Charles Koch responds.

[boneyard bill]

The difference between Koch and Buffet is one is supposed to be the subject of this thread, and the other was brought up to distract the topic of discussion.



What conservatives do is make sweeping, inaccurate statements about liberals that are merely projection. Then there's the weaker form of the same argument. "You guys are just as bad". We can tally up the sides here on the big bad guys that do character assassination, but with Coulter, Limbaugh, and Hannity alone you would win hands down, never mind just about all of AM radio. The cajones you display to try and even make such a hypocritical observation boggles the mind.

Was there a discussion to be had here or should we all just start throwing feces?

I don't read Ann Coulter so I can't say much about her. What little I have heard doesn't make a whole lot of sense. But Limbaugh mostly makes fun of liberals, and he's pretty good at it. But both he and Hannity concentrate largely on policies and issues. Where are the personal attacks? They might call Obama a liar, but that's not hard to prove. It's pretty easy to prove against just about any politician. But when they say that Obama's policies intended to help poor people will actually hurt they, they don't say that is Obama's intent to hurt poor people, they just say that he is wrong.

On the other hand, liberals are constantly accusing their opponents of being anti-woman, or racist, or homophobes who hate gay people. Check out these very boards and see how many times Republicans or conservatives have been accused of "hate." That one word alone is abundant. So did Obama "hate" gay people when he opposed gay marriage? Did Bill Clinton hate gay people when he supported DOMA? Is Obama a sexist since women on the White House staff get paid less, on average, than the men do? The double standard here egregious, and the purpose is obvious. It is not to win the debate on issues, it is to avoid that debate altogether.

 

[arkirk]

Boneyard: You had better start reading Ann Coulter. You'll fall in love with her tender feminine take on politics.

 

[laughing dog]

On the other hand, liberals are constantly accusing their opponents of being anti-woman, or racist, or homophobes who hate gay people.

Another example of rhetorical excess.

Check out these very boards and see how many times Republicans or conservatives have been accused of "hate." That one word alone is abundant. So did Obama "hate" gay people when he opposed gay marriage? Did Bill Clinton hate gay people when he supported DOMA? Is Obama a sexist since women on the White House staff get paid less, on average, than the men do? The double standard here egregious, and the purpose is obvious. It is not to win the debate on issues, it is to avoid that debate altogether.

More rhetorical "excess". Obama did not actively oppose gay marriage nor did he express himself in hateful terms like many gay marriage opponents. The charge that women in the White House get paid less, on average, then men, is based on a study that compares apples to oranges.

It does seem that butthurt that most conservatives (not all) on those board have about Obama clouds their ability to reason. Your OP and responses in this thread are perfect examples.

 

[boneyard bill]

Who drafts the Democratic Party's campaign strategy? Whoever it is, they should be fired. Their 2014 plan violates a basic rule of electoral public relations: Don't build your entire campaign around a hypocritical allegation that could blow up in your face.

I’m talking about Democrats’ unending war on the billionaires who fund right-of-center causes. Over the past month, the party’s campaign committees, PACs and allied groups have spent millions trying to link Republicans to these ostensibly evil oligarchs who are buying elections and rigging the system against the middle class.

Right. But then what are the left’s billionaires doing?

The hypocrisy starts with the Senate Majority PAC -- the type of corrupting, “special interest cash”-laden super PAC that the left alternately decries and adores. The group is currently running television ads defending vulnerable Senate Democrats or potential candidates in Louisiana, Arkansas, Colorado, Michigan and North Carolina. The ads invariably link the Republican candidate to “billionaires” -- especially the horrible “out of state” variety.

Who are the Senate Majority PAC’s biggest donors? They include out-of-state billionaires like Hollywood bigwig Steven Spielberg, music mogul David Geffen and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. “Mayor Mike” donated $2.5 million to the group earlier this year. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the group’s donor list isn’t short on moneymen funding races in states they don’t live in.
[/QUOTE]

He goes on to name more PACS and more contributors.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ts_billionaire_outsider_hypocrisy_122196.html

So what are the Koch brothers doing that these guys and their PACS aren't doing. Let's face it. It isn't the Koch's contributions that bother liberals. It's the fact that those contributions are not going to liberals that has them upset.

 

[laughing dog]

There is no doubt that the Democrats are hypocrites in singling out the Koch brothers as a pernicious influence on politics. But that doesn't make their claim wrong.

 

[The Paul]

Who drafts the Democratic Party's campaign strategy? Whoever it is, they should be fired. Their 2014 plan violates a basic rule of electoral public relations: Don't build your entire campaign around a hypocritical allegation that could blow up in your face.

I’m talking about Democrats’ unending war on the billionaires who fund right-of-center causes. Over the past month, the party’s campaign committees, PACs and allied groups have spent millions trying to link Republicans to these ostensibly evil oligarchs who are buying elections and rigging the system against the middle class.

Right. But then what are the left’s billionaires doing?

The hypocrisy starts with the Senate Majority PAC -- the type of corrupting, “special interest cash”-laden super PAC that the left alternately decries and adores. The group is currently running television ads defending vulnerable Senate Democrats or potential candidates in Louisiana, Arkansas, Colorado, Michigan and North Carolina. The ads invariably link the Republican candidate to “billionaires” -- especially the horrible “out of state” variety.

Who are the Senate Majority PAC’s biggest donors? They include out-of-state billionaires like Hollywood bigwig Steven Spielberg, music mogul David Geffen and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. “Mayor Mike” donated $2.5 million to the group earlier this year. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the group’s donor list isn’t short on moneymen funding races in states they don’t live in.

He goes on to name more PACS and more contributors.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...ts_billionaire_outsider_hypocrisy_122196.html

So what are the Koch brothers doing that these guys and their PACS aren't doing. Let's face it. It isn't the Koch's contributions that bother liberals. It's the fact that those contributions are not going to liberals that has them upset.

Ah. Now you're back to demanding to know why a bunch of people who, on the whole, don't particularly care for the Democrats love the Democrats so much.

See, it's not that the Democrats are so great, exactly, it's just that what you're demanding is both fucking insane and typical Republican rhetoric.

 

[boneyard bill]

There is no doubt that the Democrats are hypocrites in singling out the Koch brothers as a pernicious influence on politics. But that doesn't make their claim wrong.

I suppose we could debate the issue of campaign finance laws, but the Supreme Court has pretty much settled that case. I'm satisfied to accept the concession from at least one liberal here that the Democrats have been hypocrites.

- - - Updated - - -

Ah. Now you're back to demanding to know why a bunch of people who, on the whole, don't particularly care for the Democrats love the Democrats so much.

See, it's not that the Democrats are so great, exactly, it's just that what you're demanding is both fucking insane and typical Republican rhetoric.

Ah yes. As usual. Attack the critic not the criticism.

 

[pegasus8]

BB Did You Actually Refer To The First Black President's Penis? Is This A Freudian Slip Or What?

Man oh man dude. I totally get you in this reinforcement of the rote ranting from the 24/7 hate media. I never thought that I would see people who actually support Klannity and our "Rent Boy" Oxy drug addict spiritual leader of America's conservative movement in the same breath. We know how much Bill O hates fat boy Rush.

But heck more power to you. I totally support your right to your opinion. But BB do you honestly think that people like the Koch Bro's give a rat's ass about us. Well us being the working calls Joes of America. Unless you are some kind of gazillionaire BB why would anyone support monsters who are destroying what is left of the middle class along with the environment?

I just find it absolutely amazing and fascinating that any America from the masses would actually support these modern day "Robber Barons." But then I guess this is what the right wing hate machine wants some of us to do.

Thanks BB and keep up the good work. And remember Democrats hate America and conservatives are the only true patriots who love their country. And if loving this country means surrendering it to these modern day oligarchs them more power to them.

And the only true beauty in life is that people like the Koch Bros's will eventually die and rot away. All those billions can never save them from the Grim Reaper! Ah but the good point BB is that their damage and legacy shall live on for generations to come! I guess this is what some call " Freedom?" from the tyrany of big government. You know like SS, Medicare, ACA and all those pesky labor laws and environmental regulations.

Have fun BB.

Pegasus

 

[boneyard bill]

Man oh man dude. I totally get you in this reinforcement of the rote ranting from the 24/7 hate media. I never thought that I would see people who actually support Klannity and our "Rent Boy" Oxy drug addict spiritual leader of America's conservative movement in the same breath. We know how much Bill O hates fat boy Rush.

But heck more power to you. I totally support your right to your opinion. But BB do you honestly think that people like the Koch Bro's give a rat's ass about us. Well us being the working calls Joes of America. Unless you are some kind of gazillionaire BB why would anyone support monsters who are destroying what is left of the middle class along with the environment?

I just find it absolutely amazing and fascinating that any America from the masses would actually support these modern day "Robber Barons." But then I guess this is what the right wing hate machine wants some of us to do.

Thanks BB and keep up the good work. And remember Democrats hate America and conservatives are the only true patriots who love their country. And if loving this country means surrendering it to these modern day oligarchs them more power to them.

And the only true beauty in life is that people like the Koch Bros's will eventually die and rot away. All those billions can never save them from the Grim Reaper! Ah but the good point BB is that their damage and legacy shall live on for generations to come! I guess this is what some call " Freedom?" from the tyrany of big government. You know like SS, Medicare, ACA and all those pesky labor laws and environmental regulations.

Have fun BB.

Pegasus

Yet another post without a word of substance! Nothing but personal attacks on me and on others. All you guys are doing with your responses is verifying EVERYTHING that I have said !

 

[laughing dog]

I suppose we could debate the issue of campaign finance laws, but the Supreme Court has pretty much settled that case. I'm satisfied to accept the concession from at least one liberal here that the Democrats have been hypocrites.

Yet another response that missed the point.

 

[Narapoia]

Yet another post without a word of substance! Nothing but personal attacks on me and on others. All you guys are doing with your responses is verifying EVERYTHING that I have said !

Well maybe you should respond to some of the posts that have raised specific points for discussion - such as:

I see that you simply ignore what I write in my posts. I didn't infer a damn thing. I read in Koch's article that you yourself posted that he spoke of Despotic rulers intimidating their opponents, and accused the Obama administration of thinking that people can't run their own lives and trying to run it for them. Two very specific examples in the article you posted, that I mentioned twice, and both times you completely ignored. You appear completely incapable of processing information on this topic. After two attempts that were completely ignored, I don't see the point in continuing here.

before people bother going to the effort of raising further points. Generalising that all responses simply conform to your previously held expectations - while ignoring those that do not - does not exactly fill me with confidence that you are actually open to any view that conflicts with your current dogma.

 

[The Paul]

I suppose we could debate the issue of campaign finance laws, but the Supreme Court has pretty much settled that case. I'm satisfied to accept the concession from at least one liberal here that the Democrats have been hypocrites.

- - - Updated - - -



Ah yes. As usual. Attack the critic not the criticism.

You may find your crocodile tears more effective if you wait until you are attacked to complain about being attacked.

 

[pegasus8]

And Who Said The Tentacles Of $$$ Billionaires Do Not Influence, Mold and Meld The Minds Of Our Fellow Citizens?

Yep no substance here in my last response to this Faux News Koch Bro's apologetic tour.

Uh would no substance entail specifically referring to oligarchs, Robber Barons, dismantling of unions, further destruction of the working calls slobs, you and I aka the middle class and on and on ad nauseam? Would being specific in relating how can any person from said working class group supports $billionaires who enjoy profits before people akin to monopolies and extortion in one breath then commit to whining and crying in the WSJ ed op on why do these people hate us borders on the absurd on the other? Or is this still not explicit enough and in the realm of vague ambiguous assertions?

BB it is not about you or I my dear chap. IMO it is about how our political process vs v representative democracy is being bought and sold like energy companies. And again I shall repeat myself as I did in my parody of a response; how can anyone support this flagrant disregard for one person one vote being enveloped in this unceasing wave of today's $$ billionaire's money? Who on the left buys and spends $$millions like a drunken sailor on state elections and legislations in the form of TV ads? Yeh the Left buys TV ads but it is not even close to the power and ruthlessness of your so called BFB's the Koch Bros.

Bottom line BB is that W's tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations have done more harm then good for America. Deregulation has done more harm then good and so on and so forth. But to support this disingenuous argument that billionaires like the Koch Bros are being unfairly targeted and picked out is well absurd. If people like the Kochs are so up and up then why all the shell corp's and layers of multiple LCC's to conceal all this dark and out of state money?

Oh and by the way BB, if one is going to bring up a President's "unit" then by all means stand by your statement. And if this is construed as some kind of personal attack then congratulations you have now attained the neo-con 24/7 hate media merit badge of hypocrisy; better known as the medal of," that's what I am so what are you?"

Thanks BB and the GOP needs more votes now than ever. You know even with all that gerrymandering people, usually old white retired folks, still get old and die. But then the Whigs were once a political force to be reckoned with in the American arena.

Peace brother

Pegasus8

 

[boneyard bill]

Well maybe you should respond to some of the posts that have raised specific points for discussion - such as:



before people bother going to the effort of raising further points. Generalising that all responses simply conform to your previously held expectations - while ignoring those that do not - does not exactly fill me with confidence that you are actually open to any view that conflicts with your current dogma.

What's your point? Koch is responding to his critics and he raises two substantive problems with Obama. He doesn't accuse Obama of being a racist, not even a reverse racist. He doesn't say that Obama is evil. He doesn't claim he's a Muslim or attempt any kind of smear. He think Obama is despotic (a perfectly defensible claim), and he thinks Obama is trying to interfere in people's lives too much.

- - - Updated - - -

You may find your crocodile tears more effective if you wait until you are attacked to complain about being attacked.

The quotation you posted isn't the quotation that I was responding to. You've altered the text.

 

[The Paul]

What's your point? Koch is responding to his critics and he raises two substantive problems with Obama. He doesn't accuse Obama of being a racist, not even a reverse racist. He doesn't say that Obama is evil. He doesn't claim he's a Muslim or attempt any kind of smear. He think Obama is despotic (a perfectly defensible claim), and he thinks Obama is trying to interfere in people's lives too much.

- - - Updated - - -



The quotation you posted isn't the quotation that I was responding to. You've altered the text.

New board's a little truncate-happy on quote strings. Here's what that should have looked like:

Ah. Now you're back to demanding to know why a bunch of people who, on the whole, don't particularly care for the Democrats love the Democrats so much.

See, it's not that the Democrats are so great, exactly, it's just that what you're demanding is both fucking insane and typical Republican rhetoric.

Ah yes. As usual. Attack the critic not the criticism.

See, because I pointed out that you're making insane demands (because they really are strikingly crazy) and you complained that I was attacking "the critic instead of the criticism."

 

[boneyard bill]

pegasus8 writes:

Yep no substance here in my last response to this Faux News Koch Bro's apologetic tour.

Uh would no substance entail specifically referring to oligarchs, Robber Barons, dismantling of unions, further destruction of the working calls slobs, you and I aka the middle class and on and on ad nauseam? Would being specific in relating how can any person from said working class group supports $billionaires who enjoy profits before people akin to monopolies and extortion in one breath then commit to whining and crying in the WSJ ed op on why do these people hate us borders on the absurd on the other? Or is this still not explicit enough and in the realm of vague ambiguous assertions?

Not only are your assertions vague and ambiguous, but they are also unsupported. They are probably also hypocritical. Are you calling out George Soros or Warren Buffet for the same things? What specifically is it that the Koch brothers are doing that fit the various generalizations that you have made? And in what way are they doing things the Soros, Buffet, and other liberal donors are not?

BB it is not about you or I my dear chap. IMO it is about how our political process vs v representative democracy is being bought and sold like energy companies. And again I shall repeat myself as I did in my parody of a response; how can anyone support this flagrant disregard for one person one vote being enveloped in this unceasing wave of today's $$ billionaire's money? Who on the left buys and spends $$millions like a drunken sailor on state elections and legislations in the form of TV ads? Yeh the Left buys TV ads but it is not even close to the power and ruthlessness of your so called BFB's the Koch Bros.

What figures do you have to support your claim? Obama's last presidential campaign was the most expensive in history. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has out-raised their Republican counterpart by quite a bit so far in this election cycle. I haven't seen any evidence that Democrats are at a financial disadvantage. In fact, what I have seen shows the Democrats to be at a significant advantage. Not only do they have billionaire donors in abundance, but they have the unions contributing in huge amounts as well.

If money is corrupting the process, and you don't think the Koch's are contributing merely to promote good government, why should you assume that Soros, Buffet, Bloomberg, and others are not seeking to corrupt government at least as much as the Koch brothers and perhaps more? Is there any billionaire more politically connected than Warren Buffet?

Bottom line BB is that W's tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations have done more harm then good for America. Deregulation has done more harm then good and so on and so forth. But to support this disingenuous argument that billionaires like the Koch Bros are being unfairly targeted and picked out is well absurd. If people like the Kochs are so up and up then why all the shell corp's and layers of multiple LCC's to conceal all this dark and out of state money?

What deregulation? Regulation has gone almost entirely in the other direction. Sarbanes/Oxley and Dodd/Frank increase regulations far more than any slight change you might be able to cite in the other direction. Obama has signed on to the Bush tax cuts except for a continuation on the highest bracket which might bring in $50 billion - a drop in the bucket when deficits are routinely over $1 trillion. I do not know what the campaign finance laws are that require so many lawyers, but I do know that they are very complex and probably more so than they need to be. If Koch is concealing all these campaign contributions, how do you know that he is making them at all?

Oh and by the way BB, if one is going to bring up a President's "unit" then by all means stand by your statement. And if this is construed as some kind of personal attack then congratulations you have now attained the neo-con 24/7 hate media merit badge of hypocrisy; better known as the medal of," that's what I am so what are you?"

I don't know what this is all about. Someone else raised that point, but I didn't respond because I didn't understand the reference. I never made any statement that was meant to refer to the President's equipment. You're reading something into my remarks that weren't there.

Thanks BB and the GOP needs more votes now than ever. You know even with all that gerrymandering people, usually old white retired folks, still get old and die. But then the Whigs were once a political force to be reckoned with in the American arena.

Peace brother

Pegasus8

Democrats are going to lose seats in the November elections and will probably lose the presidency in 2016. The reason for this is that their policies aren't working. It won't be because they are unable to raise money. They have shown very well in the past that they know how to do that. They can yell "sexist" and "racist" all they want, if they can't produce jobs, can't improve health care, and can't make the economy work, they will be toast. So far they've failed on all fronts.

 

[fromderinside]

Yet another post without a word of substance! Nothing but personal attacks on me and on others. All you guys are doing with your responses is verifying EVERYTHING that I have said !

Yet another post without a word of substance. Nothing but unsubstantiated accusations about the poster and others. All you are doing is debunking everything you may have said.

Yeah, I know its not any better. It's logically more sound since it uses your post as substantiation of my claims.

 

[boneyard bill]

Yet another post without a word of substance. Nothing but unsubstantiated accusations about the poster and others. All you are doing is debunking everything you may have said.

Yeah, I know its not any better. It's logically more sound since it uses your post as substantiation of my claims.

My accusations AREN'T unsubstantiated. They are supported by the posters themselves. So your point is not well-taken.

 

[SimpleDon]

The Democrats are set to lose sets in Congress because the voter turnout is expected to be below 40%, the Republican sweet spot, when the senior vote weights the heaviest. Seniors vote Republican because they want their Social Security and Medicare benefits cut, apparently.

I will believe Charles Koch doesn't want government subsidies and tax cuts when he starts mailing back the checks and when he pays his lobbyists to build support to repeal them. He didn't say either. Talk is cheap Chuck.

I alone among most here don't believe that money has a large effect on the outcome of elections. Let's say that I don't believe that more money has a large added effect on the outcome of elections. I don't think that it makes much difference if someone has seen a political ad 50 times instead of 10 times. I think that diminishing returns kicks in pretty fast, especially in today's content free election campaigns.

The only policies that the Democrats have been able to enact over entrenched Republican opposition is the poorly planned and executed ACA, based entirely on the original Heritage Foundation plan with the modifications proposed and approved by the best, most qualified Republican presidential candidate circa 2012, Mitt Romney. Of course, it is a bad plan, it was devised by conservatives with the sole purpose of heavily subsidizing the health care insurance companies, among others. Just like they passed the Medicare drug benefit to increase the federal government subsidies benefiting the poor drug companies. A drug benefit that they still, to this day, have no idea how to pay for in spite of having had, what, more than ten years to come up with an answer for. It makes the five years that they haven't been able to come up with an alternative to the ACA that doesn't cost more and benefit fewer seem like a brief interlude. Perhaps they should do like they did with the Ryan budget, just order the CBO to find that it costs less and benefits more than the ACA.

And, yes, the conservative economic policies of increasing income inequality and senseless deregulation that caused the worse financial crisis and recession since the Depression also are making the recovery slow, but don't forget that for the first time in history that the opposition party decided that they would oppose any attempts that the party in power proposed to recover from the recession, even if it meant a longer, deeper recession.

And yes, the American people might hold the Democrats to task for failing to heed the advice of the best, most qualified Republican presidential candidate circa 2008, John McCain and the advice of the second most qualified Republican presidential candidate circa 2008, the half term governor, who both recommended that the US should go to war in Iraq, again, Iran, Libya, Georgia (the one in Central Asia,) North Korea, Afghanistan, again, and the Crimea. All of the peace and diplomacy that we have had to endure lately is getting on everyone's nerves. A tidy six or seven regional wars would have boosted the economy, you betcha! Politically correct Keynesian stimulus.

 

[ksen]

He think Obama is despotic (a perfectly defensible claim)

A perfectly defensible claim for loonies maybe.