• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

This is starting to get old

RaleighDevil said:
If the Koch brothers did not exist, the Democratic Party would have to invent them.
Click to expand...

It's not like they hide what they support politically and financially. They created themselves.

"In all but one key Senate race so far this year, Koch-linked organizations like Americans for Prosperity, Concerned Veterans of America and the American Energy Alliance have spent more on issue-based ads attacking Democratic candidates than all independent Democratic groups combined have spent on similar ads criticizing Republican candidates.

The outside spending in House races is also dominated by Koch-linked groups. These groups have dropped $5.7 million in 14 districts, three times as much as all Democratic outside groups have spent on non-special election races this year."
 
RaleighDevil, what kind of ROI are the Koch brothers getting on their investments in the Republican Party?
 
Not all political action (spending) is done for a tangible ROI, some of it is done for a belief in a cause or the direction you want the country to go. Examples would be the NRA, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, etc.

Like donating to a billboard in W-S. You know it won't really change anything, but it feels good to do it.
 
The Koch Brothers were inevitable after the insane CU ruling. money is not now nor has ever been equivalent to "free speech". Paying for advertising is the very definition of "commerce". There is no question that "commerce" can be regulated by Congress.
 
Sgt Hulka said:
Not all political action (spending) is done for a tangible ROI, some of it is done for a belief in a cause or the direction you want the country to go. Examples would be the NRA, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, etc.

Like donating to a billboard in W-S. You know it won't really change anything, but it feels good to do it.
Click to expand...

This doesn't make sense.
 
A thorough and devastating critique of a Washington Post smear article on the Kochs. RJ wants the Kochs to shut up so we can get our news and information from Democratic Party affiliated outlets such as this one. I'm glad some of you weren't around when Tom Paine was writing. While we're on the subject of writers, let me quote Milton: "Let the winds of doctrine blow."

ROI? Take a look at how the "green energy" Democratic Party operative in the story is getting a nice one from his emphasis on that part of the energy sector.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...st-responds-to-me-and-i-reply-to-the-post.php
 
WFFaithful said:
This doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Yes it does. It was in response to Ph's post about the Koch Brothers ROI in giving $ to the pubs. His implication is there is some nefarious back room dealing where bad actors are twirling their mustaches and figuring out how they can make money and hurt people in the process.

I contend that not all political donations are made for a return on investment. Sometimes you donate to a cause because you think it is right. Amazon.com backs the Sierra Club and their activities. What exactly would their ROI be?
 
RaleighDevil said:
A thorough and devastating critique of a Washington Post smear article on the Kochs. RJ wants the Kochs to shut up so we can get our news and information from Democratic Party affiliated outlets such as this one. I'm glad some of you weren't around when Tom Paine was writing. While we're on the subject of writers, let me quote Milton: "Let the winds of doctrine blow."

ROI? Take a look at how the "green energy" Democratic Party operative in the story is getting a nice one from his emphasis on that part of the energy sector.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...st-responds-to-me-and-i-reply-to-the-post.php
Click to expand...


The scary, unfair, liberal media bias surfaces again. If someone doesn't report what Fox News "reports," then they must be in the liberals' back pocket.
 
Sgt Hulka said:
Yes it does. It was in response to Ph's post about the Koch Brothers ROI in giving $ to the pubs. His implication is there is some nefarious back room dealing where bad actors are twirling their mustaches and figuring out how they can make money and hurt people in the process.

I contend that not all political donations are made for a return on investment. Sometimes you donate to a cause because you think it is right. Amazon.com backs the Sierra Club and their activities. What exactly would their ROI be?
Click to expand...

There is a clear ROI for the NRA. They are directly responsible for changing things.
 
Sgt Hulka said:
Not all political action (spending) is done for a tangible ROI, some of it is done for a belief in a cause or the direction you want the country to go. Examples would be the NRA, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, etc.

Like donating to a billboard in W-S. You know it won't really change anything, but it feels good to do it.
Click to expand...

I'm hard pressed to think of any core Republican beliefs that aren't motivated by a ROI. Most of them are about cutting taxes, lower government spending in order to justify cutting taxes, or opening up more avenues for capitalism so they can make money (environment, education, etc).

I'm not sure of the ROI on social issues, but I'm guess Republicans make a good bit of coin off the propaganda surrounding social issues.
 
Sgt Hulka said:
Not all political action (spending) is done for a tangible ROI, some of it is done for a belief in a cause or the direction you want the country to go. Examples would be the NRA, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, etc.

Like donating to a billboard in W-S. You know it won't really change anything, but it feels good to do it.
Click to expand...

9UhNA.jpg
 
Manmythlegend said:
But Soros, Buffett, and Gates are approved by you libral slimocrats!
Click to expand...

the heart of the matter is wealth concentration and the power it brings, not so much who exactly is wielding such power. The fact that this is possible subverts the people's government and causes societal harm, no matter which side of the aisle these billionaires sit on.
 
RaleighDevil said:
A thorough and devastating critique of a Washington Post smear article on the Kochs. RJ wants the Kochs to shut up so we can get our news and information from Democratic Party affiliated outlets such as this one. I'm glad some of you weren't around when Tom Paine was writing. While we're on the subject of writers, let me quote Milton: "Let the winds of doctrine blow."

ROI? Take a look at how the "green energy" Democratic Party operative in the story is getting a nice one from his emphasis on that part of the energy sector.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...st-responds-to-me-and-i-reply-to-the-post.php
Click to expand...

As usual you can't understand the English language and are totally brainwashed. Ever since the early 90s on AOL, I have 100% for total public financing of all federal elections. No Koch brothers money, no union money, no lawyers money, no Sandy Adelson, no David Geffen money. Give each a budget and let each show how they can use it.
 
dmcheatw said:
the heart of the matter is wealth concentration and the power it brings, not so much who exactly is wielding such power. The fact that this is possible subverts the people's government and causes societal harm, no matter which side of the aisle these billionaires sit on.
Click to expand...
This comment is absolutely correct IMHO. The irony is Obama's policies and those of the leading liberal congress leaders only worsen the problem they purport to be against. Is this intended or do they simply not understand what they are creating. Unfortunately, I believe it is the former. The Dems and Pubs have much in common from a practical standpoint than their rhetoric would have you believe. Nearly all believe they know what is best for the masses, but do not want the same rules applied to them or their families. How long until we have the ruling elite and the masses as our only two classes of people. Seems we are moving warp speed in the direction of the old USSR to me in nearly all facets of our lives.
 
PhDeac said:
I'm hard pressed to think of any core Republican beliefs that aren't motivated by a ROI. Most of them are about cutting taxes, lower government spending in order to justify cutting taxes, or opening up more avenues for capitalism so they can make money (environment, education, etc).

I'm not sure of the ROI on social issues, but I'm guess Republicans make a good bit of coin off the propaganda surrounding social issues.
Click to expand...

That is because you are one dimensional when it comes to your thinking. IN your mind, the only reason for wanting lower taxes/less government is a selfish desire to keep the money you have earned; and the only reason to increase commerce is to line someone's pockets with ill gotten gains.

Is it possible, just possible that some people feel that in the continum from small government to huge government, some people feel that we have gone too far towards the huge government end and feel that that is bad for the country (and vote accordingly?)

It is similar to those on the right who believe the only reason dems want higher taxes is so they can take money from those who earn it and buy votes with it. And the only reason those people get votes is because those lazy good for nothings just want a free lunch from those who earn money.
 
"Buying votes" is far more abstract than profiting from policy.

So then why is huge government inherently bad, Hulka? What makes it more than a style thing?

Keep in mind that huge government is largely made up of Republicans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top