And we’re just going to sit here and let them do it.
The Koch brothers’ operation intends to spend $889 million in the run-up to the 2016 elections — a historic sum that in many ways would mark Charles and David Koch and their fellow conservative megadonors as more powerful than the official Republican Party.
The figure, which more than doubles the amount spent by the Republican National Committee during the last presidential election cycle, prompted cheers from some in the GOP who are looking for all the help they can get headed into a potentially tough 2016 election landscape.
Obama spent 8 billion to hide the cuts his health care bill would do to Medicare Advantage until after the election. At least the Kochs aren’t taking money from people unwillingly.
right
That can be arranged.
http://mercatus.org/publication/top-25-political-donations-1989-2014
Just read it
Amen
I think liberals should be pleased, considering how well the Kochs $100 million and Sheldon Adelson’s 150 million and Karl Rove’s hundreds of millions did in 2012.
The only way you are going to stop it is to get rich yourself and buy the other side.
Actually – that’s my point. What isn’t anyone else doing this?
They are. Democrats use labor unions.
Perkel, you must be joking.
Really now, seriously. No one can be this naive.
Democrats raised at least 882 million over the last 25 years compared to the Republican 171 million from the top 25 donors. And that is not counting Obama’s fraudulent 2012 fundraising, which totaled over $1.1 Billion.
See Ralphie Boy’s link. It’s excellent and the last word.
Sorry, Mark. I apologize for the naive comment. Really. Appreciate the time you take to make these posts and I get a lot out of them.
Myself being brusque is uncalled for.
Again, apologize.
Uh, guys… 882 million over the last 25 years for countless elections vs 889 million for one election in 2016?
You guys really think things will be better if a bunch of plutocrats buys the presidency? You really think the average person in the USA is going to do better under a plutocrat presidency?
The Fox is strong with these ones… 😉
Considering they are anonymous, how do you know they are plutocrats?
And ever since Citizens United, the Koches and Karl Roves of the world have been collecting many millions from plutocrats who wish to remain anonymous. That strikes at the heart of free and fair elections: knowing who is contributing and who they’re spending money to support.
Why do you suppose the plutocrats want to stay hidden?
That kind of money doesn’t show up in the bar charts in Ralphie’s link.
Why do you suppose billionaires and millionaires don’t want us to know who they’re supporting? What do they have to hide?
Anyone? Bueller?
You have no clue about Citizens United beyond left wing blather. Republicans simply started copying what Democrats were doing with some 501c4 and 501c3 groups. Citizens United dealt with corporate spending on campaigns, and the group itself wanted to show an anti-Hillary movie they made.
Because it’s easier that way.
How many more TV commercials can we watch, or campaign literature pieces to receive in the mail?
Maybe this is a back door plan to keep television stations profitable, and the U.S.P.S. afloat?
Just sayin…
The Citizens United floodgates will really be opened once the Supreme Court okays the outright buying of votes…
Sheldon Adelson will be spending $200 million to get someone who doesn’t hate Israel into the presidency. Right now Obama is effectively arming Hezbollah, and telling Israel not t fight back against the attacks that they are doing in concert with Iran from both Lebanon and Syria.
Fred Eychaner
George Soros
J. Joe Ricketts
James Simons
Michael Bloomberg
Paul Singer
Richard Uihlein
Robert Mercer
Sheldon Adelson
Thomas Steyer
What this story is is projection. Liberals are imputing to Republicans their own actions and desires. Which anonymous donors to Obama are responsible for this?
Department of Justice and a few companies with uncomfortably close ties to the White House are pressuring the IEEE to change its current patent policy to shift power away from innovators–imposing price caps and weakening patent enforcement rights of all innovators who contribute to IEEE standards.
When government becomes very powerful, then more money is spent to corrupt the government.
On top of that, the reformers made it harder for the parties to raise money, making outside groups the preferred avenue of spending.
+1
The federal government is 3x the size of all of the States combined AFA budget goes.
Is there seriously any question as to why people want to buy a piece of that action?
Starving the beast is the only way to stop it.
