Now how did that happen...

I had a reader drop me a note today noting some publicity on my blog that I had missed. Apparently, for the listing for South Dakota, they have a link up for the South Dakota War College, considering it a "Conservative Republican blog, but a source of useful info." I'm assuming it's because I cover all the goofy stuff no one else cares about such as the ballot initiatives and the legislature. At least I'm about the only one who seems to pay attention when they're not talking about abortion.

I was a bit intrigued to see that "the other party" finds it useful. While it's not an endorsement, it's a modicum of respect for what I do here. And maybe I'm not just a puff of smoke in the wind.

And actually as I discuss "the other side", it bring up a good point that people should be reminded of now that the state and country are up in a furor over South Dakota passing the ban on abortion and people are drawing up battle plans and lines of demarcation.

Something I've always said is that we can agree to disagree in a civil manner. Yes, passions tend to come out on hot topics, and they're not going to cool off anytime soon. But that doesn't make the other side stupid or evil. Because when you start assuming that, you are going to underestimate or misjudge. And that's when you lose in politics.

You need to consider your opponent as smart and honorable. Better to overestimate, than underestimate. Because when I hear an opponent is underestimating one of my guys - that's when I smile. Because I know they can be suprised and fooled. It means I've got them where I want them.

In politics, it's better to go the extra-mile and think you didn't need to after you've won. Because when you don't give it your all and you end up losing, it's a bitter pill to swallow.


Anonymous said…
In this post you said:

"And maybe..."

"And actually..."

"But that doesn't..."

"Because when..."

"And that's..."

"Because when..."

"Because I know..."

"Because when..."

Good God. Your blog has some value, but this kind of writing is insufferable.

I can ordinarily tolerate your (bad) habit of starting sentences with a conjunction (something you do at least once in almost every post), but when you do it nearly ten times in a single post, I feel compelled to note it, not to be a sanctimonious prick, but because you are in serious need of the constructive criticism.

I hope you can take it for that. I mean no offense.
Anonymous said…
PP, Don't be too bothered by anon #1. It's ok. Bill Buckley was once accused of not knowing how to use the comma. You're in good company.
PP said…
Yes, now that I read it, it is pretty bad.

I've only got about 45 minutes to fix lunch, read my e-mail, and hammer out an article or two over the noon hour, so that doesn't leave much time for proofreading.

I appreciate your thoughts. Part of the reason why I started this blog was to improve my writing.

By the looks of it, I need to slow down a little and pay more attention.

Thanks again for your comments.
Douglas said…
I think blog writing can be a bit less grammatically correct than college essays and books. I suspect many of us get so used to banging away in forums and blogs that it becomes more like conversation than written communication. That may explain why it is also so easy to substitute hear for here and their for there, etc...and yes, I know there should have been quotation marks around the words cited and not really a correct way to string thoughts together into nearly incomprehensible run-on sentences.....or even worse run-on clauses with no subject and verb anywhere.
Anonymous said…
Anon #1 iz majoreen in the miners.

PP iz a grate riter.

Popular posts from this blog

Why should we be surprised?

That didn't take long