And you wonder how things get misconstrued and blown out of proportion
when listening to the media.
By Business Insider, Colin Campbell
Both of former President George W. Bush's daughters aren't following the
family's Republican Party heritage.
Jenna Bush Hager, the younger of the Bush twins, bla bla bla.
Now I ask does, any one really care or need clarification as to which
twin popped out first? Does it matter? One would assume that the name
of the daughter might be enough information to distinguish between the
two. Does anyone need further clarification, really?
Another case of putting too much impertinent information into the story
to fill space.
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:20:07 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 9/4/2014 7:24 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:30:45 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/4/2014 5:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:16:41 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> not proper English, ending the sentence with
>>>>> a preposition
>>>>
>>>> Ships do come about don't they?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ;~) I believe that would be correct, since the sentence did not end
>>> with about. I'm obviously no English guru. ;~)
>>
>> Huh? "Come about!" is a sentence.
>>
>>> The media would probably change that to, ships do just about over come
>>> don't they?
>>
>> Do you mean "overcome"? Complexly different meaning.
>>
>
>It is what you hear on TV vs the way it is spelled.
When was the last time you heard "over <break> come" on the TeeVee? Do
all of your news readers down there talk with marbles in their mouth?
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 07:31:31 -0700, jo4hn <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 9/4/2014 11:51 AM, Gramps' shop wrote:
>> The general quality of journalism has dropped significantly from the time I was a reporter for a midwest daily in the late 60s and early 70s. Part of that can be attributed to the paring of the older, more experienced (and higher paid) reporters and editors to align costs with declining revenues in the print world. Part of it is the generally lousy job colleges and universities do in teaching the craft. The example you posted is just incompetent editing. More egregious examples are easy to find on every medium in every market. The worst offenders, IMHO, are the large cable news channels. I've started tuning to BBC America and PBS for decent, competent reporting.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>>
>Larry's point is well taken. However, the major problem is that what
>passes for news these days is slanted, if not a subject of prevarication
>and omission. Cable news outlets do this purposefully in order to keep
>their listeners in line and the money flowing. For example, consider
>the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare? Fair enough. Is it a godsend? Is
>it expensive? Is it horribly expensive? Will it bring the nation to
>its knees? This kind of rhetoric is not good for our country.
The rhetoric? What about the legislation?
If you want rhetoric, what about the Prez *intentionally* pitting one
citizen against another. ...and you don't expect a reaction?
>If you want to know the state of your various worlds, stick with the BBC
>(World and American Service), the PBS Newshour, and Al Jazeera (American
>service). PBS is carried on your local PBS station. The BBC can be
>found again on PBS or on the web. Al Jazeera has its own cable channel
>(used to be the Current news channel). They all have web sites for
>print and broadcast media.
LOL! PBS? The mouthpiece of the left side of the US government? BBC?
The mouthpiece of the left side of the UK government? Look in the
mirror.
>Good stuff is out there for you. Here's a test of your political
>leanings: If you think that FOX or MSNBC is spot on, just go away and
>don't bother anyone. If you think that they are excessive, continue to
>CNN. If you find them to be a bit to the right of center or at least
>comfortable, you can easily switch to any of the above outlets.
>Otherwise, sit down and start recording/watching Jon Stewart and Steven
>Colbert until you feel you are ready to reenter polite society.
>Don't take any of this too seriously. I already get the occasional
>nasty-gram for voicing my views. Good night and good luck.
Nah, don't take bankruptcy too seriously. It's only money (and life).
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Wow... you guys are a lot more brave than I am these days. I can stand
> to hear, see, or talk about broadcast news. To me it is all full of
> slanted partial truths, and tainted with the stink of intentional
> omission of pertinent facts. And when you see the stuff that is reported
> as news on national television such as Kim K's wardrobe malfunction,
> Obama's daring move to wear tan after Labor Day, and the sad fact that
> the first gay athlete is failing in the NFL, it really drives home the
> pointless use of air all those idiots use.
>
> Putin is mildly threatening the West with talks of nuclear power, then
> amps it up to "don't mess with us as we ARE a nuclear country", Iraqi
> terrorists are bombing and killing US troops in Iraq again killing more
> soldiers and a lot of civilians, real estate sales were awful nationwide
> for the summer, Russia is replaying 1939 with their antics, new car sales
> are off again, our immigration problem is such a knot that all the king's
> horses and all the king's men can't even find a starting point for
> discussion, and on an on and on...
>
> and yet...
>
> we hear about which celebrities took the ALS ice bucket challenge, that
> Beyonce took her child on stage with her at an awards show, and juicy
> details of Chelsea Clinton's pregnancy including interviews with her Mom.
>
> Worse, the radio pin heads will talk all day long about how bad the news
> is, grinding, rehashing, vomiting it all up over and over and over. And
> surprising, none seem to own a mirror. If one side hates something, the
> other takes to the air waves with indignant passion to spew all their
> fact to discredit the other guys. It doesn't matter who is right and who
> is wrong, if you disagree with the anointed pundits of either colored
> strip they will attack like a gang of screaming hyenas.
>
> Since I have a no radios on the job policy, I noticed a difference in the
> greater peace out on the job. The boys weren't riled up about this or
> that, weren't indignant as hell about their rights being violated, and
> were generally in a much more easy going mindset. I kid you not. Since
> I didn't want to listen to the whining about civil rights being violated,
> whining a la Fox about me being scared of the truth, being afraid of
> healthy debate, etc., I just instituted a no radio policy. Period. It
> has worked out great for all kinds of reasons.
>
> I read a lot of news, try to sort out the different views from the facts
> and try to stay up on things. I NEVER believe one source, ever. But
> sometimes reading the news is very similar in experience (and smell, too)
> to getting fresh dog crap off my boots. About as informative and rewarding as well.
>
> Good on you guys that keep the networks and outlets going as I don't want
> to run into any of those jackasses on the street anywhere.
>
> Robert
Wow, LOL I mostly watch the news for weather and market prices. To all
the people that religiously watch a specific network I simply remind them
that the news is for your entertainment. I you were not being entertained
you would stop watching and their sponsors would drop them. They are all
in contradiction with their assessments of what is going on so you know the
truth not as important as sensationalism. I do believe that Joan Rivers had
died but I am not sure if it is Christmas yet.
Wow... you guys are a lot more brave than I am these days. I can stand to =
hear, see, or talk about broadcast news. To me it is all full of slanted p=
artial truths, and tainted with the stink of intentional omission of pertin=
ent facts. And when you see the stuff that is reported as news on national =
television such as Kim K's wardrobe malfunction, Obama's daring move to wea=
r tan after Labor Day, and the sad fact that the first gay athlete is faili=
ng in the NFL, it really drives home the pointless use of air all those idi=
ots use.
Putin is mildly threatening the West with talks of nuclear power, then amps=
it up to "don't mess with us as we ARE a nuclear country", Iraqi terrorist=
s are bombing and killing US troops in Iraq again killing more soldiers and=
a lot of civilians, real estate sales were awful nationwide for the summer=
, Russia is replaying 1939 with their antics, new car sales are off again, =
our immigration problem is such a knot that all the king's horses and all t=
he king's men can't even find a starting point for discussion, and on an on=
and on...
and yet...
we hear about which celebrities took the ALS ice bucket challenge, that Bey=
once took her child on stage with her at an awards show, and juicy details =
of Chelsea Clinton's pregnancy including interviews with her Mom.
Worse, the radio pin heads will talk all day long about how bad the news is=
, grinding, rehashing, vomiting it all up over and over and over. And surp=
rising, none seem to own a mirror. If one side hates something, the other =
takes to the air waves with indignant passion to spew all their fact to dis=
credit the other guys. It doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong, if=
you disagree with the anointed pundits of either colored strip they will a=
ttack like a gang of screaming hyenas.
Since I have a no radios on the job policy, I noticed a difference in the g=
reater peace out on the job. The boys weren't riled up about this or that,=
weren't indignant as hell about their rights being violated, and were gene=
rally in a much more easy going mindset. I kid you not. Since I didn't wa=
nt to listen to the whining about civil rights being violated, whining a la=
Fox about me being scared of the truth, being afraid of healthy debate, et=
c., I just instituted a no radio policy. Period. It has worked out great =
for all kinds of reasons.
I read a lot of news, try to sort out the different views from the facts an=
d try to stay up on things. I NEVER believe one source, ever. But sometim=
es reading the news is very similar in experience (and smell, too) to getti=
ng fresh dog crap off my boots. About as informative and rewarding as well=
.
Good on you guys that keep the networks and outlets going as I don't want t=
o run into any of those jackasses on the street anywhere.
Robert
The general quality of journalism has dropped significantly from the time I=
was a reporter for a midwest daily in the late 60s and early 70s. Part of=
that can be attributed to the paring of the older, more experienced (and h=
igher paid) reporters and editors to align costs with declining revenues in=
the print world. Part of it is the generally lousy job colleges and unive=
rsities do in teaching the craft. The example you posted is just incompete=
nt editing. More egregious examples are easy to find on every medium in ev=
ery market. The worst offenders, IMHO, are the large cable news channels. =
I've started tuning to BBC America and PBS for decent, competent reporting=
.
Larry
On Thursday, September 4, 2014 1:27:55 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> And you wonder how things get misconstrued and blown out of proportion=20
>=20
> when listening to the media.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> By Business Insider, Colin Campbell
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Both of former President George W. Bush's daughters aren't following the=
=20
>=20
> family's Republican Party heritage.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Jenna Bush Hager, the younger of the Bush twins, bla bla bla.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Now I ask does, any one really care or need clarification as to which=20
>=20
> twin popped out first? Does it matter? One would assume that the name=
=20
>=20
> of the daughter might be enough information to distinguish between the=20
>=20
> two. Does anyone need further clarification, really?
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Another case of putting too much impertinent information into the story=
=20
>=20
> to fill space.
"Dave in Texas" wrote in message news:[email protected]...
"Leon" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I can't not mention the local Channel 2 anchor. She is there because
she is pretty. Fresh out of college 20+ years ago as their traffic girl
and straight to the anchor desk.
HEY! WATCH YOUR MOUTH! You leave Dominique alone!
News, huh. that's what she does?
http://dominiquesachse.tv/
"I just have to look good,
I don't have to be clear
Let me whisper in your ear,
give us dirty laundry."
[With apologies to Don Henley]
Dave in Houston
On 9/4/2014 2:59 PM, knuttle wrote:
> On 9/4/2014 2:51 PM, Gramps' shop wrote:
>> The general quality of journalism has dropped significantly from the
>> time I was a reporter for a midwest daily in the late 60s and early
>> 70s. Part of that can be attributed to the paring of the older, more
>> experienced (and higher paid) reporters and editors to align costs
>> with declining revenues in the print world. Part of it is the
>> generally lousy job colleges and universities do in teaching the
>> craft. The example you posted is just incompetent editing. More
>> egregious examples are easy to find on every medium in every market.
>> The worst offenders, IMHO, are the large cable news channels. I've
>> started tuning to BBC America and PBS for decent, competent reporting.
>>
>> Larry
>> On Thursday, September 4, 2014 1:27:55 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>> And you wonder how things get misconstrued and blown out of proportion
>>>
>>> when listening to the media.
>>> By Business Insider, Colin Campbell
>>> Both of former President George W. Bush's daughters aren't following the
>>> family's Republican Party heritage.
>>> Jenna Bush Hager, the younger of the Bush twins, bla bla bla.
>>> Now I ask does, any one really care or need clarification as to which
>>> twin popped out first? Does it matter? One would assume that the name
>>> of the daughter might be enough information to distinguish between the
>>> two. Does anyone need further clarification, really?
>>> Another case of putting too much impertinent information into the story
>>> to fill space.
>>
> While there may be some items that have affected media circulation, I
> believe one of the greatest causes for the decline of the traditional
> media is the extreme bias in some organizations.
>
> There are entirely too many stories that are like the old one about the
> two horse race between the US and the USSR. "The day after the race the
> media reported the the US horse came in next to last, and the USSR horse
> came in second."
>
> I believe the US population is tired of this type of reporting and have
> given up on traditional media as a source of their news.
>
> I know in our family, we have stopped taking the newspaper because of
> the extreme bias expressed on every issue.
>
> We still watch the TV news for the entertainment value like one reporter
> who was interviewing the person in charge of an operation that produced
> a caustic byproduct. When the person in charge told the report that the
> by product was like Draino she responded by asking if his staff was
> trained to handle Draino. I will bet she did not know what Draino was.
>
> With "Intelligent" reporters like this who needs Bill Cosby.
>
I can't not mention the local Channel 2 anchor. She is there because
she is pretty. Fresh out of college 20+ years ago as their traffic girl
and straight to the anchor desk.
Anyway she reported an airplane incident. The airplane skidded into a
crash. There was no mention of the crash that the airplane skidded in
to... ;~)
And my latest favorite, The car over turned. We all understand that the
car turned over but that is not proper English, ending the sentence with
a preposition. Well maybe it is an adverb and could be turned over......
So what the heck is overturned???? Was the steering wheel turned too
much? Is that like over steer?
Maybe they should think a little harder and tell us what really
happened. The car ended up in an inverted position or the car was up
side down as a result of the accident.
On 9/5/2014 8:56 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>> On 9/4/2014 4:40 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>>>> So what the heck is overturned????
>>>
>>> Here's what Wictionary says:
>>>
>>> Etymology
>>>
>>> From Middle English overturnen, equivalent to over- +â turn. Compare
>>> also Middle English overterven (âto overturnâ), see terve.
>>> Verb
>>>
>>> overturn (third-person singular simple present overturns, present
>>> participle overturning, simple past and past participle overturned)
>>>
>>> 1. To turn over, capsize or upset (something)
>>
>> So why not just say something turned over as the #1 definition states?
>
> That's fine also. In English there is usually more than one way you
> can state something.
>
>> Or is the definition poor English?
>
> No, it is not.
>
>>>> Was the steering wheel turned too much? Is that like over steer?
>>>
>>> No, it means the car was turned upside-down. The roof was on the
>>> ground and the wheels were on top.
>>
>> Yeah, but your sentence, the car was turned upside-down, ends in a
>> preposition, down is a location.
>
> No, down is not a preposition. Down is an adverb.
Down is also a preposition.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHUE_enUS575US575&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define+down
And "over" is also.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHUE_enUS575US575&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define+over
>
>> That is supposedly a no no, do not end a sentence with a preposition.
>
> That's a myth. It is often perfectly fine to end a sentence with a
> preposition.
A myth that my English teachers taught?
>
> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/11/grammar-myths-prepositions/
> http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/prepositions_ending_a_sentence.htm
>
>> FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the
>> verb, turned
>
> The newscaster was using the single word "overturn", and that word is
> a verb.
>
>> The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
>> over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
>> words, and making the matter confusing.
>
> No. They were using the word "overturned". And they were using it
> correctly. You misinterpreted it as the two word phrase over turned.
>
>> Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
>> they say the pedestrian was over run.
>
> Because that's not what the word "overrun" means.
Doesn't it?
"Leon" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I can't not mention the local Channel 2 anchor. She is there because
she is pretty. Fresh out of college 20+ years ago as their traffic girl
and straight to the anchor desk.
HEY! WATCH YOUR MOUTH! You leave Dominique alone!
News, huh. that's what she does?
http://dominiquesachse.tv/
Dave in Houston
On 9/4/2014 7:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:24:03 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 9/4/2014 4:40 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And my latest favorite, The car over turned. We all understand that the
>>>> car turned over but that is not proper English, ending the sentence with
>>>> a preposition.
>>>
>>> "overturn" is a verb, and it's in all my dictionaries (electronic and
>>> dead-tree). Ending the sentence with the past-tense of a verb is
>>> perfectly proper when you're making a statement that something
>>> happened in the past.
>>>
>>> The tree fell.
>>>
>>> The dog barked.
>>>
>>> The car overturned.
>>
>> But did the car overturn or did the drive overturn? Is that what caused
>> the car to turn over, the steering being overturned?
>
> The word "overturned" is well understood. It is a verb with the
> subject being "car". A car is not a wheel, so there is no confusion.
> It does not mean the same thing as "over-steered".
>
> Well, it wasn't supposed to be turned on that axis, at all, so if it's
> shiny-side down, I suppose it was "over turned". ;-)
>
>>> If you prefer passive voice:
>>>
>>> The car was overturned.
>>>
>>>> Well maybe it is an adverb and could be turned over......
>>>
>>> It's a verb. In your example it's past tense [but you misspelled it
>>> by inserting a space in the middle].
>>>
>>>> So what the heck is overturned????
>>>
>>> Here's what Wictionary says:
>>>
>>> Etymology
>>>
>>> From Middle English overturnen, equivalent to over- +? turn. Compare
>>> also Middle English overterven (to overturn), see terve.
>>> Verb
>>>
>>> overturn (third-person singular simple present overturns, present
>>> participle overturning, simple past and past participle overturned)
>>>
>>> 1. To turn over, capsize or upset (something)
>>
>> So why not just say something turned over as the #1 definition states?
>> Or is the definition poor English?
>
> Like many verbs, it's precise meaning depends greatly on the subject.
> Would you limit the language to only one way of saying something? Are
> you French?
>
>>>
>>> 2. To overthrow or destroy something
>>>
>>> 3. (law) To reverse a decision; to overrule or rescind
>>>
>>> 4. To diminish the significance of a previous defeat by winning; to
>>> comeback from.
>>>
>>>> Was the steering wheel turned too much? Is that like over steer?
>>>
>>> No, it means the car was turned upside-down. The roof was on the
>>> ground and the wheels were on top.
>>
>> Yeah, but your sentence, the car was turned upside-down, ends in a
>> preposition, down is a location. That is supposedly a no no, do not end
>> a sentence with a preposition.
>
> Only in some quarters. Others have no problems with sentences ending
> such.
>
>> FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the verb,
>> turned
>
> "Overturned" is one word. It the verb of the sentence.
>
>>
>>>
>>>> Maybe they should think a little harder and tell us what really
>>>> happened. The car ended up in an inverted position or the car was up
>>>> side down as a result of the accident.
>>>
>>> I don't understand what your complaint is.
>>
>> The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
>> over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
>> words, and making the matter confusing.
>
> The words weren't reversed. "Overturned" is one word.
>
>> Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
>> they say the pedestrian was over run.
>
> Different word. "Overrun" is a big mistake for an airplane or
> something ISIS did in I.
>
The deal is that 5~6 years ago it was always turned over, then one
changed and they all played me too.
No one has any doubt what turned over means.
When you hear them reading of the teleprompter, one cannot distinguish
overturned from over turned.
On 9/4/2014 7:24 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:30:45 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 9/4/2014 5:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:16:41 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> not proper English, ending the sentence with
>>>> a preposition
>>>
>>> Ships do come about don't they?
>>>
>>
>>
>> ;~) I believe that would be correct, since the sentence did not end
>> with about. I'm obviously no English guru. ;~)
>
> Huh? "Come about!" is a sentence.
>
>> The media would probably change that to, ships do just about over come
>> don't they?
>
> Do you mean "overcome"? Complexly different meaning.
>
It is what you hear on TV vs the way it is spelled.
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:24:03 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 9/4/2014 4:40 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>
>>> And my latest favorite, The car over turned. We all understand that the
>>> car turned over but that is not proper English, ending the sentence with
>>> a preposition.
>>
>> "overturn" is a verb, and it's in all my dictionaries (electronic and
>> dead-tree). Ending the sentence with the past-tense of a verb is
>> perfectly proper when you're making a statement that something
>> happened in the past.
>>
>> The tree fell.
>>
>> The dog barked.
>>
>> The car overturned.
>
>But did the car overturn or did the drive overturn? Is that what caused
>the car to turn over, the steering being overturned?
The word "overturned" is well understood. It is a verb with the
subject being "car". A car is not a wheel, so there is no confusion.
It does not mean the same thing as "over-steered".
Well, it wasn't supposed to be turned on that axis, at all, so if it's
shiny-side down, I suppose it was "over turned". ;-)
>> If you prefer passive voice:
>>
>> The car was overturned.
>>
>>> Well maybe it is an adverb and could be turned over......
>>
>> It's a verb. In your example it's past tense [but you misspelled it
>> by inserting a space in the middle].
>>
>>> So what the heck is overturned????
>>
>> Here's what Wictionary says:
>>
>> Etymology
>>
>> From Middle English overturnen, equivalent to over- +? turn. Compare
>> also Middle English overterven (to overturn), see terve.
>> Verb
>>
>> overturn (third-person singular simple present overturns, present
>> participle overturning, simple past and past participle overturned)
>>
>> 1. To turn over, capsize or upset (something)
>
>So why not just say something turned over as the #1 definition states?
>Or is the definition poor English?
Like many verbs, it's precise meaning depends greatly on the subject.
Would you limit the language to only one way of saying something? Are
you French?
>>
>> 2. To overthrow or destroy something
>>
>> 3. (law) To reverse a decision; to overrule or rescind
>>
>> 4. To diminish the significance of a previous defeat by winning; to
>> comeback from.
>>
>>> Was the steering wheel turned too much? Is that like over steer?
>>
>> No, it means the car was turned upside-down. The roof was on the
>> ground and the wheels were on top.
>
>Yeah, but your sentence, the car was turned upside-down, ends in a
>preposition, down is a location. That is supposedly a no no, do not end
>a sentence with a preposition.
Only in some quarters. Others have no problems with sentences ending
such.
>FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the verb,
>turned
"Overturned" is one word. It the verb of the sentence.
