Fighting the Culture of Dependence

[unixronin]

Michael Barone, senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner, writes about what the Tea Parties are really about.

(Hint:  It doesn't involve hating anyone, hunting wolves from helicopters, funding from the Bavarian Illuminati, or any of the other smears you've heard.)

Comments

[johnkzin.livejournal.com]

A lot of the tea-party-ists don't really seem to be arguing against dependence. Nor for independence. What they seem to be arguing against is change, without regard to whether or not each change is for the better, whether or not the status quo was good, and whether or not it was the actual status quo. Which isn't really anything new. It's really "conservatism as usual".

[fruitylips.livejournal.com]

Which might be the dumbest thing said about them that didn't include the worst 'racist', so congrats there.

They're arguing against and for quite a lot. Finding out what will take you about 3 min if you bothered to find out.

Of course, you probably believe that many of these same people never said a word about government spending until a black man was elected, too. (Tom Daschle would disagree with you. He'd know, since they were hounding him at the time...).

[johnkzin.livejournal.com]

I've looked at what they've said. And I've looked at it for more than 3 minutes. And, I stand by my summary.

Same crap, different label.

[fruitylips.livejournal.com]

Sorry to hear about your functional illiteracy. We're all praying for you.

[johnkzin.livejournal.com]

If all you can come up with is a strawman attack (I never said anything with regard to Obama/black-man-elected), follow it up with an ad hominem attack, and no actual substantive statements, then you're really only undermining your own credibility, Chris.