Ed. note: The following is a solicited statement, requested as response to our reporting and discussion this morning concerning transparency in politics. The statement was submitted to us yesterday via email by Robert A. Tappan, director of external relations for Koch Companies Public Sector, LLC.
Privacy and confidentiality in the advancement of ideas are also held by many on the left including your guest Lee Fang's former employer, the Center for American Progress, and his current employer, United Republic, neither of which disclose their donors. Another guest on your show, Alicia Menendez, is an advisor for New Democrat Network, which assures its donors that their contributions will never be made public. Similarly, Professors Jamieson and Edelman are involved with groups that keep the identity of donors private and confidential. Moreover, academic conferences like the ones that Professors Jamieson and Edelman participate in, are often closed to press. Likewise, we assume the editorial meetings for your own show are closed to your competitors and the public.
Charles Koch and David Koch have publicly and consistently advocated for limited government, individual liberty, and economic freedom for more than 50 years. During that time, they have opposed policies that are counter to these principles, regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans were in power. They have long supported a variety of groups that analyze and advance thoughtful, reliable, free-market solutions to the pressing economic problems facing our country. Charles Koch and David Koch support these groups because of their desire to restore this great country to the principles of individual liberty and freedom upon which it was founded, and put a halt to the rampant and unchecked growth of government which threatens all Americans’ future prosperity.
All contributions to political campaigns made by Koch are disclosed and publicly available as required by law. Issue advocacy groups, however, have every right to keep their contributors private and confidential, which is an important principle that Americans have held dear since the founding of our country. That privacy protects individual citizens from retribution and harassment by the government -- the very kind that we have experienced when President Obama and his senior aides have attacked us for exercising our First Amendment rights of free expression concerning public policy issues. This harassment has included a constant barrage of threatening invective, misleading advertisements by the President’s re-election campaign, and false insinuations concerning Koch’s tax status that led to a federal investigation of the Administration. Further, some of the media coverage of Koch, including coverage by MSNBC, has led to death threats and threats of violence against Charles Koch and David Koch and our employees.
Leave a Comment:
I think one reason why the Koch brothers want to be anonymous as much as possible is that they fear consumers boycotting some of their numerous products. For example, ever since I learned that Brawny paper towels are a Koch product, I have chosen to no longer buy them, even when Costco offers a coupon for them.
Probably not a complete list.
Thanks for leaving the list, even if incomplete.
I plan on supporting these companies as often as I can.
Lies, Lies, Lies You should be ashamed of the display of YELLOW JOURNALISM I witnessed yesterday.
I didn't hear ONE word on George Soros and the MILLIONS MORE that he has SECRETLY given and/or even worse, SECRETLY orchestrated to liberal (one can often say "Radical leftest") causes. ...and was begun YEARS before the Koch Brothers.
You wonder why MSNBC can't get ratings. Have you ever thought YOUR views are extreme and are so disconnected from American Mainstream.
PS: I plan to support these Koch products 100% as well!
Poor pathetic Koch Bros. they are so angry that they've been exposed. Thank you Robert Greenwald.
Pretty serious accusation to say that MSNBC's, or any specific media outlet's coverage directly led to "death threats and threats of violence". While it doesn't surprise me at all that there are those prone to making these kind of threats against those they oppose on both sides of the ideological divide, to draw a direct connection between that and specific media outlets seems more than a bit of a stretch without provable evidence...and if there was provable evidence, why haven't the Koch brothers filed a lawsuit? Seems kinda fishy to me.
It isn't out of question with the words that Ed Schultz, the fired Keith Olbermann, and others have used against those that don't agree with them. If any person on the left would choose to have an honest debate, it won't ever occur on Ed Schultz's show, or any of their prime time shows.
For example, When Ed uses the BLS report, he only uses the establishment data that, as stated in the BLS report, excludes all NON-Incorporated Establishments and only says that there are 120,000,000 persons working. There is this other one called the Household Data that is in the same report. It is all inclusive. Ed knows this, but so does Obama and Obama also uses the one that favors him, but even then, anything less than 308,000 jobs per month added right now means it will take longer than 5 years to reach a full recovery. Obama's policies have failed by any objective measure.
So do you think the data used on Fox News and other right wing media outlets is any less skewed? I think not. All data is manipulated and it is hard to get to the real information. Critical thinking is essential.
The difference is intent! They intend to direct policy! They ask for and receive assurances from the candidate that they will promote those policies which will make them richer! This is the difference! The push for policies on the left are those that help or protect the helpless and unprotected! They represent the margins of society! They are NOT after self-interest like those on the right (like the Koch Bros)! This has been demonstrated quite effectively! So, their response is NOT a good argument!
The left pushes for policies that will protect the helpless and unprotected? Who is unprotected and who is helpless? The left hasn't ever accomplished anything they've said they were going to do in the long term. It's because they fail to recognize individuals and only recognize groups.
Not entirely true.
While the Kochs do try to increase personal wealth, the real goal for oligarchs is dictatorship.
Big campaign contributors expect appointment to high office. Does any of this sound familiar?
Rick Perry names off several of the agencies Kochs wish to abolish.
The Supreme Court eliminated limits on campaign spending.
Ron Paul wants to legalize prostitution, recreational drugs, and suicide.
The reason that Kochs want to do away with DOE is that they would like to desegregate schools.
EPA - they want to eliminate pollution limits.
SEC, ICC, and FTC - they want to eliminate wall street and commerce restrictions.
CIA - they don't like competition in foreign affairs.
OSHA - they hate that pesky safety equipment required to prevent worker deaths and injuries.
That pretty much summarizes the G.O.P. platform this year.
The Kochroachs only do what is advantageous to themselves. They are polluting this country and people are dying but fine's are nothing to them. Just a drop in the bucket for those billionaires. Wonder if they think they will never have to answer for their crimes? Spend, spend, spend all you want. Most American's are on to you and the rest of the Republican Taliban. You will lose!
Cindy,
I find it interesting you use the cockroach allusion when describing the Koch Brothers. This is similar language used by the Hutus to describe Tutsis who resisted their genocide in Rwanda. Between 500,000 and 1,000,000 were killed in the 1990s.
Do you really want to use the language of genocidal maniacs?
And folks wonder why the Koch Brothers received death threats.
Actually, Kochroaches is just a play on words, as in - they scatter when someone turns on the lights. The Koch Brothers probably receive death threats because they are serial polluters, who poison people and get off with just a small fine.
You must have spent a long time looking for that stretch to connect Hutus slurs and American politics. Political speech in America is protected, so anyone truly advocating for violence is rightly prosecuted for committing a crime.
SO.. let me get this right. Soros is ok and the Koch bros are the devil? You people funny as heck. What we are talking about is whose puppet you want to be...
Soros does not wants to re-segregate public schools like the Koch brothers.
There are some other differences.
This link is good.
They are looking for people to host viewings in their area.
No discussion of the Koch brothers would be complete without mentioning their involvement in trying to re-segregate public schools.
And how Fred Koch got $500,000 to invest in the depression era stock market from the Soviet Union in exchange for selling them patented oil refinement technology developed in the US.
Or how Fred Koch invented the John Birch Society so he could avoid his business being boycotted as a communist sympathizer AND promote racism.
I don't see the problem with preferring that student go to the nearest school. Rather than forcing a student to be bused further away just to make some demographic numbers look better. If you think a school is too scewed demographically, maybe look at the segregated community more than the segregated school.
Too many people are snorting Koch.
The core problem with the Koch brothers is their hypocrisy. The Koch brothers claim that they are working to defend "Free markets", while in fact destroying them. However, in order for free markets to function, all actors must be able to pursue their rational interests in the market place. Not just some, all. If only some actors are able to pursue their interest and others are denied the ability to pursue their interest, then what you have is not "Free Markets" but "Coercive Markets" with some actors being forced to participate against their own interest.
Now in order to pursue ones own interest, you must have factually correct information regarding the events occurring relative to your interests. If i am purchasing an oil well, i need to know if there is any oil left in it. Obviously, if i have no clue whether or not there is any oil in the well, it is not in my interest to purchase it. If i have been deliberately lied to about the oil in the well, then the person who has lied to me has denied me the ability to act in my interest.
This is the central problem with the Koch brothers. By spreading misinformation, the are undermining the very thing they claim to be protecting. They are denying actors the ability to pursue their rational interests, and thus destroying the free market, all the while claiming to defend it.