>
>>
>>> Maybe they should think a little harder and tell us what really
>>> happened. The car ended up in an inverted position or the car was up
>>> side down as a result of the accident.
>>
>> I don't understand what your complaint is.
>
>The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
>over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
>words, and making the matter confusing.
The words weren't reversed. "Overturned" is one word.
>Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
>they say the pedestrian was over run.
Different word. "Overrun" is a big mistake for an airplane or
something ISIS did in I.
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:30:45 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 9/4/2014 5:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:16:41 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> not proper English, ending the sentence with
>>> a preposition
>>
>> Ships do come about don't they?
>>
>
>
>;~) I believe that would be correct, since the sentence did not end
>with about. I'm obviously no English guru. ;~)
>
>The media would probably change that to, ships do just about over come
>don't they?
Probably so. :)
On 9/4/2014 6:45 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 14:18:05 -0500, Swingman wrote:
>
>>> The worst offenders, IMHO, are the large cable news channels. I've
>>> started tuning to BBC America and PBS for decent, competent reporting.
>
> BBC and PBS seem a lot closer to the ideal of reporting the news, instead
> of editorializing, than any of the commercial "news" broadcasts.
>>
>> Been watching OANN lately. Not long enough to make up my mind, but so
>> far,
>> so good. Even better that it is being reviled by the likes of the Daily
>> KOokS, so it must be hitting a nerve.
>
> OANN? Those are the folks that think Fox news is too liberal :-).
The political talk shows, yes.
The NEWS segments, not at all ... and much more balanced than CNN, Fox,
MSNBC, etal.
You'd have to actually watch it to realize that.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 9/4/2014 9:49 PM, Dave in Texas wrote:
> "Leon" wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> I can't not mention the local Channel 2 anchor. She is there because
> she is pretty. Fresh out of college 20+ years ago as their traffic girl
> and straight to the anchor desk.
>
> HEY! WATCH YOUR MOUTH! You leave Dominique alone!
>
> News, huh. that's what she does?
>
> http://dominiquesachse.tv/
>
> Dave in Houston
;~)
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 11:38:07 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 9/5/2014 8:56 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>> On 9/4/2014 4:40 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>
>>>>> So what the heck is overturned????
>>>>
>>>> Here's what Wictionary says:
>>>>
>>>> Etymology
>>>>
>>>> From Middle English overturnen, equivalent to over- +? turn. Compare
>>>> also Middle English overterven (to overturn), see terve.
>>>> Verb
>>>>
>>>> overturn (third-person singular simple present overturns, present
>>>> participle overturning, simple past and past participle overturned)
>>>>
>>>> 1. To turn over, capsize or upset (something)
>>>
>>> So why not just say something turned over as the #1 definition states?
>>
>> That's fine also. In English there is usually more than one way you
>> can state something.
>>
>>> Or is the definition poor English?
>>
>> No, it is not.
>>
>>>>> Was the steering wheel turned too much? Is that like over steer?
>>>>
>>>> No, it means the car was turned upside-down. The roof was on the
>>>> ground and the wheels were on top.
>>>
>>> Yeah, but your sentence, the car was turned upside-down, ends in a
>>> preposition, down is a location.
>>
>> No, down is not a preposition. Down is an adverb.
>
>Down is also a preposition.
>
>https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHUE_enUS575US575&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define+down
>
>And "over" is also.
>
>https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHUE_enUS575US575&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define+over
>
Not in this usage. It modifies the verb "turned" in "turned over" and
as such it is an adverb. In the word "overturned" is isn't either.
It's just two syllables of the word. ;-)
>
>
>
>>
>>> That is supposedly a no no, do not end a sentence with a preposition.
>>
>> That's a myth. It is often perfectly fine to end a sentence with a
>> preposition.
>
>A myth that my English teachers taught?
Yes. A common one.
>
>
>>
>> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/11/grammar-myths-prepositions/
>> http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/prepositions_ending_a_sentence.htm
>>
>>> FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the
>>> verb, turned
>>
>> The newscaster was using the single word "overturn", and that word is
>> a verb.
>>
>>> The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
>>> over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
>>> words, and making the matter confusing.
>>
>> No. They were using the word "overturned". And they were using it
>> correctly. You misinterpreted it as the two word phrase over turned.
>>
>>> Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
>>> they say the pedestrian was over run.
>>
>> Because that's not what the word "overrun" means.
>
>Doesn't it?
No. Different words.
On 9/4/2014 11:51 AM, Gramps' shop wrote:
> The general quality of journalism has dropped significantly from the time I was a reporter for a midwest daily in the late 60s and early 70s. Part of that can be attributed to the paring of the older, more experienced (and higher paid) reporters and editors to align costs with declining revenues in the print world. Part of it is the generally lousy job colleges and universities do in teaching the craft. The example you posted is just incompetent editing. More egregious examples are easy to find on every medium in every market. The worst offenders, IMHO, are the large cable news channels. I've started tuning to BBC America and PBS for decent, competent reporting.
>
> Larry
>
>
Larry's point is well taken. However, the major problem is that what
passes for news these days is slanted, if not a subject of prevarication
and omission. Cable news outlets do this purposefully in order to keep
their listeners in line and the money flowing. For example, consider
the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare? Fair enough. Is it a godsend? Is
it expensive? Is it horribly expensive? Will it bring the nation to
its knees? This kind of rhetoric is not good for our country.
