<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Better Put On Your Glasses!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:49:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: firebird</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6938</link>
		<dc:creator>firebird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:54:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6938</guid>
		<description>Hey we dont call it the New York Pravda for nothing its just one of our countrys left-wing socialists news papers if a dweeb like FRANK RICH were any different he would still be a dweeb and i.ll bet he belongs to the Council of Forgein Relations(CFR)a infamous socialsist organization</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey we dont call it the New York Pravda for nothing its just one of our countrys left-wing socialists news papers if a dweeb like FRANK RICH were any different he would still be a dweeb and i.ll bet he belongs to the Council of Forgein Relations(CFR)a infamous socialsist organization</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6776</link>
		<dc:creator>Charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Oct 2004 05:13:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6776</guid>
		<description>Of course, that should have been &quot;I can&#039;t get no satisfaction!&quot;  How I could have botched such a classical modern poetic reference is beyond me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course, that should have been &#8220;I can&#8217;t get no satisfaction!&#8221;  How I could have botched such a classical modern poetic reference is beyond me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6775</link>
		<dc:creator>Charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Oct 2004 05:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6775</guid>
		<description>I am going to wager a guess that proper names ending in a consonant followed by &quot;s&quot; (Edwards, Hopkins, Watters, even Jones because the &quot;e&quot; is silent) are already possessive historically.  Just as Johnson originates from &quot;son of John&quot;, Edwards probably comes from &quot;of the family of Edward&quot;.  &quot;Edwards&#039;s statement&quot; therefore is a double possessive, and as anyone who has ever uttered the phrase &quot;I ain&#039;t got no satisfaction&quot; knows, a double anything in English grammar is really, really bad.  Just as a double negative becomes a positive, a double possessive probably creates a free-floating, unpossessed political claim, and you never want one of those, especially in an election year.  Better, I think to leave off both the apostrophe and the s, as in &quot;Edwards statements.&quot; This will give both liberal and conservative grammarians something to complain about.  IMHO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am going to wager a guess that proper names ending in a consonant followed by &#8220;s&#8221; (Edwards, Hopkins, Watters, even Jones because the &#8220;e&#8221; is silent) are already possessive historically.  Just as Johnson originates from &#8220;son of John&#8221;, Edwards probably comes from &#8220;of the family of Edward&#8221;.  &#8220;Edwards&#8217;s statement&#8221; therefore is a double possessive, and as anyone who has ever uttered the phrase &#8220;I ain&#8217;t got no satisfaction&#8221; knows, a double anything in English grammar is really, really bad.  Just as a double negative becomes a positive, a double possessive probably creates a free-floating, unpossessed political claim, and you never want one of those, especially in an election year.  Better, I think to leave off both the apostrophe and the s, as in &#8220;Edwards statements.&#8221; This will give both liberal and conservative grammarians something to complain about.  IMHO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raymond C. Coleman</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6535</link>
		<dc:creator>Raymond C. Coleman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:30:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6535</guid>
		<description>Democrat THUGGERY going unreported....

Democrats are behaving like their thuggish, ancestrally similar in ideology, socialist, Nazi Brown-Shirt brethren in hate.  I dare ANYONE to tell me where I am wrong.  I DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU!!!  No one who reads this has a case in h@%% to distinguish their behavior from the thuggish and intimidatory (I made that word up) tactics used by Hitler’s goons. 

 

This madness seems to be a trend all over the nation and unfortunately, most of the offenders seem to be African-American.  When are we going to learn to behave?  Maybe if we put as much energy and creativity into productive pursuits, we’d be too busy to act like the Democrat Party mascot.

 

It seems like a sociopathic anarchist arm of “black America” is taking EVERY opportunity to show its collective behind to the world thus confirming the negative stereotypes they have of our race and Americans in general.

 

WHERE THE @#$% IS THE MEDIA ON THIS?  Sanitizing the news to keep that fluffed up traitor John Kerry in the race I’m sure.

 

In Gainesville, a left wing, maniacal, Democrat nutty professor (and I am being nice in my choice of descriptive terms) physically accosted a local campaign chief.  The good news is I heard he got his clock cleaned GOP GATOR STYLE!

 

In Tennessee, these psychos even SHOT UP a campaign headquarters location.  Come on people!  Where is the outrage?  Do you really want to turn the nation over to these childish fools?  Please think about the REAL consequences of a Kerry victory.  Yes, your “boogieman” Bush will be gone, but MY GOD, look at the garbage he will be replaced with!  Where are the so-called black “leaders” on this?  Huh Tavis and Tom?

 

PLEASE do not let Satan’s hate drive your heart on Election Day.  Vote for Kerry if you must and if you feel it is right, but PLEASE do some homework first and THINK as much as you emote about your choice.  

 

This is serious biz people. We are at war.  What if America had replaced Halsey, McArthur, Patton and Ike during WW2 just because some ill-educated people hated them for some silly reason?  Great Britain voted out Winston Churchill of all people after the war and now look at the sad state of England because of its hard left turn.  In fact, look at all of Europe now.  Once noble and rulers of the known Earth.  Now a sad socialist network of economic and military failure overrun by islamo-fascist locusts taking advantage of their sickly defective welfare system.

 

Loyal opposition is fine, but this thuggery has to cease. This is America not Haiti.

 

Raymond C. Coleman

Tampa, FL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Democrat THUGGERY going unreported&#8230;.</p>
<p>Democrats are behaving like their thuggish, ancestrally similar in ideology, socialist, Nazi Brown-Shirt brethren in hate.  I dare ANYONE to tell me where I am wrong.  I DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU!!!  No one who reads this has a case in h@%% to distinguish their behavior from the thuggish and intimidatory (I made that word up) tactics used by Hitler’s goons. </p>
<p>This madness seems to be a trend all over the nation and unfortunately, most of the offenders seem to be African-American.  When are we going to learn to behave?  Maybe if we put as much energy and creativity into productive pursuits, we’d be too busy to act like the Democrat Party mascot.</p>
<p>It seems like a sociopathic anarchist arm of “black America” is taking EVERY opportunity to show its collective behind to the world thus confirming the negative stereotypes they have of our race and Americans in general.</p>
<p>WHERE THE @#$% IS THE MEDIA ON THIS?  Sanitizing the news to keep that fluffed up traitor John Kerry in the race I’m sure.</p>
<p>In Gainesville, a left wing, maniacal, Democrat nutty professor (and I am being nice in my choice of descriptive terms) physically accosted a local campaign chief.  The good news is I heard he got his clock cleaned GOP GATOR STYLE!</p>
<p>In Tennessee, these psychos even SHOT UP a campaign headquarters location.  Come on people!  Where is the outrage?  Do you really want to turn the nation over to these childish fools?  Please think about the REAL consequences of a Kerry victory.  Yes, your “boogieman” Bush will be gone, but MY GOD, look at the garbage he will be replaced with!  Where are the so-called black “leaders” on this?  Huh Tavis and Tom?</p>
<p>PLEASE do not let Satan’s hate drive your heart on Election Day.  Vote for Kerry if you must and if you feel it is right, but PLEASE do some homework first and THINK as much as you emote about your choice.  </p>
<p>This is serious biz people. We are at war.  What if America had replaced Halsey, McArthur, Patton and Ike during WW2 just because some ill-educated people hated them for some silly reason?  Great Britain voted out Winston Churchill of all people after the war and now look at the sad state of England because of its hard left turn.  In fact, look at all of Europe now.  Once noble and rulers of the known Earth.  Now a sad socialist network of economic and military failure overrun by islamo-fascist locusts taking advantage of their sickly defective welfare system.</p>
<p>Loyal opposition is fine, but this thuggery has to cease. This is America not Haiti.</p>
<p>Raymond C. Coleman</p>
<p>Tampa, FL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: actus</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6485</link>
		<dc:creator>actus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2004 18:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6485</guid>
		<description>SCSIwuzzy
&quot;Where do the Iraqi’s fit in the heirarchy?&quot;

I must say that Cheney&#039;s comment was the first time I&#039;ve heard the Iraqi&#039;s referred to as a coalition partner. Usually they&#039;re a given, probably due to the fact that its not like they have a choice and can pack up and go home. I guess its fairer to say they are a coalition partner now that they have sovereignty, de jure if not de facto, but its still a strange comment, given how they really have no choice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SCSIwuzzy<br />
&#8220;Where do the Iraqi’s fit in the heirarchy?&#8221;</p>
<p>I must say that Cheney&#8217;s comment was the first time I&#8217;ve heard the Iraqi&#8217;s referred to as a coalition partner. Usually they&#8217;re a given, probably due to the fact that its not like they have a choice and can pack up and go home. I guess its fairer to say they are a coalition partner now that they have sovereignty, de jure if not de facto, but its still a strange comment, given how they really have no choice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6406</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2004 06:51:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6406</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dcmilitary.com/army/standard/9_06/national_news/27980-1.html&quot;&gt;Combat tax exclusion&lt;/a&gt; (via &lt;a href=&quot;http://joatmoaf.typepad.com/i_love_jet_noise/&quot;&gt;I Love Jet Noise&lt;/a&gt;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.dcmilitary.com/army/standard/9_06/national_news/27980-1.html">Combat tax exclusion</a> (via <a href="http://joatmoaf.typepad.com/i_love_jet_noise/">I Love Jet Noise</a>)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Preston Ledger</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6404</link>
		<dc:creator>Preston Ledger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2004 04:15:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6404</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m with La Shawn on the &quot;&#039;s&quot; argument for singular possessives, but unfortunately I have been forced to abide by Associated Press style throughout my writing/editing career, and it goes the other way:

&quot;The main AP exception to Strunk and White&#039;s Elements of Style involves forming the possessive of a singular proper noun that ends in &quot;s.&quot; AP says merely add an apostrophe. Examples: Otis&#039; cookies, Amos&#039; ice cream, ...&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m with La Shawn on the &#8220;&#8216;s&#8221; argument for singular possessives, but unfortunately I have been forced to abide by Associated Press style throughout my writing/editing career, and it goes the other way:</p>
<p>&#8220;The main AP exception to Strunk and White&#8217;s Elements of Style involves forming the possessive of a singular proper noun that ends in &#8220;s.&#8221; AP says merely add an apostrophe. Examples: Otis&#8217; cookies, Amos&#8217; ice cream, &#8230;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kiki B.</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6401</link>
		<dc:creator>Kiki B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2004 03:14:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6401</guid>
		<description>Lol, Juliette.  Dems can be so dumb and desperate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lol, Juliette.  Dems can be so dumb and desperate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sister Toldjah</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6399</link>
		<dc:creator>Sister Toldjah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2004 02:55:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6399</guid>
		<description>Juliette: wow! I hadn&#039;t heard that but it&#039;s not surprising, considering how the online polls about the debates were spammed with 99% of some polls saying Edwards &quot;won&quot;!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Juliette: wow! I hadn&#8217;t heard that but it&#8217;s not surprising, considering how the online polls about the debates were spammed with 99% of some polls saying Edwards &#8220;won&#8221;!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6388</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2004 01:18:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6388</guid>
		<description>Jeremy: I learned the rule in the same manner as you; however, since La Shawn follows page 1 of Strunk and White&#039;s, and failure to follow that rule drives La Shawn crazy, I, for one, am immediately changing my usage. The last thing in the world I want to do is drive that lovely lady crazy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeremy: I learned the rule in the same manner as you; however, since La Shawn follows page 1 of Strunk and White&#8217;s, and failure to follow that rule drives La Shawn crazy, I, for one, am immediately changing my usage. The last thing in the world I want to do is drive that lovely lady crazy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SCSIwuzzy</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6384</link>
		<dc:creator>SCSIwuzzy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2004 00:36:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6384</guid>
		<description>Steve S.,
Better to be one of Unca Sam&#039;s misguided children then a REMF, better to be a REMF than a wog (like me) :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve S.,<br />
Better to be one of Unca Sam&#8217;s misguided children then a REMF, better to be a REMF than a wog (like me) <img src='http://lashawnbarber.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Pierce</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6380</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Pierce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2004 23:25:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6380</guid>
		<description>The rule I learned is that you can add apostrophe-s all the time with any plural, but if you prefer to add just an apostrophe you can do so only when the following conditions all apply:

