Koch Brothers Making Commercials Now....i'll Let The Forum "break It Down"

[Soggy in NOLA]

Oddly, I never even heard of the Koch brothers until the leftist moonbat brigade starting shitting themselves over these two.

 

[bripat9643]

So has George Soros and Warren Buffet, do you have a real point?

They are just big pocket donors that shouldn't have a bigger voice than me or you. But since Citizens United, they DO.

Citizens United merely set things back to the way before the McCain-Fiengold attempt to overturn the First Amendment.

The idea that everyone can have an "equal voice" is an idiotic liberal notion.

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

Call it silly but you cannot call it wrong...

Some people shouldn't be more attractive than other people. Unfortunately, nature doesn't want to cooperate with human notions of fairness. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not equality of speech.

We're not talking about nature we're talking politics. I'll say it again just in case you want to disagree with me

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

In other words, you want to repeal the First Amendment. I am perfectly clear on that issue.

 

[ClosedCaption]

They are just big pocket donors that shouldn't have a bigger voice than me or you. But since Citizens United, they DO.

Citizens United merely set things back to the way before the McCain-Fiengold attempt to overturn the First Amendment.

The idea that everyone can have an "equal voice" is an idiotic liberal notion.

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

Call it silly but you cannot call it wrong...

Some people shouldn't be more attractive than other people. Unfortunately, nature doesn't want to cooperate with human notions of fairness. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not equality of speech.

We're not talking about nature we're talking politics. I'll say it again just in case you want to disagree with me

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

In other words, you want to repeal the First Amendment. I am perfectly clear on that issue.

Not in other words...I presented my side twice and you didnt disagree so we both agree with my take on it.

Thanks.

 

[Stephanie]

Citizens United merely set things back to the way before the McCain-Fiengold attempt to overturn the First Amendment.

The idea that everyone can have an "equal voice" is an idiotic liberal notion.

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

Call it silly but you cannot call it wrong...

Some people shouldn't be more attractive than other people. Unfortunately, nature doesn't want to cooperate with human notions of fairness. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not equality of speech.

We're not talking about nature we're talking politics. I'll say it again just in case you want to disagree with me

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

In other words, you want to repeal the First Amendment. I am perfectly clear on that issue.

Not in other words...I presented my side twice and you didnt disagree so we both agree with my take on it.

Thanks.

cute little game you on the left always try to pull. it doesn't work though. everybody sees through it

 

[bripat9643]

Citizens United merely set things back to the way before the McCain-Fiengold attempt to overturn the First Amendment.

The idea that everyone can have an "equal voice" is an idiotic liberal notion.

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

Call it silly but you cannot call it wrong...

Some people shouldn't be more attractive than other people. Unfortunately, nature doesn't want to cooperate with human notions of fairness. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not equality of speech.

We're not talking about nature we're talking politics. I'll say it again just in case you want to disagree with me

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

In other words, you want to repeal the First Amendment. I am perfectly clear on that issue.

Not in other words...I presented my side twice and you didnt disagree so we both agree with my take on it.

Thanks.

Equality of speech requires repealing the First Amendment. Ergo, you want to repeal the First Amendment. No amount of weaseling or tap dancing is going to fool anyone about that irrefutable fact.

 

[ClosedCaption]

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

Call it silly but you cannot call it wrong...

Some people shouldn't be more attractive than other people. Unfortunately, nature doesn't want to cooperate with human notions of fairness. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not equality of speech.

We're not talking about nature we're talking politics. I'll say it again just in case you want to disagree with me

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

In other words, you want to repeal the First Amendment. I am perfectly clear on that issue.

Not in other words...I presented my side twice and you didnt disagree so we both agree with my take on it.

Thanks.

Equality of speech requires repealing the First Amendment. Ergo, you want to repeal the First Amendment. No amount of weaseling or tap dancing is going to fool anyone about that irrefutable fact.

Well you would be correct if there was only one way to skin a cat. Since I'm telling you thats not feasible I think you would like listen to what I actually say. But since you feel the need to translate everything I say I'll say this...there are more solutions other than the one you present.

I'm sure you'll spin that into a nice strawman so have at it

 

[OnePercenter]

Says the far left Obama drone..

Stick to the propaganda message as it is all you know..

Then show us how the Koch Brothers are doing good for America.

 

[OnePercenter]

What makes them "the worst," the fact that they promote freedom and capitalism?

Such as?

 

[bripat9643]

Some people shouldn't be more attractive than other people. Unfortunately, nature doesn't want to cooperate with human notions of fairness. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, not equality of speech.

We're not talking about nature we're talking politics. I'll say it again just in case you want to disagree with me

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

In other words, you want to repeal the First Amendment. I am perfectly clear on that issue.

Not in other words...I presented my side twice and you didnt disagree so we both agree with my take on it.

Thanks.

Equality of speech requires repealing the First Amendment. Ergo, you want to repeal the First Amendment. No amount of weaseling or tap dancing is going to fool anyone about that irrefutable fact.

Well you would be correct if there was only one way to skin a cat. Since I'm telling you thats not feasible I think you would like listen to what I actually say. But since you feel the need to translate everything I say I'll say this...there are more solutions other than the one you present.

I'm sure you'll spin that into a nice strawman so have at it

Explain to use how you are going to enforce equality of speech without violating the First Amendment. Please, we can all use a goo laugh.

 

[bripat9643]

What makes them "the worst," the fact that they promote freedom and capitalism?

Such as?

Donations to the Libertarian Party, for one. Also support for various freedom oriented think tanks like the Cato Institute.

 

[ClosedCaption]

We're not talking about nature we're talking politics. I'll say it again just in case you want to disagree with me

One persons voice shouldnt be louder than another citizens based on how much money they have. Period.

In other words, you want to repeal the First Amendment. I am perfectly clear on that issue.

Not in other words...I presented my side twice and you didnt disagree so we both agree with my take on it.

Thanks.

Equality of speech requires repealing the First Amendment. Ergo, you want to repeal the First Amendment. No amount of weaseling or tap dancing is going to fool anyone about that irrefutable fact.

Well you would be correct if there was only one way to skin a cat. Since I'm telling you thats not feasible I think you would like listen to what I actually say. But since you feel the need to translate everything I say I'll say this...there are more solutions other than the one you present.

I'm sure you'll spin that into a nice strawman so have at it

Explain to use how you are going to enforce equality of speech without violating the First Amendment. Please, we can all use a goo laugh.

There was a 1st amendment prior to Citizens United wasnt there? Citizens United should be overturned and we can go back to the 1st as it was before. If I remember correctly Citizens United didnt create the 1st and reversing it wont destroy it

 

[Stephanie]

Did you ever believe the people in this country would attack other American citizens in this way? did you ever believe you'd see an ELECTED member of your government do it like, Dirty Harry Reid did?

notice not a peep from him since but why should he when his TOOLS for his party will do it for him

You need to wake UP and see how HOSTILE the Democrat party has become to you, the American CITIZEN

 

[billyerock1991]

^........................

yep its BS alright ...

 

[billyerock1991]

^........................

Oh my, a tv commercial. When's the hangin'?

So you support the Koch brothers?

I'm guessing you are poor. I'm also guessing you fight for your own destruction.

SJ was never too bright ...Its that 3rd grade education he has... He misspells words all the time and his grammar, that keeps me laughing all the time...

 

[billyerock1991]

So much blind hate. I for one think they should fire everyone and move all their jobs overseas, then the haters would just wub them!

It's like, we have Obama, the least trusted President in US history, a guy that lies almost about everything at some point... A guy that dumped billions on the rich, and I'm supposed to judge the Koch bro's because why again? Focus you peeon's.... You voted for everything you claim to hate, many of you twice.

I think America should enforce the same restrictions on Imports as it holds at home. Then we wouldn't have this dream that we are good people doing the right thing by employing people doing the bad thing.

If we can't employ 12 year olds, we shouldn't be allowed to import objects made by 12 year old work.

If we can't pollute the atmosphere, we shouldn't be allowed to import the polluters work.

It doesn't matter where it happens, it's still bad. This concept will also lower our laws and restrictions to stay competitive. We just won't be competitive beyond ignorance.

one of the biggest rants by the koch brothers are to many regulations...the repub-lie-cans said we have too many banking regulations ... the banks went down the toilet ... where we tax payers had to bail them out and they still say we have too many bank regulations ...

 

[billyerock1991]

More phoney outrage over millionaires spending their money.

I doubt Anti-Party gets this upset over any of the liberal millionaires that spend their money to advance their Agenda.

look at what liberals Agenda is before you show your ignorance here ...
these clowns rant about soros but they never look at what the koch brothers do ... if its good or if its a crime

 

[Stephanie]

Here ya go, not only are attacking you the citizens but going after someone "who worked in their administration" that speaks out about them
VOTE FOR THIS SOME MORE FOLKS you like being ABUSED by these elected ASSES

SNIP:

Obama Spokesman Responds to Leon Panetta’s Accusations by Calling Him Names

by
Bryan Preston
Bio
October 8, 2014 - 7:04 am

Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has lobbed a series of damning accusations against his old boss, President Barack Obama.
In his new book, Panetta says that Benghazi was always an obvious terrorist attack. He says that Obama approaches the world like a law professor, meaning that he does not usually see reality if it does not comport with his preconceived notions. Panetta writes that Obama’s decisions on Syria and Iraq have paved the way for the rise of of the Islamic State. Panetta writes that Obama has given up on the job, rather than continue to try working with Republicans in Congress.
The merits of some of these charges, as well as Panetta’s timing in launching them, can be debated. Obama never showed any interest in working with Republicans in Congress, for instance. In his first meeting with the opposition party, then in the minority in both houses of Congress, Obama declared “I won” and shut off debate. He lurched farther left after his overreaches, including Obamacare, led to the Republicans taking over the House in 2010. It is also probable that some of Panetta’s charges, whether correct or not, are being lodged now in order to pave the way for his friend Hillary Clinton’s run for the White House. He has revised Clinton’s role in Syria and ISIS, for instance, in a way that makes her look better and Obama look worse.
All of that said, the seriousness of Panetta’s charges isn’t debatable. He writes, essentially, that Obama is unfit for the job of president for multiple reasons. That means nothing will change for the rest of Obama’s term. He might be dragged into fighting ISIS more vigorously, which Panetta supports, but only after the world’s richest terrorist group has accumulated more territory and troops, and only after it has killed even more innocent people and become even more dangerous than it already is. By the time Obama gets around to launching more than four airstrikes per day against ISIS, the group may have further destabilized the Middle East and could even have obtained weapons of mass destruction.
So Panetta’s charges are serious, and they come from a serious man who served in Congress and who led both the CIA and the Defense Department. A man who perhaps could have done more, sooner, to make the case that he is making now — but he is serious.
President Obama is not, and he sent spokesman Bill Burton out to CNN to deflect Panetta’s accusations. Not refute, just deflect.
With childish name-calling. Watch the video on the next page.

ALL of it here:
The PJ Tatler Obama Spokesman Responds to Leon Panetta 8217 s Accusations by Calling Him Names

 

[S.J.]

Here ya go, not only are attacking you the citizens but going after someone "who worked in their administration" that speaks out about them
VOTE FOR THIS SOME MORE FOLKS you like being ABUSED by these elected ASSES

SNIP:

Obama Spokesman Responds to Leon Panetta’s Accusations by Calling Him Names

by
Bryan Preston
Bio
October 8, 2014 - 7:04 am

Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has lobbed a series of damning accusations against his old boss, President Barack Obama.
In his new book, Panetta says that Benghazi was always an obvious terrorist attack. He says that Obama approaches the world like a law professor, meaning that he does not usually see reality if it does not comport with his preconceived notions. Panetta writes that Obama’s decisions on Syria and Iraq have paved the way for the rise of of the Islamic State. Panetta writes that Obama has given up on the job, rather than continue to try working with Republicans in Congress.
The merits of some of these charges, as well as Panetta’s timing in launching them, can be debated. Obama never showed any interest in working with Republicans in Congress, for instance. In his first meeting with the opposition party, then in the minority in both houses of Congress, Obama declared “I won” and shut off debate. He lurched farther left after his overreaches, including Obamacare, led to the Republicans taking over the House in 2010. It is also probable that some of Panetta’s charges, whether correct or not, are being lodged now in order to pave the way for his friend Hillary Clinton’s run for the White House. He has revised Clinton’s role in Syria and ISIS, for instance, in a way that makes her look better and Obama look worse.
All of that said, the seriousness of Panetta’s charges isn’t debatable. He writes, essentially, that Obama is unfit for the job of president for multiple reasons. That means nothing will change for the rest of Obama’s term. He might be dragged into fighting ISIS more vigorously, which Panetta supports, but only after the world’s richest terrorist group has accumulated more territory and troops, and only after it has killed even more innocent people and become even more dangerous than it already is. By the time Obama gets around to launching more than four airstrikes per day against ISIS, the group may have further destabilized the Middle East and could even have obtained weapons of mass destruction.
So Panetta’s charges are serious, and they come from a serious man who served in Congress and who led both the CIA and the Defense Department. A man who perhaps could have done more, sooner, to make the case that he is making now — but he is serious.
President Obama is not, and he sent spokesman Bill Burton out to CNN to deflect Panetta’s accusations. Not refute, just deflect.
With childish name-calling. Watch the video on the next page.

ALL of it here:
The PJ Tatler Obama Spokesman Responds to Leon Panetta 8217 s Accusations by Calling Him Names

This is the most childish administration in our history when it comes to responding to criticism.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

^........................

Oh my, a tv commercial. When's the hangin'?

So you support the Koch brothers?

I'm guessing you are poor. I'm also guessing you fight for your own destruction.

Remind us if you support Soros

 

[S.J.]

^........................

Oh my, a tv commercial. When's the hangin'?

So you support the Koch brothers?

I'm guessing you are poor. I'm also guessing you fight for your own destruction.

SJ was never too bright ...Its that 3rd grade education he has... He misspells words all the time and his grammar, that keeps me laughing all the time...

I took a picture of your brain, but it's not developed yet.