SPECIAL NOTE FOR ALL READERS: a brief summary of right wing reality. To safely set sail on the stormy seas of the currently hyperactive right, one must remember the following: (1) The only legitimate function of government is maintenance of a military; all else is crippling regulation, corruption and waste; (2) People who choose to be poor do not have the judgment to be entrusted the vote (nor the “right” to be supported at public expense); (3) People who choose to be rich have demonstrated the judgement to be entrusted the country; (4) Taxation for other than military expenditure is confiscation; (5) Refer back to (1).
With that caution in mind, it is time to re-enter that very special world of the Brothers Koch, both clearly of category (3) and just as clearly enamored of the prospect of moving the public far closer to acceptance of all four.
It would be exceedingly difficult today to find a right-wing — or more to the point, wild-eyed, far-right-wing — political group to which the Koch brothers have not contributed money. After many years of operating behind the scenes, they have come roaring into the past three or four years funding and propelling as wide and diversified a portfolio of off-key proposals and right-wing grievance peddlers as has ever graced America’s political stage.
I quote from an Aug. 10, 2010 New Yorker report by Jane Mayer, “The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama,” which provides a great deal of information concerning the Kochs and their operations, importance and impact.
“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. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests. In a study released this spring, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst’s Political Economy Research Institute named Koch Industries one of the top ten air polluters in the United States. And Greenpeace issued a report identifying the company as a ‘kingpin of climate science denial.’ The report showed that, from 2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups.
“In a statement, Koch Industries said that the Greenpeace report ‘distorts the environmental record of our companies.’ And David Koch, in a recent, admiring article about him in New York protested that the ‘radical press’ had turned his family into ‘whipping boys,’ and had exaggerated its influence on American politics. But Charles Lewis, the founder of the Center for Public Integrity, a nonpartisan watchdog group, said, ‘The Kochs are on a whole different level. There’s no one else who has spent this much money. The sheer dimension of it is what sets them apart. They have a pattern of lawbreaking, political manipulation, and obfuscation. I’ve been in Washington since Watergate, and I’ve never seen anything like it. They are the Standard Oil of our times.’”
Among their interests and activities has been the Kochs’ role in funding university professorships and stated interest in entering the newspaper and broadcasting business! Note the following from Huffington Post, from “Koch Brothers Bought America’s Universities, Now the Billionaires Want to Buy Our Free Press,” published in May of this year: “The conservative oil tycoon billionaires, the Koch brothers, are after our free press and the newspapers that could serve as a broader platform for their conservative ideology. Newspapers provide our country with information and coverage that is essential for democracy. This is not a business investment for the billionaire brothers. Their interest in buying the newspapers is for their self-serving conservative political strategy.”
God spare us a Koch media blitz! Consider only what $720 million could buy as down payment on purchase of a host of struggling newspapers and broadcast stations. And that is just 1 percent of Charles and David’s combined net worth! Latest word is that a proposed buy of eight major newspapers, including the Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times, is now on hold — as indeed are the collective breaths of the traumatized newsmen (and women) staffing those organizations.
As to academia, consider the following from AlterNet, by Sarah Seltzer, May 2011, “Koch Brother Buys Professors At Public University to Spread Free Market Propaganda — Is Public Education the Kochs’ Next Front?”:
“Usually, when billionaires or millionaires give a large sum of money to a university, even a private one, they can specify where that gift will go — which department or function, facilities, new hires, dorms, or what have you.
“But what these monied donors cannot do, what remains taboo in the academic world, is leveraging that kind of gift to influence who gets hired and fired by the faculty and what they teach — until now, thanks to Charles G. Koch.
“A recent op-ed in a Florida newspaper brought to light a shady deal by billionaire Koch, who donated a hefty million-dollar-plus pledge to Florida State University, with some very big and ethically compromised strings attached.
“According to the St. Petersburg Times’ Kris Hundley’s thorough report:
“‘A foundation bankrolled by Libertarian businessman Charles G. Koch has pledged $1.5 million for positions in Florida State University’s economics department. In return, his representatives get to screen and sign off on any hires for a new program promoting “political economy and free enterprise.”’
“Traditionally, university donors have little official input into choosing the person who fills a chair they’ve funded. The power of university faculty and officials to choose professors without outside interference is considered a hallmark of academic freedom.
“Under the agreement with the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, however, faculty only retain the illusion of control.
“Jennifer Washburn, who has reviewed dozens of contracts between universities and donors, called the Koch agreement with FSU ‘truly shocking.’
“Said Washburn, author of ‘University Inc.,’ a book on industry’s ties to academia: ‘This is an egregious example of a public university being willing to sell itself for next to nothing.’
“David W. Rasmussen, dean of the College of Social Sciences at FSU, made a rather halfhearted attempt to defend his decision. ‘I’m sure some faculty will say this is not exactly consistent with their view of academic freedom,’’ he subsequently told the St. Petersburg Times’ Hundley. ‘But it seems to me it would have been irresponsible not to do it.’
“He denied that tough times and budget cuts contributed to his position. The head of the economics department also chimed in supporting the decision to take the Koch brother’s money, swearing it was a mere coincidence that he completely and totally agreed with the Koch brothers’ free-market dogma: ‘But I agree with what they believe, whether they give us money or not,’ he said, hardly reassuring detractors.”
Considering both the core beliefs that animate and the corporate record that has resulted from the gentle hand of the Kochs on the rudders of industry, one might be forgiven just a tiny bit of concern.
On another front, perhaps the most humorous — though for the public, painfully bizarre — battle cry on the political ramparts was the Texas Tea Party’s wail, “Today, the voices of average Americans are being drowned out by lobbyists and special interests … But you can do something about it,” ahead of a summit of like-minded folks in 2011. David Axelrod’s classic response: “What they don’t say is that, in part, this is a grassroots citizens’ movement brought to you by a bunch of oil billionaires.”
Five hundred people attended the summit, which served, in part, as a training session for tea party activists. An advertisement cast the event as a populist uprising against vested corporate power. Koch backing and funds supporting — hold your breath — a rebellion against … the Kochs?!
Jerome Page is a Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
Thank you, Jerome as always. Calling a spade a spade is not easily done but by the courageous. Your hammer has hit the nail squarely again as usual. Get ready for the yarping, hissing, and gnashing of right-wing teeth…PB
For some time I have considered, or wondered, about the possibility of some Koch-funded entity channeling pay-off to Pugh and Lund for their incessantly militant, verbal attacks on Obama, Democrats, liberal outlook and democracy itself. No proof, of course. Only the suspicion that something more than obstinately wrong-headed obsessiveness propels their efforts.
Great job, Mr. Page. Blessings and cheer to you and yours.
As far as “channeling pay-offs”, the pair are far to unimportant.
I’ll second that. PB
‘too’
The ‘Life Poet’ stated:the possibility of some Koch-funded entity channeling pay-off to Pugh and Lund
It appears that one can get up pretty late in the afternoon and still be able to get one past Benicia’s former Poet Laureate.
As hard as it may be to agree with Mr. Peterson (and his typical condescension not withstanding), I have to admit that neither Mr. Pugh, or I, have yet warranted the attention of the Koch Brothers, try though as we might.
Perhaps we should send them a few of our pieces to see if we can get their attention?
I do note that you are especially vexed by Mr. Pugh, I can assure you that the hatred you display towards him is balanced by the complete lack of interest he has in your opinions.
At the same time perhaps you, Mr. Shelby, can send some of Mr. Page’s pieces to Mr. Soro’s, who if we are to be fair and balanced (to steal a phrase) is the left wing counterpart to the Koch Brothers. Although I have noted that the Koch brothers are very generous in their charitable giving. Soros? Not so much.
Yet we rarely see the Soros name mentioned by those of you who have developed such a high level of contempt for those who have achieved great wealth.
The Koch Brothers probably wouldn’t be interested in a serial plagiarizer like Pugh and a man who came to literacy late in life like you. Also your past affinity for liberalism makes you suspect, no matter how far to the right you may feign tilting now.
Another truth: “Also your past affinity for liberalism” just points to an overall lack of integrity.
I reminded of an old adage, modified as appropriate for the discussion:
Liberals discussing integrity
are like Priests discussing marriage:
lots of learned thought,
but very little practical experience.”
Professor David Gossard, MIT
Remind me to ask a liberal about this someday.
“Those who have achieved great wealth” — typical sentiment of a knee pad conservative, always bowing and scraping before wealth. When I think of what the Kochs have achieved this comes to mind:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/ceo-worked-way-up-from-son-of-ceo,34331/
Oh, oh, oh…This is appropriate to an issue earlier in the week, but after awhile, they all sound the same:
Hissing, Yarping, and Barnacles…
A local writer provides a thoughtful article about a nearby city to our online local news source, its economic and cultural plight and likens it to many larger cities across our nation. A second writer responds and refers to “bleeding Liberals” that should go there if they don’t like it and fix the problem. A third writer responds to the second and inquires: “What? Are your undies on a little too tight this morning?” A fourth writer writes in and brings up some long-forgotten earlier criticism of the Tea Party which has little to do with anything as though perhaps it did. A 5th writer wants to “clarify the ground rules” as if the ground troops were in orbit again around the castle’s moat and the pterodactyls were in a feeding frenzy in the castle’s outer chambers.
I’m reminded of a raccoon or an opossum on a stroll down a back alley of town on a moonlit night. Suddenly every backyard dog with a barnacle in his bed is yarping and every stray alley cat is hissing. The barnacles on their boats have been disturbed again by a free, benevolent thought, and if there’s anything we don’t need it’s a free, disturbing, benevolent thought. So the yarping and the hissing continues on and on and on and on. The raccoon and/or oppossum will tell their friends about their moonlit walk and how much hissing and yarping went on. Fortunately their wavelengh receivers won’t hear much of it. And a barnacle, well, a barnacle is all it’s ever been and who cares?–PB
The Koch brothers only care about making themselves wealthier, no matter at what or who’s expense. George Soros shares his wealth attempting to make the world a better place. Quite a difference, no? Little surprise to see who’s side your on, nor that you defend our resident plagiarist, Mr. PUgh.
Your instead of you’re. Are you sure about that Benician?
And now who’s resorting to grammar critique because he has no valuable input? That’s right, it’s Bob.
No Hank. Just a jab at the folks that do that on a regular bases. Hank my input is so valuable you nor all the other Liberal readers cannot stay away from it. Thanks for reading.
Hank:
Livesay is a trivial gnat in the scheme of things. He can neither spell well nor conjugate his verbs. “Their, there, and they’re” are a daily puzzle to him. I no longer read his linen nor swat at his ceaseless buzzing. Squirrels and fruit flies have more curious charm. I suppose he thinks he’s writing for the NY or LA Times or the New Yorker. As I recall this is not Kansas either. Good luck. pb
Hank; Peter Bray is a complainer who no longer makes direct commemnts to me.
Livesay:
A complainer? No, I just value great stuff, not misspelled, mediocre, repetitive, juvenile or pre-adolescent 4th-grade warblings…Crows with a head cold show more interest…Now that word would be “intrest” if spelled the Livesay way. He’s so enamored with what he has to say, he doesn’t bother to edit or spell-check…There, I lowered my standard and actually wrote to you…My Security software says you may be “Extraterrestrial,” please confirm with a DNA sample or Secret Handshake or NSA tattoo at your earliest convenience…pb
Peter just what ARE you trying to say. Repetitive, Ha. Think about that Peter. I do believe we should move on before you get out of line again.
I said what I said, if you can’t figure it out, get a roadmap. Some of us have more to do with our lives than banter with idle backyard squirrels who fill up their Internet days with Slumber Party rhetoric…Have a good life…pb
Thanks for reading all of my comments Bob. I know you follow me around this blog and comment every time I do, no matter the story, so you’re welcome for giving you something to do every day.
Let’s be honest, let’s be truthful— Are we ready for Hillary?
From the above article:
Bulletin from the front lines!
More news– “hold your breath”– from the political front, for the community to consider…
Below a key passage and a fair question from the article below:
The Hillary Clinton for President in 2016 bandwagon has started very early and with a purpose. The idea is to get large numbers of endorsers, so that no Democratic Primary competitors dare make a move. These supporters include Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), financier George Soros and Ready for Hillary, a super PAC mobilizing with great specificity (already in Iowa).
Given this early bird launch, it is important to raise the pressing question:
Does the future of our country benefit from Hillary, another Clinton, another politician almost indistinguishable from Barack Obama’s militaristic, corporatist policies garnished by big money donors from Wall Street and other plutocratic canyons?
http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Dynastic-Hillary-Bandw-by-Ralph-Nader-Bluedog-Democrats_DLC-Republicrats_Democrat-DLC_Dynasty-Dynasties-131108-902.html
Beyond the Koch brothers–another insider-whistle-blower tells the truth.
From the above article:
Bulletin from the front lines!
An excerpt from the article below:
“Huszar admits that he left the Fed –where he’d worked for seven years– because he’d “witnessed the institution deferring more and more to Wall Street”, that is, implementing policies which only benefited the banks.”
Huszar again: “From the trenches, several other Fed managers also began voicing the concern that QE wasn’t working as planned. Our warnings fell on deaf ears. In the past, Fed leaders—even if they ultimately erred—would have worried obsessively about the costs versus the benefits of any major initiative. Now the only obsession seemed to be with the newest survey of financial-market expectations or the latest in-person feedback from Wall Street’s leading bankers and hedge-fund managers.” (WSJ)
No one cared that QE was not stimulating credit, because that was not the objective. The real goal was to boost profits at the banks so they could offset the massive losses on their trove of mortgage-backed assets which dropped precipitously following the Crash of ’08 leaving them exposed to potential restructuring and nationalization. The $700 billion from the TARP bailout merely provided enough operating capital for the banks to continue to run their businesses. In contrast, QE was a strategy to drain the ocean of red ink from bank balance sheets and restore them to profitability. What mattered was profits. Profits at the expense of employment, profits at the expense of growth, profits at the expense the nation’s economic future. Profits, profits, profits. How can anyone fail to see that now?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/15/fed-insider-exposes-giant-central-bank-easing-swindle/
Very interesting article to get the local Liberals up in arms. Substitute Soros for Koch and the same article could have been written with some slight changes. This article is directed at the local Liberal audience and will get some attention. Look at the first responces except for one about Mr. Page’s writing. They are falling all over themselves and even had to get a negative responce in about two Forum writers at the same time. Even going so far as to say they are unimportant. Which at the same time says the Forum is unimportant also, which also means Mr. Page is also unimportant. Strange way to show support for one of your own. Well at least they think all the writers on the Forum are unimportant. I would say that is a lame attempt at “Fair and Balanced” comments. Good try.
In no way does this make sense. None whatsoever.
Why?
A question for the ages.
“Even going so far as to say they are unimportant. Which at the same time says the Forum is unimportant also, which also means Mr. Page is also unimportant.”
Going one step further is to say that the commenters are unimportant. This would include you. I would say that some of those who comment here maintain a level of self-importance that blinds them to the point where they confuse a comment based on pure and simple truth for condescension. There is an old adage, “The truth hurts.”
Yes the truth hurts. Now I understand why you moved you were hurt.
“Now I understand….” Unlikely.
Koch Industries – $100 billion annually; Hedge fund: 4.5 billion annually, combined personal fortune: $35 billion “earned” money by starting out with huge fortune from CEO father
Soros – personal/hedge fortune – $23 billion – started out as Hungarian immigrant
Lobbying – 1998-2010 Koch – $51 million; PACs – $38 million
1998-2010 Soros – $14 million; PACs – $13 million
When you talk in billions, it’s hard not to compare, but Koch brothers far, far out spend and out earn Soros. They are also involved in many, many local elections, even including school board elections in such states as NC and TX.
OpenSecrets confirms most of the information above and adds this:
Individual donations to 527 organizations (2001 to 2010)
George Soros: $32.5 million
Koch Brothers: $1.5 million
Open secrets is a George Soros funded site, so one would expect it to lean favorably towards their benefactor.
Either way, all three men are spending a bundle to support the causes they believe in, as is their right.
To the readers I did not read Dennis’s comment before posting my own. But I must say he had a great responce.
The Liberals are on the run. Koch bros Page article got them all up tight. Now they just comment in comedy runs that make no sense whatsoever.
Oh, I think this article makes PERFECT sense and the subject is far, far from comedy…it is a real tragedy for our country.
J Furlong: I don’t disagree. These back pages are too easy to turn our species’ realities into a spitting contest for competing ideologies…for awhile I got involved in the yarping, hissing, and barking, but after awhile it all proved pointless…and the energy spent in futility was like just another day in Stupid US Congress…I am reminded of hardened shell barnacles that collect on the bottom of sea craft…they provide nothing but increased drag consuming energy that might have gone some where else more productively…perhaps if ground up they would make a great soil amendment…I’ll pursue that further. Until then:
Hissing, Yarping, and Barnacles…
A local writer provides a thoughtful article to our online local news source, about a nearby city and its economic and cultural plight and likens it to many larger cities across our nation. A second writer responds and refers to “bleeding Liberals” that should go there if they don’t like it and fix the problem. A third writer responds to the second and inquires: “What? Are your undies on a little too tight this morning?” A fourth writer brings up some long-forgotten earlier criticism of the Tea Party which has little to do with anything as though perhaps it did. A 5th writer wants to “clarify the ground rules” as if the ground troops were in orbit again around the castle’s moat and the pterodactyls were in a feeding frenzy in the castle’s inner chambers.
I’m reminded of a raccoon or an opossum on a stroll down a back alley of town on a moonlit night. Suddenly every backyard dog with a barnacle in his bed is yarping and every stray alley cat is hissing. The barnacles on their boats have been disturbed again by a free, benevolent thought, and if there’s anything we don’t need it’s a free, disturbing, benevolent thought. So the yarping and the hissing continues on and on and on and on. The raccoon and/or opossum will tell their friends about their moonlit walk and how much hissing and yarping went on. Fortunately their wavelength receivers won’t hear much of it. And a barnacle, well, a barnacle is all it’s ever been and who really cares? Or should we? Seems to me a barnacle is just a hardened outcropping on the bottom of a boat that increases drag and does little else.
©Peter Bray, 11/10/2013 All rights reserved
Peter,
Your comments and animal analogy reminds me of the line from ‘Picasso’s Mandolin’ by Guy Clark:
He said the damndest thing he ever heard
Was tryin’ to learn to sing from a mockingbird
That is what we seem to always degenerate into here is a bunch of Mockingbirds chiming in with the same tired comments, meant not to further debate, but to disarm and discourage any opposition.
DDl: I agree, and Iiken it to a pre-pubescent Slumber Party…which tends to prove that compared to Border Collies we humans have a very long distance to go before we sleep..I only check in occasionally to see if the canaries have died from their own exhaust products…pb
Dennis that was a great comment. Now I know why Peter Bray chimnes is as he does. Very enlightning. Thank you.
Yes the Koch Brothers exist and finance conservative causes. George Soros exists and finances liberal causes. Since the beginning of civilization people with means have bought influence. The base theory of this article has always been in place and will always be. Period. (My apologies to the president for emphasizing the “period”.)
Meth-dealing outlaw bikers eat sandwiches. Mormon accountants eat sandwiches.
The big difference is the Meth folks sandwices are laced with Meth the Morman sandwiches are not.
You don’t lace sandwiches with meth.
How do you know?
Have you ever seen a fat meth head? Meth, like crack, speed, cocaine, reduces appetite. Meth and food do not go together. Here endeth the lesson.
But they do have bad teeth. emd of education
Which also makes the idea of a sandwich preposterous. End of story.
Lightrn up Hank enjoy the fun.
You first.
You remind me of Benician with the you first comment. Thats OK with me. I am at my playing weight, how about you?
You are punching way above your weight, as usual.
You are correct Hank. I can take on anyone and still win. Not many can do that Hank. I guess you did not think your comment out very well. Thanks for the compliment.
Like you didn’t think out very well your comments about meth and sandwiches? Or your comments about Soros and the Koch brothers? Or any number of things? No, not like that at all.
Hank it is very simple you were proven a little off base on Soros. The meth comment was for fun and you know it. Take it and laugh a little. Someday we can meet and talk a little face to face. I do not think you are a mean spirited person nor am I. I must admit the personal attacks on me do not sit very well and I will respond.
All that is well and good, except I disagree that I was proven wrong on Soros. I think his detractors are wrong to compare him to the Kochs or to assign some evil intent to his altruism. But I also don’t expect to change any minds that are set on believing what they want to believe.
I understand and also hope you do to. Thanks.
Yes