Madison Taylor

 OK, I wrote earlier this week that a new interactive feature would begin on our Web site that would alter how online comments are posted, create new blogging opportunities for our online audience, create virtual happiness among our critics, change the course of human history, find a suitable away out of Iraq, figure out a way to beat Tiger Woods at Torrey Pines and find some use for cranberries on days not related to Thanksgiving.

Yes, it sounded, well, impossible.

And so it is, at least for this week.

The launch of our new format has been delayed. I do not know exactly why – it just is.

But what I will do is put the whole deal in the words of movie character Barry Champlain, the protagonist of “Talk Radio,” a movie by Oliver Stone that starred Eric Bogosian. Here’s what shock jock host Barry Champlain told his audience after he was told minutes before going on the air that his show wouldn’t be going national as scheduled.

It’s classic.

—

“I’ve just received some terrible news. Night Talk will not be broadcast nationally tonight…due to the usual corporate, big business, inefficiency, sloppiness and bureaucracy.I’ve just been informed of a scheduling problem. Nothing personal, nothing logical, just business as usual. Maybe the show will go national next week, maybe next month. No one seems to know.I’m sorry. I feel I’ve let you, the listeners, down.But I’ve been in this business long enough to know you can lose the battle… and still win the war.

—

OK, so I’m not quite as angry as Barry Champlain.  He’s a fictional character after all. Nobody in real life could be that angry, unless it’s our very own Homegrown Snob.

Anyway, here’s a copy of the story I was set to publish tonight about our new system, which we’re told really will premiere next week. I’ll keep my fingers crossed. I’ll reserve any future options on my breath 

—

The words of another editor in our company speak volumes.

“Punctuation is back,” Jeff Thomas wrote in November when his newspaper began a new online system for logging comments on stories while also creating a virtual community.

We couldn’t say this any better ourselves.

This reference is aimed at online readers and commenters on TheTimesNews.com, the online edition of the Times-News. Many have expressed frustration with the commenting tool now in place which forbids question marks, semi-colons and quotation marks. The system was put in place to filter out spam, Web addresses and profanity.

(Next week) that changes. TheTimesNews.com introduces Community Voice, a new application online that offers visitors to our site the ability to blog, establish networks of “friends,” and comment on every item published on the website.

It’s a system built specifically for you, our readers. It’s meant to be interactive and engaging — the kind of place folks might like to hang around for awhile and swap ideas and debate.

The biggest change for current users will be in the comments function on our stories. Community Voice gives administrators of TheTimesNews.com better tools to banish those who hijack worthwhile discussion with venomous words, taunts, personal vendettas and racism. Those types of comments violate our user agreement  and under the old system the online community was considered the cops for wayward traffic.

Now we can do it ourselves and even ban repeat offenders. We can do it by requiring  registration that includes a valid e-mail address. You’ll need to sign up once, and then log in each time you return to  TheTimesNews.com if you want to use any Community Voice functions.

The whole point of online discussion is to debate the issues. We hope users enjoy our new format and will enjoy becoming part of our virtual community.

—

We’ll try this again next week, promise.

A letter to folks who comment on Times-News stories posted on this Web site.
—
First let me admit that I have a love-hate relationship with the posters or bloggers who populate the Times-News online. I love the traffic on our stories. Our page views have grown with the numbers of you who provide running commentary on stories ranging from the school budget to new developments in the case involving alleged moonshiner and sex offender. Many people drop in on our sites to see what you all have to say.
—
Thanks.
—
And let me say that such forums are great for opening venues for people to speak their minds. We appreciate any of you who have done so. Some of the posts have been thought-provoking, some downright provoking and others funnier than all get out.
But I’ll also say that I’ve at times been troubled by how far the comments go or how angry some posts may get. But so it goes.
—
All of this is preface to a larger message: I wanted our online customers to know that a change is coming to our site this week that will alter how comments can be posted. Our corporation, Freedom Communications, Inc., is changing the supplier for the service that handles our online comments to one called SiteLife. We’ll probably come up with some other name for it later.
—
The good news is SiteLife will make our site much more interactive overall. Readers will have the ability to create their own interactive community that would include blogs and photos they post themselves. Users, many of whom have already created alternate identities such as Amazed, Sheez or Unfair and Unbalanced can still do so but also maintain their own page and profile.
—
Here’s what some might consider the bad news. The ability to comment on online news articles — a popular but controversial feature that has, at times, been abused — will also change. By requiring registration with SiteLife before users can post comments on articles, the Times-News will be able to restrict users who abuse the comments feature or violate the terms of its use.
—
But we also know that many people resist signing in to make comments. If this is the case, then we hope you reconsider.
—
You’ll be missed.

A couple of readers popped in with comments over the weekend. Now I’ll spread some of the credit where it’s due.
—
And at the end I’ll tack on a letter to the editor with a timely message for drivers. I couldn’t post it as a letter because the reader didn’t want a name used. It’s a shame because there’s nothing in this letter that’s in the least bit embarrassing.
—
On with the show …
—
Got this message Sunday night from Jeff Tudor of Graham who wanted to talk about the candidates forum we co-hosted with WPCM radio last week. He was also commenting on  about it published in the print edition Sunday.
—
I had been meaning to contact the Times-News to congratulate and thank you for the commissioner candidates forum this past Tuesday night. Your column in Sunday’s paper gave me a contact person.
My wife and I are lifelong residents of North Carolina, but have lived in Alamance County only about four years and knew little about the commissioner candidates. The weekend before, we had been discussing taking advantage of early voting and I had expressed my concern about voting with any confidence for any commissioner candidate. Then, I saw an article in the Times-News about the forum and we knew we had to go.
This forum was a terrific public service. I expected more people to be there Tuesday night, but the radio broadcast surely reached many more. I agree with you that the evening would have been better without those few candidates for other offices making speeches instead asking questions, but I was still very pleas ed to have had this opportunity to listen and learn.
I voted on Thursday and my wife on Friday. That’s two fewer people for the poll workers to deal with on May 6.
One other thing - I’m glad to see that you have kept the mutual fund quotes in the paper, but I have questions about the first column heading for the quotes. Every day it reads “3 year return” even though the key to the table says Tuesday is 4 wks, Wednesday is 12 months, etc.
Looking forward to the “tweaked” forum for the general election. Thanks again.
—
This is the kind of response we were hoping to see from the forum, which included candidates for the Alamance County Board of Commissioners and those for and against liquor by the drink in Graham. I want to thank the Tudors for taking advantage as others did last Tuesday.
—
The credit for putting on the show goes to several people. Bill Whitley, John Brockwell and Byron Tucker of WPCM played huge roles as did Times-News city editor Brent Lancaster. While the newspaper had hosted similar forums before, we hadn’t done so with the radio station. We enjoyed the partnership and hope they did too. Brent’s experience with forums was a key to our success and I thank him.
—
The idea for a mixed media forum actually originated with John who contacted me last fall about doing a forum during the elections for city council and mayor. By the time John and I hooked up it was too late for the city races but I promised we’d work together in 2008. I called John in April and we began to set things up.
—
I, too, look forward to the fall.
—
The next message had nothing to do with elections but about remembering a respected leader in the community who passed away. In this case, Anita Bryant.
—
Thank you Madison for the beautiful article on Mrs. Bryant, it was not hard to do because she was such a kind and beautiful lady, thank you so much.
Delacie Jacobs
—
I sent thanks back to Ms. Jacobs, of Burlington, on this one. When we found out that Mrs. Bryant, the matriarch of Hargett and Bryant Funeral Home, had passed way we wanted to do a story about it. Mrs. Bryant was a pioneer in Alamance County and among the first black women in business. In life, however, Mrs. Bryant was modest and never wanted a story done about herself — even though we tried. When she died, we had very little information in our archives about her and no obituary was immediately available from the funeral home.
—
Ms. Jacobs contacted us asking why there was no story right away. I explained our situation and she agreed to take be interviewed. When the family supplied more information we were able to put together remembrance of this important woman</a> in our area. Ms. Jacobs in no small way helped make it happen. Our reporter Isaac Groves wrote a great story. Sadly, we’re losing Isaac this month as he leaves for greener pastures.
—
Readers like Ms. Jacobs are critical to the work we do every day. We hope our readers will contact us and participate in the stories we do.
—
Thanks again.
—
And here’s the letter to the editor as promised. The reader is from Southern Alamance County.
—
Here it goes …
—
Like many of you, within the last week I have been through a random license check and have passed a parked patrolman checking speeds via RADAR. As you know, such practices are not uncommon. The local police department, the sheriff’s office, and the Highway Patrol all conduct these types of checks. My concern is with the average citizen. I’m not sure how the tradition of blinking your headlights at oncoming traffic to warn of a speed trap ahead began, but it is something that we all need to think about.
Years ago it was done out of common courtesy for your fellow motorists, and for the most part this is still true today. However, times have changed. Years ago we didn’t have terrorism or gang activity to worry us to the degree it does today. Crime is rampant. Reports of robbery, drunken driving, illegal drug trafficking, assault, murder and illegal immigration flood our televisions and newspapers. When we send out a warning signal by blinking our headlights, we could unwittingly be aiding and abetting a criminal in his or her escape by giving them time to turn around and avoid capture.
All that I am asking is that we, the proud citizens of this great and blessed country, give this practice careful consideration and allow our fine men and women in uniform the opportunity to do their jobs in trying to keep us safe. So the next time you go through a license check or a speed trap, please “Think Before You Blink.” It could make a difference in getting a dangerous person off the streets … and after all, if I am speeding, I probably deserve a ticket anyway.
—
I hope this reader reconsiders supplying a name for publication. I love letters to the editor and personally think we can’t print enough of them.

Post-mortems, Post Toasties and post-hypnotic suggestions after digesting the print, video and audio from Tuesday’s forum of candidates for the Alamance County Board of Commissioners which was held at the Paramount Theater in beautiful but otherwise deserted-at-night downtown Burlington.
Maybe a margarita from the nearby Mi Casa restaurant would’ve helped.
Welllll … probably  not.

So who won?
—
Since it wasn’t a debate, nobody did really. In gauging a forum like this one I’d say it’s sort of like the adage about the Saturday round during the Masters golf tournament. A player can’t win the Masters on Saturday but they can sure lose it.
—
By that standard two candidates — one Democrat and one Republican — fared poorly. This was likely caused by either a serious case of the jitters or a lack of command of the issues at hand. In truth, it was probably a little of both. I won’t name them here — or ANYWHERE ON THIS POST, if you get my drift.
—
Any surprises?
—

Right off the bat I’d say Democratic candidate Tristan Patterson was a revelation mainly because at age 23 he’s by far the youngest candidate in the field and seemed to have good command of his facts and the issues. He was very poised for someone of his age and experience.
—
Overall I thought the vast majority of the candidates in both parties more than held their own. It was, on both sides, a conservative lot and there was almost no discernible sharp disagreement. The only point of contention was between incumbent GOP Commissioner Bill Lashley and everybody else on the matter of taxes. Apparently no one in the field is as opposed to them as Lashley is. This is Lashley’s point of view anyway. From his perspective, there is nobody in the free world more opposed to taxes than Lashley himself.

—
Anything else on Tristan Patterson?
—
Well I found it interesting that he now identifies himself not as a businessman but as a full-time candidate for the Board of Commissioners. Hope he understands the pay ain’t that great for this gig. That’ll change of course when he gets to be president.
—
Did anybody really understand state Rep. Cary Allred’s question?
—
Not really. Well, perhaps a few did but since Allred never really asked a question it’s almost impossible to know for sure. Democrats Eddie Boswell and Linda Massey weren’t the only ones one who had  puzzled expressions. Republican Hayes Teague offered to speak with Allred about the issue at greater length later to more fully comprehend it. And Incumbent GOP Commissioner Dan Ingle admitted to spending 45 minutes talking on the phone with Allred on a recent night. Allred then engaged in a loud discussion — on his end anyway — with Lashley about it outside the theater when the forum was over and innocent bystanders were trying to get safely to their cars, or to Mi Casa for the previously mentioned margarita.
—
And people say running for president is a grind.
—
Laughs of the night … GOP
–
Lashley — and his opponents for that matter — got lots of mileage out of Lashley’s remark that on his current board he’s surrounded by a few what he called “Country Club Republicans” who make cutting taxes more difficult because they spend money like there’s no tomorrow and mentioned others on the forum panel. Commissioner candidate and school board chairman Tom Manning got the line of the night when he responded by saying “Thanks for sharing Bill.”
—
But nearly every other hopeful weighed in, including Lashley’s colleague Ingle, who prefaced by saying “I’m not a member of the country club but …  .” Larry Lee, Lee Isley and Teague all did the same.
—
It makes for good theater but not really accurate discussion. Sadly this kind of politics and labeling work together like Rove and Atwater. But it don’t make such statements necessarily so.
—
Take, for example, the abundantly weary tag “Tax-and-Spend Liberal Democrat.” There may be such a thing but there aren’t many left — kind of like mastodons of yore. In my experience, Democrats and Republicans both greatly enjoy spending money — but they really disagree about what to spend it on. The truth is, if Washington politics is any indication, the far more prevalent species these days are the “Spend and Spend Some More Republicans.” This seems to be President Bush’s personal mantra.
—
Now if Alamance County government operated like the Bush Administration this would happen: When the GOP is in charge the sheriff’s department would be outfitted with Hummers, LCACs, Howitzers and V-22 Osprey aircraft that would be based at a prison facility the size of Sing-Sing. After blowing $4.5 billion there, the board would announce a tax cut.
—
When the Democrats are in charge the newer high schools would be modeled after Duke University combined with the Taj Mahal. The shrubbery would be the largest single expense but there would also be gourmet meals, exhibits of art by Monet, high-speed internet and HDTV in each and every square foot and a graham cracker and chocolate milk machine in every classroom. After blowing $4.5 billion there, the board would charge a user fee to take art courses.
—
Cast your ballots!
—
For the record
—
<blockquote>
From my perspective I’d like to offer a correction to a statement made by Massey on the subject of open government. The former mayor of Haw River answered a question on the subject by stating that sometimes governments are bound by law to meet behind closed doors. This isn’t exactly true. The North Carolina Open Meetings law only states that local governments CAN meet out of public view to discuss certain issues such as personnel, land acquisition and legal matters.
—
But they don’t have to.
—
Local governments in North Carolina can, in theory, talk about any of this stuff in open session and be within the law. They could also release more information on these issues and still be within the law.
—
They choose not to.
—
This is a dodge local governments use to keep information from the public. To be fair, in some cases it’s wise to avoid releasing some information to avoid potential lawsuit, especially in some sticky personnel situations.  That doesn’t mean, however, that the public should be completely in the dark about why, say, a department head is fired at midnight by the county commissioners.
—
And the argument that closed meetings are the best ways to conduct business when it comes to luring industry or buying land are flat wrong. These are things people need to know so they can determine whether government is making the best decisions possible or if something  potentially troublesome is coming to their neighborhoods. Sometimes it’s to make sure government leaders aren’t making sweetheart deals for themselves, friends of family members.
—
We’d like to see state law changed to something more in line with what’s used in Florida — where very little can be conducted in secret.
—

A farm, or not
—
On the subject of land-use planning the matter of farms came up. From my experience there seems to be some confusion over what constitutes a farm, which is why land-uise planning is worth talking about.
The topic of hog farms was casually broached Tuesday night. It’s easy to be so dismissive in the Piedmont where there aren’t any hog farms to speak of. In eastern North Carolina, where I lived from 1992 to 2007, calling such operations “farms” is a wholly inaccurate characterization of what we’re talking about. In Duplin and Sampson counties these so-called farms are actually industrial areas where tens of thousands pigs are raised in places with waste treatment facilities large enough to take care of a small city. Hog lagoons are actually massive craters filled with animal waste — many of them thousands of square feet in size and located near rivers and streams.

—

When I lived in Jacksonville one of those lagoons ruptured and 25 million gallons of hog poop spilled into a river there that flowed from Richlands to the ocean. That’s 25  million gallons enveloping a shrimp you might eat later.
And try watching an orange plume of hog excrement travel down a river through the middle of town killing fish along the way and then tell me it’s not an industrial incident.
—
Good luck on Tuesday. And if you need a margarita, you know where to get one.

