Is The Tea Party Critical Enough of Corporate Political Power?

[Londoner]

In the long litany of valid Tea Party complaints, I have noticed that they don't seem to spend much energy focusing on the amount of concentrated political power corporations have. Granted, they do complain about special interests and corruption, but, on balance, they seem much more likely to complain about Washington's control over the market, rather than the control of Washington by the most powerful market players. It makes me worry that corporate money, through investments in right wing media, is pre-figuring their concerns and directing their rage. Is it possible that they are corporate pawns? Does anyone know why their criticism of corporate political power seems flaccid compared to their criticism of Government itself? Yes, I know they complained about TARP, but that wasn't really blamed on corporations, rather, it was filed under the much vaguer (and safer) "politics as usual". Does anyone know why the Tea Party didn't complain about the recent Supreme Court decision which increased the capacity of special interests to buy Washington? We know the Left is corrupt (see Clinton Obama > Wall Street), but I thought the Tea Party was genuinely opposed to the special interest corruption of politics.

 

[Annie]

In the long litany of valid Tea Party complaints, I have noticed that they don't seem to spend much energy focusing on the amount of concentrated political power corporations have. Granted, they do complain about special interests and corruption, but, on balance, they seem much more likely to complain about Washington's control over the market, rather than the control of Washington by the most powerful market players. It makes me worry that corporate money, through investments in right wing media, is pre-figuring their concerns and directing their rage. Is is possible that they are corporate pawns? Does anyone know why their criticism of corporate political power seems flaccid compared to their criticism of Government itself? Yes, I know they complained about TARP, but that wasn't really blamed on corporations, but politics as usual. Does anyone know why the Tea Party didn't complain about the recent Supreme Court decision which increased the capacity of special interests to buy Washington? We know the Left is corrupt (see Clinton Obama > Wall Street), but I thought the Tea Party was genuinely opposed to the special interest corruption of politics.

The focus is on the actions of the politicians. That is going to determine who is voted for or in worst case scenario, one we've been living with for years, against.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Someone once told this, and I find it's generally fairly accurate.

Right-wingers worry about people ripping off the taxpayers ("welfare queens", etc)

Left-wingers worry about corporations ripping off the taxpayers ( halliburton, kbr, etc)

 

[Londoner]

The focus is on the actions of the politicians. That is going to determine who is voted for or in worst case scenario, one we've been living with for years, against.

This is a fair response.

Considering the amount of money that flowed into Washington by the group of Wall Street players who destroyed the economy, my thesis is that there are no politicians qua politicians. Corporations literally staff government. Robert Rubin (Clinton's Treasury Secretary) and Hank Paulson (Bush's Treasury Secretary) both headed Goldman Sachs, who was the largest government benefactor of the Wall Street bailout. Similarly, there is no difference between the CEO of Halliburton and the vice president. When Democratic and GOP senators lose office, they go to work as lobbyists.

Washington has been absorbed by the largest market players. The government is gone. Corporations have fully captured the regulatory process. Why doesn't the Tea Party see this? It's almost like they have been conditioned not to worry about insurance monopolies and unregulated derivative markets. All their rage is being strategically directed at the puppet and not the puppet master. They have been lied to. They are being used to protect the power brokers who destroyed the country.

 

[Avatar4321]

Im all for repealing the 17th amendment and restoring the Senate to the States so that corporations or businesses will have a much more difficult time buying the Senate.

Put the check in the Senate and they lose power in the House.

Of course, as long as the large interest groups finance the campaigns of the Senators, they will always have a controlling interest.

 

[Charles_Main]

Someone once told this, and I find it's generally fairly accurate.

Right-wingers worry about people ripping off the taxpayers ("welfare queens", etc)

Left-wingers worry about corporations ripping off the taxpayers ( halliburton, kbr, etc)

I worry about Both. I guess that makes me a right left winger.

 

[Annie]

The focus is on the actions of the politicians. That is going to determine who is voted for or in worst case scenario, one we've been living with for years, against.

This is a fair response.

Considering the amount of money that flows into Washington by the group of Wall Street players who destroyed the economy, my thesis is that there are no politicians qua politicians. Corporations literally staff government. Robert Rubin (Clinton's Treasury Secretary) and Hank Paulson (Bush's Treasury Secretary) both headed Goldman Sachs, who was the largest government benefactor of the Wall Street bailout. Similarly, there is no difference between the CEO of Halliburton and the vice presidents. When Democratic and GOP senators lose office, they go to work as lobbyists.

Washington has been absorbed by the largest market players. The government is gone. Corporations have fully captured the regulatory process. Why doesn't the Tea Party see this?

You ask the wrong question. When more people follow the way blazed by the tea party, how will politicians be able to act as they have? There will be change or there will be trouble. As a 'Londoner' I'll assume you have a basic knowledge of our mutual history and our revolution? Seems even in your own, there was some guy's head on a pike, for screwing people just a tad too much?