Via the ‘Busters, this is one of those clips that’s so immensely stupid, it’s actually confounding. Where to begin? Is he suggesting that tea partiers are so committed to the “every man for himself” ethos of individualism that they oppose on principle any form of mutually beneficial cooperation — especially between desperate miners or, say, U.S. troops trapped in a survival situation? Does he not get that the reason most conservatives want less government is because they believe that people’s lives will improve that way — i.e. that liberty is a means to the end of maximizing welfare, which sort of cuts against the “tea-party miners killing each other” scenario? Does he at least understand that small government does allow for some government, and that fiscal conservatism fully allows for charity for people in need — like, say, a few dozen men trapped in a hole half a mile down? What the hell is he talking about here?
The punchline: Given his past rhetoric about scabs, if there’s anyone you wouldn’t want to be trapped in a mine with, it’s Richard Trumka. Refuse to play by his rules and you might just get your head cracked open. As a corrective to this insanity, read this new op-ed from Daniel Henninger at the Journal. Exit quotation: “The rescue of the Chilean miners is a smashing victory for free-market capitalism.”