Slashdot Mirror
AFL-CIO and Big Content Advocate For SOPA
Weezul writes "Today's House Judiciary Committee meeting on the Stop Online Piracy Act excluded any witnesses who advocate for civil rights. Google's Katherine Oyama was the only witness to object to the bill in a meaningful way. In particular, the AFL-CIO's Paul Almeida advocated for the internet blacklist, saying 'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks.'"
Laying all that fibre, installing servers, manning phones at the offices of *AA attorneys, etc.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The right to download a car.
You have to keep voting for the less-evil of the two big parties, or the most-evil will get into power. The system sucks, but a duopoly on power is almost as stable as a monopoly. I can't see it being broken short of one of the big two suffering a severe internal split - but that seems unlikely. The democrats don't have enough internal ideological disagreement, and the republicans - while they certainly have plenty of that - have a skilled and powerful leadership that ensures party loyalty.
>
> the AFL-CIO's Paul Almeida advocated for the internet blacklist, saying 'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks'"
>
Why should one be allowed to steal stuff ?
I'm tired of trying to follow the law within reason. They don't want to play nice, neither will I. I'm off to the store to buy a couple of boxes of DVDs and blurays and I'm going to start giving them away to people I know and ask them to pass more forward. I'm going to pirate like there's no tomorrow because even when I try to play nice they want to screw up the internet. We gave them all the tools to do away with what they deemed inappropriate use of their works and now they want more. No more Mr nice guy. You asked for it. I hope you guys do the same. Pirate for people you know. Money is the only language these idiots understand(the *AAs, not your family).
the AFL-CIO's Paul Almeida advocated for the internet blacklist, saying 'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks'
He's quite right. It has fuck all to do with SOPA and its associated discussions, but he's right.
What is your position on Captain Picard stationed on the Enterprise replicating the Earl Gray Tea leaves off of your trucks?
Thank you.
Sorry, dude, but the Enterprise is a tool of the government. Did you actually not think about that all these years? Earl Grey Tea supplier, which provided the original pattern for the replicator probably got a big payoff.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
There was also an op-ed by Rebecca MacKinnon in the NY Times: "Stop the Great Firewall of America". Unfortunately behind their paywall, but may be accessible through a Google search?
Here's a site to quickly push a complaint to those who need your votes:
American Censorship.org
Think we can Slashdot it?
"By the time they had diminished from 50 to 8, the other dwarves began to suspect 'Hungry.'" -Gary Larson
"'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks'" .... by AFL-CIO members !!!
Yours In Ashgabat,
K. Trout
In particular, the AFL-CIO's Paul Almeida advocated for the internet blacklist, saying 'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks'"
That's ok, we're stealing off Tubes, not Trucks.
Heh, yeah, this "democratic republic" isn't about giving power to its citizens. It's just about preventing revolutions by making people think they can get some sort of change once their group size tips slightly over 50%.
And it does a damn fine job of it :-P
How did the Roman democracy finally fail? Decayed from within. So we don't even really have to do anything about it, just let the powers-that-be proceed on their present course of action :-D
The AFL CIO leadership has show itself in the last few years to be little more than a group of high-priced whores.
I support the unions. But they suffer from the same leadership crisis our broader society labors under.
I keep hearing everyone say that your best bet is to vote against the worst candidate since third party does not have enough votes. As long as the media has enough people thinking this way, the duopoly wins. Why not vote for who you want rather than the lesser of two evils? If enough people start voting for who they want, you will start to see the top two parties lose percentage points to lesser known parties. Yes, this might not make a difference this election, but it has the potential to in the future.
It is up to you to be part of the solution to the duopoly. The more you vote for the "lesser of two evils" the more you are contributing to keeping our current system alive.
the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks
Yeah, true. But there are several points to consider that I feel make the quoted statement utterly fallacious. First, an accusation of theft isn't immediately punished; guilt has to be proven first. Second, theft of a physical object means that the original owner loses the object. In the case of a piece of digital property, the original holder hasn't lost possession of anything. The content-creation industry's obsession with immediate punishment before investigation doesn't make sense. It violates the due process rights of the accused for no legally-sound reason. It allows for corporate actions to replace proper review by the judicial system....and it's a short-sidedly, seemingly-logical extension of a content-holder's desire to maximize revenue.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
While I am knowingly replying to two trolls, it makes for a poignant comment.
