Given the rather anemic turnout, I have to express disgust, if not surprise at the media attention given to the teabaggers. Others have already pointed out the hundreds of thousands who attended the 2006 immigration reform demonstrations, the millions who attended the 2003 Iraq war protests, and hey, quite recently, 1.2 million people showed up to welcome Barack Obama into office, at the largest inauguration in history.
So, why pay this much attention to crowds of a few hundred here and there?
If you live in Seattle, you'll know that about once a month, a group of protesters gathers at Seattle Central Community College and marches a mile to Westlake Center. I'm not particularly a big fan of protests or marches, but these ones are the worst, and can't really command my respect. This is because it's the same group of 300-500 people every time, and you never know what the hell they're protesting. Each sign has a different issue. I know that on October 22nd, it's about police brutality, but only because they manage to put posters up about that. Mostly I think the attendees are there to hook up. I would think it a safe assumption that something similar goes on in most large cities.
On the last Friday of every month in almost every major city, hundreds of bicyclists gather for Critical Mass, agitating for improvements for cyclists. This is regular. In Seattle, it's caused some kerfuffles and makes the news occasionally when something unusual, like violence, occurs.
Would anyone in their right mind consider either of these events newsworthy? Not unless there was something unusual. How are the teabaggers different? On the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, people protest around the nation and it's a paragraph on the AP wire. How are these teabaggers any different?
I can only conclude that number one, it's fun to say "teabagger," and number two, the GOP controls the media.