Tag Archives: libertarians
The Koch Brothers have been bankrolling the Far Right for decades, including Tea Party and anti-science front groups. Now that the monster they’ve created is burning books and slandering Muslim Americans, they’re not so keen on taking credit.
“It’s hateful. It’s ludicrous. And it’s plain wrong,” says David Koch as he begins the defense of he and his brother against recent articles that have said the two men are spending a fortune to secretly fund an anti-Obama insurgency.
Read more here.
The billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch, both lifelong libertarians, have given more than $100 million to rightwing causes, funding so many campaigns against Obama administration policies that their ideological framework has become known as the Kochtopus. The Kochs, who run the Kansas-based company Koch Industries—which maintains oil refineries in Alaska and owns Brawny paper towels, Stainmaster carpet, Dixie cups, and Lycra, among other products—have given to other causes, including $100 million to the Lincoln Center and $20 million to the American Museum of Natural History. But their political causes in particular have gotten the most attention. As Charles Lewis, founder of the Center for Public Integrity, told The New Yorker, “The Kochs are on a whole different level. There’s no one else who has spent this much money. The sheer dimension of it is what sets them apart. They have a pattern of lawbreaking, political manipulation, and obfuscation. I’ve been in Washington since Watergate, and I’ve never seen anything like it. They are the Standard Oil of our times.”
Read more in The New Yorker article titled, “Covert Operations — The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama.
It is the picnic to celebrate Steven and it has been said that anyone wanting to celebrate knowing Steven and his life is invited to come to the picnic. As we are joining together, there is a knock at the door. It is George Walker Bush! Along with him is a Federal attorney and they have a copy of a federal law that states that you can not refuse G.W. Bush to come in and join you. You can not refuse to allow him to eat any of the food even. It is not a matter of Bush being hungry and there is no where else for him to eat. It is that he simply wants to eat at your house and you have no right to deny him or refuse to allow him to come in.
Does the Federal Government, and should it have, the power to tell you who or what you can not refuse to allow into your private property? Do they have a right to tell you who you have to be tolerant to?
Where does your civil rights ends and those of everyone else start?
It could be argued that your bias toward Bush is not based on real and factual issues, that you hate him enough to deny him access because of your perceptions of what he has done. What kind of person he is and what he may do while on your property.
That is the kind of issue that Paul was trying to point to as being Government intrusion into your property and life.
This is focusing only on one issue but Woolworths was not refusing to feed blacks when they were hungry and there was no where else they could go eat. If the Federal Government has not funded the lunch counter or the food being served should they have a say on who is served or not served? Likewise if the Government is not paying for the picnic or the food there do they have the right to tell you that G.W. Bush should be allowed to come?
These issues are a part of the Libertarian believe system and is a reason I am not a Libertarian though have some leaning towards its stances.
I hear the terms ‘center-right,’ and ‘center-left’ often. Without settling the argument of which describes America’s populace, let’s say the common denominator is ‘center.’ Are most Americans political philosophies at the center? It would seem not! It would seem Americans are ready for their Party to be truly conservative or liberal — none of this middle of the road stuff.
Are we moving toward an even greater divide? If we acknowledge the gridlock now and elect members of Congress who are more conservative and / or liberal will less be accomplished?
What did the results of the contests yesterday tell you?