• 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

I heard that George Soros funded protests in support for the Yeltsin regime in the 1990s when Yeltsin was corrupt as hell.......which means he was against communists....

But ostensibly he's funding neocommunists in the United States...:confused:

Whatever you make think of that...sheesh this boogeyman has been everywhere.
 
Last edited:
I'm talking about a Republican candidate receiving almost two million dollars from an unknown source and yet the Republican Party is making a big deal out of a Democratic candidate getting money for a TV ad campaign that may have been funded either in part or in whole by George Soros. The Republicans are doing this kind of thing right in front of people and yet some still refuse to see what is going on.
 
Whataboutism You are comparing a gubernatorial candidate to a county prosecutor. Lol Tell you what, when the governor misuses a statute to prosecute his political enemies, we will all concede the merit of your whataboutism. Until then, it is a dumpster fire.


Kim Gardner got money from a PAC for a TV ad campaign, apparently about thirty thousand dollars. Is this what we're talking about or was there more money down the line? Do you know?
 
I heard that George Soros funded protests in support for the Yeltsin regime in the 1990s when Yeltsin was corrupt as hell.......which means he was against communists....

But ostensibly he's funding neocommunists in the United States...:confused:

Whatever you make think of that...sheesh this boogeyman has been everywhere.

I was fully prepared to have a rock solid reason to hate Soros (I have no fondness for billionaires) but this doesn't look that bad:

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-03-17/news/mn-35234_1_george-soros

I'll try to see if I can find any actual dirt. :)
 
Kim Gardner used a Michigan pi firm to investigate the Missouri governor.

Sounds legit.
 
This is the point of this whole thread, and we have yet to see a conservavtive poster even attempt to adress it. Thus far, it's all been about creating false equivalencies between Soros and the Koch brothers, while forgetting to adress why people are critical about either. Hint: It's not about who they are donating money to, at least not with the Koch brothers. Instead, it's about why they are donating money.

I am not sure why you continue to ignore the simple answer put forth by a number of posters in regards to Soros and the dislike for him from conservatives. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean anyone is dodging your question, you simply ignore the answer.

As for your hypothetical question, sure I'll entertain it, and I assume you will handwave it away.

Conservatives don't like George Soros because he funds pro-choice organizations, pro open-boarder policies, the ACA, and gun regulations including registration to name a few. He calls for higher taxes on the rich while deferring his own wealth to tax shelters to avoid paying his own share of taxes, while also donating a large portion of his taxable wealth to his own foundation which attempts to push forward these issues on both the federal and local level.

That should get you started on your impossible search :rolleyes: for any reason conservatives might not like Soros.

As for the hilite, that is demonstrably false. A number of their donations have been protested without the 'why' of that specific donation being an issue. Only their views on other non related issues.
 
I am not sure why you continue to ignore the simple answer put forth by a number of posters in regards to Soros and the dislike for him from conservatives. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean anyone is dodging your question, you simply ignore the answer.

I have explained why I don't regard that answer to correspond with reality.

As for your hypothetical question, sure I'll entertain it, and I assume you will handwave it away.

Conservatives don't like George Soros because he funds pro-choice organizations, pro open-boarder policies, the ACA, and gun regulations including registration to name a few.

An answer, finally. Do all conservatives oppose women's choice, the ACA and gun regulations? No, not really, although I give you they are platforms within the GOP. None of them seem to be on the level of "badness" as funding climate change denial, except if you are a religious nutter and abortion is it. He's also not the only person who funds these things, so it doesn't explain the exceptional hatred towards him.

As for "open border policies", no he doesn't. Nobody does. An open border is a border without any form of border protection. What Soros is promoting is human rights and help for refugees. Kinda predictable, given he used to be one.

He calls for higher taxes on the rich while deferring his own wealth to tax shelters to avoid paying his own share of taxes, while also donating a large portion of his taxable wealth to his own foundation which attempts to push forward these issues on both the federal and local level.

Cite?

That should get you started on your impossible search :rolleyes: for any reason conservatives might not like Soros.

No no, you did good. You actually gave an answer to the question. It highlights how completely unreasonable the conservative hate for Soros is, but you did answer the question.

As for the hilite, that is demonstrably false. A number of their donations have been protested without the 'why' of that specific donation being an issue. Only their views on other non related issues.

No, it's not false. Their donations are protested because of what they are trying to influence, which is what I said.
 
Last edited:
Of course I know. Link Almost 200k

Okay I agree, $200,000 for a local race sounds like a lot. But the prosecution of Missouri Gov. Eric Greiten sounds to me less like a quid pro quo for contributions made by a PAC supported at least in part by George Soros than very bad timing for this to come out. This is a bad time for any political figure to have these kinds of allegations come out. It also sounds like Kim Gardner may not have had much choice as to investigating this incident.
While GOP legislative leaders limited their statements to expressions of concern and requests that Greitens be honest about what happened, a bipartisan chorus of senators called on Attorney General Josh Hawley, a Republican, to investigate...But a spokeswoman for Hawley said Gardner has jurisdiction. In a statement, Gardner said she would launch an investigation. Link
 
But the hatred manifests very differently, and that's what I'm getting at here. There are nowhere nears as many conspiracy theories, and nowhere near as much irrational bile directed at the Koch brothers as there is towards Soros.

Sure there is, you just haven't seen it. To hear some on the left tell it, the Koch empire is conspiring to suppress voters, reintroduce segregation, take over the GOP, etc etc etc. All BS. Just as the crap about Soros is all BS.

You don't like the answer, I get it. You see your side as the rational side, I get it. But don't be blinded to the BS on both sides.
 
An answer, finally. Do all conservatives oppose women's choice, the ACA and gun regulations? No, not really, although I give you they are platforms within the GOP. None of them seem to be on the level of "badness" as funding climate change denial, except if you are a religious nutter and abortion is it. He's also not the only person who funds these things, so it doesn't explain the exceptional hatred towards him.

Do all conservatives believe Soros is the boogeyman? Can they not oppose platforms they disagree with if they are not as "bad" as the ones you oppose? Let's not move the goalposts now.

And no, he is not the only person to fund these things of course. But, his Open Society Foundation is the second largest in the world, only eclipse by the Gates foundation. Which, given it's set up, financial backing and spread has enabled it to influence and fund things on a level not matched by many.

So while people might dislike one of these rich individuals for donating millions to the Clinton campaign, in Soros case they can see his money spread into local elections, local protest groups, local news outlets etc. It is not like he is actually sitting around coordinating each dollar his foundation donates, in some evil scheme to take over the globe. But his money has influence on a larger level than most in regards to politics, and leads those against that influence to grow an unnatural distaste for him.


Here is one

There are more that cover his expected tax bill if he so happens to pay it to near $7 billion dollars. I actually haven't seen much news about what happened after the tax deadline passed, so if anyone happens to see anything I would be glad to read it.

This is not to say he is doing anything illegal or nefarious. He is using a loophole that other rich individuals use to keep a larger portion of their wealth. But I personally am not big on 'do as I say, not as I do' preaching.

No no, you did good. You actually gave an answer to the question. It highlights how completely unreasonable the conservative hate for Soros is, but you did answer the question.

At least we are getting somewhere here. It is a far cry from your initial reasoning that conservatives hate Soros because of "supporting civil rights and democratic institutions".

No, it's not false. Their donations are protested because of what they are trying to influence, which is what I said.

Guess we will agree to disagree on this front. While I can concede your point in regards to certain donations, that is not always the case.

Protesting donations to colleges can kind of, sort of make sense. You don't want them to have influence in hiring and course criteria, which might lean towards their libertarian philosophy. I don't really see that as an issue, but I can understand how some could.

Protesting their attempts to purchase news outlets such as the LA Times for fear of any possible influence, again, I disagree with but I can at least see the argument.

Their donation to the UNCF though? The ACLU? No. How about their donation to the New York State Theatre? I saw it put forward that art institutions should reject their donations because, climate change denial. Because it could cause everyone to die. And if everyone is dead, no art. So yeah.
 
I am not sure why you continue to ignore the simple answer put forth by a number of posters in regards to Soros and the dislike for him from conservatives. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean anyone is dodging your question, you simply ignore the answer.

As for your hypothetical question, sure I'll entertain it, and I assume you will handwave it away.

Conservatives don't like George Soros because he funds pro-choice organizations, pro open-boarder policies, the ACA, and gun regulations including registration to name a few. He calls for higher taxes on the rich while deferring his own wealth to tax shelters to avoid paying his own share of taxes, while also donating a large portion of his taxable wealth to his own foundation which attempts to push forward these issues on both the federal and local level.

That should get you started on your impossible search :rolleyes: for any reason conservatives might not like Soros.

As for the hilite, that is demonstrably false. A number of their donations have been protested without the 'why' of that specific donation being an issue. Only their views on other non related issues.

If that is why they don't like him, why do they make up, implicate, and spread news about things he didn't do?
 
Last edited:
Sure there is, you just haven't seen it. To hear some on the left tell it, the Koch empire is conspiring to suppress voters, reintroduce segregation, take over the GOP, etc etc etc. All BS. Just as the crap about Soros is all BS.

How tied into the GOPs voter suppression efforts have they been?
 
uke2se said:
There are nowhere nears as many conspiracy theories, and nowhere near as much irrational bile directed at the Koch brothers as there is towards Soros.

Sure there is, you just haven't seen it.

Give me your three most extreme links accusing the Koch brothers of outlandish evil, and we'll compare them to the three nutty claims about Soros I easily found earlier.

But don't be blinded to the BS on both sides.

Do you understand that you're engaging in textbook false equivalence right now?
 
Last edited:
How tied into the GOPs voter suppression efforts have they been?

You're assuming xjx believes voter suppression is a real thing. He's probably thinks it's a leftwing conspiracy theory to excuse voter fraud to benefit democrats. Sigh.
 
If that is why they don't like him, why do they make up, implicate, and spread news about things he didn't do?

Could you give me a/few specific example(s) you had in mind? In a general sense it is to detract from movements by taking a grain of truth and spinning a different narrative from it, undermining the initial purpose. And uniting/focusing against a specific individual is a sound rallying tactic.
 
Give me your three most extreme links accusing the Koch brothers of outlandish evil, and we'll compare them to the three nutty claims about Soros I easily found earlier.
I have no interest in digging through nutty claims but there is a very recent book out there called "Democracy in Chains" by historian Nancy McLean which is pretty dang nutty. Even the Washington Post has taken it apart. But no, I'm not going to comb the fringes of the interwebs looking for crazy crap people believe about the Koch brothers. Which is my point. Shouldn't we all be focused on finding the truth? The truth is George Soros is not an evil mastermind plotting Satanic revolution and the Koch Brothers are not evil masterminds plotting a Racist Oligarchy. We should be much more interested in reality than the fantasies that play out in extreme partisan minds.
Do you understand that you're engaging in textbook false equivalence right now?
Only if the equivalence is indeed false.
 
You're assuming xjx believes voter suppression is a real thing. He's probably thinks it's a leftwing conspiracy theory to excuse voter fraud to benefit democrats. Sigh.

No, I understand the left's arguments concerning voter ID laws and even agree with them to some extent. However, I also think that there is some merit to protecting the integrity of the voting system. I don't think of the issue in terms of scare words.
 

Back
Top Bottom