Today's "milling exercise" is a side-by-side comparison of two headline-generating groups; the Tea Party, and the "Occupy" movement, aka Flea Party. Both are nominally rooted in our Constitutionally guaranteed right to protest, ie freedom of speech. After that though, the similarities end. Try as the lamestream media might to elevate the Occupiers, and try as they might to demonize the Tea Partiers, the demonstrated truths of both groups speaks louder and much more eloquently than the media ever could hope to. And therein is the grist for said milling exercise.
True to form, the lamesteam media does the one thing that is a cardinal no-no in proper journalism / news reportage - they have thrown all objectivity right out the window, and chosen sides. Thus, they have been somewhat successful in blurring the truth surrounding both groups, purely because they have an agenda just like everybody else in the issue - and as such they're doing a grave disservice to both their own craft, as well as the audience of their craft. Since the decline of objective media can carry infinite other discussions, let's instead take a look at some of the facts that are routinely, purposely overlooked regarding both groups.
The logical place to start is the largest difference between the two movements. Occupiers have generated tens, if not hundreds of thousands of arrests, as well as causing hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages for everything from trespassing to defecating in {and sometimes ON the} public, to felony vandalism / larceny. Tea Partiers have generated zero dollars in damages, and while their arrest record isn't clean, it is 99.44% of the minor misdemeanor variety. Tea Partiers will disperse if instructed to do so {which hasn't happened yet}; Occupiers will not {which has happened more times than one can count}.
I can hear the wailing now: "Oh come on - civil disobedience falls under First Amendment protection!" Well, yes and no. Peaceful protest is one thing, but borderline anarchy and wanton vandalism and trespassing are NOT the same thing. The term "civil disobedience" here has been co-opted and thoroughly corrupted to try and legitimize Occupiers much more so than Tea Partiers. Driving drunk, spousal abuse, and child molestation are also forms of "civil disobedience" too, and they're never seen as anything other than breaking the law; the perps are treated accordingly. Not so with the Occupy crowd; they feel pretty much free to do anything they want, laws be damned. And more often than not, they're allowed to skate many times because the idea of civil disobedience has been so dangerously bastardized, all in the name of "Political Correctness," of course.
As a rule, true Tea Partiers scrupulously operate well within ALL laws. Oh sure, there have been scattered reports of serious "incidents" involving Partiers, but nearly all of the "legitimate" cases can trace back to infiltrators and moles; the others are simple red herrings played up by the media as part of their routine agit-prop. The true rank-and-file of the Tea Party just don't roll that way, as Glenn Beck's 300,000-attendee Tea Party rally on the DC Mall a year or so ago proved. They even had the common courtesy to police after themselves when it was all over - in contrast to the tens of thousands of dollars in cleanup costs generated by any given typical Occupy stunt, or the millions spent on cleaning up after Barry Hussein's inaugural. BTW - Barry Hussein has a clandestine vested interest in Occupiers, as much of their funding comes directly from the cabal pulling the strings in Hizzown Administration.
Another stark contrast between the two movements are the basic personal qualities of the participants. Occupiers tend to be disaffected rabble; poorly educated, largely ignorant of current affairs, with a strong-to-fierce sense of "entitlement" whether deserving or not. They're given rudimentary instruction, then quickly turned loose to do their disruptive thing. If you try to pin them down about their goal, they'll either spout trite rhetoric about taking down Bad Old Capitalism in general - or more often, they simply won't have a clue about what should happen afterwards if their protests are successful. "Flea Bag" is thus an entirely accurate portrayal of their movement. Empty of logic; empty of ideals; empty of solutions. And chock-full of, well, you know.
Tea Partiers, on the other hand are well educated, well informed, and deeply concerned citizens that couldn't be more clear with their goals. Take the very group name: "Tea" is an acronym for "Taxed Enough Already." Taxed in the narrow sense of a portion of income; but also taxed in the broader sense of being fatigued to the point of danger, as in "over-taxed muscles," or "over-taxed emotions." They see both the country and the Constitution in this latter context, and both situations cause the distress that is the basic fuel of the movement to begin with. Naturally, you never hear about this from the lamestream media. Tea Partiers devoutly believe in American greatness and self-sufficiency, and they want to see it restored and flourishing once again. Their goals are clearly articulated at virtually all of their gatherings and functions, from humble blogs like this one, all the way up to the grand public displays. Prosperity for everyone, but you have to be willing to WORK hard for it.
Whilst both groups have substantial potential political clout, only the Tea Party has successfully exercised theirs; the 2010 elections being a perfect illustration. Granted, the Flea-Baggers were just getting started at the time, but it's a safe bet that their eventual political impact will be minimal at best. The majority of the population simply don't identify with much of what the F-B's supposedly stand for - and if they do, they don't feel that the typical F-B "protest" is the type of civil disobedience they wish to engage in. You might have to dig a bit to find them, but there are countless reports of Flea Bag "happenings" that were stillborn due to a marked lack of willing participants. I think the previous arrest records and crapping in public just might have something to do with this fact............
Then again, by their own {quiet} admission, the originators of the Flea Baggers have publicly admitted that the entire movement has literally been hijacked away from them - and is being re-organized into a full fledged anarchist organization. Several lawsuits have been filed to attempt to regain control, but the powers-that-be are seeing to it that they'll be swept under the rug ASAP. The "new" Flea Baggers are out to trash, loot, and generally cause chaos, period. They plan to hit big during the political conventions later this year, in an attempt to disrupt as much of the citizen-political process as possible. They don't want solutions or changes; they want pure anarchy, and they're ready to go after it with a vengeance. Who re-organized the Flea Bag community? I'll give you three guesses {mm - mm - mm}.
The Tea Party is ready, though. They've already got a firm foundation on which to build - acquired through 100% legitimate means - and they're ready to reach out and lovingly embrace all those who will be disaffected by the Flea Bag tsunami that's coming sure as God made little green apples. The fact that the deck is stacked against them thanks to the lamestream media, and His Presidency Himself doesn't bother them a whit, but they're going to be mighty careful indeed as to how they proceed from here on in. Way too much is literally - and I mean literally - riding on this next election cycle. The Flea Baggers would be quite happy to see the whole works blow up into a situation that would require martial law; Tea Partiers want anything but that.
Hopefully the strong head-start they have will be more than enough to stem the tide, but in this day and age I'm not sanguine about anything any more. There's still the 45-odd percentage of the general population that hasn't turned out to vote at all since 1960 to be concerned about. Will they be terrorized by the Flea Baggers? Despite the lamestreamers, are they well informed about the Tea Party and it's goals? Or will they continue to sit out and ignore the painful struggle as they have since JFK's term?
As always, time will tell. Y'all will hear about it here as we go along. Be of good cheer in the meantime; the heavy sh*t will commence in due course. Please ponder what I've laid out here, as it's pretty crucial to all our futures, like it or not.
More shortly.
No comments:
Post a Comment