• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Let's talk about George

The Big Dog said:
Soros funding Kerry, Clinton and Super Pacs and Correct the Record are "conspiracy theories"?

Actual undisputed facts are "conspiracy theories" now?

That is absolutely beyond ridiculous, but it does reveal the true motive behind the rhetoric here.

Conspiracy theories, can a brother get a god damn laughing dog?
Click to expand...
A tangential point... Back in 2004, it was widely reported that Soros was the largest political contributor. However once the election was over and the final accounting was complete, it turned out that his contributions were dwarfed by Bob Perry, the backer of the swiftboat smear campaign.
 
Last edited:
uke2se said:
I keep telling you what the difference is.

The Koch brothers fund climate denial, lessened environmental regulation, actions against worker's rights etc.

George Sors funds strengthened democratic institutions and civil and human rights.

One of those things is not like the other.

If you want to tell me why you feel that it is, you will have to tell me why working for democratic institutions and human rights is a bad thing. Can you do that?
Click to expand...
Yep, it the funding of charity that the right hates and not funding of democratic and liberal political causes in the US. I can only assume liberals hate the Kochs because they give money to museums.

I'm also unimpressed with the respected former congressman, as I've never heard of him. Its a bit like saying Dems are all for nationalizing oil companies because maxine waters said it once, only she is much more prominent in the Dems.
 
varwoche said:
A tangential point... Back in 2004, it was widely reported that Soros was the largest political contributor. However once the election was over and the final accounting was complete, it turned out that his contributions were dwarfed by Bob Perry, the backer of the swiftboat smear campaign.
Click to expand...

Tut tut tut, anything that soros has done that might make the right not like him is
A conspiracy theory. Soros does naught but fund super groovy charities you see.
 
ahhell said:
Yep, it the funding of charity that the right hates and not funding of democratic and liberal political causes in the US. I can only assume liberals hate the Kochs because they give money to museums.
Click to expand...

But why does the right hate democracy and human rights? You can understand why I hate climate denial and surpression of workers' rights, right?

ahhell said:
I'm also unimpressed with the respected former congressman, as I've never heard of him. Its a bit like saying Dems are all for nationalizing oil companies because maxine waters said it once, only she is much more prominent in the Dems.
Click to expand...

That you had heard of him was never part of the deal.
 
"Conspiracy theories about Soros seem to be more accepted among the right than theories about the Kochs among the left, because members of Congress espouse these theories on TV"
"Well, I never heard of the guy, try again"

I'm done.
 
My venal oligarch billionaire who uses his vast wealth to attempt to sway elections through Citizen United Style Super Pacs is WAY better than YOUR venal oligarch billionaire who uses his vast wealth to attempt to sway elections through Citizen United Style Super Pacs.
 
uke2se said:
I keep telling you what the difference is.

The Koch brothers fund climate denial, lessened environmental regulation, actions against worker's rights etc.

George Sors funds strengthened democratic institutions and civil and human rights.

One of those things is not like the other.

If you want to tell me why you feel that it is, you will have to tell me why working for democratic institutions and human rights is a bad thing. Can you do that?
Click to expand...

Obviously because both sides should be treated equally, and given the same amount of time and respect.

Just like creationism.

Never mind that one side is ideologically driven, disregards facts, and actively trying to make the world a worse place. It's like the paradox of tolerance.
 
Hlafordlaes said:
Non-sequitur.
Click to expand...

"Basically, the argument is that the asymmetrical rights of the individual to exploit, including its systemic repercussions, take precedence over the viability or continuity of the system for any or all others. IOW, a post-monarchist dystopia masquerading as grandiose "freedom" for highly motivated, or dubiously gifted, "reasoners."

Describes Soros to a tee.
 
ahhell said:
This strikes me merely as bias. You can't see the distinctions or nuance in your opposition nearly so much as you can within your own camp. I for instance don't know of any conservative that thinks soros is behind every liberal/dem group or organization. I also don't know of any liberals that think the Koch's are behind everything on the Right, but in both cases I know folks who seem irrationally focused on either the Kochs' influence or Soros'.

Honestly, I see a lot more of the Crazy, OMG, the Kochs' talk than OMG, Soros.



Do you have a name? Becuase some guy who is supposedly a respectable Republican Congressman isn't exactly a convincing argument that Soro's hate is more mainstream than Koch hate.
Click to expand...

The CT he brought up is a real thing but the form isn’t different between from how Soros is, MO, typicaly brought up by conservatives. eg:
Students from school where mass shooting occurred support gun control
Right wing response “Soros is behind it, so there”

Media Matters for America documents dishonesty in the right wing media
Right wing response “Soros is behind it, so there”

This is distinctly different from the criticisms made against the Koch bro’s for climate change denial. They are justifiably criticized for peddling pseudoscience, but no one is trying to argue it’s pseudoscience based on the Koch’s support.
 
lomiller said:
Media Matters for America documents dishonesty in the right wing media
Right wing response “Soros is behind it, so there”
Click to expand...

Media matters is a 501c3 that claims to be an educational group, but in fact is a ridiculously partisan group that lines up directly with the interests of the Clinton campaign and attacks any media that criticizes her.

You better believe Soros is behind it.
 
uke2se said:
But why does the right hate democracy and human rights? You can understand why I hate climate denial and surpression of workers' rights, right?
Click to expand...
This is the rhetorical(not moral) equivalent of, people hate hitler but hitler was nice to dogs, why do people hate dogs?

Conservative don't dislike or focus on Soros because he spends money supporting democracy and human rights, the dislike him because he spends money supporting political campaigns in the US. This has been stated many times in this thread.

I have not (I don't think anyone else has said) that Soros' ideas are morally equivalent to the Koch's*. What I have been trying to say is that they are politically and sociologically equivalent. Similar if not the same phenomena. Rich folks that spend money on political causes and campaigns. Its similar to Monsanto for the anti-GMO folks. They are an obvious target so the focus of ire that really should be focused at a number of other organizations too.
That you had heard of him was never part of the deal.
Click to expand...

I will admit that I am about to move the goal post here, but....
There are clearly a number of biases at play. Confirmation and recency bias being top of the list. You are not looking for democrats attacking the Kochs' and the Koch's aren't in the news right now. Its easy to find loan politicians saying crazy things,(admittedly easier these days of among reps than dems.) but this is an anecdote, you've got one guy saying something crazy who isn't even in office.


*I don't really think the Kochs are that much more morally represensible than Soros either but that's not the point. The question is why to conservatives focus so much ire on Soros. The answer is, he's spends money on Dems and against Reps. I realize lots of folks really want it to be because republicans hate jews and freedom but its really not nearly so complicated.
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
Media matters is a 501c3 that claims to be an educational group, but in fact is a ridiculously partisan group that lines up directly with the interests of the Clinton campaign and attacks any media that criticizes her.

You better believe Soros is behind it.
Click to expand...

Thanks’ for providing a perfect example of how different discussions on Koch support for climate denial are from Conservatives discussing Soros.

On climate denial, the pseudoscience is discussed and enumerated first by showing how it different from the actual science. On MMfA the right immediately goes to “it goes against our message so it must be evil/corrupt”. There is no attempt to show their debunking of right with media is false or misleading, it’s just “they are liberal so don’t listen, only listen to good conservative sources”
 
ahhell said:
*I don't really think the Kochs are that much more morally represensible than Soros either but that's not the point.
Click to expand...

It seems to come very close to the OP’s point. He’s specifically arguing that there IS a meaningful difference between supporting dangerous pseudoscience and supporting media fact checking that exposes systematic dishonesty in the right wing media.
 
lomiller said:
Thanks’ for providing a perfect example of how different discussions on Koch support for climate denial are from Conservatives discussing Soros.

On climate denial, the pseudoscience is discussed and enumerated first by showing how it different from the actual science. On MMfA the right immediately goes to “it goes against our message so it must be evil/corrupt”. There is no attempt to show their debunking of right with media is false or misleading, it’s just “they are liberal so don’t listen, only listen to good conservative sources”
Click to expand...

Yeah, "perfect." You are aware, are you not, that media matters does not confine itself to attacking "good conservative sources," are you not?

media matters attacked any critics of the Clintons:

https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2013/08/16/president-clinton-refutes-ny-times-errors-in-fo/195451
and again

all while playing fast and loose with the tax rules.
 
The Big Dog said:
Yeah, "perfect." You are aware, are you not, that media matters does not confine itself to attacking "good conservative sources," are you not?

media matters attacked any critics of the Clintons:
Click to expand...
Shrug. If the right doesn’t like them debunking their smear campaigns against the Clintons perhaps the right should stop conducting smear campaigns against the Clintons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom