Howell's Howler V
The Hotline's Blog is eager to compete with the Washington Post in making clearly false statements in response to Howell's Howler about Abramoff "And he had made substantial campaign contributions to both major parties". However, it also links to me. I don't want to bite the hand that links to me or to mix the metaphor that pays my rent, but the blog describes Howell's clearly false statement as a failure to "clear up the underlying semantic difference."
The semantic difference is the difference between claiming that Abramoff had made substatial campaign contributions to both major parties and claiming that Abramoff's clients had made substantial campaign contributions to both major parties. The 11 word sentence in Howell's column is perfectly clear, semantically unambiguous, concise, to the point, and false.
confession: I found The Hotline's blog with sitemeter. In spite of that, I wrote a much harsher post after reading the first half of The Hotline's Blog's post. After actually seeing my very own URL I depravedly toned down my denunciation. How can I have managed to preserve such immaturity at the advanced age of 45 ?