Tea Bag Party: Tax Revolt, Revolution or Hot Air Rhetoric?

I couldn't agree with you more about it's leaderless qualities. It is a patchwork quilt of angry persons, angry at the maturity of the world, and the forward movement of HUMAN qualities. And because thyr ARE leaderless, it makes them all the more frightening.

You are so right.

Harvey,
There will undoubtedly be many politicians who will try and capitalize on this movement.

The estimates are that upwards of 500 thousand Americans gathered across our country on tax day to protest the outrageous spending taking place within our federal government.

Those citizens have been met with unbelievable opposition from the left, with belittling and ridicule, name calling and in general hostility.

I suggest from the actions of the left, that leaderless or not these protesters are seen as a threat.

Dear Michael. I read your article dated April 20, 2009 regarding the Tea Party (please note it is not Tea Bag Party, but Tea Party. The application of the term teabaggers is offensive). It's interesting how the different area tea parties played out throughout the country.

You use the term "angry white people" and mention no other ethnic groups represented except yourself and "the other brother." The group in Baton Rouge was a little more ethnically mixed, although only few who were black. How do I know? I walked through the crowd (estimated at 3,000) and talked to numerous people, asked them about their signs, asked them what they thought of the group.

I don't know why you viewed the Atlanta group as a mob. While the Baton Rouge was boisterous, it was a peaceful group, a friendly group, and a group united in their feeling of the misdirection of this country.

You say that just five months ago the will of the people was clear. You didn't indicate that nearly 50% of the population did NOT vote for Barack Obama, and a small group did not vote for either major candidates. I don't see how clarity could even be brought forth in this discussion.

"Their side lost" unfortunately IS clear. But what did they lose? They lost a belief and dream of a different direction for our future, a direction with no decisive proof of whether it would be good or bad, just like the direction from the "side" that won.

The Baton Rouge group understood that the take off of the Boston Tea Party theme was in no way related to "taxation without representation," but related to frustration over taxes, just like the Boston Tea Party, taxes beyond the scope of income taxes. The relationship was more in spirit than application. There was frustration over the debt being applied to our children's children, the bailouts, the radical left cabinet appointments from someone indicating he would reach across party lines, and a host of other frustrations related to the policies of Obama.

The objection to the stimulus money? Your analogy is off base and implies racial overtones, which is an unfair and biased interpretation. I remember clearly who George Wallace was and you are attempting to take the Tea Party movement in a direction not intended by the participants of the Tea Party movement, particularly in relation to the group I participated in. I've been reading communications and plans for the Tea Party for months and never came across the talking points you have brought out.

Anarchistic? None of the speakers in Baton Rouge wanted to overthrow the government. The speakers talked about ways to work within the framework of the government, to become more involved in the government in the areas of their concern. The conservative right did not say the constitution was not working, but did posit about the death of states' rights.

Mr. Murdroch is not invested in this grassroots movement. Mr. Obama's ticket progressed with a grassroots movement. Was there an equally dubious party affiliated with that group? Not all memes are bad, Michael.

There IS trouble in this land, Michael. Trouble when a left wing group applies disgusting terms such as "teabagging" and deems a right wing group to be too stupid to have their own beliefs; that surely these beliefs must have been bought and paid for by the likes of Mr. Murdroch.

I wish you could have come to the Baton Rouge Tea Party. I would have been happy to stand by your side and introduce you to my friends in the group and offer you the opportunity to sit and listen to individuals and what they carried in their hearts and minds. Whether that would change your mind or not, I don't know. But Michael, it is my personal opinion that you walked away with all the wrong ideas. And that's sad.

Thanks for sharing..

Michael, I think you've expressed my concerns totally. Anger and anarchy will not achieve anything good for our country. And it's so unnecessary when the entities in the government are so tuned to the voice of the people right now.

The structure of our government, which has served us at varying levels since it's institution in the 1770s, is perfect for an administration of smart, caring people like Pres. Obama and for the majority, which elected him.

I don't think he's perfect, or super-human, nor do I agree with every advisor he's selected, but he is the man for this season and I appreciate his sacrifice and his family's sacrifice. I think the people to whom he appeals are in the majority in this country.

I also think you are correct that there is a dangerous faction that makes up a small part of the minority. What I see has a mirror in my own past. They are like my controlling and dangerous ex-husband. If he could not control me then he was willing to destroy me, all in the name of the same love he professed when he romanced me into the relationship. I equate their "patriotism" with that controlling and abusive "love."

These are two excellent, thought-provoking essays you have posted on the "tea party" movement which has reared its ugly, dangerous head.

TO CATHI: Michael's report of the tea party at his town is the same one I would write of the one in my town. Here there were skin head white supremicists in the group and obviously part of the structure of the movement. Others were the kind of people who still want George Bush JR.

However, what I read as a quote from one of the organizers in New York City, their focus was not against the current administration, but a plea for less spending which, admittedly is not currently being cut, because of the mess that has to be cleaned up first. It's like if your house catches on fire, the cost of clean-up and rebuilding is going to be large and must be done before you can live frugally in the refurbished house for a number of years because of what you lost.

It would be well to realize that the makeup of these tea parties was different around the country. Just because you saw one thing in Baton Rouge does not follow that other opinions of other gatherings in other areas are not accurate. And if you were among friends that is different from being among angry strangers.

This is not a cohesive movement across the country. It was not even that in my own state. Boise's group was simply a celebration of the original tea party and a plea for tax regulation overhaul, which President Obama has already spoken of as a necessary goal.
The reason it's so dangerous, in my opinion, is that whatever leaders there may be, such as Mr. Murdock and Rush Limbaugh, are willing to USE the small factions, promising them what they want to hear in the very same way the Bush movement used the GOP and the Christian fundamentalists and then took off in his own direction once the election was over.

Thank you Sandy F., for coming to my aid with respect to the short sightedness of Cathi.

Sandy,
Your post is a perfect example of the lefts hypocrisy, while Bush was in office the Democrats called protests against his policies a patriotic duty but now that a Democrat holds the office you are only patriotic if you walk lock step with him.

War protesters are not criticized because the left agrees with their ideals and besides they are simply exercising their constitutional right to protest.

But let a group of conservatives protest and they become "dangerous".

Sandy, you are always going to have people from all ends of the spectrum within major groups. The majority of contacts I have from various Tea Party movements throughout the country reported a lack of any appearences of skin heads. How did they identify themselves to you, by the way? You do realize that many people came specifically to be identified as right wing extremists directly because of the DHS document? My own son, an Army veteran, carried a sign saying "Proud Right-Wing Extremist." Is he a right-wing extremist? No. He's a moderate. But he, too, was angered at the clumsy wording in this document which has caused so much derision. No, skinheads are NOT part of the structure of this movement despite liberal media claims and talking points, and the laughable report from Homeland Security. Then you equate skin heads with people who still want George Bush? It's pretty clear your opinion of George Bush but is it fair to tie them in with skin heads?

As with the group in New York City, the focus is not against the current administration, but it is indeed against many of the policies of the current administration. That doesn't preclude other agendas within each state. I'm sure you understand each state is unique and has different needs, which is why states' rights, at one time, were important to our country.

I saw several things in Baton Rouge and have direct contact with groups in other parts of my state and other states. Yes, I was among friends, all angry five of them. The rest were strangers, angry strangers. The term "a peaceful protest" does not disqualify anger, otherwise what is the point of a protest?

Grassroots groups are rarely a cohesive movement, which is why they are grassroots. This is a beginning, not an ending.

I understand Obama has spoken, but as with many of the things he had promised during his campaign, and as reality has dawned very differently, his speaking does not encourage faith in his actions.

It's very odd that you, and others, would attempt to make Mr. Murdock and Rush Limbaugh into leaders. Your view is very skewed and follows the talking points, lock, stock and barrel, shall we say, of the liberal media. Believe it or not, there are conservatives who are actually able to think for themselves without listening to either. But it appears most from the left has labeled Tea Party participants as hebetudinous parrots.

I think the people to whom Obama appeals are those who hated Mr. Bush so very much that anything would be acceptable. They may be in the slim majority in this country, but there is an almost equal number of citizens who don't see the same appeal. That has to be obvious with the tallies on popular vote. And I have seen liberals attempt to mock the patriotism of conservatives before, many times, as you have done. This is also a cause of the gaping, infected wound and deep divide within this country. "My patriotism is better than your patriotism" seems like playground tactics.

No matter who voted for who and why, Mr. Obama is our president. We'd just like to see him stop apologizing for our country and tune into the other half of our citizens. Something he seems too preoccupied to do right now.

