How the nationwide tea party protests on Tax Day 2009 could be the start of a new grassroots, anti-government, anti-state – and hopefully radicalized – conservative movement.
9 Replies to “The Southern Avenger on “Tea Party Terrorists””
Comments are closed.
Hey SA got his bounce back. Notice he was kind of dragging for a while there?
I didn’t notice.
Organized protests and email/petition actions in the US (and elsewhere) in regard to high government taxes and/or various regulations are plentiful with the aid of the Internet. But this type of activism is insufficient to towards the goal of a “better” society. A strong relationship of individual self-responsibility to social order exists and needs to be understood, and then individual self-responsibility practiced. My latest article at OpEdNews.com – Tax/Regulation Protests Are Not Enough.
I frequently submit articles to OpEdNews.com because it is a “progressive” news site and, while many there have some of the wrong ideas of how to get to and even in some ways what constitutes a better society, I am highly confident that all writers and commenters there really do want one. I think that there can be inroads made by reaching out beyond the “choir” with this view of those who do not currently hold some of the same views by finding some foundational common points. I am pleased that the managing editor, after rereading and reconsidering, moved my submission from a diary entry to which she had downgraded it, to a headlined article for April 17 2009.
I agree, sorta.
Without stating on what you do and do not agree of what I wrote here and/or in my article at OpEdNews.com, your 3 word reply, “I agree, sorta” is vacuous and vacillating. Neither is appropriate for a person who is trying to convince others of the rightness of certain ideas – the purpose of your blog I have assumed. So, make it public with what you do not agree of what I wrote *and* why – that would be saying something on which others can make an assessment.
Easy Killer! I was referring to Op-Ed News.
Boy, make a comment and someone takes your head off…. Wow.
Meaning, I don’t like them, nor would I submit something there, although, I did once, and it was accepted. Mostly though, I tend to believe that Op-Ed news is not even remotely a place that Free-Market Values are even respected, much less appreciated.
<<Easy Killer! I was referring to Op-Ed News.
Boy, make a comment and someone takes your head off…. Wow.<<
Pat, I have no “Killer” tendencies. I do however, make clear statements when pointing out when someone has made a weak response to me. But in no way was my reply a “take your head off” type. Maybe your reply is a result of very often looking for problem commenters where there are none.
<< Meaning, I don’t like them,<<
So if I understand you, your original comment, “I agree, sorta”, now has become “I don’t like them”. …. This is very confusing to say the least. By what process did you go from the one to the other? And further, to this “I don’t like them”, my reply is “why not?” And please be specific as to what you object and why, since that would be the only meaningful answer.
<< nor would I submit something there, although, I did once, and it was accepted. Mostly though, I tend to believe that Op-Ed news is not even remotely a place that Free-Market Values are even respected, much less appreciated.<<
The point of publishing at OpEdNews.com, as I have stated elsewhere, is to reach beyond the “choir”, those who are already or mostly convinced of the superiority of voluntary trade to mutual benefit, which necessarily is without interference from outside parties, those not agreed to by the trading individuals. I am convinced that the vast majority of those contributing articles and/or comments at OEN are desirous of a better society, though most do not understand how to achieve or even what constitutes the optimal society.
BTW, your blog has a block to check for notification of follow-up comments by email – but it did not work for your comment to which I am now responding after being curious and checking back myself.
I’m not interested in debating with you. Sorry!
Don’t know why the mail notification thing doesn’t work. Works for others.
…and please, don’t try to bait me into a argument. Else I will ban you.
Pat. I think we have had a failure to communicate. I sat here at my computer and wondered why you would respond as you did above, threatening to ban me, suggesting that I wanted to “bait [you] into an argument” – despite the fact that the dictionary meaning of argument is “discourse intended to persuade”, and I do not (and did not) engage in any other type. I even wrote some to myself about it – a possible entry to my Kitty Reflects on MoreLife.
After 4 complete readings of this exchange I am now concluding that in your second comment you were giving me negative assessments about *where* my submitted article, Tax/Regulation Protests Are Not Enough was published, but *nothing* about *what* I wrote (something not at all clear to me by your original brief 3 words), although that is what I had requested. Consequently part of my response is not applicable as written and for this I apologize:
<< So if I understand you, your original comment, “I agree, sorta”, now has become “I don’t like them”. …. This is very confusing to say the least. By what process did you go from the one to the other? And further, to this “I don’t like them”, my reply is “why not?” And please be specific as to what you object and why, since that would be the only meaningful answer.<<
It’s your blog of course and if you do not wish to respond to something a commenter has said/asked (eg. “Without stating on what you do and do not agree of what I wrote here and/or in my article at OpEdNews.com, your 3 word reply, “I agree, sorta” is vacuous and vacillating.”), that is always your prerogative. Since you appear to want quick snippet comments/replies from readers to which you make the same type while I seek and am quite willing to make the time for reasoned discussion, I will read and comment elsewhere. Please note that this not “bait”, to use your wording, simply a plain reasoned and courteous reply with apology as appropriate included.