Billionaire Brothers Waging War On the President

Politics • Views: 5,853

The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer has an excellent piece on right wing billionaires David and Charles Koch, and their $100 million war against President Obama.

In 1958, Fred Koch became one of the original members of the John Birch Society, the arch-conservative group known, in part, for a highly skeptical view of governance and for spreading fears of a Communist takeover. Members considered President Dwight D. Eisenhower to be a Communist agent. In a self-published broadside, Koch claimed that “the Communists have infiltrated both the Democrat and Republican Parties.” He wrote admiringly of Benito Mussolini’s suppression of Communists in Italy, and disparagingly of the American civil-rights movement. “The colored man looms large in the Communist plan to take over America,” he warned. Welfare was a secret plot to attract rural blacks to cities, where they would foment “a vicious race war.” In a 1963 speech that prefigures the Tea Party’s talk of a secret socialist plot, Koch predicted that Communists would “infiltrate the highest offices of government in the U.S. until the President is a Communist, unknown to the rest of us.”

Koch married Mary Robinson, the daughter of a Missouri physician, and they had four sons: Freddie, Charles, and twins, David and William. John Damgard, the president of the Futures Industry Association, was David’s schoolmate and friend. He recalled that Fred Koch was “a real John Wayne type.” Koch emphasized rugged pursuits, taking his sons big-game hunting in Africa, and requiring them to do farm labor at the family ranch. The Kochs lived in a stone mansion on a large compound across from Wichita’s country club; in the summer, the boys could hear their friends splashing in the pool, but they were not allowed to join them. “By instilling a work ethic in me at an early age, my father did me a big favor, although it didn’t seem like a favor back then,” Charles has written. “By the time I was eight, he made sure work occupied most of my spare time.” David Koch recalled that his father also indoctrinated the boys politically. “He was constantly speaking to us children about what was wrong with government,” he told Brian Doherty, an editor of the libertarian magazine Reason, and the author of “Radicals for Capitalism,” a 2007 history of the libertarian movement. “It’s something I grew up with—a fundamental point of view that big government was bad, and imposition of government controls on our lives and economic fortunes was not good.”

Jump to bottom

211 comments
1 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:11:40am

You mean they aren't rocking a goatee and inventing really cool weapons in their spare time?

Fail.

2 zxbe  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:11:59am

And the righties complain about Soros?

3 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:13:54am

re: #1 EmmmieG

You mean they aren't rocking a goatee and inventing really cool weapons in their spare time?

Fail.

No no no... They hire people for that sort of thing.

4 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:15:40am

re: #2 zxbe

And the righties complain about Soros?

Yes I do. Soros and Koch both suffer from the same delusion that since they can make buttloads of money they have the right and wisdom to meddle in the governmental affairs of soverign nations.

I detest peddling influence at all levels. Even here at home I can see the direct link between state agencies with inefficient and corrupt boards and the lobbyists that benefit from their being that way.

5 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:16:20am

re: #3 LudwigVanQuixote

No no no... They hire people for that sort of thing.

You mean you can be hired to look hip and cool and make ironic comments? I shall get me to a coffee house now. Oh, wait. I'm not hip and cool. I'm just sarcastic.

6 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:16:33am

re: #2 zxbe

And the righties complain about Soros?

They're not upset that there are politically active billionaires. It's *left wing* politically active billionaires since that violates the old saw "if you're under 30 and not a liberal you have no heart, and if you're over 30 and not a conservative you have no brain." (Since they assume you have to have a brain in order to be a billionaire... ;)

7 jaunte  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:16:38am
The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation

.

Fish gotta swim and birds gotta fly
but they won't last long if they try
-- Tom Lehrer

8 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:16:39am

Just wait until the consequences of the Citizen's United decision sinks in.

9 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:18:27am
The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation

That's roughly 1880 or so isn't it? Gilded Age and when all the Robber Barons were on the loose. Color me surprised.

10 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:19:00am

re: #6 oaktree

(Since they assume you have to have a brain in order to be a billionaire... ;)

That is a very bad assumption. The only difference between you and me and the rich is that they have more money.

11 Darth Vader Gargoyle  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:19:07am

re: #2 zxbe

And the righties complain about Soros?

TU QUOQUE!!!11!! no...wait...
//

12 Kragar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:19:47am
“It’s something I grew up with—a fundamental point of view that big government was bad, and imposition of government controls on our lives and economic fortunes was not good.”

Because its much better to have a bunch of rich uptight bastards in control of your life and economic fortunes.

13 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:20:25am

These guys are downright sane compared to Scaife.

14 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:21:18am

re: #8 Gus 802

Just wait until the consequences of the Citizen's United decision sinks in.

I've got to believe that there is a diminishing return on political spending.

15 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:21:48am

re: #14 DaddyG

I've got to believe that there is a diminishing return on political spending.

Why do you believe that?

16 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:23:34am

re: #15 Fozzie Bear

Why do you believe that?

At some point the market gets saturated and voters tire of the campaigns. Robo-calls and sign pollution are two examples of things that turn off voters to a candidate.

What I'm afraid of is that after a certain point people will just tire of the process and tune out. Which in its own perverse way can be a political tool.

17 darthstar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:23:47am

re: #14 DaddyG

I've got to believe that there is a diminishing return on political spending.

There is if you're Meg Whitman. But hey, if she wants to pump an extra 100 million into the California economy over the next few months, let her...not that most political spending actually 'trickles down' to benefit local communities. Most of it goes to the networks.

18 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:25:14am
19 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:25:45am

re: #5 EmmmieG

You mean you can be hired to look hip and cool and make ironic comments? I shall get me to a coffee house now. Oh, wait. I'm not hip and cool. I'm just sarcastic.

No I meant that your typical wealthy wingnut considers the science needed to d that sort of thing, to be in the province of the hired help.

20 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:25:55am

I talked to some folks at Georgia-Pacific after Koch purchased them. I worked there when it was a publicly traded company.

The person I spoke to said everything was the Koch way now. They dictated the way the business should be run and it was all about making money in commodities. Lots and lots of money.

For libertarians they sure do have a top down control mentality about their business ventures.

21 darthstar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:27:37am

re: #16 DaddyG

I've somehow gotten onto Republican mail and phone lists in recent months. I've gotten all the bullshit fliers...even Sharron Angle has sent me a letter. And some guy called the other day asking if I supported Newt Gingrich's ideas...I said, "Fuck Newt." and hung up on him.

The weirdest call I got, however, was last night around 9:30 pm. A robo-call, asking if I had a "small dog"...I said yes, even though I've got two medium-large dogs, to hear what the next question was, and the call just gave me some number (something like "Survey 1,247") and rang off.

22 Darth Vader Gargoyle  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:28:08am

re: #18 Gus 802

A little something to down ding.


That is so poorly written I can't even make sense of it!
//

23 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:29:33am

re: #16 DaddyG

At some point the market gets saturated and voters tire of the campaigns. Robo-calls and sign pollution are two examples of things that turn off voters to a candidate.

What I'm afraid of is that after a certain point people will just tire of the process and tune out. Which in its own perverse way can be a political tool.

Implicit in that assessment is that political spending is all campaigning in the traditional sense. Lobbying, contributions to "think tanks" and other proxy groups, etc., is every bit as effective, if not more so, and doesn't appear to the average Joe to be political in nature.

Think of all the bad climate science out there, the misinformation regarding the Cordoba house, the push to teach "Intelligent Design" in public schools, etc. Look at all the websites out there that have the sole purpose of pushing propaganda from a specific perspective, yet don't bear the visible fingerprints of political campaigning.

Actual political ads are just a small part of the overall political propaganda model.

24 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:34:28am

re: #21 darthstar

The weirdest call I got, however, was last night around 9:30 pm. A robo-call, asking if I had a "small dog"...I said yes, even though I've got two medium-large dogs, to hear what the next question was, and the call just gave me some number (something like "Survey 1,247") and rang off.

I'll get you my pretty and your little dog too!

25 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:34:44am

What is it with libertarians?

26 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:35:15am

re: #23 Fozzie Bear

I'm not going to sleep well now. /

27 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:36:13am

re: #10 DaddyG

That is a very bad assumption. The only difference between you and me and the rich is that they have more money.

Well, there's also the fact that the rich are used to everyone around them telling them how smart (and good-looking and funny) they are.

The rest of us don't get a lot of that. When we are full of shit, people tell us. Not so much for the wealthy.

28 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:36:16am

re: #25 000G

What is it with libertarians?


Libertarianism for me and not for thee.

29 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:36:42am

Geez, for a $100 mil. you could put up a community center.

30 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:37:27am

re: #25 000G

What is it with libertarians?

Most of what I've seen is selective libertarianism.

31 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:38:20am

re: #27 garhighway

Well, there's also the fact that the rich are used to everyone around them telling them how smart (and good-looking and funny) they are.

The rest of us don't get a lot of that. When we are full of shit, people tell us. Not so much for the wealthy.

It is really an issue with leadership (money, power, influence) and the people who hold positions of power. Once a leader begins to believe their own press it can go downhill very quickly.

32 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:38:38am

re: #28 DaddyG

Libertarianism for me and not for thee.

Seriously, though. I've been wondering. Being a European, the liberal/conservative dichotomy in the USA never made much sense to me. Then I stumbled upon libertarianism. And its ties to anarchism. But anarchism in Europe is decidedly left-wing. In the USA, however, it's almost always right-wing. And very much tied into anti-communist NWO conspiracy crap. I've never stopped being baffled the further I dug into the whole history.

So, I ask again: What gives, libertarianism?

33 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:38:45am

re: #29 Jeff In Ohio

Geez, for a $100 mil. you could put up a community center.

I vote thread Winner!!

34 Mr. Crankypants  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:39:00am

re: #31 DaddyG

It is really an issue with leadership (money, power, influence) and the people who hold positions of power. Once a leader begins to believe their own press it can go downhill very quickly.

In all things it's very important to believe your own bullshit.

35 Killgore Trout  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:39:21am
36 darthstar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:39:43am

Slightly OT: Wow...I didn't realize Arsenio Hall was so broke. He'll be hitting MC Hammer up for a loan pretty soon.

37 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:39:49am

re: #34 PT Barnum

In all things it's very important to believe your own bullshit.


I have a good wife who calls me on my crap and still loves me all the same.

38 Mr. Crankypants  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:40:09am

re: #32 000G

Seriously, though. I've been wondering. Being a European, the liberal/conservative dichotomy in the USA never made much sense to me. Then I stumbled upon libertarianism. And its ties to anarchism. But anarchism in Europe is decidedly left-wing. In the USA, however, it's almost always right-wing. And very much tied into anti-communist NWO conspiracy crap. I've never stopped being baffled the further I dug into the whole history.

So, I ask again: What gives, libertarianism?

It's essentially institutionalized narcissism.

39 Mr. Crankypants  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:40:44am

re: #37 DaddyG

I have a good wife who calls me on my crap and still loves me all the same.

Mine does that too. I usually limit myself to telling her she does not look fat in that dress, though.

40 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:41:32am

re: #22 rwdflynavy

That is so poorly written I can't even make sense of it!
//

He couldn't afford the vowels. They are $250 apiece, doncha know?

41 Mr. Crankypants  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:42:24am

I think I'll break up with my girlfriend
Her behavior is strange I'll admit
every time I say Darling I love you
She tells me that I'm full of
Shaving cream
be nice and clean
shave every day and you'll always look keen.

Just introduced my 9 year old to that and it is now his favorite song.

42 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:42:31am

OT: Long Island commutes (no fun on GOOD days) are going to suck tonight:

[Link: cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com...]

43 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:42:32am

re: #14 DaddyG

I've got to believe that there is a diminishing return on political spending.

There'd have to be, or we would have had President Forbes in 2000. The totals involved in entire presidential campaigns are pretty modest compared to some peoples' personal fortunes. Just drop a cool billion and you've outspent anything anybody in the field could raise many times over. But it might annoy the people who think their votes actually matter, i.e. the voters.

44 Killgore Trout  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:42:40am

re: #32 000G

Seriously, though. I've been wondering. Being a European, the liberal/conservative dichotomy in the USA never made much sense to me. Then I stumbled upon libertarianism. And its ties to anarchism. But anarchism in Europe is decidedly left-wing. In the USA, however, it's almost always right-wing. And very much tied into anti-communist NWO conspiracy crap. I've never stopped being baffled the further I dug into the whole history.

So, I ask again: What gives, libertarianism?

I apologize on behalf of my country but we are starting to export our wacky band of Libertarianism to Europe. It's not catching on yet but it could. There were European Tea Party start ups (with the usual nonsense about world government and using gold as currency) but they didn't catch on.

45 Mr. Crankypants  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:42:53am

re: #40 tnguitarist

He couldn't afford the vowels. They are $250 apiece, doncha know?

Try parsing this, then
Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

46 darthstar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:43:16am

re: #40 tnguitarist

He couldn't afford the vowels. They are $250 apiece, doncha know?

Has anyone else noticed that the price of vowels has remained unchanged for years? They seem like a fairly safe recession-proof investment.

47 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:43:27am

re: #39 PT Barnum

Mine does that too. I usually limit myself to telling her she does not look fat in that dress, though.

There is constructive criticizm and then there is suicide.

48 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:43:28am

re: #21 darthstar

I've somehow gotten onto Republican mail and phone lists in recent months. I've gotten all the bullshit fliers...even Sharron Angle has sent me a letter. And some guy called the other day asking if I supported Newt Gingrich's ideas...I said, "Fuck Newt." and hung up on him.

The weirdest call I got, however, was last night around 9:30 pm. A robo-call, asking if I had a "small dog"...I said yes, even though I've got two medium-large dogs, to hear what the next question was, and the call just gave me some number (something like "Survey 1,247") and rang off.

I get these calls all the time. My goal is to waste as much time as I can of theirs as I can and slowly piss them off. I had one guy from the NRA who was calling about the UN invading us from Mexico (or something equally inane) who I started off with polite agreement and conversation, when I was done I thought he was going to have a heart attack. Rageboner!11! It's reverse concern trolling. I can't wait till they start coming around this fall.

On the other hand, I had a really nice lady call me from the Ohio Republican Party. Very polite, I almost ask her over for coffee. I guess they liked me so much, they called again to chat some more.

49 Darth Vader Gargoyle  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:44:02am

re: #41 PT Barnum

I think I'll break up with my girlfriend
Her behavior is strange I'll admit
every time I say Darling I love you
She tells me that I'm full of
Shaving cream
be nice and clean
shave every day and you'll always look keen.

Just introduced my 9 year old to that and it is now his favorite song.

Sunday nights surreptitiously listening to Dr. Demento...Good times!!!

50 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:44:14am

re: #46 darthstar

Has anyone else noticed that the price of vowels has remained unchanged for years? They seem like a fairly safe recession-proof investment.

I'm surprised they haven't been adjusted for inflation.

51 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:44:56am

re: #30 Gus 802

aka libertardianism.

52 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:45:02am

re: #46 darthstar

Has anyone else noticed that the price of vowels has remained unchanged for years? They seem like a fairly safe recession-proof investment.

Goldline is pimping 'em on Sajak's show right now... /

53 darthstar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:45:02am

re: #50 tnguitarist

I'm surprised they haven't been adjusted for inflation.

If I ever go on the show, I'll ask if I can get a discount if I buy a lower-case vowel.

54 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:45:15am

re: #38 PT Barnum

It's essentially institutionalized narcissism.

That's what Tammy Bruce says about "The Left". I am not buying it. Reduction of political movements or currents to psychological issues of individuals is too cheap.

55 jaunte  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:46:09am

re: #41 PT Barnum

I have an LP from a Dutch band named The Cats with that song.

56 Obdicut  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:46:41am

The Koch brothers are also related to funding of AGW denial.

They're just peachy.

57 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:46:48am

re: #44 Killgore Trout

I apologize on behalf of my country but we are starting to export our wacky band of Libertarianism to Europe. It's not catching on yet but it could. There were European Tea Party start ups (with the usual nonsense about world government and using gold as currency) but they didn't catch on.

I am not really worrying about Europe in that regard. I am migrating to the USA in the foreseeable future. Some of the acquintances I have over there are decidedly libertarian.

Oh well, gotta go.

58 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:47:08am

re: #51 Jeff In Ohio

aka libertardianism.

I call it "anarchy."

But hey, if these rich guys ever get what they want with the no government thing, I just may have to head on over there and help myself to some of their fortune. Of course most of their wealth would have instantly evaporated when the banking system goes poof! but I bet they still got some cool stuff I could take since there wouldn't be any police.

59 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:47:08am

re: #48 Jeff In Ohio
On gag I love to pull is to ask the caller if I can get their home number and call them back later. When they say they don't take calls at home I say "neither do I" and hang up.

(this only works with new phone bank workers).

60 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:47:29am

re: #36 darthstar

Slightly OT: Wow...I didn't realize Arsenio Hall was so broke. He'll be hitting MC Hammer up for a loan pretty soon.

Especially considering that the ad is just ambiguous enough that it's hard to tell whether he's a spokesman, or a client.

61 Big Steve  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:48:00am

Took me a while to read the whole article. So lets not be hypocritical here. We have rallied around the 1st amendment on the Park51 issue. In that whole article I didn't see a thing other than the Koch brothers exercising their 1st amendment rights to be critical of the government.

62 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:48:03am

re: #56 Obdicut

The Koch brothers are also related to funding of AGW denial.

They're just peachy.

The piece in the NYT today about how AGW is likely to manifest itself is pretty scary.

63 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:48:51am

re: #58 elbruce

I call it "anarchy."

But hey, if these rich guys ever get what they want with the no government thing, I just may have to head on over there and help myself to some of their fortune. Of course most of their wealth would have instantly evaporated when the banking system goes poof! but I bet they still got some cool stuff I could take since there wouldn't be any police.

Oh, they would have police. They would be the only ones with police. Private security it would be called.

64 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:49:09am

re: #58 elbruce

I call it "anarchy."

...but I bet they still got some cool stuff I could take since there wouldn't be any police.

That 54" plasma screen just isn't the same once the cable goes out and the power grid fails. /

65 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:50:32am

re: #61 Big Steve

Took me a while to read the whole article. So lets not be hypocritical here. We have rallied around the 1st amendment on the Park51 issue. In that whole article I didn't see a thing other than the Koch brothers exercising their 1st amendment rights to be critical of the government.

By the sheer amount of money they put into it, they get to be more critical than most everyone. Why should someone have more say just because they have more money?

66 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:52:12am

re: #65 tnguitarist

By the sheer amount of money they put into it, they get to be more critical than most everyone. Why should someone have more say just because they have more money?

I really do not like the money=speech argument.

67 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:52:38am

re: #58 elbruce

Well, we had the anarchy discussion the other night, and as I just spent 30 minutes trying to figure out what exactly my kids washed own the bathtub drain (odd symbolism there) I'm not in a mood to recap my youth spent reading Goodman, Goldman, etc, etc, but, no.

To me libertarianism implies the good of the individual over the community and historically anarchic communities imply the opposite.

Unless your making a joke I don't get. I have bathtub on the brain, so call me Simple Jack.

68 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:52:57am

re: #59 DaddyG

That's a classic.

69 sagehen  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:52:59am

Isn't it funny how the billionaire right wing screaming "meritocracy! no taxes! we earned this and deserve to keep it all!" is composed mostly of people who inherited their money (Koch, Coors, Scaife, Forbes, Waltons) and the billionaire left wing that wants higher taxes and more social spending is composed mostly of first-generation wealth (Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Soros, Winfrey, Turner, Google and Apple people).

Just a coincidence I'm sure.

70 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:53:19am

Speaking of libertarianism, some of you might be familiar with with this:

CRITIQUES OF LIBERTARIANISM BY Mike Huben. It's been around for 12 years now!

71 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:54:35am

I hope this type of ploy backfires regardless of the political affiliations. The American psyche is just independent enough to reject being manipulated if they smell it in time. Unfortunately as Fozzie pointed out these manipulations can be subtle.

My wife an I were in disagreement over the wisdom of the placement of the mosque in New York (we agreed over their right to do so) until I pointed out that the location was two city blocks away in an old Burlington Coat factory. She looked at me with wide eyes and after agreeing that it was no ones business but the Mosque developers she asked "who can we trust for information these days?"

72 lawhawk  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:54:47am

re: #42 garhighway

Suck is a polite way of saying... you're frakked. 250,000 people are going to have one heck of a commute tonight (or longer if they can't get it fixed). At least the summertime means not as many folks are working in the city.

73 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:55:17am

re: #66 JasonA

I really do not like the money=speech argument.

Are you saying they don't have a larger forum?

74 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:55:20am

re: #69 sagehen

Isn't it funny how the billionaire right wing screaming "meritocracy! no taxes! we earned this and deserve to keep it all!" is composed mostly of people who inherited their money (Koch, Coors, Scaife, Forbes, Waltons) and the billionaire left wing that wants higher taxes and more social spending is composed mostly of first-generation wealth (Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Soros, Winfrey, Turner, Google and Apple people).

Just a coincidence I'm sure.

Remember: it's all about small businesses. Whether it's the estate tax or the income tax, the reason we shouldn't tax billionaires is that it will hurt small businesses and family farms.

Or at least that's what they say.

75 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:56:16am

re: #61 Big Steve

Took me a while to read the whole article. So lets not be hypocritical here. We have rallied around the 1st amendment on the Park51 issue. In that whole article I didn't see a thing other than the Koch brothers exercising their 1st amendment rights to be critical of the government.

I don't know. I don't get that anyone is denying their right to throw their money around. Nothing wrong with a little transparency. Ask Target.

76 Big Steve  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:57:07am

re: #65 tnguitarist

By the sheer amount of money they put into it, they get to be more critical than most everyone. Why should someone have more say just because they have more money?

Because the Supreme Court has just recently said so......free speech is free speech. Regardless of the money you have it is your choice on how you spend it. For example, I am on a city council and I can tell you that 90% of the people who come to city council meetings and take advantage of the open address time period are retirees. So why should someone who is no longer working have more say in how a city government works?

77 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:57:31am

re: #72 lawhawk

Suck is a polite way of saying... you're frakked. 250,000 people are going to have one heck of a commute tonight (or longer if they can't get it fixed). At least the summertime means not as many folks are working in the city.

This is probably a good afternoon to be a vendor at Penn.

78 Big Steve  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:58:11am

re: #69 sagehen

Isn't it funny how the billionaire right wing screaming "meritocracy! no taxes! we earned this and deserve to keep it all!" is composed mostly of people who inherited their money (Koch, Coors, Scaife, Forbes, Waltons) and the billionaire left wing that wants higher taxes and more social spending is composed mostly of first-generation wealth (Gates, Buffett, Bloomberg, Soros, Winfrey, Turner, Google and Apple people).

Just a coincidence I'm sure.


ah.....Kennedy's......all inherited money and they seem pretty liberal to me.

79 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:59:12am

re: #76 Big Steve

Because the Supreme Court has just recently said so...free speech is free speech. Regardless of the money you have it is your choice on how you spend it. For example, I am on a city council and I can tell you that 90% of the people who come to city council meetings and take advantage of the open address time period are retirees. So why should someone who is no longer working have more say in how a city government works?

Just because they are no longer working doesn't mean that the government doesn't affect them.

80 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 11:59:30am

re: #75 Jeff In Ohio
I would not advocate limiting their right to use their money to buy air time and support like minded foundations. Transparency is a very good thing and I would support full disclosure of financial ties for all donations and purchases of air time.

81 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:00:44pm

re: #78 Big Steve

ah...Kennedy's...all inherited money and they seem pretty liberal to me.


Hmmm... perhaps its an industrial and retail vs. entertainment split? /

82 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:01:14pm

re: #73 tnguitarist

Are you saying they don't have a larger forum?

Not at all. I agree with "Why should someone have more say just because they have more money?"

83 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:01:16pm

re: #67 Jeff In Ohio

To me libertarianism implies the good of the individual over the community and historically anarchic communities imply the opposite.

I'd prefer a reasonable balance between the individual and community.

But call it "reductio ad stoopid." Let's say the overall tax rate comes in at 40%. A libertarian will say it (and government) should be smaller. Let's say we slash it in half and now it's 20%. A libertarian will say that it (and government) should be smaller. Halve it again to 10%. A libertarian will say that it (and government) should be smaller. Continue until we have a tax/spending rate of 0%, and we've hit pure anarchy - the only point at which a libertarian can be satisfied and still be a libertarian.

It goes in the opposite direction of being a communist, but employs an identical approach, which is why I hold libertarians and communists in pretty much the same regard.

84 reloadingisnotahobby  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:01:33pm

re: #76 Big Steve
Maybe you've heard this...
"What do give a Man that has EVERYTHING"?
....".Your complete and undivided ATTENTION"!

85 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:02:20pm

re: #79 tnguitarist

Just because they are no longer working doesn't mean that the government doesn't affect them.


Time for Renewal!

86 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:02:33pm

re: #83 elbruce

No argument from me.

87 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:02:42pm

re: #73 tnguitarist

Are you saying they don't have a larger forum?

They can pay to have many more vocal and affluent voices.

88 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:03:02pm

re: #82 JasonA

Not at all. I agree with "Why should someone have more say just because they have more money?"

Gotcha. I know the counter argument is that they should be able to spend their money as they please. I guess, but that really isn't 'one person, one vote' to me.

89 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:03:36pm

re: #85 DaddyG

Sport? WHy not food?

90 Reginald Perrin  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:03:42pm

re: #78 Big Steve

ah...Kennedy's...all inherited money and they seem pretty liberal to me.

That's true. Maybe some of that liberalism was a result of the family wanting legitimacy and partly out of guilt. A large part of the Kennedy fortune was a result of "rum-running" activities during prohibition.

91 Big Steve  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:03:43pm

re: #79 tnguitarist

Just because they are no longer working doesn't mean that the government doesn't affect them.

you missed the point, just because they are retired they have more time than the rest of us to petition local government......is that fair?

92 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:03:56pm

re: #58 elbruce

I call it "anarchy."

But hey, if these rich guys ever get what they want with the no government thing, I just may have to head on over there and help myself to some of their fortune. Of course most of their wealth would have instantly evaporated when the banking system goes poof! but I bet they still got some cool stuff I could take since there wouldn't be any police.

Oh I think the closer we get to no government, the ultra rich will be doing just fine. Money buys a lot of buzzcuts with assault rifles!

93 cliffster  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:04:18pm
94 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:04:31pm

re: #89 Jeff In Ohio That was my second choice. Heh.

95 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:05:09pm

re: #61 Big Steve

Took me a while to read the whole article. So lets not be hypocritical here. We have rallied around the 1st amendment on the Park51 issue. In that whole article I didn't see a thing other than the Koch brothers exercising their 1st amendment rights to be critical of the government.

It just strikes me as a "portrait" piece. Hey, here are some guys who are kinda like Soros. Frankly, I don't mind either of them on either side. I just hope the rich guys on my side dig deeper than the rich guys on their side is all.

A do agree that we need to get money out of politics overall, but I don't see how to make it happen; what majority (Democrat or Repbublican) is ever going to want to choose to neutralize an advantage they hold, however temporary?

96 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:05:24pm

re: #93 cliffster

Tiger's gotten to the Big D (and don't mean Dallas)


Speaking of people who believed their own press...

97 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:05:51pm

re: #91 Big Steve

you missed the point, just because they are retired they have more time than the rest of us to petition local government...is that fair?

Yes it is.

98 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:05:55pm

re: #91 Big Steve

you missed the point, just because they are retired they have more time than the rest of us to petition local government...is that fair?

True. I can always write or email my representatives. I still have a say. Our city council are held Monday evenings, anyway.

99 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:06:25pm

re: #90 Reginald Perrin

Maybe some of that liberalism was a result of the family wanting legitimacy and partly out of guilt.

Or maybe their momma just raised 'em right.

100 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:06:33pm

Like it or not the reality is that typically the candidate that spends the most money wins or at least raises the possibility of winning. This is in large part due to the simple fact that money buys advertising, media savvy political consultants, film makes, direct mail, calls, blitz campaigns, etc.

There may be transparency but the average Joe or Jane do not research the funding sources of candidates. Advertising will not include any logos or identification of corporate funding entities. If your idea of America is one that is governed by corporate backed candidates unfettered by financial constraints then the Citizens United decision is one you should applaud.

I doubt the founding fathers, like many other things, envisioned this.

101 reloadingisnotahobby  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:06:52pm

re: #93 cliffster

Tiger's gotten to the Big D (and don't mean Dallas)

I'm afraid my 'game' would off too...650 Mil?

102 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:06:59pm

re: #94 DaddyG

Heston had some great roles in cult movies

103 NJDhockeyfan  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:07:01pm

re: #93 cliffster

Tiger's gotten to the Big D (and don't mean Dallas)

He's on the open market now girls!
/

104 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:07:55pm

re: #102 Jeff In Ohio

Heston had some great roles in cult movies

[Video]

105 sagehen  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:08:31pm

re: #78 Big Steve

ah...Kennedy's...all inherited money and they seem pretty liberal to me.

That's why I said "mostly". The Roosevelts were also children of privilege.

I think, to a degree, it's that new money peopel have an understanding that all their smarts and hard work wouldn't have brought success without the infrastructure and government actions that provided the playing field they won on and the refs that made the competition fair. People whose daddy and grandpa earned the money think it came entirely from daddy and grandpa's magic genetic deservedness that's obviously theirs now.

106 Big Steve  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:08:48pm

re: #98 tnguitarist

True. I can always write or email my representatives. I still have a say. Our city council are held Monday evenings, anyway.

We have one elderly "gentleman" who comes to every meeting and rails away at us for his allotted three minutes. Topics vary but mostly it is stream of consciousness rambling. My opinion is that this is his enertainment for the month.

107 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:09:10pm

re: #88 tnguitarist

Gotcha. I know the counter argument is that they should be able to spend their money as they please. I guess, but that really isn't 'one person, one vote' to me.

I've suggested before, on this very board, the idea that any political campaign should be limited to accepting funds from the its constituents. So no politicians taking money from anyone who's not a resident of the district, state, town, whatever, that he's seeking to represent, just as an example. I've been shot down every time I bring it up. Ah well.

108 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:09:36pm

re: #104 DaddyG

Yeah!

109 Kragar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:10:08pm

re: #102 Jeff In Ohio

Heston had some great roles in cult movies

[Video]

I know without watching its Omega man.

Am I right?

110 Sheila Broflovski  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:10:29pm

re: #107 JasonA

I've suggested before, on this very board, the idea that any political campaign should be limited to accepting funds from the its constituents. So no politicians taking money from anyone who's not a resident of the district, state, town, whatever, that he's seeking to represent, just as an example. I've been shot down every time I bring it up. Ah well.

What's to stop a gazillionaire from buying a house in every political district he wants to influence?

111 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:10:48pm

re: #83 elbruce

Exactly. The term "smaller government" is entirely meaningless without specifying what it should be smaller than. A sane political philosophy would specify a target size of government that makes sense and could be functional.

From the perspective of most of the 20th century, the government is already WAY smaller. How much smaller than that relative minimum (post great depression) do they want it?

112 AntonSirius  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:11:05pm

re: #109 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I know without watching its Omega man.

Am I right?

Nope, it was the other one.

113 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:11:06pm

re: #107 JasonA

I've suggested before, on this very board, the idea that any political campaign should be limited to accepting funds from the its constituents. So no politicians taking money from anyone who's not a resident of the district, state, town, whatever, that he's seeking to represent, just as an example. I've been shot down every time I bring it up. Ah well.

I said the same thing to friends. Or have them run on a level playing field. If you both spend the same, the better candidate should win, no?

114 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:11:50pm

re: #110 Alouette

What's to stop a gazillionaire from buying a house in every political district he wants to influence?

Is he registered to vote in all places?

115 Walter L. Newton  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:11:53pm

re: #107 JasonA

I've suggested before, on this very board, the idea that any political campaign should be limited to accepting funds from the its constituents. So no politicians taking money from anyone who's not a resident of the district, state, town, whatever, that he's seeking to represent, just as an example. I've been shot down every time I bring it up. Ah well.

You got shot down because you keep forgetting that little amendment thing... that freedom to purchase speech.

116 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:12:10pm

re: #110 Alouette

What's to stop a gazillionaire from buying a house in every political district he wants to influence?

He'd stimulate the housing market! Yay!

117 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:12:19pm

re: #109 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Ding!

118 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:12:51pm

re: #113 tnguitarist

I said the same thing to friends. Or have them run on a level playing field. If you both spend the same, the better candidate should win, no?

No. The most convincing will win, and being convincing does not equate to being right.

119 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:13:04pm

re: #110 Alouette

What's to stop a gazillionaire from buying a house in every political district he wants to influence?

If he wants to take it that far just to donate to a political campaign then I can't think of much to stop him.

120 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:13:25pm

re: #111 Fozzie Bear

Exactly. The term "smaller government" is entirely meaningless without specifying what it should be smaller than. A sane political philosophy would specify a target size of government that makes sense and could be functional.

From the perspective of most of the 20th century, the government is already WAY smaller. How much smaller than that relative minimum (post great depression) do they want it?

