One of the great things about American politics is that it often doubles as entertainment. Given that most of network and cable television has devolved into so-called reality TV, it is getting pretty hard to distinguish between “entertainment” programming and political “news” coverage – especially where the occupy Wall Street protests are concerned.
On one hand we have strangers living in a house together with hidden cameras, arguing and having casual sex, and on the other we have what looks like a bunch of camping trips gone bad – complete with no showers, drugs and casual sex.
The former are usually paid to display their foolishness, so they know why they are there. But the later really can’t give a cogent explanation of why they are there and what they want to accomplish, other than that they are mad at “the man” and that they won’t leave until they get what they want.
Some members of the media, along with helpful liberal politicians, have compared them to the Tea Party, but there is very little in the way of comparison. The Tea Party protests were large, law abiding and about something other than sleepovers, specifically a political agenda of limited government and less spending. The Occupy crowd is smaller, mob like and unfocused. Further, their campsites have been the scene of assaults (sexual and otherwise), theft, drug abuse and sanitation hazards. And yet, the Tea Party was compared to “angry mobs”, while these people represent America? Please. read more »