On 9/5/2010 7:15 AM, Bruce Majors wrote:
the Koch's have been giving money to groups for decades--
not as much as George Soros or Stewart Mott or the Podesta brothers etc gave to MoveOn, Think Regress etc
but the Tea Party's took off and the Leftovers fizzled
so tea partiers did not become active so they could get a check from the Kochs
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Lloyd M(Yahoo) <lloyd------@yahoo.com> wrote:
Correction: "wouldn't support the burgeoning Tea Party is silly". The idea that the "Tea Party" was conjured by them is also silly. Of course, there was bound to be a reaction to the EXTREME statist Obama agenda! Of course, the Kochs would support it because it tends toward their libertarian philosophy as compared to the ultra statist agenda of Obama. Of course, the Rockefeller/Saudi camarilla would like to shutdown domestic oil and gas production ENTIRELY to feather their nests under the mirage of cap and trade and opposing global warming. . .
The campaign for Obama on the other hand is clearly a project concocted from whole cloth by the Rockefeller/OPEC/Islamic faction of capital! . . . one of the major blocs or THE MAJOR BLOC of finance capital. The connection of Zbig to Rockefeller and Obama is key. It is clear from David Rockefeller's bio that Obama would be his ideal candidate. No co-incidence the major media except Fox supports Obama in the most obvious, even simple-minded ways!
Here's another look at the truth about the BILLIONAIRE LIBERTARIAN who ran with Ed Clark under the Libertarian Party banner!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Clark
The idea that the Kochs WOULDn't support the burgeoning Party is silly. Hey! Rich people have the right to support ideas and movements they believe to be helpful. The same people who ding-dong on the minority efforts of the Kochs REFUSE to look at the Mammoth propaganda efforts of the Rockefeller Foundations!
Ed Clark
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article concerns the Libertarian presidential candidate. For information on other people of the same name, see Edward Clark.
Ed Clark
Libertarian candidate for
President of the United StatesElection date
November 4, 1980Running mate
Opponent(s)
Ronald Reagan (R)
Jimmy Carter (D)
John B. Anderson (I)Incumbent
Jimmy Carter (D)
Born
1930
Political party
Ed Clark (born 1930) is an American politician who ran for Governor of California in 1978, and for President of the United States as the nominee of the Libertarian Party in the 1980 presidential election.
Clark is an honors graduate of Tabor Academy, Dartmouth College and received a law degree from Harvard Law School.
[edit] 1978 California governor campaign
In 1978, Clark received some 377,960 votes, 5.46% of the popular vote, in a race for Governor of California. Although a member of the Libertarian Party, he appeared on the California ballot as an independent candidate.[1]
According to a 1980 article in Mother Jones magazine, Clark's 1978 vote ran strongest in "wealthy Orange County, a long-time stronghold of right-wing sentiments; in the back country of the Sierra Nevada, where loggers, miners and developers rail against government restrictions on land use; in Berkeley and the gay neighborhoods of San Francisco, which share the Libertarians' antipathy for drug laws and vice squads; and in the cocaine-and-Perrier precincts of Marin County..."[2]
Another factor leading to the unprecedented (for California) 5.46% vote total for Clark was his libertarian campaign occurring the same year as the successful Proposition 13 which limited property taxes, and the unsuccessful anti-gay Briggs Initiative (Proposition 6). Clark and the California Libertarian Party campaigned in support for Proposition 13[3] and in opposition to Proposition 6[4] both of which turned out people to the polls who might be more inclined to favor a libertarian candidate.
Clark lost the race to Jerry Brown, who was re-elected with 56% of the vote. Republican nominee Evelle J. Younger had 36.5% of the vote.[5]
[edit] 1980 Presidential campaign
In 1979 he won the Libertarian Party presidential nomination at the party's convention in Los Angeles, California. He published a book on his programs, entitled "A New Beginning". The book's introduction was by Eugene McCarthy. During the campaign, Clark positioned himself as a peace candidate and emphasized both large budget and tax cuts, as well as outreach to liberals and progressives unhappy with the resumption of Selective Service registration and the arms race with the Soviet Union.[6]
When asked in a television interview to summarize libertarianism, Clark used the phrase "low-tax liberalism," causing some consternation among traditional libertarian theorists, most notably Murray Rothbard.[7][8] Clark's running to the center marked the start of a split within the Libertarian Party between a moderate faction led by Ed Crane and a radical faction led by Rothbard[9] that eventually came to a head in 1983, with the moderate faction walking out of the party convention after the nomination for the 1984 presidential race went to David Bergland.[10]
Ed Clark's running mate in 1980 was David H. Koch of Koch Industries, who pledged part of his personal fortune to the campaign for the vice-presidential nomination, enabling the Clark/Koch ticket to largely self-fund and run national television advertising.
Clark received 921,128 votes (1.06% of the total nationwide)[11]; the highest number and percentage of popular votes a Libertarian Party candidate has ever received in a presidential race. His strongest support was in Alaska, where he came in third place with 11.66% of the vote, finishing ahead of independent candidate John Anderson and receiving almost half as many votes as Jimmy Carter.[12]
[edit] References
- ^ Doherty, Brian. Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement, New York: Publicaffairs, p. 406
- ^ Paul, Mark. "Seducing the Left: The Third Party That Wants YOU". Mother Jones, May 1980.
- ^ Doherty, p. 405-406
- ^ Libertarian Review, vol. 7 no. 9 October 1978
- ^ JoinCalifornia election history for the state of California, http://www.joincalifornia.com/election/1978-11-07
- ^ See, for example, The "Ed Clark: Isolationist Libertarian" television ad at http://www.icue.com/portal/site/iCue/chapter/?cuecard=5818 and NBC's August 8, 1980 profile of the Libertarian Party at http://www.icue.com/portal/site/iCue/chapter/?cuecard=3253
- ^ Doherty, p. 415
- ^ Raimondo, Justin. An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard, Prometheus Books
- ^ Hayes, Christopher. "Ron Paul's Roots". The Nation, December 6, 2007
- ^ Doherty, p. 418-421
- ^ U.S. Presidential Election Atlas, http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1980&off=0&f=1
- ^ U.S. Presidential Election Atlas, http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1980&fips=2&f=1&off=0&elect=0
Party political offices
Preceded by
Roger MacBrideSucceeded by
David Bergland
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Clark"
Categories: American lawyers | American libertarians | Dartmouth College alumni | Harvard Law School alumni | Libertarian Party (United States) presidential nominees | Libertarian politicians | United States presidential candidates, 1980 | Members of the Libertarian Party (United States) | 1930 births | Living people
From: a-albionic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:a-albionic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of razl dazl
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 8:49 PM
To: a-albionic@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [prj] The Billionaire Right Winger
The Billionaire Right-Winger
By Joe Conason
August 24, 2010 | 6:43 p.m
David Koch, with his wife.
Despite the kaleidoscopic proliferation of political media over the past decade, most of what Americans hear and read about the workings of our democracy can be politely termed superficial. Only very rarely does journalism fully penetrate the glittering illusions created by partisans on every side to reveal the grittier realities. When a reporter does blast through the usual scrim of deception, that is worth noting—as in the case of Jane Mayer's investigation in the current issue of The New Yorker of the Koch family and its malign influence.
For decades, the Koch brothers, billionaire heirs of one of the largest privately held companies in the United States, have covertly sought to promote their hard-right ideology through third parties, think tanks, foundations and front groups. Their late father, Fred, having earned a fortune assisting the nascent Soviet oil industry, eventually became a right-wing extremist and member of the John Birch Society. His sons, especially David Koch, have not only expanded the family business but infiltrated their father's political views into the mainstream.
Happily for them, the expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars on nonprofit and "educational" ventures has served their corporate priorities perfectly. While Ms. Mayer cites many examples of self-serving Koch philanthropy that match their more direct program of buying politicians and policies, the enterprise that is currently most pertinent is the Tea Party movement.
Although the Kochs cannot be said to directly control the Tea Party outfits, they have succeeded in infusing their priorities, strategies and ideas into the movement through an organization called Americans for Prosperity. Typically, a Koch Industries spokeswoman sought to deny that David Koch, his brother Charles, their company or their foundations have funded the Tea Parties—and technically that may be true. David Koch says he has never attended a Tea Party event and that nobody representing the Tea Party "has ever even approached me."
David Koch, who lives in a 9,000-square-foot Park Avenue apartment, is not exactly a pitchfork populist and has no interest in mingling with such unfashionable types.
It certainly seems unlikely that David Koch has ever encountered any of the folks who turn up at a typical Tea Party event or that he has ever showed up at a Congressional town hall meeting to scream about health care reform. He lives on Park Avenue in a 9,000-square-foot duplex apartment and spends his time cultivating elitist Manhattan society with donations to New York cultural institutions, notably the ballet. He used to divide his time between a yacht in the south of France and a palatial home in the Hamptons, where he hosted "an East Coast version of Hugh Hefner's soirees" in the clothes-optional Playboy mansion.
In short, Mr. Koch is not exactly a pitchfork populist and has no interest in mingling with such unfashionable types. He also doesn't care much what they think. A former Koch adviser told The New Yorker that the Kochs back the Tea Party movement for the most cynical reasons. "This right-wing, redneck stuff works for them. They see this as a way to get things done without getting dirty themselves."
The kind of things that the Kochs want to "get done"-aside from advancing their social profile in places like the Upper East Side-mostly involve reducing taxes and regulations on themselves and their companies. If they had their way, Social Security and Medicare would disappear tomorrow, and so would any other program that benefits families without a billion dollars at their disposal. So would the Environmental Protection Agency, the Clean Air Act and every other obstacle to their massive effusions of deadly filth. Lately, they have been trying to prevent stricter regulation of formaldehyde, a known carcinogen, because their company produces enormous amounts of the stuff for commercial use.
Bruce Bartlett, a conservative economist and historian who worked at one of the many right-wing think tanks funded by Koch money, believes that the Koch brothers are "trying to shape and control and channel the populist uprising into their own policies." Perhaps the Tea Party activists should take a harder look at those policies—and try to figure out whether the national interest truly coincides with the avaricious, destructive attitude of these "libertarians."
__._,_.___Group Owner/Discussion Moderator: Lloyd Miller, Research Director for A-albionic Research. The Moderator is not responsible for the content of this or any other post which appears on this uncensored discussion list unless sent to the list by him. Those wishing to pursue A-albionic Theories in more detail should join the SUBSCRIBERS ONLY site where back issues of the PROJECT, a 4000+ book bibliography, and other articles are archived and issued to a http://a-albionic.com/forums/98 SUBSCRIBERS ONLY list. ($9.95/365 days) Click http://a-albionic.com/forums/98 for a description of benefits and subscription information.
A-albionic Book Inventory Liquidation Auction:
http://a-albionic.org
MARKETPLACE
.
__,_._,___
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.If your tired of your Internet connection making you a criminal, click here.
http://www.eff.org/
-- "Where the people are free there can be no great contrast or distinction among honest citizens in or out of office." - Maryland Gazette and Baltimore Advertiser, March 7, 1788. The true identity of the author is unknown.
No comments:
Post a Comment