Right, So Why Do You Keep Wasting Our Time With This?


    OK, let’s get this straight. The corporate media spends months blowing the “tea party” into a huge phenomenon, giving it nonstop/over-the-top coverage, making it the narrative of 2010.  Then, the Washington Post actually does some journalism for a change and finds the Tea Party’s scope is “limited,” that the “disparate groups” “do little to engage in the political process,” and that “Seventy percent of the grass-roots groups said they have not participated in any political campaigning this year.” So, why is the corporate media wasting our time with this? Any answers? [sound of crickets chirping]

    • Nate Silver now says there’s a 1-in-5 chance Dems keep House AND Senate. How game-changing would that be? Tea Party revealed as all talk, no action. Dems suddenly have House & may be emboldened enough to FINALLY reform the filibuster, making progress on everything from immigration to climate to education possible. Again, not likely, but would be amazing.

    • cvllelaw

      Current thought is that the best thing that the media can do for us is to keep scaring the hell out of Democratic voters with the lunacy of the Tea Party.  Some pundits have said in recent days that the Christine O’Donnell phenomenon in neighboring Delaware is helping Sestak in Pennsylvania.  

      With Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, Rand Paul and Rev. Stephen Broden as the public faces of the Republican Party, getting more media time than John Boehner, independent voters are wondering just who these guys are.  

    • I spent a lot of time in the 1980’s reading about the 1960’s.  I did this for two reasons — one, I worked in the Special Collections Department of the University of Pittsburgh’s Library, and they have one of the best collections of 1960’s small press/”zines” in the country, so why not take advantage?  And second, I wanted to understand why, living as I was in the world of Reagan and trickle down economics, it had, from my perspective, all gone so horribly wrong.

      What you come away with is the realization that for all of the sound and the fury the radical 1960’s created in the media (Bra burning!), their actual numbers were very small.  And their long-term political impact was ultimately undone by intra-group wars and inability to decide on priorities (even good ones.)

      So I keep all of this in mind as I watch the current radicalization of the right.  And you know what?  I feel badly for all of the young people who are out there now who are, whether temperamentally or ideologically, who will be reading and wading through media/books in the not-so-distant future and wondering, like I once did, what had gone wrong and how they could make it right.

      Good luck.

    • libra

      accord them the respect of calling them a “Party”? They have no platform, no secific legislative agenda, no official representatives (chair, vice-chair, treasurer, etc) and no political candidates (every one of the Tea Potty endorsed candidates runs as a candidate of the Republican Party). At best, they’re an amorphous coalition (or, more exactly: “collection”, since most of them don’t really work together, even if they do share the same funding sources) of various “I’m a mad-as-hell-victim-of-something-or-other” groups.

      From where I sit, they’re just a Tea Potty — full of steamy hot, yellow liquid which might be mistaken for (weak) tea, as long as one doesn’t get close enough to smell it.