“We’ll tweak this in the fall,” I said as I approached Brent Lancaster and Bob Boyer immediately after the candidates’ forum Tuesday night at the Paramount Theater. It was my first forum since I returned to the Times-News. Lots of things went as expected. A few didn’t. That’s how it goes.
—
“We’ll tweak this in the fall,” I said again to Brent and Bob who represented the Times-News as the questioners during the forum, John Brockwell of WPCM was moderator. All did an excellent job.
—
Still, when I said “We’ll tweak this in the fall,” a third time Brent had to laugh out loud. Some gaffes were obvious.
—
Yes, this event was a good learning experience and dry run for the much more complicated fall election ahead when we plan to have forums on several races. But on Tuesday the Times-News, with WPCM radio, played host to a relatively simple session of the Democratic and Republican candidates for the Alamance County Board of Commissioners. Four and eight people respectively are running for three available seats on May 6 — the only local primary race. Also featured was a mini-debate on the Graham liquor by the drink issue, which will go before that city’s voters on May 6.
—
Let me just say first that David Waggoner, who represented the pro LBD debate and Graham City Councilman Jim Albright who spoke for the anti forces, acquitted themselves exceptionally well, were knowledgeable without being strident and made their points with eloquence, diplomacy and humor.
—
All of this begs the question, why aren’t these guys on a ballot themselves this year? I have an idea for a race that could use the help.  More on that later.
—
Anyway, by most accounts the night was a success. The people at WPCM were great to work with as were Dave Wright and all the folks at the Paramount. It’s the perfect venue for this kind of forum and the crowd of about 100 seemed to appreciate it. The turnout was positive and those who attended likely walked away with a good idea of what the candidates are about. The free-flowing format favored by John kept the talk more lively.
—
Here are a few things we learned:
—
1. Forums on three races/issues are perhaps too many in one night — especially with eight candidates in one race. Even though one GOP hopeful, Patricia Pickell, could not attend due to a prior commitment, the Republican candidates still got fewer questions than the Democrats. And we allowed about 20 more minutes for the GOP.
—
2. The town hall format in which those in attendance were allowed to come down and ask a question was a good addition. It might be best, however, to have the questioners write their queries beforehand so the idea could be harnessed and the questions move more quickly and smoothly. On a couple of occasions it was difficult to determine what the question actually was.
—
3. Those running for other political offices should not be allowed to ask questions — or if they are a time limit would be imposed. Both candidates for state House 64 — incumbent Republican Cary Allred and Democratic Challenger Henry Vines posted questions. Allred’s to the Democrats checked in at more than 3 minutes and featured a good chunk of politicking disguised as explanation. The Democrats, in fact, never really got an actual question at all about the tax proposal Allred’s talked about for months — he just kind of petered out. Vines had an actual question on land use planning but it’s hard to know if he only posed it because rhetorically he and Allred seem to be joined at the hip until their election is over in November. If one speaks, the other has to chime in, too.
—
There are too many miles to go in that House campaign for this much talk between the candidates. Just imagine how sick voters could become of Allred and Vines by November. And even though the newspaper company that owns the Times News usually refrains from endorsing any political candidates we might be tempted to break rank in this case.
—
Can you endorse None of the Above?
—
Check back later for a look at last night’s winners and losers.

I wouldn’t want to be a teenager again — not these days.  Not no way not no how.
—
In fact if, as the popular parlor game goes, I had the power to go back to say age 16 and do things over again I’d opt to stand pat. Stay right where I am. OK maybe it’d be cool to return to age 26 or so.
—
In retrospect I’m not that sure about it.
—
But there’s no doubt I would never want to be a teenager again. I was convinced of this well before last week when law enforcement, a local high school and media outlets blew the lid off this particular phenomenon — beer at the prom.
—
Yeah really.
—
Now for people of my generation this was positively shocking mainly because we just assumed there was drinking at the prom, something people talked about endlessly later but nothing would come of it. That’s how it was in the late 1970s and probably beyond. When it came to booze at the prom, most people knew it, nobody was suspended for it and certainly nobody ever got charged by law enforcement because of it.
—
But times change.
—
Last week nine students were cited for  and all got a suspensions stemming from the Western Alamance prom. None of the students was driving or endangering the public but that shouldn’t matter. All were well under the legal age of 21 to consume alcohol. It was wrong for them to do it and the punishment was justified.
—
It was wrong back in my day, too but the laws were different then. In the 1970s the legal age to buy beer and wine was 18 and more than a few high school seniors could drink legally in any bar in North Carolina by the time the prom rolled around.
—
But lots of other things are different between now and then — things that make being a teenager a larger challenge than ever before and more dangerous than anyone can imagine. It’s a world of mixed messages where life is either too tricky or not tricky enough; where there is too much supervision or not nearly enough; where teens are tethered by cell phones to their parents like wireless umbilical cords; where there’s too much trust, but not in what should be trusted — or perhaps that should read too much trust in the imminently untrustworthy. It’s a world where teens freely give away their privacy on YouTube or MySpace to a degree someone of my generation finds not only depressing but alarming. There are gangs, and access to guns and drugs and sex and … the list is too long and terrifying to go through.
—
Some of this hit home again today when a Western parent called to complain about the teens’ names appearing in the newspaper. She was also upset with the Sheriff’s Department for releasing the information without informing the parents beforehand.
—
But when the parent kept talking I became more convinced that the newspaper was right to publish the story. She talked about how widespread drug and alcohol use is among teens and the need for something to be done about it.
—
“It’s not just those eight or nine they caught,” the parent said. “This generation was being swept under the carpet even before this happened. Somebody needs to tell parents to wake up and not let their children go out on Friday night and do whatever they please. … This is a problem of epidemic proportions.”
—
If anyone learns a good lesson from all of this then it’s worth it.

I’m an idiot.
—
There, it’s out. I’ve stated it for the record — come absolutely clean with something that most might have already suspected.
—
I’m an idiot.
—
I say so because I let something get by in today’s Letters to the Editor that frankly shouldn’t have happened. I’m not saying this because I knew the answer. I really didn’t (more on that later). What I failed to do was check to make sure something written by a reader was in fact correct at all.
—
I really do know better, honest. We get letters making lots of claims. Some don’t see the light of day because of inaccurate info or accusations that can’t be substantiated. What I do usually is check.
—
Today we published a letter from Frances Hindman of Burlington headlined ’Columnist should have good command of grammar’ in reference to a column by Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post Writers Group. When we first received it I talked about the criticism with my partner in crime managing editor Jay Ashley. We both somewhat shamefully admitted little real knowledge of the situations in which “whom” or “who” should be used. From my experience lots of people are chained to the same boat — many of them writers or longtime newspaper types. I’d stand a much better chance explaining the balk rule in baseball or the minutae of the industrial revolution than explain the use of “whom.”
—
And because books on grammar useage are more scarce in newsrooms than manual typewriters — well there are likely far more manual typewriters used for decorative purposes — we took her word for it.
—
I apologize now to Kathleen Parker and anyone else for doing so. Mrs. Hindman does the same. She sent me this e-mail early today. I thank her for writing it so quickly.
—
“I am writing in regard to my letter to the editor concerning the article “Dumbing Down The Presidency”.  Ever since I spoke to the Times-News to verify that I had sent the letter to be published, something has been resonating in my head.  I headed  for my English grammar reference, and discovered what I had feared–I WAS WRONG!
—
 To choose correctly between “who” and “whom”, rephrase the sentence so you choose between “he and him”.  If you want “him, write “whom”; if you want “he”, write “who”.
—
Ex.-  The sentence in the article was–”Clinton’s ad posed the correct question: Whom are voters going to trust to be commander in chief…? ” Rephrase the part of the sentence I  questioned, and you have…  The voters are going to trust ______ to be commander in chief…   The word you would choose is “him”; therefore, “whom” is the correct choice.
—
Kathleen Parker was correct, and I was wrong.  I wanted to make that correction myself.
Thank you,
Frances Hindman
—
Again I want to thank Mrs. Hindman for her self-correction. I’ll publish it early next week on the Opinion page. But that doesn’t relieve me of my responsibility. In the future I plan to check these kinds of claims with the same concern we pay to crime reports or crticism of public officials.
—
And on the matter of who and whom — well I may never fully get it. A friend of long standing who did not wish to be identified sent me what I hope will be a help, though. I plan to print it out at work and post it on my bulletin board. Here it is.
—
“I know Helen Euliss (the late and well-respected Southern Alamance and Elon College English instructor) would spin in her grave if she read Hindman’s letter.
—
The … best way to determine the correct usage of “whom” is to diagram Parker’s sentence, and I’m sure diagramming sentences is a lost (although effective) art in public schools and colleges, not to mention among the lay public.
—
The portion of Parker’s sentence that Hinton questions – “Whom are voters going to trust to be commander in chief?” – is properly diagrammed this way:
—
Voters/are going/to trust/whom.
 —
Voters is the subject/are going is the verb/to trust is a prepositional phrase/whom is the object of the prepositional phrase to trust that modifies are going.
—
The only real question Parker had to solve in writing her sentence was whether to use who or whom ….and she made the correct choice, I suspect, by mentally diagramming the sentence. At least that’s what I do when I have such a question.”
—
I strongly suspect my English major friend is correct on all counts — particularly about diagramming sentences being a lost art. One of the biggest challenges we face in newspapers today is the spelling wreckage created by e-mail and text-messaging. Journalism schools today are churning out a generation of poor spellers who look for answers not in dictionaries but on the Internet.
—
But that’s no excuse.