Real Change vs. Political Control

Steve M. nails the real difference between the Tea Party and Occupy:

.... the teabaggers didn't mobilize -- or perhaps I should say weren't mobilized -- until after the inauguration of Barack Obama, even though most of the the things they complained about (deficit spending, the Wall Street bailout, the very existence of taxation or a social safety net) predated Obama's election. And they've never felt the level of disgruntlement with the sytem that Occupy does -- from the beginning they've found dozens of elected officials who suit them just fine, many of whom have actually been elected. You can't possibly say that about the Occupy protesters, whoknow they're well to the left of President Obama and the Democrats, even if the GOP is much further to the right.

The Occupy protesters are upset at a system that's failed them under both Republican and Democratic presidents. The tea party will utterly vanish the second its ideological soul mates seize control of what few parts of the government they don't control already, even if those soul mates don't enact a tea party agenda. (Did we hear a peep from any of these people when George W. Bush was running huge deficits or expanding government health care with the Medicare prescription drug plan?)

Occupy wants real change. The tea party wants a change in political control. That's it. End of story.

Read the whole thing.