It’s not really “news” that Twitter, Facebook, Foursquare and the like have been embraced by politicians, journalists, and political junkies alike. Last night’s GOP Presidential debate was live-tweeted, and discussed on just about every social media network in real-time. Bloggers on politics are rapidly increasing their influence to the point where it isn’t insane to consider the possibility of their eclipsing traditional journalists in the not-so-distant future.

Print and broadcast journalists aren’t the only sacred cows in danger of losing ground with the populace as a direct result of the rise of social media and blogging in politics. The days of old-style political consulting are facing extinction as well. Gone are the times when political advisers of all breeds can say without fear of failure “this is the way we do this because it’s the way it always worked.” Commentaries abound about the rise of the populist movement in right-wing politics – aka the Tea Party – but that is only half the story. Thanks to Ariana Huffington’s experiment in citizen journalism, there’s a left-wing version of that movement, and it’s alive and well on networks like Twitter. A simple search for the #p2 hashtag will yield thousands of comments from the movers and shakers of the left’s populist movement. Again, not really news, although perennially useful information for anyone wanting to keep tabs on politics on social networks.

What is news is what appears to be happening based on the buzz on Twitter during and after the first GOP Presidential Debate for the 2012 election. Before pollsters from any of the campaigns had a chance to do it, there was an immediate response from the people on the supposed winner – based on most indications, hands down it was Herman Cain, for anyone that wants to be in the know. Another interesting point was the observation that the Fox Luntz Focus Group was apparently paying attention to a particular blogger, Robert Stacy McCain.

Ding! Now that’s news! It isn’t verifiable, and could very well just have been a joke, but the reality is that there are growing signs that politicians aren’t just using social media to get their message out anymore. They have (finally?) discovered that the various networks are a rich resource of information on potential voters and supporters. It is an instant barometer in real-time indicating what the politically motivated public is thinking on just about anything a politician would want or need to know. Additionally, it is fertile ground where non-professional political pundits freely state their opinions on the issues and the candidates. Even better than all of that, it’s free! Well, not completely, since candidates would probably end up paying people on their staffs to read and analyze the information for them, but that’s still a great deal less expensive than traditional polling. The tide is turning, and now it is not unrealistic to suggest that the successful candidate in the 2012 Presidential Election will not only consult the pros, but also the social networks and the blogosphere. Forget about watching the network coverage on the upcoming election – the next President of the United States will be announced on Twitter!

Seriously? You think that the political beliefs of this guy will make a difference to the family members of anyone that may end up hurt or killed today? It didn’t occur to anyone that it might be better to take a moment, and consider the plight of the people that are being affected by this situation? This post is not something for #tcot users to be proud of or glorify. #Epic Fail

Reactions to the databases being maintained by the LOC have run from general acceptance, to severe paranoia. Some have brought up the potential costs involved, rightfully so, in light of current plans to monetize the service – taxpayer monies being used to maintain permanent digital records of advertisements on Twitter isn’t in the least bit appealing, and hopefully there is a plan to scrub the databases of that material for the LOC’s purposes. The cries of big brother watching aren’t very compelling either, since all the information concerned is already out in the open for authorities on all levels of government to make use of in investigations if they choose.

Cost of maintenance is a viable concern, as is the method. Beyond the privacy issues that could arise if the LOC did anything significant to the databases to ease searching through them, there is of course the cost involved in those changes. Otherwise, I am generally uncertain of the justification of any lawsuits claiming an invasion of privacy anyway, primarily because the information was always out in the public eye to begin with anyway.

So, I can only think that the ones that are complaining about the government looking at their tweets or maintaining them for posterity must have something to hide. Then the simple question is, “why would anyone be so silly that they would post anything they would regret on a service like Twitter?” Sorry, but if you were running around tweeting things you now realize might have been wrong or could get you in trouble, that’s your problem. Please don’t try to cry about protecting the rights of the people to privacy now that the LOC is going to be keeping all of your nonsense for posterity. Take it as a lesson learned – it’s not a good idea to post anything that you would be ashamed of online where anyone else can see it. If you must do that sort of thing, create a diary on your own computer for your venting!

The other day, a friend on Twitter posted a couple seemingly unrelated links in one message. She was of the opinion that there was some common ground between them, and I agree. The first was an article on The New Apostolic Reformation (or The Family). If this is the first time that you’re seeing those names, it’s highly unlikely that it will be the last. When Muslims bring up the concept of Holy War, people immediately think of the word “jihad”. When Christians do, more likely than not, one thinks of the Crusades. That might be about to change to “The Family.”

While Stack and Bedell are symptoms of the general unrest in this country right now, The Family is part of the disease that is moving extremist actions like theirs from the fringe to the mainstream. That is not to say that either man was ever associated with The Family, but that future Stacks and Bedells may very well be. So the coming attractions in the realm of extremist behavior will probably involve an organization that is proselytizing that they have found a cure for AIDS (sorry, but absolutely not true), and are already behind the anti-homosexual legislation in California and Uganda (yes, they’re already a world-wide organization.)

While the press runs about chasing tea parties, this group has been building connections in all sectors of society. Of course the GOP has been associated with them already, notably Jim DeMint, Michele Bachmann, Sam Brownback, and Sarah Palin. Their goals are simple enough – take over, community by community.

The other story that piqued that Twitter friend’s interest was on upcoming Supreme Court hearings on gun control laws. Of course the NRA is coming out on the side of not limiting the rights of citizens to bear arms. The piece explores how the high court may end up interpreting the Second Amendment. I’ve never been a huge fan of gun control, and one of the only issues where I’ve really parted ways with the NRA is on assault weapons. Sorry, but I don’t buy that there’s a “legitimate” reason for civilians to have weapons that are made specifically for the purpose of killing people. No, they aren’t by any stretch of the imagination hunting weapons, and unlike handguns, aren’t very practical for personal protection. Throw in the possibility of folks from The Family getting their hands on them, and I’m definitely not sold. The concept of that organization ending up with armed militias is terrifying – honestly, Al Qaeda looks like a quilting bee in comparison, if for no other reason, The Family has a much larger pool to recruit from. There are plenty of Christians out there.

Throw in Bossier Parrish’s new militia and its Operation Exodus, and the U.S. is really starting to look like one of those countries we tend to make war in because religious leaders start crying jihad. Sadly, the Bossier Parrish story is probably going to be overlooked as just wingnuttery hitting law enforcement in the backwoods. I’d love to know if anyone involved in organizing that militia is an “Apostle.”

But we have nothing to worry about. It’s just a lot of unconnected nonsense, that will settle down on its own….

To be fair, I admit to going over the top in naming this post, because it isn’t absolutely true – thankfully. However, it is difficult to find hard political journalism out there these days that has a firm grasp on reality. I suspect that the observations I mentioned above focused on the tea party movement primarily because that is the issue du jour – there is quite a bit of material out there on it. But if you’re going to start talking about the unreality of political journalism in America today, perhaps you should point out the elephant in the room – racism.

To be sure, the tea party movement has left us with many opportunities to explore the issue of racism. Why it hasn’t been done in earnest falls under what I’ve come to call a journalistic taboo. At best, it would open the proverbial can of worms President Carter broke the seal on when he suggested that America wasn’t ready for Obama in the White House. In a practical sense, it would make it more difficult for the administration to get anything done, since it could effectively justify civil rights organizations calling out the President to be their anointed leader in their cause. But all of that is assuming that journalists would approach it in the context of Obama the man, as opposed to focusing on the nature of racism in America in general.

And there, I’ve said it. There is racism in America. It is an ugly truth, and reality of the situation is that the perpetrators of it are being given a pass on it by journalists. That is a generalization, and bluntly, this is focused on the rule as opposed to the exceptions. When I say this, I mean that out of the countless times that the mainstream press has covered racist sentiments being paraded about by tea partiers, it has been little more than an aside – it has been rare when these individuals have been brought to task for these actions, called racist, or had to face rebuttals from civil rights leaders because the journalists bothered to make the calls to get those statements.

Ironically enough, I ended up thinking on this purely because I was accused of appearing like a Dixiecratic jingoist on Twitter. To summarize the context, since it involved quite a few posts from multiple users, @Shoq (a progressive politics Twitter icon for those of you that don’t know) was encouraging posts on GOP campaign slogans. Several racist posts appeared in the Twitterstream, and I reposted one to a local political journalist because he had pointed out that Jay-Z had been engaged in some racist activities of his own, against whites. The entire situation was an exercise in bad political humor, but was obviously taken rather seriously by at least one person.

At first, I started thinking twice about my “image” on Twitter, but my thoughts quickly shifted to the lack of reality in political journalism. While many of the posts that suggested new campaign slogans for the GOP were in bad taste, they were real. There was no tap-dancing around the issue of racism. They were what I have no doubt many journalists wish they could say when faced with the blatant hatred they see daily from many in the political scene. Some of the denial of reality in journalism today is probably from journalists, and some of it may be the result of editorial policies that cater to advertisers. Regardless of the source, the bottom line is that we’ve moved to the point where “news”, particularly where politics is concerned, is not about being neutral and reporting what is real. If the people want reality, they need to look beyond the headlines – even to places like Twitter and the blogosphere. But that’s not news either.