Karl Rove: The tea party is “not sophisticated” compared to the Reagan Revolution

posted at 7:12 pm on October 19, 2010 by Allahpundit

For some reason, this story made me think of that Politico poll this morning showing widespread skepticism about the tea party among Washington “insiders.” I wonder why.

Seriously, though, with one small exception I think the outrageous outrage about what he said here is overblown. Some people will grumble about it anyway, partly due to lingering resentment over his criticisms of O’Donnell a few weeks ago, but I don’t think he means to be insulting. The gist of what he’s saying is that (a) there are a lot of political newbies in the tea-party movement, which is true, (b) the tea-party movement is notably decentralized, which is also true, and (c) virtually all political movements, including the Civil Rights movement, expect instant change even though politics is more complicated than that. It’s not that tea partiers are “not sophisticated” in the sense that lefty bloggers are, ahem, “not sophisticated” about American history, it’s that they’re not sophisticated when it comes to building well-oiled political organizations. They’re getting there to be sure, but you don’t go from 0 to 90 overnight.

SPIEGEL: Are you convinced, then, that the Republican Party will be able to integrate the Tea Party without drifting too far to the right?

Rove: Sure. There have been movements like this before — the Civil Rights movement, the anti-war movement, the pro-life movement, the Second Amendment rights movement. All of them popped up, insistent, loud, and relatively unsophisticated. They wanted everything now and for politicians to be with them 100 percent of the time. And after an election or two, people wake up saying, our system produces mostly incremental progress and takes time and compromise. That’s exactly what’s going to happen here. I meet a lot of Tea Partiers as I go around the country, and they are amazing people. Most have never been involved in politics before. This is their first experience, and they have the enthusiasm of people who have never done it before.

SPIEGEL: Is the Tea Party movement a repeat of the Reagan Revolution?

Rove: It’s a little bit different because the Reagan Revolution was driven a lot by the persona of one man, Ronald Reagan, who had an optimistic and sunny view of what the nation could be. It was also a well-organized, coherent, ideologically motivated and conservative revolution. 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.

Read the whole interview, as he goes on to defend O’Donnell (er, sort of), calls Obama a centrist only by the standards of European social democracy, and reminds the interviewer that The One wasn’t the only president in recent memory to have his legitimacy questioned by the other party. I don’t know what he’s talking about, though, when he says tea partiers haven’t read Hayek — didn’t they help make “The Road to Serfdom” a bestseller a few months ago after Glenn Beck touted it on his show? — and it’s bizarre that he’d describe the Reagan Revolution as “ideologically motivated and conservative” but not the tea party. I think what he means is that Reaganism was more about a comprehensive conservative policy platform, including social conservatism, whereas the tea party is chiefly (but not entirely) a response to the looming fiscal crisis caused by debt, entitlements, pension obligations, and so forth. In other words, the tea party is a tad narrower in scope (but maybe not for much longer). Argue with that if you like, but I don’t think he means it as an insult.

Update: Actually, maybe his point about Hayek is that there aren’t many tea partiers who have read Hayek’s more nuts-and-bolts economic pieces, only the broader big-think stuff like “Serfdom.” That is to say, whereas the Reagan Revolution had a stable of think-tank eggheads ready to roll out policy ideas, the tea party thus far is an almost entirely grassroots populist phenomenon. I’m not sure that he’s right — the good folks at the Cato Institute would happily lend a hand in a tea-party administration, I assume — but that’s his claim.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Screw this jerk.

Bugler on October 19, 2010 at 7:14 PM

Bye “Mr. Illegal Alien”

tool….

Oil Can on October 19, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Hey, Turd Blossom, go Fxxx yourself!

patch on October 19, 2010 at 7:16 PM

But a guy whose nickname is turd blossom is sophisticated?

Blake on October 19, 2010 at 7:17 PM

Karl Rove should be more responsible with his huge brain.

Meighy McCain & Karl Rove sure sound the same lately.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:18 PM

Overreaction, underreaction, who cares. Wouldn’t hurt the Tea Party to distance themselves from Rove as much as possible anyway.

Go RBNY on October 19, 2010 at 7:18 PM

Rove’s O’Donnell moment

I guess what goes around, comes around.

Kini on October 19, 2010 at 7:19 PM

I don’t know what he’s talking about, though, when he says tea partiers haven’t read Hayek — didn’t they help make “The Road to Serfdom” a bestseller a few months ago after Glenn Beck touted it on his show? — and it’s bizarre that he’d describe the Reagan Revolution as “ideologically motivated and conservative” but not the tea party.

Exactly, Ap. That was very strange. Remember last week when, I think, the WaPo was scolding tea partiers for reading all those dead supply side economists and such? Then Rove singles out Hayek? Doesn’t that sound…just simply out of touch with both sides?

Weight of Glory on October 19, 2010 at 7:19 PM

I don’t know what he’s talking about, though, when he says tea partiers haven’t read Hayek.

Exactly, Ap. That was very strange. Remember last week when, I think, the WaPo was scolding tea partiers for reading all those dead supply side economists and such? Then Rove singles out Hayek? Doesn’t that sound…just simply out of touch with both sides?

Weight of Glory on October 19, 2010 at 7:20 PM

Try integrating the Tea Party if the GOP doesn’t get its collective crap together by 2012, the only things being integrated will be the losers of both parties as they leave their Congressional offices for the last time.

Bishop on October 19, 2010 at 7:21 PM

Hey guys, Karl is right. The Tea Party isn’t a sophisticated, savvy group. Not yet. That’s part of the charm.

Oink on October 19, 2010 at 7:21 PM

Wow. They really are scared shirtless. Or they’re just completely stupid.

SouthernGent on October 19, 2010 at 7:22 PM

A fly swatter isn’t very sophisticated either, but sometimes it is just the right tool for the job. Brooms, shovels, hoses, pitchforks. None are sophisticated, but they work exceedingly well for cleaning up B.S. and other offal.

daddio on October 19, 2010 at 7:22 PM

Exactly, I thought tea partiers were supposed to be unsophisticated because they they DO read Hayek.

See what happens when Journolist goes down?

Planet Moron on October 19, 2010 at 7:23 PM

I don’t think he means to be insulting.

I suppose it just comes natural to DC insiders.

SPIEGEL: Are you convinced, then, that the Republican Party will be able to integrate the Tea Party without drifting too far to the right?

Rove: Sure. There have been movements like this before — the Civil Rights movement, the anti-war movement, the pro-life movement, the Second Amendment rights movement. All of them popped up, insistent, loud, and relatively unsophisticated. They wanted everything now and for politicians to be with them 100 percent of the time.

This sort of thing makes me pessimistic as to the ability of the GOP to actually understand what is going on. They want to co-opt and harness the Tea Party like some kind of draft horse to pull their baggage. That isn’t going to work.

sharrukin on October 19, 2010 at 7:23 PM

The tea party is “not sophisticated” compared to the Reagan Revolution

Look what the original members of the Regan Revolution have lowered themselves to:

David Brooks
Kathleen Parker
Peggy Noonan
George Will

These were the Reagan Revolution “Sophisticates”.

I’ll be with the Tea party Crowd, you can keep your “Sophisticates”..

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:23 PM

Rove is out of touch with the conservative movement. Medicare Part D, amnesty for illegals, and “compassionate conservatism” are from Karl Marx.

Valiant on October 19, 2010 at 7:24 PM

I was part of the Reagan Revolution. The remark was pretty dumb.

Connie on October 19, 2010 at 7:24 PM

The tea party is “not sophisticated” compared to the Reagan Rev*lution

Look what the original members of the Regan Rev*lution have lowered themselves to:

David Brooks
Kathleen Parker
Peggy Noonan
George Will

These were the Reagan Rev*lution “Sophisticates”.

I’ll be with the Tea party Crowd, you can keep your “Sophisticates”..

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:24 PM

Rove is the establiishment GOP. The ones that chose Gerald Ford over Ronald Reagan. That could be compared to choosing Joe Biden over Ronald Reagan. They chose Bob Dole and John McCain. Hard to believe, isn’t it? The only reason they are even relevant is they exist as only the lesser of two evils. The day is coming, but political evolution has to start somewhere and they, like the liberals, exaggerate their own self worth. Obama must be stopped and Rove’s party is the only vehicle available. Conservatives will clean the wound that is as close to a mortal wound as never before. If they recognize it great, if not, there relevance will erode as it most definitely will.

volsense on October 19, 2010 at 7:24 PM

REMEMBER FOLKS: HOTAIR WILL NOT ALLOW THE WORD REV*LUTION IN THE COMMENTS SECTION, EVEN THOUGH IT IS USED IN THE HEADLINE.

JUST TRYING TO SAVE YOU ALL FROM DOUBLE/TRIPLE POSTING.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:25 PM

For some reason, this story made me think of that Politico poll this morning showing widespread skepticism about the tea party among Washington “insiders.” I wonder why.

I think it is the paucity of concrete policies which drives that skepticism. Extensive polling of Tea Party membership shows unified objectives but on specific policies and how to get there, the movement splinters badly.

lexhamfox on October 19, 2010 at 7:26 PM

That is to say, whereas the Reagan Rev*lution had a stable of think-tank eggheads ready to roll out policy ideas, the tea party thus far is an almost entirely grassroots populist phenomenon

Well…yeah…but isn’t every “rev*lution” made up of different levels or strata of participation and knowledge? Am I to believe that there was no “unsophisticated” elements that led the popular drive at the grassroots level within the Reagan revolution? Did the 48-49 state majorities that pushed Reagan to victory all know the “nuts and bolts” of sophisticated economic theory? It still doesn’t make sense with that explanation.

Weight of Glory on October 19, 2010 at 7:26 PM

I actually don’t think that Rove was trying to insult the tea party, because the good thing about the tea party right now, they are not centered around one candidate(that may change for 2012), but right now they are a grassroots movement and I think that is what Rove was trying to say.

ConservativePartyNow on October 19, 2010 at 7:26 PM

That is to say, whereas the Reagan Rev*lution had a stable of think-tank eggheads ready to roll out policy ideas, the tea party thus far is an almost entirely grassroots populist phenomenon

Well…yeah…but isn’t every “rev*lution” made up of different levels or strata of participation and knowledge? Am I to believe that there was no “unsophisticated” elements that led the popular drive at the grassroots level within the Reagan rev*lution? Did the 48-49 state majorities that pushed Reagan to victory all know the “nuts and bolts” of sophisticated economic theory? It still doesn’t make sense with that explanation.

Weight of Glory on October 19, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Guess you have to be a lot more sophisticated to be able to interpret what he is saying than I am. He has been at this game long enough to say what he means without any ambiguity.

fourdeucer on October 19, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Hey Karl… Blow me…

Very few people knew anything about economics (or Voodoo Economics as GHWB desribed it), we just knew we wanted things back to the way they were… Today’s Tea Party activist has a much better feeling of the economics and history involved

phreshone on October 19, 2010 at 7:28 PM

“Sophisticated” pretty much just means “complex” anyway. I don’t take it as a compliment. Only sophisticated people could contort themselves into an intellectual position from which they think we can spend our way out of debt and borrow our way to prosperity.

forest on October 19, 2010 at 7:28 PM

SPIEGEL: Are you convinced, then, that the Republican Party will be able to integrate the Tea Party without drifting too far to the right?

I always laugh when I see phrasing like this. Define “far right” ideas as it relates to what you could seriously see the Tea Party as a whole getting behind.

Kataklysmic on October 19, 2010 at 7:28 PM

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:25 PM

Thanks. I had to hunt for all my usages of that word. It’s like a Where’s Waldo hunt for the “offensive” terms.

Weight of Glory on October 19, 2010 at 7:28 PM

Rush touched on this today…

… the fear of the Political Elite on both sides.

Seven Percent Solution on October 19, 2010 at 7:29 PM

I’m not the least bit offended if someone says I’m unsophisticated; at least regarding political sausage-making.

I don’t feel like it’s my job to be an average citizen, small business owner, Conservative, and politician. I vote to elect that last one. It’s his/her job to represent my views properly and adequately in the political arena. Failing that, I vote for someone else.

I don’t feel as though I must know the process inside and out to form reasonable opinions and make reasonable decisions about my elected representatives. So, unsophisticated to the operations of the political machine? Sure, I’ll admit to that.

BKeyser on October 19, 2010 at 7:30 PM

My collie says:

Hey Karl. I guess maybe those colonists that dressed up like indians and threw the tea off of those British ships into Boston harbor in the middle of the night weren’t very sophisticated either. Markos and Gwen and can tell you that they didn’t even do it in the right year.

Yeah. I doubt they’d read Friedrich August von Hayek either.

CyberCipher on October 19, 2010 at 7:31 PM

It’s not like these people have read the economist Friedrich August von Hayek

 
Yep. You’re right, Karl. Plenty of us were taught economics by our parents at the kitchen table. You know, like how to maintain a balanced checkbook and learning stupid-people things like “don’t spend more than you earn” and “debt is useful but dangerous and should be taken on cautiously and carefully.”

rogerb on October 19, 2010 at 7:34 PM

Reagan was pro-government, and he made the government bigger.