The rest of the world isn't too worried about this I think. With actions like this, America is just making itself more and more of a laughing stock in the eyes of the world. The credibility of America has been in decline for decades and eventually it will write itself out of the world stage that it so desperately want to stay in.
I am not saying that everyone in the US is to be painted with the same broad brush, but the folks at the top certainly seem to have free reign to write their own legislation and rules. With that sort of playing field, it is only a matter of time before all the other teams stop turning up to matches.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Does anyone else think this was a poor analogy? I thought everyone knew by know that the internet isn't a big truck. It's a series of tubes. Maybe she can come back with an analogy that includes those tubes at the bank drive through or something.
Make the buggers pick one and stick to it. The media should be having a field day with how often they flip backing and forth when it suits their need, but I suspect they are picking sides. Only once that has been defined can a real discussion about how media should be treated could possibly begin.
Exactly. The "Wasted Vote" argument can continue to be extrapolated reductio ad absurdum to say, "If you didn't vote for the winning candidate, you wasted your vote."
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Why not vote for who you want rather than the lesser of two evils?
Every now and then we try that. The most recent example was in 2000, when enough people voted for Ralph Nader to decide the election.
I will point out that the "lesser of two evils" is a false dichotomy. If you wait for November next year, yeah, that's what it comes to. If you want more choices, get active in the parties -- the people who actually put in the work year in and year out have a lot more leverage than those whose whole involvement amounts to checking a few lines on a ballot.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
The Media companies NEED the US gove to pass laws that help them stay alive at the same time the US gov NEEDS US made music and movies to keep the masses entertained while they sneak in censorship laws with each anti piracy bill that is passed.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
either. yet paul, you are there, blabbering and whoring for your leash holders.
Read radical news here
The "LOL! American Freedom!" comment is actually the most insightful and intelligent of the 40+ comments currently posted under this story.
Using just three words, the author managed to make the following points:
1) That American citizens and organizations claim to hold freedom in high regard, but then hypocritically practice the complete opposite.
2) That the American government claims to hold freedom in high regard, but then hypocritically practices the complete opposite.
3) That most Americans are oblivious to the sad state of "freedom" in their nation.
4) That most Americans are oblivious to being oblivious to the sad state of "freedom" in their nation.
5) That the rest of the world does not respect America, and finds American attitudes regarding freedom to be laughable.
It's too bad that it's at -1. It's the best comment posted here yet.
Remember the proposed legislation mandating DRM TCPA chips on all computers years ago? Someone on slashdot linked the senate's website and contact info. It died. :-)
So instead of whinning let your senators know how you feel?
Their website is here for the American Slashdot readers. Don't know who your senators are? There is a list here including an email link.
Calling your senator is effective as well.
When contacting your senator do not mention you want to dowload illegal material or that you are just angry and think it is unfair. Mention you work in the I.T. field and are worried about negative implications and liabilitiy risks for non copyrighted or infringement uses that this bill could be abused. Mention it would harm Google's youtube service costing American jobs as they would move overseas. This bill would be costly and could cost American innovation and jobs. Mention we already have existing copyright laws in force and sites like youtube already remove copyrighted or infrindged material in a timely manner and this is nothing but a power grab.
If your senator is a democrats mention your worried about the power grab by the media companies will harm competition. If your senator is a republican mention this would increase government intervention and regulation as it would cost well into the billions of dollars of tax payer money to fund this etc. You all can be creative.
Someone mod this up for the links. I just made it easier for everyone to spend 5 minutes telling your representative how you feel. Remember if you do not pick your voice the RIAA/MPAA will. If all they hear is the RIAA/MPAA then they will vote for the bill as it shows we don't care and like being fucked over. Do your duty.
The rest of the world is worried about the extent that this will spread outside your borders. The US is a very imperialist nation and will try very hard to press other nations into similar situations. They have to, because if they're the only draconian nation they're at an economic disadvantage, to say the least.
So yes, we're worried about NAFTA, ACTA (and PATRIOT as it relates to cloud services). Beyond that, we couldn't care less. You're deluding yourself if you think the US has any credibility left. We're just looking for a bigger stick.
using Democratic Egalitarian Clubs: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/science_egalitarians.html
He suggests to run progressive candidates in the primaries.
His big picture:
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/science_freshstart.html
"The failures of the American left are not in its egalitarian values, but in the means it uses to realize those values. This document suggests the strategies the left could follow in the United States if it took the findings of the social sciences more seriously than it currently does. There are links throughout to other documents on this site that provide greater depth on specific topics, and an annotated bibliography at the end."
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
I'm just gonna throw this one out there... mostly because it's obnoxious.
http://www.reverserobocall.com/
Politicians robocall you. Now you can robocall them.
Welcome to the Robocall Revolution. We believe that voters should have access to the same technology political groups use to get their message across; so we built a simple web-based robocall tool to literally give citizens back their voice in the political discourse. What better way to exercise your rights to to speech, than to actually speak truth to power?
ReverseRobocall.com provides voters an easy way to communicate with one or hundreds of politicians or political groups using the same technology politicians use, the robocall or automated phone call.
"You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
A license gives you bounded permission to use someone else's property. Someone has to have a proprietary interest before they can provide someone else a license, so the "property or license" dichotomy you suggest that someone needs to "pick one and stick to it" is nonsense. For their to be a license, there must be property.
If enough people start voting for who they want, you will start to see the top two parties lose percentage points to lesser known parties.
This is the problem. Those points are coming from the party which is closer to your position. Sure, if enough people join in you may be able to get someone even closer elected (though they may turn out to be just as bad once they're in power). The odds of that happening in any given election, however, are minuscule, so you'd just be hurting your own interests. If your candidate doesn't win, you've had no more positive effect on the election than if you'd stayed home. Rather than voting for third-party candidates in your own district with little other support, you'd do better to move to a district where a candidate you like actually has a chance of winning. As a bonus, the policies in that district are probably already closer to those you would prefer. Demonstrate that your policies are better, even if it has to be somewhere else, and it may just have a positive effect on the other districts.
The real solution is a better voting system, one that rewards candidates for offending the fewest voters—having a broad support base, even if some supporters like other candidates more—rather than achieving a simple plurality of voters' first choices. Almost any reasonable system would be better than the current first-past-the-post arrangement.
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
AFL-CIO no longer represents the workers
Ever since the mid 1980's, AFL-CIO has changed into AFL-CEO
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
The wrong lizard might get in.
if media piracy was stealing off trucks at red lights in traffic, the law and cops could stop it. like they could stop the Chinese copy shops if China got on board.
the issue is the hearts and minds of the public in the face of a continuous history in recorded media of all kinds of the corporations ripping off the artists, and changing up formats all the time to rip off the customers.
at base is this... a customer can buy a license to use a work for their own purposes... and under fair use provisions of the copyright act, convert that to any other format, as long as they don't sell the copies, and destroy them all if the genuine licensed original is transferred. greedheads want to take that away, and even prevent you from using your licensed copy after X amount of time.
stop that nonsense, and things might change.
NostrilDrippus Predicts! (tm) that artists are going to go on the Internet themselves to peddle their works, and the MafIAA is going to wither and die for their sins.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
I thought Ted Stevens established for Congress a long time ago that the internet wasn't a big truck?
...In particular, the AFL-CIO's Paul Almeida advocated for the internet blacklist, saying 'the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks'" Isn't this guy just incriminating himself of a crime? Isn't that how the Syndicates operate? "Oh, it just fell off a truck". I remember when I lived in a free country where rights and liberties were protected. It is a sad shame our society is heading in such a wrong direction.
The rest of the world SHOULD be worried. If SOPA (etc) passes it will effectively make a good chunk of the internet subject to US law. The remainder of the internet will either be willingly subject to US law, or risk exile outside of the "Great American Firewall"
If this gets rammed through your government, it WILL change the internet.
It's worth noting that the press (right now) seems to be running headlines to the tune of "Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) sparks backlash from Facebook, Google". Average folks online get a lot of 'news' from Facebook and the Google news aggregation.
As I understand it, I need only send a "take-down" notice indicating a site is infringing on my trademark. The DNS must then be blocked and the site owner must be notified of the blockage. The site owner may then send a counter-notice claiming it should remain unblocked. If the site owner sends a counter-notice the site is unblocked and the matter is referred to the courts. If the site owner does not respond with a counter-notice the site remains blocked.
If I am correct, what is stopping me from drafting a "take-down" notice stating that I own the trademark for MPAA.org? RIAA.org? whitehouse.gov?
Would this not automatically force the specific site off-line until they produce a counter-notice?
No, jackass. Vote for who you think should be in office. Not "the lesser of two..." or other voting strategies. This is the surest way to keep things from changing.
'Vote with your feet' lacks any real teeth within a centralized, Federalist system. Different states and localities lack the sovereignty necessary to demonstrate the superiority of a radically different method of government. I agree the idea is a good one, in fact I fully identify as a panarchist because I have come to realize that there is no perfect system under which every person can be happy, but the first necessary change would be to decentralize authority, and good luck ever achieving that.
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
Earl Grey tea is just black tea blended with bergamot You can get it from thousands of suppliers. Quality varies--too much bergamot is bitter, too little can be insipid.
Time to learn how to use Tor I guess.
As long as the media has enough people thinking this way, the duopoly wins.
The problem is that it doesn't matter what you do, the duopoly wins.
The two largest third parties are the Greens and the Libertarians. You can't go from a situation where in one election either of those parties have zero seats in Congress and in the next they have 50% or more. Even if they won every single election held, only a minority of the seats in the Senate are even on the ballot in any given election. And the idea that they could win all the seats on the ballot is hopelessly, ridiculously optimistic. It would be a miracle if they could get five seats in the House.
Now let's suppose that happens. The Green party puts up a candidate in all the districts that aren't Republican strongholds, makes a miraculously strong showing, and five of them win. But in a large number of districts where they ran and they didn't win, their strong showing caused their Democratic opponent to lose to the Republican, because the Democrats and the Greens split the vote. So you get a new House of Representatives that contains 5 Greens, 150 Democrats and 280 Republicans. Oops.
Naturally, if anything even resembling that should happen, both the Greens and the Democrats do whatever it takes to stop it happening again. Because Greens running candidates in a substantial number of districts, if they make a strong enough showing for even a single one to win, have made a strong enough showing to cause 30 other Democrats to lose to Republicans. And the Greens have the same interest as the Democrats in seeing the Republicans lose. So what happens is that the two parties merge together. Both parties realize that they both lose to the Republicans if they run against each other, so they don't; all the viable Green candidates join the Democratic party and Greens never win another seat. The Green party remains in name only, full of the loons who were left over. And likewise for the Republicans as against the Libertarians.
But here's the secret to breaking it. You have to forget about all the existing parties. What you need is a new third party that takes exactly one half of its positions from the Democrats and one half from the Republicans. That way they "split the vote" with both major party candidates, which allows them to make a strong showing without devastating the major party most like them, because there isn't a major party "most" like them. (I leave it as an exercise to the reader to choose which half of the positions of each major party to adopt.)
goodbye Internet it was nice knowing you
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
You have to get active in the local part of one of the two major parties and get enough other people who agree with you active so that you can control who represents the local party in local elections and who represents the local party and higher levels. It takes work and it takes time, but you can change things if you are willing to put in the effort (and are willing to listen to other people's ideas).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Why not? It works on slashdot. No discussion is complete without a car analogy.
The text of goates posts.
You can't explain that!
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
If you are only going to vote in the general election, I would say that you should vote for, or against, the incumbent. Most of the time you should vote against the incumbent (this is significantly less true in elections for offices that are term limited). It is much easier to unseat a bad one-term legislator than a bad two or more term legislator. The longer someone is in a particular office, the less likely they are to actually act in the best interests of their constituents. There was actually a study that found that the more powerful the Congressman and Senators from a particular state were, the more poorly that state's economy did relative to the rest of the country.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Short term, the only way you are going to effect meaningful change to US elections is with a bunch of people with guns.
Long term, you can think about trying to work through the system like the LaRouche candidates are doing. Who knows, they might eventually make it. But it is going to take them decades as it would take any "populist" set of candidates to do so.
No, the answer is likely guns. Simply blocking the polling places and actively making sure that people who are planning to vote for the "wrong" candidate don't make it inside. The US population are for the most part sheep so any strategy that interferes with their ability to continue their lives unaffected is going to work. Unfortunately, the way the population is structured you can never have a majority of people really behind a "cause". Obama won because the Republicans couldn't field a candidate that was interesting enough and there was no third-party candidate to push the majority below 50%. Not being George Bush helped a lot too. Obama is unlikely to win again but it is possible because once more the Republican candidates are a lukewarm bunch with little going for them - other than not being Obama.
So the question is if an "occupy" style group decided to make sure that Obama won in 2012 by whatever means necessary to achieve that goal would they succeed? Well, the police, mayors and state officials would probably take days to figure out a strategy - long after the voting had ended. Would the federal government force a re-do of the election? Probably not as it would be hugely unpopular to do so even in the face of massive voter interference. So it would probably work and only really need a few thousand people in key cities. You see, the last few elections are very telling in that we are talking about less than a million votes making the difference between the two (or three) candidates.
Once you start down that road you can then get whatever reforms you want, assuming the elected candidate is really loyal to who put him in office. Obama may not be the right guy, but he seems to understand who got him in in 2008 well enough, and it wasn't the "progressives" or "liberals" or anyone other than people that financed the bulk of his campaign. Wall Street money did it and he has shown himself to be remarkably loyal to them. Perhaps he would be equally loyal to a group that ensured a second term and a hand-picked set of Senators to go along with it. Probably take back the House as well.
You have to keep voting for the less-evil of the two big parties, or the most-evil will get into power.
Of course, it could just be that both major parties are equally evil, just in different ways.
And then some nerd who's teed off about getting his domain seized or something puts together a replacement for DNS and it's all good again.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Instead of posting to the choir, do something that matters.
Send a dead-tree fax to your congressman.
Most of them don't give a rat's posterior about volumes of email messages. Send a real fax to your local congresscritter in your own state. Most have their local fax numbers available via their links at http://www.house.gov/representatives/ . Posting here and on other sites frequented by those of us who actually understand how bad the censorship will be won't do ANYTHING. Send a polite fax to your congressman's home (not in DC) office - even congressmen can count faxes.
-Jeff
The sooner the US gets pushed off the "world stage" the better for the American PEOPLE.
The US is merely a tool of the rich, and most Americans are not the elites. The rich keep us comfortable enough not to kill them, but the world would do us a favor to resist US hegemony, treat its politicians (ALL of them) with scorn, and chart its own course.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
It may not be clear to a lot of readers but Google is already considered a bad boy. Not just for "promoting" piracy. The far right wing is angry at Google for several reasons and Glenn Beck has advocated for a boycott of Google. Ie, supposedly it supports homosexual rights, censors right wing news, etc.
So it is no surprise at all that chairman Lamar Smith from the far right wing was so openly hostile to Google during the proceedings.
Do you wish your trolling powers were put to better use than simply trolling the already crappy /. messages threads? If so, there is an opportunity for you on the AFL-CIO blog!
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
First time I saw this I thought it said 'Stop Online Privacy Act'. Funny old world, this.
You sure it wasn't the Teamsters? They'd know all about that.
Get off my launchpad!
It's in the Republicans' DNA to attack civil rights and to support their moneyed sugar daddies.
I don't see them holding the House next year so SOPA may well be watered down in a year or so if it passes during this session. Here's to hoping, anyway.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
I'm sure everyone thought that in 1860...
Or didn't you know that Lincoln was running, essentially, as a third party candidate, since up to that point the "duopoly" had been the Democrats and the Whigs?
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
That'll work really well if you want to get arrested, and have the Supreme Court order new elections.
Otherwise, not so much.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Republicians Are on the Side of Big Record/Movie Labels
Democrats Are on the Side of RIAA/MPAA Artists.
Frankly, I'm more surprised it isn't the law of the land by now.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
Why was the first thing I thought of was mobbed up unions and Robert De Niro in Goodfellas?
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
ACTA is virtually toothless compared to TPPA. Look it up sometime.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
I'd hope the AFL-CIO would shape up if enough members threatened to quit.
Well they've had players quit before. I dont see what the CIO can do about that when keeping players is up to the clubs.
What, we aren't talking about the Australian Football League's Chief Information Officer?
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
...and then the thing I said would happen, did. The Whigs and the Republicans merged. Lincoln was a Whig before he was a Republican. The fact that most of the former Whigs joined the Republicans rather than the other way around doesn't really change anything. You can't get a stable third party with a first past the post voting system. The incentives for the two most similar parties to merge are too overwhelming.
Hammers are just hunks of metal attached to sticks. Mopheads are just pieces of cloth or rope attached to sticks. You can get either from hundreds if not thousands of suppliers. Do you not think that the supplier(s) of these items to the government get payoffs? $400 hammers?
The AFL-CIO is the equivalent of the mafia, and has been for at least 40 years now.
Like any organization, unions are fine until they get too powerful. After they reach a certain size, it's all about the interests of the few people controlling the union - and screw the little guy.
In this case, you can bet there have been some back-room deals between the AFL-CIO and the media companies - and the union leaders have fatter bank accounts as a result.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
Of course there are! Any 'little' person accused of abusing the system will be jailed and/or fined into oblivion, while any important person caught repeatedly abusing the system too much will be told that maybe they shouldn't do that as much, but gently as we wouldn't want to hurt their feelings.
The internet is not a big truck. It's a series of tubes.
That most Americans are oblivious to being oblivious to the sad state of "freedom" in their nation.
And that is the saddest one of all
SSC
We've detected you've joined an illegal terrorist DNS root. By doing so, you are aiding and abetting terrorism. Sorry citizen, but come with us.
SSC
the First Amendment does not protect stealing goods off trucks.
I do agree since one is about speech and the other about stealing 'hard' goods, but what the hell does that have to do with anything based on reality?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
There really isn't anything stopping you from voting for a third, fourth or fifth party other than the fear of the consequences. Why is it those who champion individual freedom are such whiners?
"What does it say about society that if you advocate legalizing almost everything you'll be labelled a conservative?"
and oddly conservatives are among those most adamantly opposed to legalizing abortion, gay rights and higher taxes on the wealthy. What does that say about "conservatives"?
"Short term, the only way you are going to effect meaningful change to US elections is with a bunch of people with guns."
I couldn't agree more. The sooner those eager to use guns against the government of the United States find themselves either dead or in jail, the sooner many of the US's problems will be solved.
Or the Greens could take over the democratic party like the Tea Party has done with the republican party and you get an entirely different outcome.
Only if by "an entirely different outcome" you mean "we still have a two party system."
The Tea Party doesn't really run candidates against the Republicans. They aren't forming another hopeless third party that never wins any seats, they're changing the nature of one of the existing major parties from the inside. (That is to say, they were before they were co-opted by the Republican campaign apparatus and their message was converted from something in the nature of fighting corruption to something in the nature of "taxes are bad, so we should cut everything other than the things that actually cost money.")