Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Help me proof read my oped.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:08 PM
Original message
Help me proof read my oped.
The Fact Check staff at Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania recently completed an analysis of the Bush Administration’s funding cuts relative to levees in the New Orleans area. They concluded that, “Bush indeed cut funding for projects specifically designed to strengthen levees” and that “local officials had been complaining about that for years.”

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Hurricane Protection Project in this region was not complete and would not have been even if it was fully funded. It also was not designed to withstand hurricanes greater than a Category 3. However, any reasonable person would be able to admit, given hindsight, that cutting funding to levee projects in New Orleans turned out to be a poor decision. It could have helped a little or a lot but it could have saved lives.

Bush and company have been using the phrase “the blame game” to refer to attempts to hold officials accountable for the government’s response to Hurricane Katrina. Without our effort to question our leaders we are an assembly line of puppets, ponds on a chess board. At that moment, our freedoms could just as easily be taken by our own consent than by force.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Der Blaue Engel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
1. "ponds" should be "pawns"
Otherwise, it's great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lildreamer316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. Looks good to me..
but I defer to others who may be more experienced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alizaryn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:12 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sounds great to me!
The only thing I MIGHT consider is to move the last paragraph to the beginning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Hummm, interesting idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zensea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
4. Pawns on a chess board, not ponds.
Edited on Wed Sep-07-05 11:17 PM by Zensea
other than that from a technical standpoint looks ok.
(that is, purely proofreading)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autonomy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. that's "pawns on a chessboard" one word, not two
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autonomy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
6. yeah, "pawns"
"relative to levees" is wordy. try "for levees"

"given hindsight" is awkward, since we all already have it.. to some degree. try "in retrospect"

the first sentence of the 3rd paragraph should be the first sentence of the first paragraph. otherwise, looks ok. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rabrrrrrr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
7. Id' make this switch:
Edited on Wed Sep-07-05 11:18 PM by Rabrrrrrr
Without excercising our Constitutional right to question our leaders we are an assembly line of puppets, pawns on a chess board who have given up our freedoms by our own consent, giving up through our own complicity that which we are told we are waging a war to protect.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autonomy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. two more things:
the first sentence is wordy and stilted. take out anything extraneous. also, you start two sentences with pronouns. put in nouns. "it also" becomes "The project". The last sentence in the 2nd paragraph also starts with a pronoun. Comma before "but" in same sentence.

guess that's more than 2 things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
10. Thanks guys submitting now...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-05 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
11. I think you need a comma before "even if it was fully funded" in the
1st sentence of the 2nd paragraph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 02:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC