"... that helped reshape American politics, has died. He was 79.... Three decades after David Koch’s public steps into politics, analysts say, the Koch brothers’ money-fueled brand of libertarianism helped give rise to the Tea Party movement and strengthened the far-right wing of a resurgent Republican Party....ince the 1970s, the Kochs have spent at least $100 million — some estimates put it at much more — to transform a fringe movement into a formidable political force aimed at moving America to the far right by influencing the outcome of elections, undoing limits on campaign contributions and promoting conservative candidacies, think tanks and policies.... Under the administration of Donald J. Trump, the Koch brothers’ prospects in Washington seemed improved, at least superficially. But beneath the surface lay substantive political and personal differences between the Kochs and Mr. Trump.... As the 2018 congressional elections approached, the Kochs’ frustrations with Mr. Trump broke into an ugly and open exchange between Charles Koch and the president. Charles denounced Mr. Trump’s restrictive trade and immigration policies as divisive, and threatened to withhold the family’s support for Republican candidates who opposed the free-trade, government-shrinking policies at the heart of the Koch political philosophy. Mr. Trump struck back on Twitter, calling the Koch political apparatus 'overrated' and 'a total joke in real Republican circles.'"
From the NYT obituary.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१५९ टिप्पण्या:
They were "Right wing" they were globalist Greedheads who were rich and wanted to be richer. All their "libertarian" policies were designed to put money in their pocket. They were selfish anti-American open borders freaks and "Free traders". I'm glad he's dead and hope more of the same for the rest of the family.
Other than that, RIP.
Far right wing?
Well, that’s the NYT for you.
The Koch’s desiderata was standard free market conservatism, Milton Friedman stuff.
Or “classical liberal”, unbroken continuity to the 19th century.
This part is propaganda.
If living were a thing that money could buy
Then the rich would live but the poor would die.
First John McCain and now a Koch Brother. In certain ways, America *is* getting better.
"to transform a fringe movement...."
Translation: He disagreed with the NYT.
The Kochs are evil,if for nothing else, all those PBS shows their foundation sponsors.
Just kidding.
NYT: "Hey, let's dog-pile on the effusion of joy being expressed by our commenters and label people we don't like in death the same way we labeled them in life!"
NYT on RBG obit in the near future: "How dare these talking heads and commenters rejoice at the passing of this wonderful woman. They have no shame!"
This dumbshits almost destroyed the Republican party with their support for Amnesty and Open Borders. Every time the R party started to enforce the immigration laws, the Cock brothers were their with a checkbook supporting the Opposition and siding with the Democrats. That's why Trump got elected. These rich assholes never give an inch. Its always me,me, and my money and to hell with the country.
"Far right wing"
"Fringe"
More leftist NYT bullshit propaganda. How AWFUL that people who weren't dedicated leftists had the temerity to spend money on politics!
$100 million is small ball these days. How many billions has steyer squandered on his political follies?
Was RBG cremated when she died last year?
Others have beaten me to it but the Kochs were anything but "Right Wing."
If he's "far right wing" I must be off the right hand side of the map, in the place where there be monsters.
Others have beaten me to it but the Kochs were anything but "Right Wing."
We called them part of the Chuck-Wing of the Republican Party.
Libertarian used to be left wing when they were attacking the Ancien Régime from the left. Now they are right wing as they attack progressivism from the right. The right, in the old sense, has been fairly eradicated from the modern west and so the Koch's get to be far right. It sort of makes sense.
Is 'Frankenstein' in the public domain? Otherwise the NYT writer owes Mary Shelley some royalties.
...money-fueled brand of libertarianism helped give rise to the Tea Party movement and strengthened the far-right wing of a resurgent Republican Party.... transform a fringe movement into a formidable political force aimed at moving America to the far right by influencing the outcome of elections, undoing limits on campaign contributions and promoting conservative candidacies, think tanks and policies.... Under the administration of Donald J. Trump, the Koch brothers’ prospects in Washington seemed improved, at least superficially. But beneath the surface lay substantive political and personal differences between the Kochs and Mr. Trump.... As the 2018 congressional elections approached, the Kochs’ frustrations with Mr. Trump broke into an ugly and open exchange between Charles Koch and the president. Charles denounced Mr. Trump’s restrictive trade and immigration policies as divisive, and threatened to withhold the family’s support for Republican candidates who opposed the free-trade, government-shrinking policies at the heart of the Koch political philosophy. Mr. Trump struck back on Twitter, calling the Koch political apparatus 'overrated' and 'a total joke in real Republican circles.'"
I suspect that the Koch brothers pressured Scott Walker to be squishy on immigration issues when Walker was running for President.
amassed a multibillion dollar fortune
Amassed> How about "created"
A hedge fund manager "amasses" a multibillion dollar fortune.
The Koch brothers created wealth from mining/energy. One of the few endeavors wealth is actually created. Not a service provided. Farming, lumber, fishing, mining = creating wealth.
"Amassing" makes it sound like he was good at couponing.
Guess Times' employees have never been to Lincoln Center, the Met or the Natural History museum.
I remember that when Walker began running for President, he indicated that he would get tough on immigration issues.
Then he suddenly backed off.
I think that the Koch brothers warned him they would cut off their donations to him.
The NYT dissin' the Koch brothers as "far-right" is just a little intra-globalist in-joke. NYT doesn't really have any major beef with open-borders libertarians.
Dr.K: Others have beaten me to it but the Kochs were anything but "Right Wing."
You think people would have wised up about this by now, but apparently not.
The Koch Industries had great management and excellent financing. All they needed was cheap labor and they paid the GOP well for getting that. Trump was their enemy because he promised his deplorables to drive up wages. That made him the enemy of Koch Industries and their wholly owned pols such as Ryan and Pence. DJT has maneuvered through that mine field and manya Rino IED planter.
This is a new day.The next IED for replacement is Mr Powell's economic assassination team at the FED . It is going to be replaced by Trump very soon.
From the NYT obituary.
Shorter NYT: The obituaries are the continuation of politics by other means.
"Charles denounced Mr. Trump’s restrictive trade and immigration policies as divisive, and threatened to withhold the family’s support for Republican candidates who opposed the free-trade, government-shrinking policies at the heart of the Koch political philosophy."
How are Trump's immigration policies anti-free trade or anti-government shrinking? I see the argument about Trump's trade policies, but immigration? Can someone explain that to me?
Used to be, the fastest way to get one acquaintance [see below] of mine to lapse into an obscene, spittle-spewing tirade was to mention the Koch brothers. Nowadays, he has no time for them. He's into Trump-hatred full time. Same obscenities. Same spittle.
[Considered the man a friend for many years. But he's spent the last three standing out in a parking lot, screaming at the sky. He's no longer the talented, witty, genial person he once was. Now he hates Donald J. Trump and all his works 24/7. DJT has a 7,000-square foot mansion in this man's head and pays no rent.]
In fairness, within NYT bubble land anybody who is opposed to single payer healthcare, complete higher education loan forgiveness, and the banning of partically all firearms for private citizens qualifies as "far right" and "fringe". Even though the Kochs are open border gloablists, that fact is not enough to move them away from the scary person zone in the progressive/liberal mind.
Harvard's Steven Pinker talks about the Left Pole. The comparison is to the North Pole. If you are at the North Pole, everywhere else is, by definition, south of you.
At the left pole, every point of view that is not left is, by definition, right or alt-right or right-wing extremist. There is no tolerance for people of nuanced viewpoints or those willing to participation in discussions of particular issues. If you are not at the left pole, you are a heretic and must be scorned.
Tom Steyer, a portion of whose fortune was made by funding coal mines and coal-burning plants, repented his heresy but instead of using his fortune to close those mines and plants, scampered to the Left Pole -- or maybe drove there in his Prius. He was granted redemption in exchange for funding left-leaning political causes and filming commercials in which he bravely argued for the impeachment of Donald Trump.
See how it works?
David Koch (as Koch-watchers know) ran for vice-president on the Libertarian Party ticket in 1980. Ed Clark was their POTUS candidate. Koch was recruited to run because of how campaign finance laws work: You’re allowed to contribute as much of your own money as you want to your own campaign, but not to that of others. The Libertarians needed a lot of money to (among other things) engage in an effort to qualify the Clark/Koch ticket for the ballot in all 50 states.
I met my husband working on those ballot qualification efforts and I also met David Koch, because not only did he contribute millions to the campaign effort, but he actively campaigned. I was running the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin (all eight of us) and so when David Koch came to Wisconsin a few times, I was his designated driver. I drove him around in my old not-very-nice car and he was a good sport about everything.
RIP.
The descriptors "Right wing" and "Libertarian" do not belong together, unless you are a left wing SJW.
To them, everyone not on board wit the cause is a fascist. They must have learned that from the Soviets.
The Koch brother always seemed like legitimate libertarians to me. But that's just following the tenants of free market. From that perspective, what is wrong with moving factories oversees considering that you can gain access to cheap labor costs? And what is wrong with supporting an immigration policy that systemically lowers the value of labor? In both case those are opinions that are great for your bottom line.
Just once, I'd like the NYT to tell me a position on some issue that is right wing, but not "far right."
Since the 1970s, the Kochs have spent at least $100 million
That's all?? What with all the hype we've been subjected to about these guys -- like they're Richard Mellon Scaife* or something -- you'd have thought they spent $20 trillion.
A hundred million is chump change to the benefactors of the left.
*Another person demonized for all his supposed influence on the right, but most conservatives would say, "Who?" when his name was mentioned.
I'm a long-standing WWII freak, but geez guys, how much Nazi wonder weapons does NOVA need?
So, David Montgomery Plantagenet Schicklgruber Koch, RIP.
Narr
Left Pole: brilliant!
The Koch's have largely been failures politically. To wit, they are: pro-choice on abortion, pro same sex message, pro legalization of drugs, pro immigration, against tariffs and for "free" trade, against military spending, against the Iraq war and our interventions abroad, against the Patriot Act and NSA surveillance....
The Republican Party that they've spent millions supporting is and has been against almost all of that.
"Right-wing libertarian movement." As opposed to those popular "left-wing libertarian moments." Got to get the scary labels in there.
Wilbur: How are Trump's immigration policies anti-free trade or anti-government shrinking? I see the argument about Trump's trade policies, but immigration? Can someone explain that to me?
Because to those of a certain ideological bent, real free trade dictates free movement of labor as well as free movement of goods.
A consistent position, if not a sane one.
Why do libertarians (or liberals as I prefer) always get branded as "right wing"
Is being for small and effective government a particularly right wing value?
RIP and thanks for all your support of Reason and other liberal causes.
John Henry
"The Kochs are evil,if for nothing else, all those PBS shows their foundation sponsors."
We might add hospitals to Carol's reminder on PBS.
Why do libertarians (or liberals as I prefer) always get branded as "right wing".
Yes. They are mostly liberal on social issues (I think Ron Paul was pro-life); and largely conservative on economic. So why does that place them on the right? But to the left if you're not on the left they you're on the right. It's either one or the other.
Just call them libertarian. There's no need to place them on the ideological spectrum.
Harvard's Steven Pinker talks about the Left Pole.
Interesting idea. Here's a version where the poles almost meet.
From Wikipedia:
Koch Industries, Inc. /koʊk/ is an American multinational corporation based in Wichita, Kansas. Its subsidiaries are involved in the manufacturing, refining, and distribution of petroleum, chemicals, energy, fiber, intermediates and polymers, minerals, fertilizers, pulp and paper, chemical technology equipment, ranching, finance, commodities trading, and investing. Koch owns Invista, Georgia-Pacific, Molex, Flint Hills Resources, Koch Pipeline, Koch Fertilizer, Koch Minerals, Matador Cattle Company, and Guardian Industries. The firm employs 120,000 people in 60 countries, with about half of its business in the United States.[1][4] The company is the largest landowner in the Athabasca oil sands.
All of those are very capital intensive industries. Other than ranching, most of the labor will be skilled and a lot of it highly skilled. I wonder how significant wages are as a part of their total revenue stream and profitability.
In other words, if wages for unskilled/semi-skilled workers could be depressed 10-15% I don't think it would make a lot of difference to Koch Industries' profitability. Ditto if they were increased by 10-15%.
I think they do much better from improved economic activity than from labor rates.
John Henry
At the left pole, every point of view that is not left is, by definition, right or alt-right or right-wing extremist. There is no tolerance for people of nuanced viewpoints or those willing to participation in discussions of particular issues. If you are not at the left pole, you are a heretic and must be scorned
Good illustration, and it helps explain why so many folks on this blog are so quick to label others as a "lefty". They have themselves firmly planted at the "right pole" and thus anyone who isn't in their camp must be a "lefty".
Which is mostly harmless name-calling - 'cept that a lot of the same people are also calling out to (literally) hang the lefties from the public gallows. Then what was just ignorant name-calling becomes more of a death-threat.
Leslie Graves, 10:51:
Interesting. Thanks for that.
Mark, 11:04, re $100 million:
"That's all?? What with all the hype we've been subjected to about these guys -- like they're Richard Mellon Scaife* or something -- you'd have thought they spent $20 trillion."
I seem to recall the Koch brothers' ranking as the 57th biggest political donors in the country not so long ago.
But the left hated their guts, and lately a faction of the right does too, so we heard a lot about them, and all the wonderful things we could have, or the terrible things we wouldn't have, if it weren't for the Koch brothers and their money. Personally I think money is overrated as a force in politics - necessary but not sufficient - and if y'all think I'm wrong, ask President Jeb Bush.
"Harvard's Steven Pinker talks about the Left Pole. The comparison is to the North Pole. If you are at the North Pole, everywhere else is, by definition, south of you.
"At the left pole, every point of view that is not left is, by definition, right or alt-right or right-wing extremist. There is no tolerance for people of nuanced viewpoints or those willing to participation in discussions of particular issues. If you are not at the left pole, you are a heretic and must be scorned."
This works the other way around, too. (Thus, all the lunatic cries of the Democrats being "lefties" and "commies.")
“All of those are very capital intensive industries. Other than ranching, most of the labor will be skilled and a lot of it highly skilled. I wonder how significant wages are as a part of their total revenue stream and profitability.”
Know a leftist who went to work for them a bit ago, right out of grad school. Paid top dollar. Funny thing was that the thing that most impressed them was how high the business ethics were for their company. The three younger Koch boys all got engineering graduate degrees from MIT (oldest went to Harvard). And it apparently shows in the way that their companies are run. Sounds very much like Hewlett-Packard, before the founders were pushed out.
'cept that a lot of the same people are also calling out to (literally) hang the lefties from the public gallows.
As opposed to the assassination fantasies about Bush and Trump on the left.
Thus, all the lunatic cries of the Democrats being "lefties" and "commies.")
Says Cook firmly planted at the left pole.
As opposed to the assassination fantasies about Bush and Trump on the left.
Says Micheal K firmly planted at the right pole.
Those of us who live at neither the right pole nor the left pole would say you kooks are all cut from the same cloth.
I remember that when Walker began running for President, he indicated that he would get tough on immigration issues.
Then he suddenly backed off.
I noticed that, too. Immigration was going to be a big issue and the Kochs pulled the plug on Walker,. I liked him a lot at the time, too.
"far right wing" means--- not radical leftist and therefore must be smeared.
Those of us who live at neither the right pole nor the left pole would say you kooks are all cut from the same cloth.
Says the voice from the left poll. Where James Hodgkinson is a patriot and Bush needed to be assassinated.
Wow! rcocean sure seems nice.
Right wing libertarian? Uh... 😐
Where James Hodgkinson is a patriot and Bush needed to be assassinated
I never said anything of the sorts.
Are you just another asshole who gets off on lying about others or do you honestly think I have expressed such opinions? If it's the latter, then please provide a link to where you have think I said those things...'cause it appears that you are confused about what I actually said and I would like to clear it up.
"A total joke in real Republican circles."
You can't make this stuff up.
I hereby order Althouse to make something like this up.
Are you just another asshole who gets off on lying about others or do you honestly think I have expressed such opinions? If it's the latter, then please provide a link to where you have think I said those things.
Just to oblige.
As opposed to the assassination fantasies about Bush and Trump on the left.
Says Micheal K firmly planted at the right pole.
Those of us who live at neither the right pole nor the left pole would say you kooks are all cut from the same cloth.
You're welcome, Chuck, Inga, Ritmo, etc.
"Where James Hodgkinson is a patriot and Bush needed to be assassinated."
IIRC, re Bush, a popular opinion in those circles at the time.
Come for the host of goobers all strenuously pretending that the GOP's Daddy Warbucks wasn't REEEEALLY right wing at ALL, they were libertarian to the core, man ... stay for the scrumpdillyicious bliss of a kleptocrat herd culled, be it ever so gently.
One down, too many to go.
There are two, and only two, political positions: right-wing (sometimes called fasciscm or Hitlerism) and left-wing (sometimes called socialism or communism).
Now play nice.
The "kooks" re Bush were, again IIRC, in San Francisco anyway, solid citizens and remarkably wealthy people. I cross both (or all) political worlds, observe and do not comment, as I have done for nearly four decades here.
I am by circumstance unplaceable. On the "left", really the fashionable haute-bourgeoisie, I am a foreigner, a Euro, professional and well off, one of them. On the right I am both white and a conservative, a sympathiser though not a member. I have been (unwilling, mostly) a spy in everyone's ranks.
One thereby gets to observe all sides expressing their id.
I remember when being a libertarian was the in-thing to be here in these threads. Everyone and their brother claimed they were libertarians. What happened?
"There are two, and only two, political positions: right-wing (sometimes called fasciscm or Hitlerism) and left-wing (sometimes called socialism or communism)."
When in a state of conflict, this is entirely true. This is not sarcasm.
Conflict eliminates the middle.
Just to oblige.
Then please do so. Show me where you beleive I made ay comments about James Hodgkinson being a patriot and/or that Bush needed to be assassinated. 'cause I don't hold those opinions at all.
Sad part is that I don't think you think you are lying...you really-truly do beleive that I feel as such, don't ya? 'cause anyone who isn't living at the Right Pole alongside you is a lefty and in your world all lefties hold the same exact same opinions, don't they?
*rolls eyes*
You're a clown. And not even a funny one.
On the matter of eliminating the middle, one sees it right here in spades.
The Kochs were, in the context of the last fifty years of US politics, center-right and entirely mainstream Republican. They were reviled by the Democrats because they were important funders of their entirely conventional Republican opponents.
The poison of propaganda remains long after short-term goals are addressed, minds are permanently twisted, unless one makes a conscious effort to maintain perspective. What you are in now is no longer a state of normal politics, but of open social conflict, the result of, partly, decades of propaganda, and the negative reaction to propaganda.
"transform a fringe movement into a formidable political force aimed at moving America to the far right"
I call BS. The Kochs didn't create the Tea Party, and the Tea party failed in any case. Free trade and pretty open immigration were, until recently, bipartisan, middle-of-the-road positions that didn't need much Koch prodding. Undermining the criminal justice system: also bipartisan, though there Koch dollars may have helped. Drug legalization: no Koch help needed, it's a prog cause. SSM: Tony did it, not the Kochs.
Their main successes were on issues where they agreed with progs. Nearly everything else failed--deregulation, smaller government. Sure, we got somewhat lower taxes, but only because no one cares about lower spending or debt anymore.
The Koch’s are open borders Globalists. When they started funding CATO and FEE those think tanks started churning out open borders crap as 90% of their output. The Koch brothers and Soros have that in common. I don’t think they had the evil intentions of Soros but they damn sure knew that open borders ends by relegating the masses to peasantry again. Citizenship is a type of property, like living in a huge gated community HOA. Illegal immigration devalues the property of citizenship. So does uncontrolled mass immigration. The Koch brothers know this but don’t care.
I remember when any Koch brother was mentioned here in an unflattering light, there were a bevy of so called libertarians who sprang to their defense. What happened? Odd how that has changed. Why?
Because Libertarianism is now unfashionable. There are a lot of former libertarians.
Part of this is because the progressive polarization of US politics.
There are several studies on polarization, I suggest a bit of research.
The roots of this were well described decades ago. There have been many prophets.
Their main successes were on issues where they agreed with progs. Nearly everything else failed
Those on the right now consider Scott Walker's reign in Wisconsin to be a failure?
Wow - attitudes sure have changed in the past few years.
When in a state of conflict, this is entirely true. This is not sarcasm. Conflict eliminates the middle.
Politics is and always has been conflict. The word you're looking for is war.
To make a short story of it, the "left", or rather the dominant parts of the haute-bourgeoisie, in order to satisfy their ids, win elections and capture the Federal Government for their benefit, have been playing several styles of increasingly dirty pool for over fifty years.
When a game becomes too dirty, the game changes to conform to the state of the rules, or lack of rules. Both sides resort to loaded gloves. The Marquess of Queensbury retires to his estates.
"Politics is and always has been conflict. The word you're looking for is war."
Perhaps. A cold war so far.
Politics was played for relatively small stakes then, but not now.
Consider it a continuum.
"Those on the right now consider Scott Walker's reign in Wisconsin to be a failure?"
If you listen to and read the right, you will get the impression that Scott Walkers successes are seen as rather trivial in the larger context. There was much sturm und drang at the time, over objectively minor things.
A cold war so far.
A "cold war" with millions in collateral damage. But the structures are intact.
If you listen to and read the right
That's exactly why I visit this blog. As one of the top conservative blogs in America the comment section is filled to the brim with the thoughts & opinions of the average right-winger.
My impression is that most of those folks on this blog LOVED Scott Walker and consider him to be a hero for the massive overhauls he accomplished here in Wisconsin. You view it otherwise and think his supporters were just making a lotta noise over a lotta nothing?
he chose poorly allying with pierre Omidyar, the Iranian catspaw, which has steered the standard into a ditch, as for walker, his was a mild course correction, evers is driving into the iceberg, the banking scion jane mayer did do a hit, and yet is still well regarded, like with Cavanaugh last fall,
“Because Libertarianism is now unfashionable. There are a lot of former libertarians.”
Indeed, I noticed.
“Part of this is because the progressive polarization of US politics.”
Blame it all on progressives, how insightful.
for some that I know, his failure to defend his own employees against the wave of lawfare, that Chisholm carried out, probably rankled,
“Part of this is because the progressive polarization of US politics.”