There is a kind of weird throwing money at problems at the federal level while states are getting pinched providing more services with less resources. Sooner or later the combination of federal debt and unfunded state mandates are going to show some real cracks in our infrastructure. I'm a fan of more local control over many government functions but the wholesale slashing of government budgets for the sake of political pandering is scary.

121 Big Steve  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:13:44pm

re: #105 sagehen

That's why I said "mostly". The Roosevelts were also children of privilege.

I think, to a degree, it's that new money peopel have an understanding that all their smarts and hard work wouldn't have brought success without the infrastructure and government actions that provided the playing field they won on and the refs that made the competition fair. People whose daddy and grandpa earned the money think it came entirely from daddy and grandpa's magic genetic deservedness that's obviously theirs now.

I think you are vastly over generalizing here. Most people who have earned their wealth themselves tend to think that they have some special quality rather than having been a random generation of the system. Also the very article we are debating starts with the Koch's having given generously to things like the ballet and musuems......that sounds pretty socially generous to me.

122 calochortus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:13:50pm

re: #105 sagehen

Perhaps people who make a gazillion dollars also have faith they could do it again, whereas if you inherit money and lose it you might end up as a Walmart greeter rather than CEO.

123 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:14:21pm

re: #115 Walter L. Newton

You got shot down because you keep forgetting that little amendment thing... that freedom to purchase speech.

I'm trying to change my sights away from the people spending the money to the politicians taking it.

124 tnguitarist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:14:26pm

re: #118 b_sharp

No. The most convincing will win, and being convincing does not equate to being right.

How would that be much different than now? Being convincing might get you elected, but it won't get you reelected.

125 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:14:37pm

re: #100 Gus 802

I doubt the founding fathers, like many other things, envisioned this.

They were mostly wealthy landowners. Ben Franklin ran a printing press, which is about as much "control of the media" as you could have back then. But I think "the richer guy wins" was pretty well established even then. The notion of the "populist outsider" politician didn't really form until Andrew Jackson came along, and even then he had a tough time elbowing his way into being accepted by the political establishment.

126 Jeff In Ohio  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:14:50pm

OK. Got to make the tub flow. We have three bathrooms in this rambling, hodgepodge old farm house, and 2 are out of commission. I was hoping for a nice relaxing day in the barn playing with my new toy - a classic RCA BA3A console preamp. Oh well. Apparently the women I live with like to bathe regularly.

127 Digital Display  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:15:05pm

re: #107 JasonA

I've suggested before, on this very board, the idea that any political campaign should be limited to accepting funds from the its constituents. So no politicians taking money from anyone who's not a resident of the district, state, town, whatever, that he's seeking to represent, just as an example. I've been shot down every time I bring it up. Ah well.

You make very valid points...But I'm from Napa Valley and am more interested in Home politics there than Indiana or Oklahoma or my future life in Singapore..Can I not contribute to Candidates there?

128 spikester  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:15:52pm

re: #117 Jeff In Ohio

&#937 not mainstream!?

129 spikester  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:16:16pm

re: #128 spikester

insert man

130 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:16:31pm

re: #127 HoosierHoops

You make very valid points...But I'm from Napa Valley and am more interested in Home politics there than Indiana or Oklahoma or my future life in Singapore..Can I not contribute to Candidates there?

Well, there's nothing to stop you from giving the money to friends or relatives living in the area to donate.

131 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:16:45pm

re: #110 Alouette

What's to stop a gazillionaire from buying a house in every political district he wants to influence?

Telling him to pick which one counts as his primary residence, and restrict the rule to that. But I don't think the SCOTUS would go along with this scheme anyway.

132 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:16:57pm

re: #125 elbruce

They were mostly wealthy landowners. Ben Franklin ran a printing press, which is about as much "control of the media" as you could have back then. But I think "the richer guy wins" was pretty well established even then. The notion of the "populist outsider" politician didn't really form until Andrew Jackson came along, and even then he had a tough time elbowing his way into being accepted by the political establishment.

I find it ironic that the anti-big-government people are pro big-money. Of course that's always been the case with well indoctrinated Americans who see money as a sort of virtue even amongst the lowest form of the ultra-rich. They would simply replace big-government with big-corporatism.

133 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:17:34pm

re: #130 JasonA

Well, there's nothing to stop you from giving the money to friends or relatives living in the area to donate.

If you want to be popular with the politicians learn how to effectively bundle donations.

134 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:17:44pm

OT... Here is a movie that promises to have no substance, a mediocre script that even Lawrence Olivier could not save, and yet, so much style, that I will probably love it for its popcorn value anyway. Either that or it will totally suck...

There is just something about dragons taking out Second World war era warbirds and ninja show girls taking out 30 foot tall, wielding 30mm Gatling guns wielding samurai.

135 Daniel Ballard  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:17:46pm

When I look at Koch and Soros and the like, and all the complaining about it...
At least nobody can argue secret conspiracy. To my mind the controlling factor is first about transparency. Then we can get into the real influence, if possible with any objectivity.

re: #107 JasonA

I've suggested before, on this very board, the idea that any political campaign should be limited to accepting funds from the its constituents. So no politicians taking money from anyone who's not a resident of the district, state, town, whatever, that he's seeking to represent, just as an example. I've been shot down every time I bring it up. Ah well.

Sounds good at first glance. But the problem with that is our interests as citizens are not limited to our location. Things that happen far away have real effects at home. To lose that influence would be damaging to representation in the larger sense.

136 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:18:12pm

re: #120 DaddyG

There is a kind of weird throwing money at problems at the federal level while states are getting pinched providing more services with less resources. Sooner or later the combination of federal debt and unfunded state mandates are going to show some real cracks in our infrastructure. I'm a fan of more local control over many government functions but the wholesale slashing of government budgets for the sake of political pandering is scary.

I think there already IS local control over local governments. The strings come when they take federal money: then they have to comply with the rules that come with the money.

That said, I think I agree with you more than I disagree with you. The whole "pay taxes to the US Govt so it can send some of that money back to your state or local government so you can pay less local taxes" seems pretty messy and inefficient to me. And it masks the true costs of your state and local government.

Better to make the local government really accountable, and to not flinch if local voters don't want to pay for services. If they insist on shitty roads and crappy schools, so be it.

137 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:18:29pm

re: #131 elbruce

Telling him to pick which one counts as his primary residence, and restrict the rule to that. But I don't think the SCOTUS would go along with this scheme anyway.

Oh, it's a total pipe dream. I know that. Especially after Citizens United. But we talk and talk and talk about Campaign Reform and, well... what the hell does that mean to us, anyway?

138 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:19:19pm

re: #132 Gus 802

I find it ironic that the anti-big-government people are pro big-money. Of course that's always been the case with well indoctrinated Americans who see money as a sort of virtue even amongst the lowest form of the ultra-rich. They would simply replace big-government with big-corporatism.

It's almost like libertarians believe that if it isn't something that they vote for or against, it can't possibly oppress them. The stupidity of that method of thought should be obvious, but for many, it isn't.

139 Digital Display  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:19:42pm

re: #107 JasonA

I've suggested before, on this very board, the idea that any political campaign should be limited to accepting funds from the its constituents. So no politicians taking money from anyone who's not a resident of the district, state, town, whatever, that he's seeking to represent, just as an example. I've been shot down every time I bring it up. Ah well.


I am responding to the above bolded...You are proposing stopping me from
Contributing as a non-resident...It gets a little complex doesn't it?

140 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:19:59pm

re: #132 Gus 802

I find it ironic that the anti-big-government people are pro big-money. Of course that's always been the case with well indoctrinated Americans who see money as a sort of virtue even amongst the lowest form of the ultra-rich. They would simply replace big-government with big-corporatism.

There's always gonna be a big something.

141 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:20:33pm

re: #139 HoosierHoops

I am responding to the above bolded...You are proposing stopping me from
Contributing as a non-resident...It gets a little complex doesn't it?


Technically I'm proposing a candidate not being allowed to accept your money. Because he won't be representing you.

142 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:21:13pm

re: #135 Rightwingconspirator

When I look at Koch and Soros and the like, and all the complaining about it...
At least nobody can argue secret conspiracy. To my mind the controlling factor is first about transparency. Then we can get into the real influence, if possible with any objectivity.

Sounds good at first glance. But the problem with that is our interests as citizens are not limited to our location. Things that happen far away have real effects at home. To lose that influence would be damaging to representation in the larger sense.

True transparency is tough. Astroturf groups spring up faster than you can track down who is really behind them.

143 cliffster  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:21:36pm

re: #132 Gus 802

I find it ironic that the anti-big-government people are pro big-money. Of course that's always been the case with well indoctrinated Americans who see money as a sort of virtue even amongst the lowest form of the ultra-rich. They would simply replace big-government with big-corporatism.

The whole point of government, the point of social contract, is to prevent oppression. That's why the constitution places so much restriction on government - to keep people from using its power to oppress. The same thing can happen though if a corporation gets enough money and power.. corporate america can also oppress and that has to be avoided too. It's a delicate balance.

144 ShaunP  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:21:47pm

re: #134 LudwigVanQuixote

OT... Here is a movie that promises to have no substance, a mediocre script that even Lawrence Olivier could not save, and yet, so much style, that I will probably love it for its popcorn value anyway. Either that or it will totally suck...

There is just something about dragons taking out Second World war era warbirds and ninja show girls taking out 30 foot tall, wielding 30mm Gatling guns wielding samurai.


[Video]

I'm so watching that...

145 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:21:51pm

re: #136 garhighway

The whole "pay taxes to the US Govt so it can send some of that money back to your state or local government so you can pay less local taxes" seems pretty messy and inefficient to me.

Hey, if we didn't help 'em out from the federal level a lot of those red states would be practically third world by now. I mean, more than they are.

146 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:22:06pm

re: #134 LudwigVanQuixote

Sailor Moon meets The Cell?

147 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:22:59pm

re: #135 Rightwingconspirator

When I look at Koch and Soros and the like, and all the complaining about it...
At least nobody can argue secret conspiracy. To my mind the controlling factor is first about transparency. Then we can get into the real influence, if possible with any objectivity...

True. But transparency is only valuable if people pay attention to it and seek out the information. If it's not clearly and visibly noted in advertisement then the average American will not have a clue. I propose that they create a law which requires that all televised and broadcast advertising clearly state the funding such as:

My name is John Doe and I approve this message.
This message was funded in large part by Massey Energy.

And yes, to be fair. You can replace Massey Energy with a large national union of your choice.

148 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:23:36pm

re: #134 LudwigVanQuixote

OT... Here is a movie that promises to have no substance, a mediocre script that even Lawrence Olivier could not save, and yet, so much style, that I will probably love it for its popcorn value anyway. Either that or it will totally suck...

There is just something about dragons taking out Second World war era warbirds and ninja show girls taking out 30 foot tall, wielding 30mm Gatling guns wielding samurai.

I believe that was called "Avatar."

149 Daniel Ballard  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:23:50pm

re: #142 garhighway

Tough we can deal with. As we see in the article about the tax returns paved the way for the article. Tough disclosure rules are what I want to see first before any big structural changes to the rules.

150 Kragar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:24:07pm

re: #134 LudwigVanQuixote

OT... Here is a movie that promises to have no substance, a mediocre script that even Lawrence Olivier could not save, and yet, so much style, that I will probably love it for its popcorn value anyway. Either that or it will totally suck...

There is just something about dragons taking out Second World war era warbirds and ninja show girls taking out 30 foot tall, wielding 30mm Gatling guns wielding samurai.

[Video]

It looks so god awful it almost has to be good.

151 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:24:40pm

Good game, Karen Hughes, way to just totally be a slimeball about Park51

Hughes sounds many of the same notes we've heard frequently from opponents over the last few weeks. But what struck us is that Hughes failed to mention her own work with Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf as he was dispatched around the globe to discuss the Islamic faith in America on behalf of the Bush administration.

152 cliffster  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:24:46pm

re: #147 Gus 802

that sounds fine, but how do you determine who funded it? contributors don't buy a candidate a commercial, they give them money that goes into a pot. You can't itemize every contributor to that pot in every commercial...

153 Killgore Trout  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:24:51pm

Disney Hijab Controversy: Muslim Hostess Calls Disney's Replacement Hijab "Offensive"

I'll side with Disney on this one. She worked for years with no problem until she decided to wear her Hijab. She was offered a non-public position if she didn't want to observe the dress code. She declined. Too bad.

154 Daniel Ballard  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:24:52pm

re: #147 Gus 802

The whole process is subject to the public's attention span. Not just the money rules. The vote itself.

155 Fozzie Bear  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:25:30pm

re: #120 DaddyG

There is a kind of weird throwing money at problems at the federal level while states are getting pinched providing more services with less resources. Sooner or later the combination of federal debt and unfunded state mandates are going to show some real cracks in our infrastructure. I'm a fan of more local control over many government functions but the wholesale slashing of government budgets for the sake of political pandering is scary.

I think much of the energy directed at the criticizing federal spending would be better spent focusing on municipal and state expenditures. The federal government needs to get out of the business of propping up failed local governments. It just shifts the cost of waste from one entity to another, and masks corruption and ineptitude at the local level.

I submit that much of the waste that the Tea Party types decry so vehemently is the indirect result of their own failed local governments.

156 Kragar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:26:07pm

re: #148 elbruce

I believe that was called "Avatar."

The greatest scene that should have been the final ending to Avatar:

A bunch of Marines sitting around the shuttle back up to the cruiser.

"So what do we do now?"
"Radio home. Call in another ship. Nuke the site from orbit. Only way to be sure"

157 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:26:47pm

re: #156 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

James Cameron mashup!

158 Daniel Ballard  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:27:12pm

re: #153 Killgore Trout

Okay she can wear it under the Goofy costume.
///
I'm with you there.
Disney made reasonable compromise offers. They have the right to transfer her to whatever job she seems best for, including her attire.

159 garhighway  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:27:40pm

re: #149 Rightwingconspirator

Tough we can deal with. As we see in the article about the tax returns paved the way for the article. Tough disclosure rules are what I want to see first before any big structural changes to the rules.

On a somewhat broader (but still related) note, I would modestly propose that all mandated disclosures, whether health side effects or APR or fine print terms and conditions or the "real party in interest" disclosures we are talking about here would all have to be in as large a font as the largest used elsewhere in the ad or website. No burying the disclosure in tiny little characters that we will never be able to read. It has to be as large as the biggest, and it has to stay on the screen at least as long. Fair's fair.

160 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:27:47pm

re: #152 cliffster

that sounds fine, but how do you determine who funded it? contributors don't buy a candidate a commercial, they give them money that goes into a pot. You can't itemize every contributor to that pot in every commercial...

Yeah. Then it would require policing of sorts. That is they would have to register the ad noting who funded it. That's why I chose "in large part" because I figured that once you get into bundling it would be a rather long list. Guess I don't have a quick answer here. Truth be told big-money being an influence in politics is not a new thing anyway.

161 sagehen  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:28:42pm

re: #121 Big Steve

I think you are vastly over generalizing here. Most people who have earned their wealth themselves tend to think that they have some special quality rather than having been a random generation of the system. Also the very article we are debating starts with the Koch's having given generously to things like the ballet and musuems...that sounds pretty socially generous to me.


Not a random generation of the system -- just that those awesome brains and clever ideas and hard work wouldn't have gotten them very far in places where there wasn't good public education and libraries, and a well-regulated stockmarket or a trustworthy banking system, or a government space program and ARPNET and a middle class that could afford a new i-Pod every time they change the color of the plastic.

They know they didn't do it alone.

162 Wozza Matter?  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:29:08pm

'sup..............

163 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:29:18pm

re: #141 JasonA

Technically I'm proposing a candidate not being allowed to accept your money. Because he won't be representing you.

Also consider that this would reduce the stranglehold that party politics would hold over representatives, who now have to toe the line or risk being denied party funds.

164 cliffster  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:31:39pm

re: #160 Gus 802

Yeah. Then it would require policing of sorts. That is they would have to register the ad noting who funded it. That's why I chose "in large part" because I figured that once you get into bundling it would be a rather long list. Guess I don't have a quick answer here. Truth be told big-money being an influence in politics is not a new thing anyway.

Plus there's other influences over an election besides commercials. Campaign workers on the ground, canvassing, working phone lines, etc etc. Anyone on the clock for a campaign has to wear a t-shirt with a list of the top 20 contributors? It's a valid concern, but it's also one that doesn't have a good solution.

165 cliffster  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:31:51pm

re: #160 Gus 802

how are you feeling?

166 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:32:20pm

re: #165 cliffster

how are you feeling?

A little better. No more fever I think.

167 reine.de.tout  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:32:32pm

re: #165 cliffster

how are you feeling?

I was about to ask what his temp was this morning.

168 Cato the Elder  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:33:37pm

I'm sure there are still plenty of Lizards who think "work" should occupy most of one's "spare" time, that John Wayne was a god, and that billionaires always get that way because of some special heaven-sent virtue.

All this shite makes me gag, though, and John Wayne was a dick.

169 cliffster  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:34:40pm

re: #166 Gus 802

re: #167 reine.de.tout

well, he's made a couple of intelligent comments so fortunately the fever didn't cook the brain..

170 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:34:43pm

re: #167 reine.de.tout

I was about to ask what his temp was this morning.

Ended up not taking my temperature. Fell asleep and got up around 6 AM. Did a little work then took a nap. Just finished drinking coffee and had a bagel.

171 Mocking Jay  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:34:58pm

re: #168 Cato the Elder

All this shite makes me gag, though, and John Wayne was a dick.

Steve McQueen 4ever.

And I must be off to visit mom. I helped her walk around the room yesterday. First time I've gotten to see that in two months.

172 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:35:04pm

re: #158 Rightwingconspirator

Okay she can wear it under the Goofy costume.
///
I'm with you there.
Disney made reasonable compromise offers. They have the right to transfer her to whatever job she seems best for, including her attire.

That won't stop this from being a PR nightmare for Disney and Islam both.

173 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:35:11pm

re: #169 cliffster

re: #167 reine.de.tout

well, he's made a couple of intelligent comments so fortunately the fever didn't cook the brain..

PBS made me do it!

/

174 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:36:50pm

re: #168 Cato the Elder

I'm sure there are still plenty of Lizards who think "work" should occupy most of one's "spare" time, that John Wayne was a god, and that billionaires always get that way because of some special heaven-sent virtue.

All this shite makes me gag, though, and John Wayne was a dick.

If John Wayne was a real American, he'd have used his real/birth name.
Just my opinion.

Now granted, the actor wasn't of my generation. I viewed him as someone who exemplified that macho shit-head mentality that I very much disliked.

175 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:36:54pm

re: #150 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

It looks so god awful it almost has to be good.

My thoughts entirely.

176 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:37:14pm

re: #144 ShaunP

I'm so watching that...

me too.

177 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:38:01pm

re: #83 elbruce

I'd prefer a reasonable balance between the individual and community.

But call it "reductio ad stoopid." Let's say the overall tax rate comes in at 40%. A libertarian will say it (and government) should be smaller. Let's say we slash it in half and now it's 20%. A libertarian will say that it (and government) should be smaller. Halve it again to 10%. A libertarian will say that it (and government) should be smaller. Continue until we have a tax/spending rate of 0%, and we've hit pure anarchy - the only point at which a libertarian can be satisfied and still be a libertarian.

It goes in the opposite direction of being a communist, but employs an identical approach, which is why I hold libertarians and communists in pretty much the same regard.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on this one. Libertarians are not about no Government, but limited government. The question is, what limitations should exist with governments. When you look at any group with a pure enough lens you're going to find that the extreme is... unappealing. Case in point, look at the Republican party today.

In the case of Libertarianism, you have a smaller set of active people in the movement, so the forces that are... bat shit crazy, are going to be proportionally higher, despite being a very small numberical total of the group. Libertarians aren't some monolithic group of anarchists. In fact I would argue that Libertarianism exists on some level in most people, it's just a matter of where you draw the line.

178 Interesting Times  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:38:17pm

re: #160 Gus 802

Yeah. Then it would require policing of sorts. That is they would have to register the ad noting who funded it. That's why I chose "in large part" because I figured that once you get into bundling it would be a rather long list. Guess I don't have a quick answer here. Truth be told big-money being an influence in politics is not a new thing anyway.

Canadian Election Laws & Policies

A controversial aspect of federal election laws is the limits placed on private individuals and groups who are not running in the election but who wish to advertise in support of or against specific candidates or parties. Amendments made to the Elections Act in May 2000 placed a $3,000 limit on "third party" spending in each constituency and $150,000 for a national advertising campaign...

There are two main justifications for the third-party limits. The first is to protect the spending limits on political parties and candidates; otherwise, parallel campaigns could be conducted by groups allied to particular parties. The other is to protect individual candidates from being targeted by expensive ad campaigns to which they could not respond because of both their own limited funds or the spending limits imposed on candidates.

179 Kragar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:38:36pm

Roger Ebert - Sane American

Ten things I know about the Mosque

1. America missed a golden opportunity to showcase its Constitutional freedoms. The instinctive response of Americans should have been the same as President Obama's: Muslims have every right to build there. Where one religion can build a church, so can all religions.

6. Somewhere on the Right is an anonymous genius at creating memes. Sarah Palin floats a suspicious number of them: Death Panels, Ground Zero Mosque, 9/11 Mosque, Terror Babies. Her tweets are mine fields of coded words; for her, "patriot" is defined as, "those who agree with me." When she says "Americans," it is not inclusive.

8. A meme is infecting our society that Muslims are terrorists and hate America; they are the enemy. It is a cliche to say, "the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful," but is true. When Muslim nations are bombed by America, can those nations be expected to applaud? In Iran after 9/11 there were candlelight marches in sympathy with the United States.

180 spikester  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:38:52pm

OT
&#937

charles
the preview shows greek omega the post shows...
do i get a "bug of the week wine shot?"

181 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:40:25pm

re: #177 bloodstar

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on this one. Libertarians are not about no Government, but limited government.

How limited? If you can answer that question and not shift the goalpost later on, then you're not a libertarian any more.

182 reloadingisnotahobby  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:40:35pm

re: #168 Cato the Elder

All this shite makes me gag, though, and John Wayne was a dick.


Well,He didn't like Hippies,long hair and off color or raunchy
jokes.A true gentlemen to all else!
He was a really nice guy!

183 DaddyG  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:41:05pm

re: #174 eclectic infidel

If John Wayne was a real American, he'd have used his real/birth name.
Just my opinion.

Now granted, the actor wasn't of my generation. I viewed him as someone who exemplified that macho shit-head mentality that I very much disliked.

I am very tempted to link Denis Leary's A**hole song. But its NSFW.

184 cliffster  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:41:34pm

re: #180 spikester

you're kinda weird.. did you know that?

185 spikester  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:42:54pm

re: #184 cliffster

you sir are not the first one to say that!

the "kinda" thing was nice of you though

186 Kragar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:42:58pm

re: #175 LudwigVanQuixote

My thoughts entirely.

Hot chicks, guns, Samurai, dragons, ninjas and jackbooted thugs.

It will make a bundle.

187 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:43:07pm

re: #182 reloadingisnotahobby

He was a really nice guy!

John Wayne was a huge and vocal supporter of Hollywood blacklisting, ruining hundreds if not thousands of careers and lives.

188 reloadingisnotahobby  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:45:14pm

re: #187 elbruce

John Wayne was a huge and vocal supporter of Hollywood blacklisting, ruining hundreds if not thousands of careers and lives.

Maybe so ..I'm sure politically I would not agree with him!
We didn't talk Politics...We were BBQing at My Uncles home Pacific Palisades!
I liked him!

189 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:46:35pm

John Wayne's final days:

On January 12 of 1979, he went into the hospital for gall bladder surgery, and it turned in to a 9 1/2 hour operation because they found cancer in his stomach, and doctors removed it. He was released, attended the Oscars on April 9 and returned to the hospital on May 2, where cancer was found in his intestines. According to one report, Wayne was in total agony at the end, and often refused pain killers because he wanted to be with his children and his grandchildren.  He was taken to the 9th floor of the UCLA Medical Center where Jimmy Carter paid him a bedside visit, and the Queen sent him a get well card. According to his daughter, John Wayne had converted to Catholicism while on his death bed.  He went into a coma on Sunday the 10th, and he died at 5:35pm on Monday, June 11th, 1979. He was 72 years old.

190 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:47:54pm

re: #183 DaddyG

I am very tempted to link Denis Leary's A**hole song. But its NSFW.

There's always MDC's "John Wayne Was A Nazi" song.

191 Kragar  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:47:56pm

re: #189 Gus 802

And you can blame his death on The Conqueror.

192 cliffster  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:48:30pm

re: #185 spikester

you sir are not the first one to say that!

the "kinda" thing was nice of you though

well, it takes one to know one, I suppose

193 reine.de.tout  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:48:49pm

re: #189 Gus 802

John Wayne's final days:


According to one report, Wayne was in total agony at the end, and often refused pain killers because he wanted to be with his children and his grandchildren

My mom wouldn't take pain killers, either - wanted to visit with us. And not one flinch or word of complaint from her . . .

194 Gus  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:49:01pm

re: #191 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

And you can blame his death on The Conqueror.

Alongside Susan Hayward and others.

195 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:50:15pm

re: #188 reloadingisnotahobby

Maybe so ..I'm sure politically I would not agree with him!
We didn't talk Politics...We were BBQing at My Uncles home Pacific Palisades!
I liked him!

Ah, I didn't catch that you were posting a personal impression based on actually meeting the guy.

196 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:50:27pm

re: #22 rwdflynavy

That is so poorly written I can't even make sense of it!
//

Yes, but anything that begins with "Chs, Chs, Chs" is probably not going to get any better.

197 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:52:32pm

re: #181 elbruce

How limited? If you can answer that question and not shift the goalpost later on, then you're not a libertarian any more.

I disagree. If you argue that everything must be set in stone, you risk having reality pass you by. You can't argue that a definition of limited government today would apply to 50 years ago. I don't consider that moving the goal posts, no more than I would consider the goals of civil rights today compared to 50 years ago to be moving the goal posts. (*1)

Look at it this way, If you viewed Libertarianism as a concept, that in general, government should be the role of last resort in society, then things become a bit easier. It's not moving the goal posts to say that health care is a mess and individuals and corporations have had plenty of chances to make things better, but they haven't. We already have government programs to help the elderly and at least a fig leaf of coverage for the most needy. why? because individuals and corporations have failed to provide for those people. Only the most heartless views of Libertarianism would say to let these people die on the streets. I could go on with other examples but we can start with that for now. That from a libertarian standpoint Health Care reform was a necessary event. The question is, did they get the details right or wrong?

Note:
*1 - when I compare the idea of a libertarian goal to a civil rights goal, I am in no way making a moral equivalence between the two

198 Sheila Broflovski  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 12:52:39pm

re: #153 Killgore Trout

Disney Hijab Controversy: Muslim Hostess Calls Disney's Replacement Hijab "Offensive"

I'll side with Disney on this one. She worked for years with no problem until she decided to wear her Hijab. She was offered a non-public position if she didn't want to observe the dress code. She declined. Too bad.

Disney has some mighty strict dress codes for all of the employees who appear at any of their public venues.

She should count herself lucky that she isn't required to wear Disney-issued underwear.

199 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 1:01:33pm

And now for a completely serious movie that I wholeheartedly recommend to anyone.

A Serious Man is a Coen brothers film. In many ways, this is their reflection on being Jewish in America and Jews losing their way.

On the one hand, this can be taken as yet another quirky dark comedy much like the Big Lebowski or Fargo. On the other hand, this is the story of Job as visited to a mid-western physics professor.

It is full of incredibly deep references and the sort of attention to detail that sets this movie apart from all but the smallest percentage of other movies. There is no doubt, that this movie is about the hard eternal questions and it has a strong context of theology interfacing with a modern existence and metaphors for it from theoretical physics. However, it does not beat one over the head with them.

Much like the old Jewish proverb, those who understand, understand. Those who do not catch all the references will still get the flavor.

An example that impressed me, is an entire sub debate about certainty vs uncertainty. In the course of this, the physics professor, in his lecture, providing an elaborate derivation, writes that that quantum uncertainty is zero. This is not a mistake. I thought this must be a dream sequence. Sure enough, the camera pans back on the elaborate blackboards, and they are full of some very impressive cabalistic references in addition to the physics. The reduction of uncertainty to zero mixed with the cabalistic references, perfectly coincides with the events of the terrible dream he is having.

Those who understand, understand, those who don't necessarily know the derivation of the Heisenberg principle from Fourier analysis and a dash of Zohar, will still get the point, such things are simply there in the background.

Perhaps the most impressive thing is that classic Jewish answer to all of his questions (even though he goes to incompetent Rabbi after Rabbi looking for spiritual guidance) is right in front of him the whole time. His son is preparing Parsha Yitro for his Bar Mitzvah. Unfortunately, none of them speak Hebrew, and the junior Rabbi of their congregation is the sort who does not know what a get is. It is a long story for how that parsha answers Job, and the movie does not bother to hit one over the head with it. It is there, as perhaps the most perfect example of being lost in the faith. Parsha Yitro, remains, something in the background of the movie, Semitic sounds, in a foreign tongue, and no more, that the son is memorizing to parrot from a record.

When his sister and he get into a fight, the son flips her off and shouts "F*ck you, I'm studying Torah."

Every single part of this movie has a purpose and several layers of meaning.

Those who understand, understand.

200 spikester  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 1:03:47pm

Ω
|

201 spikester  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 1:07:38pm

CHARLES

Ω
|

never mind
MY BAD

Sorry if you waisted any time on this

202 elbruce  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 1:12:01pm

re: #197 bloodstar

Look at it this way, If you viewed Libertarianism as a concept, that in general, government should be the role of last resort in society, then things become a bit easier. It's not moving the goal posts to say that health care is a mess and individuals and corporations have had plenty of chances to make things better, but they haven't. We already have government programs to help the elderly and at least a fig leaf of coverage for the most needy. why? because individuals and corporations have failed to provide for those people. Only the most heartless views of Libertarianism would say to let these people die on the streets. I could go on with other examples but we can start with that for now. That from a libertarian standpoint Health Care reform was a necessary event. The question is, did they get the details right or wrong?

I don't disagree with that principle at all, so I guess that makes me a libertarian.

As long as one is looking at issues on a per-case basis based on what one might call "social ROI," (i.e. what are we getting out of it per dollar) as well as considering whether we're applying any secondary coercion (other than the spending itself), then that seems to be the only rational way to do it.

But I don't think that either most people who call themselves libertarians or most who don't would define it that broadly.

203 MittDoesNotCompute  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 1:14:10pm

re: #27 garhighway

Well, there's also the fact that the rich are used to everyone around them telling them how smart (and good-looking and funny) they are.

The rest of us don't get a lot of that. When we are full of shit, people tell us. Not so much for the wealthy.

Rich people have the money to hire yes men...

204 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 2:08:49pm

Some page that I found illuminating regarding various strains and splits within Anarchism and Libertarianism and how it ended up becoming what it is in the USA: [Link: flag.blackened.net...]

205 samuraishake  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 3:07:06pm

The Koch family has roots here in Wichita. Interestingly, the name of the minor league baseball team is the Wichita Wingnuts.

Coincidence?

206 b_sharp  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 3:20:23pm

re: #124 tnguitarist

How would that be much different than now? Being convincing might get you elected, but it won't get you reelected.

You're assuming people will do what is best for themselves and vote bad politicians out of office, but history shows that isn't the case. People will do what they believe is best, and that includes anything they have been convinced of whether good for them personally and/or for society, or not.

What is best for you and your family is objective, but what most of your decisions are based on is emotion. Confirmation bias, charisma (as in a charismatic politician) and the word of trusted authorities all have a major influence on how you arrive at a decision.

207 wrenchwench  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 3:24:03pm

re: #205 samuraishake

The Koch family has roots here in Wichita. Interestingly, the name of the minor league baseball team is the Wichita Wingnuts.

Coincidence?

That's priceless!

I wonder whether they'd mind having their logo borrowed once in a while.

208 Amory Blaine  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 3:29:26pm

re: #205 samuraishake

The Koch family has roots here in Wichita. Interestingly, the name of the minor league baseball team is the Wichita Wingnuts.

Coincidence?

No way man! That's got to be fake!

209 (I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was)  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 4:26:36pm

Googling for "Kochtopus" brings strange and fascinating results...

210 samuraishake  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 4:58:38pm

re: #208 Amory Blaine

No way man! That's got to be fake!

100% true

211 Stephen T.  Mon, Aug 23, 2010 5:06:46pm

re: #174 eclectic infidel

If John Wayne was a real American, he'd have used his real/birth name.
Just my opinion.

Now granted, the actor wasn't of my generation. I viewed him as someone who exemplified that macho shit-head mentality that I very much disliked.

My grandfather grew up with the man who could be said to have "made" John Wayne. He too changed his name. Although I never met my grandfather, (he died long before I was born), I quote has been passed down to our family from him. He apparently said: "You can call yourself 'John Ford' when you are around all those Hollywood types in California, but around here you will be and always remain Sean Feeney, an Irish boy from Munjoy Hill."


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 132 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 296 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1