Remeber?,,John Kerry:Global Warming Is Real.The Argument Is Over.Anyone Laughing?

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, they're so honest that they don't tell people what money they're spending or where it's going. That's honest?

WTF should they tell you anything? Keep you guessing as far as I'm concerned. Who do you think you are where you are owed an explanation of how people spend their own money politically?

I can actually stand it when people challenge my views. In fact I welcome it Ray, this is why I come on forums like this, to actually talk about things and to see if my views are right, if they're wrong.

Ray, to have someone like you, someone who is as partisan as they get, with your head stuck so far into the sand, who hardly ever does research on what they're saying, who hardly ever thinks logically on it, who takes the line given to you, to tell me that I don't like people challenging their views.

And you can't see the irony between these two paragraphs??????

You're the one who talks complete crap and then disappears whenever someone calls you out of it, to then reappear with the same argument a few weeks or months later.

No, it's just that debates that go back and forth with the same messages gets old. The "Yes you did--no you didn't" arguments bore the hell out of me. Several times I've "unwatched threads" when two people hijacked a topic and keep going back and forth, so I don't want to become one of those people.

The evidence is there Ray. Remember the FPTP and PR debate? You said in a different topic that "Choice is freedom" but then when it came to discussing PR you didn't want to choose freedom. In fact you said you didn't know what PR or FPTP were, you couldn't be bothered to even do a simple search for what they are to understand what was being spoken about. I explained to you what they were. Then two months later (or three) we discussed the same thing again, and again you didn't know what FPTP or PR were. Then I called you out on the fact that I'd told you before and you stopped replying.

You try to change the subject to that in every topic you participate in.

Or how about the time when you admitted you didn't read most of what I wrote? That was fun. Knowing you actually make an argument and the other guy doesn't give a shit. He reads the first two lines and then replies only to that.

Because if I read the same garbage before, I don't read it again. I know what it's going to say because I've read similar dozens of times. It's simply not worth my time to read it again.

You don't debate properly Ray. You don't look to find the truth either. You're attempting to convert people to your way of thinking.

And yet you cannot help yourself but to try and debate me. Yes, I would like to convert people to my way of thinking. Does't everybody here want to do that????

 

[beagle9]

. The 2nd most corrupt man in America.

 

[bodecea]

Loving how the Red South is freezing right now.

 

[beagle9]

Loving how the Red South is freezing right now.

. Where you speaking from Hell ?? LOL

 

[frigidweirdo]

Okay, I see you have the ability to post the web address of a dodgy websites. So...?

You're using insults again Ray. Are you some kind of child or an adult?

Obama (his name is Obama for fuck's sake) closed down the gulf after a major oil disaster which polluted the ocean and killed people.

How does this gain more control over the people exactly? Oh, you couldn't go off into the gulf and start drilling for oil. Could you just start doing this under Bush or any other president?

The Koch brothers don't spend the most money in politics? Really? Then who does?

Koch Brothers’ Budget of $889 Million for 2016 Is on Par With Both Parties’ Spending

"
Koch Brothers’ Budget of $889 Million for 2016 Is on Par With Both Parties’ Spending"

Do you know of any other person who spends around $889 million in a year on politics?

"Yes, they are combatting the GW freaks to sustain business. You see something wrong with that?"

Yes, I see they've bought you, and you've been taking in totally. You'll do as you're told.

Yes, there is data that has proven to be wrong. Some scientists will do things badly. But this doesn't mean the good data is any less good.

Your argument here is that there are a few bad apples, so all apples must be bad. That's bad logic Ray. I can imagine Koch brothers' paid workers sitting down and figuring out how to make people like you accept their way of thinking, and they're quite good at it.

They present things in a manner which makes you lose all sense of logic, in order to follow the religion of partisan politics and they KNOW you'll follow.

What do I do?

I don't own a car Ray, never have. I only use public transport. I walk to work. I use the heating only when necessary, it's cold now and I don't have any heating on.

However you've complete ignored all the stuff I said. The only way to reduce things is if the world is on board. The US has lost a lot of dirty industry to China. China will probably get fed up of a polluted world and send their dirty stuff elsewhere. Moving it around doesn't change things.

So, you're basically more interested in money than in actually having a planet that is livable?

And you are citing fake news. WAPO and the New York Times and numerous others all bought into a Bernie Sanders claim that the Koch Brothers would outspend both political parties which was utter nonsense. Not only was that budget considerably smaller than what both political parties spent in 2016, only about 1/3rd of it went federal, state, and local elections and the Koch Brothers themselves contributed only a small portion of that. I believe they gave nothing to President Trump and they actively campaigned and spoke against him in the primaries.
Sanders says Koch brothers are outspending either political party in 2016 elections

Donald Trump won’t be getting money from the billionaire Koch brothers

Ultimately President Trump was outspent by the Clinton campaign by at least 2 to 1 and he received nothing from the Koch Brothers who opposed his candidacy.
What Trump and Clinton spent per electoral vote

Now if your sources get their facts so really REALLY wrong re the Koch Brothers, how reliable are they to be accurate in what they report about climate change? Not much.

Actually the Koch Bros. have been pretty equal opportunity contributors in the climate change debate.
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/w...thers-changed-their-mind-about-climate-change

Sometimes it helps to actually do one's own research and read something other than the assigned and/or parroted talking points. Probably none of us have the access or means to do our own climate research so for what we know, we are dependent on others to tell us. And if we actually want the truth instead of just reinforcing our own beliefs/prejudices, it really helps to look for both sides of any story.

Given the huge amount of money involved, and the fact that only pro-global warming scientists are getting the huge lion's share of it, that is especially true when it comes to truth re climate change.

I didn't claim that they outspent the two political parties. I claimed they spent a lot of money on politics. My claim was they spent more than any other individual on politics. That claim still holds.

We don't know how much they spend. That's the biggest problem here. You go onto opensecrets and it'll probably show they spent like $2,000 or something ridiculous like that.

What is a small portion? 5%? 95%? We have no idea, just vague words from someone I wouldn't trust with a stick.

I didn't say Trump received from the Koch brothers. The Koch brothers have decided to go for a more direct route at the voters, rather than spending on the politicians. They have tried to change how people think, rather than getting their own politicians in power.

And how the fuck do you get climate change in here. Jeesuz foowkin' krist.

There's a massive difference between SCIENCE and trying to figure out where people are sending their money, if you haven't noticed.

The thread is about global warming so excuse me, If I try to relate to the topic at least in some way.

I provided links to support my opinion. Dispute them if you can.

Your unsupported opinion is noted.

The Global Warming topic here is more about the narrative than what is actually happening in the world. It's about who believes who.

The Koch brothers, and many other rich oil magnets, are pumping millions into denying there is any man made global warming, and people here are sucking it up.

The articles you provided didn't seem to answering any questions I had.

My problem with the koch brothers, who almost went to prison for stealing oil by the way, now have the blessing from our politicians to pollute for profit. Anything for profit and the public be damned.

link below, one of many about these thieving, polluting right wing heroes.


Uncloaking the Koch Brothers’ Ethics – Molly Aloysius: My Thoughts, My World

The political classes always look after each other. The Koch brothers helped get rid of restrictions on political spending and are really going for it now.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, they're so honest that they don't tell people what money they're spending or where it's going. That's honest?

WTF should they tell you anything? Keep you guessing as far as I'm concerned. Who do you think you are where you are owed an explanation of how people spend their own money politically?

I can actually stand it when people challenge my views. In fact I welcome it Ray, this is why I come on forums like this, to actually talk about things and to see if my views are right, if they're wrong.

Ray, to have someone like you, someone who is as partisan as they get, with your head stuck so far into the sand, who hardly ever does research on what they're saying, who hardly ever thinks logically on it, who takes the line given to you, to tell me that I don't like people challenging their views.

And you can't see the irony between these two paragraphs??????

You're the one who talks complete crap and then disappears whenever someone calls you out of it, to then reappear with the same argument a few weeks or months later.

No, it's just that debates that go back and forth with the same messages gets old. The "Yes you did--no you didn't" arguments bore the hell out of me. Several times I've "unwatched threads" when two people hijacked a topic and keep going back and forth, so I don't want to become one of those people.

The evidence is there Ray. Remember the FPTP and PR debate? You said in a different topic that "Choice is freedom" but then when it came to discussing PR you didn't want to choose freedom. In fact you said you didn't know what PR or FPTP were, you couldn't be bothered to even do a simple search for what they are to understand what was being spoken about. I explained to you what they were. Then two months later (or three) we discussed the same thing again, and again you didn't know what FPTP or PR were. Then I called you out on the fact that I'd told you before and you stopped replying.

You try to change the subject to that in every topic you participate in.

Or how about the time when you admitted you didn't read most of what I wrote? That was fun. Knowing you actually make an argument and the other guy doesn't give a shit. He reads the first two lines and then replies only to that.

Because if I read the same garbage before, I don't read it again. I know what it's going to say because I've read similar dozens of times. It's simply not worth my time to read it again.

You don't debate properly Ray. You don't look to find the truth either. You're attempting to convert people to your way of thinking.

And yet you cannot help yourself but to try and debate me. Yes, I would like to convert people to my way of thinking. Does't everybody here want to do that????

Yeah, why should people in politics tell the voters anything? Just force them to vote for two political parties and then leave them in ignorance for the rest of the time.

Some people think that politics should be transparent and open, not hidden away from the voters. But then some people aren't fascists.

The irony between the two paragraphs? No, come on then Ray, amuse me with the so called irony.

Oh, you find debates that go back and forth with the same message tiring do you? You want to liven it up with a lot of bullshit thrown in just to make it more entertaining. Well you got Trump, as entertaining as politics can be, I guess.

Oh, I see Ray, I show you examples of your complete bullshit and you deflect with "why do you bring this up every time?"

Well Ray, some people happen to think that your actions in the past can show how you react in the present and future. I could go through many posts of your and find absolute drivel. Stuff that has no logic, no sense, and you've backed it up with nothing, and whenever someone calls you out on it, you go off hiding, and then come back later.

Am I wrong here Ray? Because based on just about every time I talk to you, this is what I see.

Ray, you claim to have opinions on topics where you don't even understand the terminology of the topic and you can't even be fucking bothered to use an internet search engine to find out, and you don't remember what people tell you, in fact you probably didn't even fucking read it.

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously Ray, when you don't read, don't understand and post complete crap? Really? Why should anyone take you seriously?

 

[Wyatt earp]

No, the proof is that global warming is nothing more than a scare tactic. Some of what I posted are the extremes, but I have more if you like.

The only "proof" is from people who can't understand what they're looking at.

Come on Ray, you're so used to not understanding things you find inconvenient, that you don't support the view that Man is making the Earth warmer is proof that man made global warming is happening.

Nobody has ever been able to prove it, that's the point. Do you really believe that God made a planet with all the resources to make a comfortable life only so we could destroy it?

There was not one factory, one car, one truck, one cow at the end of the ice age. Like I said, this planet changes every single day. It has changed in the past, it's changing now, and it will continue to change in the future no matter if every single human being died tomorrow.

I don't believe in God Ray, you're talking about evidence and proof, and then go talk about God having made stuff.

What are you going on about with factories in the Ice Age?

Come on Ray, we should be beyond this primary school level science, don't you think?

Primary school level and you can't figure out where I was getting at with the end of the ice age and no man to cause it?

I have an entire folder dedicated to Global Warming and the fact that it's not happening. Scientists from all over the world that claim it's entirely BS. A theory? Perhaps, but not a science.

But even if there were empirical evidence that yes, the plant has been warming for the last 500 years, that's nothing for a planet that's millions of years old. If there were any truth to it, warming would be consistent every single year. But it isn't. In fact, the country is experiencing record low temperatures across cities all across the nation. It doesn't look like it's going to warm up anytime soon either; at least here up north.

But again, not indicative of anything. It's still normal with those record low temperatures.

Oh I got what you wanted to say Ray, I just didn't deem it worthy of a reply, seeing as it's so primary school.

Oh, you have a whole folder. Well isn't that nice?

It's science Ray, you may not understand science, but often science doesn't know the answer, science is about searching for those answers. And yes, global warming isn't a 100%.

Basically they know about 85%, and you point to the 15% and say "there, that proves it's 0%" which is ludicrous.

There's a big picture, and then there are lots of smaller pictures, and people like you pick up one small picture and use it to show the big picture. It doesn't work like that Ray.

Saying "it's cold here right now" doesn't mean shit when it comes to GLOBAL warming. You can't tell whether the whole world is colder or warmer.

Also it ignores almost everything else that we do know about man made global warming.

They know 85%



LMFAO


Try 1%

 

[beagle9]

The only "proof" is from people who can't understand what they're looking at.

Come on Ray, you're so used to not understanding things you find inconvenient, that you don't support the view that Man is making the Earth warmer is proof that man made global warming is happening.

Nobody has ever been able to prove it, that's the point. Do you really believe that God made a planet with all the resources to make a comfortable life only so we could destroy it?

There was not one factory, one car, one truck, one cow at the end of the ice age. Like I said, this planet changes every single day. It has changed in the past, it's changing now, and it will continue to change in the future no matter if every single human being died tomorrow.

I don't believe in God Ray, you're talking about evidence and proof, and then go talk about God having made stuff.

What are you going on about with factories in the Ice Age?

Come on Ray, we should be beyond this primary school level science, don't you think?

Primary school level and you can't figure out where I was getting at with the end of the ice age and no man to cause it?

I have an entire folder dedicated to Global Warming and the fact that it's not happening. Scientists from all over the world that claim it's entirely BS. A theory? Perhaps, but not a science.

But even if there were empirical evidence that yes, the plant has been warming for the last 500 years, that's nothing for a planet that's millions of years old. If there were any truth to it, warming would be consistent every single year. But it isn't. In fact, the country is experiencing record low temperatures across cities all across the nation. It doesn't look like it's going to warm up anytime soon either; at least here up north.

But again, not indicative of anything. It's still normal with those record low temperatures.

Oh I got what you wanted to say Ray, I just didn't deem it worthy of a reply, seeing as it's so primary school.

Oh, you have a whole folder. Well isn't that nice?

It's science Ray, you may not understand science, but often science doesn't know the answer, science is about searching for those answers. And yes, global warming isn't a 100%.

Basically they know about 85%, and you point to the 15% and say "there, that proves it's 0%" which is ludicrous.

There's a big picture, and then there are lots of smaller pictures, and people like you pick up one small picture and use it to show the big picture. It doesn't work like that Ray.

Saying "it's cold here right now" doesn't mean shit when it comes to GLOBAL warming. You can't tell whether the whole world is colder or warmer.

Also it ignores almost everything else that we do know about man made global warming.

They know 85%



LMFAO


Try 1%

. Looking outside, it might be less than 1%.. lol

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Loving how the Red South is freezing right now.

And I love how the liberal states are getting hit with huge snow and bad weather. Think God is trying to tell them something? Nahhh, can't be, there is no God in liberal land. Government is the highest power.

 

[beagle9]

Loving how the Red South is freezing right now.

And I love how the liberal states are getting hit with huge snow and bad weather. Think God is trying to tell them something? Nahhh, can't be, there is no God in liberal land. Government is the highest power.

. You're right, they think government sent them the snow and misery, because everything is caused by the man, and the man currently is the government under Trump. Don't worry they're already trying to figure out how to blame it on Trump.. Just wait.

 

[Foxfyre]

Busting the 97% Myth | Climategate Book



The more they can BS people about GW, the more they will be permitted to control our energy. Take DumBama for instance, he closed down the Gulf after the oil spill, he closed down power plants that he deemed environmentally unfit to be allowed in this country, he even used taxpayer money for Cash for Clunkers which was a total flop.

Yes, they do use the GW hoax to gain more control over the people.


No, the Koch brothers do not spend the most money in politics. Yes, they are combatting the GW freaks to sustain business. You see something wrong with that?

And plenty of data that has been proved fudged. These scientists get their paycheck though politicians and they are going to say whatever it is that makes their bosses happy.

Do you have a windmill in your backyard? How about solar panels on the roof of your home and garage? Do you use public transportation whenever possible? And when you can't, use your all electric car that you keep plugged in in the garage?

And even if every American lived like this, would that stop the GW people from ever complaining again? Do you think they would go away?

Make a difference? Okay, fair enough. What is the goal that would shut environmentalists up forever and what will it cost us? I want to know, because so far, not one of your kind has ever been able to answer my question.

We have spent trillions of dollars and lost even more in companies moving away just to escape some of our global antics, and thus far, I haven't seen one happy environmentalist yet. Do you know of any, and if so, who are these people?

Okay, I see you have the ability to post the web address of a dodgy websites. So...?

You're using insults again Ray. Are you some kind of child or an adult?

Obama (his name is Obama for fuck's sake) closed down the gulf after a major oil disaster which polluted the ocean and killed people.

How does this gain more control over the people exactly? Oh, you couldn't go off into the gulf and start drilling for oil. Could you just start doing this under Bush or any other president?

The Koch brothers don't spend the most money in politics? Really? Then who does?

Koch Brothers’ Budget of $889 Million for 2016 Is on Par With Both Parties’ Spending

"
Koch Brothers’ Budget of $889 Million for 2016 Is on Par With Both Parties’ Spending"

Do you know of any other person who spends around $889 million in a year on politics?

"Yes, they are combatting the GW freaks to sustain business. You see something wrong with that?"

Yes, I see they've bought you, and you've been taking in totally. You'll do as you're told.

Yes, there is data that has proven to be wrong. Some scientists will do things badly. But this doesn't mean the good data is any less good.

Your argument here is that there are a few bad apples, so all apples must be bad. That's bad logic Ray. I can imagine Koch brothers' paid workers sitting down and figuring out how to make people like you accept their way of thinking, and they're quite good at it.

They present things in a manner which makes you lose all sense of logic, in order to follow the religion of partisan politics and they KNOW you'll follow.

What do I do?

I don't own a car Ray, never have. I only use public transport. I walk to work. I use the heating only when necessary, it's cold now and I don't have any heating on.

However you've complete ignored all the stuff I said. The only way to reduce things is if the world is on board. The US has lost a lot of dirty industry to China. China will probably get fed up of a polluted world and send their dirty stuff elsewhere. Moving it around doesn't change things.

So, you're basically more interested in money than in actually having a planet that is livable?

And you are citing fake news. WAPO and the New York Times and numerous others all bought into a Bernie Sanders claim that the Koch Brothers would outspend both political parties which was utter nonsense. Not only was that budget considerably smaller than what both political parties spent in 2016, only about 1/3rd of it went federal, state, and local elections and the Koch Brothers themselves contributed only a small portion of that. I believe they gave nothing to President Trump and they actively campaigned and spoke against him in the primaries.
Sanders says Koch brothers are outspending either political party in 2016 elections

Donald Trump won’t be getting money from the billionaire Koch brothers

Ultimately President Trump was outspent by the Clinton campaign by at least 2 to 1 and he received nothing from the Koch Brothers who opposed his candidacy.
What Trump and Clinton spent per electoral vote

Now if your sources get their facts so really REALLY wrong re the Koch Brothers, how reliable are they to be accurate in what they report about climate change? Not much.

Actually the Koch Bros. have been pretty equal opportunity contributors in the climate change debate.
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/w...thers-changed-their-mind-about-climate-change

Sometimes it helps to actually do one's own research and read something other than the assigned and/or parroted talking points. Probably none of us have the access or means to do our own climate research so for what we know, we are dependent on others to tell us. And if we actually want the truth instead of just reinforcing our own beliefs/prejudices, it really helps to look for both sides of any story.

Given the huge amount of money involved, and the fact that only pro-global warming scientists are getting the huge lion's share of it, that is especially true when it comes to truth re climate change.

I didn't claim that they outspent the two political parties. I claimed they spent a lot of money on politics. My claim was they spent more than any other individual on politics. That claim still holds.

We don't know how much they spend. That's the biggest problem here. You go onto opensecrets and it'll probably show they spent like $2,000 or something ridiculous like that.

What is a small portion? 5%? 95%? We have no idea, just vague words from someone I wouldn't trust with a stick.

I didn't say Trump received from the Koch brothers. The Koch brothers have decided to go for a more direct route at the voters, rather than spending on the politicians. They have tried to change how people think, rather than getting their own politicians in power.

And how the fuck do you get climate change in here. Jeesuz foowkin' krist.

There's a massive difference between SCIENCE and trying to figure out where people are sending their money, if you haven't noticed.

The thread is about global warming so excuse me, If I try to relate to the topic at least in some way.

I provided links to support my opinion. Dispute them if you can.

Your unsupported opinion is noted.

The Global Warming topic here is more about the narrative than what is actually happening in the world. It's about who believes who.

The Koch brothers, and many other rich oil magnets, are pumping millions into denying there is any man made global warming, and people here are sucking it up.

The articles you provided didn't seem to answering any questions I had.

And you obviously did not read any of the links I posted previously that thoroughly debunk the talking point you just posted as fact.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, why should people in politics tell the voters anything? Just force them to vote for two political parties and then leave them in ignorance for the rest of the time.

And just how do they "force" anybody? I don't recall a time when I went to vote and somebody put a gun to my head telling me I can't vote Libertarian or Green. Believe it or not, they let me (like all Americans) make the choice.

Some people think that politics should be transparent and open, not hidden away from the voters. But then some people aren't fascists.

You mean like "we have to pass the bill to see what's in it?"

The irony between the two paragraphs? No, come on then Ray, amuse me with the so called irony.

If you can't see it, then it's you that's blind. It can't be more obvious.

Oh, you find debates that go back and forth with the same message tiring do you? You want to liven it up with a lot of bullshit thrown in just to make it more entertaining. Well you got Trump, as entertaining as politics can be, I guess.

You bet. Trump is the most entertaining President in our lifetime--just like DumBama was the mosts leftist and anti-business in our lifetime.

Oh, I see Ray, I show you examples of your complete bullshit and you deflect with "why do you bring this up every time?"

It's called changing the subject. You do it all the time. Not only is it boring, but against USMB rules.

Well Ray, some people happen to think that your actions in the past can show how you react in the present and future. I could go through many posts of your and find absolute drivel. Stuff that has no logic, no sense, and you've backed it up with nothing, and whenever someone calls you out on it, you go off hiding, and then come back later.

Really? Then quote me on WTF you're talking about because you are making it all up as usual.

Ray, you claim to have opinions on topics where you don't even understand the terminology of the topic and you can't even be fucking bothered to use an internet search engine to find out, and you don't remember what people tell you, in fact you probably didn't even fucking read it.

Why do I need to read the story about the Three Pigs over and over again? I know how it turns out, just as I know the outcome between the Road Runner and the wolf.

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously Ray, when you don't read, don't understand and post complete crap? Really? Why should anyone take you seriously?

Apparently you do.

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay, I see you have the ability to post the web address of a dodgy websites. So...?

You're using insults again Ray. Are you some kind of child or an adult?

Obama (his name is Obama for fuck's sake) closed down the gulf after a major oil disaster which polluted the ocean and killed people.

How does this gain more control over the people exactly? Oh, you couldn't go off into the gulf and start drilling for oil. Could you just start doing this under Bush or any other president?

The Koch brothers don't spend the most money in politics? Really? Then who does?

Koch Brothers’ Budget of $889 Million for 2016 Is on Par With Both Parties’ Spending

"
Koch Brothers’ Budget of $889 Million for 2016 Is on Par With Both Parties’ Spending"

Do you know of any other person who spends around $889 million in a year on politics?

"Yes, they are combatting the GW freaks to sustain business. You see something wrong with that?"

Yes, I see they've bought you, and you've been taking in totally. You'll do as you're told.

Yes, there is data that has proven to be wrong. Some scientists will do things badly. But this doesn't mean the good data is any less good.

Your argument here is that there are a few bad apples, so all apples must be bad. That's bad logic Ray. I can imagine Koch brothers' paid workers sitting down and figuring out how to make people like you accept their way of thinking, and they're quite good at it.

They present things in a manner which makes you lose all sense of logic, in order to follow the religion of partisan politics and they KNOW you'll follow.

What do I do?

I don't own a car Ray, never have. I only use public transport. I walk to work. I use the heating only when necessary, it's cold now and I don't have any heating on.

However you've complete ignored all the stuff I said. The only way to reduce things is if the world is on board. The US has lost a lot of dirty industry to China. China will probably get fed up of a polluted world and send their dirty stuff elsewhere. Moving it around doesn't change things.

So, you're basically more interested in money than in actually having a planet that is livable?

And you are citing fake news. WAPO and the New York Times and numerous others all bought into a Bernie Sanders claim that the Koch Brothers would outspend both political parties which was utter nonsense. Not only was that budget considerably smaller than what both political parties spent in 2016, only about 1/3rd of it went federal, state, and local elections and the Koch Brothers themselves contributed only a small portion of that. I believe they gave nothing to President Trump and they actively campaigned and spoke against him in the primaries.
Sanders says Koch brothers are outspending either political party in 2016 elections

Donald Trump won’t be getting money from the billionaire Koch brothers

Ultimately President Trump was outspent by the Clinton campaign by at least 2 to 1 and he received nothing from the Koch Brothers who opposed his candidacy.
What Trump and Clinton spent per electoral vote

Now if your sources get their facts so really REALLY wrong re the Koch Brothers, how reliable are they to be accurate in what they report about climate change? Not much.

Actually the Koch Bros. have been pretty equal opportunity contributors in the climate change debate.
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/w...thers-changed-their-mind-about-climate-change

Sometimes it helps to actually do one's own research and read something other than the assigned and/or parroted talking points. Probably none of us have the access or means to do our own climate research so for what we know, we are dependent on others to tell us. And if we actually want the truth instead of just reinforcing our own beliefs/prejudices, it really helps to look for both sides of any story.

Given the huge amount of money involved, and the fact that only pro-global warming scientists are getting the huge lion's share of it, that is especially true when it comes to truth re climate change.

I didn't claim that they outspent the two political parties. I claimed they spent a lot of money on politics. My claim was they spent more than any other individual on politics. That claim still holds.

We don't know how much they spend. That's the biggest problem here. You go onto opensecrets and it'll probably show they spent like $2,000 or something ridiculous like that.

What is a small portion? 5%? 95%? We have no idea, just vague words from someone I wouldn't trust with a stick.

I didn't say Trump received from the Koch brothers. The Koch brothers have decided to go for a more direct route at the voters, rather than spending on the politicians. They have tried to change how people think, rather than getting their own politicians in power.

And how the fuck do you get climate change in here. Jeesuz foowkin' krist.

There's a massive difference between SCIENCE and trying to figure out where people are sending their money, if you haven't noticed.

The thread is about global warming so excuse me, If I try to relate to the topic at least in some way.

I provided links to support my opinion. Dispute them if you can.

Your unsupported opinion is noted.

The Global Warming topic here is more about the narrative than what is actually happening in the world. It's about who believes who.

The Koch brothers, and many other rich oil magnets, are pumping millions into denying there is any man made global warming, and people here are sucking it up.

The articles you provided didn't seem to answering any questions I had.

My problem with the koch brothers, who almost went to prison for stealing oil by the way, now have the blessing from our politicians to pollute for profit. Anything for profit and the public be damned.

link below, one of many about these thieving, polluting right wing heroes.


Uncloaking the Koch Brothers’ Ethics – Molly Aloysius: My Thoughts, My World

Your problem with the Koch Bros is going to places like the website you linked for your information. If you consult other than the leftwing propaganda sites, you will get a very different perspective.

 

[Foxfyre]

And you are citing fake news. WAPO and the New York Times and numerous others all bought into a Bernie Sanders claim that the Koch Brothers would outspend both political parties which was utter nonsense. Not only was that budget considerably smaller than what both political parties spent in 2016, only about 1/3rd of it went federal, state, and local elections and the Koch Brothers themselves contributed only a small portion of that. I believe they gave nothing to President Trump and they actively campaigned and spoke against him in the primaries.
Sanders says Koch brothers are outspending either political party in 2016 elections

Donald Trump won’t be getting money from the billionaire Koch brothers

Ultimately President Trump was outspent by the Clinton campaign by at least 2 to 1 and he received nothing from the Koch Brothers who opposed his candidacy.
What Trump and Clinton spent per electoral vote

Now if your sources get their facts so really REALLY wrong re the Koch Brothers, how reliable are they to be accurate in what they report about climate change? Not much.

Actually the Koch Bros. have been pretty equal opportunity contributors in the climate change debate.
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/w...thers-changed-their-mind-about-climate-change

Sometimes it helps to actually do one's own research and read something other than the assigned and/or parroted talking points. Probably none of us have the access or means to do our own climate research so for what we know, we are dependent on others to tell us. And if we actually want the truth instead of just reinforcing our own beliefs/prejudices, it really helps to look for both sides of any story.

Given the huge amount of money involved, and the fact that only pro-global warming scientists are getting the huge lion's share of it, that is especially true when it comes to truth re climate change.

I didn't claim that they outspent the two political parties. I claimed they spent a lot of money on politics. My claim was they spent more than any other individual on politics. That claim still holds.

We don't know how much they spend. That's the biggest problem here. You go onto opensecrets and it'll probably show they spent like $2,000 or something ridiculous like that.

What is a small portion? 5%? 95%? We have no idea, just vague words from someone I wouldn't trust with a stick.

I didn't say Trump received from the Koch brothers. The Koch brothers have decided to go for a more direct route at the voters, rather than spending on the politicians. They have tried to change how people think, rather than getting their own politicians in power.

And how the fuck do you get climate change in here. Jeesuz foowkin' krist.

There's a massive difference between SCIENCE and trying to figure out where people are sending their money, if you haven't noticed.

The thread is about global warming so excuse me, If I try to relate to the topic at least in some way.

I provided links to support my opinion. Dispute them if you can.

Your unsupported opinion is noted.

The Global Warming topic here is more about the narrative than what is actually happening in the world. It's about who believes who.

The Koch brothers, and many other rich oil magnets, are pumping millions into denying there is any man made global warming, and people here are sucking it up.

The articles you provided didn't seem to answering any questions I had.

My problem with the koch brothers, who almost went to prison for stealing oil by the way, now have the blessing from our politicians to pollute for profit. Anything for profit and the public be damned.

link below, one of many about these thieving, polluting right wing heroes.


Uncloaking the Koch Brothers’ Ethics – Molly Aloysius: My Thoughts, My World

The political classes always look after each other. The Koch brothers helped get rid of restrictions on political spending and are really going for it now.

Doesn't it embarrass you at all to keep spouting this stuff that has been spoon fed to you when there is absolutely no truth in it?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Okay, I see you have the ability to post the web address of a dodgy websites. So...?

You're using insults again Ray. Are you some kind of child or an adult?

Obama (his name is Obama for fuck's sake) closed down the gulf after a major oil disaster which polluted the ocean and killed people.

How does this gain more control over the people exactly? Oh, you couldn't go off into the gulf and start drilling for oil. Could you just start doing this under Bush or any other president?

The Koch brothers don't spend the most money in politics? Really? Then who does?

Koch Brothers’ Budget of $889 Million for 2016 Is on Par With Both Parties’ Spending

"
Koch Brothers’ Budget of $889 Million for 2016 Is on Par With Both Parties’ Spending"

Do you know of any other person who spends around $889 million in a year on politics?

"Yes, they are combatting the GW freaks to sustain business. You see something wrong with that?"

Yes, I see they've bought you, and you've been taking in totally. You'll do as you're told.

Yes, there is data that has proven to be wrong. Some scientists will do things badly. But this doesn't mean the good data is any less good.

Your argument here is that there are a few bad apples, so all apples must be bad. That's bad logic Ray. I can imagine Koch brothers' paid workers sitting down and figuring out how to make people like you accept their way of thinking, and they're quite good at it.

They present things in a manner which makes you lose all sense of logic, in order to follow the religion of partisan politics and they KNOW you'll follow.

What do I do?

I don't own a car Ray, never have. I only use public transport. I walk to work. I use the heating only when necessary, it's cold now and I don't have any heating on.

However you've complete ignored all the stuff I said. The only way to reduce things is if the world is on board. The US has lost a lot of dirty industry to China. China will probably get fed up of a polluted world and send their dirty stuff elsewhere. Moving it around doesn't change things.

So, you're basically more interested in money than in actually having a planet that is livable?

And you are citing fake news. WAPO and the New York Times and numerous others all bought into a Bernie Sanders claim that the Koch Brothers would outspend both political parties which was utter nonsense. Not only was that budget considerably smaller than what both political parties spent in 2016, only about 1/3rd of it went federal, state, and local elections and the Koch Brothers themselves contributed only a small portion of that. I believe they gave nothing to President Trump and they actively campaigned and spoke against him in the primaries.
Sanders says Koch brothers are outspending either political party in 2016 elections

Donald Trump won’t be getting money from the billionaire Koch brothers

Ultimately President Trump was outspent by the Clinton campaign by at least 2 to 1 and he received nothing from the Koch Brothers who opposed his candidacy.
What Trump and Clinton spent per electoral vote

Now if your sources get their facts so really REALLY wrong re the Koch Brothers, how reliable are they to be accurate in what they report about climate change? Not much.

Actually the Koch Bros. have been pretty equal opportunity contributors in the climate change debate.
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/w...thers-changed-their-mind-about-climate-change

Sometimes it helps to actually do one's own research and read something other than the assigned and/or parroted talking points. Probably none of us have the access or means to do our own climate research so for what we know, we are dependent on others to tell us. And if we actually want the truth instead of just reinforcing our own beliefs/prejudices, it really helps to look for both sides of any story.

Given the huge amount of money involved, and the fact that only pro-global warming scientists are getting the huge lion's share of it, that is especially true when it comes to truth re climate change.

I didn't claim that they outspent the two political parties. I claimed they spent a lot of money on politics. My claim was they spent more than any other individual on politics. That claim still holds.

We don't know how much they spend. That's the biggest problem here. You go onto opensecrets and it'll probably show they spent like $2,000 or something ridiculous like that.

What is a small portion? 5%? 95%? We have no idea, just vague words from someone I wouldn't trust with a stick.

I didn't say Trump received from the Koch brothers. The Koch brothers have decided to go for a more direct route at the voters, rather than spending on the politicians. They have tried to change how people think, rather than getting their own politicians in power.

And how the fuck do you get climate change in here. Jeesuz foowkin' krist.

There's a massive difference between SCIENCE and trying to figure out where people are sending their money, if you haven't noticed.

The thread is about global warming so excuse me, If I try to relate to the topic at least in some way.

I provided links to support my opinion. Dispute them if you can.

Your unsupported opinion is noted.

The Global Warming topic here is more about the narrative than what is actually happening in the world. It's about who believes who.

The Koch brothers, and many other rich oil magnets, are pumping millions into denying there is any man made global warming, and people here are sucking it up.

The articles you provided didn't seem to answering any questions I had.

And you obviously did not read any of the links I posted previously that thoroughly debunk the talking point you just posted as fact.

I read what you posted in reply to me. I'm not going to search through random posts.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, why should people in politics tell the voters anything? Just force them to vote for two political parties and then leave them in ignorance for the rest of the time.

And just how do they "force" anybody? I don't recall a time when I went to vote and somebody put a gun to my head telling me I can't vote Libertarian or Green. Believe it or not, they let me (like all Americans) make the choice.

Some people think that politics should be transparent and open, not hidden away from the voters. But then some people aren't fascists.

You mean like "we have to pass the bill to see what's in it?"

The irony between the two paragraphs? No, come on then Ray, amuse me with the so called irony.

If you can't see it, then it's you that's blind. It can't be more obvious.

Oh, you find debates that go back and forth with the same message tiring do you? You want to liven it up with a lot of bullshit thrown in just to make it more entertaining. Well you got Trump, as entertaining as politics can be, I guess.

You bet. Trump is the most entertaining President in our lifetime--just like DumBama was the mosts leftist and anti-business in our lifetime.

Oh, I see Ray, I show you examples of your complete bullshit and you deflect with "why do you bring this up every time?"

It's called changing the subject. You do it all the time. Not only is it boring, but against USMB rules.

Well Ray, some people happen to think that your actions in the past can show how you react in the present and future. I could go through many posts of your and find absolute drivel. Stuff that has no logic, no sense, and you've backed it up with nothing, and whenever someone calls you out on it, you go off hiding, and then come back later.

Really? Then quote me on WTF you're talking about because you are making it all up as usual.

Ray, you claim to have opinions on topics where you don't even understand the terminology of the topic and you can't even be fucking bothered to use an internet search engine to find out, and you don't remember what people tell you, in fact you probably didn't even fucking read it.

Why do I need to read the story about the Three Pigs over and over again? I know how it turns out, just as I know the outcome between the Road Runner and the wolf.

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously Ray, when you don't read, don't understand and post complete crap? Really? Why should anyone take you seriously?

Apparently you do.

Flippin' hell Ray. I didn't say they forced people. I was being sarcastic and I did do it in such a way that it's easy to get on the internet.

Yes, I mean like people who want to pass the bill before it can be seen is not very transparent. Is this your way of deflecting by stating something obvious?

No Ray, I can't see it, so it can't be so fucking obvious. If it's so obvious I doubt you'll have trouble telling me. If you can't put it down in writing, I'm going to assume it's not there. So, let's have it. Or is this just more deflecting?

Yes, I see, you like Trump because he manages to keep your attention when otherwise normal "running the country" makes you lose concentration after five minutes.

You know Ray, I'd rather have someone COMPETENT running the country and let the entertainers do entertaining without pretending to run the country. You seem to think that entertainers should be presidents. Why not have a prozzie as your doctor then? I mean, she'll be hotter looking than the fucking boring doctor and she won't be like "you've got cancer" she'll be like "wow, your dick is so huge", I know the latter sounds so much better Ray, but it doesn't solve the problem of YOU'VE GOT FUCKING CANCER.

No Ray, it's not "changing the subject", it's "the subject is complex", but seeing as you can't read people's posts and you can't look up simple things like FPTP and you can't.... fuck it Ray, you can't really debate at all. It's sad, but true. You spend your whole time deflecting. You want to think you're intelligent and you can do this shit, but every time someone points out that you can't do basic shit like reading, you get all defensive. It's tiring Ray.

The rest of your post is just CRAP. It has nothing to do with anything. It's just you fucking around pretending you can actually do this shit.

What kind of a person can't even look up an acronym on the internet? What kind of a person gets told what it means and still can't figure it out a few months later?

What is the fucking point talking to someone who you explain the basics of a subject to, because they don't have the smallest fucking clue what the subject is about, but they still have the opinion that they know best.

How can you know something when you don't know a single thing about the issue?

You're an expert in something, but don't know the basics?

Tell me Ray, how the fuck am I supposed to debate with someone who just makes it all up? Tell me.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Yeah, why should people in politics tell the voters anything? Just force them to vote for two political parties and then leave them in ignorance for the rest of the time.

And just how do they "force" anybody? I don't recall a time when I went to vote and somebody put a gun to my head telling me I can't vote Libertarian or Green. Believe it or not, they let me (like all Americans) make the choice.

Some people think that politics should be transparent and open, not hidden away from the voters. But then some people aren't fascists.

You mean like "we have to pass the bill to see what's in it?"

The irony between the two paragraphs? No, come on then Ray, amuse me with the so called irony.

If you can't see it, then it's you that's blind. It can't be more obvious.

Oh, you find debates that go back and forth with the same message tiring do you? You want to liven it up with a lot of bullshit thrown in just to make it more entertaining. Well you got Trump, as entertaining as politics can be, I guess.

You bet. Trump is the most entertaining President in our lifetime--just like DumBama was the mosts leftist and anti-business in our lifetime.

Oh, I see Ray, I show you examples of your complete bullshit and you deflect with "why do you bring this up every time?"

It's called changing the subject. You do it all the time. Not only is it boring, but against USMB rules.

Well Ray, some people happen to think that your actions in the past can show how you react in the present and future. I could go through many posts of your and find absolute drivel. Stuff that has no logic, no sense, and you've backed it up with nothing, and whenever someone calls you out on it, you go off hiding, and then come back later.

Really? Then quote me on WTF you're talking about because you are making it all up as usual.

Ray, you claim to have opinions on topics where you don't even understand the terminology of the topic and you can't even be fucking bothered to use an internet search engine to find out, and you don't remember what people tell you, in fact you probably didn't even fucking read it.

Why do I need to read the story about the Three Pigs over and over again? I know how it turns out, just as I know the outcome between the Road Runner and the wolf.

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously Ray, when you don't read, don't understand and post complete crap? Really? Why should anyone take you seriously?

Apparently you do.

Flippin' hell Ray. I didn't say they forced people. I was being sarcastic and I did do it in such a way that it's easy to get on the internet.

Yes, I mean like people who want to pass the bill before it can be seen is not very transparent. Is this your way of deflecting by stating something obvious?

No Ray, I can't see it, so it can't be so fucking obvious. If it's so obvious I doubt you'll have trouble telling me. If you can't put it down in writing, I'm going to assume it's not there. So, let's have it. Or is this just more deflecting?

Yes, I see, you like Trump because he manages to keep your attention when otherwise normal "running the country" makes you lose concentration after five minutes.

You know Ray, I'd rather have someone COMPETENT running the country and let the entertainers do entertaining without pretending to run the country. You seem to think that entertainers should be presidents. Why not have a prozzie as your doctor then? I mean, she'll be hotter looking than the fucking boring doctor and she won't be like "you've got cancer" she'll be like "wow, your dick is so huge", I know the latter sounds so much better Ray, but it doesn't solve the problem of YOU'VE GOT FUCKING CANCER.

No Ray, it's not "changing the subject", it's "the subject is complex", but seeing as you can't read people's posts and you can't look up simple things like FPTP and you can't.... fuck it Ray, you can't really debate at all. It's sad, but true. You spend your whole time deflecting. You want to think you're intelligent and you can do this shit, but every time someone points out that you can't do basic shit like reading, you get all defensive. It's tiring Ray.

The rest of your post is just CRAP. It has nothing to do with anything. It's just you fucking around pretending you can actually do this shit.

What kind of a person can't even look up an acronym on the internet? What kind of a person gets told what it means and still can't figure it out a few months later?

What is the fucking point talking to someone who you explain the basics of a subject to, because they don't have the smallest fucking clue what the subject is about, but they still have the opinion that they know best.

How can you know something when you don't know a single thing about the issue?

You're an expert in something, but don't know the basics?

Tell me Ray, how the fuck am I supposed to debate with someone who just makes it all up? Tell me.

Translation (as much as I can figure)

You want a well spoken clown that can read off a teleprompter like Obama instead of a man who doesn't give a shit about PC am I correct?



So did you hate

Payton?

McCarther ?

JFK?

BILL clinton ?

Reagen?

Churchill?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Yeah, why should people in politics tell the voters anything? Just force them to vote for two political parties and then leave them in ignorance for the rest of the time.

And just how do they "force" anybody? I don't recall a time when I went to vote and somebody put a gun to my head telling me I can't vote Libertarian or Green. Believe it or not, they let me (like all Americans) make the choice.

Some people think that politics should be transparent and open, not hidden away from the voters. But then some people aren't fascists.

You mean like "we have to pass the bill to see what's in it?"

The irony between the two paragraphs? No, come on then Ray, amuse me with the so called irony.

If you can't see it, then it's you that's blind. It can't be more obvious.

Oh, you find debates that go back and forth with the same message tiring do you? You want to liven it up with a lot of bullshit thrown in just to make it more entertaining. Well you got Trump, as entertaining as politics can be, I guess.

You bet. Trump is the most entertaining President in our lifetime--just like DumBama was the mosts leftist and anti-business in our lifetime.

Oh, I see Ray, I show you examples of your complete bullshit and you deflect with "why do you bring this up every time?"

It's called changing the subject. You do it all the time. Not only is it boring, but against USMB rules.

Well Ray, some people happen to think that your actions in the past can show how you react in the present and future. I could go through many posts of your and find absolute drivel. Stuff that has no logic, no sense, and you've backed it up with nothing, and whenever someone calls you out on it, you go off hiding, and then come back later.

Really? Then quote me on WTF you're talking about because you are making it all up as usual.

Ray, you claim to have opinions on topics where you don't even understand the terminology of the topic and you can't even be fucking bothered to use an internet search engine to find out, and you don't remember what people tell you, in fact you probably didn't even fucking read it.

Why do I need to read the story about the Three Pigs over and over again? I know how it turns out, just as I know the outcome between the Road Runner and the wolf.

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously Ray, when you don't read, don't understand and post complete crap? Really? Why should anyone take you seriously?

Apparently you do.

Flippin' hell Ray. I didn't say they forced people. I was being sarcastic and I did do it in such a way that it's easy to get on the internet.

Yes, I mean like people who want to pass the bill before it can be seen is not very transparent. Is this your way of deflecting by stating something obvious?

No Ray, I can't see it, so it can't be so fucking obvious. If it's so obvious I doubt you'll have trouble telling me. If you can't put it down in writing, I'm going to assume it's not there. So, let's have it. Or is this just more deflecting?

Yes, I see, you like Trump because he manages to keep your attention when otherwise normal "running the country" makes you lose concentration after five minutes.

You know Ray, I'd rather have someone COMPETENT running the country and let the entertainers do entertaining without pretending to run the country. You seem to think that entertainers should be presidents. Why not have a prozzie as your doctor then? I mean, she'll be hotter looking than the fucking boring doctor and she won't be like "you've got cancer" she'll be like "wow, your dick is so huge", I know the latter sounds so much better Ray, but it doesn't solve the problem of YOU'VE GOT FUCKING CANCER.

No Ray, it's not "changing the subject", it's "the subject is complex", but seeing as you can't read people's posts and you can't look up simple things like FPTP and you can't.... fuck it Ray, you can't really debate at all. It's sad, but true. You spend your whole time deflecting. You want to think you're intelligent and you can do this shit, but every time someone points out that you can't do basic shit like reading, you get all defensive. It's tiring Ray.

The rest of your post is just CRAP. It has nothing to do with anything. It's just you fucking around pretending you can actually do this shit.

What kind of a person can't even look up an acronym on the internet? What kind of a person gets told what it means and still can't figure it out a few months later?

What is the fucking point talking to someone who you explain the basics of a subject to, because they don't have the smallest fucking clue what the subject is about, but they still have the opinion that they know best.

How can you know something when you don't know a single thing about the issue?

You're an expert in something, but don't know the basics?

Tell me Ray, how the fuck am I supposed to debate with someone who just makes it all up? Tell me.

Leave Ray alone take me on


Of course you won't

 

[frigidweirdo]

And you are citing fake news. WAPO and the New York Times and numerous others all bought into a Bernie Sanders claim that the Koch Brothers would outspend both political parties which was utter nonsense. Not only was that budget considerably smaller than what both political parties spent in 2016, only about 1/3rd of it went federal, state, and local elections and the Koch Brothers themselves contributed only a small portion of that. I believe they gave nothing to President Trump and they actively campaigned and spoke against him in the primaries.
Sanders says Koch brothers are outspending either political party in 2016 elections

Donald Trump won’t be getting money from the billionaire Koch brothers

Ultimately President Trump was outspent by the Clinton campaign by at least 2 to 1 and he received nothing from the Koch Brothers who opposed his candidacy.
What Trump and Clinton spent per electoral vote

Now if your sources get their facts so really REALLY wrong re the Koch Brothers, how reliable are they to be accurate in what they report about climate change? Not much.

Actually the Koch Bros. have been pretty equal opportunity contributors in the climate change debate.
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/w...thers-changed-their-mind-about-climate-change

Sometimes it helps to actually do one's own research and read something other than the assigned and/or parroted talking points. Probably none of us have the access or means to do our own climate research so for what we know, we are dependent on others to tell us. And if we actually want the truth instead of just reinforcing our own beliefs/prejudices, it really helps to look for both sides of any story.

Given the huge amount of money involved, and the fact that only pro-global warming scientists are getting the huge lion's share of it, that is especially true when it comes to truth re climate change.

I didn't claim that they outspent the two political parties. I claimed they spent a lot of money on politics. My claim was they spent more than any other individual on politics. That claim still holds.

We don't know how much they spend. That's the biggest problem here. You go onto opensecrets and it'll probably show they spent like $2,000 or something ridiculous like that.

What is a small portion? 5%? 95%? We have no idea, just vague words from someone I wouldn't trust with a stick.

I didn't say Trump received from the Koch brothers. The Koch brothers have decided to go for a more direct route at the voters, rather than spending on the politicians. They have tried to change how people think, rather than getting their own politicians in power.

And how the fuck do you get climate change in here. Jeesuz foowkin' krist.

There's a massive difference between SCIENCE and trying to figure out where people are sending their money, if you haven't noticed.

The thread is about global warming so excuse me, If I try to relate to the topic at least in some way.

I provided links to support my opinion. Dispute them if you can.

Your unsupported opinion is noted.

The Global Warming topic here is more about the narrative than what is actually happening in the world. It's about who believes who.

The Koch brothers, and many other rich oil magnets, are pumping millions into denying there is any man made global warming, and people here are sucking it up.

The articles you provided didn't seem to answering any questions I had.

My problem with the koch brothers, who almost went to prison for stealing oil by the way, now have the blessing from our politicians to pollute for profit. Anything for profit and the public be damned.

link below, one of many about these thieving, polluting right wing heroes.


Uncloaking the Koch Brothers’ Ethics – Molly Aloysius: My Thoughts, My World

Your problem with the Koch Bros is going to places like the website you linked for your information. If you consult other than the leftwing propaganda sites, you will get a very different perspective.

Sure, get a different perspective. Potentially a perspective written by someone being paid for by the Koch brothers themselves.

Is that going to be an unbiased perspective? No, not at all.

The problem is that you can look at anything the Koch brothers have put money into, politically, and you'll basically find the same message throughout. That message is something like "The degree of financial support was not spelled out." which comes from The Kochs Aren't the Only Funders of Cato

"A review of recent tax returns filed by Koch foundations shows no donations to Cato."

"David Koch, who serves as a trustee, is listed in the institute's 2010 annual report as a donor of $25,000 or more, but there is no time line given for his contributions."

So, David Koch put in "more than $25,000", well $100 million is more than $25,000, I believe.

""Charles Koch and David Koch have contributed tens of millions of dollars to Cato Institute, including more than $13 million since 2000."

And $100 million is also more than $13 million.

Then you have

'"Charles stopped donating personally around 1991 (I don't have an exact date.) He did continue to contribute about $250,000 a year through a foundation he controls (The Claude Lambe Foundation), but that ceased in 2010."

So, Charles didn't donate to the Cato Institute after about 1991, however he did donate to the Cato Institute up until 2010 through another foundation. And then what? He moved money through another institute?

"David contributed varying amounts from the time he became a shareholder and board member in the 1980s, but his contributions ceased in 2010 as well."

Ceased as a direct individual, or ceased totally? Oh, again, we don't know.

""Total contributions from the Kochs over our 35 year existence is about $30 million."

Directly or indirectly? We don't know.

"During that time, the Cato Institute has raised more than $340 million, so over the life of the Institute, their contributions have amounted to about 10 percent of our funding.

Direct or indirect? We don't know.

"Corporate sponsors include such major companies as FedEx, Google, CME Group and Whole Foods."

What's a "Corporate sponsor" and what do they contribute and what do they get out of it?

Koch Industries Inc. Takes Position in CME Group Inc. (NASDAQ:CME)

"
Koch Industries Inc. Takes Position in CME Group Inc. (NASDAQ:CME)"

Ah. The Koch brothers get a position in the CME group inc. which then goes and funds the Koch Brothers' little institute. Surprise!!!

I think I could go on all day doing this, finding the little bits of information about their foundations that they don't put all the money into, but somehow manage to be connected to companies that do fund these things, and somehow have a million different foundations which they push money through so that it doesn't look like they're finding it totally, and then they go and make vague comments about how they don't finance the whole of this organization but it's got lots of donors, which probably seems to be the Koch brothers in various different entities.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yeah, why should people in politics tell the voters anything? Just force them to vote for two political parties and then leave them in ignorance for the rest of the time.

And just how do they "force" anybody? I don't recall a time when I went to vote and somebody put a gun to my head telling me I can't vote Libertarian or Green. Believe it or not, they let me (like all Americans) make the choice.

Some people think that politics should be transparent and open, not hidden away from the voters. But then some people aren't fascists.

You mean like "we have to pass the bill to see what's in it?"

The irony between the two paragraphs? No, come on then Ray, amuse me with the so called irony.

If you can't see it, then it's you that's blind. It can't be more obvious.

Oh, you find debates that go back and forth with the same message tiring do you? You want to liven it up with a lot of bullshit thrown in just to make it more entertaining. Well you got Trump, as entertaining as politics can be, I guess.

You bet. Trump is the most entertaining President in our lifetime--just like DumBama was the mosts leftist and anti-business in our lifetime.

Oh, I see Ray, I show you examples of your complete bullshit and you deflect with "why do you bring this up every time?"

It's called changing the subject. You do it all the time. Not only is it boring, but against USMB rules.

Well Ray, some people happen to think that your actions in the past can show how you react in the present and future. I could go through many posts of your and find absolute drivel. Stuff that has no logic, no sense, and you've backed it up with nothing, and whenever someone calls you out on it, you go off hiding, and then come back later.

Really? Then quote me on WTF you're talking about because you are making it all up as usual.

Ray, you claim to have opinions on topics where you don't even understand the terminology of the topic and you can't even be fucking bothered to use an internet search engine to find out, and you don't remember what people tell you, in fact you probably didn't even fucking read it.

Why do I need to read the story about the Three Pigs over and over again? I know how it turns out, just as I know the outcome between the Road Runner and the wolf.

How do you expect anyone to take you seriously Ray, when you don't read, don't understand and post complete crap? Really? Why should anyone take you seriously?

Apparently you do.

Flippin' hell Ray. I didn't say they forced people. I was being sarcastic and I did do it in such a way that it's easy to get on the internet.

Yes, I mean like people who want to pass the bill before it can be seen is not very transparent. Is this your way of deflecting by stating something obvious?

No Ray, I can't see it, so it can't be so fucking obvious. If it's so obvious I doubt you'll have trouble telling me. If you can't put it down in writing, I'm going to assume it's not there. So, let's have it. Or is this just more deflecting?

Yes, I see, you like Trump because he manages to keep your attention when otherwise normal "running the country" makes you lose concentration after five minutes.

You know Ray, I'd rather have someone COMPETENT running the country and let the entertainers do entertaining without pretending to run the country. You seem to think that entertainers should be presidents. Why not have a prozzie as your doctor then? I mean, she'll be hotter looking than the fucking boring doctor and she won't be like "you've got cancer" she'll be like "wow, your dick is so huge", I know the latter sounds so much better Ray, but it doesn't solve the problem of YOU'VE GOT FUCKING CANCER.

No Ray, it's not "changing the subject", it's "the subject is complex", but seeing as you can't read people's posts and you can't look up simple things like FPTP and you can't.... fuck it Ray, you can't really debate at all. It's sad, but true. You spend your whole time deflecting. You want to think you're intelligent and you can do this shit, but every time someone points out that you can't do basic shit like reading, you get all defensive. It's tiring Ray.

The rest of your post is just CRAP. It has nothing to do with anything. It's just you fucking around pretending you can actually do this shit.

What kind of a person can't even look up an acronym on the internet? What kind of a person gets told what it means and still can't figure it out a few months later?

What is the fucking point talking to someone who you explain the basics of a subject to, because they don't have the smallest fucking clue what the subject is about, but they still have the opinion that they know best.

How can you know something when you don't know a single thing about the issue?

You're an expert in something, but don't know the basics?

Tell me Ray, how the fuck am I supposed to debate with someone who just makes it all up? Tell me.

Leave Ray alone take me on


Of course you won't

Thank you Bear but I'm very entertained by him (her) taking on me. Kind of like using the laser pen to entertain your dog.