Kochs push their errand boy for GOP nomination

[Michchamp]

1) I haven't verified your data but even if it's true, it's one election. ...

well, we were talking about Scott Walker & and the Koch Bros., so...

2) I don't believe unions represent or speak on behalf of their members. I believe there was a time that we needed unions but I think now they are among the most corrupt and detrimental organizations in the country and they actually do a disservice to American workers. Also, their are plenty of Americans who don't like the undue influence unions have over elections who don't have the means that the Koch brothers have. And that's probably true of other initiatives they fund. To say their PAC represents the views of only 2 rich guys is simply incorrect.

Well, I believe unions represent their members, if not 100% of the time, then close enough to it. if they didn't, the union leadership would be voted out. Certainly they represent the interest of their members more than the Koch PAC represents any of the rank and file Republitards that have fallen for their drivel, no?

Rhetorical question: how does the avg. American - conservative or liberal - benefit from the Koch's agenda?

 

[Michchamp]

...

Rhetorical question: how does the avg. American - conservative or liberal - benefit from the Koch's agenda?

somewhat related...

LOL.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Finance regulation regarding campaigns is a good thing and we need a great deal more of it. There's a fundamental conflict when you combine capitalism and democracy. Capitalism requires financial inequality while democracy endeavors to create political equality. If money can buy political power then you can't have financial inequality and political equality at the same time.

 

[Spartanmack]

well, we were talking about Scott Walker & and the Koch Bros., so...



Well, I believe unions represent their members, if not 100% of the time, then close enough to it. if they didn't, the union leadership would be voted out. Certainly they represent the interest of their members more than the Koch PAC represents any of the rank and file Republitards that have fallen for their drivel, no?

Rhetorical question: how does the avg. American - conservative or liberal - benefit from the Koch's agenda?

Sounded like we were talking about campaign finance but I never hear you complain about undue influence from unions and wealthy liberals.

And no, Union leadership wouldn't necessarily be voted out - they're no different than scumbag politicians that keep winning elections without ever delivering on their promises. And if the Koch's represent greater market influence in labor pricing by killing unions, then their policies benefit all Americans, including the sheep blindly following the lead of their unions and libtard politicians.

Rhetorical question: how does the avg. American - conservative or liberal - benefit from the job-killing union agenda?

 

[Sbee]

and Unions...

I'm not a fan of unions dumping tons of money into elections either but unions do represent 10 percent of the workforce but the kochs are two people

 

[Spartanmack]

I'm not a fan of unions dumping tons of money into elections either but unions do represent 10 percent of the workforce but the kochs are two people

Why should a group that represents only 10% of the workforce get such extraordinary influence in the election process?

And like I said above - they're not just 2 people. There are plenty of Americans who have the same agenda who lack the means to finance a fight against pro union, pro welfare forces.

According to wikipedia here are the top concerns in the koch political agenda:
- Fighting AGAINST the Patriot Act ($20mm spent on the effort)
- Educational grants - they have donated millions to 270 Universities around the country as well as $25mm to the United Negro College Fund
- Free enterprise seminars - it has a very libertarian slant - they're not pushing a pro corporate welfare/corp tax break agenda. I read the bit about Koch Industries and the corp welfare they receive. They writers pegged the number at $88mm for Koch and say that we should be shocked and outraged by that number but Koch Ind's annual revenues are $115 Billion and their spending on political campaigns has eclipsed the $100mm mark. Plus, some of that $88mm in "welfare" comes from clean water projects they fund. Do you really think they're in it for the corp welfare? It's probably more the case that the subsidies are there so they'd be foolish not to take them.
- Politics - the bulk of their money went to support Republicans - mostly libertarian leaning conservatives. Not a huge surprise but considering the amount of money being spent by dem special interests it doesn't seem particularly egregious.

 

[Sbee]

like I said above - they're not just 2 people. There are plenty of Americans who have the same agenda who lack the means to finance a fight against pro union, pro welfare forces.

