If there's one thing I've seen quite clearly this semester, it's that there are a lot of smart, fair, reasonable people on both sides of the political spectrum, and such is the case with this article in The New Republic. In it, John Judis, a senior editor for the liberal magazine, debunks four myths about the Tea Party, and in the process, he makes the Tea Party look better every single time.
Let's consider the four myths in order. Judis first takes on the notion that the Tea Party is not a true movement. In doing so, he challenges a front page story by the Washington Post's Amy Gardner, and defends his position well. After three paragraphs of clear, solid, analysis, he wraps it up with this helpful paragraph:
I don’t want to read too much into Gardner’s analysis, but what I suspect in these cases is that the writer is imposing a continental European model of a political movement onto American politics. In Europe’s multiparty systems, movements cohere more easily into parties, but in America, the two-party system discourages the transition from movement to party except when the movement takes over one of the two parties.
I highlight this excerpt because I wasn't sure myself what Judis meant by "European model," but he provides a quick yet sufficient explanation and moves on to the next point.