Contrary to MSM's contention, while I'm neither an Undecided, Early, Hispanic or I-4 voter, it looks like I "may hold key" to 2012 Florida GOP Presidential Primary

Wall Street Journal video: Florida Tea Party to Vote Against Mitt Romney. January 31, 2012. http://youtu.be/6V1muYp0bGU

Contrary to MSM's contention, while I'm neither an Undecided, Early, Hispanic or I-4 voter, it looks like I "may hold key" to the 2012 Florida GOP Presidential Primary. I am definitely NOT undecided.

Before I leave to go cast my ballot in today's Florida primary, can I please make two quick points about ALL the very bad reporting that I've seen the past year, nationally and in Florida, along the lines of "What's new with the Tea Party?"

First, in a large grass-roots movement that is intentionally decentralized, in large part because so many of its supporters have regular lives, jobs and family responsibilities, and do NOT have a taxpayer-paid PR flack like members of Congress to arrange sit-downs with reporters, the news media's insistence that any story about the Tea Party, esp. one that is filmed, involve a conversation with a purported "leader" is especially problematic.

Problematic since 99.9% of the people within that particular state who support the movement in a general way, likely have never heard of this person interviewed.

And frankly, in many cases, it makes them wonder why if this bottom-up point is so well understood by them, and is actually part of its appeal to them and many others, i.e. effort over ego, why does this person in the news video -any video- seem so unaware of the central tenet of the movement and unwilling to say so during the interview.

Is it simply the way the piece is edited they wonder?

And so it is today in this Wall Street Journal video at the top of the post.

Why does the MSM persist in expending so much time and energy looking for someone that is simply not there? 

There's no Tea Party Oz behind the curtain.

Certainly many liberals want to believe that there is, despite all the evidence to the contrary,  because this fits into their mindset that,

a.) people who think differently than they do are clearly sheep being led around by someone else that the sheep are too stupid to see for themselves,

b.) they'll have a face in particular to hate and a person to write snarky comments about in newspaper and blog reader comments at 2 a.m., when they can't get their venom out of their system and fall asleep.

You see this more and more frequently all over the blogosphere and on YouTube, when you see the time stamp next to their remarks, that is to say, when they aren't posting meet-up times and locales for their local Occupy Wall Street protests, on news stories that have nothing to do with it.

Second, Tea Party supporters are the main reason that the GOP took over the U.S. House of Representatives in the election of November 2010, NOT some grass roots movement that desperately wanted to see much more of uninspiring, charisma-challenged, Cincinnati tear-jerker John Boehner appearing on Sunday morning TV chat shows.

In the process, they defeated many of the few remaining moderate House Democratic incumbents -some of whom I'd met- and elected many conservative Republicans in districts that weren't necessarily leaning GOP, but had gotten past the goal line because of a larger-than-expected Tea Party turnout.

This, of course, also had the practical effect of making the Democratic Party in Washington MUCH more liberal and less able to keep itself tethered to reality, given that the most liberal Democratic members of Congress also have long had the advantage of being able to run from gerrymandered districts.

Unlike most of the Dems who lost, who'd previously won elections in either Neutral or Leans GOP districts, but had somehow found a way to win, either personality, experience or campaign fundraising.

But that momentous election was just 15 months ago, not 15 years ago, yet judging by many of the news stories I've seen and read, there's literally an army of reporters and columnists who have been waiting to declare the Tea Party moment dead or dying, because...

Well, they can't point to anything specifically, but they keep telling us that they 'feel' it.

They were especially keen on mentioning this during the Fifteen Minutes of Occupy Wall Street a few months ago.

The problem is that there is not a national election for Tea Party supporters to weigh-in on for another nine months, and it's as predictable as hurricane warnings in late August down here that lots of well-known liberal columnists and Beltway pundits will be talking about the Tea Party being dead without any tangible evidence, other than them simply wanting it so.

But don't you actually need elections first before you do post-election analysis?

No, for them, their intuition is enough.