sic: thus; so. Used to indicate that a quoted passage, especially one containing an error or unconventional spelling, has been retained in its original form or written intentionally. - Answers.com definition
Adding religious insult to mortal injury in its coverage of the 3000th US service-person to die in Iraq, ABC seemed to suggest that there was something odd or erroneous in the expression of a traditional belief in the afterlife.
Today's "Good Morning America" focused on the death of Army Specialist Dustin Donica of Texas, believed to be that 3000th serviceman lost in Iraq. Narrating the segment, ABC's Jonathan Karl stated: "The MySpace page he left behind bears the tributes of those whose lives he touched." The screen then displayed the message [shown larger-than-normal here for clarity's sake] from one of those friends:
"You were one of my best friends and I'll never forget you. All my prayers go to your family and I'll see you again." (sic)
The friend was obviously expressing his expectation to see Dustin again in the world to come. That the reference to seeing Dustin again was prefaced by a mention of the family being in the friend's "prayers" leaves no doubt that religious faith was being expressed.
Does traditional religious belief strike ABC as so odd or erroneous as to require a snide little "sic"?
UPDATE 01/03: An ABC News executive has been in touch to say that the 'sic' was intended to refer to a misspelling of 'I'll' as 'ill' in the original MySpace posting by SPC Donica's friend, and that the 'sic' was mistakenly left in when the misspelling was corrected in the screen graphic. ABC has, in any event, reaped what the MSM has sown. That a member of the MSM would have intentionally sought to slight traditional religious beliefs with the use of the 'sic' is entirely plausible.
Mark was in Iraq in November. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
ABC adds the qualifier (sic)
January 1, 2007 - 08:05 ET by Andrew H.ABC adds the qualifier (sic) where it did not have to--the sentence may be unique (I like unique) but it is not incorrect. It appears one of our best who gave his life is a better writer than those in the liberal clutch at ABC.
One might suspect part of their agenda here is to lend credence to Kerry's comment--our brave C student who lied and married his way to political prominence in the highly educated northeast--you know the place where the students missed Milton Friedman but know Galbreath by heart.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
With respect, it was not Sp
January 1, 2007 - 08:09 ET by Mark FinkelsteinWith respect, it was not Spec. Donica's sentence. It came from one of his friends leaving a tribute on Spec. Donica's MySpace page. IMHO there was nothing unique about the sentence. It expressed a very traditional religious belief in the afterlife.
I stand corrected, still I li
January 1, 2007 - 08:14 ET by Andrew H.I stand corrected, still I liked the conversational tone of "All my best to your family and I'll see you again." It kind of punches out sentinment (which I happen to agree with) and captures two subjects in my view. What I don't understand is why ABC would qualify.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
I think the answer to your
January 1, 2007 - 08:17 ET by Mark FinkelsteinI think the answer to your question is clear: ABC thought it so odd that someone would express a belief in the afterlife that they wanted viewers to understand that the "mistake" was the author's, not ABC's.
Seems an odd usage of (sic),
January 1, 2007 - 12:24 ET by balboaSeems an odd usage of (sic), but I'm not sure it's used to question belief in the afterlife. Perhaps someone thought it might be confusing, a passage saying that they'd see him again. "But I thought he died?"
It's not really needed, but I guess I don't think it's anything more than odd.
Balbao - you have just made
January 1, 2007 - 12:44 ET by Mark FinkelsteinBalbao - you have just made my point. Only someone who doesn't believe or understand those who do could have failed to understand what the writer had in mind. Would you have been confused without the 'sic'?
Not at all. I'm simply not su
January 1, 2007 - 14:07 ET by balboaNot at all. I'm simply not sure it was a stab at belief in the afterlife.
Thank you bal for admitting again you have no idea
January 1, 2007 - 18:03 ET by SportPoliticsThank you bal for admitting again you have no idea what is going on.
You agree it's not needed. You also are not sure it was a stab at belief in the afterlife. It wasn't, you think, snide or the like.
In other words for you it's just there, not needed, out of place, and the reader, like you, can decide they have no idea why, and that's the end of it.
You're such an idiot, you're entertaining, because you always are willing to admit how little you know or understand, but only if you're opposing the obvious conclusion all normal people draw.
You even slipped in your little jab about the people here being "experts" at "those kinds" of conclusions.
If a bomb showed up in the middle of Time Square on the street, and the bomb crew found the wires, the timer, a battery, and the explosive charge in it, I'm sure you'd be the first to declare we don't really know what it is, or why it was there. When others argue it is a bomb, you'd be the one to say you're not really sure, although you find it to be out of place, you cannot really determine it's nature.
Congratulations for being openly the most ridiculous tard I have ever seen. I am in wonder and awe of it.
I do understand, you certainly won't be able to follow or comprehend what I'm getting at, because of course you can infer to others here I'm insane or didn't properly make my point, or used poor prose.
Yes, so, we'll settle it by just concluding that you have no idea what I just wrote, or what my real meaning might be. Congratulations again.
In other words for you it's j
January 1, 2007 - 18:17 ET by balboaIn other words for you it's just there, not needed, out of place, and the reader, like you, can decide they have no idea why, and that's the end of it.
I'm not 100% positive why it's there, and neither are you, despite your obvious genius in moments like this.
Sure I am bal
January 1, 2007 - 19:36 ET by SportPoliticsSure I am bal, and the fact that you're not, is all telling.
Mark was certain, and you even posted that certainty, and he called you on it.
It was belittling and mean, and snickery for the person to put it there. The left makes fun of the military for it's religious beliefs as well, as it is deeply ingrained there in many, many cases, and they don't like that. Certainly they'ed like God removed from the military as well, and they'ed probably start with the Marines.
It's still interesting though, when a liberal plays their superior card and another liberal pretends they haven't a clue, and tells everyone else that they are in the same boat. Congratulations bal. Playing dumb is your key asset.
It was belittling and mean,
January 1, 2007 - 19:41 ET by balboaIt was belittling and mean, and snickery for the person to put it there.
There's absolutely no proof of that anywhere.
That might fly on Kos, Bal.Bu
January 1, 2007 - 19:44 ET by BlondeThat might fly on Kos, Bal.
But you've been voted of the island on this issue.
Only because of general conse
January 1, 2007 - 19:47 ET by balboaOnly because of general consensus, not because of reason or actual proof.
Its simple; you're wrong. I
January 2, 2007 - 10:18 ET by Ten7sIts simple; you're wrong. I repeat, you need to familiarize yourself with the usage of "[sic]", or just move on in blissful ignorance.
You seem to think it's used t
January 2, 2007 - 10:44 ET by balboaYou seem to think it's used to ridicule; it's not. How am I wrong about it's usage?
Re: SIC - Mark wins...AGAIN...
January 2, 2007 - 13:02 ET by TruthMongerAs the resident TM, I'll save all of us some further time and trouble and declare that Mark is undeniably 100% correct on this...
This particular reference of "I'll see you again" is not confusing to MSM liberals or anyone else whatsoever - we all know EXACTLY what it means - that they will see each other again in Heaven. Therefore there is no absolutely no "confusion" on it's meaning. And we can also see that there are no spelling errors either, therefore no "sic" is required...
So why is it there?
Obviously, as Mark adeptly notes, for no other reason than to imply and promote the cherished MSM/lib notion that the belief in an afterlife is "confusing" to many people, probably even a wrongful belief...actually anyone who believes in an afterlife (but mainly just the Christian one!) must be an absolute moronic idiot...
To illustrate further let's try this phrase:
"A fetus is nothing more than a blob of tissue (sic)."
Any problems with this sic, resident NB libnuts...?
Man, I'm tired of being irrefutably correct all the time...
I'm glad we finally cleared t
January 2, 2007 - 13:30 ET by balboaI'm glad we finally cleared that up. That's good work, TM. :-)
...I da man (sic)...:)!
January 2, 2007 - 13:43 ET by TruthMonger...I da man (sic)...:)!
Since there was no misspel
January 1, 2007 - 16:00 ET by Ten7sSince there was no misspelled word or misusage of grammar, "(sic)" in this case is obviously used to snidely ridicule the writer's thoughts. Great catch, Mark.
You're assuming the intention
January 1, 2007 - 16:13 ET by balboaYou're assuming the intentions. "Obviously" and "snidely ridicule" are not clear.
bal - stop fighting
January 1, 2007 - 16:24 ET by misterbillThe word "sic" has been used in public discourse forever. It's purpose is to disassociate the reporter from the printed or written word. It is usually used to say "hey, I am not as bad a speller as the idiot who wrote this". I had thought you were a man of reason, but here you sit and defend a mean and spiteful bit of journalism.
"Obviously" and "snidely ridicule" are not clear. (sic)
It's hard to assume spite, th
January 1, 2007 - 16:30 ET by balboaIt's hard to assume spite, that's all. For you guys, not so much, but then this is your area. I agree it's poor usage.
I hate to break your back Bal, but writers write, readers infer.
January 1, 2007 - 16:35 ET by acaiguanaI hate to break your back Bal, but writers write, readers infer.
Your whole stick here seems to be a lousy point that the reader assumes something and judges the writer's intent from that assumption.
Duh...
And you are the arbiter of whether reader's assumptions are correct or should not be made?
I don't think so.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
It's possible that you're rig
January 1, 2007 - 16:40 ET by balboaIt's possible that you're right in what you assume. I don't see the same intent. I could be wrong, but I'm going to argue my position.
Saddam was still arguing his position as his floor fell away.
January 1, 2007 - 17:26 ET by acaiguanaSaddam was still arguing his position as his floor fell away.
But at any rate, I am not commenting on the use of <sic> here because in my opinion it is used totally incorrectly.
This would reflect on the poor writing.
That would be normal for the MSM.
That would mean boring.
I am now officially bored.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
ACA,Well, that leaves me the
January 1, 2007 - 17:33 ET by BlondeACA,
Well, that leaves me the opportunity to say something totally inappropriate here.
...
Like....did you see the whole Saddam snuff film on YouTube?
He wasn't ready for the floor to drop out from under his feet as he was arguing away, was he?
me too
January 1, 2007 - 17:41 ET by misterbillI'm a little <sic> of it too!
Saddam's floor-----
January 1, 2007 - 17:46 ET by misterbillSaddam's floor-----now there's a platform for the democrats!!!!
balboa, you're on the wrong t
January 1, 2007 - 16:36 ET by Ten7sbalboa, you're on the wrong track here. You need to familiarize yourself with the usage of "(sic)".
I know the usage. I've said i
January 1, 2007 - 16:41 ET by balboaI know the usage. I've said it's poor usage. I just don't believe your stance on why it was used.
So, do you deny the absolute
January 1, 2007 - 16:44 ET by Ten7sSo, do you deny the absolute fact that "(sic)" is used by journalists to ridicule others that they quote?
Happy New Year, BTW.
Yes. I deny that as "absolute
January 1, 2007 - 16:45 ET by balboaYes. I deny that as "absolute fact."
And a Happy New Year to you, too.
Thanks,At least now, we know
January 1, 2007 - 16:48 ET by Ten7sThanks,
At least now we know the position you're defending; good luck with that.
I feel pretty good defending
January 1, 2007 - 17:04 ET by balboaI feel pretty good defending the position that "sic" is not used to ridicule.
sic only means
January 1, 2007 - 17:06 ET by tumbler_2007All sic stands for is "spelling is correct". (In other words, Don't blame us.)
Actually tumber, it means t
January 1, 2007 - 17:16 ET by Jack BauerActually tumber, it means the writer has noted that the spelling or meaning in a quote from another person is incorrect.
But I am guessing you knew that and it was a mistype!
sic transit gloria mundi
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
"so; thus: usually written pa
January 1, 2007 - 18:22 ET by balboa"so; thus: usually written parenthetically to denote that a word, phrase, passage, etc., that may appear strange or incorrect has been written intentionally or has been quoted verbatim."
Balboa: exactly! ABC found it
January 1, 2007 - 19:14 ET by Mark FinkelsteinBalboa: exactly! ABC found it "strange or incorrect" that someone would believe in the afterlife!!!
No, ABC found the phrase "I'l
January 1, 2007 - 19:39 ET by balboaNo, ABC found the phrase "I'll see you again" as potentially confusing, as the person it was written too is dead.
But, but but but but but Mark - bal uhh...well
January 1, 2007 - 19:42 ET by SportPoliticsBut, but but but but but Mark - bal uhh...well .... let's just say since it's too obvious we all have to agree with bal the just that no rude or belittling attitude or any such bad thing inspired the "sic" nor was meant, intended, nor inferred by it, and anyone pointing out any such possibility of offense is wrong. Bal knows the lib that did this, were that it was a lib which is indeteminative, is a kind soul meaning no rude or unbecoming conduct and was merely increasing understanding for those who are offended by religious freaks like GWB.
Thanks for agreeing in advance, right then.
I gotta agree with Balboa.
January 1, 2007 - 23:23 ET by Rupert CadellI gotta agree with Balboa. They're trying to alleviate confusion about the fact that the guy is actually dead. Poor usage, but not an anti-Christian conspiracy, though it is highly entertaining how you all jump to that conclusion and think that you know everything about the MsM writers' beliefs (since they are apparently just one monolithic entity).
Which reminds me, did secularist SWAT teams led by Nancy Pelosi and the ACLU descend on everybody's houses on Christmas morning as expected?
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
Happy New Year
January 1, 2007 - 23:36 ET by Free StinkerAnd another bridge goes without its Toll collector
Baaaaaah!
January 1, 2007 - 23:37 ET by BlondeBaaaaaah!
Troll Allergy
January 1, 2007 - 23:40 ET by Free StinkerIt's just reflex for us now, aint it?
;-)
Barnyard animal noises and
January 1, 2007 - 23:41 ET by Rupert CadellBarnyard animal noises and obscure in-jokes (I guess). Geez, at least tell me where I went wrong. Even my signature makes an attempt at straddling the ideological divide, and I'm getting run out on a rail already?
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
I don't get it. "Phan
January 1, 2007 - 23:38 ET by Rupert CadellI don't get it. "Phantom Tollbooth" reference?
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
Your insipid tagline and rema
January 2, 2007 - 10:21 ET by Ten7sYour insipid tagline and remarks make you look like a troll.
OK, ten7s. And that has so
January 2, 2007 - 10:36 ET by Rupert CadellOK, ten7s. And that has something to do with a toll collector on a bridge? Just wondering about the reference. Since you're apparently an expert on copywriting conventions, please let us know why it's so simple that Balboa is wrong. As I said (and I was only echoing Balboa), some people might not be familiar with what a MySpace page is, when it was written, etc. Using sic to establish that the soldier is indeed dead, that they will not be seeing one another in literal, mortal terms, is dubious. No one's doubting that. Even Balboa said "poor usage." Leaping to the conclusion that those 3 letters indicate some sort of anti-Christian jab is totally unfounded. Much like the war on Xmas, but that's another thread, isn't it?
As for my signature tag....well, seems like par for the course around here. How do you like this one:
"Putting the United Arab Emirates in charge of our ports is like putting Bill Clinton in charge of security at the Lane Bryant dressing room." -NPR 2006 wrap-up.
Is that properly anti-liberal? Should I have called him "Clintoon" or a "Libtard" to keep up with the level of discourse on this site?
Balboa is wrong, wrong, wrong
January 2, 2007 - 10:41 ET by kathleenirishBalboa is wrong, wrong, wrong about everything...well, he seems to know way too much about bad television shows. That in itself says alot.
I hear he makes a good cup of lukewarm milk, though.
Look, ABC hates, and I mean HATES! conservatives primarily and Republicans secondarily, which means much of middle America. The use of 'sic' was unnecessary, whatever the technical arguments are here.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
I don't think ABC is across
January 2, 2007 - 10:50 ET by Rupert CadellI don't think ABC is across-the-board hateful toward middle America any more than a recent post on NB was being literal in describing all denizens of Manhattan as wine and cheese loving limousine liberals who didn't want Saddam executed. But I always assume the best in people ;)
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
Look, ABC hates, and I mean
January 2, 2007 - 11:10 ET by balboaLook, ABC hates, and I mean HATES! conservatives primarily and Republicans secondarily, which means much of middle America.