I'm sorry, dear Michael. My vision is excellent! And before you label my point of view as short-sighted, you will need to revise your statement:

AS ALWAYS COMMENTS ARE WELCOME ON BOTH SITES AS BOTH HAVE DIFFERENT AUDIDENCES AND MAY NOT SEE YOUR COMMENTS ON GATHER.

I was at a tea-freedom-party gathering of proud Americans in Albany NY. These people were not the usual semi-professional protesters who attend anti-war and pro-union marches. These are people with real jobs, most have never attended a protest march before.
As usual the obama-cons and the Obama butt-kissing media will dismiss these patriots as racist-tea-baggers{sc-- bagg---} actually said about these patriots.
When a racist like Louie Farrakhan leads a Jew- white hating march people like Mr. Harvey applaud it- Leftist Media Applaud it-Obama's Marxist-anti American ACORN group hold demonstrations against private businesses, that's just fine, liberal anti- American protest are OKAY, THESE SOCIALIST ARE JUST PRACTICING FREE-SPEECH.
Mr. Harvey, around America, taxpayers have had enough. Fed up with "excessive ----spending- both parties"-taxes, fees-surcharges government out of control.
These people-300,000 of them spread throughout America- not paid to show-up, represent a kind of energy that our politics hasn't seen lately, an influx of new activists.
To all the people who are fed up-grass-root citizens, disgusted with the borrow and spend lunacy that is Washington today, spend like there is no tomorrow approach. It's your chance to be part of an authentic popular protest movement, one that just might save America from the greed an ineptitude of the folks who have been running it into the ground.
So if you have had enough, visit the next tea-party protest in your area. Ignore the haters whom will call you racist, just because you care about America.
HEY-HEY-HO-HO-HO, Big Government gotta GO!
BUSH OR OBAMA LED !!!!

I attended the Tea Party in Warner Robins. It was multi-racial, pleasant, and very enlightening. It's good to know that people are keeping an eye on government. Our nation has been too lax in the past... it's time to start taking an active role in OUR government.

I did not get to the tea party in my area due to circumstances beyond control but I did intend to go. I am not sure whether the movement is grass roots or not but I certainly do not fit the mold that you seem to have made of the group in your area Michael.

I did mail a tea bag to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. and I am sick to my soul over the distress our nation is in. I do not hate anyone nor do I wish anyone any kind of ill. I just feel that our great country is being led into an abyss of moral corruption and financial ruin and somehow I must do what I can to help turn it around.

I cannot see where Mr. Obama's leadership is taking us out of the situation. If I did, I would be out front supporting him but, giving him the benefit of any doubt about his sincerity, I feel in my gut that he is misdirected. There is no way we can spend ourselves out of the hole we are in and I think I have as much to lose as anyone else, so I have as much right to voice my opinion as anyone else.

I respect other people's opinion but that does not mean I have to agree with them.

The movement, as I understand it , is simply a means of speaking to our leadership in a way that they cannot ignore. For those who decide to do so, may I say that you do so at your own risk. Election day is not that far ahead.

M. C.did you read the article that was written? If so what are your specific objections to it? Compare and contrast what the article states with the view taken by Cathi. I believe her point to be totally off base in that she took exceptions to my view of an event that I witnessed and that she did not witness. How smart is that? I have no opinion of what occurred in Baton Rouge because I did not witness it and will accept her view of what happen there. Yet her initially comments were not objective but wanted me to see what occurred at an event that I did not witness. Moreover, my article makes it plan that I attended this event as a citizen journalist and not as a participate of the event. I was not there to support or to object to what took place. I simply recorded what I saw and sought to put it into context for my public. You are invited to leave a comment on The Harvey Journal as that audience is quite different from the Gather audience as they are not out to support a particular position and are objective in their assessment of what is read. I would like to see how your comments hold up to such scrunity. Certainly Cathi's initial comment could not hold water because they are very subjective and attempted to force her experience upon the experience that I had in Atlanta. I kindly invite you to read the entire article and answer the questions I posed above and let the discussion begin.

Very good point, thanks for posting this. Very true.

M C., the first statement relates to the fact that more the Atlanta group was comprised of mostly northern transplants and not born and breed southerners. The reference to Gov. Wallace has to do with a charismatic leader like him. Ins. Commissioner John Oxendine came close to delivering the bacon on this point at the Atlanta rally. Please don't misunderstand me too quickly. This article took off from the earlier one where most people thought that the crowd was mainly southern red necks who had issued threats to me. I made use of an expression that was commonplace in the South following the Civil War to make people understand that they were wrong in assuming this was a southern movement. Perhaps white people should not wear their feelings on their sleeves, then they would be less likely to get bend out of shape over descriptive adejectives that correctly describes how they come off to people not in their culture. If you were there you might have seen that all that is needed to propel this movement is a charismatic leader. Mr. Wallace was a good populist speaker. He spoke to the needs and interest of his audience. This is the content that you should view this verbage.