If you want to know the state of your various worlds, stick with the BBC
(World and American Service), the PBS Newshour, and Al Jazeera (American
service). PBS is carried on your local PBS station. The BBC can be
found again on PBS or on the web. Al Jazeera has its own cable channel
(used to be the Current news channel). They all have web sites for
print and broadcast media.
Good stuff is out there for you. Here's a test of your political
leanings: If you think that FOX or MSNBC is spot on, just go away and
don't bother anyone. If you think that they are excessive, continue to
CNN. If you find them to be a bit to the right of center or at least
comfortable, you can easily switch to any of the above outlets.
Otherwise, sit down and start recording/watching Jon Stewart and Steven
Colbert until you feel you are ready to reenter polite society.
Don't take any of this too seriously. I already get the occasional
nasty-gram for voicing my views. Good night and good luck.
mahalo,
jo4hn
On 9/4/2014 3:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:16:41 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> not proper English, ending the sentence with
>> a preposition
>
> Ships do come about don't they?
>
That is a proposition up with which I will not put! [Attributed to W.
Churchill]
mahalo,
jo4hn
On 9/4/2014 2:51 PM, Gramps' shop wrote:
> The general quality of journalism has dropped significantly from the time I was a reporter for a midwest daily in the late 60s and early 70s. Part of that can be attributed to the paring of the older, more experienced (and higher paid) reporters and editors to align costs with declining revenues in the print world. Part of it is the generally lousy job colleges and universities do in teaching the craft. The example you posted is just incompetent editing. More egregious examples are easy to find on every medium in every market. The worst offenders, IMHO, are the large cable news channels. I've started tuning to BBC America and PBS for decent, competent reporting.
>
> Larry
> On Thursday, September 4, 2014 1:27:55 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>> And you wonder how things get misconstrued and blown out of proportion
>>
>> when listening to the media.
>> By Business Insider, Colin Campbell
>> Both of former President George W. Bush's daughters aren't following the
>> family's Republican Party heritage.
>> Jenna Bush Hager, the younger of the Bush twins, bla bla bla.
>> Now I ask does, any one really care or need clarification as to which
>> twin popped out first? Does it matter? One would assume that the name
>> of the daughter might be enough information to distinguish between the
>> two. Does anyone need further clarification, really?
>> Another case of putting too much impertinent information into the story
>> to fill space.
>
While there may be some items that have affected media circulation, I
believe one of the greatest causes for the decline of the traditional
media is the extreme bias in some organizations.
There are entirely too many stories that are like the old one about the
two horse race between the US and the USSR. "The day after the race the
media reported the the US horse came in next to last, and the USSR horse
came in second."
I believe the US population is tired of this type of reporting and have
given up on traditional media as a source of their news.
I know in our family, we have stopped taking the newspaper because of
the extreme bias expressed on every issue.
We still watch the TV news for the entertainment value like one reporter
who was interviewing the person in charge of an operation that produced
a caustic byproduct. When the person in charge told the report that the
by product was like Draino she responded by asking if his staff was
trained to handle Draino. I will bet she did not know what Draino was.
With "Intelligent" reporters like this who needs Bill Cosby.
On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
> And my latest favorite, The car over turned. We all understand that the
> car turned over but that is not proper English, ending the sentence with
> a preposition.
"overturn" is a verb, and it's in all my dictionaries (electronic and
dead-tree). Ending the sentence with the past-tense of a verb is
perfectly proper when you're making a statement that something
happened in the past.
The tree fell.
The dog barked.
The car overturned.
If you prefer passive voice:
The car was overturned.
> Well maybe it is an adverb and could be turned over......
It's a verb. In your example it's past tense [but you misspelled it
by inserting a space in the middle].
> So what the heck is overturned????
Here's what Wictionary says:
Etymology
From Middle English overturnen, equivalent to over- +â turn. Compare
also Middle English overterven (âto overturnâ), see terve.
Verb
overturn (third-person singular simple present overturns, present
participle overturning, simple past and past participle overturned)
1. To turn over, capsize or upset (something)
2. To overthrow or destroy something
3. (law) To reverse a decision; to overrule or rescind
4. To diminish the significance of a previous defeat by winning; to
comeback from.
> Was the steering wheel turned too much? Is that like over steer?
No, it means the car was turned upside-down. The roof was on the
ground and the wheels were on top.
> Maybe they should think a little harder and tell us what really
> happened. The car ended up in an inverted position or the car was up
> side down as a result of the accident.
I don't understand what your complaint is.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! ... I want a COLOR
at T.V. and a VIBRATING BED!!!
gmail.com
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 14:18:05 -0500, Swingman wrote:
>> The worst offenders, IMHO, are the large cable news channels. I've
>> started tuning to BBC America and PBS for decent, competent reporting.
BBC and PBS seem a lot closer to the ideal of reporting the news, instead
of editorializing, than any of the commercial "news" broadcasts.
>
> Been watching OANN lately. Not long enough to make up my mind, but so
> far,
> so good. Even better that it is being reviled by the likes of the Daily
> KOokS, so it must be hitting a nerve.
OANN? Those are the folks that think Fox news is too liberal :-).
On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
> On 9/4/2014 4:40 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>> So what the heck is overturned????
>>
>> Here's what Wictionary says:
>>
>> Etymology
>>
>> From Middle English overturnen, equivalent to over- +â turn. Compare
>> also Middle English overterven (âto overturnâ), see terve.
>> Verb
>>
>> overturn (third-person singular simple present overturns, present
>> participle overturning, simple past and past participle overturned)
>>
>> 1. To turn over, capsize or upset (something)
>
> So why not just say something turned over as the #1 definition states?
That's fine also. In English there is usually more than one way you
can state something.
> Or is the definition poor English?
No, it is not.
>>> Was the steering wheel turned too much? Is that like over steer?
>>
>> No, it means the car was turned upside-down. The roof was on the
>> ground and the wheels were on top.
>
> Yeah, but your sentence, the car was turned upside-down, ends in a
> preposition, down is a location.
No, down is not a preposition. Down is an adverb.
> That is supposedly a no no, do not end a sentence with a preposition.
That's a myth. It is often perfectly fine to end a sentence with a
preposition.
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/11/grammar-myths-prepositions/
http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/prepositions_ending_a_sentence.htm
> FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the
> verb, turned
The newscaster was using the single word "overturn", and that word is
a verb.
> The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
> over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
> words, and making the matter confusing.
No. They were using the word "overturned". And they were using it
correctly. You misinterpreted it as the two word phrase over turned.
> Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
> they say the pedestrian was over run.
Because that's not what the word "overrun" means.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! MMM-MM!! So THIS is
at BIO-NEBULATION!
gmail.com
On 2014-09-05, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
> On 9/5/2014 8:56 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>> That is supposedly a no no, do not end a sentence with a preposition.
>>
>> That's a myth. It is often perfectly fine to end a sentence with a
>> preposition.
>
> A myth that my English teachers taught?
How should I know what your English teachers taught? There are high
school teachers teaching alls sorts of incorrect things. I wouldn't
be a bit surprised if your English teacher told you never to end a
sentence with a preposition. Despite what he/she may have told you,
your English teacher only made up the rules for your work in his/her
class -- not for the entire English speaking world.
>> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/11/grammar-myths-prepositions/
>> http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/prepositions_ending_a_sentence.htm
>>
>>> FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the
>>> verb, turned
>>
>> The newscaster was using the single word "overturn", and that word is
>> a verb.
>>
>>> The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
>>> over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
>>> words, and making the matter confusing.
>>
>> No. They were using the word "overturned". And they were using it
>> correctly. You misinterpreted it as the two word phrase over turned.
>>
>>> Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
>>> they say the pedestrian was over run.
>>
>> Because that's not what the word "overrun" means.
>
> Doesn't it?
No, it "doesn't". Look it up.
--
Grant
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:30:45 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 9/4/2014 5:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:16:41 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> not proper English, ending the sentence with
>>> a preposition
>>
>> Ships do come about don't they?
>>
>
>
>;~) I believe that would be correct, since the sentence did not end
>with about. I'm obviously no English guru. ;~)
Huh? "Come about!" is a sentence.
>The media would probably change that to, ships do just about over come
>don't they?
Do you mean "overcome"? Complexly different meaning.
On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 20:18:48 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 9/4/2014 7:22 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:24:03 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/4/2014 4:40 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>>> On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And my latest favorite, The car over turned. We all understand that the
>>>>> car turned over but that is not proper English, ending the sentence with
>>>>> a preposition.
>>>>
>>>> "overturn" is a verb, and it's in all my dictionaries (electronic and
>>>> dead-tree). Ending the sentence with the past-tense of a verb is
>>>> perfectly proper when you're making a statement that something
>>>> happened in the past.
>>>>
>>>> The tree fell.
>>>>
>>>> The dog barked.
>>>>
>>>> The car overturned.
>>>
>>> But did the car overturn or did the drive overturn? Is that what caused
>>> the car to turn over, the steering being overturned?
>>
>> The word "overturned" is well understood. It is a verb with the
>> subject being "car". A car is not a wheel, so there is no confusion.
>> It does not mean the same thing as "over-steered".
>>
>> Well, it wasn't supposed to be turned on that axis, at all, so if it's
>> shiny-side down, I suppose it was "over turned". ;-)
>>
>>>> If you prefer passive voice:
>>>>
>>>> The car was overturned.
>>>>
>>>>> Well maybe it is an adverb and could be turned over......
>>>>
>>>> It's a verb. In your example it's past tense [but you misspelled it
>>>> by inserting a space in the middle].
>>>>
>>>>> So what the heck is overturned????
>>>>
>>>> Here's what Wictionary says:
>>>>
>>>> Etymology
>>>>
>>>> From Middle English overturnen, equivalent to over- +? turn. Compare
>>>> also Middle English overterven (to overturn), see terve.
>>>> Verb
>>>>
>>>> overturn (third-person singular simple present overturns, present
>>>> participle overturning, simple past and past participle overturned)
>>>>
>>>> 1. To turn over, capsize or upset (something)
>>>
>>> So why not just say something turned over as the #1 definition states?
>>> Or is the definition poor English?
>>
>> Like many verbs, it's precise meaning depends greatly on the subject.
>> Would you limit the language to only one way of saying something? Are
>> you French?
>>
>>>>
>>>> 2. To overthrow or destroy something
>>>>
>>>> 3. (law) To reverse a decision; to overrule or rescind
>>>>
>>>> 4. To diminish the significance of a previous defeat by winning; to
>>>> comeback from.
>>>>
>>>>> Was the steering wheel turned too much? Is that like over steer?
>>>>
>>>> No, it means the car was turned upside-down. The roof was on the
>>>> ground and the wheels were on top.
>>>
>>> Yeah, but your sentence, the car was turned upside-down, ends in a
>>> preposition, down is a location. That is supposedly a no no, do not end
>>> a sentence with a preposition.
>>
>> Only in some quarters. Others have no problems with sentences ending
>> such.
>>
>>> FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the verb,
>>> turned
>>
>> "Overturned" is one word. It the verb of the sentence.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe they should think a little harder and tell us what really
>>>>> happened. The car ended up in an inverted position or the car was up
>>>>> side down as a result of the accident.
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand what your complaint is.
>>>
>>> The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
>>> over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
>>> words, and making the matter confusing.
>>
>> The words weren't reversed. "Overturned" is one word.
>>
>>> Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
>>> they say the pedestrian was over run.
>>
>> Different word. "Overrun" is a big mistake for an airplane or
>> something ISIS did in I.
>>
>
>The deal is that 5~6 years ago it was always turned over, then one
>changed and they all played me too.
>No one has any doubt what turned over means.
Perhaps you've led a sheltered life? I've heard, and used, the word
"overturned" since I was a kid. "Turned over" is an active voice, as
in "I turned over the car" (which could mean that I started it, too
;-). The passive voice "the car overturned" doesn't imply who did it.
It's the state of the vehicle; shiny side down.
>When you hear them reading of the teleprompter, one cannot distinguish
>overturned from over turned.
Perhaps it's you? If they teleprompter reader doesn't have a mouthful
of marbles, the two should be easily discriminated, not to mention the
context or grammar should be clear.
On 9/4/2014 5:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 15:16:41 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> not proper English, ending the sentence with
>> a preposition
>
> Ships do come about don't they?
>
;~) I believe that would be correct, since the sentence did not end
with about. I'm obviously no English guru. ;~)
The media would probably change that to, ships do just about over come
don't they?
On 9/7/2014 11:06 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2014-09-05, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>> On 9/5/2014 8:56 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>> On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>>>> That is supposedly a no no, do not end a sentence with a preposition.
>>>
>>> That's a myth. It is often perfectly fine to end a sentence with a
>>> preposition.
>>
>> A myth that my English teachers taught?
>
> How should I know what your English teachers taught? There are high
> school teachers teaching alls sorts of incorrect things. I wouldn't
> be a bit surprised if your English teacher told you never to end a
> sentence with a preposition. Despite what he/she may have told you,
> your English teacher only made up the rules for your work in his/her
> class -- not for the entire English speaking world.
>
>>> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/11/grammar-myths-prepositions/
>>> http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/prepositions_ending_a_sentence.htm
>>>
>>>> FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the
>>>> verb, turned
>>>
>>> The newscaster was using the single word "overturn", and that word is
>>> a verb.
>>>
>>>> The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
>>>> over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
>>>> words, and making the matter confusing.
>>>
>>> No. They were using the word "overturned". And they were using it
>>> correctly. You misinterpreted it as the two word phrase over turned.
>>>
>>>> Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
>>>> they say the pedestrian was over run.
>>>
>>> Because that's not what the word "overrun" means.
>>
>> Doesn't it?
>
> No, it "doesn't". Look it up.
>
You have absolutely totally missed the point.
On 9/4/2014 4:40 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2014-09-04, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>> And my latest favorite, The car over turned. We all understand that the
>> car turned over but that is not proper English, ending the sentence with
>> a preposition.
>
> "overturn" is a verb, and it's in all my dictionaries (electronic and
> dead-tree). Ending the sentence with the past-tense of a verb is
> perfectly proper when you're making a statement that something
> happened in the past.
>
> The tree fell.
>
> The dog barked.
>
> The car overturned.
But did the car overturn or did the drive overturn? Is that what caused
the car to turn over, the steering being overturned?
>
> If you prefer passive voice:
>
> The car was overturned.
>
>> Well maybe it is an adverb and could be turned over......
>
> It's a verb. In your example it's past tense [but you misspelled it
> by inserting a space in the middle].
>
>> So what the heck is overturned????
>
> Here's what Wictionary says:
>
> Etymology
>
> From Middle English overturnen, equivalent to over- +â turn. Compare
> also Middle English overterven (âto overturnâ), see terve.
> Verb
>
> overturn (third-person singular simple present overturns, present
> participle overturning, simple past and past participle overturned)
>
> 1. To turn over, capsize or upset (something)
So why not just say something turned over as the #1 definition states?
Or is the definition poor English?
>
> 2. To overthrow or destroy something
>
> 3. (law) To reverse a decision; to overrule or rescind
>
> 4. To diminish the significance of a previous defeat by winning; to
> comeback from.
>
>> Was the steering wheel turned too much? Is that like over steer?
>
> No, it means the car was turned upside-down. The roof was on the
> ground and the wheels were on top.
Yeah, but your sentence, the car was turned upside-down, ends in a
preposition, down is a location. That is supposedly a no no, do not end
a sentence with a preposition.
FWIW my dictionary indicates over to an adverb also, modifys the verb,
turned
>
>> Maybe they should think a little harder and tell us what really
>> happened. The car ended up in an inverted position or the car was up
>> side down as a result of the accident.
>
> I don't understand what your complaint is.
The reporters are trying to make the last words in a sentence "turned
over" grammatically correct as easily as possible, by reversing the two
words, and making the matter confusing.
Oddly they continue to say that the pedestrian was run over, why don't
they say the pedestrian was over run.
On 9/4/2014 1:51 PM, Gramps' shop wrote:
> The worst offenders, IMHO, are the large cable news channels. I've started tuning to BBC America and PBS for decent, competent reporting.
Been watching OANN lately. Not long enough to make up my mind, but so
far, so good. Even better that it is being reviled by the likes of the
Daily KOokS, so it must be hitting a nerve.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)