Until you are ready to go back to a true constitutional republic, complaining about this kind of behavior is wasting your time and everyone who has to listen to you.
I always smile at “starve the beast” analysis.
Who is the beast?
What is starving it?
Silly Hoomans.
The beast is the government. Starving it means stopping its uncontrolled growth and intrusion into every aspect of our public and private lives.
You seem to be intelligent, yet you have a hard time grasping this simple concept. Why is that?
What is it that makes you smile?
Note just in this post he has acknowledged not reading a link he has posted, and confirming it by posting a link at odds with what he said.
Clyde—you are quite right. Waaaay too sloppy on my part. Starting to bark myself? Always good to be confronted…if one wants to improve.
The beast is the gubment, I agree except to the extent and meaning of it being a beast. Beast: a bad thing. How can something that is necessary and in fact the ONLY viable arrangement, the only POSSIBLE arrangement whether for good or bad?
Well, it comes down to what the gubment actually wants to do or does do? Calling it a beast from the get go negates that analytical process.
NO>the Beast in Fact can never be starved. Thats why it is silly, that is why I smile.
What exact policy does the gubment have wrong and how should it be corrected?? THAT is what I’m saying.
…..but all I read here and most everwhere is the mundicidious dog whistle to one group and its opposite.
And that makes me smile.
A sad smile…… for…….
………….we are only hooman.
Mickey==were ya been?….. Welcome back, your misreading of every issue has been missed.
Of course I read my own linked article. Clearly stated, I didn’t read the OP. I assume it has nothing new to say as I specifically identified.
Prove me wrong: what did I miss?
Now===what did the article say TO ACTUALLY DO about it? Lower taxes and balance expenditures??? (Note, I haven’t read the article…..
Tim says:
1/31/2015 at 11:55 am
“”Its conflict that arises whenever there are two or more people. Only the alternative is worse.
State the ‘alternative’, please. /// Well, you almost stated it? The only alternative is to “live” all by yourself. One and one alone. Two people introduces “government.” Meaning rules externally applied. Yes……..even if there are only two people. fun to watch those naked survival shows?==>just two people and their little society gets stressed or falls apart because one person won’t accept the rules of the other. I nice statement about being hooman==>and how even those with a survival rating of 9.6 need support from others. IE==none of us built that ourselves.
Is it some form of ‘ist’ or ‘chy’ over an ‘ism’? Anarchy? Or more to the philosophical and, yes, dare I say ‘spiritual’? — Loneliness. /// Oops. You did say it. Yea verily: congrats. The ism I would give it is pragmatism.
Forsaken. A Village of One. It would seem sometimes that, IRL, ‘we’ just can’t get along; We did it to ourselves moreso and concomitant to allowing others to do it to us. — Yes, I am apparently indeed now talking to a frog in my pocket. /// Talking directly to me in perfect simpatico. You went into depth on what I first posted I thought you might have skipped. I do read way to fast….meaning I don’t read much at all past the 1-2 sentence and then look for key words below? I’d give that a reading comprehension of about 10%. Wifey can speed read a page a second of new dense material with 95% comprehension. Godsmacking awesome in its observation.
Concerning my hatred of ‘government’: I have arrogantly and flippantly crudely painted shit-pigment with the broadest of brushes when not using my own fingers (and apathetically, literally not using those literal fingers to figuratively attempt to wipe away the smudges by attempting to engage a cleaning booth machine) . /// Thats a nice self deprecating return to humor.
I have cast contaminated aspersions of The Institution too far and too wide — Broadly disparaging all of its practitioners; Even so far as to malign the original founder only because the pure founding principle was sullied and made putrid by others; But, to a large degree, pristine or otherwise, or whether they be in the right or in the wrong; Because it tends to constrain and inconvenience me personally. //// I might be losing your thread a bit……..but……I would agree that if you are too inward looking you will miss most of what life/reality/experience has to teach you……..and thats not good. I will affirm: you are too intelligent to be as you describe other than it being a habit pattern that nets you out a comfort level you are coasting with. Fair enough. You don’t have the stimulus to change because you are comfortable enough. Join the majority.
