Here is an almost coherent thought: "Barack Obama may have the upper hand against those who imagine that global warming is a hoax and abstinence-only education works, evidence be damned. He is keeping his promise to use the power of the federal government...."
To be truly coherent it just needs one little comma, which I'll mark as [comma here!] for easy reading.
"Barack Obama may have the upper hand[comma here!], against those who imagine that global warming is a hoax and abstinence-only education works, evidence be damned. He is keeping his promise to use the power of the federal government
4 comments:
Here is an almost coherent thought:
"Barack Obama may have the upper hand against those who imagine that global warming is a hoax and abstinence-only education works, evidence be damned. He is keeping his promise to use the power of the federal government...."
To be truly coherent it just needs one little comma, which I'll mark as [comma here!] for easy reading.
"Barack Obama may have the upper hand[comma here!], against those who imagine that global warming is a hoax and abstinence-only education works, evidence be damned. He is keeping his promise to use the power of the federal government
AA incoherent as usual.
So what's the upshot?
RIF?
Post a Comment