Phil Plait notes an update to the Sen. David Vitter story that I mentioned last month. Vitter had snuck an earmark into a Federal appropriations bill that would have given $100,000 to a Louisiana group that wants public schools to teach creationism as science. Now, thanks to reaction from the reality-based community, it ain't gonna happen.
Plait gives partial credit, and rightly so, I think, to the blogosphere for bringing Vitter's tactics to light. Whether or not my tiny contribution helped, I'm proud to have been part of the protest.
Phil's source for the news is this piece in the Times-Picayune, which is worth a look if you want to see some clumsy backpedaling by Vitter.
On a related note, in an earlier post, Phil links to a great editorial in the Calgary Herald, titled "Schools should put faith in science." Evidently, Canada is starting to suffer wingnut infestation as well.
2 comments:
Since you're one of those mayvinim (I so wanted to use that word) about correct grammar, I assume that you choose the incorrect "snuck" rather than "sneaked" because you were following Sistrunk and White's dictum that: "Only the writer whose ear is reliable is in a position to use bad grammar deliberately; only he knows for sure when a colloquialism is better than formal phrasing; only he is able to sustain his work at the level of good taste." LOL
I do know that "sneaked" is correct, but I like the sound of "snuck" better, possibly because of "strike/struck." Also, "snuck" sounds more sinister, always the tone to convey when talking about Republican politicians.
Strunk and White is one of my bibles, to be sure, and I'd like to claim that I'm following the dictum you cited.
Along the same lines, I prefer "I lit a cigarette" to "I lighted a cigarette." The former seems to be gaining mainstream existence -- I see it in new novels all the time now, and not just in dialogue.
One word that never seems to make it, but which many competent speakers and writers love, is "ain't." It seems especially good in this case: "Ain't I?" as opposed to "Am I not?" or "Aren't I?"
I ain't saying I'd use it all the time, but it should be accepted English.
P.S. Note that the spell-checker built into Firefox accepts "ain't." Progress! (On the other hand, it wishes I would use "dialog" instead of "dialogue." I'll use the former for computer terms like "dialog box," but it just looks wrong in the sense that I used it above.)
Post a Comment