To those egregiously offended by some of my past words on this blog, I apologize. I’m sure I’ll be able to offhandedly offend with all new words, should anybody miss it. /// I haven’t seen you offend anyone…or atleast I would not take offense at anything I have seen you post against others. I’m more content driven?
============================
Marc Perkel: Could you please contact me at the email address which is associated with this current avatar as I don’t see a ‘contact’ link? Thx, Tim /// Just for emphasis……….
Second Draft: yes, the beast is the gubment but what is usually being denigrated is social spending programs that are meant to be cut so that the RICH can amass more riches to trickle down to us?
So, in that context: the beast is actually we the people and who votes to starve themselves?
……………it is a bitter laugh.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MbykzqJ6ens&x-yt-ts
when one is young one is idealist, when contemporaries become cynic,ye know you are getting auld. Bet there is a third brother. I know; his name is America. He is staying home tonight, watching the fight, the homicidal bitchin’ go down in every kitchen, to decide, who shall eat and who shall serve.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=WIrPOUdvo9w
This is why we need Obama and company, including Hillary, Jeb Bush, and all such out of office now.
It’s an excellent read, so I don’t expect many to look at it. It’s also a PDF (so you know).
I’ve reprinted the conclusion below.
http://mercatus.org/sites/default/files/de-Rugy-Fichtner-Debt-MOP.pdf
” As economists, we’re concerned about the negative
consequences of excessive debt. But neither we nor
any other economist can identify at what point high
debt levels become unacceptable to global credit
markets. Nor can we reliably predict what form
the resulting fiscal crisis will take. It could mean an
inexorable deterioration of the US economy. Or it
could be more abrupt, with creditors losing faith
and pulling their funds from the United States overnight,
throwing the country into a vicious debt spiral,
another deep recession, and ultimately a lower standard of living here and around the world.
Continued failure to reform the main
drivers of current and future spending and debt—
principally Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security,
and the Affordable Care Act—will eventually force
deep and highly destabilizing policy changes.”
Who is opposing those reforms?? Republicans??
Ah Yea—did you recognize that everyone in the frickin world agrees with this so called conclusion? ie==its an exposition of the OBVIOUS, avoiding what is always the issue of concern: what to do about it. Economists are no help there.
When the subject is hoomans, any claimed expertise is a shell game.
You should know this by now.
(not always but by and large: Economists are shills for the RICH.)
Silly hoomans.
Translation, bobbo doesn’t like what economists say. He would prefer they talk like Krugman who says the Greeks should default on their debt and not institute any reforms that balance their budget.
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/paul-krugman-syriza-should-ignore-calls-to-be-responsible-1.2080112
NFS—again with the failure to comprehend simple declarative statements. I’ll repeat and emphasize: “everyone in the frickin world agrees with this so called conclusion.”
I may be thought egotistical, but I do consider myself one in this world.
EVERYONE HAS CONCERNS ABOUT EXCESSIVE DEBT. ….. you frickin idiot.
Now===what did the article say TO ACTUALLY DO about it? Lower taxes and balance expenditures??? (Note, I haven’t read the article…..its what they always say because EVERYONE IN THE FRICKEN WORLD KNOWS THAT.
Now–how much to reduce or raise taxes to balance the budget? and that nfs is where economists disagree with one another and have no expertise at all.
Its a dismal subject, economics. There are tradeoffs==not absolutes.
You have to …………………………. “think.”
On May 14, 2013, the Treasury Department’s Inspector General reported that the IRS had “used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions.”
Whats your point NFS? Fibbing to contest what Phydeau told you and even with the cheat, your statement doesn’t say nut job orgs where targeted by the IRS.
What a failure.
People who don’t use links: so stupid, they think other people are too stupid to notice. Thats how stupid you are.
http://washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/04/03/targeting-of-tea-party-groups-by-the-irs-or-inappropriate-criteria/
Well thanks for correcting my stupidity with a link that confirms what I was saying. The Obama Admin spokesman got 3 Pinocchios, which is really hard to get from a liberal factchecker like this. Not as bad as Politifact, whose ‘Lie of the Year’ by Romney turned out to be true, but still biased.
