AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Being heard doesn't mean I control them. It doesn't even mean they will agree with anything I say.

But somehow you think Soros controls every organization he gives money to?
You are nothing but a follower of the Manchurian Lunatic it seems.

aka six of one, half a dozen of the other




(VW diesel truck)

You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the leg.

SO, okie, you are saying that the GOP can be bought, right? That's how bush became president, right?

The problem is that you don't understand the point you are trying to make.

What you think and what the facts are as usual are two different things okie.

The Koch brothers have more money than Soros.
Koch Bros - $35 billion
Soros - $14 billion

The Koch brothers give MORE money to the GOP than Soros does to Dems.


Check out the difference in Lobbying expenditures okie...
Lobbying Expenditures (1998 to 2010)




The Koch brothers seem to be more involved with RW think tanks including being on boards and being the primary donors for others.

http://www.rightsidenews.com/2010092411717/us/politics-and-economics/capital-rivals-koch-brothers-vs-george-soros.html

The Koch Brothers are more than twice as dangerous than Soros . . . they're on the wrong side!

Money can buy advertising, and advertising, or getting your message out there, it helps win elections. The message needs to resonate. Bush became president by winning more electoral votes.

He stole the election.

Florida.

parados, I covered the subject of donations on the Obama thread. Where Soros wins overwhelmingly the money war in the area of 527 groups. The following site shows that the Koch Brothers donated only 1.5 million between 2001 and 2010, compared to George Soros total contributions to 527s of 32.5 million. Hopefully, most people that are voting these days are becoming familiar with groups like Moveon.org and a whole host of other radical leftist organizations.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/09/opensecrets-battle---koch-brothers.html

Fortunately, the court prevented Gore from cherrypicking votes to steal the election, by invoking the Equal Protection Clause in the Constitution, and I believe rightfully so. Ballots in elections should be counted using consistent rules from area to area, county to county. Gore's lawyers were trying to corrupt the recount in this regard.

Actually pom, you have recognized the salient point here. What really matters is whether you agree with Soros and his leftist agenda supporting the Democratic Party more than the libertarian Koch Brothers supporting a conservative agenda. You apparently support Soros's socialist / New World Order / anti-American views, while I support a conservative agenda for the Republicans and the Tea Party movement. Everyone can believe what they will in this country, but I believe everyone should at least be well informed about what they are believing and what their leaders are aiming for with the agenda being pushed. It is my opinion that not many Obama voters actually know who Soros is and what the man's agenda is. Let him do his donations, but I am at least hoping the people will become more informed about the money man behind the Democratic Party. Perhaps you like what he is doing, but I know a few Democrats that would be shocked if they actually faced the truth of it.

Yeah..
And the Koch brothers spent 50 million lobbying Congress.

So when it comes to money spent to influence policy Soros isn't close to the Koch brothers.

And yet you claimed Soros had more money than the Koch brothers? I don't think you covered it okie. I think you picked out what you thought would support what the Manchurian Lunatic told you and ignored the rest.

Apples and oranges, parados. I think of lobbying as "protection money." Businesses need to send people to D.C. to help inform congress about their businesses, to try to keep them from enacting as many laws that will destroy or screw up their industries. It is bad enough anyway.

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php

The above site shows that the Koch Brothers are relatively small in terms of their lobby expenditures. In the first place, they are involved in several industries, each needing some expenditures in that regard. To compare, the mismanaged General Motors that Obama bailed out with our taxpayer money has spent 113 million alone, between 1998 and 2010, more than twice the amount spent by the Koch Brothers for several business interests. Just one organization, AARP, spent close to 200 million, almost 4 times the amount of the Koch Brothers, yet AARP does not industrially produce goods and services like the businesses that the Koch Brothers have interests in.

The above is one reason I will never join AARP. It is nothing more than a liberal organization using unsuspecting old peoples money to further causes that many of those people may not even favor.

I still think Soros is a bigger mover and shaker in politics than the Koch Brothers will ever be.

Apparently the top spender in lobbying is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, at 688 million between 1998 and 2010, however when you consider the millions of chamber members, I think it is highly justified. In fact, my business has been a member in the past, because I believed in what they try to do for the businesses in this country. We need more spokesmen like them.

Remember the 'earmark moratorium' the Republicans passed?

It didn't last a week.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/23/AR2010112305580.html

I hope you guys actually hold your elected representatives to the fire, but we all know you won't do **** about it. They lie to you constantly and you just suck it up because voting for a Democrat is against yer religion or something.

Cycloptichorn

I read your link, cyclops, and this does not appear to me to be a typical earmark at all. In fact, it is instead an additional detail that needed to be taken care of, consistent with the primary thrust of the bill that was passed. The way I read it, Kyle's provision was in fact a claim by indians against the federal government, which was part of the purpose of the bill. This appears instead to be Democratic propaganda being put out there, cyclops, being propagated by one of their compliant organizations, otherwise known as Associated Press. Maybe the larger question here should be, is this merely another case of the mainstream press, namely Associated Press, of blatantly lying to us?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/23/AR2010112305580.html

"Only three days after GOP senators and senators-elect renounced earmarks, Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, the No. 2 Senate Republican, got himself a whopping $200 million to settle an Arizona Indian tribe's water rights claim against the government. Kyl slipped the measure into a larger bill sought by President Barack Obama and passed by the Senate on Friday to settle claims by black farmers and American Indians against the federal government. Kyl's office insists the measure is not an earmark, and the House didn't deem it one when it considered a version earlier this year. "

Hahahaha, what a line of bullshit, Okie.

When a Senator directs money to be spent in a certain fashion that benefits their home state, it's an earmark. That's the definition of an earmark.

For example, if we have a Transportation bill for 30 billion dollars, it's safe to assume that this money is intended to fix highways. If a Senator then directs 500 million of that to go to his home state, he's earmarking those funds, even if they are consistent with the thrust of the overall bill!

Just face it: you were lied to. They have no intention whatsoever of stopping the practice of earmarking. And I was perfectly right: you don't give a ****.

Cycloptichorn