That’s why we want Ron Paul.

Spathi on October 19, 2010 at 7:36 PM

That’s why we want Ron Paul.

Spathi on October 19, 2010 at 7:36 PM

If the votes he got are anything to go by, there is no ‘we‘ involved. It’s pretty much just you.

sharrukin on October 19, 2010 at 7:38 PM

Ronald Reagan must be rolling over in his grave at all these jackwagons invoking his revolution….

“I was a foot soldier of the Reagan Revolution”-Juan McCain

“Americans that don’t want their children and grand children to endure the pain and suffering of debilitating debt and overreaching government are not sophisticated compared to their forefathers that wanted the same for them”…..thankfully for us, Rove hasn’t decided to run for anything.

HornetSting on October 19, 2010 at 7:39 PM

Is Rove’s brain bigger than his skull? Or is his foot bigger than his mouth?

EMD on October 19, 2010 at 7:39 PM

Its the difference between being angry when leftoids call for massive increases in gas taxes, and a subtle takedown of the invisible hand verse central planning. I don’t think its that big a deal.

rob verdi on October 19, 2010 at 7:39 PM

Reagan was pro-government, and he made the government bigger.

That’s why we want Ron Paul.

Spathi on October 19, 2010 at 7:36 PM

He’ll never make it; he’s come out way too strongly against the Zionist and military-industrial influences in his lifetime. And unlike Obama, he would actually do something about them if elected.

His son might have a shot, though. He’s sold out to various degrees on things his father wouldn’t budge on…but I have a hard time blaming him for that since our system is just a few steps above Mexico for corruption.

Dark-Star on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

I think there are alot of highly educated opinions here at HA, but he’s probably right about the movement as a whole….try not to take it so personally….

lynncgb on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

How the hell does expanding entitlements fit into the Reagan Revolution, Mr. Rove?

You’re a poser.

mankai on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

Uh the Tea Party brought us Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle…I think I agree with Karl.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

Rove’s hatred of the Tea Party can be directly linked to the O’Donnell win against Mike Castle.

He has literally become unhinged about it. This is just more of the same.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

Politico trying to stir stuff up.

MayBee on October 19, 2010 at 7:44 PM

Uh the Tea Party brought us Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle…I think I agree with Karl.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

O’Donnell & Angle won their primaries fair and square. No phony ballots, no ACORN, no “Dead voters”.

Get the Heck over it already.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:45 PM

REMEMBER FOLKS: HOTAIR WILL NOT ALLOW THE WORD REV*LUTION IN THE COMMENTS SECTION, EVEN THOUGH IT IS USED IN THE HEADLINE.
JUST TRYING TO SAVE YOU ALL FROM DOUBLE/TRIPLE POSTING.
portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:25 PM

I thought long ago it was agreed that “Rancid” would be used in place of The Word Which Shall Not Be Written here at HA?

Example: The American Rancid War OR The Industrial Rancid

Bishop on October 19, 2010 at 7:45 PM

Uh the Tea Party brought us Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle…I think I agree with Karl.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

I see no problem with that line of thinking at all.

Weight of Glory on October 19, 2010 at 7:46 PM

Shut up and go away you big amnesty-shill hack.

oddjob1138 on October 19, 2010 at 7:46 PM

I was too young to vote for Reagan the first time, happily pulled the lever for him in 1984 and while there was plenty of enthusiasm for him back then much of it was revulsion at Carter and the economic mess we were in. The antipathy toward the Democrats, Obama in particular, is at a much more fevered pitch these days and our economy isn’t in much better shape than in 1980. Back then it was considered the silent majority and Reagan Democrats who abandoned Carter. I sense the excitement nowadays is driven a lot by the 24/7 media, the Internet boom and loathing of the media.

Back then we got our news and opinion from so few sources, hence it may be seen as a revolution led by a limited chattering class of the Will and Buckley types. Today we all have a megaphone and it may not come off as highbrow, sophisticated discussion to the DC types. But I think we’re much more fired up these days.

JammieWearingFool on October 19, 2010 at 7:47 PM

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:45 PM

The GOP gave us Lissa Murkelshevski, Castle, and Crist.

Karl should shut up now.

Bishop on October 19, 2010 at 7:47 PM

terryann take your bs somewhere else

CWforFreedom on October 19, 2010 at 7:48 PM

Uh the Tea Party brought us Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle…I think I agree with Karl.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

The Tea Party brought us Scott Brown & Chris Christie.
I think I disagree with Karl.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:48 PM

I was too young to vote for Reagan the first time, happily pulled the lever for him in 1984 and while there was plenty of enthusiasm for him back then much of it was revulsion at Carter and the economic mess we were in. The antipathy toward the Democrats, Obama in particular, is at a much more fevered pitch these days and our economy isn’t in much better shape than in 1980. Back then it was considered the silent majority and Reagan Democrats who abandoned Carter. I sense the excitement nowadays is driven a lot by the 24/7 media, the Internet boom and loathing of the media.

Back then we got our news and opinion from so few sources, hence it may be seen as a revolt led by a limited chattering class of the Will and Buckley types. Today we all have a megaphone and it may not come off as highbrow, sophisticated discussion to the DC types. But I think we’re much more fired up these days.

JammieWearingFool on October 19, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Rove let’s slip the mask.

Back when Palin resigned, the first thing she did was run around DC shopping for a policy job. She got rejected by every think tank there is. Every one of them. That is when she saw the tea parties break out, she lent her prestige to them and surreptitiously built them into such a huge force. She had no choice but to wage a populist revolution because the establishment closed their doors on her.

And it wasn’t Romney alone who drafted his wretched healthcare bill. Heritage was completely behind it.

What does this all mean?It means that the policy think tanks which were part of Reaganite movement are no longer conservative and the tea party people have their work cut out for them. They will have to fight the whole enchilada–American Crossroads, RNC, Heritage, NRO– all the while their own candidates will defect to the other side like Brown and Miller.

All this

promachus on October 19, 2010 at 7:50 PM

We get it, Karl. The Outside-the-Beltway rubes will be so emBARRRRassing at your fancy-schmancy cocktail parties. They’re just so “flyover.”

hoosiermama on October 19, 2010 at 7:50 PM

I bet the tea party has more NYTimes best sellers sold than and other.

tarpon on October 19, 2010 at 7:52 PM

“If you look underneath the surface of the Tea Party movement, on the other hand, you will find that it is not sophisticated.”

You know Karl…

… Individual citizens meeting for a common cause to restore liberty and freedom on their own dime against the corrupt political elite and entrenched bureaucracy that is the cause of the problem seems fairly sophisticated to me.

Seven Percent Solution on October 19, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Uh the Tea Party brought us Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle…I think I agree with Karl.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:43 PM

Of course you do.
I’m just glad you don’t live in Florida…I’ll bet Crist would appreciate your vote.

HornetSting on October 19, 2010 at 7:54 PM

The Tea Party movement to me seems very sophisticated: It is taking down the obnoxious “moderates” and “compassionate conservatives,” the kind Rove likes that helped bring us Obama, and the Tea Party is giving us real conservatives to vote for.

Also, how can Rove, that apologetic, elitist “compassionate conservative,” even think he is part of the Reagan Revolution? He was the architect of its destruction.

Gabe on October 19, 2010 at 7:54 PM

This is where the the Bush crew (and others) can’t seem to grasp what a movement is vs a party.

clement on October 19, 2010 at 7:55 PM

The Tea Party brought us Scott Brown & Chris Christie.
I think I disagree with Karl.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:48 PM

I didn’t know Chris Christie was supported by the Tea Party.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:55 PM

Of course you do.
I’m just glad you don’t live in Florida…I’ll bet Crist would appreciate your vote.

HornetSting on October 19, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Yuck. I can’t stand Crist.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:56 PM

I didn’t know Chris Christie was supported by the Tea Party.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:55 PM

Well now you do.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:56 PM

Karl, Karl, Karl, you sure know how to insert your foot into your mouth, don’t you??
If the tea party has the backing of Rush, we don’t need you. Republicans will be begging for our support not the other way around!! Get use to us, we are a force and you & your snobby friends will soon find this out.

mmcnamer1 on October 19, 2010 at 7:59 PM

Based on the spending of the Bush administration, it is clear Rove never read Hayek himself.

echosyst on October 19, 2010 at 7:59 PM

The GOP gave us Lissa Murkelshevski, Castle, and Crist.

Karl should shut up now.

Bishop on October 19, 2010 at 7:47 PM

Arlen Specter too.

the_nile on October 19, 2010 at 7:59 PM

OT: The Iron Lady taken to the Hospital….

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 8:00 PM

Dismiss Rove at your own risk. Just like superior athletes, Rove makes politics look easy – it’s not.

rock the casbah on October 19, 2010 at 8:02 PM

HornetSting on October 19, 2010 at 7:54 PM
Yuck. I can’t stand Crist.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:56 PM

I figured he’d be your man, terryann.

HornetSting on October 19, 2010 at 8:04 PM

As much as I admired Ron Reagan, he did say that America was transitioning to a service based economy.
-
He apparently did’t understand the process of wealth creation.
-
Services do NOT create wealth.
-
Mining the earth and manufacturing products create wealth, period.
-
I wonder if Rove gets it.
-

esblowfeld on October 19, 2010 at 8:05 PM

Dismiss Rove at your own risk. Just like superior athletes, Rove makes politics look easy – it’s not.

rock the casbah on October 19, 2010 at 8:02 PM

What are Rove’s accomplishments, exactly? Barely winning the elections of 2000 and 2004 that should have been landslides?

Gabe on October 19, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Dismiss Rove at your own risk. Just like superior athletes, Rove makes politics look easy – it’s not.

rock the casbah on October 19, 2010 at 8:02 PM

The same could be said of Axelrod.

That doesn’t mean we agree with what he says.

sharrukin on October 19, 2010 at 8:06 PM

As much as I admired Ron Reagan, he did say that America was transitioning to a service based economy.
-
He apparently did’t understand the process of wealth creation.
-
esblowfeld on October 19, 2010 at 8:05 PM

Bullsh!t. He understood it, he just didn’t have the power to stop it, any more than he could ask Congress repeal the law of gravity.

Even a man of his stature can only do so much.

Dark-Star on October 19, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Reagan was pro-government, and he made the government bigger.

That’s why we want Ron Paul.

Spazti on October 19, 2010 at 7:36 PM

The lab called , your meds are ready.

cableguy615 on October 19, 2010 at 8:07 PM

Dismiss Rove at your own risk. Just like superior athletes, Rove makes politics look easy – it’s not.

rock the casbah on October 19, 2010 at 8:02 PM

Politics today is a sewer. If Rove knows his way around it so well, its because he’s been down there for awhile.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 8:10 PM

Reagan remains my political hero, but he term-limited his revolution by picking a non-Reaganite as his successor. As gifted and persuasive as Reagan was, he failed to change the entrenched establishment idiocracy in the unelected institutions of power, including the GOP. Despite Reagan’s impressive accomplishments, unelected liberals still dominated academia, the media, the judiciary and the bureaucracy when he left office and 22 years later. Such are the limits of top-to-bottom revolutions so dependent on one specific leader.

The Tea Party is a bottom-to-top and side-to-side revolution that will not rise or fall on the actions of one leader. The advantage of citizen revolution is that change surges upward from grassroots consensus. The rebellion is against all institutions of power, elected and unelected, that are out of touch with the will of the people. If the Tea Party fulfills its promise, culture as well as politics will be revolutionized from the bottom up.

Terrie on October 19, 2010 at 8:12 PM

Karl Rove’s Opinion is highly overrated.

IowaWoman on October 19, 2010 at 8:13 PM

This guy is becoming annoying. I’m sure that more Tea Party members have read Hayek than all of congress. By the way
after Obama any one is qualified to run for office.

Who are the senators that don’t like O’Donnell?
What are the names of these insiders?

lilium on October 19, 2010 at 8:18 PM

Rove’s opinion is on par with Newt’s and not very relevant. I do hope they get the message and don’t try to play a waiting game – hoping the TEA Partiers will ‘give up after a few elections’. THAT would be a very grave error for the RINO and Dem elitists.

Sporty1946 on October 19, 2010 at 8:19 PM

I agree with AP. I don’t think he meant it as an insult, and frankly, I don’t take it as one.

This is a popular uprising, not a Washington power shift.

It may result in a Washington power shift, but the direction of change is entirely different. This is bottom up, not top down, and to be honest, that’s a good thing.

Chris of Rights on October 19, 2010 at 8:26 PM

I’m sorry but I just despise Karl Rove.

This guy is very intelligent like Michael Barone (about districts and polling, etc.) but he is just a elitist BUSH FAMILY tool. He is everything WRONG with the GOP. He’s a sellout to the highest bidder and the only reason he’s putting money into these elections for GOP candidates is that he knows…….KNOWS……Political power means MONEY FOR YOUR FRIENDS.

Between this kneepad Republican and Richard Lugar, Judd Gregg and the other RINO-Wretches I don’t know if the GOP will ever survive.

THROW THEM ALL OUT…..!!!!

TEANAMI……….11/2/2010

TEANAMI II !!!!..November 2012

PappyD61 on October 19, 2010 at 8:38 PM

REMEMBER FOLKS: HOTAIR WILL NOT ALLOW THE WORD REV*LUTION IN THE COMMENTS SECTION, EVEN THOUGH IT IS USED IN THE HEADLINE.

Hmmm…

You say you want a rev‍olu‍tion; well, ya know…
We all wanna change the world.

The Monster on October 19, 2010 at 8:38 PM

I didn’t know Chris Christie was supported by the Tea Party.

terryannonline on October 19, 2010 at 7:55 PM
Well now you do.

portlandon on October 19, 2010 at 7:56 PM

Don’t forget the original Tea Party candidate – Marco Rubio

Marybeth on October 19, 2010 at 8:41 PM

and it’s bizarre that he’d describe the Reagan Revolution as “ideologically motivated and conservative” but not the tea party.

I think the problem here is, Rove is part of the elitist Republicans. The insider. So he would see any group….as not up to snuff. He’s free to think what he wants, but I think he’s not as conservative as the Tea Party, and sides with the insiders who believe they’re entitled to their jobs. He doesn’t want change of the guard anymore than McCain, or Boehner, or Pelosi, or Reid want it.

capejasmine on October 19, 2010 at 8:43 PM

That’s why we I want Ron Paul.

Spathi on October 19, 2010 at 7:36 PM

Fixed it for you Acrosso

bw222 on October 19, 2010 at 8:44 PM

Tea Partiers know that this will be a long march: “Change” will be “instant” for some, but others will require repeated lessons.

GaltBlvnAtty on October 19, 2010 at 8:45 PM

He better hope Obama accuses him of something illegal again, I bet his donations are going to plummet.

Cindy Munford on October 19, 2010 at 8:48 PM

Extensive polling of Tea Party membership shows unified objectives but on specific policies and how to get there, the movement splinters badly.

lexhamfox on October 19, 2010 at 7:26 PM

Have you a link to this extensive polling?

massrighty on October 19, 2010 at 8:52 PM

The money Mr. Rove has raised is much appreciated, but it will not buy him any reprieve from the Tea Partiers. He has made some dumb mistakes this election cycle.

d1carter on October 19, 2010 at 8:52 PM

Mining the earth and manufacturing products create wealth, period.
-

esblowfeld on October 19, 2010 at 8:05 PM

This! is the missing element in all conversations about increasing America’s greatness.

We must build our manufacturing capacity, and produce vastly more of the products and materials we consume.

massrighty on October 19, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Time will tell if Michael was right (or even McCain)……

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/the_real_american_idol/article1656939.ece

This from 2008………..

Michael Reagan, 63, said watching the vice-presidential hopeful was like seeing “my dad reborn – only this time he’s a she”.

Palin’s stirring speech at the Republican convention on Wednesday night was watched by 40million people across the US.

And Michael, a broadcaster and writer whose father was President from 1981 to 1989 – said: “I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan.

I insisted he was one of a kind. I was wrong!”

Describing Palin’s speech as “electrifying”, he added: “Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.”

and now this in 2010….

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/nightline-exclusive-interview-sen-john-mccain/story?id=11908284&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

In his first extensive television interview since defeating Hayworth in the Arizona primary, echoes from the 2008 election lingered as McCain again said he supported his former running mate former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin.

I haven’t seen anyone since Ronald Reagan that with certain individuals and large groups of individuals who really have this passionate belief and support for her,” he said, “It’s really a remarkable thing to observe.

KARL ROVE…….LET’S HELP HIM EAT SOME CROW.

PappyD61 on October 19, 2010 at 8:55 PM

It appears as though Rove has lost his medical insurance, no meds…

Gohawgs on October 19, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Karl Rove loves to give bloggers something to blog about Glenn Beck does also. Today Glenn Beck even started instructing the Lefty bloggers on air, to pay attention and pause the show when they needed to.

Karl Rove is playing people like a fiddle, you want a Republican “Establishment” target? Rove is not running for any public office, he is happy to let you vent, better him than any Republican incumbents.

It’s called, Manipulation.

Dr Evil on October 19, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Karl its like this: enough have read Hayek and other economists to tell their friends about it so that they understand it. Once you got the basics down then the ‘application’ part is nuts and bolts, and the people looking to get elected aren’t the types who are career politicians – they are ‘nuts and bolts’ sort of people from various normal jobs that you have to do this thing known as ‘work at’ to get paid.

They are not taking the ‘sophisticated’ appraoch of this as a career – but as a job that is messy, dirty, and needs to be done. And the ‘sophisticated’ politicians have screwed it up royally over the last 90 years. So if the ever so lovely ‘sophisticated’ politicians can’t figure out that the economy needs to be left alone to run well, then perhaps it is time for people actually used to real jobs with real understanding of how to balance a friggin budget a chance to figure things out. They will take a truly pragmatic approach of: cut what doesn’t work, cut what is unnecessary, sell off parts that are unnecessary and can get cash, cut down on the spending by a factor of 70%, let people keep their cash, knock off the regulatory state and maybe, just maybe, see if there is some way to pay off the era of ‘sophisticated’ spendthrift DEBT.

Its pretty simple, Karl: the ‘sophisticated’ ones aren’t serious about doing their JOB. They aren’t serious about treating the people’s money with respect because the individuals EARN THAT MONEY and it is THEIRS. And for all of lovely Reaganism there was no cutting back on the size, scope or cost of government beyond letting it grow slower. You guys left the monster in place so once the tax cuts generated some revenue the ‘sophisticates’ spent it all plus an additional 30 cents for every buck taken in… and not one penny of it was THEIRS.

Got it, Karl?

You don’t have to be ‘sophisticated’ to understand that your lovely agenda didn’t change a damned thing worth talking about and never, not once, attempted to address the entitlements that you KNEW where going to make us insolvent. For a bunch of ‘sophisticates’ you guys really were bozos on that, you know?

ajacksonian on October 19, 2010 at 9:04 PM

What we unsophisticated people know, is we can’t or don’t want to have to afford the sophisticated prescription drug plan, the illegal amnesty plan, the winning hearts and minds of the enemy plan, the Obamacare, the cap and tax, the global baloney hoax the Rino establishment elites or the Demrat socialist/ Marxists!

You sophisticates have ef’d us over for the last time baldy and in my most unsophisticated way I say kiss my ass, bone head!

I’m an Economics and Business major and I know bullsh.t when I see it whether it be free drugs, free immigration, being nice to the enemy or Obamas Blunders.

You RINO’s got a reprieve for the most part this time and as Sarah said yesterday in Nevada learn or be gone. As a matter of fact you insider, game playin, money changers are gonna be gone either way, you have scavenged and siphoned funds from the good intentioned “little people” long enough!
Now, get your smart ass out of town ahead of the pitchforks and torches, IF YOUR INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO SEE THEM COMMIN!

dhunter on October 19, 2010 at 9:15 PM

I think the problem here is, Rove is part of the elitist Republicans. The insider. So he would see any group….as not up to snuff. He’s free to think what he wants, but I think he’s not as conservative as the Tea Party, and sides with the insiders who believe they’re entitled to their jobs. He doesn’t want change of the guard anymore than McCain, or Boehner, or Pelosi, or Reid want it.

capejasmine on October 19, 2010 at 8:43 PM

Thats’ right, because he is a political consultant and fund raiser and HE MAKES MONEY NO MATTER WHO IS IN CHARGE!

Throw their asses out! Run the media, political, big corporate alliance to ground and then bury it. Chase the money changers from the temple with extreme prejudice, then never forget that they robbed the “little people” who make this country work and pay its bills to enrich themselves!

Starts with Sarah the reformer in 2012! Thats’ why they fear and must stop her, she will tear their playhouse down!

dhunter on October 19, 2010 at 9:25 PM

What do you know, Karl Rove? With you as his “Architect” Bush only beat nutty Al Gore by the luck of the electoral draw and only beat John Dufus Kerry by Ohio. He should have easily beaten Gore and beaten Kerry in a landslide. Why don’t you just go off some place and count your money for the next several years. Without you the Tea Party and America would be much better off.

Luka on October 19, 2010 at 9:31 PM

As has always been the case, karl Rove has a brilliant mind and great teaching skill….but karl also has an agenda. He isn’t doing the stuff for noblesse oblige reasons. His agenda is simple…derail Palin thus leaving Jeb Bush a shot at reclaiming the Bush family’s divine right to the Presidency. That makes every word he says suspect.

jimw on October 19, 2010 at 9:38 PM

Rove is a JACKASS. NO make that an elite JACKASS with his own agenda. He is most definitely, trying to derail the Palin train. What a JACKASS.

Buckeye Babe on October 19, 2010 at 9:43 PM

Comment pages: 1 2