Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: flaglady47

Total hyperbole. Rudy would be fine as President, and at least he speaks the king’s English well.
***We really are on different planes of existence. Rudy is against the very principles of the republican platform. Principles. The King’s English is important to you? Talk about hyperbole. You’re talking about “the King’s English” while we socons are talking about 40M dead babies. I can only imagine the Whig party was talking about proper hat sizes at the time the Republican contingent was talking about extending the right to liberty to human beings. HYPERBOLE? NO. And that’s ~400k dead versus 100X more dead. Hyperbole? You’re so full of baloney we can’t tell what the original ingredients were.

The King’s English
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King’s_English
The King’s English is a book on English usage and grammar. It was written by the Fowler brothers, Henry Watson Fowler and Francis George Fowler, and published in 1906, and thus pre-dates by 20 years Modern English Usage, which was written by Henry alone after Francis’s death in 1918.

The King’s English is less like a dictionary than Modern English Usage; it consists of longer articles on more general topics such as vocabulary, syntax and punctuation, and draws heavily on examples from many sources throughout. Because it has never been updated since the third edition in 1930, it is rather dated, and some of the Fowlers’ views are idiosyncratic; however, it still remains useful and has remained in print since its first publication.

The book deals exclusively with British English usage. Readers should be aware that its attitude to “Americanisms” reflects the age in which it was written.


462 posted on 10/21/2007 7:24:38 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 445 | View Replies ]


To: Kevmo

Nothing you say above about myself or Rudy negates the ABSOLUTE result of allowing a Dem to be elected, which will be increased, not decreased, abortions. Do you want those results on your hands? Then don’t vote for Rudy if he ends up being the Pub candidate, and you will get just exactly what you claim you don’t want.

If you will not vote for Rudy Guliani for Prez, you will instead get Hillary Clinton or worse. You will have condemned untold numbers of fetuses to death, under a Hillary Clinton regime. So your “principles” will buy death and more abortions than ever. Plus new planned parenthood clinics and abortion clinics, which will inevitably spring up under a Democratic presidency. And undoubtedly a return to partial birth abortion if the Dems have their way. Under Guliani, you will get neutrality, and probably little change from the status quo where pro-life candidates and demonstrations against abortion clinics in individual states have made great inroads. The one area that is under the control of the Prez of the U.S. is appointment of judges, and Rudy has sworn to appoint constructionist judges. If he is the Pub candidate, then that will be a good thing in the one area most important to pro-life conservatives. If you do not vote for Rudy, you will be absolutely guaranteeing the deaths of future babies by abortion, more than you can imagine. So, that’s where your hard-nosed, non-logical, lacking in pragmatism viewpoints will take you. Enjoy yourself while dooming future babies to an early demise.


467 posted on 10/21/2007 7:56:21 PM PDT by flaglady47 (Thinking out loud while grinding teeth in political frustration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson