June 27, 2012
First, let me say this: Liljenquist, with his talk of “revenue enhancements” and his prior political record, didn’t strike me — or a number of other conservatives / classical liberals — as a particularly spectacular candidate (unlike, say, a Ted Cruz in Texas). Second, Hatch had the support not only of the Romney camp, but also of people like Mark Levin and Sean Hannity, who were openly advocating for him. And finally — and this is key – a number of TEA Party groups supported Hatch, including the TEA Party Express.
So while FreedomWorks supported Liljenquist, it simply isn’t true that the TEA Party was defeated here — and I suspect the reporter know this.
Which raises the question: why is this story written in such a way that it suggests more of a TEA Party defeat than a Hatch victory?
And the answer, of course, is that the media — even if it is putatively “conservative” — is largely invested in beating back TEA Party influence.
Well, yes. It threatens the whole feedlot.