Comments on: It’s a round-up, round-up, round-up

By: such sweet thunder

such sweet thunder — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:17:00 +0000

In regards to Michelle O's use of "less" instead of "fewer" in reference to time, there may be usage differences between British English and American English.

American Heritage says:

“[L]ess is used in some constructions where fewer would occur if the traditional rule were being followed. Less than can be used before a plural noun that denotes a measure of time, amount, or distance: less than three weeks; less than $400; less than 50 miles.”

By: GrammarBlog

GrammarBlog — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:25:00 +0000

I think in the UK we tend to view all politicians with suspicion, and as objects of ridicule – even the ones we end up voting for.

Politics seems to be a more vehemently partisan (literally) sport over the pond.

For what it's worth I think Obama has lovely eyes and is a far better prospect for the White house than Tweedledee and Tweedledumber.

I just don't think he'll be any different from all the other back-stabbing careerist politicians out there. He's not the Messiah, but neither is he a very naughty boy.

By: JoseMonkey

JoseMonkey — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:30:00 +0000

No, you’re right; “pious arse” was the worst part. I just thought “mad-eyed” was particularly ridiculous. Maybe it’s a British expression that just sounds weird to my American ears? I suppose the McCain post was pretty harsh, too. Perhaps I should lighten up.

By: Gez

Gez — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:10:00 +0000

I think Tom's comments were necessary in the interests of balance after my post about McCain and Palin.

Is "mad-eyed" really that bad a thing to say? It is better or worse than "pious arse"?

By: JoseMonkey

JoseMonkey — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:47:00 +0000

"It's hard to believe that you didn't pick up the difference between less and fewer during your time at Princeton and Harvard, you mad-eyed, pious arse."

Whoa. Just lost a reader with that unnecessary bit.

Seriously, "mad-eyed?"