• 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

varwoche said:
Still broken here. I assume you offered this link to counter my claim that Bob Perry was a bigger political donor than Soros in the 2004 election cycle. If so, please quote the bits that counter my claim. Thanks!!
Click to expand...

Yes, that is what my link says.

“That would be a radical change from donations in the 2003-2004 election cycle, when businessman George Soros gave more than $23 million to Democratic-aligned 527 groups such as Media Fund and America Coming Together, and Houston homebuilder Bob Perry contributed more than $8 million specifically to help the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group that questioned John Kerry’s Vietnam War record.”
 
The Big Dog said:
Yes, that is what my link says.

“That would be a radical change from donations in the 2003-2004 election cycle, when businessman George Soros gave more than $23 million to Democratic-aligned 527 groups such as Media Fund and America Coming Together, and Houston homebuilder Bob Perry contributed more than $8 million specifically to help the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group that questioned John Kerry’s Vietnam War record.”
Click to expand...
OK, thanks, I retract my claim.
 
The official Twitter of the Missouri GOP thinks the reason their governor is now in custody is because of.....George Soros!
 

Attachments

  • Screen-Shot-2018-02-23-at-10.09.16-PM.jpg
    Screen-Shot-2018-02-23-at-10.09.16-PM.jpg
    35 KB · Views: 10
Travis said:
The official Twitter of the Missouri GOP thinks the reason their governor is now in custody is because of.....George Soros!
Click to expand...

Still no evidence that high level conservative officials are pandering to the conspiracy crowd, because... Shut up filthy liberal.
 
A major difference between the Koch brothers and George Soros is visibility or what Soros would probably call transparency. Soros has made his views public -- he's written at least ten books and done countless interviews -- and made himself available to the media. The Koch brothers are secretive, issuing few public statements, much less writing books.
 
The facts seem to be, back in 2016 -- in the wake of the disturbances in Ferguson -- Kimberly Gardner, a black woman with experience as a prosecutor, in nursing and a member of the Missouri legislature, announced she was running for St. Louis Circuit Attorney. She said she believed "Together we can make St. Louis safe." Her three point plan was 1) partner with mental health services to treat non-violent offenders, 2) increase accountability by public agencies and 3) crackdown on gang violence. In a story that appeared on the St. Louis Post-Dispatch news site in July 2016, it was reported that Gardner's "new internet and cable TV ad was financed by a federally registered campaign committee from Washington called the Safety & Justice Committee. It was established in June and reported $30,000 in initial funds from Soros." From that story:
Gardner said Friday that she has no regrets about assistance from the super PAC. She said the latest donation is paying for the TV and online ad, and that the committee’s mission aligns with her platform to reform the criminal justice system and restore trust in the community. She said the spot will run until primary day.

The committee “reached out and heard my platform and liked what I was saying about building trust,” Gardner said. “They said they’d like to support me and get my message out.” News link
Click to expand...
 
The Don said:
Another way of spinning it is that the Kochs are seeking to make US industry more cost competitive and are pushing back against the current mania for global warming (when 40 years ago we were frightened that the next ice age was just around the corner). A lot of people support that.

<snip>
Click to expand...


Not sure who "we" are. I certainly wasn't, and it was a conversation I took note of at the time.

This is a great example of the sort of false equivalency and myth peddling used as a substitute for fact and reasoned argument by the right.

For starters (false equivalency), there is no comparison between the tiny handful of people in the climatology field discussing the possibility of a "mini-ice age", as it was being referred to at the time, and the vast, overwhelming unanimity of climatologists today about the existence of AGM and the effects already being seen, not to mention the effects which can reasonably be anticipated. This is all aside from the more extreme predictions.

And (myth peddling) there was certainly no widespread concern among the public that an ice age was imminent and all but assured, which is noticeably different from the actual on-going effects of global warming which we all can see now if we bother to look, and which the right desperately tries to downplay and disparage.
 
ahhell said:
<snip>

Edit to add, supporting media fact checking that exposes systematic dishonesty in the right wing media is clearly partisan, it doesn't mean they're dishonest but they do clearly aim their efforts at the right, which would naturally annoy the right.

<snip>
Click to expand...


This is another example of the liberal bias of reality.

Any group which does unbiased fact checking and reports their results dispassionately is going to appear to aim their efforts at the right, simply because the right lies more often, more openly, and more blatantly.

If you're cutting down all the tall poppies, and five of them are blue while fifty of them are red, then you aren't being biased toward the red ones because they are red.

In fact, you aren't being biased toward them at all. It's just that there are ten times as many of them.
 
quadraginta said:
This is another example of the liberal bias of reality.

Any group which does unbiased fact checking and reports their results dispassionately is going to appear to aim their efforts at the right, simply because the right lies more often, more openly, and more blatantly.

If you're cutting down all the tall poppies, and five of them are blue while fifty of them are red, then you aren't being biased toward the red ones because they are red.

In fact, you aren't being biased toward them at all. It's just that there are ten times as many of them.
Click to expand...

Lol. Good one :thumbsup:

People who are on the opposite side of the political spectrum lie!
 
quadraginta said:
Not sure who "we" are...
Click to expand...

Also not sure what this has to do with Soros -- discredit him because he appears concerned with climate change I guess -- but here's a headline from Weather dot com last year:
We’re Due For Another Ice Age But Climate Change May Push It Back Another 100,000 Years, Researchers Say Link
Click to expand...
 
ahhell said:
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.
Click to expand...

Lots of people do that. They don't receive the hate nor the conspiracy theorizing that Soros does. How do you explain that?

ahhell said:
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.
Click to expand...

You are saying they are equal in the same paragraph where you say they aren't equal. It's all very confusing.

ahhell said:
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.
Click to expand...

I'm not looking for democrats attacking the Kochs because this is a thread about George Soros, and why he is reviled by the right despite seeming to be a generally decent human being, throwing great sums of money on very worthy causes.

ahhell said:
*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.
Click to expand...

But, as I said, lots of people spend money on Democrats, and they don't earn the same amount of bile by conservatives. If it's just a matter of him spending money on Democrats, I would expect the right to see him as misguided. Instead he's a monster beyond all porportions. I simply don't buy your explanation, because it doesn't fit reality.
 
uke2se said:
Lots of people do that. They don't receive the hate nor the conspiracy theorizing that Soros does. How do you explain that?



You are saying they are equal in the same paragraph where you say they aren't equal. It's all very confusing.



I'm not looking for democrats attacking the Kochs because this is a thread about George Soros, and why he is reviled by the right despite seeming to be a generally decent human being, throwing great sums of money on very worthy causes.



But, as I said, lots of people spend money on Democrats, and they don't earn the same amount of bile by conservatives. If it's just a matter of him spending money on Democrats, I would expect the right to see him as misguided. Instead he's a monster beyond all porportions. I simply don't buy your explanation, because it doesn't fit reality.
Click to expand...
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
The first name on that list that is just a guys last name, Adelson the second is Soros.

Adelson gives to the GOP/conservatives, Soros gives to Dems/liberals. Tall poppy, same reason anti-GMO types always go after Monsanto.
 
ahhell said:
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
The first name on that list that is just a guys last name, Adelson the second is Soros.

Adelson gives to the GOP/conservatives, Soros gives to Dems/liberals. Tall poppy, same reason anti-GMO types always go after Monsanto.
Click to expand...

But Adelson isn't getting the same treatment as Soros. How do you explain that?

In case you didn't knew, Adelson isn't the same person as the Koch brothers, your last tu quoque.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom