Subj : Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article
To   : alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy
From : kashe
Date : Wed Oct 05 2005 09:06:56

From Newsgroup: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 13:40:46 -0400, Amos Keag <A.K01@comcast.net>
wrote:

>Richard Clark wrote:
>
>SNIPPED
>
>> Seems you've drawn a blank then too.  On your own sentence which is
>> the point I made significant.  That you missed on both accounts is
>> doubly indicting.  Do you have a relative in Texas that is sweating
>> bullets now?
>
>Richard, Richard, Richard!  :-(     Read your last sentence. Do you see 
>the error??
>
>"Do you have a relative in Texas that is sweating bullets now?"
>
>There is a GLARING ERROR in it!!!!!  It should be ...
>"Do you have a relative in Texas WHO is sweating bullets now?"
>
>A relative is a PERSON not a THING: a WHO not a THAT!!
>
>Tch, Tch,

	Gramatically the antecedent of that or who in both cases is
Texas. It should read, "Do you have, in Texas, ...." In any case it's
none of anyone's damned business where my relatives are.

.