Why Do Liberals Complain About the Koch Bros but not George Soros?

[RandomVariable]

Liberals being hypocrites, liars and scum...believe the rules are different for them.

They are allowed to say whatever they like about others, but the same doesn't apply to others counter to their opinion.

So if a conservative gives money to his political nominee, that is illegal and immoral thus must be stopped...nevermind their scumbags give more money to their fellow goons.

When a someone, anyone, gives money to buy influence and favors from the U.S. government, yeah, liberals have a problem with that.

No they don't. They sure as hell don't have a problem with George Soros.

Yes, they do!

 

[1776]

Asswipe...why are California liberals interested in who is Governor in "another state?" They sent money to kick Scott Walker out of office in Wisconsin and many of them will never step foot in Wisconsin.

So the Kochs can't support GOP politicians running for CONGRESS or the White House, but liberals can funnel money to red states to counter someone running for city mayor, Governor, etc....typical fucking idiocy.

It's ok for Hollywood liberals to give money to some Democrap woman running for Gov in Texas despite not having any connection to Texas, but the Kochs can't give money to a GOP POTUS nominee....that is liberal logic.

There is no such thing as a local election any more.

 

[1776]

English....a planet far, far away from you.

If I was wanted to be Ambassador to Guam and gave $100 in order to get that position then that is wrong. If I get the position of Ambassador to Guam and I gave $100 because I believe in what that candidate stood for then that is OK. One can not automatically say one or the other. When some of these groups get people all riled up because they believe in "freedom" and the other person is a "commie" then what that group is really after is suspect.

 

[bripat9643]

- See more at: The REAL George Soros: An evil, despicable excuse for a human being. No wonder the libs love the POS ? 2.0: The Blogmocracy

Hope you don't mind I cut most of that out. I left the URL just in case. This is the problem with the rightie propaganda machine. Most of the people just get really upset about the liberal commie socialists. Then someone like you comes along. Completely over the edge, foaming at the mouth, all sense of proportion completely gone from your mind. If you ever met the Koch Brothers to shake their hands for being the savior of your country they would probably call security.

Are you claiming the the article lied about Goerge Soros?

If they Koch brothers had planned to meet me, why would they call security? IF they hadn't planned to meet me, then they would be justified in calling security.

 

[bripat9643]

When a someone, anyone, gives money to buy influence and favors from the U.S. government, yeah, liberals have a problem with that.

No they don't. They sure as hell don't have a problem with George Soros.

Yes, they do!

I've never seen a single liberal in this forum attack George Soros.

End of story.

 

[RandomVariable]

Asswipe...why are California liberals interested in who is Governor in "another state?" They sent money to kick Scott Walker out of office in Wisconsin and many of them will never step foot in Wisconsin.

So the Kochs can't support GOP politicians running for CONGRESS or the White House, but liberals can funnel money to red states to counter someone running for city mayor, Governor, etc....typical fucking idiocy.

It's ok for Hollywood liberals to give money to some Democrap woman running for Gov in Texas despite not having any connection to Texas, but the Kochs can't give money to a GOP POTUS nominee....that is liberal logic.

There is no such thing as a local election any more.

What is it with you righties tonight? Wow. Anyone for some green tea and scented candles? Like I said everyone can give money to anyone, anywhere, any race, U.S. citizen that is, although I am not sure about even that. We're here on the boards discussing Senator Hagan's reelection, why is that?

 

[1776]

Uh....I'm pointing out your liberal hypocrisy.

The Kochs aren't allowed to support their politicians but liberals in California can support a liberal dog catcher in North Dakota if say Sarah Palin was running against the dog catcher.

Oh, you're a stupid ass to believe liberals "don't buy power" through those they send to DC with political donations.

Obama got the majority of Wall Street money vs Bush + Romney....because they FEARED him.

Asswipe...why are California liberals interested in who is Governor in "another state?" They sent money to kick Scott Walker out of office in Wisconsin and many of them will never step foot in Wisconsin.

