Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Quotation of the Day

[J]ust because the thing I saw wasn't there doesn't mean there wasn't something there that I didn't see.

Ann Althouse

That's some fine legal reasoning. I think Ann's definitely shown that she can see the law library from her house.

[h/t to Jon Swift]


  1. That explains so goddamn much about her.

  2. Yesterday upon the stair
    I saw a man who wasn't there.

    He wasn't there again today.
    Oh how I wish he'd go away.

  3. Jasmine-the Pakistani Heretical Girl10/29/08, 2:44 AM

    "There wasn't something there i didn't see."

    Does that work as a sentence, sorry, me head never functions well with double negatives, but can that actually be a logical sentence even?
    Ok then, if it can not stand by itself as a logical sentence (maybe)- then, it's like contingency upon the first bit.
    so u got to fix them together- which is hard- cos the second bit still doesn't make much sense.
    I mean- if there wasn't anything there- how could u see it?

  4. Jasmine-the Pakistani Heretical Girl10/29/08, 3:15 AM

    mm, see, it's like 'spoken english' in what looks like a literary english sentence maybe, if u think of it as 'spoken english' it's easy to understand- most people however if they got education will be thrown- why- cos just they are trying to figure out the meaning of something- when ure brain is telling it should be anything- cos it's a negative sentence, ure trying to figure out what's the significance of something used when it ought to be anything- in fact, maybe there is no significance- except that it's use of spoken english when u don't expect it.

  5. Jaz: It's actually a triple negative, but don't worry too much about trying to parse it. Ann Althouse is an idiot and the quotation is stupid.

  6. Jasmine The Pakistani Heretical Girl10/29/08, 9:45 AM

    yes larry, i gone to her blog site and looked at all her stuff. she's a downclass.

  7. Isn't that a quadruple negative? Just counting the 4 "n'ts.

    I would imagine (and perhaps it is just a flight of fancy) that someone would have commented on her blog that actual high-tech in-ear receivers are much less visible than "...a crescent of clear plastic.", she mentions in comment #6.

    Ooh, would that be an Islamic crescent!?


Please pick a handle or moniker for your comment. It's much easier to address someone by a name or pseudonym than simply "hey you". I have the option of requiring a "hard" identity, but I don't want to turn that on... yet.

With few exceptions, I will not respond or reply to anonymous comments, and I may delete them. I keep a copy of all comments; if you want the text of your comment to repost with something vaguely resembling an identity, email me.

No spam, pr0n, commercial advertising, insanity, lies, repetition or off-topic comments. Creationists, Global Warming deniers, anti-vaxers, Randians, and Libertarians are automatically presumed to be idiots; Christians and Muslims might get the benefit of the doubt, if I'm in a good mood.

See the Debate Flowchart for some basic rules.

Sourced factual corrections are always published and acknowledged.

I will respond or not respond to comments as the mood takes me. See my latest comment policy for details. I am not a pseudonomous-American: my real name is Larry.

Comments may be moderated from time to time. When I do moderate comments, anonymous comments are far more likely to be rejected.

I've already answered some typical comments.

I have jqMath enabled for the blog. If you have a dollar sign (\$) in your comment, put a \\ in front of it: \\\$, unless you want to include a formula in your comment.