Now THERE's a ridiculous statement.
It's more than true. It is
January 2, 2007 - 12:25 ET by kathleenirishIt's more than true. It is certainly not far off the mark. Substitute "has contempt for" or "feels superior to" or "can't stand" Republicans and conservatives, if that makes you feel better. What, you're going to deny that, too? The whole msm is pretty much in the same boat, proven over and over again.
The media is a powerful and left-leaning group that deserves scrutiny. The fact that those who post on this site make fun of the effete and pink-ribbon-wearing elites is a bit of silliness compared to the danger of the biased and agenda-driven media establishment poses to this democracy, our nation. The two cannot be compared, gentleman.
You'd better get back to watching your oatmeal boil.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
"Since you're apparently
January 2, 2007 - 13:19 ET by Ten7s"Since you're apparently an expert on copywriting [sic] conventions, please let us know why it's so simple that Balboa is wrong.[sic]"
I'm not an expert. Its common knowledge that "[sic]" is VERY often used in a demeaning way, especially by self-satisfied journalists. Do you get the point?
"Common knowledge"? You mean
January 2, 2007 - 13:32 ET by balboa"Common knowledge"? You mean within Newsbusters, or in general?
Actually, I'd say ten7s is
January 2, 2007 - 13:36 ET by Rupert CadellActually, I'd say ten7s is correct on this. But this is a newscast about a death, not some parody show, and I just don't see it being used to ridicule in this case.
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
Putting the United Arab Emi
January 2, 2007 - 13:29 ET by Jack BauerPutting the United Arab Emirates in charge of our ports is like
putting Bill Clinton in charge of security at the Lane Bryant dressing
room." -NPR 2006 wrap-up.
Poor analogy. Clinton has been on the payroll of the UAE since before he left office.
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
OK here's the thing about a
January 2, 2007 - 13:39 ET by Rupert CadellOK here's the thing about analogies. Saying X:Y::A:B does not mean that X and A have anything to do with each other. It could have just as easily been "...is like putting Rosie on the NRA directors' board."
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
Here's the thing about anal
January 2, 2007 - 13:41 ET by Jack BauerHere's the thing about analogies. That's not a good one. And it's not even funny.
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
Fine, take it up with NPR.M
January 2, 2007 - 13:51 ET by Rupert CadellFine, take it up with NPR.
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
nein.
January 2, 2007 - 13:53 ET by Jack BauerNo thanks.
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
(sic) spelling is correct; t
January 1, 2007 - 20:55 ET by tumbler_2007(sic) spelling is correct; to distinguish from one of our own errors. It means the error is being shown as written.
Sic is not an abbreviation
January 1, 2007 - 21:02 ET by lnthompSic is not an abbreviation for "spelling is correct". It is a Latin word (not abbreviation) meaning, approximately, "thus" or "so" or "just as it is". As in "sic semper tyrannis" meaning "thus always to tyrants"
LNTHOMP previously posting as LEENT. U.S. Navy (ret.)
I have enough money to last me the rest of my life. Unless I buy something.
Ok, bal, here's your chance
January 1, 2007 - 18:10 ET by SportPoliticsOk, bal, here's your chance:
BAL > " I just don't believe your stance on why it was used."
Well BAL, pray tell, omniscient organhead, why was it used ? I've been waiting for you to share your opinion, so I can surmise exactly WHY you disagree with the crowd, and give you the benefit of the doubt, that you're not just opposing the general consensus out of partisan spite.
Well, shall I take my already believed to be correct conclusion about you, that you just don't have any clue whatsoever, but that what has been said about it by others just doesn't sit as spot on with you ?
What's your answer B ? Please, don't disappoint me again, you don't freaking have one, do you ?
My opinion on why it's there
January 1, 2007 - 18:20 ET by balboaMy opinion on why it's there is that whomever put it there thought they were helping to clarify what was written on the MySpace page.
bal -
January 1, 2007 - 19:45 ET by SportPoliticsbal, unfortunately, you are so lacking in understanding the written word as you have proven here for so many months, I guess I'll have to agree that it indeed is an idiot marker, for souls such as yourself.
