Conservatives4Palin (C4P) does excellent work, but they are of such a cheerleader mindset and approach that they sometimes loose sight of, uh, reality. Consider this from a 02 NOV 2010 response to criticism of the Tea Party Movement (TPM) from Karl Rove, noting the bolded parts of the article itself. Please tell me if you, deep in your gut, think this is even remotely true: ------------------------------------------ Tuesday, November 2, 2010 Palin v. Rove and the Battle for the GOP's Future By Doug Brady ... After eviscerating Christine O'Donnell's campaign, Rove challenged the TPM in Der Spiegel, where he was quoted as saying, If you look underneath the surface of the Tea Party movement, on the other hand, you will find that it is not sophisticated. It's not like these people have read the economist Friedrich August von Hayek. Rather, these are people who are deeply concerned about what they see happening to their country, particularly when it comes to spending, deficits, debt and health care. As a Tea Party supporter who talks with other Tea Party supporters, I would point out that the works of von Hayek, Friedman, von Mises, Hazlitt, and other adherents of "Austrian School" economics figure prominently in our discussions. At its heart, the Tea Party movement is about limiting the size, scope, and role of government. This philosophy is at the heart of Hayek's famous treatise, The Road to Serfdom and, I hasten to add, Governor Palin's economic philosophy. In fact, I have no doubt that the average Tea Partier knows far more about the writings of von Hayek than the politicos who occupy the beltway. I don't know if Karl "Tokyo" Rove has read von Hayek or not (I have). I am certain of one thing, however: if Rove did read it, he didn't understand it... --------------------------- That first paragraph (and first two sentences of the second) have to be among the most unbelieveable expressions ever to hit C4P. I've had my issues with C4P, but this one goes beyond mere "issues." Tea Partiers are by and large not educated on such matters. The vast majority have never even heard of "'Austrian School' economics," and every single one of your Tea Partier readers knows it. If they are honest, they will admit to complete ignorance of those high-falootin' people. Now, I'm the first to admit that not an economist and didn't know those names myself. (Just tell me how much gasoline and ammo will cost, and I'm done with economic matters.) My point was that a movement dominated by people who can't even spell "did'nt" ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMdPTpOyUk4 , go to 1:12 point) probably doesn't have a lot of people who've read much German (Austrians are ethnic German) beyond "Hansel and Gretel". More likely, they would hear "Austrian School" and all those "von" names, and label the whole thing "Nazi," because the ejeemakated ones would know Hitler was born Austrian. [T]he works of von Hayek, Friedman, von Mises, Hazlitt, and other adherents of "Austrian School" economics figure prominently in our discussions....In fact, I have no doubt that the average Tea Partier knows far more about the writings of von Hayek than the politicos who occupy the beltway. Someone tell me they honestly believe that about these people below: Screenshot from video--note bottom middle sign. Not only does this scene make Tea Partiers look stupid, it actually counters the effect intended. The video is a response to Keith Olber-notaman's complaint about the lack of "people of color" in the TPM. So some idiot in the Dallas group puts this video together and is either too stupid to spell, too dumb to realize how this makes them look, and/or too desperate for scenes of such people at TPM events that he includes that one picture here. Now, to give the C4P writer the benefit of a not-so-existent doubt, it's barely possible he simply means that Tea Partiers have a better grasp of those writers' economic values like "Don't spend so much!" than the bigwigs in DC. Yet if that's what he meant, he said it very, to borrow a term from Obamessiah, stupidly. He speaks specifically of their "works" and "writings," not simply the ideas included in their works and writings. If this defense is correct, he is either merely a bit delusional, or he thinks that using terms like "works" and "writings" makes the TPM sound a lot more educated and intelligent than even they might think they are. Either way, his "works" and "writings" here show actually turn around to show Rove--the man who admits he failed his President by not combating the anti-Iraq War lies--to have a point. |