Well, you have seconded Mickeys comment above, and to be truthful, I half remembered the article was a Pinochio.
But I have made an error. See what happens when you disrespect your opposition after years of negligent and nonresponisve exchanges? You (sic-“I”) get lazy and then they S – C – O – R – E!!
So, thank for actually reading and responding to you NFS and to Mickey above as well.
Note–I won’t even go back to check on your reading of what I posted. I read the start of it way too fast and ignored my own half memory.
So, in conclusion: We can all do better?
Ha, ha.
But lets see….I never did post back when the issue was hot: the IRS did exactly what it should have done: enforce the IRS rules against non profits being shills for politcal operations. What we do currently is NOT ENFORCE the law as no side want to be criticized for making the IRS a politcal arm of gubment. So…the law is not enforced and corruption is running amuck. We ought to try the opposite. Dumbo gubments enforcing the law against Pukes, and then the next go around the Pukes enforce the law against the Dumbos. Alternate enforcement to political ends surely must be more sound than no enforcement at all?
The issue is: SUPERSEDED.
I’ll be here all week.
This is nothing new. The only thing new is the increased amount of money one or two individuals wants to spend in the political spectrum. And ya, that person/people spending the money will certainly want something for their “soft earned” dollars too. I don’t think anyone above the age of 10 is quite that naive unless there’s something wrong with them. I’m just grateful these political investors aren’t some foreign entity which HAS happened!
Here’s the deal. Since 1913, America has been overthrown by some so called “banksters.” It started under (Democrat) Woodrow Wilson’s administration who instituted the IRS as well as the privately owned Federal Reserve and steadily grew worse over the years. (Don’t even start me on Woodies suggestion of starting a League of Nations — a.k.a. the U.N.) Perhaps the last notable “change” came in 1971 when (Republican) Richard Nixon cancelled the direct convertibility of the United States dollar to gold. Of course, (Democrat) FDR really started that one when he more or less outlawed minting U.S. gold coins. (And let’s not forget Democrat JFK who tried to institute silver certificate dollars (those funny looking 2-dollar bills with red ink) directly from the U.S. Treasury — a move which conspiracy theorists claim is what really got him assassinated.)
Now, we have a totally corrupt money system where the U.S. dollar is a fiat currency. That simply means our money is not backed by anything other than what the Federal Reserve says it’s worth. Go ahead, look it up. And while you’re at it, try to note another huge fact that the Federal Reserve is NOT officially part of the U.S. government!!! Ya, sure, the POTUS gets to appoint the Fed chairman but take a wild guess where the list of nominees comes from. And all while this was going on, these banksters also instituted a new form of wealth — it’s called debt!
So if one of these uber rich bankster guys wants to spend his Monopoly money — money you and I GIVE him when we purchase his crap — I say, let him back whoever he wants. Because in the end, it isn’t the Koch brothers, or anyone else, corrupting things — it’s all of us who CHOOSE to do business with them!!!
… You liberals really need to concentrate your powers on the fools who buy these politically backed products and services and shame them. You might even want to take an honest look at all the labor unions, most of which are left-leaning, that rob people of their earnings too. Earnings that these fundamentally communist unions use just so they can act like the Koch brothers. But even if you don’t want to see your own isle of corruption, which I say is bigger than the right side, you might want to look at your own purchases! Maybe then you wouldn’t sound as hypocritical for gasping at stories like this.
Well….not to quibble too much but the fiat money is backed by the full faith and credit of the US Gubment which is basically the economic strength of the country compared to all others.
…………and it is very much “kept honest” by the international currency ratings and exchanges.
……….AND….. we are moving away from currency all together to electronic banking.
I know. Nothing but the barter system is valid…… but what you gonna do?
http://slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/01/the_upper_middle_class_is_ruining_all_that_is_great_about_america.html
Alfie making one of his better posts in quite a while says:
1/31/2015 at 6:49 am
I’m still a Tea Party dude, just tire of the GOP elites calling me a wackobird extremist for voting the Republican Platform. /// That would be gauling but don’t miss the point: you are a wackobird for the unworkable idealogical dressed up libertarian positions you espouse, NOT because you vote the Republican Platform.
Yea, the Republican Platform I support, so I’m a wackobird to the GOP. /// See above.
That something is radically wrong in DC is proved by their being over 29 Tea Party congressmen, but they could only muster 28 votes against BendOver Boehner. Corrupted already… //// No, again it flows from the above. The Tea Party “faction” of the Republican Party is just that: NOT a part of the Republican Party, but a voting faction of it that has very different even “non-Republican” ideas. Those voting results are…………..”reality.” You should understand them more deeply to see where you actually are: a minority. Leave the Puke Party and become completely irrelevant with little to no power. Your only hope is to be kept as a valuable thorn in the side of the large conservative (Rich Man-status Quo) party. Just like their other big faction: the looney religious. Just like the Dumbo equivalent of Blacks to the Dumbos. …………….. Its all a part of why Third Partys don’t get off the ground in our country. You have all the bits and pieces before you: make your choices, and live with the results.
Tired of wasting my money on their election. /// Yes, there is no Santa Clause either but the shell game will continue.
I’m sitting it out, and if their actions confirm the GOP should go the way of the Whigs, I’ll be voting Libertarian in 2016 and the GOP won’t ever get another dime or word of support from me.
Reply /// Only from your point of view, better to be a thorn in something that matters and to be completely irrelevant.
YMMV.
You know my good friends, I’m struck at being called out for being wrong in both of my posts today.
Its a caution….yes, I got lazy.
Good to be caught up short. As I’ve posted: being shown you are wrong is the only way to get better, to stay honest.
So……….I am very much put in mind of the MANY DOZENS of times so many of you have been challenged by myself or others to defend or explain or to CORRECT what you have posted, and the only response is the wind in the willows.
THANK YOU for showing me you all actually are paying attention, making an effort, and even indeed RESPONDING when you have a case to make.
Ha, ha…………………………..yes……………………. silly hoomans.
ENJOY being correct. When you recognize it, and change, you have just become a better person.
Live and learn. To learn is to Change. Stop changing…..who or what exactly are you?
Know what I mean?
According to Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart, who argued the case, the government could theoretically regulate other forms of pre-election corporate speech as well, including books and the Internet. “That’s pretty incredible,” said Justice Samuel Alito. “You think that if a book was published, a campaign biography that was the functional equivalent of express advocacy, that could be banned?” Yes, Mr. Stewart said, if a corporation or union were paying for it. It would be possible to “prohibit the publication of the book using the corporate treasury funds.” – See more at: http://citizensunited.org/press-releases.aspx?article=430#sthash.qLimSKvg.dpuf
I didn’t read your link Mickey.
WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
Is someone obviously correct or wrong? What you have posted is totally non-committal, devoid of analysis or opinion.
Why do you do that?
My own view: corporations aren’t people and have no free speech or religious practice rights. They are creatures of statute and should be totally controlled by statute with the balance in contested cases of “rights” going to individual biological hoomans.
In similar vein, money is not speech. See….its right there in the words used: money. dictionary says it is a medium of exchange to transact business (sic–I made that up, did not look it up). Nothing about it being speech.
Supreme Court: bought and sold right wing activists.
Reposted as it wound up in the wrong place.
Tim says:
1/31/2015 at 11:55 am
“”Its conflict that arises whenever there are two or more people. Only the alternative is worse.
State the ‘alternative’, please. /// Well, you almost stated it? The only alternative is to “live” all by yourself. One and one alone. Two people introduces “government.” Meaning rules externally applied. Yes……..even if there are only two people. fun to watch those naked survival shows?==>just two people and their little society gets stressed or falls apart because one person won’t accept the rules of the other. I nice statement about being hooman==>and how even those with a survival rating of 9.6 need support from others. IE==none of us built that ourselves.
Is it some form of ‘ist’ or ‘chy’ over an ‘ism’? Anarchy? Or more to the philosophical and, yes, dare I say ‘spiritual’? — Loneliness. /// Oops. You did say it. Yea verily: congrats. The ism I would give it is pragmatism.
