• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Charles Koch Op-Ed: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society

Dang Chuck, we're free now, how much free 'er can we get?

I know, I know, the tea party want's to take back their country.

PEP-RALLY-1-300x199.jpg

Now, if they'd only learn how to spell.

englishonly.jpg
 
What if...? said:
"Free" debate. That's "rich" coming from a Koch.
Click to expand...
So why does the left keep trying to silence him? Classify him as evil, not to be trusted, etc. How is that free debate?

Hypocrisy comes to mind.
 
Lord of Planar said:
So why does the left keep trying to silence him? Classify him as evil, not to be trusted, etc. How is that free debate?

Hypocrisy comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Not silence. I just want to see his name on every piece he funds.

Disclosure goes a long way to addressing undue influence.

Our politicians should wear sponsor patches at work.
 
Lord of Planar said:
So why does the left keep trying to silence him? Classify him as evil, not to be trusted, etc. How is that free debate?

Hypocrisy comes to mind.
Click to expand...
How in the world is anyone shutting up someone that has that much money? George Soros is talking just as much as Charles is--no more no less. :shrug:
 
What if...? said:
Not silence. I just want to see his name on every piece he funds.

Disclosure goes a long way to addressing undue influence.

Our politicians should wear sponsor patches at work.
Click to expand...
You should apply that to the likes of Soros as well. He indirectly operates very many liberal fund raising institutions.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
"Im fighting for a society where money literally buys and influences everything"
Click to expand...

George Soros spent $80,000 to support the legalized marijuana agenda. Why don't we ever hear you bitching about him?
 
Lord of Planar said:
You should apply that to the likes of Soros as well. He indirectly operates very many liberal fund raising institutions.
Click to expand...

But...but...but...it's ok when Libbos do it!
 
Lord of Planar said:
You should apply that to the likes of Soros as well. He indirectly operates very many liberal fund raising institutions.
Click to expand...

Fine with me.

Its interesting to me that so many on the right go "but what about dem donors?" While the majoritg on the left go "them too".

Few on the right take the latter stance.

Why do you think that is?
 
What if...? said:
Fine with me.

Its interesting to me that so many on the right go "but what about dem donors?" While the majoritg on the left go "them too".

Few on the right take the latter stance.

Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...

Post a link to all the threads, started by Libbos, bitching about Soros. Thanks!
 
apdst said:
Post a link to all the threads, started by Libbos, bitching about Soros. Thanks!
Click to expand...

You know tberes not foing to be any more of those than y'all bitching about the Kochs.

But you will find many from the left supporting limiting the influence of money on our politics.

Not so much on the right. Few if any.
 
What if...? said:
First of all, a union member would be voting against their interest if they voted republican
Click to expand...
.
So I suspect they're cool.with the union spending their money against republicans. That's not the point
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Its one person being easily.able to outspend thousands.
Click to expand...
Providing them with an "amplifier" that can easily drown out thousands (millions?).

In a world driven by persuasion science, money spent on persuasive.messaging produces predictable returns on investment.
Tell a bald faced lie enough times and people begin to believe it.
Click to expand...
The more times they hear it, from apparently "different" sources, the quicker they believe.

Low information voters are.the target, emotions are the vector.
Click to expand...
And before you start, I'm fine with nobody getting to spend huge sums influencing our political process.
Click to expand...

Your 1st editorial observation was intentionally snarky and unintentionally wrong ... it has been estimated that 40% of union members vote Republican.
That would make your 2nd editorial observation then, equally wrong.
And I'm afraid the Supreme Court says your 3rd editorial observation is vacuous.

BUT ... As for people believing the bald-faced lie you're right. It can even get the lying candidate through a re-election when those whose job it is to check just aren't motivated to check.
Come to think of it, that's the strategy being used in the co-ordinated attack on the Koch Brothers.

And when you bring up LIV as the targets, you've correctly identified the MO of the Democrat Party.
THAT was a good observation.
 
What if...? said:
You know tberes not foing to be any more of those than y'all bitching about the Kochs.

But you will find many from the left supporting limiting the influence of money on our politics.

Not so much on the right. Few if any.
Click to expand...

No, you people want to limit RIGHT WING donors. You're ok with Liberal donors spending as much as they please. We'll never you insist tjat Media Matters lose their tax exempt status.
 
apdst said:
No, you people want to limit RIGHT WING donors. You're ok with Liberal donors spending as much as they please. We'll never you insist tjat Media Matters lose their tax exempt status.
Click to expand...

Not me, so there goes your theory.

I even support removing donor anonymity from ALL politically active nonprofits. Unions too.
 
bubbabgone said:
Your 1st editorial observation was intentionally snarky and unintentionally wrong ... it has been estimated that 40% of union members vote Republican.
That would make your 2nd editorial observation then, equally wrong.
And I'm afraid the Supreme Court says your 3rd editorial observation is vacuous.

BUT ... As for people believing the bald-faced lie you're right. It can even get the lying candidate through a re-election when those whose job it is to check just aren't motivated to check.
Come to think of it, that's the strategy being used in the co-ordinated attack on the Koch Brothers.

And when you bring up LIV as the targets, you've correctly identified the MO of the Democrat Party.
THAT was a good observation.
Click to expand...

Some union members must want lower pay, fewer benefits and less safe work environments then. Cuz that's what voting rwpublican is likely to get them.

There are gay republicans too.

Rational self interest obviously isn't a universal trait.

And I knew the SC would unleash the hounds of money upon us the moment Roberts was appointed. Hell, no party to CU even asked for what we got. The roberts court just seized on an opportunity to further the corporate agenda.

And why are you bashing Bush?

23% of your guys believe everything they hear too. Its a homo sapiens thing, apparently.
 
What if...? said:
Some union members must want lower pay, fewer benefits and less safe work environments then. Cuz that's what voting rwpublican is likely to get them.
Click to expand...
There are gay republicans too.

Rational self interest obviously isn't a universal trait.

And I knew the SC would unleash the hounds of money upon us the moment Roberts was appointed. Hell, no party to CU even asked for what we got. The roberts court just seized on an opportunity to further the corporate agenda.

And why are you bashing Bush?

23% of your guys believe everything they hear too. Its a homo sapiens thing, apparently.
Click to expand...

Ya know ... you may not be one, but some of your comments make you sound like a caricature of a propaganda repeating leftwing nutball.
Maybe you oughta ratchet it back a notch or two.
You know ... to be taken seriously and all?
 
What if...? said:
Fine with me.

Its interesting to me that so many on the right go "but what about dem donors?" While the majoritg on the left go "them too".

Few on the right take the latter stance.

Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...
Why the complaint about Koch brothers? Shouldn't it work both ways?
 
bubbabgone said:
Ya know ... you may not be one, but some of your comments make you sound like a caricature of a propaganda repeating leftwing nutball.
Maybe you oughta ratchet it back a notch or two.
You know ... to be taken seriously and all?
Click to expand...

And I don't know, but its possible you have been successfully trained to reject anything alien to your programming as propaganda.

Pretty standard persuasion modus.

"My side tells only truth. Your side only lies."

Divide and conquer. Old trick.

I take it you have no issues with corruption of our political process by money. I hope at least you're making a profit from it of some kind.
 
What if...? said:
Some union members must want lower pay, fewer benefits and less safe work environments then. Cuz that's what voting rwpublican is likely to get them.
Click to expand...
This is getting off topic, but remember. there are liberal and conservative republicans as there are liberal snd conservative democrats. that said, of course, they tend to lean with one side more than another. As a right leaning union member, I had little choice. It was ether join or not have my particular job. You would be wrong to say republicans want lower union pay, in fact, the unions suppress my wages. There was a point in time when my employer wanted to pay my particular job title more. However, the union would have nothing to do with it unless all jobs were raised. Skilled vs. non-skilled. My employer has a hard time attracting highly skilled workers in my specific job because it is below non-union industry standard.

Rare, but true!

In a union, you have collective bargaining with the lowest common denominator holding everyone back. Non union jobs have individual bargaining capability between employees and the business.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Why the complaint about Koch brothers? Shouldn't it work both ways?
Click to expand...

I would gladly strip soros of his influence.

I don't bitch too much because i align with his agenda fairly well, and in the current climate mankind needs balance in power and money.

You cut off the Kochs and I'll turn on Soros.

Sound good?
 
What if...? said:
I would gladly strip soros of his influence.

I don't bitch too much because i align with his agenda fairly well, and in the current climate mankind needs balance in power and money.

You cut off the Kochs and I'll turn on Soros.

Sound good?
Click to expand...
I'm not aware of anything wrong that Koch does, but Soros agenda is against what I believe is right for America. Don't get me wrong, Soros has done a lot of good in the world. I just don't agree with his manipulation of our politics as he does. He is more active and hidden than most people realize. At least people know how the Koch brothers are acting.
 
Lord of Planar said:
This is getting off topic, but remember. there are liberal and conservative republicans as there are liberal snd conservative democrats. that said, of course, they tend to lean with one side more than another. As a right leaning union member, I had little choice. It was ether join or not have my particular job. You would be wrong to say republicans want lower union pay, in fact, the unions suppress my wages. There was a point in time when my employer wanted to pay my particular job title more. However, the union would have nothing to do with it unless all jobs were raised. Skilled vs. non-skilled. My employer has a hard time attracting highly skilled workers in my specific job because it is below non-union industry standard.

Rare, but true!

In a union, you have collective bargaining with the lowest common denominator holding everyone back. Non union jobs have individual bargaining capability between employees and the business.
Click to expand...

Thats interesting. I know there are republican leaning members of my union. Stagehands.

But the republicans kill every union they can.

I don't see anybody quitting our union for higher wages. I DO see vendors trying to circumvent our union to allow them to pay less. But i believe what you say about your situation.

My union is a little different from most. Entertainment and conventions. Big money, lots of it deductible.

And while those with in demand skills have leverage with employers, direct competition with starving people and the need to pay for necessities at American prices confers massive advantage to employers in most situations.

I honestly think the German labor model would be better than our union one. Part of the process all along instead of in a constant pitched battle. Able to readily give and take instead of fighting hard and gripping what is won beyond reason. Seems to work well for them.
 
I don't see anything wrong in what the Koch brothers do. In fact I find the attacks by the left blatantly unmerited just like the attacks on Mozilla CEO last week as he was forced out for holding the same beliefs that Obama did in 2008. Charles Koch is very open at what he supports. I understand why the left hate him, because he supports a free society. The same reason I despise Soros for his socialist, often hidden agenda. I doubt the average leftie is aware of all the organizations that Soros money is funneled through supporting this socialist agenda.
Organizations Funded by George Soros and His Open Society Institute - Discover the Networks
He even uses his so called humanitarian organizations as fronts for his political agenda. He also gives his organizations touchy feely names that on the surface may stir patriotism or nationalism but in truth support nothing that supports the institutions that made this country great. There isn't a Democrat in office that hasn't reaped the benefits of the deep pockets of Soros. Especially Obama.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I'm not aware of anything wrong that Koch does, but Soros agenda is against what I believe is right for America. Don't get me wrong, Soros has done a lot of good in the world. I just don't agree with his manipulation of our politics as he does. He is more active and hidden than most people realize. At least people know how the Koch brothers are acting.
Click to expand...

Both fly under the radar as much as possible. We only know what they're up to because folks are watching them.

I really think full, up front disclosure would fix a lot of the problems.

"You know candidate "a" gets 90% of his money from corps that want the opposite of what he's claiming in his campaign, right?" with the ability to prove that claim, would defuse a bunch of nefarious crap from both sides.

And probably have sufficient backlash to discourage ridiculous spending on campaigns.

I'm really not partisan on this issue. I believe it transcends partisanship.
 
What if...? said:
Both fly under the radar as much as possible. We only know what they're up to because folks are watching them.

I really think full, up front disclosure would fix a lot of the problems.

"You know candidate "a" gets 90% of his money from corps that want the opposite of what he's claiming in his campaign, right?" with the ability to prove that claim, would defuse a bunch of nefarious crap from both sides.

And probably have sufficient backlash to discourage ridiculous spending on campaigns.

I'm really not partisan on this issue. I believe it transcends partisanship.
Click to expand...
The Koch brothers are outright open with their contributions. Soros hides behind many organizations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom