I hate to waste my monthly allowance on a subject that should be obvious to the editors – especially since there is so much going on that is worthy of comment – but here it is: David Ogilvie (letter, 11-12) used the term “tea-bagger” to describe a group of people who are exercising their rights under the First Amendment in opposition to the “progressive” agenda, out-of-control spending and onerous debt imposed on our descendants.
These people do not describe themselves with that term, since it is not only pejorative, but obscene. In all other cases, your paper uses the names that groups use to describe themselves, not those used by the enemies of those groups; but not for conservatives, who compose a plurality of political orientation.
Shame on you for your obvious bias.
JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.