by the Editor 7/26/16
New submission rules for this site:
#1) No article will be accepted that merely regurgitates the day’s headlines and in effect says “shame on them.” No article will be accepted that sounds as if it is talking about broad political philosophy (a subject that is not at all taboo) but, in effect, is about regurgitating the day’s headlines and saying “shame on you.” The only political articles accepted (and encouraged) will be those that are more journalistic or activist in nature. I want to read about reports of what you (or someone you know…or someone you’ve read about) are doing to materially promote the conservative/Christian/American world view and/or are doing to oppose the Left. No article will be accepted there is purely analysis, for we conservatives are truly a victim of that old adage of “paralysis by analysis.”
You needn’t expunge current events, broad political philosophizing, or analysis from your articles. But such things should exist to highlight and reinforce the real-world (firsthand or secondhand) events that you are writing about. If your child (or the child of someone you know, or a specific report of a child, say, from Australia) gets in trouble in school for pointing a Pop-Tart at someone and saying “Bang,” then by all means write about it. We need to know what’s going on out there in the real world (and the world of Washington DC is not the real world, so few of us need a blow-by-blow account of the latest outrage).
But even in case of the Pop-Tart gun from some region not of your own home town, it would be far better to write about a local school board meeting, PTA meeting, or teacher-student meeting that you actually attended where you directly heard nonsense views from a school official and/or responded to those views with opposing views. It would be highly instructive in such a case to then tell us how that all went, what tips you might have for opposing those views, etc., for that is the real weakness of the conservative movement. We are too much a debating society and not enough an activist one. Make broad use of pseudonyms all you like. I understand that the truth can be dangerous. Change names to protect the innocent. Whatever.
#2) Think about opening your wallet and contributing even $5.00 for the maintenance of this site. I don’t think it’s fair to “soak the rich” in this regard, not that either Pat or I are rich. We are not rich accept in family and friends (he far more than I). But I think it’s high time that some of you had some skin in the game. And having some skin does not guarantee that your mediocre article will be published. If you want to buy influence, go see Donald Trump for advice on that.
#3) Pat Tarzwell (our Koch Brother…he purchased the press) and Annie (a StubbornFellow) are exempt from these rules, but I encourage them to write about real-word stories (as Pat has done regarding his Big Adventure at the GOP convention).
#4) The Editor is free to break these rules if a submission is singularly concise, clear, relevant, and engaging.
If you have questions, let me know. No one is being singled out or picked on. These rules apply the same to the Editor as they do to Glenn the Greater. And the Editor may or may not have (or take) the time to personally correspond with you about why your article didn’t make it. If I had a staff (a dream I long ago gave up), that would be different. But I don’t have a staff. I have to carefully manage my time, such as I ever really do.
Brad is editor and chief disorganizer of StubbornThings.
About Author Author Archive Email
Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (924 views)