So the Kochs can't support GOP politicians running for CONGRESS or the White House, but liberals can funnel money to red states to counter someone running for city mayor, Governor, etc....typical fucking idiocy.

There is no such thing as a local election any more.

What is it with you righties tonight? Wow. Anyone for some green tea and scented candles? Like I said everyone can give money to anyone, anywhere, any race, U.S. citizen that is, although I am not sure about even that. We're here on the boards discussing Senator Hagan's reelection, why is that?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

how can you defend them stealing elections?

So when the Republicans say, "That shit happened 30 years ago, can we be allowed to have a say again in ballot security in areas with minorities?", anybody who supports that wants elections to be stolen?

Your ability to analyze what you're reading is unforgiveably piss-poor. Whoever was responsible for teaching you basic comprehension should be dragged into the street and flogged publicly.

 

[RandomVariable]

Uh....I'm pointing out your liberal hypocrisy.

The Kochs aren't allowed to support their politicians but liberals in California can support a liberal dog catcher in North Dakota if say Sarah Palin was running against the dog catcher.

Oh, you're a stupid ass to believe liberals "don't buy power" through those they send to DC with political donations.

Obama got the majority of Wall Street money vs Bush + Romney....because they FEARED him.

Asswipe...why are California liberals interested in who is Governor in "another state?" They sent money to kick Scott Walker out of office in Wisconsin and many of them will never step foot in Wisconsin.

So the Kochs can't support GOP politicians running for CONGRESS or the White House, but liberals can funnel money to red states to counter someone running for city mayor, Governor, etc....typical fucking idiocy.

What is it with you righties tonight? Wow. Anyone for some green tea and scented candles? Like I said everyone can give money to anyone, anywhere, any race, U.S. citizen that is, although I am not sure about even that. We're here on the boards discussing Senator Hagan's reelection, why is that?

OK. I think I see the disconnect here. We liberals aren't saying that the Koch Brothers can't give money to anyone, anywhere. What we are saying is that the Koch Brothers are lying scum who are corrupting our government with their self-serving propaganda and immoral tactics of hate mongering. (I put a little edge on that last sentence just to keep with the mood of the evening. Did you like it? )

 

[1776]

Uh, you're the only scumbag liberal saying that.

Soros is a Nazi supporting piece of shit that made his money harming the economies of third world banana republics....so I'd say he is going to hell before the Kochs but you will be holding his hand in hell.

Uh....I'm pointing out your liberal hypocrisy.

The Kochs aren't allowed to support their politicians but liberals in California can support a liberal dog catcher in North Dakota if say Sarah Palin was running against the dog catcher.

Oh, you're a stupid ass to believe liberals "don't buy power" through those they send to DC with political donations.

Obama got the majority of Wall Street money vs Bush + Romney....because they FEARED him.

What is it with you righties tonight? Wow. Anyone for some green tea and scented candles? Like I said everyone can give money to anyone, anywhere, any race, U.S. citizen that is, although I am not sure about even that. We're here on the boards discussing Senator Hagan's reelection, why is that?

OK. I think I see the disconnect here. We liberals aren't saying that the Koch Brothers can't give money to anyone, anywhere. What we are saying is that the Koch Brothers are lying scum who are corrupting our government with their self-serving propaganda and immoral tactics of hate mongering. (I put a little edge on that last sentence just to keep with the mood of the evening. Did you like it? )

 

[bripat9643]

Uh....I'm pointing out your liberal hypocrisy.

The Kochs aren't allowed to support their politicians but liberals in California can support a liberal dog catcher in North Dakota if say Sarah Palin was running against the dog catcher.

Oh, you're a stupid ass to believe liberals "don't buy power" through those they send to DC with political donations.

Obama got the majority of Wall Street money vs Bush + Romney....because they FEARED him.

