Credit:radio.foxnews.com
INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA — The conservative Koch network plans to spend between $300 million and $400 million to influence politics and public policy over the next two years, intensifying its nationwide efforts in the initial years of Donald Trump’s presidency.
Network officials disclosed their rough spending plans Saturday as donors gathered at a luxury hotel in the California desert. The investment, backed by the organization’s extensive nationwide network, positions the billionaire industrialist family to play a major role in the debate over several Trump priorities — even those they oppose.
“We’re just getting started,” billionaire industrialist Charles Koch said at the opening reception for the weekend conference, which attracted more than 550 donors, each willing to donate at least $100,000 each year to the various conservative political and policy groups backed by the Koch brothers.
Koch and many of his top donors refused to support Trump in the run-up to his election, raising questions about both his readiness for […]
I’m not a Koch brothers fan, but I do think it’s ironic, Stephan, that you promote articles excoriating the money they give to support political causes they espouse, yet I don’t recall seeing anything about the massive amounts of funding George Soros contributes to the so-called progressive political causes he and others like him support. Is it not the case that if large amounts of money in politics corrupts, that would be the case whether the cause is conservative or liberal? When will he hear something on Schwartzreport about the financial excesses on the left side of the spectrum?
In an idea world there would be no mega donors. In this world Soros is dwarfed by the Kochs.
Paul —
I suspect I know a great deal more about what Soros is doing than you do, because I have known and worked with Soros people since he and Don Kendall, chairman of Pepsico, and Laurence Rockefeller basically alone tried to help Russia become a democracy during the Perestroika/Glasnost period, and poured more than 100 million into that effort. It was consistently sabotaged by Rightists and, as a result,the U.S. created the opportunity that Putin took. I find almost all Rightwing commentary about Soros to be factually inaccurate. The truth is Soros consistently funds efforts designed to strengthen democracy, creativity, and the Earth’s ecology.
Everyday I read a wide spectrum of Rightwing media and am constantly astounded by how utterly bogus most of it is — I am speaking here of FOX, Breitbart, Daily Caller, and Red State, as well as things even weirder.
— Stephan
Stephan–I have no doubt you know a lot about –and approve–Soros’s (and others like him) vast injection of funding into American politics. Whether “rightwing media” get it wrong I have no idea (I spend virtually no time with agenda-driven media of either stripe.) To reiterate: Over the years you have posted various articles about the evils of large amounts of corporate and private spending going to influence politics in the United States. Yet only one side of that equation (the one supporting conservatism) ever seems to get pointed up, while the egregious violators of that same principle on the other side are ignored. I believe large amounts of special interest money in politics is evil. But you seem to believe it is only evil if it supports positions with which you disagree. Sorry to say, it strikes me as hypocritical to condemn one guilty party while ignoring the others just because one happens to side with their agendas.
Paul —
If you read me regularly then you already know that for over a decade I have opposed the trend of rich individuals and corporations pouring money into politics. I have long espoused public financing of elections based on petitions.
As to Soros: Soros unlike the Koch brothers does not fund pseudo-think tanks, and the like, nor operations like ALEC. His money pretty uniformly goes to foster wellbeing, and is not partisan in the same way the Koch brothers fund. Consequently, I have not negatively commented on Soros.
Well said. Soros first became well known for efforts to rebuild civil society in Eastern Europe after the collapse of Communism. He is not doing what the Kochs do- then or now.
The Kochs not only abuse the electoral process, they engage in deceptive actions destructive of civil society, as in their manipulation of universities to fill academic departments with apparatchiks rather than genuine scholars. They fund a position given to a hand picked tool long enough for the person to get tenure, then stop funding so as to repeat the same act elsewhere. Meanwhile the taxpayers continue paying the apparatchik’s salary. They also set up fake institutes within a university that gains prestige by the link while serving purely political goals. http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/got-science/2015/got-science-september-2015#.WJCxfBDMfYo
Right wingers, as usual, accuse others of what they are doing, from election fraud to violence to hating the constitution to attacking traditional values.
Ah, yes–one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. But even ISIS got the utilities running in some of the areas it conquered. I don’t mean to demean everything Soros has done. Yet some of his causes many find just as objectionable as you do what the Koch’s do. One could make similar arguments against Soros (and other left -wing contributors) regarding much of what his dozens of millions of dollars has gone toward. I know, Stephan, that you have regularly ” opposed the trend of rich individuals and corporations pouring money into politics.” That’s my whole point. You have opposed it–yet only when it involves right-wing funds. If one were to rely exclusively on Schwartzreport, one would believe that only conservatives ever inject vast sums of money to influence politics. And that is just plain…well, to use one of your favorite terms, propaganda.
Paul —
As I write frequently I do not care about partisan politics, except in an anthropological sense. My interest is fostering wellbeing. If Rightwing political movements did that I would say so. But they don’t. Universally, conservative politics produce more expensive, less efficient, less productive, less pleasant to live under, wellness degrading social outcomes. Rightwing politics are about fear, racism, nativism, and greed, and that’s what they foster. I will be happy to provide dozens of examples comparing the social outcomes of the two worldviews. If you can find me a counter example I would be interested in seeing it.