Kochs inching closer

[Ransom]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/business/media/koch-brothers-time-meredith.html?src=twr


In a move that came to light on Wednesday, the Kochs have tentatively agreed to back an offer (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/15/business/media/koch-brothers-time-meredith.html?_r=0) by the magazine publisher Meredith Corporation for Time Inc., the owner of titles including Time, People and Sports Illustrated. Koch Industries, the sprawling industrial conglomerate controlled by the two brothers, plans to support the deal.
Advertisement

Continue reading the main story (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/business/media/koch-brothers-time-meredith.html?src=twr#story-continues-1)
Meredith and Time Inc. have discussed the details of a potential transaction over the last week and are hoping to announce a deal, should it occur, on the Monday after Thanksgiving. Under the preliminary terms of Meredith’s proposal, the company would pay $18 to $20 a share for Time Inc., people involved in the talks said.


Would this mean....Uncle Ransom could resume his subscriptions? Sports Illustrated of course banned from the Ransom household after Bruce Jenner went from hero with flag draped around his shoulders to 'woman' of the year for simply adding a dress and breast enhancements.

Time......People(so we could actually learn about real people rather than made up frauds, drug addicts, and Hollywood Stars)...and Sports I? Might Sports Illustrated....actually return to illustrating sports?

Rather than circus events?

[Chris]

The Kochs are libertarian, noninterventionist, I don't think you would like them.

[Crepitus]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/business/media/koch-brothers-time-meredith.html?src=twr



Would this mean....Uncle Ransom could resume his subscriptions? Sports Illustrated of course banned from the Ransom household after Bruce Jenner went from hero with flag draped around his shoulders to 'woman' of the year for simply adding a dress and breast enhancements.

Time......People(so we could actually learn about real people rather than made up frauds, drug addicts, and Hollywood Stars)...and Sports I? Might Sports Illustrated....actually return to illustrating sports?

Rather than circus events?

Grat, more rabid RWNJ media.

Just what the world needs, InfoWars magazine.

[Chris]

Grat, more rabid RWNJ media.

Just what the world needs, InfoWars magazine.

Kochs are libertarian. Try and use words as if they have some meaning.

[Crepitus]

Kochs are libertarian. Try and use words as if they have some meaning.
I know you think they are, but they aren't.

[Chris]

I know you think they are, but they aren't.

In what way are they rabid RWNJ? Define your terms first.

[Crepitus]

In what way are they rabid RWNJ? Define your terms first.
You know what RWNJ means.

The only thing notably libertarian they have done is fight the patriot act.

[Chris]

You know what RWNJ means.

The only thing notably libertarian they have done is fight the patriot act.

You, who keeps talking how words have meaning, cannot tell us what you mean by the words you use. I'm guessing RWNJ means someone you dislike.

[Mini Me]

The Kochs are libertarian, noninterventionist, I don't think you would like them.


The Kochs took over the Libertarian movement long ago, and fund the Stink tanks that are so against democratic principles. Here is proof that the Kochs destructive agenda will be a main feature of the Trump presidency;

The Kochs certainly did not want Trump to win the GOP nomination; they preferred the likes of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker or Florida Senator Marco Rubio. As the New York magnate made surprising headway, the Koch network shifted resources to Congressional and state battles, pursuing a strategy designed to maximize post-2016 leverage despite Trump. But now that Trump has actually prevailed, Koch cleverness hits the jackpot. Although widely unpopular (http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/ahertel/files/koch_network_paper_ts-ahf.pdf) with the mass public, the Koch policy agenda of tax cuts for the rich, union busting, Medicare privatization, business deregulation, and evisceration of environmental and global warming measures is ripe to be rammed through a GOP-dominated Congress and sent to the desk of a president who needs Koch-affiliated personnel, understands very little about policy issues, and will be looking for victorious bills to sign into law. The stage is perfectly set to advance the core Koch ultra-free-market agenda, even though the brothers avoided endorsing Trump and the candidate himself discussed almost none of the relevant policy shifts in his appeals to voters.


Must read article; http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/behind-make-america-great-the-koch-agenda-returns-with-a-vengeance

[Chris]

The Kochs took over the Libertarian movement long ago, and fund the Stink tanks that are so against democratic principles. Here is proof that the Kochs destructive agenda will be a main feature of the Trump presidency;

The Kochs certainly did not want Trump to win the GOP nomination; they preferred the likes of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker or Florida Senator Marco Rubio. As the New York magnate made surprising headway, the Koch network shifted resources to Congressional and state battles, pursuing a strategy designed to maximize post-2016 leverage despite Trump. But now that Trump has actually prevailed, Koch cleverness hits the jackpot. Although widely unpopular (http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/ahertel/files/koch_network_paper_ts-ahf.pdf) with the mass public, the Koch policy agenda of tax cuts for the rich, union busting, Medicare privatization, business deregulation, and evisceration of environmental and global warming measures is ripe to be rammed through a GOP-dominated Congress and sent to the desk of a president who needs Koch-affiliated personnel, understands very little about policy issues, and will be looking for victorious bills to sign into law. The stage is perfectly set to advance the core Koch ultra-free-market agenda, even though the brothers avoided endorsing Trump and the candidate himself discussed almost none of the relevant policy shifts in his appeals to voters.


Must read article; http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/behind-make-america-great-the-koch-agenda-returns-with-a-vengeance


That's right, the Kochs are libertarian.

[Ransom]

Grat, more rabid RWNJ media.

Just what the world needs, InfoWars magazine.

We need something to offset the criminality of media outlets manipulating our constituencies. You being a primary example.

[Ransom]

I know you think they are, but they aren't.

You enjoyed the centerfold with Bruce Jenner? Consider his swimsuit portfolio courageous too do ya?

Typical pajama boy.

[Ransom]

https://startingstrength.com/contentimg/20170526_pjboy.jpg (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi_2ITd_8rXAhUD8mMKHQLgC5AQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fstartingstrength.com%2Farticle%2 Fpajama-boy-redux-the-male-in-modern-society&psig=AOvVaw18gQTgPpZdDbhoJKbBaCoD&ust=1511193253059093)<Crepitus

[nic34]

The Kochs are libertarian, noninterventionist, I don't think you would like them.

So they claim...

[Chris]

So they claim...

Who should I believe, them or the LWNJ media?

My point though was Ransom is a self-proclaim neocon interventionist and the Kochs as libertarians are non-interventionist.

[midcan5]

The Kochs are libertarian, noninterventionist, I don't think you would like them.
You gotta be kidding! The Koch's want to and are controlling the universe of economic thought in America, money buys time and media, and money manages ideas and those who want to follow or benefit from those ideas. For the interested thinker see 'Dark Money' for an idea on how much the American is managed today by Koch supported thought.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27833494-dark-money

"The group of high-powered donors plans to spend between $300 million and $400 million on political projects over the 2018 cycle."

http://ktla.com/2017/03/23/koch-brothers-vow-re-election-funds-for-republicans-who-vote-against-gop-health-care-bill/

"The Koch brothers contribute a large amount of money to conservative, libertarian, and free-market individuals and organizations.[1] They have given more than $196 million to dozens of free-market and advocacy organizations.[1] Tax records indicate that, in 2008, the three main Koch family foundations contributed to 34 political and policy organizations, three of which they founded, and several of which they direct.[1][2]”

https://obamacarefacts.com/koch-brothers-facts-obamacare/

"The advocacy groups helmed by Charles and David Koch have unveiled a new pool of money for advertisements, field programs and mailings that would exclude those who vote for the health care bill they oppose on Thursday. The effort, which they described as worth millions of dollars, is an explicit warning to on-the-fence Republicans from one of the most influential players in electoral politics not to cross them."

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/03/22/koch-brothers-dropping-millions-to-decide-the-fate-of-the-gop-healthcare-bill/

" Their political network helped finance the Tea Party and powers today's GOP. Koch-affiliated organizations raised some $400 million during the 2012 election, and aim to spend another $290 million to elect Republicans in this year's midterms. So far in this cycle, Koch-backed entities have bought 44,000 political ads to boost Republican efforts to take back the Senate." guess what?

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/inside-the-koch-brothers-toxic-empire-20140924

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/three-new-ways-the-koch-brothers-are-screwing-america-20140604

"The Great Recession had wiped out some $9 tillion in household wealth. But after forty years, the conservative non-profit ecosystem had grown quite adept at waging battles of ideas. The think tanks, advocacy groups, and talking heads on the right sprang into action, shaping a political narrative that staved off the kind of course correction that might otherwise have been expected.

A key skirmish in this battle was the reframing of the history of the 2008 economic crash. From an empirical standpoint, it was hard to see it as anything other than a wipeout for the proponents of free-market fundamentalism and an argument for stronger government regulations. Like the Great Depression, it might have been expected to produce a backlash against those seen as irresponsible profiteers, resulting in more government intervention and a fairer tax system.

Joseph Stiglitz, the liberal economist, described the 2008 financial meltdown as the equivalent for free-market advocates to the fall of the Berlin Wall for Communists. Even the former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, Washington's free-market wise man nonpareil, admitted that he'd been wrong in thinking Adam Smith's invisible hand would save business from its own self-destruction. Potentially, the disaster was a "teachable moment" from which the country's economic conservatives could learn. This is not what happened, however. They instead started with their preferred conclusion and worked backward to reach it.

In what the economic writer and asset manager Barry Ritholtz labeled Wall Street's "big lie," scholars at conservative think tanks argued that the problem had been too much government, not too little. The lead role in the revisionism was played by the American Enterprise Institute, whose board was stocked with financial industry titans, many of whom were free-market zealots and regulars at the Koch donor seminars.

Specifically, AEI argued that government programs that helped low-income home buyers get mortgages caused the collapse. Ritholtz noted that these theories "failed to withstand even casual scrutiny." There was plenty wrong with the government's quasi-private mortgage lenders, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but numerous nonpartisan studies ranging from Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies to the Government Accountability Office proved they were not a major cause of the 2008 crash. Yet by shifting the blame, Ritholtz noted, those "whose bad judgment and failed philosophy helped cause the crisis" could continue to champion the "false narrative" that free markets "require no adult supervision."

Self-serving research from corporate-backed conservative think tanks wasn't exactly news by 2011, but what was surprising, Ritholtz contended, was that "they are winning. Thanks to the endless repetition of the big lie." Phil Angelides, the chairman of the bipartisan commission that Congress set up to investigate the causes of the crash, was also taken aback by the revisionism. In an op-ed column, he tried to remind the public that it had been "the recklessness of the financial industry and the abject failures of policymakers and regulators that brought the economy to its knees." Instead, though, he said, "those at the top of the economic heap" were peddling "shopworn data" that had been "analyzed and debunked by the committee." He conceded that history was written by the winners and that by 2011, while much of the country lagged behind, most of the financial sector had bounced back and "the historical rewrite is in full swing."

Soon politicians backed by the same conservative donors who funded the think tanks were echoing the "big lie." Marco Rubio, a rising Republican star from Florida, for instance, who had defeated a moderate in the 2010 Republican Senate primary with the help of forty-nine donors from the June 2010 Koch seminar, soon proclaimed, "This idea-that our problems were caused by a government that was too small-it's just not true. In fact, a major cause of our recent downturn was a housing crisis created by reckless government policies."

p 365, 366 book mnetioned above.

[resister]

You, who keeps talking how words have meaning, cannot tell us what you mean by the words you use. I'm guessing RWNJ means someone you dislike.
Judging by the context of his frequent use of it, pretty sure it equals "Republican"

[Chris]

You gotta be kidding! The Koch's want to and are controlling the universe of economic thought in America, money buys time and media, and money manages ideas and those who want to follow or benefit from those ideas. For the interested thinker see 'Dark Money' for an idea on how much the American is managed today by Koch supported thought.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27833494-dark-money

"The group of high-powered donors plans to spend between $300 million and $400 million on political projects over the 2018 cycle."

http://ktla.com/2017/03/23/koch-brothers-vow-re-election-funds-for-republicans-who-vote-against-gop-health-care-bill/

"The Koch brothers contribute a large amount of money to conservative, libertarian, and free-market individuals and organizations.[1] They have given more than $196 million to dozens of free-market and advocacy organizations.[1] Tax records indicate that, in 2008, the three main Koch family foundations contributed to 34 political and policy organizations, three of which they founded, and several of which they direct.[1][2]”

https://obamacarefacts.com/koch-brothers-facts-obamacare/

"The advocacy groups helmed by Charles and David Koch have unveiled a new pool of money for advertisements, field programs and mailings that would exclude those who vote for the health care bill they oppose on Thursday. The effort, which they described as worth millions of dollars, is an explicit warning to on-the-fence Republicans from one of the most influential players in electoral politics not to cross them."

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/03/22/koch-brothers-dropping-millions-to-decide-the-fate-of-the-gop-healthcare-bill/

" Their political network helped finance the Tea Party and powers today's GOP. Koch-affiliated organizations raised some $400 million during the 2012 election, and aim to spend another $290 million to elect Republicans in this year's midterms. So far in this cycle, Koch-backed entities have bought 44,000 political ads to boost Republican efforts to take back the Senate." guess what?

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/inside-the-koch-brothers-toxic-empire-20140924

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/three-new-ways-the-koch-brothers-are-screwing-america-20140604

"The Great Recession had wiped out some $9 tillion in household wealth. But after forty years, the conservative non-profit ecosystem had grown quite adept at waging battles of ideas. The think tanks, advocacy groups, and talking heads on the right sprang into action, shaping a political narrative that staved off the kind of course correction that might otherwise have been expected.

A key skirmish in this battle was the reframing of the history of the 2008 economic crash. From an empirical standpoint, it was hard to see it as anything other than a wipeout for the proponents of free-market fundamentalism and an argument for stronger government regulations. Like the Great Depression, it might have been expected to produce a backlash against those seen as irresponsible profiteers, resulting in more government intervention and a fairer tax system.

Joseph Stiglitz, the liberal economist, described the 2008 financial meltdown as the equivalent for free-market advocates to the fall of the Berlin Wall for Communists. Even the former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, Washington's free-market wise man nonpareil, admitted that he'd been wrong in thinking Adam Smith's invisible hand would save business from its own self-destruction. Potentially, the disaster was a "teachable moment" from which the country's economic conservatives could learn. This is not what happened, however. They instead started with their preferred conclusion and worked backward to reach it.

In what the economic writer and asset manager Barry Ritholtz labeled Wall Street's "big lie," scholars at conservative think tanks argued that the problem had been too much government, not too little. The lead role in the revisionism was played by the American Enterprise Institute, whose board was stocked with financial industry titans, many of whom were free-market zealots and regulars at the Koch donor seminars.

Specifically, AEI argued that government programs that helped low-income home buyers get mortgages caused the collapse. Ritholtz noted that these theories "failed to withstand even casual scrutiny." There was plenty wrong with the government's quasi-private mortgage lenders, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but numerous nonpartisan studies ranging from Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies to the Government Accountability Office proved they were not a major cause of the 2008 crash. Yet by shifting the blame, Ritholtz noted, those "whose bad judgment and failed philosophy helped cause the crisis" could continue to champion the "false narrative" that free markets "require no adult supervision."

Self-serving research from corporate-backed conservative think tanks wasn't exactly news by 2011, but what was surprising, Ritholtz contended, was that "they are winning. Thanks to the endless repetition of the big lie." Phil Angelides, the chairman of the bipartisan commission that Congress set up to investigate the causes of the crash, was also taken aback by the revisionism. In an op-ed column, he tried to remind the public that it had been "the recklessness of the financial industry and the abject failures of policymakers and regulators that brought the economy to its knees." Instead, though, he said, "those at the top of the economic heap" were peddling "shopworn data" that had been "analyzed and debunked by the committee." He conceded that history was written by the winners and that by 2011, while much of the country lagged behind, most of the financial sector had bounced back and "the historical rewrite is in full swing."

Soon politicians backed by the same conservative donors who funded the think tanks were echoing the "big lie." Marco Rubio, a rising Republican star from Florida, for instance, who had defeated a moderate in the 2010 Republican Senate primary with the help of forty-nine donors from the June 2010 Koch seminar, soon proclaimed, "This idea-that our problems were caused by a government that was too small-it's just not true. In fact, a major cause of our recent downturn was a housing crisis created by reckless government policies."

p 365, 366 book mnetioned above.



If by all that screeching you mean they take a stand in politics, why they do, libertarian. That you and other liberal opininaters dislike them is beside the point neocons also dislike them.

[Mini Me]

The first blame they lied about was they put it all on independent mortgage brokers, of which I was with!
When the real blame was on rogue banks and lenders! And Greenspan and the GOP's deregulation push.

You tube has Greenspans apology on it. These bad loans were virtually all variable rate loans, and Greenspan raised the fed rates too soon for years, and people's payments skyrocketed! None of the ARM loans were really legal, as disclotures about future rates were never done!

[Mini Me]

That's right, the Kochs are libertarian.
Libertarian is not what you think it is anymore. The Kochs truly hate democracy, and want a world where they can make all the laws to benefit the fascist corporatocracy...and to Hell with the people! They took over the Libertarian Party after Clarke ran for POTUS in 198? It became a party of "me firsters, and greedy businessmen.

Google: James Buchannon, George mason law school. Read the book; "Democracy in Chains" !

[Crepitus]

You, who keeps talking how words have meaning, cannot tell us what you mean by the words you use. I'm guessing RWNJ means someone you dislike.

Don't be deliberately thick.

[Ransom]

Thank God for the Koch Brothers and all they represent, they've done much for our country. The Left hates everything about them not the only reason why they should be championed. Not to mention, the magazines mentioned.....People, Time, Sports Illustrated....they've lost their prestige, they've become politically driven rags, it was past time to reinstall integrity in those three rags...and the Kochs certainly have integrity.

[Ransom]

https://www.bellanaija.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Caitlyn-Jenner-Sports-Illustrated-Magazine.jpg (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj_k4ijr8vXAhXDzFQKHTq_AUUQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bellanaija.com%2F2016%2F06%2 F40-years-after-winning-an-olympic-gold-medal-caitlyn-jenner-covers-sports-illustrated-magazine%2F&psig=AOvVaw2TKXMAPqEEXLa3rHcc_kmB&ust=1511206022437126)

Then and now. Sports Illustrated needs to get a hold of itself or lose audience and integrity. Or is it too late?

[Chris]

Don't be deliberately thick.

I tried to engage you in a discussion. You left. Now you return to insult?

[Crepitus]

I tried to engage you in a discussion. You left. Now you return to insult?

Nope. You know what "RWNJ" means. You are being disingenuous at best. That isn't "engaging in discussion".

[Chris]

Nope. You know what "RWNJ" means. You are being disingenuous at best. That isn't "engaging in discussion".

Sure, I have my definition, but I was trying to figure out yours given that you call libertarians that name.So I'm still interested in what you mean.

Is your being insulting engaging in doscission?

[Grokmaster]

The Kochs took over the Libertarian movement long ago, and fund the Stink tanks that are so against democratic principles. Here is proof that the Kochs destructive agenda will be a main feature of the Trump presidency;

The Kochs certainly did not want Trump to win the GOP nomination; they preferred the likes of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker or Florida Senator Marco Rubio. As the New York magnate made surprising headway, the Koch network shifted resources to Congressional and state battles, pursuing a strategy designed to maximize post-2016 leverage despite Trump. But now that Trump has actually prevailed, Koch cleverness hits the jackpot. Although widely unpopular (http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/ahertel/files/koch_network_paper_ts-ahf.pdf) with the mass public, the Koch policy agenda of tax cuts for the rich, union busting, Medicare privatization, business deregulation, and evisceration of environmental and global warming measures is ripe to be rammed through a GOP-dominated Congress and sent to the desk of a president who needs Koch-affiliated personnel, understands very little about policy issues, and will be looking for victorious bills to sign into law. The stage is perfectly set to advance the core Koch ultra-free-market agenda, even though the brothers avoided endorsing Trump and the candidate himself discussed almost none of the relevant policy shifts in his appeals to voters.


Must read article; http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/behind-make-america-great-the-koch-agenda-returns-with-a-vengeance
"Democratic principles" = government intervention in every area of our lives. No thanks.

[Adelaide]

https://startingstrength.com/contentimg/20170526_pjboy.jpg (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi_2ITd_8rXAhUD8mMKHQLgC5AQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fstartingstrength.com%2Farticle%2 Fpajama-boy-redux-the-male-in-modern-society&psig=AOvVaw18gQTgPpZdDbhoJKbBaCoD&ust=1511193253059093)<Crepitus

Thread banned.

[nic34]

Who should I believe, them or the LWNJ media?

My point though was Ransom is a self-proclaim neocon interventionist and the Kochs as libertarians are non-interventionist.

Are you saying the Kochs do not support right wing candidates that are interventionist?

[Chris]

Are you saying the Kochs do not support right wing candidates?

If they believe the candidate supports their libertarian principles they will.

To me it's the oddest thing in the world to criticize someone for supporting those who uphold their principles. If you disagree with those principles, fine, have at it, if you're against greater liberty, say so.