Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Letter: Perfect storm

April 14, 2014

Advertisement

To the editor:

The Journal-World seems to be working overtime to defend and celebrate the political activities of the Koch brothers. You have been scolding the peasants for not appreciating the brothers’ holy mission to remake American in their own image. After all, they are only exercising their God-given right to sway the electorate by spending their considerable fortune. The Supreme Court recently blessed that mission. So why are some of the peasants cranky about all this? The problem is that their well-financed political activism makes a mockery of the principle of one person, one vote. George Orwell said it best: All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

The Koch boys think you are a socialist or worse if you want your kids to have a decent education or maybe you way affordable health care or breathable air or a wage a family can live on. Remember when the Kansas Legislature did things like maintain the infrastructure of the state, support K-12 schools and higher education and work with local governments to solve real problems? The Koch brothers worked hard to put the present crop of extremist legislators in office. Add a pliable and disinterested electorate, and we have a perfect storm.

Comments

Gerald Kerr 6 months, 1 week ago

Richard, you have compiled a near exaustive list of current DNC and Harry Reid talking points in the past years campaign solicitations.

4

Richard Heckler 6 months, 1 week ago

Good Salaries for Teachers !!!!! YES YES

Teacher wages are usually a forgotten subject in Kansas conversation. Better wages for teachers bring more tax dollars home to respective communities! We’re talking local economic growth.

Why shouldn't teachers receive somewhat substantial salaries:

  • for the years they spent in college

  • for the long teaching days,

  • for the time spent reviewing homework at home

  • for the long hours grading exams at home

  • for the time and money spent upgrading their credentials annually

  • for the commitment to teaching the children in the communities

  • for putting up with the abuse coming out of Topeka,Kansas.

  • for the time spent dealing with children who refuse to do homework

From an LJW 2003 poll Teacher Salary Support:

Would you favor a sales tax increase to provide more money for Lawrence teacher salaries?

Of 5,198 votes increasing teacher salaries 4,204 votes in favor of increased teacher salaries. 80% of 5198 votes said yes to a sales tax increase to support teaching salaries. http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2003/mar/teacher_salaries/

5

Gerald Kerr 6 months, 1 week ago

Any hard working kansan can ask for good salaries. They all deserve them too. Unfortunately public sector salaries already average some 46% more than private sector salaries. In part this is due to very high taxes which choke the private sector and rob citizens of the ability to keep a fair share of their hard earned wages. Taxes that pay state public employees so much more than their private sector counterparts are a travesty which will not be sustained despite the constant bleatings of lobbyists pandering for more. More!

1

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Other than when you look at qualifications and experience, sure.

2

Kevin Elliott 6 months, 1 week ago

Your failure is to appreciate the fact that better salaries attract and retain better teachers and that means better educated students. The better educated the people, the better economic base and lower crime rates in the community. I understand investing in our children, our future is not a luxury but rather essential for a vital community.

1

Richard Heckler 6 months, 1 week ago

Koch boys and their money honored at the John Birch Society http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/06/10/242334/john-birch-society-celebrates-koch/

The Aegis-Strategic Recruiting and Training Camp for The ALEC Party representatives is underway.

The consulting firm plans to handpick local, state, and federal candidates who share the Kochs' free-market, limited-government agenda, and groom them to win elections. "We seek out electable advocates of the freedom and opportunity agenda who will be forceful at both the policy and political levels," the company notes on its website. Aegis says it can manage every aspect of a campaign, including advertising, direct mail, social media, and fundraising.

--- http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/01/koch-brothers-candidate-training-recruiting-aegis-strategic

6

Greg Cooper 6 months, 1 week ago

Yeah, and maybe sometime the electorate will listen.

What was your point?

4

Bob Smith 6 months, 1 week ago

I'll spell it out for the incredibly obtuse, a member of what used to be know as the greatest deliberative body in the world is acting all Rainman to focus attention on two Americans who don't agree with his policies and who are legally expressing their own opinions. Simple enough for you, bub?

1

Greg Cooper 6 months, 1 week ago

Well, Bob, you seem to have the idea that I don't know what I'm talking about because I disagree with you. As I am not a political neophyte, I do have some idea as to what is going on and what is happening to the political process. Your characterizing me as obtuse is pretty petty, as you know little about me or my understanding of the process. Bub.

As to focusing attention on the Kochs, there needs to be that attention, as they, and the minions they control through huge monetary gifts, are little in touch with the needs of the ordinary American. Now, it seems as if you are quite extraiordinary, and I understand that, but I'm not, and neither are the vast majority of Americans who, unlike you, do not make billions of dollars a minute, but who are trying to cope with a political system that, at least in Kansas, is trying its best to make it more diffficult for them to rise in the monetary caste system that the Kochs, and you, seem to think is the American way. Bub.

7

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Smart move on his part. It's a winning political issue. Voters don't like having their democracy purchased out from underneath them.

Much more of a winner than going on Obamacare repeal over and over and over again. We don't know any politicians with an obsession on that one, now do we?

6

Gerald Kerr 6 months, 1 week ago

James, wrong. Americans, seemingly, love selling their liberty off to the highest bidder. Why else the media love affair with all so called progressive special interests. Immelt and G.E. can offshore billions in profit and pay zero taxes. George Soros buys politicians and the current administration with billions and billions of special interest payola. Silicon Valley and google literally own the special Apps used by dot.gov to ease drop on common citizens and political as well as State enemies. B.P. oil fouls the gulf by risky drilling rights purchased from the Current administration and is given a free pass by sycophant media and party elites who turn blind eyes to treachery. Wall Street bankers and investors skim off the vast Q.E. wealth funded by us the taxpayers- we get crumbs. Those bankers own the politicians whose corruption has become legendary and is duly noted by us serfs who are aware of their deceit. But you are wrong to believe Americans can't be bought. Without an honest press to inform us we are easily duped.

Thank God for the few wealthy who are willing to go to bat for their interests as well as the interests of liberty and are willing to battle the established special interests who have already bought this country.

1

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Yeah, I still haven't figured out how your head doesn't explode from cognitive dissonance when you type about how awful it is that rich special interest groups control everything with their money and then conclude about how wonderful it is that rich special interest groups control everything with their money.

4

Bob Smith 6 months, 1 week ago

The shade of Joe McCarthy is envious of the success of Reid's demonization of American citizens.

1

Scott Burkhart 6 months, 1 week ago

The Koch brothers are less dangerous than a lot of others on the left who think it is their duty to silence free speech.

2

Chris Golledge 6 months, 1 week ago

The Koch brothers are on the left?

3

Scott Burkhart 6 months, 1 week ago

The Koch brothers are less dangerous than a lot of others on the left who think it is their duty to silence free speech.

0

Greg Cooper 6 months, 1 week ago

For instance, Scott, of whom are you speaking? Do you mean that criticizing the system that allows the Kochs and other super-monied to buy entire legislatures is alright with you?

Or do you just post talking points to get brownie points with them?

7

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 6 months, 1 week ago

The problem is you think the Koch's have a right to free speech and the left and the moderates don't have as much right.

4

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

The unions for decades donated millions and millions of union dues to democrats. Those unions have significantly more influence than individuals but I guess that is OK in the democrats world because they have been the beneficiary of all that union money.

2

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Or perhaps because they represent small donations from many, many voters instead of two really rich dudes that may not even be in their district?

6

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Union members had no choice about where the money went. The leadership decided where it went. Those same members had no choice but to join the union in the first place if they wanted the job. So if unions can donate millions to get politicians they want elected and legislation they want passed then any person however rich should have the same right. I would be happy if everyone and every group was limited to $2000 per any candidate. If groups can donate millions then individuals should have the same right. Also unions often support causes/candidates outside the districts where the members are paying union dues. I don't like what the Kochs are doing, but their influence buying is not that much different than the unions buying influence as they have for decades.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Union members elect their representatives, and they all do have a choice about whether or not to join a union. In some states, not ours, they must pay the union for negotiating their contract in some cases, but that isn't the same as joining, even if the union gets some money either way. They get a better contract out of the deal.

It's true that after Citizens United, unions no longer had to set up separate political funds, and I think that's totally wrong. I support a cap on individual donations, revoking the tax status of political groups, and transparency. You'll get no argument for me on that one.

4

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

In a union state such as MO I believe you would not be hired at the car plants or AB brewery unless you are in the union. Yes they vote for their leaders but as you know no vote is typically 100%. With thousands of union employees not all of them are going to be in agreement as to which cause/candidate should get a portion of their union dues. This the problem, there will inherently be some union member's dues that are donated to a candidate he doesn't support. It is one thing to elect leaders to negotiate your contract, it is something else to be forced to pay dues to support political causes you don't agree with.

0

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Yes I know the law says you can't be forced to join the union, but in real terms just try to get or keep a job at a union shop without being in the union.

0

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 6 months, 1 week ago

if the members refused to get involved in their union, then yes, they had no choice. Koch's are looking to buy influence for their own selfishness, and could care less about the future or the United States as a whole. Unions care about how workers are treated and about many people. Sorry, you argument doesn't work.

4

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

So it is OK for the unions to buy influence for their gain but the Kochs can't buy the same influence. Just because you don't agree with the Kochs politics doesn't mean that the Kochs don't care about the US or others. That is only your opinion. The Kochs have their opinion how the country should be run and you have yours. If the conservatives shouldn't be able to buy influence then neither should the liberal unions. Your argument doesn't stand up.

0

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 6 months, 1 week ago

It's not selfish to buy influence just for you and brother? Unions buy influence for millions of people, whether or not they are union members. Do you want to go back to child labor, no overtime pay, no holidays, no vacations? Do you want to go back to no work place safety, no worker insurance. Hey, if you fall into the furnace, no problem, plenty of people looking for a job, and your family can just take in laundry. Would you like to go back to that? I think the Kochs would like it.

2

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

Union leaders buy influence to gain power to strengthen their union and increase their salaries. If you really believe it is about their members then I have a bridge I want to sell you.

0

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Dorothy, So as long as you agree with the agenda it is OK for an individual or group to buy influence but if you don't agree with the agenda then they shouldn't be allowed to buy influence. My how open minded. My argument is that no one person or group should be able to buy influence. If each person or group is limited to a smallish donation ($2000) per candidate that would eliminate any one person or group from buying any influence. That would be a step towards returning politics back to the people and away from special interests groups. But apparently you are OK with special interests groups buying influence as long as you personally agree with the group's agenda.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Her argument is that advocating on behalf of a massively large number of constituents is fundamentally different than advocating for an elite few that are already quite powerful. Personally, I think all money, including unions, should be removed from politics, but I'm not going to concede that both situations are equivalent. They simply aren't.

1

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Fine have your opinion. I think you are wrong just like you think I am wrong.

0

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 6 months, 1 week ago

Actually, I'm ok about limiting all donations. Give the major networks and local tv stations a tax break to have political debates and a free 15 minute spot (all in one spot) to state their views. No more political ads from Pacs or candidates, or those "social welfare" groups. No more lies and attack ads. No more sound bites. Each candidate must fully disclose the resumés, so we know if they live their beliefs. Each must go through a background check that is made public which they pay for themselves. This would make it easier for common sense people to run, who aren't kissing up to Soros or the Kochs or the unions or the NRA. There would people running who want to govern and protect our country.

0

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Dorothy, while I would love to see your "plan" put in place, unfortunately I don't see it happening because too many people on all sides would lose influence and too many people on all sides would lose money (such as radio and TV stations losing money due to loss of ads). Nice idea but I just don't see it happening in my lifetime.

0

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Dorothy, Your hatred for the Kochs is obvious. Unfortunately your outlandish "concerns" about the type of society the Kochs would "like" only reduce your argument to easily ignorable.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Then ignore it. Move along now. No need to comment. Otherwise you're proving yourself to be wrong. Her arguments are not easily ignorable. You can't ignore them.

1

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Just like you can't ignore me.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

I never claimed I wanted to ignore you. That was what you said to you were doing to me for a while after you got all tangled up in your logical inconsistencies on gay marriage. I guess you forgot. At any rate, I may have to leave you alone for a bit, because it looks like you're overly worked up and just making pointless responses for the sake of getting in the last word. That can't be healthy. Please take care of yourself.

1

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Once again you are guilty of what you accuse me of. So take your own advice.

0

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Somehow it is OK for the Democrats and liberals to benefit from the same type of support they endlessly complain about the Republicans and conservatives receiving. Why doesn't Reid complain about the unions that overwhelmingly support him and his democratic friends? Why not complain about Geo. Soros? When the Democrats and liberals complain about their big money supporters as loudly as they complain about the Kochs , then I will listen.

2

Jim Slade 6 months, 1 week ago

The Koch's spent 10x as much money the last election as did all the unions combined.

6

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

I doubt that but even if you are correct you noticeably did not not comment about big money people such as Soros that donated to the democrats and liberals. I don't particularly like what the Kochs do but they are far from the only ones doing it. My point is both sides are taking this money yet the Democrats don't seem to care about anyone but the Kochs. Limit all persons/groups to no more than $2000 per candidate. I doubt the republicans would go for it and I doubt the dems would either because they would have to give up the union money.

Maybe you and the democrats are upset that after decades of the unions wielding more power than any group due to donating union dues to democrats, that some group has surpassed the unions?

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

As it turns out, Soros isn't that big of a player right now. http://www.businessinsider.com/george-soros-2012-donations-2012-9

But I absolutely agree that all outside money should be both limited and completely transparent.

4

Bob Smith 6 months, 1 week ago

Citation, please? From an actual news source?

0

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

Looks like Jim doesn't have any proof.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

I'd be interested in seeing it, too. From what I've read, the Kochs do outpace union spending, but not by ten times as much.

1

Elston Gunn 6 months, 1 week ago

This letter is fraught with spelling and punctuation errors. Use your spell check. You could have saved time and just said "The Koch Bros. and Walmart are ruining America for their own financial gain". Evil rich Republicans blah blah blah. Hicks and Hippies used to coexist peacefully in this town. It was unique. Lately it wreaks of leftwingnut patchouli. I do apologize for not donating to the ACA. I make just over minimum wage. Forced charity. No thanks.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

You'll find Oklahoma is just a short drive to the south. Please be sure to turn the lights out as you leave.

4

Grégoire Guillaume 6 months, 1 week ago

I think it's fine to defend the Koch brothers and their agenda for the United States. If you are in their camp then you want to eliminate all of the social safety nets including social security,medicare,unemployment insurance. You also want to eliminate the transportation department so you will have to travel on private roads and pay a toll where ever you go. No more public education, pony up or you will be trying to eke out an existence in a country that provides no health care, no welfare of any kind and demonizes you for being poor. Of course no EPA so wholesale poisoning of the environment can go on full tilt boogie. The good news also is that money is now free speech so the Kochs will get to groom and pick candidates nationwide like they just did in a local election in Wisconsin for the school board.. What a country! It really only takes a few minutes to ferret out that the utopia the Kochs are looking for is great when you are a billionaire but no so good for the average joe.

7

Cille King 6 months, 1 week ago

Gregoire Guillaume. I wish I could have said it as well as you.
And those who criticize Union donations don't mention that Unions represent thousands, even millions of people who give a little, as opposed to the two Koch brothers who represent two.

6

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

The difference is in order to get certain jobs a person is forced to join the union. They then are forced to pay dues. Then whether they like it or not a portion of those dues are used to support political causes (typically democrat/liberal). The leadership decides who gets the donations not each rank and file member. If each union member on their own wants to donate to the democrats, great go ahead. The problem is that it is not voluntary if one is in a union. While most union members may be democrats certainly not all union members are. Thus those individuals are forced to support a cause/candidate they may disagree with if they want to keep their union job.

I would be all for limiting how much the Kochs or any individual/group can donate but that limit should also apply to unions as well.

1

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Not in Kansas. But even in states with strong union laws, workers aren't required to join the union. They're required to pay some portion of the union fees, because the union is required to negotiate their contract whether they're a member or not.

6

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Try to get a job at a union shop without joining the union. It is well accepted in STL that you were not going to get a job at AB or an auto plant unless you had someone inside the union backing you. Regardless of what the law may say, in real terms you had to be part of the union.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

So well accepted, in fact, that you've come armed with many links to confirm this bit of folk wisdom from a city 6 hours away in which we do not live.

Interestingly, I wouldn't have my current position without backing from someone on the inside. They didn't happen to be a union member, but I bet if this were a union shop, it would have been.

4

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Having lived in STL for 15 years and having worked with union employees (including shop stewards, local reps and a national rep) on a daily basis yes I have no problem standing by my prior statement. The fact you have not lived in STL or have no knowledge of what happens there doesn't mean my statements were incorrect.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

In other words, ya got nothing. Got it.

1

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Know more about my comments than you do.

0

Seth Peterson 6 months, 1 week ago

Other than the degree of their validity.

1

Gerald Kerr 6 months, 1 week ago

G.G., You paint your straw man with a broad brush. The Kochs seem to me to appreciate liberty and fear governments' great accumulation of power. You are seemingly blind to the huge special interest steamroller that promotes bigger government in order to buy it's power to promote this or that law which which gives it power over competitors and free men. The Kochs are not the tyrrany you fear. Politicians bought and sold are to be feared. Corrupt government power is to be feared. Lies by the highly favored are the danger.

1

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Wow. I'm not sure how you manage to stand upright with that amount of cognitive dissonance in one post. The Kochs are the huge special interest steamroller that buys government power to entrench their own position over their competitors. They are the corrupting influence we should fear. They are the ones buying the politicians.

5

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

Greg, I have an open mind. Show me where the Kochs have advocated for the things you describe in your post. Show me where the Kochs have advocated for eliminating social security, Medicare and so on as you say they have.

If you can then you may alter my opinion, if you can't then you're lying.

0

Grégoire Guillaume 6 months, 1 week ago

check out the 1980 Libertarian party platform where David Koch was running for VP. It's all in black and white. I'm surprised that their real agenda is a surprise to you!

1

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

Your source is a quarter century old Libertarian platform? Reall? That is all you have.

Bet you don't hold democrats like Obama to their views from 24 years ago?

If you did you'd be writing how Obama was against gay marriage wouldn't you?

People evolve, views change. Show me where that is their current agenda. And you referred to both of them. Show me where Charles embraces these things too.

0

Gerald Kerr 6 months, 1 week ago

Fred Atchison hustles the favorite DNC whine. Attack the Kochs and hope that the nation doesn't notice that the majority of the Rich and Famous long ago crawled in bed with the leftist Democrat agenda in order to more easily buy government favor. Folks our government has been sold to the Immelts, Schmidts, Gates, Buffets, Wall Street Bankers, Hyde Park elites, Marthas vinyarders, Teachers Unions, Big Pharma, Trial Lawyers, Hollywood elites, Silly Celebrities, Media Mavens, Financiers, Big City Pols, Big Medicine, Academic Grant recipients, wealthy and spoiled brats of the enviornmentalist religion.

Unfortunately most wealthy individuals who trend conservative are cowards and fear the media and celebrity attacks lead by demogouges like Harry Read and the dupes who echo his slander.

The Kochs are one of the few uber wealthy who oppose most of the above special interests death grip on political dialog. God Bless their courage and integrity in opposing the juggernaut expansion of government power and their support for Liberty.

1

Julius Nolan 6 months, 1 week ago

Were you able to write this post while keeping a straight face? Average person would be laughing too hard to post a coherent statement.

5

Bob Smith 6 months, 1 week ago

Seems like the best the statists can do is make personal attacks on the people who don't support Harry Reid's eternal two minute hate campaign.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Sounds like someone is jealous that Reid finally rediscovered populism. That faux libertarian populism was going to die sooner or later.

1

Mike Ford 6 months, 1 week ago

152 years ago in an area known as the Confederacy thousands of pauper farmers joined the cause and defended slavery in spite of the fact that they were never going to be in a position to be the economic equals of the slave owners and generations later their descendants would be working for pennies on the dollar in the new plantation system of big box deregulated no benefit jobs courtesy of the GOP, the Waltons, and the Kochs. It's illogical how some people bury their heads in the sand to avoid the reality and only become more stubborn in their denial. We can't legislate smart but we can certainly overcome dumb and put it in it's rightful place in spite of the Koch $ propping it up.

9

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

Mike you demonize the Kochs for trying to further their political beliefs while you are doing exactly the same thing. You write letters to the editor trying to influence political and governmental decisions such as building the SLT. You frequently post in support do democrats, criticizing the GOP and trying to shape others views.

This is exactly what the Kochs do only they do it better so you demonize them. You can't condemn others for the exact same behavior you exhibit without being a hypocrite.

Do you really believe we would be better off without the jobs WalMart and the Kochs provide.?

1

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

It's not exactly what they do. Other than calling him a hack, you see this sort of criticism against George Will? No. The problem isn't op eds or having an opinion, no matter how wrong-headed. It's the dark money network of influence. It's the politicians in the pockets. It's the access that comes from deep pockets. It erodes our democracy. It needs to stop.

1

John Graham 6 months, 1 week ago

Agreed. But both sides need to stop.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

I agree there, but don't use the "he hit me back first" defense to pretend that both side are in any way equitable in power or influence.

1

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

So how do you stop it?

How do you stop access without denying access to "good" groups?

I agree certain kinds of influence is bad but how do you stop the bad without stopping the good?

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Honestly, it's all got to stop. Money needs to leave.

1

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

How do you do this without violating free speech? Should an individual or group be allowed to voice their opinion on an issue or a candidate?

I agree our system is broken. I just don't know how to fix it without taking away our freedom of speech.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Well, when we have a sane Supreme Court that hasn't been themselves corrupted by Koch money, it shouldn't be as much of an issue. Getting the Constitution amended to reflect that money isn't the same thing as speech is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Otherwise, I think the only recourse is to raise a ruckus about it and try to vote the corrupt out of office.

2

Mike Ford 6 months, 1 week ago

like many non native people you wrongly equate a political stance with a stance of ethics and a cultural and physical connection which is why I fought the SLT. You and many others know nothing of the suffering that went on in the federal Indian boarding school system of the late 19th and early 20th century and your road is an insult to that memory. Your culture has no conscience the SLT and the Koch Brothers are the best examples of this.

2

Mike Ford 6 months, 1 week ago

Officer Masters.......why don't you ask the Osage Nation of Oklahoma how much they like the Koch Brothers? one of the Koch subsidiaries under reported oil production on Osage tribal lands for years bilking the tribe out of earned oil royalties. Former US senator Bob Dole defended them because they purchased his voice. 60 Minutes ran a program entitled :What Wouldn't Bob Dole do for Big Oil?" I wrote a LTE about this and this paper never printed it when the Dole Center was dedicated some time ago. I lobby with my voice and my writings. The Kochs lobby to pollute, cajole, and influence at will. I've never tried to buy a politician. They can. That's not a democracy. That's the GOP returning to the early 20th century to create the Big People/Little People divide. If you all want a French Revolution style uprising between economic classes you're well on your way.

1

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

Tell me, if you had the ability to use money to lobby against the SLT you wouldn't have done it? Sure you would because it is important to you. You're angry because they can do what you can't - be effective.

And what is the deal with the officer bit? Did I get a promotion I don't know about?

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

If "being effective" is now defined as using money, we should all be angry. We've lost one person one vote and become an oligarchy.

3

Fred Mertz 6 months, 1 week ago

Money allows you to communicate your message to the masses in order to sway them. Every politician and every special interest group does it.

Money is not the same as being effective but it does proved a vehicle to be effective.

1

Bob Smith 6 months, 1 week ago

Was "oligarchy" yesterday's word of the day on the "New Words for Unpleasant People" calendar?

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

Nope, but it is in the dictionary, so you might want to avail yourself of that resource. It also made the news because of the report I linked, but here's an easier to digest resource for you, since I know you like the sensational website summary: http://gawker.com/study-the-u-s-is-an-oligarchy-1563363760

2

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 6 months, 1 week ago

So Koch haters and union haters. Why don't we unite and agree to push and support the abolishment of all monetary support. Media must be given tax incentives to publish and promote each candidate fairly. All candidates must submit a detailed resumé, just like anyone else applying for a job. No more attack ads or political ads at all. Candidates must be given 15 minutes to state their positions, and are broadcast once a week for 2 months before an election, at different times of the day, so anyone could catch the spots, despite their work schedule. Full, not edited transcripts must be published on line, of both the 15 minute spots and debates. No more sound bites that either attack or defend your candidate. No more coverage of the candidates families, leave them alone. No more reports about what women candidates are wearing. No more coverage of candidates at all, except the debates and the 15 minute spots. Candidates can travel the country holding town meetings, but media can only report on the times they will be in a community. No only allowing your supporters into the town meetings. Oh and did I say "no more political ads"? NO MORE POLITICAL ADS!!!! How great would that be.

1

Bob Smith 6 months, 1 week ago

You can bet that the Koch brothers don't have any illegal alien relatives living off the American taxpayers' dime.

0

James Howlette 6 months, 1 week ago

That's true. The Kochs are all US citizens living off of the American taxpayer's dime.

2

Richard Heckler 6 months, 1 week ago

All voters CHECK your voting status frequently to be sure Sam and Kobach have not purged YOU AMERICANS from the documents.

We say it cannot happen. Yes it it can. By the time voters discover they have been purged it will be too late to vote.

Here is the link to check your status as a registered voter.

http://douglas-county.com/online_services/cl/ve/ve_voterportal.aspx?category_id=alreadyreg

1

Steve King 6 months ago

The Koch agenda is demonic to the average citizen.

2

Commenting has been disabled for this item.