Clifford N., thanks for your comments. Did you read the articles? I think that you as did many people misunderstood others misunderstood the source of the anger and where it is being directed. Many people who commented on the first article thought that it had to do with a crowd of angry southerners threaten to do bodily harm to other Americans. First the crowd I witnessed was comprised of mostly northerners who have been transplanted in the South and their anger is directed at the government. I heard talk of succeeding from the Union and talk of over throwing the government because the government is taxing the people and spending too much money. This is dangerous rhetoric. On another point, you must at least give Mr. Obama's plan time to work. If we are in no better position this time next year, then I say it is time to get busy and rouse the congress out of their comfortable seats. It is simply too early in his administration to down so hard on his plans to correct what is essentially an inherited problem. He did not create it, but we expect him to fix it in a hurry. Please Clifford, even the Lord seldom works that quickly.

Dan E., it is one thing to protest against a policy of the government and it is quite another thing to seek the overthrow of the government or to promote succession if your group does not get its way. You do not make a good comparison.

Micky d and Tammy, I agree that protest is an American as apple pie. However, the danger is in the message. I heard lots of talk about succession and overthrowing the government and I believe that such talk is dangerous.

Michael, I'm terribly sorry I took your bait. I now see that my response was exactly what you wanted so you could immediately attempt to discredit all I had said. Apparently someone was supposed to come to your article and give a calm and considered point of view and relate how this group was not full of dangerous skin heads and white supremicists. Although there were a few bald guys so there is a chance they may have been there disguised as ordinary citizens. I now see that your statement about attending this rally as a citizen journalist was merely a feint to cause the responders to assume you came in totally unbiased with no agenda. I realize now that I was naive in assuming such and I certainly apologize for that mistake. It won't happen again.

I believe her point to be totally off base in that she took exceptions to my view of an event that I witnessed and that she did not witness. How smart is that?

I didn't take exceptions to what you viewed, Michael. I took exceptions to your racial hatred displayed in your comments.

Certainly Cathi's initial comment could not hold water because they are very subjective and attempted to force her experience upon the experience that I had in Atlanta.

Below I have listed my initial comment. What part of my initial comment could not hold water and how did I attempt to force my experience upon the experience that you had in Atlanta. I was accepting what you had witnessed, albeit with the now clear agenda, and was comparing and contrasting with my own personal experience.

Dear Michael. I read your article dated April 20, 2009 regarding the Tea Party (please note it is not Tea Bag Party, but Tea Party. The application of the term teabaggers is offensive). It's interesting how the different area tea parties played out throughout the country.

I simply recorded what I saw and sought to put it into context for my public.

Now I'm curious as to who your public is that you would want to characterize the Tea Party Movement as teabaggers and dangerous. This statement, this mob objected to the government cramming stimulus money down their throats, similar to my junior high school classmates objecting to me being crammed down their throats four decades ago, displays your black racist agenda as definitively as white on rice.

Let’s make no mistake about it, this mob is not controlled by the Republican Party. It is essentially leaderless at the grass roots level.

Why should a multi-party, multi-ethnic movement be controlled by the Republican Party? And being leaderless at the grass roots level, do you actually understand what a grass roots level is? You might want to check out your Funk & Wagnels (sorry, I'm dating myself).

The reference to Gov. Wallace has to do with a charismatic leader like him.

Don't pretend you don't think conservatives are stupid, Michael. You very specifically chose the terms carpet bagger and Gov. Wallace. Let's not beat around the Bush here. Wallace was for southern segregationists and you are well aware of that. There were many other charismatic leaders you could have chosen. You could have chosen Martin Luther King, Jr. He was a charismatic leader. Or Huey Long, a better charismatic leader choice for your example, who truly rose up from the grass roots level and became a national figure until he, too, was assassinated.

Perhaps white people should not wear their feelings on their sleeves, then they would be less likely to get bend out of shape over descriptive adejectives that correctly describes how they come off to people not in their culture.