My mistake, the reason "sic" is there, is for idiots such as, well, I've gone there already. Congratulations bal.
You have indeed convinced me, but only by your massive stupidity. That is one heck of an accomplishment. Perhaps a first.
And you wonder why I usually
January 1, 2007 - 19:49 ET by balboaAnd you wonder why I usually don't respond to your moronic, delusional ramblings...buh-bye.
As I said bal, in my other post
January 1, 2007 - 21:31 ET by SportPoliticsAs I said bal, in my other prior post in this thread, you would soon accuse me of being insane or making no sense in what I write.
That's another "out" for you. Congratulations, you have not failed to use it again, for the hundredth time.
Your stupid answer is the same as it was when you whined in the first place that Mark doesn't know what he's talking about, and is the same as it always is for you. That answer is " I DON'T KNOW". Of course, you are happy, each and every time to couple that with, pointing at everyone else here that isn't a lib, " YOU'RE WRONG. YOU'VE OVERBLOWN THE ISSUE."
Of course, that's great for the mentality you reside in, where only happy hyper love of some obscure movie is globbered about. Therein where only your opinion of it can actually be issued, and can never be wrong, because it's all about "your tastes".
Not everything comes down to wether you like it or not bal.
What's this guy's problem?M
January 1, 2007 - 23:37 ET by Rupert CadellWhat's this guy's problem?
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
bal -happy new year
January 1, 2007 - 16:41 ET by misterbillbal -happy new year. I think you are a good person and you see no evil even when it is intended.
I see evil intent, but usuall
January 1, 2007 - 16:43 ET by balboaI see evil intent, but usually it's in something such as the continued existence of "According to Jim" or the movie "Dr. T and the Women." :-)
I draw a blank
January 1, 2007 - 16:46 ET by misterbillI am such a fuddy duddy that I have not seen either show, so, I pass.
I still hope you have a grand new year.
Happy New Year to you, too. A
January 1, 2007 - 16:58 ET by balboaHappy New Year to you, too. As for the mentioned show and movie, you're not missing much. :-)
Actually, I believe that this
January 1, 2007 - 08:23 ET by NoMoreClintonsActually, I believe that this is an incorrect use by an editor of the annotation "sic", which is not normally used to question the writer's thoughts - just spelling, syntax or grammar.
But then again, what do you expect from a bunch of sic, heathen liberals?
Happy New Year to all you NBers!
NMC,You just may be right her
January 1, 2007 - 08:34 ET by Indiana JoeNMC,
You just may be right here... hadn't occurred to me in quite that way, but it did feel like an odd usage. I guess they just can't help themselves when it comes to bashing religion... at least ONE religion, right?
It just sickens me how the MSM can only see the numbers stack up. They wait with bated breath for the next milestone, never seeing or considering that these are human lives they're talking about. How these people can sleep at night, or even look in a mirror, is beyond me.
Disgusting...
(Btw, noticed the right-side is back up!!! Thanks, NB staff, very much appreciated!)
IJ
(Btw, noticed the right-side
January 1, 2007 - 11:17 ET by Eric Turner(Btw, noticed the right-side is back up!!! Thanks, NB staff, very much appreciated!)
Oh YES! Thank goodness I wasn't the only one! I didn't say anything earlier because I thought I was just REALLY computer stupid, not just computer dumb. Oh I'm so glad it is back. I had stopped really posting because it wasn't up. Thank you thank you thank you.
Ah! NOW we see the violence inherent in the system. Come and see the violence inherent in the system. Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
No, armyvet, it wasn't just y
January 1, 2007 - 14:01 ET by Indiana JoeNo, armyvet, it wasn't just you. It was missing all through the weekend. Lots of folks commented on it. Just took a while to fix, I guess. Holidays and all....
Happy New Year!
IJ
ditto armyvet
January 1, 2007 - 19:57 ET by SportPoliticsditto armyvet. I thought it was me, that I had been working so much with so little sleep the past month or two, that I for some time failed to see it when I mentioned it missing a few weeks ago. ( might still be the case haha ! )
But I saw the recent comments again last night or the night before.
( I say, I thought it's removal was to stop the little not so happy go lucky interchanges, and part of the ad changes. Whatever it was, glad it's back as well. )
No surprise. When you can ki
January 1, 2007 - 08:39 ET by cunservatyveNo surprise. When you can kill children for convenience-sake and call it "a right to choose," why not go fully secular and call faith and belief "incorrect." It's called arrogant secular elitism, and the entire cohort of liberals is teeming with it.
Cunservatyve military medical guy
If you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on Paul's vote!
Happy New year to all NBers a
January 1, 2007 - 12:24 ET by Senior ChiefHappy New year to all NBers and may your 2007 be a Spirit-filled year as you serve your Lord God and Master! The writer (above photo) was expressing his belief as a Christian, taught by the Holy Bible, that he will see him again. Only "born again" Christians will understand what he wrote. I fully understood what was written. I may not know Mr. Donica (or his friend) here on earth, but as a brother in the Lord, I will see him in heaven when my life is taken from me. Note also that he sends his love and prayers to Donica's family, and not to him- another Biblical teachings in that, nobody can't do anything once your dead. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment (Heb 9:27).
The agnostics, the haters, the leftists and the liberals can denigrate, disrespect and bastardize Christians and our beliefs, but one thing for sure heaven is our home. Yes, its a promise as Jesus said, ...I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also (John 14:2-3).
Whether or not there is an af
January 1, 2007 - 12:59 ET by MikeBWhether or not there is an afterlife cannot be proven. Either position has to be taken on faith. (I'll bet that sentence ticked off some people at ABC.) ABC's snarky little "sic" at the end of the statement of Donica's friend is condescending at best, and at worst is an indication of ABC's, and indeed, every Liberal's, wish to proclaim religion to be the "opiate of the masses", and abridge the First Amendment rights of every American citizen.
Assuming there is an afterlife, I can see when Donica and his friend meet again, sitting and laughing at the fools (Biblical definition) of ABC in their rather warm accomodations in their afterlife. But, then, Donica and friend would probably have a lot more class than that demonstrated by ABC.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
I agree. The added, "s
January 1, 2007 - 13:18 ET by kathleenirishI agree. The added, "sic", was unnecessary and demeaning, not to mention obnoxious. Who are they to question the wording and intent of this writer? ABC- still no. 1 as the 'American-Bashing (Elite Media) Company" (sic). They should put (sic) at the end of every sentence they utter on air, if that's the case.
I regularly am amazed at the misspelled words on the banners that often accompany headlines or run underneath news programs in general. Hooray for the liberal educational establishment!!! And, soon it won't even be in English if they get their way.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
Yo, Katy Irish
January 1, 2007 - 13:20 ET by acaiguanaYo, Katy Irish
Happy NY to ya.
ACA...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
Same to you, my fine fellow!
January 1, 2007 - 13:33 ET by kathleenirishSame to you, my fine fellow! I hope you are well. And, Happy New Year to all of our other fantastic, brilliant posters: keep up the good work!
I don't know exactly why, but I am an atheist when it comes to New Year's Day. It's such a non-holiday to me. Probably because I am sad Christmas is over for most and it's back to regular business.
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
I have not 'partied' on NY for many many years.
January 1, 2007 - 13:37 ET by acaiguanaI have not 'partied' on NY for many many years.
Aside from personally not wanting to spend the night in a jail and also create a $25K problem for myself, I have no control over all the other idiots on the road.
A quite evening at home and here (Acapulco) lots of fireworks. Enough for me.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
Sounds really lovely. Very ni
January 1, 2007 - 13:43 ET by kathleenirishSounds really lovely. Very nice.
Nice to forget about the usual b.s., especially the msm-type, hmmm?
"He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one enemy will meet him everywhere" -Ali ibn-Abi-Talib, 4th Islamic Caliph
I think that the "sic&qu
January 2, 2007 - 04:38 ET byI think that the "sic" notation (in this case) signifies the main stream media's hate for Christ. It is like a disclaimer. They are covering themselves, so that no one would actually think that they 'believe' in an after-life, much less Christ.
I was just listening to a Bible lesson tonight on the radio that spoke of how -- just as the wicked are abominations to God's children, God's children are abominations to the wicked.
They don't want to be mistaken for one of us, any more than we want to be mistaken for one of them.
Debra...-of: .. www.InformingChristians.com
Coordinating Conjunction (CC)
January 2, 2007 - 08:47 ET by ding7777Coordinating Conjunction (CC)
Coordinating Conjunction (CC)
January 2, 2007 - 08:49 ET by ding7777Coordinating Conjunction (CC)
Are you now or have you ever been 'on topic'?
January 2, 2007 - 08:56 ET by acaiguanaAre you now or have you ever been 'on topic'?
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
acaiguana - there is no comma
January 2, 2007 - 09:04 ET by ding7777acaiguana - there is no comma before the "and" in the 2 independent clauses; hence the "(sic)" notation.
Oh, you were actually talking about the use of ?
January 2, 2007 - 09:12 ET by acaiguanaOh, you were actually talking about the use of <sic>?
Sorry 'bout that.
That is the most obscure and unenforced rule in the English Latin based idea of 'grammer'. It is actually OK to violate it. The violation of that rule is encouraged if you study Sociology.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
aca -- no, but he has been
January 2, 2007 - 09:11 ET by Jack Baueraca -- no, but he has been "on meds"
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
Jack, I needed to be wrong about something today.
January 2, 2007 - 09:16 ET by acaiguanaJack, I needed to be wrong about something today.
I was getting out of control. Mom made me go to the basement with my rocket science toys, brought out the switch and took away my tin foil.
It's been a rough after XMAS wake up.
He was bringing up Ms. Grundy's grammer. My bad.
It would have helped if he had at least pointed out that the rule had some application to the use of <sic>; but I should have been much more astute.
I am hanging my head in shame. I am mortified. I am trembling from the emotional body slam for my incursion into critical comment.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
English 101
January 2, 2007 - 09:15 ET by tegajayDenoting the user comment with sic is correct because the quote doesn't use commas after and when using the conjuction with two independent clauses.
It's been a long time since m
January 2, 2007 - 11:17 ET by The Real TonyIt's been a long time since my writing classes but I do recall the usage of "sic." It was NOT necessary in this case and its usage was not improper but unnecessary. It has been and is used to denote when something appears in print that may be incorrect, to let the reader know that this has been quoted with any and all inaccuracies (spelling, grammar, etc.) intact.
As a reader, I infer that this was an attempt by ABC to show that they don't believe in the afterlife but the person who actually posted the quote did. I did NOT see this as an attempt to display for the reader that there might be confusion over the writer addressing someone that was dead.
It is these tiny, seemingly insignificant things that start adding up and display the actual intent of ABC..good catch Mark!
On a side note, AND ADDRESSED TO NO ONE IN PARTICULAR, could be please stop with the "tard" references to any/all (retard, libtard, retarded, etc.)?? I've posted this before but I really think it should stop. I'll be the first to admit that I've often peppered my postings with sometimes raw emotion and raw language but can we at least all agree to stop using this particular word and its derivatives and permutations? Mentally retarded people are born with this condition and cannot choose it and work hard to overcome it. Let's not make it a slur. Please. I ask this from everyone, not as a saint but as a (working hard to be) reformed sinner.
Thanks.
Fight Terrorism at home - defeat a liberal!
Tard. "There are two
January 2, 2007 - 11:22 ET by MightyMouthTard.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
BTW. I am in no way calling
January 2, 2007 - 11:25 ET by MightyMouthBTW. I am in no way calling you one. :-)
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Understood and no offense tak
January 2, 2007 - 11:32 ET by The Real TonyUnderstood and no offense taken. I know its in the popular lexicon as slang but it still references "retarded" and that's why I posted my request.
Happy New Year!
Fight Terrorism at home - defeat a liberal!
I read this quote and immedia
January 3, 2007 - 00:26 ET by SvenI read this quote and immediately understood what was meant. Good grief, the person says: "you were one of my best friends..." (emphasis mine). I guess it was the past tense that gave it away for me.
Truth is, everybody could read this and get it! Given the MSM's treatment of religion in general (see Billy Graham blog), it's very appropriate to believe this use of "sic" was intended to be a smart ass statement by these malcontents!