« When you Assume.... | Main | Are "State's Rights" Republicans Hypocrites on Medical Marijuana? »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Completely agree. Having said that:
- I don't think it's significant that Montini ended the quote with a comma. That's proper punctuation for that sentence. The problem is the omission of the next one.
- Are you sure you're not just upset because Montini started his column with the word "Dude"?
Don't worry, he can imitate your style but I know Greg Patterson, Greg Patterson is a friend of mine, and you, E.J. Montini, are no Greg Patterson.

"It should come as no surprise" is a phrase I find myself saying so many times of late when it comes to the bovine feces coming from the left--media, politicians, Hollywood types, etc.
Montini has been spreading this kind of tripe for decades.

Montini is just another liberal Jiggle Lo!

I'm sure you could post this same thing every week in regards to Montini. It's too bad. He's gifted at writing...just has trouble with facts, reason and honesty. As long as you approach his columns with those character flaws in mind you'll come to the correct conclusion at the end.

Gifted or not, you will NEVER see him retract this. He still won't understand when hes ridden out of town on a rail.

Montini is just lazy...waqthc, he will milk this issue for at least five or six columns.

He's one of the reasons I haven't read the Repungnat for a few decades. Benson is the other.

Surprised, the correct punctuation of Montini's mis-quote would have used an ellipses: "We have no intention of targeting or going after people who are implementing or who are in compliance with state law...." Burke said. An ellipses indicates that there are words not included from the quote. Using a comma is as Gregg says: dishonest.

Unfortunately, Montini will never be "ridden out of town on a rail." He is as much a part of the culture of the Arizona Republic as Linda Valdez and the rest of the hypocritical leftists at 200 E. Van Buren. We're stuck with him.


I know it's silly to quibble about punctuation, but I can't resist. An ellipsis indicates that there are words left in the sentence, or that there has been an omission between sentences. It doesn't mean that the person never said any sentences after that (if this were true, you'd need to put ellipses after virtually every quote from a larger body of work).

Note that in Greg's original post quoting the Republic story with both sentences, a comma was used. That first line is an entire sentence. The second line is an entire sentence too. The real crux of the issue is that Burke took back almost everything from the first sentence in the second sentence, and that Montini omitted that huge caveat. Do you really think it would have been honest if Montini had only included the first sentence and had an ellipsis?

@RONJ, right he's a fixture, but fixtures tend to remain stuck in the same place. Gladly we are not and we don't have to read the 'RAG' ever again if we don't want to. End of story, Ed Montini+Linda V + 'RAG'+ channel 12 = irrelavent.

Joe I'm with you on Ch 12. I'm also ditching Ch 5. Seems since Kent Dana left, they have started edging left, much like Ch 12 did when Kent left there. I've switched to 15. Seems the news is actually news and no hipe like Ch 12 or 5.

Surprised, you make a good point. Ellipses do not belong after every quote; clearly we know that(except for deathbed utterances) the quotes are followed by other statements.

However, that a comma was used in the original Rep article was only because the reporter chose to follow the statement with "Burke aid." Based on that article, we may believe that Burke's two statements were uttered sequentially.

So yeah I do believe it would have been honest to conclude the first statement with ellipses. Still devious and underhanded, but at least honest.

Joe and KT: you are both right on. I read the Rag because it's part of my job. And I still cherish Ronald Reagan's famous line about newspapers: "My favorite parts of the newspapers are the comics and the corrections." Ellipses notwithstanding.

Thank you for making the bigger point that Dennis Burke's statement actually further fueled the confusion and concern. He said state employees don't have immunity. Brewer and Horne had absolutely no choice whatsoever. They should have filed a declaratory judgment action a LONG time ago (before the law was implemented). They didn't need Burke's letter. Once Burke issued his letter (May 2), Brewer and Horne should have filed the action immediately. There isn't a lawyer anywhere who believes Prop 203 will survive this legal challenge. So, the real question is . . . WHY didn't Tom Horne file this action the second he took office? And, WHY did Terry Goddard allow this unconstitutional law on the ballot in the first place? Aren't Attorneys General supposed to be lawyers? What a waste of time and taxpayer dollars.

Montini lie? (gasp)
He's become the master at the RAG of a newspaper.
Throw him in with Valdez, who doesn't have the courage of her convictions to admit her lies in writing the RAG's SB 1070 outrageous editorial which set off a hysterical storm by the lame stream media.

The comments to this entry are closed.