Yeah, there's that unbiased citizen journalist you were talking about. I'm hoping black people don't wear their feelings on their sleeves because I'd be afraid they would get bend out of shape when someone calls them on their racist agenda. I'm surprised to find the amount of bigotry in your words, Michael. I take offense at any bigotry and hate speech. In this article, I didn't start the fire but I am willing to meet it's ugly head and stand up against it.

You want to discuss your article now? Let's get going. Or do you want to continue with the disguise of a citizen journalist/race baiter? By the way, am I also invited to put my comments on The Harvey Journal? My question is, would you delete them? Or is your readership closely groomed along your POV? Or is your readership truly interested in hearing opposing opinions?

Michael,
I can see that there are some here who seem to have personal agendas protruding from their comments and I do not wish to get into such but I also do not want to be misunderstood myself.

It is not that I do not wish to give Mr. Obama the time to work us out of the problems we are in. I would be delighted to see him do so. What I am trying to get across to you and what I think the majority of those in the tea party movement are saying, is that I am convinced Mr. Obama is taking us down a road that will never solve the problem. On the contrary, what he is doing is leading further down the road we have been on for about 50 years. It is the kind of reckless taxation and spending that he is promoting that has gotten us where we are and is only accelerating our total destruction financially and morally.

I am not castigating Mr. Obama, the democratic party or the republican party. I am condemning corrupt politicians who seem neither to understand or care what they are doing to our country. I am for the election of some honest and qualified people who will truly put the interest of our nation FIRST. We have next to none who seem to fit the bill in office at present.

Only an aroused and informed voting pool can do anything about it and that is the aim of the tea parties.

I just love it when Liberals with no clue to reality try to tell others what is going on. They show their contempt for those that actually try and do something, that they them selves have no care about.
"THe White Crowd"... so what about the Legal Hispaniocs, Blcaks, Asians, Arabs, and all the others that attend the rallies? Ohhh that is tight, these are just Conservitives, so they are racest... Well the fact is, these protests are about the Government, Comrad Obama is just one of many that has dug into the wounds suffered by the people of this country. The fact you have no clue to what is going on, does not in the least surprise me.
Here is Tulsa, on the 15th, I talked to a White guy that voted for Obama, and regretts he was so fooled by the media about it. Yes he is a Liberal Democrat, and yes he is at the Protests, and yes he can actually think, unlike some here...

Hi MC. Please clarify what my agenda is.

MC, I can understand what you mean as being a product of our upbringing, our education. That's so true.

I think this post seems to be everybody reacting to everybody. But at some point that has to stop. I appreciate that you recognize that, also.

Ohhh I do want to say, just so it is known, that in every Tea Party, there has been a wide diversity of races, and unlike the left here, it is not just a "White Crowd".

Mr. Harvey you speak a truth that many dare not speak of. Thank you for your forthright account of this Tax Revolt. It saddens me....but as I keep saying the more outrageous they get is a accurate measure that President Obama and his administration is on the correct path to change.

My work stands on its own merits. I stand my what I witness. I never said the crowd was a racist crowd. In fact because some perceived in the first article that the crowd was mad up of racist, I went to great pains to describe the crowd that I saw and to make it clear that the crowd was not racist in its approach, not to be nor to the other black person that I saw in Atlanta (which is the only tea bag party I can speak for). The salient facts remains: the over whelming complexion of the crowd was white, the mood of the crowd was angry, the anger of the crowd was directed at the government. I believe that unlike both the liberal and conservative press, I accurately reported what I saw occur. That was a dangerous crowd in my mind because it talked about withdrawing from the Union and revolting from the government like was done in 1773. Surely you all recall that the actions of 1773 in the Boston Harbor lead to a bloody revolution. I am just reporting what I saw and what I heard. If that is not the message that the planners of the Tea Bag Party intended, then they should revamp their thrust in subsequent parties. You may take my words out of context all day long, but the fault is not with me it is with the event as it was carried out. Change the message and the message that I report will be different.

I'm sorry, dear Michael. My vision is excellent! And before you label my point of view as short-sighted, you will need to revise your statement: Cathi

Cathi, this comment relates to your initial comments where you essentially disagreed with my reporting of an event that occurred in Atlanta, Georgia because it did not compare with what you witnessed in Baton Rouge. I think to take an approach like that is extremely shortsighted. It would be like me writing that your vision was skewered because you did not see what I saw in Atlanta. To that extent, I stand behind my original comment. However, I could have described your comments as arrogant because I described what occurred in my town differently than what you observed in yours. Before you get too critical with me over this point review your own words.

?Cathi? L. with respect to your comments posted on , Apr 20, 2009, 10:33pm EDT: First I did not lay out any bait for you are anyone else. I wrote an article. You chose to respond to it. You could have simply written your on article about your experiences at the Baton Rouge Tea Bag Party (perhaps you did and I missed it), Secondly that article has to be read in conjunction with the initial report of the Tea Bag Party. George Wallace was used in the second article because he was used to illustrate a point in the first article. My junior high school mates were used in the second article because they were used in the first article to illustrate a point, that although this angry crowd of 13-14 years yelled at the top of their lungs against government intrusion into their lives, 44 years later we realize that integration did not taste so bad after all. We may come to find that government stimulus money does not taste so bad in the years to come as well. Third, the second article was prompted because many who read the first one thought that the crowd was comprised of racist southerners. The first article did not say that but many of the comments I received had that tone about them so I decided to set the record straight. I found more Yankees in attendance in Atlanta than southerners. The term carpetbagger was not designed to offend, but to dispel the image of the old south as being full of southern racist. Fourth, the first article talked about the anger of the crowd and many readers believed that I was in some sort of personal danger as a result of being in that crowd. The second article wanted to dispel that notion and to make it clear that the anger of the crowd was directed at the government. Now I did find this fact troubling. I believe that all the talk I heard about succeeding from the Union and overthrowing the government is dangerous talk coming from a crowd as resourceful as the one I observed.

I regret that you were offended by the words I selected to use in this article and for any misunderstanding that occurred by publishing my account of Atlanta's Tea Bag Party.

M C , Apr 20, 2009, 11:58pm EDT, M C , Apr 21, 2009, 12:01am EDT ,M C , Apr 21, 2009, 12:10am EDT

With respect to the comments posted at the above times: See my response of Apr 21, 2009, 7:06am EDT above. I believe it adequately responses to your concerns as you and Cathi have stripped me naked to continue your descriptive term. Moreover, I regret that you were offended by the words I selected to use in this article and for any misunderstanding that occurred by publishing my account of Atlanta's Tea Bag Party.

This post has received far more interest than I thought it would. I wonder how much objection did the national networks get over their reporting of this event. I dare say that I did not see one news reporter in the crowd gathering the pulse of the public like I did. Read The Harvey Journal daily, it is on the cutting edge of becoming the best political journal on the web: http:theharveyjournal.blogspot.com

Michael, are anti-Obama white folk-welcome on that blog?.
Please to all the people{grass-roots} people who love America the Constitution and who recognize the miracle that America is, keep taking to the streets, in the short run, this is likely to provide at least a bit of resistence to the borrow and spend "dems and repubs "who are out of control. Mr. Harvey if your concern is about racist in America, hwere are a few you should write about in your BLOG. Al Sharpton, Rev. Wright. Louie Farakahn,the new Black Panthers.

Micky d., you are welcome to read the blog. It has nothing to do with racism, and everything to do with maintaining our system of representative government. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me. Do you have anything else to tell me?

Micky, lets be fair about this.

NAACP, KKK, Al Sharpton, Rev. Wright. Louie Farakahn, Black Panthers, Holy Aryans, Red Bandanas (Mexican hate group, against Whites), and the rest of the hate groups that are not allowed at those meatings.

Michael, if you'll notice, usually the Hate groups side with the Democrats, and the only reason they are even being place with us, is because of Comrad Obama. I personally have yet to talk to anyone in those meatings that dislikes the guy for his color or race, it is all politics. But in all honesty, hate groups don't usually follow the Conservatives, because they believe in real equality, unlike the left that uses the words to draw in the uninformed.

NO!

Have fun guys.

MC! LOL!

Wow, returning to read the comments has been an education in human charachter or the lack thereof=(

hugs

Purrrrrrrrrrr~Genki dashite~Nantoka naru-yo! S., contrast these comments with the ones left on The Harvey Journal. It makes you wonder what is the actual make up of human kind that frequent Gather.com.

I had to come back and read these.

LOL

It makes you wonder what is the actual make up of human kind that frequent Gather.com.

Or The Harvey Journal.

I was wondering how well groomed your readership would be. Sorry Michael your comment about human kind was out of line.

I stand by my comment.

Apparently so do I.

Good for you.

And back at ya! ;)

Thanks you for the confirmation. Are you always this slow?

Your grandfather sounds like he was an interesting man!

Thanks for sharing this.