According to wikipedia here are the top concerns in the koch political agenda:
- Fighting AGAINST the Patriot Act ($20mm spent on the effort)
- Educational grants - they have donated millions to 270 Universities around the country as well as $25mm to the United Negro College Fund
- Free enterprise seminars - it has a very libertarian slant - they're not funding pro corporate welfare/corp tax break legislation. I read the bit out Koch Industries and the corp welfare they receive. They writers pegged the number at $88mm for Koch and say that we should be shocked and outraged by that number but Koch Ind's annual revenues are $115 Billion and their spending on political campaigns has eclipsed the $100mm mark. Plus, some of that $88mm in "welfare" comes from clean water projects they fund. Do you really think they're in it for the corp welfare? It's probably more the case that the subsidies are there so they'd be foolish not to take them.
- Politics - the bulk of their money went to support Republicans - mostly libertarian leaning conservatives. Not a huge surprise but considering the amount of money being spent by dem special interests it doesn't seem particularly egregious.

yes, they've given money to causes other than republican politicians but let's be frank about their agenda, they are looking to win a propaganda war in the climate debate and fool the american public into believing that burning fossil fuels doesn't affect the climate. They want legislators who will approve keystone and other pro fossil fuel initiatives and they want to fund think tanks that come the the very conclusions that are the most benefitial to their business. hell, they fun the heritage foundation who used to be out there saying smoking wasn't bad for you.

 

[KAWDUP]

There are still some pretty strong unions out there. Ever seen what even the threat of a Longshoremen strike on either coast means to the economy? Ever had your tires slashed and car keyed by folks as part of a teamsters strike? I wish I could say those were isolated incidents, but the fact is they aren't.

BTW Sbee, you just described in the post above mine exactly what every lobby group in Washington does every day of the year. There are some pretty damn strong lobbies for both political parties. You got any data on the agendas of all those groups too?

 

[Spartanmack]

yes, they've given money to causes other than republican politicians but let's be frank about their agenda, they are looking to win a propaganda war in the climate debate and fool the american public into believing that burning fossil fuels doesn't affect the climate. They want legislators who will approve keystone and other pro fossil fuel initiatives and they want to fund think tanks that come the the very conclusions that are the most benefitial to their business. hell, they fun the heritage foundation who used to be out there saying smoking wasn't bad for you.

They're spending money to fight the propaganda war that's trying to fundamentally transform our economy and dedicate trillions of dollars to alternative energy and destroy America's economic competitiveness before the debate is even settled.

And the Heritage Foundation was never out there saying smoking wasn't bad for you. That's the Heartland Institute and it's not on the list of Koch supported think tanks on Wikipedia. On the Heartland Institute's Wikipedia page it does mention they received a whopping $25,000 from the Charles G Koch Charitable Foundation. They further state that the money was ear marked for research in healthcare, not climate change and not specifically for "smoking isn't bad for you" research. You need to fact check some more.

It seems like there is a lot of misinformation out there about the Koch's and their "agenda" and it's gotten absolute and full buy-in, that it's become a dog whistle for the left. Now, all you have to do is tie the Koch brothers to something and lefties are instantly against whatever it is. I honestly knew almost nothing about the Koch's before I came to this forum and the name was being thrown around so much by you and the uber libs that I decided to look into it. Not surprisingly, I found much of it to be untrue.

 

[tinselwolverine]

David Koch did run for Veep on a third party ticket (Libertarian) against Reagan-Bush in 1980.

I think I also heard that David Koch actually supported reversing the top marginal tax rate back to 38% as a budget balancing measure.

 

[Michchamp]

... Ever had your tires slashed and car keyed by folks as part of a teamsters strike? ...?

good heavens! these Union ruffians must be stopped!

[insert standard anecdotal evidence about the UAW member your uncle knows who sleeps 8 hours a day on the job, but can't be fired because of the unions & this is why unemployment is high in Detroit and all unions are bad]

 

[Sbee]

There are still some pretty strong unions out there. Ever seen what even the threat of a Longshoremen strike on either coast means to the economy? Ever had your tires slashed and car keyed by folks as part of a teamsters strike? I wish I could say those were isolated incidents, but the fact is they aren't.

BTW Sbee, you just described in the post above mine exactly what every lobby group in Washington does every day of the year. There are some pretty damn strong lobbies for both political parties. You got any data on the agendas of all those groups too?

I'm against unions funding candidates as well, but i disagree on the equivelance when it comes to the Koch brothers. I don't think the sierra club can come up with 100m to match them

 

[Sbee]

They're spending money to fight the propaganda war that's trying to fundamentally transform our economy and dedicate trillions of dollars to alternative energy and destroy America's economic competitiveness before the debate is even settled.

And the Heritage Foundation was never out there saying smoking wasn't bad for you. That's the Heartland Institute and it's not on the list of Koch supported think tanks on Wikipedia. On the Heartland Institute's Wikipedia page it does mention they received a whopping $25,000 from the Charles G Koch Charitable Foundation. They further state that the money was ear marked for research in healthcare, not climate change and not specifically for "smoking isn't bad for you" research. You need to fact check some more.

It seems like there is a lot of misinformation out there about the Koch's and their "agenda" and it's gotten absolute and full buy-in, that it's become a dog whistle for the left. Now, all you have to do is tie the Koch brothers to something and lefties are instantly against whatever it is. I honestly knew almost nothing about the Koch's before I came to this forum and the name was being thrown around so much by you and the uber libs that I decided to look into it. Not surprisingly, I found much of it to be untrue.

I apologize, i mixed heartland and heritage up, heartland is the big climate denier think tank that takes money from oil and gas companies. There are also anonymous donors giving millions to them.

they've only given 79 million to climate denial groups

they fund the heritage foundation, americans for prosperity, cato institute, manhattan instittue and they all question climate change. AFP got 400 congressmen to sign a pledge against climate change legistlation that doesn't include the same tax cuts

they're the poster children of purchasing political influence

 

[sggatecl]

No. But they're separate issues. I've made my position on publicly funded stadiums and arenas very clear on other threads here. I wasn't endorsing the guy for President. Just because I like one thing someone accomplishes doesn't mean I have to like everything they do. It was a nice try but you're going to have to do better if you want to be a master baiter.

I don't frequent this cesspool of bias political talk, so I wasn't aware of your previous stances on publicly funded stadiums. And it's good that you don't ride the extreme "everything he does is right" train that most people on both sides tend to do. Nobody likes a sheep.

So although you thought I was trying to bait you, it was an honest question from a former resident of Wisconsin. Carry on.

 

[Thumb]

He can't help it, he's an angry little man.

 

[Michchamp]

I don't frequent this cesspool of bias political talk...

you prefer the other cesspools on this forum?

 

[sggatecl]

you prefer the other cesspools on this forum?

Sports cesspools are way cooler than political cesspools!

 

[tigersofjustice]

Nothing I like better than a politician that has already sold himself the the highest bidder. Koch Walker for President!

 

[tigersofjustice]

I'm not defending the Koch brothers or Scott Walker. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of being OK with unions spending gobs of money to buy elections but decrying corporations for doing the same thing. As for the every day worker, according to Forbes, Koch Industries employs over 100k people - many of them skilled laborers making well above the national minimum wage. But the Democrats and the unions tell you they're bad guys, so they must be bad guys.

I'll happily slam both for doing it. Corporate money and organizational money of any kind should be out of politics.

 

[TheVictors]

I will slam both as well but I doubt any union has ever held clandestine meetings at The Peninsula Hotel in Beverly Hills or Ritz-Carlton Beaver Creek, nor have quite the current day clout.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


Actually, last time I saw any union meeting like that it was in 2006 and at a Residence Inn in Minneapolis, MN. Some form of Construction Union meeting where the guys took smoke breaks every 20mins or so

And I agree that many unions no longer truly represent the members beat interests and that's from exposure to the teachers union ..not the ball busting auto workers or electricians.