What is it with you righties tonight? Wow. Anyone for some green tea and scented candles? Like I said everyone can give money to anyone, anywhere, any race, U.S. citizen that is, although I am not sure about even that. We're here on the boards discussing Senator Hagan's reelection, why is that?

OK. I think I see the disconnect here. We liberals aren't saying that the Koch Brothers can't give money to anyone, anywhere. What we are saying is that the Koch Brothers are lying scum who are corrupting our government with their self-serving propaganda and immoral tactics of hate mongering. (I put a little edge on that last sentence just to keep with the mood of the evening. Did you like it? )

So how are Democrats any different?

 

[RandomVariable]

Uh, you're the only scumbag liberal saying that.

Soros is a Nazi supporting piece of shit that made his money harming the economies of third world banana republics....so I'd say he is going to hell before the Kochs but you will be holding his hand in hell.

Uh....I'm pointing out your liberal hypocrisy.

The Kochs aren't allowed to support their politicians but liberals in California can support a liberal dog catcher in North Dakota if say Sarah Palin was running against the dog catcher.

Oh, you're a stupid ass to believe liberals "don't buy power" through those they send to DC with political donations.

Obama got the majority of Wall Street money vs Bush + Romney....because they FEARED him.

OK. I think I see the disconnect here. We liberals aren't saying that the Koch Brothers can't give money to anyone, anywhere. What we are saying is that the Koch Brothers are lying scum who are corrupting our government with their self-serving propaganda and immoral tactics of hate mongering. (I put a little edge on that last sentence just to keep with the mood of the evening. Did you like it? )

I speak on behalf of my brethren. What do you know about developing countries' economics anyway? Let me guess, you learned everything you know from talk radio.

 

[RandomVariable]

Uh....I'm pointing out your liberal hypocrisy.

The Kochs aren't allowed to support their politicians but liberals in California can support a liberal dog catcher in North Dakota if say Sarah Palin was running against the dog catcher.

Oh, you're a stupid ass to believe liberals "don't buy power" through those they send to DC with political donations.

Obama got the majority of Wall Street money vs Bush + Romney....because they FEARED him.

OK. I think I see the disconnect here. We liberals aren't saying that the Koch Brothers can't give money to anyone, anywhere. What we are saying is that the Koch Brothers are lying scum who are corrupting our government with their self-serving propaganda and immoral tactics of hate mongering. (I put a little edge on that last sentence just to keep with the mood of the evening. Did you like it? )

So how are Democrats any different?

We believe in supporting poor women and children for one.

 

[1776]

Shitbag....AB in Economics, MBA and access to intel you will never know about....shut the fuck up.

Uh, you're the only scumbag liberal saying that.

Soros is a Nazi supporting piece of shit that made his money harming the economies of third world banana republics....so I'd say he is going to hell before the Kochs but you will be holding his hand in hell.

OK. I think I see the disconnect here. We liberals aren't saying that the Koch Brothers can't give money to anyone, anywhere. What we are saying is that the Koch Brothers are lying scum who are corrupting our government with their self-serving propaganda and immoral tactics of hate mongering. (I put a little edge on that last sentence just to keep with the mood of the evening. Did you like it? )

I speak on behalf of my brethren. What do you know about developing countries' economics anyway? Let me guess, you learned everything you know from talk radio.

 

[bripat9643]

OK. I think I see the disconnect here. We liberals aren't saying that the Koch Brothers can't give money to anyone, anywhere. What we are saying is that the Koch Brothers are lying scum who are corrupting our government with their self-serving propaganda and immoral tactics of hate mongering. (I put a little edge on that last sentence just to keep with the mood of the evening. Did you like it? )

So how are Democrats any different?

We believe in supporting poor women and children for one.

You mean you believe in looting everyone else to buy off a constituent group.

 

[RandomVariable]

Shitbag....AB in Economics, MBA and access to intel you will never know about....shut the fuck up.

Uh, you're the only scumbag liberal saying that.

Soros is a Nazi supporting piece of shit that made his money harming the economies of third world banana republics....so I'd say he is going to hell before the Kochs but you will be holding his hand in hell.

I speak on behalf of my brethren. What do you know about developing countries' economics anyway? Let me guess, you learned everything you know from talk radio.

First of all, not impressed and second of all, I got OSINT, you ain't got nothin' on me.

 

[1776]

OSINT?

Strange in my +20 years I never heard of such a thing and I've been inside places you will never know about.

After googling OSINT...open source intelligence aka unclass or leaked classified info....what a joke.

Shitbag....AB in Economics, MBA and access to intel you will never know about....shut the fuck up.

I speak on behalf of my brethren. What do you know about developing countries' economics anyway? Let me guess, you learned everything you know from talk radio.

First of all, not impressed and second of all, I got OSINT, you ain't got nothin' on me.

 

[Londoner]

It's the Clinton Principal.

Clinton discovered a funding problem plaguing the post sixties Left, which had some serious electoral problems after Reagan shattered the New Deal Coalition and delivered the South and Heartland to the GOP.

Clinton realized that Reagan successfully harnessed the financial leverage of business and created the blueprints for a genuine revolution. The Left only had a dying union movement coupled with a host of small donor bases spread over environmental, racial and lesser social constructs. These funding sources could not compete with business, which hated the Left's tax and regulatory policies.

So Clinton courted Wall Street and fucked Labor through NAFTA. He made the Left competitive again. Essentially, by tapping into the Right's traditional funding sources, Clinton beat them at their own game.

Problem is, business would rather support the party of low taxes, so the compact Clinton made with Wall Street is vulnerable, not least because Obama is perceived as anti-business.

To answer the OPs question. I think the Left is trapped between a rock and hard place. Either they tap into the deepest pockets, or they lose elections to the most well funded political party in history. Truth be told: if your party promises to lower the taxes and cut regulations on Big Business, than your party will always have a funding advantage that forces the opposition into hard decisions.

This is why the real battle field is the Supreme Court, where the goal is to protect legislation which shines a brighter light on who funds government. Tragically, the Left lost the battle on Citizens United. As a result, the Right has successfully made it easier for special interests to buy government. Obama fought the ruling, but Roberts, Scalia and the Conservative Movement won. Now, big money is the only game in town.

 

[RandomVariable]

So how are Democrats any different?

We believe in supporting poor women and children for one.

You mean you believe in looting everyone else to buy off a constituent group.

No, I mean helping out someone who needs it because they need it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Supreme Court denies RNC bid to end voter fraud consent decree

January 14, 2013




The court’s action is a victory for the DNC, and it comes after an election year in which the two parties regularly exchanged charges over “voter fraud” and “voter intimidation.” But most of the recent battles have been fought on the state level, and it is not clear whether the long-standing consent decree has had much impact.

The case began in 1981 when the RNC created a “national ballot security task force” that, among other things, undertook mailing campaigns targeted at black and Latino neighborhoods in New Jersey. If mailers were returned undelivered, party activists put those voters on a list to be challenged if they showed up to cast a ballot. In addition, the party was alleged to have hired off-duty law enforcement officers to “patrol” minority neighborhoods on election day.

The DNC sued the RNC in federal court, alleging its activities violated the Voting Rights Act and were intended to suppress voting among minorities. Rather than fight the charges in a trial, the RNC agreed to a consent decree promising to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities … directed toward [election] districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic minority populations.”

The consent decree has remained in effect, and DNC lawyers say they have gone to court in states such as Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Pennsylvania to challenge Republican activities that appear to target mostly black precincts. Both sides agree, however, that the consent decree does not forbid “normal poll watching” by Republican officials.


Supreme Court denies RNC bid to end voter fraud consent decree - Los Angeles Times

And this has to do with what?
Your attempt to derail the thread is a FAIL.