1. The word is a proper noun.
2. The word has at least two syllables.
3. The words ends in &#039;s&#039;.

According to that rule, it would be fine to add just an apostrophe to Edwards&#039; name as I just did.

The fact of the matter is that standard rules for formal English vary, because different standardizations of spelling cropped up in different circles, and the ones that became most accepted are the ones that are most accepted now. There&#039;s still not complete uniformity, just much more than there once was.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The rule I learned is that you can add apostrophe-s all the time with any plural, but if you prefer to add just an apostrophe you can do so only when the following conditions all apply:</p>
<p>1. The word is a proper noun.<br />
2. The word has at least two syllables.<br />
3. The words ends in &#8216;s&#8217;.</p>
<p>According to that rule, it would be fine to add just an apostrophe to Edwards&#8217; name as I just did.</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is that standard rules for formal English vary, because different standardizations of spelling cropped up in different circles, and the ones that became most accepted are the ones that are most accepted now. There&#8217;s still not complete uniformity, just much more than there once was.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve S.</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6377</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve S.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2004 23:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6377</guid>
		<description>In order for a civilian to qualify for the $78K of tax exemption, you must maintain a BONA FIDE PRIMARY RESIDENCE outside of the US for either one entire calendar year, or to be out of the country for 330 days of any 365 day period.  If that time frame fell into two separate fiscal years, you would pro-rate your salary into the &quot;taxable&quot; and &quot;tax-exempt&quot; sections, and base your taxable income on the former category for each of those fiscal years.  

I was able to enjoy this little benefit for several years while living in the UAE from 1995 to 2000.

And Jeff M., I always had a gripe with the your REMFs (meant solely in loving jest, of course, for those of you who understand the acronym!) &quot;in the Gulf&quot;, since I was a Marine Embassy Guard in Baghdad, Iraq from 1986-1988, during the Iran-Iraq War (Gulf War 1/2).  We were having missiles from Iran land around the city every other night or so, but received no hazardous pay, while guys hanging around at the old Chicago Beach Club in Dubai were collecting that extra cash!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In order for a civilian to qualify for the $78K of tax exemption, you must maintain a BONA FIDE PRIMARY RESIDENCE outside of the US for either one entire calendar year, or to be out of the country for 330 days of any 365 day period.  If that time frame fell into two separate fiscal years, you would pro-rate your salary into the &#8220;taxable&#8221; and &#8220;tax-exempt&#8221; sections, and base your taxable income on the former category for each of those fiscal years.  </p>
<p>I was able to enjoy this little benefit for several years while living in the UAE from 1995 to 2000.</p>
<p>And Jeff M., I always had a gripe with the your REMFs (meant solely in loving jest, of course, for those of you who understand the acronym!) &#8220;in the Gulf&#8221;, since I was a Marine Embassy Guard in Baghdad, Iraq from 1986-1988, during the Iran-Iraq War (Gulf War 1/2).  We were having missiles from Iran land around the city every other night or so, but received no hazardous pay, while guys hanging around at the old Chicago Beach Club in Dubai were collecting that extra cash!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Juliette</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6376</link>
		<dc:creator>Juliette</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2004 22:58:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6376</guid>
		<description>Off-topic, but sort of related.  Brit Hume just reported the CNN was flooded with email about the VP candidate debate, all of it stating that Edwards had cleaned Cheney&#039;s proverbial clock.

The problem?  all of the email was sent before the debate started.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Off-topic, but sort of related.  Brit Hume just reported the CNN was flooded with email about the VP candidate debate, all of it stating that Edwards had cleaned Cheney&#8217;s proverbial clock.</p>
<p>The problem?  all of the email was sent before the debate started.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: La Shawn</title>
		<link>http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/comment-page-1/#comment-6369</link>
		<dc:creator>La Shawn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2004 22:25:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2004/10/07/glasses/#comment-6369</guid>
		<description>Lyle! Breaking grammar rules? Actually we do it all the time. I do it, too. For example, it&#039;s become acceptable to begin a sentence with &quot;But&quot; and &quot;And&quot;, as I often do, but it&#039;s grammatically incorrect. But (see?) there&#039;s something about an apostrophe hanging at the end of a word without an &quot;s&quot; that is supposed to be there!

Think about it. The &quot;s&quot; at the end of &quot;Edwards&#039;s&quot; (singular noun) indicates the possessive. The rule is that unless the word is &lt;em&gt;plural&lt;/em&gt;, you add apostrophe &quot;s.&quot; If plural, only the apostrophe. For example: &quot;Dan Rather read the bloggers&#039; posts and retired in shame.&quot; 

&lt;em&gt;Bloggers&lt;/em&gt; is a plural noun ending in &quot;s&quot;, so you don&#039;t need another &quot;s&quot; to make the noun possessive. But &quot;Edwards&quot; is not a plural noun despite the &quot;s&quot; at the end. It is singular, so you must add an apostrophe &lt;em&gt;and&lt;/em&gt; an &quot;s&quot; to indicate the possessive. Got it?

Anyway, I think I should get off the computer now!

Hi, Rosemary. Welcome to my blog!

&lt;strong&gt;Addendum&lt;/strong&gt;: Jeremy&#039;s comment below reminded me that I posted only half the rule. A plural noun ending in &quot;s&quot; (&quot;Bloggers&quot;) needs an apotrophe without another &quot;s&quot; to indicate the possessive, as in my Dan Rather example. And this is what I forgot to note: for plural nouns &lt;em&gt; not ending in &quot;s&quot;&lt;/em&gt; (men), you need to add an apostrophe &quot;s&quot; (men&#039;s retreat).

I can&#039;t believe I&#039;m blogging about grammar...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lyle! Breaking grammar rules? Actually we do it all the time. I do it, too. For example, it&#8217;s become acceptable to begin a sentence with &#8220;But&#8221; and &#8220;And&#8221;, as I often do, but it&#8217;s grammatically incorrect. But (see?) there&#8217;s something about an apostrophe hanging at the end of a word without an &#8220;s&#8221; that is supposed to be there!</p>
<p>Think about it. The &#8220;s&#8221; at the end of &#8220;Edwards&#8217;s&#8221; (singular noun) indicates the possessive. The rule is that unless the word is <em>plural</em>, you add apostrophe &#8220;s.&#8221; If plural, only the apostrophe. For example: &#8220;Dan Rather read the bloggers&#8217; posts and retired in shame.&#8221; </p>
<p><em>Bloggers</em> is a plural noun ending in &#8220;s&#8221;, so you don&#8217;t need another &#8220;s&#8221; to make the noun possessive. But &#8220;Edwards&#8221; is not a plural noun despite the &#8220;s&#8221; at the end. It is singular, so you must add an apostrophe <em>and</em> an &#8220;s&#8221; to indicate the possessive. Got it?</p>
<p>Anyway, I think I should get off the computer now!</p>
<p>Hi, Rosemary. Welcome to my blog!</p>
<p><strong>Addendum</strong>: Jeremy&#8217;s comment below reminded me that I posted only half the rule. A plural noun ending in &#8220;s&#8221; (&#8220;Bloggers&#8221;) needs an apotrophe without another &#8220;s&#8221; to indicate the possessive, as in my Dan Rather example. And this is what I forgot to note: for plural nouns <em> not ending in &#8220;s&#8221;</em> (men), you need to add an apostrophe &#8220;s&#8221; (men&#8217;s retreat).</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t believe I&#8217;m blogging about grammar&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

