In response to:

To Punch a Liberal

OHPerry Wrote: Apr 29, 2013 7:18 AM
Please read again. You seemed to have missed several salient points. Very little credit for moral authority was given and wanting to punch someone in the nose is title of the article.
Tacitus X Wrote: Apr 29, 2013 12:14 PM
Your appraisal is of little value since you don't seem to understand how one makes a case. An obvious difference in our posts is that I support my conclusions with quotations taken directly from the column in question. You merely present your subjective impressions. BTW, the titles are typically dubbed by the editors, not the columnists. While the title slapped on the column reads "To Punch a Liberal" the actual line in the column says "[it] made me want to go punch a liberal…or to be more precise, to punch liberal moral bullies." Wanting to punch someone is not the same thing as actually landing a punch, literally or figuratively. My point is that conservatives & libertarians need to stay on offense rather than try to play defense.
OHPerry Wrote: Apr 29, 2013 10:48 AM
Based on what you just wrote, huh? Let's just say that I don't think you've made your case.
Tacitus X Wrote: Apr 29, 2013 9:42 AM
I'm happy to help you out. Mitchell states "This is not to deny the role of government as a change agent. The Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, and their continued enforcement have given us a better America." Thus, my first two sentences. Next he writes "Suffering makes us sorry. Hardship makes us sad... we are human beings and we wish well to other human beings, whatever their race, creed, religion, national origin, or choices in the pursuit of happiness" - in other words "boo hoo, please don't hate us. We don't mean to be racist." Thus my second two sentences. A little more punching and a lot less whining, thanks.