
with my sock-drawer, and that I have not at any time offered him a
monetary reward.

Dragons teeth, is my guess.

[fffurken]

On Jun 18, 12:36 am, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I solemnly declare that Citizen fffurken is not associated in any way
> with my sock-drawer, and that I have not at any time offered him a
> monetary reward.

FWIW, I solemnly second that.

[Skitt]

CDB wrote:
> fffurken wrote:

>> CDB wrote:

>>>> How does that differ from "The dog blinked, obviously" ?
>
>>> The comma breaks the expected close connection between the verb and the
>>> adverb, and allows the adverb to modify the whole statement as a
>>> "sentence adverb".
>
>> Good, sciency.
>
>>> Without a comma, it's the dog's way of blinking that's obvious; with a
>>> comma, it's the fact that the dog is blinking.
>
>> Good English translation too!
>
>> And you already did an excellent metaphorical description of the
>> difference -
>
>> "Time for his eyedrops. Dogs know from bitter experience that there's
>> no use being subtle with humans."
>
>> Obviously, obviously.
>
>> No wonder I picked you out for investigation, you seem on the ball to
>> me, a *real* language expert. I'm not at all sure about that Skitt guy.
>
> Skitt is famous for his contributions to these discussions. His name
> will be remembered by people who, tomorrow as today, would say "CDWho?"

<blushing> Aw! You're much too kind, sire. But go on ...

[Peter Moylan]

On 18/06/13 09:29, fffurken wrote:

> No wonder I picked you out for investigation, you seem on the ball to
> me, a *real* language expert. I'm not at all sure about that Skitt guy.

There's a foolproof way to pick an expert: just choose the person who
agrees with you.

[fffurken]

On Jun 18, 3:14 am, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> On 18/06/13 09:29, fffurken wrote:
>
> > No wonder I picked you out for investigation, you seem on the ball to
> > me, a *real* language expert. I'm not at all sure about that Skitt guy.
>
> There's a foolproof way to pick an expert: just choose the person who
> agrees with you.

That's all very interesting Pete (is it a proverb?) but I came to my
conclusion that CDB was on the money based on three facts.

Number one, the metaphorical description of the unsubtly blinking dog
which showed a clear understanding of the context involved.

Number two, the sciency bit (admittedly I was weakest on that).

And number three, the English translation, which again, showed a clear
understanding of the comma separation.

So don't give me your trite "There's a foolproof way to pick an
expert: just choose the person who agrees with you." shit.

I based my agreement with CDB based on fact and evidence. What have
you done in this thread? Huh? Pretty much fucking nothing, right?

That's the problem with Wordsmiths like you, you're all quotes and no
brains!

And I'm starting to have serious doubts that, you filled in the
registration form, either.

[Travel A]

To those from the grammar group. Fffufgoof is totally clueless in the
proper use of commas. Why he constantly pontificates on puctuation, when
everyone always points out that he's wrong, is a mystery.

He doesn't know that a comma is properly used before the word ", too."
at the end of a sentence, for example.

Obviously, as demonstrated here, he's clueless about a grammatical
set-up before a statement.

Also, he thinks that changing the syntax of a sentence and then
presenting it as a correction is legitimate: it's merely writing it in a
different way, and that would obviously require different punctuation;
it's irrelevant to whatever point he's trying to stumble upon. This
only serves to demonstrate that he's clueless about distinctions in
writing styles.

For example, wonder if Graham Greene would "drive Fffurfgoof nuts" as
Fffurfgoof wrongly identifys punctuation errors in, and rewrites
sentences for: "The Heart Of The Matter."

Indeed, if everyone started writing in the style of Ffffurfgoof, a newly
published book would never be sold again.

[Travel A]

On Jun 18, 3:14�am, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid>
wrote:

I wrote:
Fffurfgoof, in your last sentence, there's no comma used after the word
"that." You weren't setting-up a statement. You actually broke-up the
proper flow in mid-sentence by placing a comma after "that."

We'll add that to your "clueless list."

Note: when Fffurfgoof's wrong, Fffurfgoof "gets real wordy."

[fffurken]

On Jun 18, 6:48 pm, nine...@webtv.net (Travel A) wrote:

> To those from the grammar group. Fffufgoof is totally clueless in the
> proper use of commas. Why he constantly pontificates on puctuation, when
> everyone always points out that he's wrong, is a mystery.

Just look at that for goodness sake. Look at that last sentence
absolutely littered with unnecessary commas. Are you out of breath or
something?

And btw, what was "To those from the grammar group.." supposed to
mean? Were you talking to the folks on the other group RichD
crossposted to? In which case, why did you only post to
rec.gambling.poker? I mean, how did you expect them to hear, Travel?
You DO know how to crosspost, right?

[fffurken]

On Jun 18, 7:10 pm, nine...@webtv.net (Travel A) wrote:

> And I'm starting to have serious doubts that, you filled in the
> registration form, either."
>
> I wrote:
>
> Fffurfgoof, in your last sentence, there's no comma used after the word
> "that." You weren't setting-up a statement. You actually broke-up the
> proper flow in mid-sentence by placing a comma after "that."

Sure it was a set-up. *And* you said earlier in the thread - "It's

similar to pausing after the word "that," within a sentence."

They're YOUR rules asshole. Don't blame me if they're wrong.

[Travel A]

[Travel A]

[fffurken]

Must be a Web-TV thing.

[fffurken]

On Jun 19, 8:02 pm, nine...@webtv.net (Travel A) wrote:
> On Jun 18, 3:14 am, Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid>

Ha! You're reposting? A sure sign! I win.

Or, did you think that means you win? lolol You're as bad as Beldin.

Actually, that's a bit unfair and not really true. You cut 'n paste
the same post whereas Beldumb, for reasons only known to himself,
slighty rewrites the same post, over and over and over, and over,
again.

[Travel]

[Travel]