So... Confused...

I mentioned in my earlier post that I read between 20 and 25 baseball blogs a day. Some of my favorite writers are Joe Sheehen of baseballprospectus.com and baseballanalysts.com, Rich Lederer of baseballanalysts.com, everyone on firejoemorgan.com, and Rob Neyer and Keith Law on ESPN. Law also has his own blog called "The Dish," which also includes his various ramblings on things unrelated to sports, mostly cooking. Az I was browsing The Dish this afternoon, and I noticed that one of the labels he uses is "Grammar," so I clicked on it, and four posts showed up. In one of them he makes fun of the New York Times copy-editors for missing something:

From the times: "...And the Giants, boosted by a 7-1 road record and the knowledge that none of the five top seeds are currently on even a two-game winning streak, see reason to view their postseason outlook optimistically."
Law: “None” takes a singular verb - none of the top five seeds IS currently on a two-game winning streak. So that’s bad, but not uncommon. What’s awful is that some copyeditor at the Times liked that sentence and used it for a pull quote, repeating the grammatical error...

Schmutter: Now, I'm pretty sure that using "none" with a singular verb is technically correct because the word "none" is an archaic contraction of "no one," which would definitely take a singular verb. However, I'm positive that these days the word "none" should ALWAYS take a plural verb. How can I respect a writer who corrects grammar incorrectly? I will have to do some research on that, but again, I'm positive I'm right.

Meanwhile in another of his grammar posts, he comes up with this gem:

Newsday: It’s generation-spanning plot combines one of the season’s favorite themes (the guileful acts of children) with one of its trendiest (turmoil in Afghanistan). And it premieres on the heels of nettlesome publicity involving stage-parent outrage and threats of bodily harm targeted at its youngest stars. … Like it’s author, “The Kite Runner’s” morose protagonist is the son of a Kabul diplomat who relocates to California as the Russians begin their incursions into Afghanistan.

Law: I deleted one paragraph in the middle, but in the span of five sentences, Jan Stuart manages to use the correct “its” twice and the incorrect one twice, even though every instance called for the same word (”its” without its apostrophe). This has to be one of the easiest grammatical rules to remember, and I see it screwed up all the freaking time. All Stuart had to do was remember Strong Bad’s helpful song:
If you want it to be possessive, it’s just “I-T-S.” But, if it’s supposed to be a contraction then it’s “I-T-apostrophe-S,” … scalawag.

Yes, Law just quoted Strong Bad. I don't know what to do! First he performs a MAJOR grammatical faux-pas, but then he quotes the King of Grammar Corrections himself! It's like that Halloween costume commentary by Strong Bad where he shows a picture of an attractive girl dressed up as Homestar. Hilarity ensues:

STRONG BAD: Dar, dar dar dar dar DA-A!! So confused... what to think?? Hot Homestar?!? My brain is splitting in half!
HOMESTAR RUNNER: Oh, hey Strong Bad!
STRONG BAD: Daa! You get outta here!
HOMESTAR RUNNER: Whoa, you sound tense. Do you want me to give you, like, a back rub or anything?
STRONG BAD: Uh... yes! No! I... don't know! Next picture, next picture!!
HOMESTAR RUNNER: I think this is the last one, sweetie.
STRONG BAD: WAAAAA!! {trails off as though he's running away}
HOMESTAR RUNNER: I should probably stop calling everybody "sweetie".

Okay, enough for today, sweetie.