Incidently, I remember reading an article in The New Republic wear the writer attended anti-Iraq war rally. The entire article was the guy seathing with rage invoking 9/11 as the reason we were invading iraq and dreaming of having the protestors arrested and deported. I bring this up because I know how TNR can get there circulation up. See, they’re marketing themselves to the wrong crowd. If they started putting girls in bikinis draped over the hoods of cars on their front cover, they’d reach a friendlier audience.
First, "Incidentally". The word's been spelled that way since the 1800s. "Incidently" is archaic. Get with the program. Come join us in the current effing century. Next: "wear the writer". I think that's illegal. Jeff Dahmer & all that. WHERE the writer attended AN anti-Iraq war rally. I don't even know where to begin with 'seathing'. Is it a thing from the sea? (See Russell, Kurt, Thing, The). Seething would be an actual word that one could use in this instance. Eye-raque needs to be capitalized, regardless of one's opinion of it. Next, we come to 'get there circulation'. Typical misuse of 'there'. Should be 'their'. This error is particularly odd, because in the very next sentence, the author (holy carp) uses "they're" correctly. Seriously, what's up with that?
I rant because I strongly feel that these sorts of error detract from the thrust of one's argument. And apart from the above mentioned errors (don't get me started on the grammar), I think that the ideas expressed are not without merit.
Possible definition of 'seathing':