Forsaken. A Village of One. It would seem sometimes that, IRL, ‘we’ just can’t get along; We did it to ourselves moreso and concomitant to allowing others to do it to us. — Yes, I am apparently indeed now talking to a frog in my pocket. /// Talking directly to me in perfect simpatico. You went into depth on what I first posted I thought you might have skipped. I do read way to fast….meaning I don’t read much at all past the 1-2 sentence and then look for key words below? I’d give that a reading comprehension of about 10%. Wifey can speed read a page a second of new dense material with 95% comprehension. Godsmacking awesome in its observation.
Concerning my hatred of ‘government’: I have arrogantly and flippantly crudely painted shit-pigment with the broadest of brushes when not using my own fingers (and apathetically, literally not using those literal fingers to figuratively attempt to wipe away the smudges by attempting to engage a cleaning booth machine) . /// Thats a nice self deprecating return to humor.
I have cast contaminated aspersions of The Institution too far and too wide — Broadly disparaging all of its practitioners; Even so far as to malign the original founder only because the pure founding principle was sullied and made putrid by others; But, to a large degree, pristine or otherwise, or whether they be in the right or in the wrong; Because it tends to constrain and inconvenience me personally. //// I might be losing your thread a bit……..but……I would agree that if you are too inward looking you will miss most of what life/reality/experience has to teach you……..and thats not good. I will affirm: you are too intelligent to be as you describe other than it being a habit pattern that nets you out a comfort level you are coasting with. Fair enough. You don’t have the stimulus to change because you are comfortable enough. Join the majority.
To those egregiously offended by some of my past words on this blog, I apologize. I’m sure I’ll be able to offhandedly offend with all new words, should anybody miss it. /// I haven’t seen you offend anyone…or atleast I would not take offense at anything I have seen you post against others. I’m more content driven?
============================
Marc Perkel: Could you please contact me at the email address which is associated with this current avatar as I don’t see a ‘contact’ link? Thx, Tim /// Just for emphasis……….
So far Dem mega donors are still in the lead so get over it.
Many or even several Dem contributors interferring in the democratic process is NOT THE SAME THING as a single individual having control of Pukes.
So vacuous to stop thinking when you find one item of comparison between two groups. Why don’t you weigh and contrast the differences as well?
Silly, easily lead by the nose, partisan,….hooman.
Even Phydeau has acknowledged it’s not the Kochs’ billion but money they have collected from others. Pay attention.
That makes no sense at all Mickey.
THE POINT IS: the Kock Brothers are a SINGLE POINT OF DISTRIBUTION and therefore control.
It doesn’t matter if its their money or they collect it from others.
THEY are the reason $Romey dropped drop out in the Pre-Iowa Koch Brothers nominating process.
Do you see the point now?
Note regarding Phydeau: I like him. We are both liberdrools and gain support from one another agreeing with slapping you anti-science wing nuts down. We lead because we are more competent than you on the right………….but………..we fail in that we don’t gang up and march in lock step with one another.
I’m sure you see the point there …… (ha, ha!)
I think the Kochs will buy so much air time running negative ads that it will turn people off and they will vote for the other candidate.
The wingnuts say they are such worshipers of the founding fathers… do they really think the founding fathers envisioned money being such a huge part of the electoral process? They were already warning about the power of corporations back then.
Another thing… corporations don’t deserve a “voice” in politics because all the people who make up the corporation already have voices given them by the Constitution. A corporation is not a person, as many have pointed out, it’s a legal construct that exists because we the people allow it to.
Boo hoo. Dems have been outspending the GOP for quite some time.
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
We’ve been thru this. The Koch brothers want to spend as much on the 2016 election as the D’s have spent in the last 25 years.
And read your own link:
And here’s a bit on Patriot Majority from http://factcheck.org/2011/09/patriot-majority-usa/
That’s chump change compared to the Koch brothers and their $889 million.
Why are there so many rich Republicans who want to hide their contributions? What are they hiding? Is this a good way for Democracy to work in America?
Anyone? Bueller?
Nope… the wingnuts run away. Just can’t handle the truth. 🙁