Progressive liberalism or monotonic divergence... from the center.
only two, political positions: right-wing (sometimes called fasciscm or Hitlerism) and left-wing (sometimes called socialism or communism).
So, the left-wing is the right-wing is the left-wing, and everyone not into central/single/monolithic/monochromatic solutions, Pro-Choice selective and opportunistic "ethics", political congruence ("=") or selective exclusion, anti-nativism, diversity or color judgment including racism, environmentalism, redistributive change, selective-child or wicked solution, is in the center.
Show me where you beleive I made ay comments about James Hodgkinson being a patriot and/or that Bush needed to be assassinated
The left has quietly suppressed anything known about Bernie Bro Hodgkinson. No information on his correspondence with Senator Durbin. It is as if he had never existed and never tried to assassinate the Republican Congressional leadership.
You don't have to comment,. No Democrat does so. Just as no Democrat will condemn your attack squad of Antifa.
As for Bush, your opinions are obvious.
I consider myself to be a libertarian/Republican. Those make up a large segment of Trump supporters. We were also Tea Party supporters and the Obama IRS went after the leaders so as to accomplish what China wants to do to the Hong Kong demonstrators.
We don't care about gays and gay marriage, although the gay marriage thing was purposely pushed to alienate the religious.
There is a very interesting Michael Barone essay on China worth reading.
This is what Trump is about. And Boris, by the way.
and it helps explain why so many folks on this blog are so quick to label others as a "lefty". - PP
Since you continue to insist you're not a leftist, why don't you list some conservative positions you hold?
although the gay marriage thing was purposely pushed to alienate the religious
Case in point: Separation of Church and State.
Also, targeting the LDS in retribution for the votes cast by black and Hispanic Protestants and Catholics in California, where democracy and equality died with the decree of transgender judge. Then there is medical corruption, indoctrination, and human sacrificial rites for social progress,
https://www.theindychannel.com/news/national/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-underwent-treatment-for-pancreatic-cancer
You don't have to comment,. No Democrat does so. Just as no Democrat will condemn your attack squad of Antifa.
As for Bush, your opinions are obvious.
In other words, it is your own personal bigotry that makes you state I beleive that I am a Democrat and I beleive James Hodgkinson is a patriot & that Bush needed to be assassinated rather than anything I've actually said/done.
Thanks for setting the record straight - gotta give you credit for flat-out admitting you're just pulling it out of your ass. That's more than a lotta folks will do, which makes you a tad better than some of the other kooks who make similar claims about me.
Not much better, but definitely a "tad".
gotta give you credit for flat-out admitting you're just pulling it out of your ass. <
It's amusing how you lefties turn to personal insults and obscenity so quickly when you are losing arguments.
Between the NY Times and The New Yorker (noted in a later post) there is nowhere to go. Everything is far right. These publications cannot even give direction without using the word far, next to the word right. "How do I get to Times Square?" "Go far right at 47th".
It's gotten so bad, you really cannot go to these rags for information any longer unless you are OK with propaganda. Just this past week they had a Senior editor outed as a racist and anti-semite (though he happily calls the rest of us not living in NYC, racist white supremacists), and their Executive Editor caught in a 'closed' meeting relaying how they pushed the Russia narrative and now have to pivot to race. Race. Race.
It is a very serious thing that our papers of record (WaPo and NYT) are so far afield from the mainstream of America and...reality in many cases. They are activists, working for a cause, posing as the paper of record. These are NOT journalists.
Ann- how can you continue to go to these pubs as your main source of news? Other than to troll the rest of us?
why don't you list some conservative positions you hold?
I'm a strong defender of the Second Amendment. (Folks who used to read the now-defunct Isthmus forums are most likely laughing when someone here calls me a lefty-left-leftard) I look forward to discussing that issue if our hostess decides to make a post about it.
I've been arrested while defending Free Speech issues. (Do folks camped out at the Right Pole still generally support the First Amendment or is that on a case-by-case basis?)
The War on Drugs is a big gov't/socialist program which I have actively opposed.
I am against the current income tax system, and wish to see it replaced with the Fair Tax.
I support a strong military for home defense (enlisted in two different branches of the military) but beleive we shouldn't engage in overseas conquests and/or nation-building.
The most active I was in working on an election campaign was for a a DA on the Libertarian Ticket. (Tho, as noted elsewhere, many "conservatives" now view libertarians as lefty-leftards, so maybe that isn't a good example).
There are other issues as well, but to a lotta folks on this blog (or a couple folks with a lotta different logins?) none of that matters. In their eyes, anyone who isn't firmly planted at the Right Pole is a lefty, and nothing you can tell 'em will make 'em think otherwise.
As noted before, it is mostly just harmless name-calling...'cept for the fact that many different folks (or a couple folks with many different logins) are constantly saying Hang the left and such. Which makes the "lefty" smear more like a death-threat than childish attempts at bullying.
"As one of the top conservative blogs in America "
It isn't. This is a unique place, and not highly ranked in Alexa, etc. The top conservative sites are
"My impression is that most of those folks on this blog LOVED Scott Walker and consider him to be a hero for the massive overhauls he accomplished here in Wisconsin. You view it otherwise and think his supporters were just making a lotta noise over a lotta nothing?"
It wasn't the right making noise about Walker, it was the left. There were no masses of right-wingers demonstrating in Madison for weeks. Most of the right-wing noise (such as it was), was a reaction to the left. That's usually the case. Conservatives are conservative in more things than politics.
Walker was a very normal Republican governor. There was no baby-eating human sacrifice going on. It was the reaction to him that was abnormal.
Top sites - try these for a selection of attitudes and people. The opinions are far more disparate than the top liberal sites. Althouse does not figure in this.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/top-conservative-websites-for-2018/
BTW- Libertarianism is anything but far right. The Libertarian cause is the individual. Individual rights, liberty. That is closer to the foundations of our own country than anything posed by the NY Times.
it is mostly just harmless name-calling...'cept for the fact that many different folks (or a couple folks with many different logins) are constantly saying Hang the left and such.
I guess I missed those comments. Pardon me if I don't believe you.
It wasn't the right making noise about Walker, it was the left.
The projection by the left is amazing. I grew up in Chicago so have no doubts about Democrats.
I have less trust of Republicans the past couple of decades. I was ready to vote for Perot until he went nutsy.
Now, I see Trump, and to some degree Boris Johnson, as rare individuals willing to take on the Blob that is the self dealing bureaucracy and its creatures, like Ryan and May.
It isn't
For quite a while, it was sold to advertisers as exactly that. ("One of America's top conservative blogs") Is it your opinion they were misled by that statement?
It wasn't the right making noise about Walker, it was the left
There was massive cheering and support for Walker - both in our state and on this blog.
There was massive cheering and support for Walker - both in our state and on this blog.
Yes and all those buses bringing in right wing supporters of Walker.
Oh, wait...
Paul Ryan is probably nearly as broke up about this as Justin Trudeau was when his papa Castro died.
"For quite a while, it was sold to advertisers as exactly that. ("One of America's top conservative blogs") Is it your opinion they were misled by that statement?"
Define "top". Top 1000? Top 500? Maybe.
I don't see where Althouse claimed some particular standing in those ranks.
Also define misleading.
Peculiarly interesting, unique even, yes. But not as a specifically political blog.
Althouse is her own category, in my opinion.
"There was massive cheering and support for Walker - both in our state and on this blog. "
Define massive. There was no particular physical effort put into supporting Walker. No torchlight processions into Madison. The right can do a March for Life by hundreds of thousands (always ignored by the press) or some Rolling Thunder manifestation of motorcycle enthusiasts, for some motivating purpose. But there was none of that for Walker. Just a lot of internet chatter, that probably would have been far less than if the left had behaved itself in Madison.
"There was massive cheering and support for Walker."
Walker's accomplishments remain popular here in Wisconsin, I think: lower taxes, lower UW tuition, lower cost of government, right-to-work -- what's not to like? But Walker as a politician lost his in-state support by running for President, and lost his nationwide celebrity as a moderate to the same Trump torching as the other Republican primary candidates.
His association with the liberty- and philanthropy-minded Kochs only reflected to his credit among non-rabid, (read, non-Madison) in-state observers.
@PP
So, a Neal Boortz-type Libertarian. Fair enough.
That's exactly why I visit this blog. As one of the top conservative blogs in America the comment section is filled to the brim with the thoughts & opinions of the average right-winger.
I don’t know that there are very many “right wingers” on this blog commenting. I think that it’s pretty much a right of center blog, with the possible exception of buwaya who wants to bring back royalty. That seems kind of out there on some wing anyway.
The Koch bros give a pile of money to.... science.
leftwing headz go bang.
Charles denounced Mr. Trump’s restrictive trade and immigration policies as divisive ...
And so they are. Trump’s policies divide people who want unrestricted immigration — chiefly the already very rich who want only to get richer — from the people who pay for unrestricted immigration, chiefly the middle class and working poor. The former pay higher taxes that they cannot absorb as easily as people as wealthy as the Koch brothers, and the latter pay taxes and yet suffer from depressed wages besides.
How did the Koch brothers reconcile their stated desire for smaller government with the need for additional government workers to process incoming immigrants with very limited job skills, many illiterate in their native language, much less English? Not to mention the increased work load on social services?
"with the possible exception of buwaya who wants to bring back royalty. "
Well, more specifically I want to restore the Spanish Empire as a Catholic power under the House of Bourbon.
And, as a stretch goal, to restore what is currently the United States to its natural position as part of that Empire, as it would have been were it not for some ill fortune along the way.
There is always a second chance.
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
¡Viva España!
and, of course,
¡Viva el Rey!
As a unifying Imperial motto, there is no better, none more universal, than that of Carlos I/Charles V, on the coat of arms, embracing the Pillars of Hercules -
"Plus Ultra" - Go Beyond, out into the infinite reaches of creation.
Define "top".
Top
Also define misleading.
Misleading
Define massive
Massive
And while I don't recall any actual torches being carried, there was a lot of support for Walker in our state and in this blog. Perhaps you weren't around at the time, but dig around the archives and you'll see a lot of folks (including our hostess & her husband) cheering him on.
you'll see a lot of folks (including our hostess & her husband) cheering him on.
But not those buses full of Chicago Republicans.
I remember Ann and Meade walking to the Capitol and being attacked by leftists. Is that what you mean ?
"The Koch’s are open borders Globalists. When they started funding CATO"
The Kochs owned CATO.
"And while I don't recall any actual torches being carried, there was a lot of support for Walker in our state and in this blog. “
Really? Torches?
"Perhaps you weren't around at the time, but dig around the archives and you'll see a lot of folks (including our hostess & her husband) cheering him on.”
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
Just to be clear - the now-defunct Conservative Blog Advertising Network was a service that sold advertising to businesses that wished to appear on various different conservative blogs. At the time, Althouse was being advertised by them as "One of the Top Conservative Blogs in America"
If ya'll are saying there is nothing at all "conservative" about this blog, then doesn't it stand to reason that the CBAN was being untruthful with their sales pitch?
"Top" is relative, in context. "One of the top" can mean a lot of things. 1 of three, one of ten, one of a thousand? The definition and concept are usefully fuzzy.
Metrics are called for here. Alexa ranks are in order of popularity
Althouse 90-day ranks #107,141 in Alexa
Ace of Spades HQ is #33,839
Freerepublic is #19,890
Hotair is #14,276
Instapundit is #9,504
National Review is #8,591
etc.
