WTAF Chris Hayes:

[PCIntern]

I believe he is actually a very bright guy, very verbal, very well educated and is no dummy.

So someone here needs to explain to me how he referred to the Iron Dome of Israel as “infamous“. Is it a misuse of the word such as the word “notoriety“? I don’t get how a device which prevents thousands of civilians from being killed or mutilated is somehow infamous.

I know I’m being picky, but that’s me…. actually, “that is I”.

[bigtree]

1. probably misused it

...he's pretty glib.

You are correct. In no way is their defense against rogue missiles launched into their neighborhoods something nefarious or wrong. I can see why you reacted to it.

[PCIntern]

3. I will tell you frankly

And I have never been satisfied with his position on Israel, I don’t even see him as “evenhanded“. He is made some remarks to which I took astonished offense over the years. I remember once in a panel discussion many years ago, Andrea Mitchell took real exception to something he said.

[bigtree]

10. he talks very fast

...and his devil's advocate premises are way often repudiated by his guests.

At some point, those absurdities become what viewers take from him. I don't personally percieve any firm center in his jive. He began with the air of an enlightened progressive, but he's whittled all that away by opting for strained populism.

That's where I think you find uninformed views such as the ones you mentioned with Hayes, in the forced rhetoric of carnival barkers.

[Justice]

12. Perfect description

I don't watch him. He's preachy

And I hate his glasses (but that's just a personal shot)

[2naSalit]

18. ...

[FakeNoose]

16. Yes I've seen him do exactly that, and I finally realized why he does it

Chris Hayes is very intelligent, and he wants to have a lively show. If he agreed with everything his guests say all the time, it wouldn't be very interesting. So his trick is to get his guests started by provoking them to defend their own views. He presents an "opposing" viewpoint and then he gives them the opportunity to disagree. It doesn't always work, but it does make for some interesting conversations.

What can happen is that DUers will misunderstand Chris' ploy, and they think he really believes the opposing viewpoint.

[betsuni]

28. +1

[Earth-shine]

2. I think it's "That is me," not "that is I."

"I" is a subject. The word for an object is "me."

"Infamous" also seems like the wrong word. "Infamy" is a bad kind of fame.

[DavidDvorkin]

4. It's "That is I"

"I" is the predicate nominative, not the object.

But no one speaks that way, of course.

[Earth-shine]

6. English can be really annoying. I never even heard the term "predicate nominative."

From Google ...

What is simple predicate nominative?

Predicate Nominative Guide for Students

In simplest terms, a predicate nominative renames the subject of a sentence. It features a noun, pronoun, or noun phrase that appears after a linking verb (for example, “become,” “is,” “be,” “was,” “were,” etc.).

[PCIntern]

7. The verb "to be" does not take a direct object

[DavidDvorkin]

23. Oh, you looked it up already

I was going to say that I had invented the term just to mess with your mind.

(Not really.)

[Earth-shine]

24. Na. Na. Na. Google is my friend. But you are a meany, so we can't be friends.

Just kidding.

[tblue37]

5. The subject complement of a linking verb sentence is properly in the nominative case. "I" is

correct, because it is a subject complement, not an object.

[GreenWave]

8. If "to be" is a linking verb

it should be a cold day in Hell when a subject "links" to an object.

[tblue37]

19. "To be" is definitely a linking verb, and what follows it is not an object. Only transitive verbs

can take objects.

[SCantiGOP]

9. And ending a sentence with a preposition

is something up with which I will not put.

[tblue37]

20. "To put up with" is a phrasal verb, and those are not prepositions, but the adverbial particles of

the phrasal verb. Since they are actually part of the verb, they should not be separated from the verb or its other adverbial particles. In other words, adverbial particles are perfectly fine at the end of a sentence.

OTOH, it is often inappropriate to end a sentence with a proposition. In fact, in some situations it might even get you slapped.

[SCantiGOP]

22. Oh My God!

Is that you, Miss Bobo from Senior English? I thought you died 40 years ago.

[Bucky]

27. Ha!!

[madaboutharry]

11. He often makes verbal mistakes like this.

I have noted in the past him using the wrong vocabulary word to describe something.

[JoseBalow]

13. "Infamous" is when you're MORE than famous...

[allegorical oracle]

31. Agree. That was probably Hayes's intent: So fierce that it's become awesome.

[Beastly Boy]

14. I think it's a slip up that has its origins in the pro-Islamic propaganda.

To them, it's infamous. The slip-up itself tells me that Chris Hayes is well connected to letftist intellectual circles (I am somewhat familiar with their sentiments and prevailing themes of discourse) where certain overtones from the propaganda sources in the middle east are often rehashed. it's the "in" thing to do.

[PCIntern]

15. Agreed

[Maru Kitteh]

17. Agreed. It shows his framing, and it is beyond unfortunate.

[yorkster]

21. I think I've heard infamous used on occasion when it seemed

that the person meant well known. Their tone when using the word infamous sounded almost offhand or casual, as opposed to a stronger tone you'd expect for that word.

OTOH I didn't hear Chris Hayes, so he may have intended to use infamous in its full sense, which seems odd.

[Cheezoholic]

25. You nailed it IMO

I have used it in such a way before. It may be grammatically wrong but Ive heard it used the way you described rather frequently, especially by younger people. Wouldn't be the first time a word or phrase morphs through a generation.

Also the main theme of his show tonight, besides showing Austin's strong reaffirmation of US support for Israel, was reporting on the Israeli govt's perceived lack of an initial public reaction from its peoples POV to Oct. 7th. Basically the show was focusing on Netenyayhoos fairly strong disapproval ratings and anger from families of hostages who were feeling silenced. He had some guests from within Israel that were pretty critical of the way the Israeli govt has handled this so far and some that were against an all out attack on Gaza. Pretty touchy stuff that was bound to hit some nerves but it is an aspect of this terrorist act that deserves reporting. I thought he did a good job of treading on some very thin ice.

But he is young (comparatively) for a host of a prime time news/opinion show and his hubris shows at times but overall I think he does a pretty damn good job. When people on here are raising hell about news that MSM is ignoring, chances are Chris is covering it.

[yorkster]

30. Thx. Well put. I generally find him to be quite good.

It may be, as you say, a generational thing.
Now, about that verse for versus thing....
(Kidding of course - a brief diversion from a necessarily serious discussion of a terrible situation.)

[Bucky]

26. Chris Hayes is infamous for making slips like this

I personally restrict my complaints about journalists to matters of substance rather than sloppy word choice.

[PCIntern]

29. As do I.

But he used it twice