Adrian Peterson

[Mr.B]

Not that there's anything remotely funny about this news story, but this headline caught my eye:

AP Source: Dead 2-year-old Adrian Peterson's son

How can a two-year-old have a son? Do people proof-read anymore?

[mike]

Not that there's anything remotely funny about this news story, but this headline caught my eye:

AP Source: Dead 2-year-old Adrian Peterson's son

How can a two-year-old have a son? Do people proof-read anymore?

MrB, you should really learn how to read ... let me break it down for you:

There is, sadly, a dead 2 year old. The two year old is Adrian Peterson's son.

Amazingly, Adrian Peterson will be playing for the Vikings this weekend.
I might have to go with the Vikings for a win this weekend if for no other reason than to show my thoughts, heartfelt even, regarding his loss of a son. (I'm not a Vikings fan - they're in the same division as my Packers)

Still, despite your ignorance regarding the headline and the subject matter, MrB, here's a bit more:

[O Really]

I think Mr.B understood the story, but couldn't resist his current, ummm, "interest" in grammar usage. But he's right, the headline was clumsy.

[homerfobe]

Not that there's anything remotely funny about this news story, but this headline caught my eye:
How can a two-year-old have a son? Do people proof-read anymore?

MrB, you should really learn how to read ... let me break it down for you:

There is, sadly, a dead 2 year old. The two year old is Adrian Peterson's son.

Still, despite your ignorance regarding the headline and the subject matter, MrB, here's a bit more:

Oh look. Another libtard has weighed in these boards.

I understood perfectly what Mr. B meant. He wasn't making light of the child's murder, (I hope they hang the bastard) rather the way the headline was presented. You damn libtards have to be so damn politically correct; your ignorance is in not understanding the post. Dummy, let me break it down for you, you should learn how to read and comprehend.

Granted, it was dumb to put that post in the Just for Fun thread, but the title of the headline must have been written by a libtard who had very little training in the use of proper writing skills and the use of punctuation. You can piss on now.

[Bungalow Bill]

It is slightly confusing on the first reading. A was after old would
have made things clearer.

[Bungalow Bill]

That's true, it is because Peterson is famous. I still think was
makes it clearer.

[homerfobe]

It is slightly confusing on the first reading. A was after old would
have made things clearer.

Or this:

AP Source: Dead: 2-year-old Adrian Peterson's son

or this: AP Source: Adrian Peterson's 2-year-old son dead (dies)

Mike was just trying impress. Fail.

[mike]

It is slightly confusing on the first reading. A was after old would
have made things clearer.

Or this:

AP Source: Dead: 2-year-old Adrian Peterson's son

or this: AP Source: Adrian Peterson's 2-year-old son dead (dies)

Mike was just trying impress. Fail.

I have no desire to "impress" anyone, Homophobic.

Headlines are written to save letters and get attention. Additionally, they're written on the fly. MrB posted about this as he read breaking news headlines (Dewey and Truman, anyone? This is hardly and nowhere near as commensurate).

The headline to which MrB referred, and you have taken days to present an edit thereof, got his attention regardless of whether or not he understood the gravity of the words and the meaning any 6 year old would have understood.

Fail, Homophobic.

Oh, and, Vrede, moving this to its own thread was a good call. Thank you.

My thoughts are with the Peterson family right now.
The headline was accurate even though we appear to have many with little reading comprehension among us.

[homerfobe]

I have no desire to "impress" anyone, Homophobic.
About that comprehension thingy----

The headline to which MrB referred, and you have taken days to present an edit thereof
Oooh---- now mike's a real scholar!

Fail, Homophobic.
About that comprehension thingy----

You might not have had a desire to "impress" anyone, but you've missed a good chance.

[Mr.B]

OK, OK, I made a blunder; I apologize.

My jab was at the headline presentation, not the story; that doesn't mean I'm ignorant, mike.
Notice I did say "Not that there's anything remotely funny about this news story, but this headline caught my eye"

"I don't think Mr.B was "dumb" to post where he did. His focus was the quirkiness of the headline. I just moved it all here because we also started discussing the tragedy behind the headline. Otoh, with all the goofy headlines out there, it might not have been the wisest choice to curmudgeon on one that's about such a horrible event."

"Oh, and, Vrede, moving this to its own thread was a good call. Thank you."

I agree; but mike, I think you got your step-ins in a wad over a trivial matter. Worse has been posted without your weighing in with criticism.