In His First Appearance On Meet The Press, Bernie Sanders Terrifies The Koch Brothers

[Cigar]

Sen. Sanders said, “Chuck, I think Citizens United will go down in history as one of the worst Supreme Court decisions ever. I think it is opening up the road to oligarchy in the United States of America, where the billionaires like the Koch brothers….left or right, but it’s mostly right let’s be clear.”

Sanders continued, “The Koch brothers are going to spend $400 million. Do you know what their agenda is? Do you know what they believe in? Let me tell you what they believe in. This is what they told us. They want to end Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. More tax breaks for the rich and large corporations. Nobody in America wants that except the billionaire class, and yet they are now able to put hundreds of billions of dollars into the political process. This is a real danger to American democracy.”

Sen. Sanders talked about the profound anger in the country among Democrats and Republicans, and the fact that the candidate who can talk about middle-class issues will do pretty well....

The Koch agenda getting called out on the most mainstream of corporate media institutions was a big deal. It was also a sign the Citizens United is becoming a bigger issue. Sen. Sanders and others on the left have been good at connecting the dots. If voters want to know why their members of Congress aren’t listening to them and doing things that they oppose, the answer is Citizens United.

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/09/14/appearance-meet-press-bernie-sanders-terrifies-koch-brothers.html


I love when this guys tells it like it is ... :grin:

http://aattp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/bernie.jpg

[hanger4]

But Sanders didn't tell it like it is. As per partiisanship he ignored Michael Bloomberg, George Soros and Tom Steyer to name a few. Not telling the whole story is lying by omission.

[nathanbforrest45]

Speaking of Bloomburg, he is spending millions in Uruguay to get laws passed to hinter the sale of tobacco products. I guess since he is a private citizen he can interfere in the politics of another country. Heaven forbid if the CIA tried the same thing.
http://www.tobaccoworld.org/bloomberg-backs-uruguay%E2%80%99s-anti-smoking-laws/

[momsapplepie]

sanders is another idiot that needs to retire.

[Bob]

http://www.kochfacts.com/kf/

Wednesday, August 27th, 2014
Notable Links Digest – August 27, 2014
Koch Brothers Take On Camo-Wearing Cops
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/27/koch-brothers-take-on-camo-wearing-cops.html
By TIM MAK
The Daily Beast
Groups on the left have been among the loudest voices condemning police actions in Ferguson, Missouri, after the fatal shooting of unarmed teenager Michael Brown this month. But the Koch brothers, boogeymen of national Democrats, have long funded libertarian groups that laid the intellectual groundwork for opposing police militarization, a phenomenon that now has been discussed and denounced much more widely.
The militarization of police in particular is an issue the Koch brothers view as necessary to tackle and which they have spent years fighting, a spokesman said.
“We need to address issues such as overcriminalization, excessive and disproportionate sentencing, inadequate indigent defense that is inconsistent with the Sixth Amendment, and the militarization of police,” Mark Holden, general counsel of Koch Industries Inc., told The Daily Beast. “We have deep respect for the moral dignity of each and every person and because of this, we’ve worked for decades to support those who defend the full range of individual rights.”
Why I stand with the Koch brothers
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/272792971.html
By FRITZ CORRIGAN
The Star Tribune
Every day, another media personality or politician criticizes Charles and David Koch. Even our two Minnesota senators — Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar — regularly attack these two brothers, as has their boss, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who called them “un-American.” The Kochs, who have created hundreds of thousands of jobs and donated hundreds of millions to charity, earned such scorn for promoting free-market policies.
I agree with the Kochs. … We share a common vision: a society where opportunity and innovation improve well-being for everyone. We want to protect the American dream for future generations.
We believe that everyone should be free to chart his or her own path to success. They should be free to start and grow a small business into an economic powerhouse. And they should be free to do all of this without politicians and bureaucrats blocking the path.


Thursday, July 10th, 2014

Responding to Attack Ads by Partisan Activist Group (http://www.kochfacts.com/kf/responding-to-attack-ads-by-partisan-activist-group/)
The League of Conservation Voters Victory Fund (LCV) is running a false and deceptive television advertisement entitled “Billionaires” in markets in or near the state of New Hampshire.
The LCV is a partisan activist group that does not disclose its donors. It is part of the Democracy Alliance, a group of billionaires and millionaires who support liberal causes and candidates but also doesn’t disclose its members.
The ad attacks Charles Koch and David Koch, and falsely maligns their companies’ business interests. Contrary to the ad’s assertions, Charles Koch and David Koch are opposed to government subsidies of any kind and have been outspoken and consistent in their opposition to subsidies and other instances of the government picking winners and losers.
The ad leads with a pejorative characterization of the Kochs as “out-of-state oil billionaires,” and claims that United States Senate candidate Scott Brown “voted to keep giving billions in special tax-payer funded subsidies to oil companies,” leaving a reasonable viewer with only one (inaccurate) conclusion: that Charles Koch and David Koch are in favor of such alleged taxpayer-funded subsidies. LCV Senior Vice President Daniel J. Weiss repeated this inaccurate and false claim in the press release accompanying the new ad, asserting that “…[t]hey know Scott Brown will continue where he left off by protecting oil industry profits at the expense of taxpayers and public health.”
As Charles Koch explained in an April 2014 Wall Street Journal opinion piece:
“…Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs—even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished.
Koch Industries was the only major producer in the ethanol industry to argue for the demise of the ethanol tax credit in 2011. That government handout (which cost taxpayers billions) needlessly drove up food and fuel prices as well as other costs for consumers—many of whom were poor or otherwise disadvantaged. Now the mandate needs to go, so that consumers and the marketplace are the ones who decide the future of ethanol.”
Citations: See Charles Koch, Op-Ed “I’m Fighting to Restore a Free Society,” The Wall Street Journal (Apr. 2, 2014), available athttp://online.wsj.com/news/articles/…0515021286 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303978304579475860515021286); see also Statement from Koch Industries Regarding Accusations of Lobbying for Surtax on Renewable Energy (May 1, 2014), available at:
- http://www.kochfacts.com/kf/statement-from-koch-industries-regarding-accusations-of-lobbying-for-surtax-on-renewable-energy/
- http://www.kochfacts.com/kf/consistentlyopposing/
- http://www.kochfacts.com/kf/whyspeakout/;http://www.kochfacts.com/kf/an-open-letter-to-congress-regarding-the-budget/
- http://www.kochfacts.com/kf/the-new-york-times-ignores-kochs-stated-position-on-proposed-carbon-tax-and-falsely-tries-to-drive-a-wedge-between-koch-and-other-energy-companies/
The LCV advertisement’s claim that Charles Koch and David Koch are in favor of receiving a subsidy at the expense of taxpayers is deceitful and completely false. We welcome an open and honest debate about the important issues facing the country. We are disappointed that the LCV has instead chosen to misrepresent the record and mislead the people of New Hampshire.
We ask the LCV to stop misrepresenting our positions and engage in a principled debate about the issues.

[Libhater]

sanders is another idiot that needs to retire.

Yes, another idiot for sure, but even more dangerous than his idiocy is his self avowed claim to be Congress's sole Socialist.

[Mister D]

But Sanders didn't tell it like it is. As per partiisanship he ignored Michael Bloomberg, George Soros and Tom Steyer to name a few. Not telling the whole story is lying by omission.

They're all Jews. Imagine that.

[nic34]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=m1pKpKYEICE

[Common Sense]

sanders is another idiot that needs to retire.

What did he say that was wrong?

[Common Sense]

They're all Jews. Imagine that.

So?

[Chris]

Why do so many hate liberty?

[Captain Obvious]

Why do so many hate liberty?

Because it applies mostly to the privileged.

Just like "freedom".

[hanger4]

What did he say that was wrong?
It's what he didn't say as I pointed out in the first post.

