The playbook marches on *UPDATED*

Mr. Bookworm was very excited because both of his favorite publications just proved that the whole Tea Party is a fraud, funded and masterminded by the Koch brothers.  The most recent The New Yorker has an article saying so, and so does the New York Times.  Oh, my God!  It’s the evil Richard Mellon Scaife scenario all over again!  A few points seem to elude Mr. Bookworm.

1.  So what if the Tea Party is getting funded? If there wasn’t a genuine public feeling, all the funding would fall on its face.  Secretive billionaires can’t get between 500,000 to 1,000,000 so excited that they journey to D.C.  Soros has never managed it (unless you count all the people who turned up at the Obama inauguration as evidence.)

2.  No matter how the screamers try to build up the funding as something evil, it’s still a drop in the bucket compared to the collective money poured into the Dems (who admit their coffers are larger).  It’s also questionable whether it offsets the fact that 88% of the media and approximately 90% of academia contribute, not just money, but their intellectual power (such as it is) and their bully pulpits (which are huge) to the Democrats.

3.  Scaife was right:  Clinton was an incredibly corrupt sex assaulter and manipulator.  Even his followers knew that the sex charges were true, though they kept it secret.  In other words, Scaife’s funding did nothing but expose the truth.

Feel free to add to this list.

UPDATE:  The post title refers to the “coincidence” that the two articles appear at the same time.  This is not because the Left suddenly discovered the Kochs, who presumably have been a burr in their collective butt for a while.  It’s because the day’s menu calls for that item.  That the Left reads from the same menu shows up in other areas as well.  I’d also spotted the “predominantly white” phrase in the articles I read.  Notice that the articles are incapable of saying that blacks were barred, ridiculed, insulted, threatened or otherwise made unwelcome.  Apparently black self-selection is now the Tea Partiers’ fault too.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Spartacus says

    On the right, we have a few hyperventilational news and opinion sources who operate by innuendo, insinuation, deliberate misleading, careful omission, guilt by association through several degrees of separation, and a general disinterest in contacting the subject(s) of the story to hear their side of it.  And unfortunately, not all right-of-center news aggregators know enough to avoid occasionally linking to them.  But their headlines tend to be sufficiently distictive that the careful reader of aggregation sites senses something amiss, and can simply hover over the link, check the destination URL in the status bar, roll his or her eyes, and move on to the next item without wasting a trip through several servers.

    These stories from the left are precicely the sort of rubbish that I would put on my personal blacklist, were they from the right.  The difference is, The New Yorker and the NYT are not considered to be the WorldNet Daily and NewsMax of the left, but rather, their NRO.  It’s what happens in the intellectual marketplace when artificial barriers to entry create an enforced market hegemony over a prolonged period: atrophy of intellectual rigor.  Its demise cannot come too soon.

Leave a Reply