Karl Rove Admits That 'Tea Party' Candidates Are Just Republicans That Have Already Held Elective Office


I think Karl Rove just let one slip during this interview with Fox's Greta Van Susteren on Friday night. While discussing Herman Cain's latest rise in the polls and whether he has the organization in place to turn those poll numbers into voters turning out for him or not, and Van Susteren mentioning that the "tea party" might be ready to get behind Cain, Rove admitted that all of those so-called 'tea party" candidates they got elected the last go around are nothing more than Republicans who've previously held elective office.

So much for any pretense that Fox and CNN pushing this fake, corporate sponsored "grass roots" "tea party" movement was ever about anything other than getting more extreme right wing Republicans elected to office.

VAN SUSTEREN: The fact that he hasn't held an office, I actually think in this climate enures to his benefit. You've got the tea party who's so sick of Congress, and they've predominantly, we expect that they're going to vote Republican. I mean if anything, I think it hurts more to have a background.

ROVE: I hear this, but I don't accept it. I think the presidential... we want our presidents to be people who've got substance, and...

VAN SUSTEREN: But that's not substance though. I mean experience is....

ROVE: ...experience... and then look. We think about the new members of Congress as tea party representatives... they are. But they have the same percentage of people who've held local elective or state elective office as the rest of the Congress. So they're not that much different in terms of their experience than the rest of the Congress. And that is to say, tea party did not sweep in a bunch of people that have never been involved in politics before. Just the opposite.


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.