Tea Party versus “occupy” movement

A friend commented:

There is, in my opinion, little or no difference between modern-day Communists and Capitalists – Romney and Obama. The “Occupy Wall Street” and “The Teaparty Movement” were both correct, simply viewed from different perspectives.

The notion that the Tea Party and the “occupy” movement are both “correct” is surprising to me.

The Tea Party folks want to protect private property rights. The “occupy” folks would supersede private property with the “needs” of the State — which is to say, them.

(As an aside, I always write “occupy” and “ows” in lower case, in deference to their hatred of capitalism.)

TP: Government’s minimal job is to protect the lives of all citizens.
“ows”: String up the bankers from handy lampposts.

TP: The rule of law as crafted in the Constitution and Bill of Rights is worth getting back to.
“ows”: No rule of law, as it’s not “fair” that someone should have more than them.

TP: Everyone has an opportunity to succeed through work and invention.
“ows”: Everyone has a right to live off the government without working.

TP: Racism, sexism et cetera have no place in America.
“ows”: Racism and sexism are rampant and therefore society and the State must use racist and sexist policies to counter them.

TP: Free enterprise creates wealth and prosperity that lifts the world out of poverty.
“ows”: Free enterprise is unjust, immoral, and should be taken over by the State.

TP: America is a good country at core and deserves to succeed.
“ows”: America is the terrorist of the world and deserves to die.

I don’t see these as close, but then again I don’t see Romney and Obama as close. The positions of each are similar to the above, except that Romney is squishy and Obama is sly so this is not quite so blatantly obvious.

===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle