Revolts the Tea Party-Obsessed Corporate Media Overlooked

[grandpa]

I'm not going to post the whole article, though I expect you all can read it. Here is the gist of it, though:

Some of the most undercovered stories of 2010 were actions taken by ordinary people standing up for a more just and equitable society. People are taking to the streets on a regular basis across the country, but unlike the corporate-sponsored Tea Party -- whose spokespeople can't answer basic questions about the deficit they claim to be so worried about -- those who believe in health care, affordable housing, economic justice, education, a living wage, and a better life for all rarely, if ever, get the attention they deserve. Instead, the media, even the alternative media, spent the better part of last year obsessing over the Tea Party and manufactured personalities like Sarah Palin, while ignoring people like 85-year-old Julia Botello.

Last month, Botello was among 22 people arrested for blocking the doors of a Chase Bank branch in downtown Los Angeles. Over 200 people, many of them homeowners facing foreclosure and eviction, took part in the action organized by Home Defenders League and the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment.
85-Year-Old-Woman Arrested for Bank Protest -- 6 Revolts the Tea Party-Obsessed Corporate Media Overlooked | | AlterNet

What are your thoughts?

Grandpa h.

[Dan74]

The main stream media also ignores every single anti-war protest, environmental protests, and anything that doesn't involve boring conservative noise.

[Thanatos]

*angry grumbles emanate from the center-left*

Because maybe if they don't cover us we'll go away?

[Angry Citizen]

Yep, 200 people doing a stupid protest against a banking institute, without which they would never have had a home in the first place, is certainly worthy of national news.

[Dan74]

Yep, 200 people doing a stupid protest against a banking institute, without which they would never have had a home in the first place, is certainly worthy of national news.

And the "tea party" is? Normally a big bunch of angry old people wouldn't get much media attention due to it being generally uninteresting and not out of the ordinary. The 'tea party' consists of about 300,000 members, which is roughly the same amount as the Green Party of the USA. The Green Party, unlike the tea party, actually lays their views out clearly, takes action rather than waving signs with stupid phrases on them, while receiving almost no media attention. What makes the tea party different from the Republican Party of the USA? The fact that they nominate anti-masturbation non-witches? The fact that they try to kill politicians who disagree with them? The whole tea party thing has never appealed to me in the slightest. Sorry, but I like to go beyond little sign-waving parties and actually take direct action.

[Angry Citizen]

And the "tea party" is?

A group of people whose number exceeds the protest mentioned in the OP by at least three, probably more like four orders of magnitude. I am equally aghast at the media attention given to the Westboro Baptist Church as I would be if the anti-banking protest were given any attention.

The Tea Party represents not a distinct party in and of itself, like the Green Party, but rather a fundamental political spectrum shift of an already powerful political entity: the Republican party. It is news-worthy for precisely this reason. It represents the fact that the Republicans are moving further to the right. This has tremendous implications for the near-future of politics, and I believe it could also represent a change in the modern party structure -- either by discrediting the far-right and facilitating a collective move to the left, or should it prove popular, widening the schism between the two parties. I believe the logical consequence of the Tea Party is the former. In short, the Tea Party is doing more for your cause than your Green Party could ever do, because the Green Party has never held federal (and probably state) office, and never will. We both know this. So by all means, scream about the Green Party's lack of media coverage; scream about the bank protests; but in this case, the level of Tea Party media coverage is spot-on. These 'angry old people' will shake the foundations of politics for years to come.

[Dan74]

You've failed to show me exactly what the 'tea party' is, as everyone else who supports it has. What is it? Republicans? Libertarians? Where was the tea party for the Republican surge in 1981? 2000? What have they done besides giving the Republican Party a slightly different look? Doesn't the fact that it is largely funded by big business make it a completely non-grassroots organization?

I don't see the appeal, and I never will, because it is just the Republican Party. These people would never elect a Libertarian candidate, because that's not who they are. God forbid they have to do something besides make noise on street corners.

[Angry Citizen]

You've failed to show me exactly what the 'tea party' is, as everyone else who supports it has. What is it? Republicans? Libertarians? Where was the tea party for the Republican surge in 1981? 2000? What have they done besides giving the Republican Party a slightly different look?

If you'd read what I said earlier, you'd note that I support this viewpoint, to an extent, though I believe the rightward shift in the Republican party is more than cosmetic. The Tea Party is not libertarian at all. I do not support it. Like I said, the Tea Party is not a distinct political entity. It is a representation of the far-right Republican wing, forcing candidates to appeal to the ghastly policies of the Christian conservative bloc even moreso than during the Reagan sweep and the GWB era.

Please read what I write. Your posts comes across as though you were responding to a caricature of my political viewpoints, not the political science theories I laid out. Nowhere did I say they were libertarian, or even distinguished them from the Republican party; in fact, I explicitly stated they were little more than far-right, anti-moderate Republicans:

The Tea Party represents not a distinct party in and of itself, like the Green Party, but rather a fundamental political spectrum shift of an already powerful political entity: the Republican party.

...

It represents the fact that the Republicans are moving further to the right.

[Nono]

Minister (hurrying in): "Sire, the peasants are revolting!"

King: "You're telling me."

[Trojan_Ripper]

I say the more “partays” the better.



What’s so wrong with different parties? It seems we have a whole lot of them in the U.S. expressing what they believe in, and isn’t that the point of our freedom here?

Why are some people scared of the Tea party so much that they keep them in the lime light by constantly drawing attention to them? Just like Gpa’s quoted source said, the media, even the alternative media, spent the better part of last year obsessing over the Tea Party. Why?

And Dan please don’t respond with statements like, "The fact that they try to kill politicians who disagree with them?"
Unless you have evidence of such which I’m sure everyone here would love to see.

[Dodds]

What’s so wrong with different parties? It seems we have a whole lot of them in the U.S. expressing what they believe in, and isn’t that the point of our freedom here?

It would be nice if some people actually voted for them though TR. That way the USA wouldn't be stuck between a far right and a center right party for election every 4 years. Might help calm the polarization too.

[Trojan_Ripper]

It would be nice if some people actually voted for them though TR. That way the USA wouldn't be stuck between a far right and a center right party for election every 4 years. Might help calm the polarization too.

Agreed dodds, but it seems the media won’t let us. If a different party tries to take hold, “no matter the stance” negativity from all sides sweeps them under. We are bound to a 2 party system of fools afraid of votes being stolen.