"A post-partisan expression of outrage," is how Reynolds described it. Perhaps it is more accurate to say it was a way to fill the void left by no meaningful or articulate opposition to what is happening in Washington.

In a crisis such as this one, where one party is swept aside despite doing essentially a smaller version what the party that took power has done, political opposition has trouble finding a voice. For a history lesson, look no further than the 1930s. An op-ed by the Wall Street Journal's Bernard Kilgore, written on May 11, 1934, said the real problem back then was that opponents to Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal lacked leadership and organization. "The opposition is neither united on an alternative program nor in a stand against any program at all (in the sense that such a stand would represent a move against the prevalent idea that the national government must always 'do something.')"

And there you have the meaning of the tea parties. They were ways for people to tell Washington to do nothing, at a time when neither political party seems willing to do so.

If the president's policies succeed, the protests probably will fade away. More likely, however, they will continue to smolder, fed by the oxygen of the Internet and radio, come rain, snow or sunshine.

Jay Evensen is editor of the Deseret News editorial page. E-mail: even@desnews.com. Visit his blog at deseretnews.com/blogs.