[Mister D]

So?

So is it partisanship or ethnic loyalty?

[Common Sense]

So is it partisanship or ethnic loyalty?

I don't know. What do you think?

[Mister D]

I don't know. What do you think?

Not sure. It sure is some coincidence though. oi vey

[Common Sense]

Not sure. It sure is some coincidence though. oi vey

Hmmm.....

[Mister D]

Hmmm.....

Yes, indeed. :wink:

[Mac-7]

Because it applies mostly to the privileged.

Just like "freedom".

The alternative to liberty is tyranny.

If libs want a dictatorship of lefty do-gooders they are in for a big disappointment..

[Common Sense]

Yes, indeed. :wink:

Your collective posts paint a predictable picture. Maybe I was right after all.

[Common Sense]

The alternative to liberty is tyranny.

If libs want a dictatorship of lefty do-gooders they are in for a big disappointment..

Maybe they just don't want industry writing laws that only help industry at the cost of the citizenry?

[Mister D]

Your collective posts paint a predictable picture. Maybe I was right after all.

My collective posts about what, Common? Secondly, I thought it was just a "metaphor"? :laugh: I mean that's what the mods say.

[PolWatch]

all partisans are now in a quandary: Koch brothers are speaking out against the militarization of the police! Leftists don't like the Koch brothers, rightists deny the police militarization! should be fun to watch this unfold! (will someone pass the popcorn please?)

[Chris]

Because it applies mostly to the privileged.

Just like "freedom".


It applies to all, what rule of law is all about, not the special privileged few.

[Chris]

The alternative to liberty is tyranny.

If libs want a dictatorship of lefty do-gooders they are in for a big disappointment..


Right, but it also applies to righty do-gooders.

[Mac-7]

Maybe they just don't want industry writing laws that only help industry at the cost of the citizenry?

You mean allowing industry to exist and pollute the citizens pristine environment?

in any case you are really complaining about government that harms both citizens and industry through unnecessary regulation.

[Chris]

all partisans are now in a quandary: Koch brothers are speaking out against the militarization of the police! Leftists don't like the Koch brothers, rightists deny the police militarization! should be fun to watch this unfold! (will someone pass the popcorn please?)

http://i.snag.gy/4PdXR.jpg

Hope it's a good show!

[Common Sense]

You mean allowing industry to exist and pollute the citizens pristine environment?

in any case you are really complaining about government that harms both citizens and industry through unnecessary regulation.

Not at all. I don't think you understand what I'm talking about.

[Mac-7]

Right, but it also applies to righty do-gooders.

I don't know any righty do-gooders.

Conservatives want less government and more personal responsibility for individuals.

[Mac-7]

Not at all. I don't think you understand what I'm talking about.

Maybe I don't.

why don't you explain?

[Chris]

I don't know any righty do-gooders.

Conservatives want less government and more personal responsibility for individuals.

Some do, some are do gooders, like social cons. And then there's the neocons.

[Common Sense]

Maybe I don't.

why don't you explain?

There's no point.

[Mac-7]

There's no point.

Ok

[Mac-7]

Some do, some are do gooders, like social cons. And then there's the neocons.

There's that word again.

can you name one person who you consider a neocon?

[Captain Obvious]

There's that word again.

can you name one person who you consider a neocon?

Dick Cheney

[Mac-7]

Dick Cheney

You mean cheney used to be a lib?

i think you don't know the meaning of the words you use.

[Captain Obvious]

You mean cheney used to be a lib?

You're words, not mine.

[Mac-7]

You're words, not mine.

Cheney is not a neocon.

[Common Sense]

Cheney is not a neocon.

He actually is. I understand that the origins of the term neocon comes from people on the left moving towards conservatism and how you seem to think for someone to be labeled a neocon they must start from the left and move right. But the reality is neoconservatism is a political movement and indeed Cheney and his crew are indeed neocons.

[Mac-7]

He actually is. I understand that the origins of the term neocon comes from people on the left moving towards conservatism and how you seem to think for someone to be labeled a neocon they must start from the left and move right. But the reality is neoconservatism is a political movement and indeed Cheney and his crew are indeed neocons.


"Neocon" has a particular meaning and you can't just redefine it at will.

[Common Sense]

"Neocon" has a particular meaning and you can't just redefine it at will.

"neoconservatism, variant of the political ideology (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/281943/ideology) of conservatism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/133435/conservatism) that combines features of traditional conservatism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/133435/conservatism) with political individualism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/286303/individualism) and a qualified endorsement of free markets (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/365647/market). Neoconservatism arose in the United States (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/616563/United-States) in the 1970s among intellectuals who shared a dislike of communism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/129104/communism) and a disdain for the counterculture of the 1960s, especially its political radicalism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/488762/radicalism) and its animus against authority, custom, and tradition."

'Neoconservatives have been especially influential in the formulation of foreign and military policy, particularly in the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/492882/Ronald-Reagan), George H.W. Bush (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/86083/George-HW-Bush), and George W. Bush (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/86112/George-W-Bush). They contend that power—military, economic, or political—that is unused is for all practical purposes wasted..."

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1075556/neoconservatism/279451/Economic-and-social-policy

[Mac-7]

"neoconservatism, variant of the political ideology (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/281943/ideology) of conservatism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/133435/conservatism) that combines features of traditional conservatism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/133435/conservatism) with political individualism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/286303/individualism) and a qualified endorsement of free markets (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/365647/market). Neoconservatism arose in the United States (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/616563/United-States) in the 1970s among intellectuals who shared a dislike of communism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/129104/communism) and a disdain for the counterculture of the 1960s, especially its political radicalism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/488762/radicalism) and its animus against authority, custom, and tradition."

'Neoconservatives have been especially influential in the formulation of foreign and military policy, particularly in the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/492882/Ronald-Reagan), George H.W. Bush (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/86083/George-HW-Bush), and George W. Bush (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/86112/George-W-Bush). They contend that power—military, economic, or political—that is unused is for all practical purposes wasted..."

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1075556/neoconservatism/279451/Economic-and-social-policy

The problem with your use of the term is in the "neo" in neocon.

Neo means new.

As in the are now a conservative but used to be something else.

And the something else is a liberal.

Cheney has always been a conservative and is not a new conservative in any way shape or form.

you people are misusing the term.

[Common Sense]

The problem with your use of the term is in the "neo" in neocon.

Neo means new.

As in the are now a conservative but used to be something else.

And the something else is a liberal.

Cheney has always been a conservative and is not a new conservative in any way shape or form.

you people are misusing the term.

Oh I'm sorry, I guess encyclopedia Britannica is wrong and you are right.

[Mac-7]

Oh I'm sorry, I guess encyclopedia Britannica is wrong and you are right.

Im still waiting for you or your source to explain the neo part of neocon.

[Common Sense]

Im still waiting for you or your source to explain the neo part of neocon.

Yes, it means new. As in neoclassical. The movement itself is a new version...not the ideas or affiliation of the individual.

[Captain Obvious]

i think you don't know the meaning of the words you use.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--N87rEGl6tE/UhuxfHvo63I/AAAAAAAAd1c/QsEHWpn17FU/s1600/usingthatwordneocon.jpg

[Mac-7]

Yes, it means new. As in neoclassical. The movement itself is a new version...not the ideas or affiliation of the individual.

There is nothing new about conservatives or their belief in national defense.

[Common Sense]

There is nothing new about conservatives or their belief in national defense.

OK. It doesn't really bother me that you don't understand.

[Chris]

There's that word again.

can you name one person who you consider a neocon?


Used to mean liberals mugged by reality, per Irving Kristol.

These days it's perhaps more appropriate to call them neo-neocons, and that would include all the conservative war hawks, like ransom.

[Mac-7]

OK. It doesn't really bother me that you don't understand.

I sure don't understand how old becomes new to you.

neocons are a specifically defined group of people who were basically recovering liberals.

not any conservative that you choose to label as a neocon.

[Chris]

You mean cheney used to be a lib?

i think you don't know the meaning of the words you use.

A neocon is (was) a conservative.

I'm not sure Bush and Chemey were, Bush was a social con amd Cheney a paleocon. But both were heavily influenced by the neocons--who would include all the co-signers of the PNAP letter to Clinton--see http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/98-Rumsfeld-Iraq.pdf. Those would be

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett
Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad
William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber
Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick

[Mac-7]

These days it's perhaps more appropriate to call them neo-neocons, and that would include all the conservative war hawks, like ransom.

Why?

because most libs are ignorant and don't know what neocon actually means so its safe to use it for anything?

[Common Sense]

I sure don't understand how old becomes new to you.

neocons are a specifically defined group of people who were basically recovering liberals.

not any conservative that you choose to label as a neocon.

Not according to the definition. But that is how the movement started, yes.

[Mac-7]

Not according to the definition. But that is how the movement started, yes.

If someone has always been a conservative how can you or some lib egghead at Britannia label them as a new conservative?

[Captain Obvious]

http://cdn.meme.li/instances/500x/54388124.jpg

[Chris]

I sure don't understand how old becomes new to you.

neocons are a specifically defined group of people who were basically recovering liberals.

not any conservative that you choose to label as a neocon.


Hell, back in the early 50s when Buckley and Kirk and others formed what was then called New Conservatives most were ex-liberals, ex-communists, etc. Somethings never change.

[Chris]

Why?

because most libs are ignorant and don't know what neocon actually means so its safe to use it for anything?

You wanted names, you've been given them. I've also given history. Don't get hung up on the word.

[Mac-7]

Hell, back in the early 50s when Buckley and Kirk and others formed what was then called New Conservatives most were ex-liberals, ex-communists, etc. Somethings never change.

I don't think so.

buckley launched his movement from Yale where most of the recruits were not formerly anything except students.

[Chris]

http://cdn.meme.li/instances/500x/54388124.jpg

http://s13.postimg.org/o0p7zds53/1390699922500.gif

^^That needs a new chapter for the neo-neocons under the Obama Administration.

[Mac-7]

You wanted names, you've been given them. I've also given history. Don't get hung up on the word.

A list you managed to cobble together but I don't think many - if any - of them are ex-communists or even just garden variety libs who switched to the other side.

[Chris]

I don't think so.

buckley launched his movement from Yale where most of the recruits were not formerly anything except students.

Buckley was an ex-liberal.

Hell, we're all liberals, the West is inundated in liberalism.

[Mister D]

Buckley was an ex-liberal.

Hell, we're all liberals, the West is inundated in liberalism.

Buckely was a liberal (in this case meaning progressive)? I did not know that.

[Chris]

A list you managed to cobble together but I don't think many - if any - of them are ex-communists or even just garden variety libs who switched to the other side.

My list came from co-signers of a PNAC letter to Clinton, all of whom considered themselves neocons.

Go read up on PNAC. Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century.

[del]

They're all Jews. Imagine that.

the evil christkilling jooooooooooooooooooooooooooos

lol

[Chris]

Buckely was a liberal (in this case meaning progressive)? I did not know that.

Not a progressive, more libertarian.


Liberal in the sense you tend to use the word.

[Mac-7]

Buckley was an ex-liberal.

Hell, we're all liberals, the West is inundated in liberalism.

Buckley was a student at Yale himself.

So unless you are holding him accountable for whatever he believed at 12 or 13 he was not a former lib of any great consequence.

[Mister D]

Not a progressive, more libertarian.

Ah, I see. He seemed to come from old school east coast conservative milieu but I don't know much about his early life.

[Chris]

Buckley was a student at Yale himself.

So unless you are holding him accountable for whatever he believed at 12 or 13 he was not a former lib of any great consequence.

What does Yale have to do with it?

He was a liberal. Liberalism has a long tradition prior to FDR's hijacking it.

[Chris]

Ah, I see. He seemed to come from old school east coast conservative milieu but I don't know much about his early life.

Yes, I think though some here are getting hung up on only contemporary meanings of liberalism, which are all but meaningless.

Same with neocon.

[Common Sense]

If someone has always been a conservative how can you or some lib egghead at Britannia label them as a new conservative?

You went on about definitions, then one was provided to you...now you claim encyclopedias are made by liberals?

You're an ideologue. You've decided what you think is right and so regardless of what facts are presented to you, you shove your head in deeper. So what's the point? I'm not interested in arguing semantics.

[Mac-7]

My list came from co-signers of a PNAC letter to Clinton, all of whom considered themselves neocons.

Go read up on PNAC. Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century.

I doubt if they were true neocons but perhaps a few were.

the point is most conservatives who believe in national defense are not neocons.

that term has just become a catch all phrase for libs who can't get over the first bush invasion of Iraq.

[Mac-7]

You went on about definitions, then one was provided to you...now you claim encyclopedias are made by liberals?

You're an ideologue. You've decided what you think is right and so regardless of what facts are presented to you, you shove your head in deeper. So what's the point? I'm not interested in arguing semantics.

the definition you supplied didn't make any sense.

what is new about neocons?

the obvious answer that the libs writing your definition were careful to avoid is that a true neocon is a reformed liberal.

[Mac-7]

What does Yale have to do with it?

He was a liberal. Liberalism has a long tradition prior to FDR's hijacking it.

Yale is where Buckley was attending college when he launched his conservative movement,

and I don't think he was or ever had been a liberal.

its just that the fortunes of conservatism was so low that there was no existing Conservative party to lead him so he devoted his life to leading others who were not libs either.

[The Xl]

The alternative to liberty is tyranny.

If libs want a dictatorship of lefty do-gooders they are in for a big disappointment..

As opposed to the tyranny of big special interests literally bribing politicians?

Bribery isn't speech, it's bribery.

And for any fellow libertarian that wants to try me on this issue, realize that money in politics has totally ruined our rights.

[Mac-7]

As opposed to the tyranny of big special interests literally bribing politicians?

Bribery isn't speech, it's bribery.

And for any fellow libertarian that wants to try me on this issue, realize that money in politics has totally ruined our rights.


Little special interests bribe politicians too.

social security is called the third rail of politics because if a politician touches it he dies.

because millions of little special interests want what the libs promised them in 1933.

[The Xl]

Little special interests bribe politicians too.

social security is called the third rail of politics because if a politician touches it he dies.

because millions of little special interests want what the libs promised them in 1933.

Get all of money out of politics, period, unions and shit, too.

Let's not pretend that anyone else has the muscle or influence that huge special interests do, though.

People who make policy shouldn't be taking money from individuals or groups, period.

[Common Sense]

http://assets.sunlightfoundation.com/images/blog/infographics/lobbying/lobbying_spending_totals_98-09.png

[The Xl]

http://assets.sunlightfoundation.com/images/blog/infographics/lobbying/lobbying_spending_totals_98-09.png

And they all get taken care of.

But.....but......it's "speech"

No. It's bribery. In the same way a sporting game would be considered illegitimate and void if it was revealed that a ref took 1 million bucks from one of the teams.

[Mac-7]

Get all of money out of politics, period, unions and shit, too.

Let's not pretend that anyone else has the muscle or influence that huge special interests do, though.

People who make policy shouldn't be taking money from individuals or groups, period.

I don't mind campaign contributions because candidates need money to campaign.

but don't allow anyone in government to accept any gift such as free rides on corporate jets to a plush vacation spot.

and don't allow politicians to keep unused campaign funds when they leave office.

[The Xl]

I don't mind campaign contributions because candidates need money to campaign.

but don't allow anyone in government to accept any gift such as free rides on corporate jets to a plush vacation spot.

and don't allow politicians to keep unused campaign funds when they leave office.

I'm okay with campaign financing if they were allowed one term and not allowed to ever work for the companies, hell the industries, that financed them, once they got out of office. That would both kill incentive for the interests to finance them, and kill incentive for politicians to be cheap corporate whores.

[Captain Obvious]

oh shit, charts again...

[del]

oh shit, charts again...

8883

[Chris]

http://i.snag.gy/mUoK4.jpg

[texan]

The one comment that is very telling is that "its mostly right." Hogwash! There is no advantage by either side there are billionaires out the kester on each side. Bill Gates, Warren Buffett to add to the list......................The left acts like this is the democrat party from 1970 when it was about the blue collar guy. It is not anymore, its about who pays them and the billionaires pay them.

Setting this aside.

I want some people that think outside the box. I can assure you that Kochs are talking alternatives to the Social Security and Medicaid services. They are not talking about ending them without replacement. Good Old Bernie didn't elaborate now did he? Want to know why he doesn't? Because then he and his coharts can continue to steal money from those programs (not what they were intended for, thanks LBJ) and spend it on BS that doesn't help much.

Why does Bernie not want the American people to have more money? Sen. Bernie Sanders, (I-VT), Avowed Socialist.

Also does Bernie participate in Social Security? No, no he doesn't he participates ina better program with a better return.

Our Senators and Congressmen don't pay in to Social Security, and, of course, they don't collect from it. The reason is that they have a special retirement plan that they voted for themselves many years ago. For all practical purposes, it works like this:

When they retire, they continue to draw their same pay, until they die, except that it may be increased from time to time, by cost of living adjustments.


Bernie is intellectually dishonest and he is campaigning so that makes it a lie from jump street.

8884

[Professor Peabody]

What terrifies me the most about Sanders is the man's incredible stupidity and worse yet, he keeps getting re- elected.

[momsapplepie]

you could say the same thing for pelousy

[Libhater]

What terrifies me the most about Sanders is the man's incredible stupidity and worse yet, he keeps getting re- elected.

That's what happens when their districts are embedded deeply into a blue or leftist population of socialists.

[texan]

Paloser you mean?

I looked at Sanders wikipedia page and his net worth (net worth ususally says it all), surprisingly he doesn't "appear" to be on the take at $500K assuming its correct..................Unlike Harry Reid who was worth nothing coming in and now worth 5 mil or Pelosi rigging legislation for her husband to make millions. At least Romney inherirted it and flipped it.

His wikipage is interesting. He ran for office and failed several times, ended up a mayor and went from there. Worth a glance if you have time.

[texan]

My cousin was a 25 year AF pilot. He flew some of these people around in here and country (Iraq, Afgan etc.). He told me some things about these people.

Biden - always showed up every month in a military hot zone because by doing so it kept him tax free on his government paycheck. The bad is it really screwed up airspace and added a lot of cost for protection.

Peloser - She was demanding huge aircraft every weekend to fly family, friends and staffers home to california like it was her personal yacht. There is a debate that this isn't true, but he says it has happened more than once.

[momsapplepie]

when there's a bill for liquor of over $100K for pelousi's flights? and her demanding larger planes and to change to a different airport, yeah, I'd say she abuses the taxpayer dollars.

[Common Sense]

It's like a support group in here.


"Hi my name is Jim...and this is where Obama touched me."

[The Xl]

What terrifies me the most about Sanders is the man's incredible stupidity and worse yet, he keeps getting re- elected.

Meanwhile, the "speech" of these corporations is busy taking away the rights of everyone else.

Don't kid yourself. The fact that public bribery somehow got labeled "speech" is a unbelievable joke that would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous.

[Professor Peabody]

Meanwhile, the "speech" of these corporations is busy taking away the rights of everyone else.

How is that? Speak up you have always had the right to be heard.