Revolts the Tea Party-Obsessed Corporate Media Overlooked

[Dodds]

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.

Something that might allow for a more robust democracy would be for the leaders of some smaller political parties to lobby the government for an open debate involving all parties. Or a limit on funds for each party campaigns. That way the role of the media could be limited. Difficult to do though, someone will claim freedom of speech or something. I would say its just making things a more even playing field.

I do agree with you that the media plays a large part in the situation as it is. Hopefully the internet can help in that respect though. More people are becoming more media savvy, more information is getting out there, more ideas are floating around. Might help through time change the voting habits of the nation.

[Dan74]

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:

Everything we see from them is just stupid sign-waving and bell ringing, with the occasional idiot who threatens a Democrat. Most of the tea party is actually libertarian, yet from what the media portrays they support all sorts of terrible neoconservative candidates. The point is that they get far too much media attention, when much of it should be going towards groups that actually matter. There are tons of other organizations that do much more than that tea party ever has, and they've been doing it for a far longer time.

[Angry Citizen]

Like the Green Party, who has never had an elected official on the federal level? The Green Party isn't any different from the Tea Party -- except that Tea Party-backed candidates have won in several federal districts within a couple years of its formation.

I'm having trouble understanding your reasoning, Dan. Just what groups do you feel are underrepresented by the media?

[grandpa]

Like the Green Party, who has never had an elected
official on the federal level?
The Green Party isn't any different from the Tea Party --
except that Tea Party-backed candidates have won in several
federal districts within a couple years of its formation.

At least the Green Party holds that no one should be able to go through life without medical care availability.

Also, explain how we couldn't possibly have homes without banks buying up a bunch of land and space for buildings. It seems houses really don't care who owns them or how they come about. I realize you're one of the foremost experts on human affairs, so please enlighten me.

Grandpa h.

[Dan74]

Like the Green Party, who has never had an elected official on the federal level? The Green Party isn't any different from the Tea Party -- except that Tea Party-backed candidates have won in several federal districts within a couple years of its formation.

I'm having trouble understanding your reasoning, Dan. Just what groups do you feel are underrepresented by the media?

Many. Sierra Club, Veterans for Peace, Code Pink, the Revoke BP's Charter movement, Public Citizen.

"Tea-party backed" really means nothing since these people were all Republicans anyway, and would have had Republicans vote for them had the tea party not existed. Why doesn't the tea party create an actual party? It's because they're too afraid of losing all of their "support" in Congress. The Green Party of the USA hasn't held a federal office because it doesn't represent one of the two major parties. Saying that the tea party helps elects Republicans is really no different than saying that Republicans help elect Republicans, or Democrats help elect Democrats.

[Angry Citizen]

Why create an actual party when you can infiltrate an already powerful party and take it over from the inside? Like I said, the Tea Party represents the far-right in this country. Tea Party backed simply means the far-right endorses them. That does mean something.

As you can see from the Green Party, the Sierra Club, Veterans for Peace, Code Pink, and the Revoke BP's Charter movement, none of these leftist organizations work. This isn't the fault of the media, but simply the fact that noone cares about third parties and random special interest groups. I've heard of all of these organizations, and I'm not a leftist (shut up Dodds). It's not media exposure that's necessary. What needs to happen is a leftist Tea Party. A group of people who are willing to exercise their will in the appropriate venue: one of the two main parties. Like it or not, this nation is dependent on a two-party system. Until the fundamental political structure changes, third parties have no place in the system.

[grandpa]

Why create an actual party when you can infiltrate an
already powerful party and take it over from the inside?
Like I said, the Tea Party represents the far-right
in this country.

The Tea Party is a wilderness of Republican re-branding, basically. If you look at their propaganda, they want to make sure you agree with the operation before signing on. It's not an attempt to accept everyone and to let many voices shine through, despite their "American people" rhetoric. It's an attempt to keep more and more people out.

Grandpa h.

[Angry Citizen]

Like I said, for the umpteenth time, the Tea Party represents radicalism. Of course it's going to be exclusionary rather than inclusionary.

[Buzz62]

Why create an actual party when you can infiltrate an already powerful party and take it over from the inside? Like I said, the Tea Party represents the far-right in this country. Tea Party backed simply means the far-right endorses them. That does mean something.

As you can see from the Green Party, the Sierra Club, Veterans for Peace, Code Pink, and the Revoke BP's Charter movement, none of these leftist organizations work. This isn't the fault of the media, but simply the fact that noone cares about third parties and random special interest groups. I've heard of all of these organizations, and I'm not a leftist (shut up Dodds). It's not media exposure that's necessary. What needs to happen is a leftist Tea Party. A group of people who are willing to exercise their will in the appropriate venue: one of the two main parties. Like it or not, this nation is dependent on a two-party system. Until the fundamental political structure changes, third parties have no place in the system.

Unfortunately this is dead-on.
The Tea Party is an issue BECAUSE they infiltrated the Republican Party...and because they include a bunch of freaks who parrot extreme ideas without the slightest idea of the repercussions...

What the Democrats need is an angry LEFT.
An irrational group of socialists and greenies.
A militant group of tree-huggers who can raise money and organize huge rallies where they should make outlandish statements like;
"No More Paper Money! Save the trees!"
or
"Republicans are trying to ruin our country by destroying our economy!"
or
"The rich don't deserve more power!"
or whatever they can think of.

They should make effigies of Boner frying in a tanning bed.
They should make signs that say; "Kill all bankers!"

It would be lunacy for sure...it would be of equal lunacy to the Tea Party in fact...and IT WOULD MAKE NEWS!!!

The Democrats would be forced to address them...and maybe even grow some balls.

[Angry Citizen]

The only problem is, America really is a right-wing country. The number of real socialists in America (not the watered down social democrats) is probably in the hundreds or low thousands. It's going to require the elderly of our generation to finally die before social change may once again occur, or a widespread condemnation of right-wing philosophy. The former is assured, however -- their stance against taxes (and thus proper funding of medicare and health care) means they will die earlier than necessary. It sounds callous, but they're their own worst enemy.

[Buzz62]

The only problem is, America really is a right-wing country. The number of real socialists in America (not the watered down social democrats) is probably in the hundreds or low thousands. It's going to require the elderly of our generation to finally die before social change may once again occur, or a widespread condemnation of right-wing philosophy. The former is assured, however -- their stance against taxes (and thus proper funding of medicare and health care) means they will die earlier than necessary. It sounds callous, but they're their own worst enemy.

Also agreed.

the enemy to this is time.
do you guys have enough time to wait?

i sure as hell hope so...the alternative would be less than optimal...unless you LIKE the 3-dip rat...

[notthecheatr]

Government decisions aren't made based on what the majority of Americans think or want. Government decisions are based on who is noticed, who is seen, who gets publicity. Government decisions are made on appearances. Hence, the accomplishments of the Tea Party in spite of their ridiculous approach and inane positions.

Consequently, this type of revolt does need to take place, a lot more often and with a lot more people involved. We real Americans need a real grassroots movement, not a fake one which the Tea Party clearly is. Those of us who want to accomplish real change, for the better, need to learn to organize and convince other people and stop using ideologies and loaded (yet meaningless) words like "liberal" or "conservative" but instead to clearly protest and revolt against specific issues that affect us all.

When it comes to real people (NOT the political elite, but common, every day people), the left and right are not separated by as much as many Americans think. We agree on a lot of things, we share a lot of the same values, and if we could unite on the common ground, we could accomplish a lot more than we have been.

Losing your home because of economic troubles caused by big corporations who only continue to rake in more money for the wealthiest Americans and then get bailed out by Your Tax Dollars is only one example of problems that all Americans, left or right, are faced with. Losing your job, or not being able to get one, because of greedy American corporations who send all the labor overseas is another issue that affects everyone, regardless of political ideology. These issues are common to everyone - left or right, it's a problem and will continue to be one until we organize ourselves and stop letting corporate elitists like the Tea Party, Fox News, or the two farcical parties in our country trample us underfoot.