"Misleading" is also a fuzzy concept, unless there is something someone is specifically misled about. Such as how one defines "Top".
That’s a good point that the main beneficiaries of immigration are the wealthy and the powerful. Just like the main beneficiaries of “net neutrality” were Silicon Valley billionaires. It’s almost like these “causes” that the left goes crazy on from time to time are planted by people who don’t have the rank and file left’s best interests at heart....
"If ya'll are saying there is nothing at all "conservative" about this blog, then doesn't it stand to reason that the CBAN was being untruthful with their sales pitch?"
I don't know if all others are saying this, but IMHO those people were stretching the truth a fair bit. You can of course check for yourself - see Alexa ranks.
Really? Torches?
Yup. Buwaya brought up the fact that there were no "torchlight processions" for Walker as proof he wasn't widely supported in our state. While I remember a couple pro-Walker rallies, I don't think there were any torches involved.
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
Nope - just saying it did happen, while Buwaya insists it didn't.
Perhaps you are ignoring her comments, but my responses will make more sense if you read what I am responding to.
I don’t even think this is a conservative blog. She just doesn’t automatically ban conservatives after the first comment that reveals the commenter’s sympathies like so many others. It’s definitely a conservative comment section though.
I guess I can’t care about an argument as to whether this blog was sympathetic to Scott Walker. It certainly was. It’s not even worth arguing about. So I guess I will drop out now.
Beg your pardon buwaya - I thought you were contesting the term "conservative" rather than "top". My bad for the assumption, and thank you for clearing it up.
I agree that the current rankings for Althouse seems to show that it has slipped considerably. Perhaps used to be one of the top conservative blogs is a better way to reflect today's reality.
I believe the left/the Democratic Powers that Be did Scott Walker an enormous favor by its extreme reaction.
This more than anything generated an opposite, though far less demonstrative reaction, in support of a man who was not at all an extremist, nor particularly charismatic. Walkers largest political asset was his enemies.
Has there ever been a page of comments for this blog that better demonstrates how alienated Althouse’s readership is from the Republican Party?
" how alienated Althouse’s readership is from the Republican Party?"
I believe that this simply reflects how Republican voters in general are alienated from the Republican party. This is shown in numerous polls, for what they are worth. Not exactly a new observation either. The phenomenon goes back to at least 2009. The Tea Party was in large part a reaction to the then-Republican party too. There certainly were a lot of Republicans and their pundits complaining about it at the time.
The world has been threatening to turn upside down for a decade or more.
the Left will always hate you
per @AP4Liberty
The passing of David Koch is a good reminder that @KurtSchlichter is right. No matter how much philanthropy you do, or how much you buck the party system, and even service many liberal causes, if you don't fully buy into their program, the left hates you and wants you to die.
"Has there ever been a page of comments for this blog that better demonstrates how alienated Althouse’s readership is from the Republican Party?”
You mean the readership of the Democrat funded Bulwark? That “Republican Party?"
“The passing of David Koch is a good reminder that @KurtSchlichter is right. No matter how much philanthropy you do, or how much you buck the party system, and even service many liberal causes, if you don't fully buy into their program, the left hates you and wants you to die.”
Funny, I’m not reading any lefty hate directed at the Koch Bros. on this thread, but there are many righty hate comments. Explain that.
The key to understanding the Koch brothers is when Trump started trying to restrict illegal Immigration (aka cheap labor) and stand up America in trade, the Cock brothers starting funding Democrats.
Yeah, you know the Democrats, those liberty loving, 2nd amendment supporting, freedom loving, fiscally responsible, DEM-O-CRATS. Like Bernie Sanders and Obama.
Unless you're a moron, that shows what the Cock Brothers were all about. They didn't give a damn about the USA or the people who live here. Their only love was $$$ - and illegal immigration and globalism put $$$ in their pocket. In a decent society, they'd be regarded as greedy scum. But all they had to do was shower the Bulwark boys or creeps like Kevin Williamson with some $$ - and suddenly they become "Republican stalwarts" - "Freedom loving libertarians". But almost no one buys that shit anymore.
BUT you STILL have some gullible morons on the Right, who literally have to be PUNCHED IN FACE before they understand that just because someone says they are on "our side" doesn't mean they are REALLY on "our side".
there were rallies in support of prosser's election, that the huntress participated it, along with the late Andrew breitbart, who held off the lawfare by Chisholm, whose raids were upheld by the 7th circuit,
Funny, I’m not reading any lefty hate directed at the Koch Bros. on this thread, but there are many righty hate comments. Explain that. StupiduR
There are countless posts on other sites detailing the outpouring of leftist hate regarding the death of Mr. Koch. Vile shit that would curl a normal person's toes.
What I've read here is nothing in comparison to what you and your ilk are saying publicly.
LLR Chuck: "Has there ever been a page of comments for this blog that better demonstrates how alienated Althouse’s readership is from the Republican Party?"
90%+ of republicans support Trump.
LLR Chuck thinks Bill "FusionGPS/OmidyarsLeftyBillions" Kristol represents the republican party.
I think we know who is correct here.....
BTW Chuck, did you hear? Your boy Biden fell on his face again after they let him out of nursing home for awhile.
Tough break and its not going to get easier for you once you read the old Joe Walsh tweets about Bill Kristol!!
Hang in there tough guy! Give our best to your wife, Morgan Fairchild.
his blitzkrieg was of a par with the Ronnie earles and Andrew Weissmans, of the world, just another illustration that they see politics as war by other means,
Inga: "Funny, I’m not reading any lefty hate directed at the Koch Bros. on this thread, but there are many righty hate comments. Explain that."
LOL
Althouse thread is now representative of lefty thought everywhere!!!
New days bring new miracles...
Please note, the ONLY reason the Left dislikes the Koch Brothers is because they gave $$$ to the Republicans. That's it. They would've loved the Koch Brothers if they'd given more $$$ to the Left. Just like they love ALL Billionaires who give the D's money. The Left has no principle except one - JUST WIN BABY.
Most Billionaires in the USA support the D's. that's why when any liberal/Lefty starts talking about "class warfare" it sounds hollow and fake. They always look uncomfortable, and before you know it they're talking about "open Borders" and "racism" and "immigrants". That's because its all about power.
meanwhile Andrew McCabe, officially joins cnn, he was the source of many of their stories, through middle men, like peter strzok,
as well as to the Washington post's devlin barrett, who you can sell him on mostly anything,
@Jim at said...
There are countless posts on other sites detailing the outpouring of leftist hate regarding the death of Mr. Koch. Vile shit that would curl a normal person's toes.
What I've read here is nothing in comparison to what you and your ilk are saying publicly.
This.
our post wasnt in praise of the Koch bros
The key to understanding the Koch brothers is when Trump started trying to restrict illegal Immigration (aka cheap labor) and stand up America in trade, the Cock brothers starting funding Democrats.
Yes. That was the moment. The Chinese and the drug cartels own the Democrat party. Libertarians care only about open borders and drug legalization. Milton Friedman explained that open borders and a welfare state cannot coexist. The Libertarians are fine with that but know, and don't care, that there is no chance of reducing the welfare state. The tech billionaires support Democrats because of H1B visas that cut their costs. Then fact that H1B visa holders wrote the code for the 737 Max MCAS system is not a concern.
"If ya'll are saying there is nothing at all "conservative" about this blog,
I have always thought of this blog as libertarian. I've been reading here well before the Walker demonstrations. I left for a while when the election hysteria got so bad.
Koch played basketball at MIT, averaging 21 points per game at MIT over three years, a school record. He also held the single-game scoring record of 41 points from 1962 until 2009, when it was eclipsed by Jimmy Bartolotta
$100mil? chump change compared to Soros. If you list the things the Koch brothers have stood for and supported it doesn't sound "far right" at all. biased report (duh)
How did the Koch brothers reconcile their stated desire for smaller government with the need for additional government workers to process incoming immigrants with very limited job skills, many illiterate in their native language, much less English? Not to mention the increased work load on social services?
I sincerely doubt whether David Koch or his creepier older brother give a flying fuck whether immigrants are processed by government workers. I doubt whether the Koch brothers give a fuck whether the English language is slowly supplanted until poof, it's as dead as Latin. The Koch brothers mainly cared about getting richer at the expense of the poorest Americans. To put it another way, the Kochs would gladly enrich Chinese and Mexican peasants over what's left of the American middle class and poor and at the end of the day, they'd still call themselves humanitarians. Watch for these lies at his eulogy.
Obviously, none of you have ever been to a Koch plant, there are no unskilled jobs except a few sweeping the floors.
@MacMacConnell: That's like saying "obviously, none of you have ever met Nancy Pelosi" -- who probably never had an abortion or personally hired illegal aliens. It's the support that the person of influence shows that counts.
For that matter, I suspect that a fair amount of Althouse's readers -- mainly the ones who employ people -- are sympathetic to open borders, or anything that smacks of higher wages. Tucker Carlson touched on this a very long time ago.
Penguin keeps hoping his Isthmus commenting is legendary.
Blogger Temujin said...
BTW- Libertarianism is anything but far right. The Libertarian cause is the individual. Individual rights, liberty.
______________
I recall seeing how libertarian now buy into Rawls variety of utilitarian/collectivist.
Any thoughts?
FWIW, and in the spirit of statistical precision expected here, I would break down the active Althousers as--
35-45% strong conservative/pro-Trump
20-30% center-right
15-20 center-left
5-10 strong left
And whatever it takes to fill out the numbers with Libertarians, libertarians, librarians, and contrarians.
I know nothing and care little (what am I supposed to do about it?) sockpuppets and opposition provocateurs . . . seems like greatly overestimating the influence of the place.
Narr
WADR
Chilly willy does seem to think that.
chickelit
What makes you think I haven't met Nancy or the Kochs or toured a plant? Talk to anyone that works for the Kochs, blue or white collar, they'll tell you they are stand up guys.
I see where Justice Ginsberg was treated for cancer at Sloan Ketteringe in a 23 story building that Koch built. It's name after him.
For that matter, I suspect that a fair amount of Althouse's readers -- mainly the ones who employ people -- are sympathetic to open borders, or anything that smacks of higher wages.
@chicklit, first, I assume you meant lower wages, as in not pay workers enough for them to feed their families? The answer is negative, but if your competitor is paying people next to nothing they are going to underbid you. It’s not easy.
Show me where you beleive I made ay comments about James Hodgkinson being a patriot and/or that Bush needed to be assassinated.
It's an interesting double standard. I'm not sniping at you because I am astounded you can't see it.
I am expected to pro-actively disassociate myself from and denounce the David Dukes and Richard Spencers and Stormfront sites. If I fail to do that I am "enabling white supremacy" or whatever the bogeyman is that day.
But you, with your privilege, have to be proven guilty.
The burden is on the Right to prove they don't support x
The burden is also on the Right to prove the Left supports x
there are many righty hate comments. Explain that.
Okay, but you have to give me a lap dance first.
Judging by the comments on Instapundit, Koch pissed off both the Dumb Trumpkins and the Stupid Left. If you're making enemies among that many bozos, you must be doing something eight.
No mention of the cancer research they fund. Figures.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा