Why don't the conspiracy websites ever cover the Koch Brothers?

[Strive for Empiricism]

Watch the recent Infowars call where Alex Jones is forced to directly confront the Koch Brothers conspiracy to a listener. He begins by claiming they fund both Democrats and Republicans; and then describes them as a 'four' on a scale of 1 to 10 (Where 10 is the most politically active). He puts Warren Buffet and Lord Rothschild at number 10.

The ties between Alex Jones' and the Koch Brothers run deep. Fred Koch helped start the John Birch society which Alex Jones' father was a part of. So Alex Jones grew up around Birchers. And he regularly has Birchers and people close to the John Birch Society on his show (G Edward Griffin, Joel son of Cleon Skousen, Ron Paul).

Now, when you realise that Ron Paul used to work for the richest brothers in the world, as Chairman of their very first think tank; then you begin to see the picture more clearly.

 

[Bill]

Who's in charge here?

You are. Right?

 

[Bill]

Then veer it back. Why do you think the Koch's don't figure as part of the NWO that Alex Jones is suggesting? Purely politics?

I think it's an interesting logical inconsistency in the conspiracy theory. If there are segments of the elite that are against the NOW, then how do all the conspiracies work?

Are Bill Gate and the Koch's for or against the 9/11 controlled demolition? Are their diametrically opposed politics just for show, or is there a war going on for different versions of the elite? If there was a war, then who did 9/11?

Who's in charge here?

At its very root "Infowars" is a for profit entertainment venture. I think the Koch brothers get a pass because their political activities don't appeal to the target demographic. They also strike me as the type of people that would sue AJ into oblivion if he makes some claim about the that falls into the libel/slander area and its revealed that his facts tenuous at best.

 

[Critical Thinker]

At its very root "Infowars" is a for profit entertainment venture.

Infowars and its followers call it a news site.

 

[Pete Tar]

New York times ? psychology professor ? Please .

What does that even mean? Was that meant to be a coherent rebuttal?

 

[Joe]

Like I said, it's irrelevant unless you think Jones is just being nice to Koch because he thinks PBS is nice to Soros.

The question is about the Kochs.

Well who is in Power ? The left or right ? Maybe if the republicans held the majority things would be the other way around . I seem to remember a lot on Dick Cheney back in the Bush days . I hear the Left cry about the Kochs all the time . Just no major conspiracies about them . Who believes in conspiracies anyway ?

 

[Joe]

What does that even mean? Was that meant to be a coherent rebuttal?

I explained it in the above post . Both are bias towards the left .

 

[Pete Tar]

But how does that make it wrong?

 

[Sarcastro]

and you wont either . Dr Swami and the NYT your not going to get a right winger to agree with such nonsense . So leave it at I have my opinion and you and others have theirs . Because we are way off Topic . BYE no further comment . If youd like to discuss further PM me .

Why wouldn't a right winger agree with Dr. Swami's assessment as to why people believe in conspiracy theories? (and again, NYT is irrelevant, they were just the newspaper who interviewed him.) Are all right wingers conspiracy theorists? Are only right wingers conspiracy theorists? You really are just making no sense here. Sounds like you're too personally and emotionally invested in this Koch Brothers thing that you're just lashing out at anything.

 

[Joe]

Why wouldn't a right winger agree with Dr. Swami's assessment as to why people believe in conspiracy theories? (and again, NYT is irrelevant, they were just the newspaper who interviewed him.) Are all right wingers conspiracy theorists? Are only right wingers conspiracy theorists? You really are just making no sense here. Sounds like you're too personally and emotionally invested in this Koch Brothers thing that you're just lashing out at anything.

Ok here is something he said most would agree with ,

In 2010, Swami and a co-author summarized this research in The Psychologist, a scientific journal. They found, perhaps surprisingly, that believers are more likely to be cynical about the world in general and politics in particular.

Content from External Source

Now Im not exactly sure why he had to do research on something thats pretty obvious ? Now this statement made more sense .

Kathryn Olmsted, a historian at the University of California, Davis, says that conspiracy theories wouldn’t exist in a world in which real conspiracies don’t exist. And those conspiracies — Watergate or the Iran-contra Affair — often involve manipulating and circumventing the democratic process. Even people who believe that the Sandy Hook shooting was actually a drama staged by actors couch their arguments in concern for the preservation of the Second Amendment.

Content from External Source

This was Noparty s statement ,

I think that much of the allure of the conspiracy theories is that they can make uneducated people
feel like they are smarter than others. This usually keeps the conspiracy kind of shadowy.

Content from External Source

which I called Uneducated followed by Sarcastros Response

It's really not.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/m...-into-conspiracy-theories.html?pagewanted=all
Content from external source
“If you know the truth and others don’t, that’s one way you can reassert feelings of having agency,” Swami says. It can be comforting to do your own research even if that research is flawed. It feels good to be the wise old goat in a flock of sheep.
-Viren Swami, a psychology professor who studies conspiracy belief at the University of Westminster in England.

Content from External Source

I dont agree that people believe in conspiracies because it makes them feel smarter .You can say that anybody . I could say that about atheist or any group . I believe its more the lack of trust . Junk Study Junk Science

 

[Joe]

Why wouldn't a right winger agree with Dr. Swami's assessment as to why people believe in conspiracy theories? (and again, NYT is irrelevant, they were just the newspaper who interviewed him.) Are all right wingers conspiracy theorists? Are only right wingers conspiracy theorists? You really are just making no sense here. Sounds like you're too personally and emotionally invested in this Koch Brothers thing that you're just lashing out at anything.

The New York times loses Millions year after year . not even sure how they stay open at all ? . No actually most are libertarians

 

[Bill]

Infowars and its followers call it a news site.

And yet what they present as news rarely rises above the standards tabloid journalism. They are more akin to the old National Enquirer, which relied on sensationalism to make a sale and the provided entertaining but dubious features between the cover pages, than they are to a reputable news source. My great aunt considered the Enquirer to be real news but that didn't make it so. They never did discover any actual "bat boys" living in the cellar. At it's root the Enquirer was entertainment. Infowars is no different.

 

[Joe]

Some of Infowars it is actual News . Drudge Report links it sometimes when the stories are credible . I think StriveForEmpiricism gave a a good explanation .

Watch the recent Infowars call where Alex Jones is forced to directly confront the Koch Brothers conspiracy to a listener. He begins by claiming they fund both Democrats and Republicans; and then describes them as a 'four' on a scale of 1 to 10 (Where 10 is the most politically active). He puts Warren Buffet and Lord Rothschild at number 10.
The ties between Alex Jones' and the Koch Brothers run deep. Fred Koch helped start the John Birch society which Alex Jones' father was a part of. So Alex Jones grew up around Birchers. And he regularly has Birchers and people close to the John Birch Society on his show (G Edward Griffin, Joel son of Cleon Skousen, Ron Paul).

Now, when you realise that Ron Paul used to work for the richest brothers in the world, as Chairman of their very first think tank; then you begin to see the picture more clearly.

Content from External Source

 

[Bill]

Some of Infowars it is actual News . Drudge Report links it sometimes when the stories are credible . I think StriveForEmpiricism gave a a good explanation .

Watch the recent Infowars call where Alex Jones is forced to directly confront the Koch Brothers conspiracy to a listener. He begins by claiming they fund both Democrats and Republicans; and then describes them as a 'four' on a scale of 1 to 10 (Where 10 is the most politically active). He puts Warren Buffet and Lord Rothschild at number 10.
The ties between Alex Jones' and the Koch Brothers run deep. Fred Koch helped start the John Birch society which Alex Jones' father was a part of. So Alex Jones grew up around Birchers. And he regularly has Birchers and people close to the John Birch Society on his show (G Edward Griffin, Joel son of Cleon Skousen, Ron Paul).

Now, when you realise that Ron Paul used to work for the richest brothers in the world, as Chairman of their very first think tank; then you begin to see the picture more clearly.

Content from External Source

Some of the old National Enquirer article were actual news as well but that was not its primary product. The comment you've highlighted that was introduced to the thread by Strive for Empiricism in post #81 fascinates me. It provides no documentation or supporting links and the language and phrasing (then you begin to see the picture more clearly) sounds like something you would find on a conspiracy site.

 

[Strive for Empiricism]

Some of the old National Enquirer article were actual news as well but that was not its primary product. The comment you've highlighted that was introduced to the thread by Strive for Empiricism in post #81 fascinates me. It provides no documentation or supporting links and the language and phrasing (then you begin to see the picture more clearly) sounds like something you would find on a conspiracy site.

I'll provide evidence for each of my claims then.

1. [Alex Jones] begins by claiming [the Koch Brothers] fund both Democrats and Republicans; and then describes them as a 'four' on a scale of 1 to 10 (Where 10 is the most politically active). He puts Warren Buffet and Lord Rothschild at number 10;
Source:

2. Fred Koch helped start the John Birch society;
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#Origins - Corresponding footnotes are available below

3. Alex Jones' father was a part of [the John Birch Society]. Alex Jones grew up around Birchers;
Source: http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...-most-paranoid-man-in-america-20110302?page=3 It seems maybe I heard wrong about his Dad, but Alex himself says the John Birch society was his earliest political influence - from age two.'

To be continued...

 

[Bill]

I'll provide evidence for each of my claims then.

3. Alex Jones' father was a part of [the John Birch Society]. Alex Jones grew up around Birchers;
Source: http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...-most-paranoid-man-in-america-20110302?page=3 It seems maybe I heard wrong about his Dad, but Alex himself says the John Birch society was his earliest political influence - from age two.'

To be continued...

Why change the words of your own source? Quote the actual text.

"The closest thing to a childhood political training was some neighbors who were members of the John Birch Society. They'd come over for dinner and I'd be exposed to those ideas, starting at around age two."

Content from External Source

As an aside: How many two year old children do you know that are sitting around absorbing political doctrine from the neighbors that come over for dinner from time to time? How much influence would dinner conversation between adults have on a two year old? What are the odds that Alex Jones, who relies on hyperbole and exaggeration for a living would engage in hyperbole and exaggeration to sell his back story?

 

[Joe]

Why change the words of your own source? Quote the actual text.

"The closest thing to a childhood political training was some neighbors who were members of the John Birch Society. They'd come over for dinner and I'd be exposed to those ideas, starting at around age two."

Content from External Source

As an aside: How many two year old children do you know that are sitting around absorbing political doctrine from the neighbors that come over for dinner from time to time? How much influence would dinner conversation between adults have on a two year old? What are the odds that Alex Jones, who relies on hyperbole and exaggeration for a living would engage in hyperbole and exaggeration to sell his back story?

 

[Bill]

I'm not questioning his opinion of the John Birch Society or its influence on him, I'm questioning how much influence dinner conversation has on a two year old. This assumes he can actually remember that much about being two years old and could comprehend the conversations taking place. Most people only have vague recollections of their second year and their cognitive skills at that age are less than stellar. It's also about the documentation of sources. You shouldn't change the language used in a source without acknowledging that you are paraphrasing or interpreting the original source.

 

[Strive for Empiricism]

Some of the old National Enquirer article were actual news as well but that was not its primary product. The comment you've highlighted that was introduced to the thread by Strive for Empiricism in post #81 fascinates me. It provides no documentation or supporting links and the language and phrasing (then you begin to see the picture more clearly) sounds like something you would find on a conspiracy site.

4. [Alex Jones] regularly has Birchers and people close to the John Birch Society on his show (G Edward Griffin, Joel son of Cleon Skousen, Ron Paul);
Sources:
G Edward Griffin -
http://www.infowars.com/g-edward-griffin-the-collectivist-conspiracy/
- Griffins John Birch legacy (footnotes available below) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Edward_Griffin#Political_advocacy

Joel and Cleon Skousen and John Birch
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleon_Skousen#Political_life (footnotes)
- With Alex Jones:
http://www.infowarsshop.com/Complete-Joel-Skousen-Collection_p_781.html
http://wp.alexjonespodcasts.com/tag/joel-skousen

Ron Paul - http://www.jbs.org/news/ron-paul-and-jbs
-
- with Alex Jones; http://wp.alexjonespodcasts.com/tag/ron-paul

5. Ron Paul used to work for the richest brothers in the world, as Chairman of their very first think tank;
Sources:
Ron worked for the Kochs' as Chairman of their very first think tank - http://www.lib.ku.edu/paul/RonPaulCitizensforaSoundEconomy.pdf The link was originally here but was recently taken down. I can upload the original document if you want.
-
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_for_a_Sound_Economy#Background (Footnotes below)
The Kochs are the Richest brothers in the world
- http://www.forbes.com/profile/david-koch/

Yes I agree Bill, I should quote sources directly and will endeavour to do so in the future

 

[Solastalgia]

Two of the richest and most powerful people in politics are against the NWO? It makes no sense at all.

Actually, it makes a lot of sense. The NWO conspiracy has origins in the John Birch Society and other radical right-wing groups, paranoid about a one-world socialist government.

 

[Joe]

Actually, it makes a lot of sense. The NWO conspiracy has origins in the John Birch Society and other radical right-wing groups, paranoid about a one-world socialist government.

You think the one world government will never happen ? What is the European union ? African Union ? No maybe the rights paranoia is correct . Can you predict the future ? have you noticed how socialist most countries are ? Cant have a socialist government without Government Healthcare . You should be paranoid .

 

[Jason]

You think the one world government will never happen ? What is the European union ? African Union ? No maybe the rights paranoia is correct . Can you predict the future ? have you noticed how socialist most countries are ? Cant have a socialist government without Government Healthcare . You should be paranoid .

A one world government could never happen. There are many reason why it wouldn't succeed. But lets start with US policy. We can see a clear influence of US policy in every corner of the world, in terms of democracy. When Democracy was trying to get a stronghold in all corners of the world before and most definitely during the cold war, it wasn't uncommon for leaders to express a desire for a one world government, which in my opinion meant democracy, not a centralized bank or power to be. For what ever reason, that sentiment has carried over into peoples desire to believe in the NWO. Cultural, religious, political and the most obvious; currency will never permit a one world government from ever happening. As it stands today, its impossible to get world leaders to agree on anything. A secret society operating in the back drop of "government puppeteers" would even be more unlikely.

Comparing the European Union to a one world government isn't the greatest analogy. The European Union is devised of 28 countries, of which only 17 of them share the same currency. It actually was already in motion long before it took hold thanks to the EEC (European Economic Community). This "union" was set up to make trade and employment in the region much easier as well as being able to maintain and govern human rights. Not unlike NAFTA, which is an agreement between Mexico, Canada, and the US. It's focus was to keep the economy stable and vibrant from an import and export perspective. So that all nations would have a fair shake. It eliminates one nation from employing slave labor to create the same product cheaper, which happens in other parts of the world like Indonesia, Philippines, and China. It was a smart union if you think about it, and while all unions have their set backs and hurdles, in the end it will prove to be for the greater good. The US, Asia, and Africa have no influence over the European Union, so I don't understand how them becoming a Union proves the theory of a "one world government".

As for healthcare, I again don't see the analogy of one world government, when the US is already governed by a "government" regardless of what kind of health care we provide to the people.

 

[Joe]

A one world government could never happen. There are many reason why it wouldn't succeed. But lets start with US policy. We can see a clear influence of US policy in every corner of the world, in terms of democracy. When Democracy was trying to get a stronghold in all corners of the world before and most definitely during the cold war, it wasn't uncommon for leaders to express a desire for a one world government, which in my opinion meant democracy, not a centralized bank or power to be. For what ever reason, that sentiment has carried over into peoples desire to believe in the NWO. Cultural, religious, political and the most obvious; currency will never permit a one world government from ever happening. As it stands today, its impossible to get world leaders to agree on anything. A secret society operating in the back drop of "government puppeteers" would even be more unlikely.

Comparing the European Union to a one world government isn't the greatest analogy. The European Union is devised of 28 countries, of which only 17 of them share the same currency. It actually was already in motion long before it took hold thanks to the EEC (European Economic Community). This "union" was set up to make trade and employment in the region much easier as well as being able to maintain and govern human rights. Not unlike NAFTA, which is an agreement between Mexico, Canada, and the US. It's focus was to keep the economy stable and vibrant from an import and export perspective. So that all nations would have a fair shake. It eliminates one nation from employing slave labor to create the same product cheaper, which happens in other parts of the world like Indonesia, Philippines, and China. It was a smart union if you think about it, and while all unions have their set backs and hurdles, in the end it will prove to be for the greater good. The US, Asia, and Africa have no influence over the European Union, so I don't understand how them becoming a Union proves the theory of a "one world government".

As for healthcare, I again don't see the analogy of one world government, when the US is already governed by a "government" regardless of what kind of health care we provide to the people.

Well I disagree that it is impossible . Im not sure I buy into the secret societies creating The NWO but more of a fascist type . Giant corporations .

 

[Solastalgia]

You think the one world government will never happen ?

No, not in the sense of the right-wing NWO conspiracy of a one-world socialist government. Now, as far as a uni-polar world goes, that's certainly been the case since the fall of the Soviet Union. But even that is weening steadily as we see the rise of BRICS, especially the rebirth of China and Russia.

What is the European union ? African Union ?

Well, you obviously have no idea what these two institutions are, if you believe they're indicative of a one-world socialist government.

The European Union member nations all have different governments, different economics, different health-care systems, different domestic and foreign policy. It's far from a one-European government, let a lone indicative of a one-world government. Besides, the EU has been on the rocks as of recent, ordering lots of social program cuts (austerity, far from socialism that you claim, Joe), and some member nations want out.

The same goes for the African Union, which has a hard time even implementing what policy it can agree on. Nonetheless, the AU actually serves an important purpose for Africa as a deterrent to greater western imperialism, specifically the US AFRICOM. So, Joe, you're in good company with US corporate interest and their military minions when it comes to an opinion on the African Union.

Can you predict the future ?

No, I can't, and neither can you. Your whole post here has basically been a blind stab (bad points) at predicting the future of a one-world socialist government.

have you noticed how socialist most countries are ?

No, I haven't noticed how socialist most countries are. Maybe because most countries aren't socialist. Aside from South America and the Nordic countries that are more social-capitalist than traditional socialist, the rest of the world is quite the opposite with austerity and heavy cuts in social programs.

Cant have a socialist government without Government Healthcare .

Having government healthcare doesn't mean that a government is on the road to socialism, despite what the Tea Party and rest of the right-wing will tell you. There are plenty of countries with socialized and universal healthcare that are still at their core capitalist. Take for example the Nordic model aka welfare capitalism, which puts a priority on a strong universal welfare system, while remaining a strong capitalist economy.

You should be paranoid .

No, I shouldn't be. But you obviously are - and trying to bring others into your circle of paranoia.

 

[Mick West]

Thread is getting a touch off-topic. The topic was the conspiracy media coverage of the Koch brother.

 

[Jason]

Well I disagree that it is impossible . Im not sure I buy into the secret societies creating The NWO but more of a fascist type . Giant corporations .

Well I disagree that it is impossible . Im not sure I buy into the secret societies creating The NWO but more of a fascist type . Giant corporations .

Content from External Source

So let me play the devils advocate for a second here. Let's ask the obvious question; In a "one world government" who would be the leader of this type of government. What would the hierarchy look like? Would there be a global election or would we be dealing with another dictator? Would your one world government encompass the entirety of our planet, or only be North America and Europe (because technically speaking thats not a One World Government)? Do you suppose Russia, China, Africa, and the middle east would be open to this new "one world government"? Would wars ensue as a result, and if so what would be the net gain for those orchestrating the war? Who gets all the gold, who controls the oil, and how does a one world government have oversight over all infrastructure, manufacturing, and resources from one end of the globe to the other? How would the military powers combine, or would you even need a military in a one world government? How would currency be distributed, and printed, and which country would be responsible for oversight in this department.

I could go on and on with questions, and I ask these questions because people who propose this "one world government" never seem to have the answers to these simple yet impossible questions. Why is that one might ask? Because there could never be a one world government, one that encompasses the entire globe and the billions who reside here. It would never work in a capitalist society, one that thrives in competition. Think about it, the US loves being the superpower, and others like using the US's superpower as a scapegoat. The middle east is a prime example of this never being a possibility. You expect me to believe that Israel and the rest of the middle east will fine common ground in this new one world government. Never happen. There are too many differences among the residents of this world, and while those with money have one commonality (MONEY), they too have differences that run through their very souls. In every country there is division, division is what defines a nation if you think about. There will always be them and us in any society, so a one world government could never work.

 

[Jason]

Thread is getting a touch off-topic. The topic was the conspiracy media coverage of the Koch brother.

sorry I didn't read the entire thread. I only caught the bottom of it...

 

[Pete Tar]

Well, you obviously have no idea what these two institutions are, if you believe they're indicative of a one-world socialist government.

But, they have the word 'union' in them!

 

[Solastalgia]

But, they have the word 'union' in them!

hahahah

 

[Joe]

No, not in the sense of the right-wing NWO conspiracy of a one-world socialist government. Now, as far as a uni-polar world goes, that's certainly been the case since the fall of the Soviet Union. But even that is weening steadily as we see the rise of BRICS, especially the rebirth of China and Russia.



Well, you obviously have no idea what these two institutions are, if you believe they're indicative of a one-world socialist government.

The European Union member nations all have different governments, different economics, different health-care systems, different domestic and foreign policy. It's far from a one-European government, let a lone indicative of a one-world government. Besides, the EU has been on the rocks as of recent, ordering lots of social program cuts (austerity, far from socialism that you claim, Joe), and some member nations want out.

The same goes for the African Union, which has a hard time even implementing what policy it can agree on. Nonetheless, the AU actually serves an important purpose for Africa as a deterrent to greater western imperialism, specifically the US AFRICOM. So, Joe, you're in good company with US corporate interest and their military minions when it comes to an opinion on the African Union.



No, I can't, and neither can you. Your whole post here has basically been a blind stab (bad points) at predicting the future of a one-world socialist government.



No, I haven't noticed how socialist most countries are. Maybe because most countries aren't socialist. Aside from South America and the Nordic countries that are more social-capitalist than traditional socialist, the rest of the world is quite the opposite with austerity and heavy cuts in social programs.



Having government healthcare doesn't mean that a government is on the road to socialism, despite what the Tea Party and rest of the right-wing will tell you. There are plenty of countries with socialized and universal healthcare that are still at their core capitalist. Take for example the Nordic model aka welfare capitalism, which puts a priority on a strong universal welfare system, while remaining a strong capitalist economy.



No, I shouldn't be. But you obviously are - and trying to bring others into your circle of paranoia.

I am the tea party and right wing . Healthcare is redistribution of wealth AKA socialism . I guess Larry Patton McDonald X John Bircher democrat warning about the CFR and the NWO and Communist only to shot down By A Mig fighter on flight 007 . Oh thats right thats just some crazy conspiracy ? The left fears The Koch bros they are the bogey man and just the right is paranoid ? Maybe it would look like the UN ? .

 

[Joe]

Actually, it makes a lot of sense. The NWO conspiracy has origins in the John Birch Society and other radical right-wing groups, paranoid about a one-world socialist government.

Whats with the radical crap ?

 

[Pete Tar]

Healthcare is redistribution of medical technology not wealth.
You seem to want a classist society where healthcare is not available unless you belong to the class that can afford it.

 

[Joe]

Seems Media Matters is also paranoid about the Koch bros ? http://mediamatters.org/tags/koch-brothers .

 

[Joe]

Healthcare is redistribution of medical technology not wealth.
You seem to want a classist society where healthcare is not available unless you belong to the class that can afford it.

Utter bullshit . We have Medicaid for the poor , there isn't one hospital that would deny medical care . We have free county health depts . Your not in America your not a small business owner . I just got a increase because of Obama care today of 125 % . higher deductible for a male 32 years of age that I wanted to give a raise but now I cant . The problem is the redistribution must be going to the top and not the poor . Im glad the Koch bros are on our side . Maybe they can run for president ! Nobody can afford the affordable healthcare

 

[Mick West]

This is not a thread for discussion political ideology. Not even really a forum for that.

 

[Joe]

This is not a thread for discussion political ideology. Not even really a forum for that.

Then remove it . Because clearly the Koch bros are right wing on a left wing site . The question was answered anyway so there is no point to continue . Comments like this are political and offensive to me .

Actually, it makes a lot of sense. The NWO conspiracy has origins in the John Birch Society and other radical right-wing groups, paranoid about a one-world socialist government.

Content from External Source

 

[Jason]

Utter bullshit . We have Medicaid for the poor , there isn't one hospital that would deny medical care . We have free county for health depts . Your not in America your not a small business owner . I just got a increase because of Obama care today of 125 % . higher deductible for a male 32 years of age that I wanted to give a raise but now I cant . The problem is the redistribution must be going to the top and not the poor . Im glad the Koch bros are on our side . Maybe they can run for president ! Nobody can afford the affordable healthcare

"We have medicaid for the poor", your right we do, and how exactly do we pay for medicaid. The problem isn't that we already have a system in place to help those in need with medicine, the problem is how will we be able to help those in need 10yrs from now or 20yrs from now when medicaid goes bankrupt. How much will the average american pay into medicaid and ssn a few decades from now. Most reports have the medicaid program going bankrupt in the next 20 to 30 yrs. Listen, I didn't support the Affordable Care Act, and I was upset with congress for passing it. I'm part of that group of Americans that make too much according to this President's Campaign tour. But its a law now, and we all have to make the best of it. By avoiding it and having people opt out, it will only raise prices for people who are actually paying, like myself. And in turn, it will only drive up prices in the foreseeable future. We all agreed that we needed to fix medicaid and our healthcare, at least this President tried to do something about it. Wrong or right, good or bad, he took it on. Granted its been a nightmare regardless of which media outlet you prefer to watch, but its here to stay now. The republicans had their chance to come up with a better plan for a few years, and even while it was being worked on. They had their chance to make changes to it and give advice, but they decided to sit back and hope it failed. I'm a republican and I could care less for this president to be honest with you, but we need to action like a nation. We need to rise above this left and right bs, and make the best of this.

 

[Solastalgia]

I am the tea party and right wing .

Thank you for establishing that. Now I know why you're making such a fuss here, seeing as the Tea Party was created by the Koch brothers. [*]

Healthcare is redistribution of wealth AKA socialism .

It's pretty sad/scary to see someone who actually thinks that healthcare and socialism are the same thing. You obviously don't have much of a political understanding, outside of the tea party propaganda that you read.

The left fears The Koch bros they are the bogey man and just the right is paranoid ?

Yes, the right wing's irrational fear of communists and a one-world socialist government can be characterized as paranoia. This has been written about at great lengths, just do some research on the Red Scare.

The left's fear of the Koch family is not irrational paranoia, because there is a political reality to the influence of the Koch brother's undemocratic policy pushing. This is well documented here.

Whats with the radical crap ?

Well, the term "radical right" first came into common usage by political scientists in reference to the John Birch Society gaining influence in the 1950s. When I said, 'other radical right wing groups,' I was referring to anti-government militias.

Comments like this are political and offensive to me .

How does that comment offend you? I was simply bringing up a historical reality - that the NWO one-world socialist govt conspiracy originates in the John Birch Society and other radical right-wing groups (ie. anti-government militia groups). This is something that the renowned political science professor, Michael Barkun, has written on extensively.

You even brought it up yourself when you mentioned Larry Patton McDonald - the second president of the John Birch Society and well-known promoter of the NWO one-world socialist government conspiracy.

Because clearly the Koch bros are right wing on a left wing site.

The Koch Brothers being right wing is not a matter of leftie opinion, but rather a simple fact as proven by their political funding.

Im glad the Koch bros are on our side . Maybe they can run for president !

Well, David actually ran for vice president, and let's just say that didn't work out well for him.

 

[Joe]

Thank you for establishing that. Now I know why you're making such a fuss here, seeing as the Tea Party was created by the Koch brothers. [*]



It's pretty sad/scary to see someone who actually believes that healthcare and socialism are the same thing. You obviously don't have much of a political understanding, outside of the tea party propaganda that you read.



Yes, the right wing's irrational fear of communists and a one-world socialist government can be characterized as paranoia. This has been written about at great lengths, just do some research on the Red Scare.

The left's fear of the Koch family is not irrational paranoia, because there is a political reality to the influence of the Koch brother's undemocratic policy pushing. This is well documented here.



Well, the term "radical right" first came into common usage by political scientists in reference to the John Birch Society gaining influence in the 1950s. When I said, 'other radical right wing groups,' I was referring to anti-government militias.



How does that comment offend you? I was simply bringing up a historical reality - that the NWO one-world socialist govt conspiracy originates in the John Birch Society and other radical right-wing groups (ie. anti-government militia groups). This is something that the renowned political science professor, Michael Barkun, has written on extensively.

You even brought it up yourself when you mentioned Larry Patton McDonald - the second president of the John Birch Society and well-known promoter of the NWO one-world socialist government conspiracy.



The Koch Brothers being right wing is not a matter of leftie opinion, but rather a simple fact as proven by their political funding.



Well, David actually ran for vice president, and let's just say that didn't work out well for him.

No the Tea Party wasn't created By the Kochs . Iv never heard of them at all Until some leftist mentioned them . Shows how little you know . Did the Kochs also create the Italian Tea Party ? Now Occupy was astroturf created by unions and leftist even though there were many independent libertairians that werent controlled by anybody . he was a congressman as well . Voted the most conservative . A democrat as well .The last good on as well . Killed by the same communist Birchers warned about , John Birch

John Morrison Birch (May 8, 1918 – August 25, 1945) was an Americanmilitary intelligence officer and a Baptistmissionary in World War II, who was killed during a confrontation with supporters of the Communist Party of China.

Content from External Source

name those so called radical groups ? were they as radical and violent as The Weather Underground ? The Black panthers ? What makes someone radical to you ? Do you pay for your own healthcare ? Are you a small business owner as I been for 28 years ? What do you know about the healthcare bill that was passed ? being Nancy Peloisi said " we have to pass it to see whats in it " If it so great why does King Obama keep changing the law which is against the Constitution the Law Of the land ?

 

[Pete Tar]

Comments like this are political and offensive to me .
Content from external source
Actually, it makes a lot of sense. The NWO conspiracy has origins in the John Birch Society and other radical right-wing groups, paranoid about a one-world socialist government.

Why so offended? Do you think there's no such thing as radical right groups, or was it the implication that the John Birch Society is radical right?
What would qualify as radical right to you, or is there no such thing?