Unintentional Irony Alert: The Astroturf St. Louis Tea Party

Dana Loesch was angry about the fact that singer Kim Massie backed out of the 9/12 tea party rally because she didn't want to be used as a political pawn, and had the following to say on her blog:

Something to note: Massie was invited by the Lt. Governor of Missouri and was reportedly excited to debut her song about 9/11 at the 9/12 event. It was never marketed as anything but a tea party event.

Sad that the left is so uncomfortable with the idea of a huge grassroots movement which isn’t under the sway of a political party.

So Loesch says that the tea party "isn't under the sway of a political party," just two sentences after noting that the Republican Lt. Governor was helping to book guests for the rally! When Republican politicians are scheduling your guests for you, yes you are under the sway of a political party!

This might be surprising to some, but hopefully not to readers of this blog since I've been documenting the astroturf nature of the St. Louis tea party for a while now, culminating in the fact that the St. Louis tea party was one of the few (in fact, maybe the only) tea party group(s) in the state to refuse to sign on to a letter stating that they had not endorsed Roy Blunt in the Republican primary. Loesch reinforced their astroturf credentials yesterday by tweeting the following:


Now we know that the St. Louis tea party leaders love them some attention, but what was odd is that Loesch complimented an article by Jake Wagman that questions whether the tea party is a tool of the Republican Party:

Support for Blunt may fuel criticism that the Tea Party is a thinly veiled extension of the GOP. Yet the November election will offer an insight into the strengths — and shortcomings — of the insurgent movement.

The St. Louis tea party has been astroturf from the very start, and their support of Republican insiders like Roy Blunt and Ed Martin only reinforces that fact.