Harry Reid’s Koch addiction

April 14, 2014
By

Back in January, we asked, “Are the Koch brothers the left’s new Emmanuel Goldstein?”

Magic 8-Ball says, “It is decidedly so.”

59 Responses to Harry Reid’s Koch addiction

  1. Judy T on April 15, 2014 at 4:11 am

    “Speakers at the New Hampshire Freedom Summit, which was sponsored by Citizens United and Koch-backed Americans For Prosperity, included Senators Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, all of whom would be top tier presidential contenders should they run.

    Donald Trump also spoke.”

    Those Koch’s sure are helpful aren’t they?

    • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 15, 2014 at 7:25 am

      Agree, Judy.
      It’s good to see citizens involved with the political process.

  2. Jake on April 15, 2014 at 6:06 am

    You forget all the bitching and whining Republicans directed at George Soros over the last decade or so? Geese and ganders and all that.

    • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 15, 2014 at 7:34 am

      Don’t forget the Tides Foundation and all the other big-money Dem spenders.
      But somehow that doesn’t get the media amplification, does it?

      If you go back a thread or two, you’ll find links to a recent series of events:
      a WaPo reporter married to a Dem operative writes a story saying that Koch Bros want the pipeline to Canada.
      the story consists of facts copied from a refuted article from a partisan rag.
      two days later, Sen Reid and other Dems start a repetitive campaign to attack the Koch Bros.

      Collusion? Hard to believe otherwise.
      Find a coordinated campaign like that involving Repubs. I’d like to hear about it.

      • Jake on April 15, 2014 at 8:05 am

        “Find a coordinated campaign like that involving Repubs. I’d like to hear about it.”

        You mean other than a major MSM media outlet, radio personalties, political operatives and members of Congress all reciting the same exact talking points, verbatim, on whatever the cause du jour?

        • Ken_phd on April 15, 2014 at 8:59 am

          Pluto:

          “You mean other than a major MSM media outlet, radio personalties, political operatives and members of Congress all reciting the same exact talking points, verbatim, on whatever the cause du jour?”

          No reason to make a mini-novel response. Answer: none.

          • Jake on April 15, 2014 at 9:35 am

            “No reason to make a mini-novel response.”

            Didn’t realize one sentence qualified for “TL;DR”.

            But, sure, other than what I posted, I got nothing.

      • The Trolls on April 15, 2014 at 3:39 pm

        Find a coordinated campaign like that involving Repubs. I’d like to hear about it.

        You don’t have to look further than your own links.

        • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 16, 2014 at 6:54 am

          Surely you’ll agree that conservative blog links don’t have the same national impact as major campaigns in WaPo, NY Times, LA Times and the like?
          Surely you’ll agree that the outreach of MSM network news orgs like CBS, ABC and NBC is an order of magnitude greater than, say, a cable channel like Fox?

          • The Trolls on April 16, 2014 at 2:50 pm

            Surely you’ll agree that conservative blog links don’t have the same national impact as major campaigns in WaPo, NY Times, LA Times and the like?

            You have two errors in that sentence. First, comparing blogs with major newspapers can’t be taken seriously. Secondly, your use of the word “campaign” is indulgent.

            cable channel like Fox?

            Fox is run by Roger Ailes, a GOP operative. There is a reason why.

          • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 16, 2014 at 3:17 pm

            “Fox is run by Ailes, a Repub operative”

            And CBS, NBC and ABC are stacked with managers whose relatives work for the Obama Admin. And those network channels are way bigger than cable TV.

            I think the recent Koch smear shows coordination between Dem operatives, WaPo and the Dem Senators. So “campaign” is correct, not indulgent.

          • The Trolls on April 16, 2014 at 9:31 pm

            I think the recent Koch smear

            There was none, and so the rest of your statement is moot.

    • John Rolle on May 5, 2014 at 11:41 am

      The Speaker of the House nor the Senate Minority or Majority leader ever used his office as a pulpit during session to ridicule Soros like Reid is doing to the Koches. Ried is in a class of his own. In an effort to slime ORomney he used the vague “The word is out” phrase. The man has no morals, ethics or shame.

  3. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 15, 2014 at 7:35 am

    List of Dems who have taken Koch Bro campaign donations.
    http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2014/04/14/koch-derangement-syndrome/

  4. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 15, 2014 at 7:39 am

    Not much money.
    And a long time ago.
    But…guess who has taken Koch money.
    http://freebeacon.com/blog/harry-reid-took-money-from-koch-lobbyist/

    • The Trolls on April 15, 2014 at 3:39 pm

      Not much money.
      And a long time ago.

      And, tenuous. Verdict: hypocrite card not awarded.

      • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 16, 2014 at 6:56 am

        I’m curious.
        How did Sen Harry Reid and many family members become so rich while he served in the Senate? Where did all the money come from?

        • The Trolls on April 16, 2014 at 2:56 pm

          How did Sen Harry Reid and many family members become so rich while he served in the Senate? Where did all the money come from?

          Let me guess: you aren’t going to answer your questions.

          • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 16, 2014 at 3:18 pm

            Correct. Cos I don’t know. But I’d like to find out.
            I’m sure WaPo, NYT and CBS are curious too…

          • The Trolls on April 16, 2014 at 9:30 pm

            I’m sure WaPo, NYT and CBS are curious too…

            Translation: the media must chase down right wing conspiracy theories, or be labeled as partisan.

            Nice crucible you’ve got there.

    • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 16, 2014 at 11:49 am

      Cool, are we playing the Prog Hypocrite Sweepstakes, then?
      If you didn’t like the Sen Reid item, how about this one–

      http://gawker.com/income-inequality-institute-will-pay-paul-krugman-25-0-1563245534
      Income Inequality Institute Will Pay Paul Krugman $25,000 Per Month
      Offer letter says “play a modest role in our public events”, “contribute to the build-up” of a new “inequality initiative” (no details provided) and “You will not be expected to teach or supervise students”.

      To compare with more modest incomes:
      “CUNY … is publicly funded” and “pays adjunct professors approximately $3,000 per course” while “annual salaries of tenured (but undistinguished) professors … top out at $116,364″.

  5. The Trolls on April 15, 2014 at 3:42 pm

    George Soros is funding the persecution of Cliven Bundy. I read it on the internet.

  6. The Trolls on April 15, 2014 at 3:54 pm

    Both Soros and the Koch brothers give substantially to non-political causes, such as fighting cancer and poverty.

    They all deserve applause for that.

  7. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 16, 2014 at 6:59 am

    How will we know if O’Care worked? By examining the census records to compare before and after. Except….
    http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-04-15/is-obama-cooking-the-census-books-for-obamacare
    “For several months now, whenever the topic of enrollment in the Affordable Care Act came up, I’ve been saying that it was too soon to tell its ultimate effects. We don’t know how many people have paid for their new insurance policies, or how many of those who bought policies were previously uninsured. For that, I said, we will have to wait for Census Bureau data, which offer the best assessment of the insurance status of the whole population. Other surveys are available, but the samples are smaller, so they’re not as good; the census is the gold standard. Unfortunately, as I invariably noted, these data won’t be available until 2015.

    I stand corrected: These data won’t be available at all. Ever.

    No, I’m not kidding. I wish I was. The New York Times reports that the Barack Obama administration has changed the survey so that we cannot directly compare the numbers on the uninsured over time.”

  8. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 16, 2014 at 7:06 am

    The incurious media.
    http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/04/the-incurious-media-when-it-comes-to-obama-admin-scandals/

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/04/14/attkisson-chilling-effect-from-obama-administration-on-journalists/

    “When she went after the Bush administration, Attkisson noted, no one was calling her a ‘progressive’ journalist — and her CBS bosses were delighted to run those stories.”

  9. Jim,MtnView,Ca,USA on April 16, 2014 at 8:21 pm

    Criminalizing political opponents.
    Time is now to spread your voice, time’s to come there’ll be no choice.
    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/04/16/the-terrifying-implications-of-the-irs-abuse-doj-connection/?singlepage=true
    Engelbrecht founded True the Vote in 2010 and filed for tax exempt status with the IRS that year. She was subjected to invasive questioning while Lerner’s IRS group held up her investigation. Soon thereafter, several executive branch agencies descended on her, her family and her business. The ATF, OSHA, the FBI all harassed her. OSHA fined her $25,000 for minor violations.

    Fast forward to 2012. True the Vote is going strong, despite the IRS holding up its tax exempt application. It is making a difference. States are adopting voter ID and other election integrity improvements. Local groups are organizing to receive True the Vote’s poll training. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) and his staff communicate with Lerner at the IRS, in what now appears to be a fishing expedition to find something — anything — to use against Engelbrecht.

    Why Engelbrecht? True the Vote is not the largest activist group out there, and it is not partisan. It advocates election integrity legislation and it trains people to help ensure that our elections are fair and free from corruption. As such, it backs measures like voter photo ID. Voter ID is supported by about 70% of the American people. It’s not controversial, despite the left’s efforts to make it so.
    … What this tells us is that the Democrats, at least some Democrats, fully intended to weaponize government against dissent while it watered down election law and used lawfare via the Justice Department to damage and even remove state-level election law improvements.

    • The Trolls on April 16, 2014 at 9:28 pm

      There is no evidence of voter fraud.

      None.

      Thus you must ask yourself, Jim, what is the intention of the GOPs tremendous efforts to put in place voter ID?

      fully intended to weaponize government against dissent

      Hyperbole. With absolutely no foundation in fact.

      Again, no evidence. None.

      IRS harassment</I.

      There is no evidence for harassment, let alone partisan harassment. None.

      Voter ID is supported by about 70% of the American people.</i.

      A strong majority of Americans are also interested in fairness in elections, and are concerned about suppression of the vote. Given the lack of transparency in the largely GOP efforts to put in place voting changes, you must ask yourself your motivations, Jim.

      Don't kid yourself Jim, your side wishes to suppress the vote.

      • The Trolls on April 16, 2014 at 9:29 pm

        oops, italics error.

        • Ken_phd on April 17, 2014 at 5:27 am

          Pluto:

          I thought I would distill your answers down to their core.

          Again, no evidence. None,Again, no evidence. None,Again, no evidence. None,Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None,Again, no evidence. None,Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None, Again, no evidence. None……,

          There. That saves posters time.

          woof. woof.

          • The Trolls on April 17, 2014 at 4:14 pm

            Correct, there is no evidence of voter fraud.

            Your hysteria on the matter is self-serving.

          • Ken_phd on April 18, 2014 at 1:27 pm

            Pluto:

            “Correct, there is evidence of voter fraud.”

            I am pleased that you finally agreed with the other posters.

            woof.

          • The Trolls on April 19, 2014 at 7:36 pm

            Weak.

    • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 17, 2014 at 11:51 am

      “No … voter fraud. None.”
      Well, that’s wrong. Even if not, there is no reason to hassle people who want to eliminate voter fraud unless…unless you are benefiting from it.

      • The Trolls on April 17, 2014 at 4:17 pm

        There is no reason to hassle people to eliminate non-existent voter fraud, unless you are benefiting from it.

        There, fixed that for you.

  10. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 17, 2014 at 11:55 am
  11. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 17, 2014 at 11:58 am

    We saw this in the Bush/Gore election back in 2000. People who are registered in 2 states (typically Florida and New York) and vote in both of them.
    Now, North Carolina uncovers it:
    http://www.wral.com/state-elections-officials-seek-tighter-security/13533579/

  12. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 17, 2014 at 12:00 pm

    More info on the NC situation.
    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/04/02/massive-voter-fraud-discovered-in-north-carolinas-2012-election/

    But again, the point is who could possibly be against illegal voters, and why would they be against it?

    • The Trolls on April 17, 2014 at 4:23 pm

      Once again Jim links to a conservative website, without having the curiosity to look further.

      Why could that possibly be, Jim?

      If you look into it further, Jim, you will see that the supposed voter fraud in North Carolina does not exist. There was no voter fraud in North Carolina.

      All efforts to reduce non-existent voter fraud are poorly veiled Republican strategies to reduce voter turn-out. Un-American? Why, of course.

  13. troll bait on April 17, 2014 at 12:36 pm

    -who could possibly be against illegal vot(ing), and why would they be against it?

    I presume the question is rhetorical–there is no great mystery about who and why.

    Witness the resident troll hysterics.

    • The Trolls on April 17, 2014 at 4:11 pm

      who could possibly be against illegal vot(ing), and why would they be against it?

      Straw man. There is no illegal voting in this country.

      Now, who would be against illegal voting that doesn’t exist?

      Republicans.

      And why?

      To restrict the vote.

      Wouldn’t that be un-American?

      Yes.

    • The Trolls on April 17, 2014 at 4:24 pm

      Witness the resident troll hysterics.

      Now, now, cupcake, don’t get bent of shape and attack just because you can’t demonstrate evidence of vote fraud.

  14. Ken_phd on April 17, 2014 at 4:48 pm

    Pluto:

    “There is no evidence of voter fraud.”

    There is no evidence that humans cause AGW. None.

    woof.

    • The Trolls on April 17, 2014 at 6:39 pm

      There is no evidence that humans cause AGW.

      More precisely, you mean to say that global warming is not anthropogenic. Or, that there is no global warming.

      In either event, it has nothing to do with the alarmist tactics of conservatives regarding non-existent voter fraud.

      Back to bed for you, bub.

      • Ken_phd on April 18, 2014 at 6:12 am

        Pluto:

        “you mean to say that global warming is not anthropogenic.”

        No.
        I am afraid you missed the parody. That’s OK. More to come, bub.

        • The Trolls on April 19, 2014 at 7:39 pm

          I am afraid you missed the parody.

          Lame excuse.

    • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 18, 2014 at 7:47 am

      Global warming is causing Antarctic ice to “demolish old records”
      http://iceagenow.info/2014/04/antarctic-sea-ice-demolishing-records/

      • Ken_phd on April 18, 2014 at 8:10 am

        Jim:

        “Global warming is causing Antarctic ice to “demolish old records”
        http://iceagenow.info/2014/04/antarctic-sea-ice-demolishing-records/

        You may want to add Chris Turney to your copy list. He’s the AGW dumkoff who got caught in the Antarctica ice.

        • The Trolls on April 19, 2014 at 7:49 pm

          You may want to add Chris Turney to your copy list.

          Good idea, since you are collecting bright and shiny things.

      • Baidarka on April 20, 2014 at 4:04 pm

        Global warming is causing Antarctic ice to “demolish old records”.

        Jim, let me get this straight, you think that the warming in the early part of the 20th century was because we are still exiting the last ice age. You will not comment on the cooling in the middle part of the 20th century. You state that the warming in the last part of the 20th century could not be due to humans, because the warming in the early part of the 20th century was not due to humans. Now, you link to someone who believes that a new ice age is upon us, with the increase in Antarctic ice one supportive example. How about this summary: we continued exiting the ice age early 20th century, then we entered it again mid century, then we exited it again late century, now we are entering it again, all in 100 years. Complicated, I know! Sort of like, “The Restaurant at the Edge of the Universe”. Your thoughts?

        • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 21, 2014 at 12:18 pm

          No, I posted a link to an article that asked why one period of warming for several decades (which occurred at a time of a much lower level of human tech and much lower human population) was irrelevant.
          But another period of warming that happened a couple of decades later was solid proof of hockey-stick warming that needed massive intrusion into everyone’s lives to deal with.

          • Ursus maritimus on April 21, 2014 at 4:55 pm

            But another period of warming that happened a couple of decades later was solid proof of hockey-stick warming that needed massive intrusion into everyone’s lives to deal with.

            But, it is solid proof of hockey-stick warming. It is largely due to anthropogenic CO2, and it was predicted over 100 years ago, at the end of the 19th century. The mid century cooling is thought to be due to aerosols, which are now not dominant.

            The present warming is different from the early century warming in that it has just begun, there is more to come. That is what has everyone worried, not the present, but that there is more to come.

            “Massive intrusion” is an overstatement. There is a difference between simple social contract obligations, and fomenting a spectre of full-blown communism. Moreover, it will be recognized, hopefully not too late, that massive intrusion might have been required, similar to WWII.

            By the way, regarding your link to Antarctic ice, you will recall that Judith Curry is on record for stating that an increase in Antarctic ice is a conclusion of global warming.

          • Ursus maritimus on April 22, 2014 at 3:19 pm

            Let me elaborate regarding Judith Curry, she states that recent increases in Antarctic ice are due to warming, but eventually the southern ocean will heat up sufficiently such that Antarctic ice will decline. Here, from the Abstract of her 2010 paper in Proc Natl Acad Sci:

            “The observed sea surface temperature in the Southern Ocean shows a substantial warming trend for the second half of the 20th century. Associated with the warming, there has been an enhanced atmospheric hydrological cycle in the Southern Ocean that results in an increase of the Antarctic sea ice for the past three decades through the reduced upward ocean heat transport and increased snowfall…The increased heating from below (ocean) and above (atmosphere) and increased liquid precipitation associated with the enhanced hydrological cycle results in a projected decline of the Antarctic sea ice.”

          • Ursus maritimus on April 22, 2014 at 3:38 pm

            By the way, Jim, the post in your link above used as evidence a graph that was taken from a great website largely devoted to the Arctic, “Cryosphere Today”:

            http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/

            This year and next are predicted to be unusually, perhaps record strong El Nino years. If correct then Cryosphere Today should be a mesmerizing view of the impending Arctic sea ice train wreck.

            Here is another website that deals exclusively with the Arctic ice:

            http://neven1.typepad.com/

          • Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 23, 2014 at 7:21 am

            So, let me see if I follow your time line:
            Warming begins roughly 1910 to 1940 after being predicted at the end of the 19th century.
            Followed by a pause, perhaps due to aerosols.
            Then a continuation of warming from 1975 to 2000 after aerosols are brought under control.
            Now, another pause.

            As always, btw, thanks for your interesting, fact-based and civil comments.

          • Ursus maritimus on April 23, 2014 at 3:16 pm

            You almost got it. A period of early 20th century warming, the origins of which are not understood. Followed by mid-century cooling, thought to be due to aerosols. Aerosols brought under control. Latter 20th century warming is due to anthropogenic CO2, and CO2 ppm are still increasing. Noting here again that this cause and effect was predicted beginning over 100 years ago. Recent studies indicate that there has been no pause in early 21st century warming.

            If the current El Nino conditions continue to develop and hold, then 2015 is going to generate a new and greatly heightened level of discussion.

  15. Jim,MtnView,Ca,USA on April 17, 2014 at 6:14 pm

    As noted a few threads back, blue politicians have been getting elected by promising pension benefits that are not sustainable.
    Another data point.
    http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/04/something-soaring-in-ny-state-borrowing-to-cover-local-pension-costs/
    Local governments and the state increased borrowing off the state pension fund to pay yearly retirement costs by 22 percent between 2013 and this year, state records show.
    … 133 municipalities deferred $472 million in retirement obligations this year — a record amount … Last year, 139 employers borrowed $368 million. …
    Local governments readily admit that delaying pension costs, plus interest, isn’t great fiscal policy.

  16. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 18, 2014 at 4:24 pm

    Interesting story on a couple of Dem mega-donors.
    The Dem party has so many of these that neither one of them is Soros.
    http://theweek.com/article/index/260111/the-democrats-have-a-mega-donor-problem

  17. Jim,MtnView,CA,USA on April 18, 2014 at 4:30 pm
  18. Jim,MtnView,Ca,USA on April 19, 2014 at 8:24 am

    A commentary on the lapdogs of the press…

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/04/jay-carney-admits-jon-stewart-was-obamas-toughest-interview-of-2012/
    White House press secretary Jay Carney claimed that the toughest interview President Obama had during the 2012 presidential campaign was with the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *