Chart of the Day: Who’s in politics for “investment”?

posted at 9:31 am on February 9, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

As the 2014 cycle starts to heat up, we’re hearing once again the cries about the corporate fat cats taking over politics. This means, of course, more hysteria about the Koch brothers, such as this from Reid Wilson at the Washington Post.  Wilson insists that there isn’t anything like the Koch brothers for Democrats because the Kochs are in it for the cash:

That’s because big Democratic donors and big Republican donors are motivated by different types of issues, and therefore give differently, according to Democratic strategists who deal frequently with high-dollar donors.

For the Koch brothers, electing the right candidate can mean a financial windfall. Republican candidates the Koch brothers back tend to favor fewer regulations on businesses and more fracking and right-to-work laws, to name a few. All of those issues benefit, to different extents, the bottom lines of the companies or stock prices or hedge funds associated with the mega-donors from whom the Koch brothers solicit big checks.

Social issues? Not so much. Organizations that spend the Koch brothers’ money may align themselves with conservative hardliners on abortion or gay marriage, but the brothers themselves — and most of their donors — are less concerned with social conservatism than they are with fiscal and regulatory policy. To them, political giving is an investment.

To his credit, Wilson at least skips the nearly-obligatory mention of Citizens United in his piece, but that’s unusual in this genre of lamentation. Perhaps if Wilson had looked at Sean Sullivan’s report on a new Sunlight Foundation analysis of PAC contributions post-Citizens United, he might have found a group that “invests” more heavily in Democrats than corporate givers such as the Kochs do with Republicans.  And that sector is …. Big Labor:

sunlight-superpacs

When it comes to writing big checks to favored candidates and causes, unions last year seemed to be taking greater advantage of the landmark Citizens United decision than corporations.

A Sunlight analysis of groups and individuals who wrote checks of $10,000 or more to super PACs and other political committees that report to the FEC revealed big labor bested big business in 2013 by better than 2-to-1.

Our study was focused on determining who is writing the kind of checks that would not have been legal prior to the controversial 2010 Supreme Court decision that opened the way for unions and companies to give money directly from their treasuries in unlimited amounts — as opposed to the donations they traditionally made in $1,000 increments from their long-established political action committees.

In fact, the biggest donors are Democratic donors:

Though most donations from corporations went to right-leaning groups, the year’s biggest corporate donor, at $1.1 million, was the Mostyn Law Firm, run by Democratic donor Steve Mostyn. Contran Corporation, founded by the late Harold Simmons, a longtime Republican donor, gave $1 million. Democrats also took the top two positions for individual donors as well.

Wilson’s strange claim that the Kochs uniquely see political donations as “investments” is demonstrably absurd, thanks to this data. Why do unions kick in more than anyone, and almost entirely to Democrats, if not as rent-seeking behavior aimed at securing legislation that expands their ability to collect dues and strengthen their own political power? Given that the most active political unions tend to be public-employee unions (PEUs) like SEIU, AFSCME, and especially the NEA, their influence on regulation and government expansion very much makes this domination an “investment” in future revenue.

And how about other private-sector associations like the American Association for Justice (AAJ), formerly the Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA)? Does their heavy contribution — nearly a million dollars already in the 2014 cycle — merely reflect pure civic engagement, or an attempt to block policies like tort reform that would hit members in their wallets?

Newsflash: everyone makes political donations out of a sense of investment in desired outcomes. Let’s not pretend that the Kochs are the only people “investing” in politicians. If we don’t like this system, then let’s throw out the campaign-finance reform enacted since Watergate in favor of full and immediate transparency on all donations directed at candidates and parties, and remove all tax exempt statuses for parties and PACs. At least that way we’ll be able to skip the need for fainting rafts floating on seas of hypocrisy.

Addendum: My friend Warner Todd Huston wrote a takedown yesterday of the same article for Breitbart:

This is an odd claim considering that the left has spent the better part of the last 40 years creating dozens of purported think tanks and agenda shops like the Center for American Progress (CAP), and in George Soros has one of the richest men in the world funding Democrats and their issues at nearly every turn.

It seems that the crux of the Post‘s argument is that liberals donate their money and focus their efforts on social issues while Charles and David Koch focus on regulatory issues.

However, this might be a distinction without a difference. If you focus on left-wing social issues and elect politicians that support them, you will undoubtedly get liberal regulatory rules sought after and passed; if you focus on conservative regulatory issues and elect politicians that support those you’ll undoubtedly get more conservative social policy. One leads to the other either way.

Be sure to read it all.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

…Heck!…that’s one of my cats!

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 9:32 AM

bishop

307wolverine on February 9, 2014 at 9:33 AM

Drat, missed it again

307wolverine on February 9, 2014 at 9:33 AM

Drat, missed it again

307wolverine on February 9, 2014 at 9:33 AM

…it’s ok!…I have obtained a good many broken bones from Union Thugs…doing what I just did!

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 9:37 AM

…I learned…not too call out any longer…it doesn’t alert him!

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 9:39 AM

When are people going to wise up and when are the Republicans going to start using rhetoric the way the enemy does. They’ve done a good job of making Republicans look like rich, fat cats while raking in the gravy themselves. I guess I don’t expect the establishment Repubs to care since they are part of the group at the trough but the conservatives need to get going on things like this.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 9:42 AM

George Soros. And Warren Buffet.

The Left lies all the time. And their lies get easier to expose.

rbj on February 9, 2014 at 9:47 AM

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 9:42 AM

This is some of the best insight from one of the newer folks. (I think COL is new anyway).

But this is advice gold. Push the characterization right back at them where it’s deserved. I’ve said it before, I get tired of trying to remember if we’re the old rich white guys or the flyover state rubes solons.

hawkdriver on February 9, 2014 at 9:50 AM

socons

hawkdriver on February 9, 2014 at 9:50 AM

I’d like to see a chart comparing Koch brothers vs Google, Facebook, Progressive Ins CEO’s and cover unionization of their work force, political contributions, charitable contributions to what type of organizations; and treatment of pets.

the sidewalks are safe on February 9, 2014 at 9:51 AM

George Soros. And Warren Buffet.

The Left lies all the time. And their lies get easier to expose.

rbj on February 9, 2014 at 9:47 AM

That’s because leftists have the delusion that they are the most intelligent people on Earth while in fact being amongst the DUMBEST.

Look at Obama. Is that a man of even average intelligence? No.

ConstantineXI on February 9, 2014 at 9:51 AM

Its shameful that someone would do that to a cat just for a photo op.

Cookie?

famous amos on February 9, 2014 at 9:59 AM

Remember, Obama’s re-election campaign was famously dubbed the billion-dollar campaign for being the first to ever raise a billion bucks for an election

…MSM…
*crickets*

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 10:00 AM

Its shameful that someone would do that to a cat just for a photo op.

Cookie?

famous amos on February 9, 2014 at 9:59 AM

If you poured money over my cats it would annoy them.

ConstantineXI on February 9, 2014 at 10:02 AM

…MSM…
*crickets*

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 10:00 AM

That’s always their reaction. If the Democrats nominated Charles Manson that’s how they’d react.

ConstantineXI on February 9, 2014 at 10:03 AM

When are people going to wise up and when are the Republicans going to start using rhetoric the way the enemy does.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 9:42 AM

As much as I can’t stand my political adversaries they have not been elevated to the status of enemy. That is Dog Eater rhetoric and I’m not ready to adopt it. Not until the lead flies.

Franklin100 on February 9, 2014 at 10:18 AM

They’re telling us that the Dem party is going to be wiped out in November. It’s good that they acknowledge this fact.

The Tea Party isn’t dead, folks. We’re just getting started and Washington isn’t going to like it. This makes me happy.

Key West Reader on February 9, 2014 at 10:19 AM

…Heck!…that’s one of my cats!

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 9:32 AM

KOOLAID2: Tell me about it,..thats our cat,..Elvis,..turning into a
fat Kitteh:)

canopfor on February 9, 2014 at 10:20 AM

…Heck!…that’s one of my cats!

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 9:32 AM

What is YOUR cat doing with MY MONEY???

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:21 AM

To his credit, Wilson at least skips the nearly-obligatory mention of Citizens United in his piece, but that’s unusual in this genre of lamentation.

Good grief, Ed. You are a squish’s squish.

How about a brief mention of the fact that the Koch Brothers aren’t Republicans? Wilson is so stupid/ignorant that he fails to even get the political ideology right. They are capital-L Libertarians. They have an institute – a very expensive proposition – dedicated to the development of libertarian thinkers.

The WaPo piece is junk journalism, a hit piece that makes the hit pieces in the NYT look like true journalism. At least call him out on it, for cripes sake.

Jaibones on February 9, 2014 at 10:21 AM

…I learned…not too call out any longer…it doesn’t alert him!

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 9:39 AM

The greatest of accomplishments are those taken in silence.

Rio Linda Refugee on February 9, 2014 at 10:24 AM

As the 2014 cycle starts to heat up, we’re hearing once again the cries about the corporate fat cats taking over politics.
==================================================

David Axelrod ‏@davidaxelrod Feb 6

With the Senate seriously at risk, and the Koch Brothers spending prodigiously, shouldn’t Dem funders be focused on ’14 and not ’16 races?

canopfor on February 9, 2014 at 10:24 AM

David Axelrod ‏@davidaxelrod Feb 6

With the Senate seriously at risk, and the Koch Brothers spending prodigiously, shouldn’t Dem funders be focused on ’14 and not ’16 races?

canopfor on February 9, 2014 at 10:24 AM

Sorry Axelturd, George Soro’s and Paul Allen have already maxed out on their legal Hillary contributions.

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:28 AM

I have a mental picture of you guys sitting at your computers hoping to be the first to comment on a new story…thanks for the laugh.

mike_NC9 on February 9, 2014 at 10:32 AM

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 9:42 AM

I agree with you and have been saying same thing for years. The Rs allowed the Ds to get their messaging across as truth and the Rs did nothing. I’m so tired of still reading that Rs are the party of the rich when we see over and over again that the big money…Unions, Wall Street and the Tech companies make up a large donating class to the Democrats.

Not only has the R not getting a marketing/branding message across their outreach on the technical side is still woefully behind.

I’m tired of watching them roll over and play dead.

CoffeeLover on February 9, 2014 at 10:32 AM

George Soros, Warren Buffet, Koch brothers, tech CEOs….. Who cares?

What I want is an accounting of all the in-kind donations that MSM provides by biased reporting and outright lies.

When they don’t bat down the assertion that Mitt Romney caused a women to get cancer. When they edited Mitt Romney’s comments to make it sound like he had just discovered convenience stores. When the fat pig Candy Crowley puts down her bucket of fried chicken long enough to wave a transcript in rebuttal to Mitt Romney’s comments in a debate that she was (supposedly) moderating…… Well, you just can’t buy that kind of contribution.

Happy Nomad on February 9, 2014 at 10:35 AM

They’re telling us that the Dem party is going to be wiped out in November. It’s good that they acknowledge this fact.

The Tea Party isn’t dead, folks. We’re just getting started and Washington isn’t going to like it. This makes me happy.

Key West Reader on February 9, 2014 at 10:19 AM

If the Dem party is decimated in November, GREAT! But that’s not the attitude you want headed into game day. We need to fight as if the Dems are poised to take it all.

And, BTW, if the Dems lose the Senate in November and don’t take the House, look for November and December to be filled with more looting than a Louisiana Walmart when the EBT system is down.

Happy Nomad on February 9, 2014 at 10:39 AM

This is some of the best insight from one of the newer folks. (I think COL is new anyway).

Thank you. Yes I am new but my opinions are old.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 10:39 AM

The Rs allowed the Ds to get their messaging across as truth and the Rs did nothing.
CoffeeLover on February 9, 2014 at 10:32 AM

The Media tells the story they want told, as Mark Twain once famously said, “Never pick a fight with a man who buy ink by the barrel”. It doesn’t matter what the R’s say, as long as the Media keeps buy ink (or pixels) by the barrel and telling the story the way they want it told.

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:40 AM

canopfor on February 9, 2014 at 10:24 AM

(waving) thanks for the updates. Missed seeing them. Hope you are feeling better.

CoffeeLover on February 9, 2014 at 10:41 AM

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:40 AM

well said, but as they are being interviewed on the MSM their messaging is “individual”….the Ds do it as a pack. About time the Rs learned the tactics that work and adopt some. Maybe I’m dreaming but I think they can do a H*ll of a lot better.

CoffeeLover on February 9, 2014 at 10:44 AM

No mention of how Soros and Buffet and Hollywood corporations get richer and richer in spite of their social conscience? Go figure. It’s an article that starts with a premise and supports that premise regardless of the fact. Am omission of fact is as good as a lie itself. Journalism is all about taking sides, now. Maybe it always has been.

Klick the Dick on February 9, 2014 at 10:45 AM

Not only has the R not getting a marketing/branding message across their outreach on the technical side is still woefully behind.

I’m tired of watching them roll over and play dead.

CoffeeLover on February 9, 2014 at 10:32 AM

What is so frustrating is they don’t even try. I’ve always said the Republicans assume people are smart enough to know what’s going on and the Democrats know better.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 10:46 AM

Go Chiefs!

davidk on February 9, 2014 at 10:50 AM

I have a mental picture of you guys sitting at your computers hoping to be the first to comment on a new story…thanks for the laugh.

mike_NC9 on February 9, 2014 at 10:32 AM

…for most of us…”shit just happens” !
(:->)

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 10:51 AM

Journalism is all about taking sides, now. Maybe it always has been.

Klick the Dick on February 9, 2014 at 10:45 AM

Way back in the olden days the newspapers used to all be partisan and they didn’t mind admitting it. They called themselves Democrat papers or Republican papers or conservative papers. Everybody knew what their agendas were and bought the paper that agreed with them. The problem with the socialist media is they don’t want to admit what they are.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 10:52 AM

What is YOUR cat doing with MY MONEY???

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:21 AM

…did you notice…that he grabbed the Benjamin…and the Washington’s are laying there?

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 10:55 AM

What is YOUR cat doing with MY MONEY???

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:21 AM

…did you notice…that he grabbed the Benjamin…and the Washington’s are laying there?

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 10:55 AM

Yes, that did not escape my notice, you have trained your padiwan cat well Jedi Master…

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:58 AM

Everybody knew what their agendas were and bought the paper that agreed with them. The problem with the socialist media is they don’t want to admit what they are.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 10:52 AM

It’s more insidious than that. They openly squelch free speech and then wrap themselves in the First Amendment in moral outrage when they’re called on their bias. There is no way that LIVs are getting a fair picture of the GOP and conservatives. So, Mitt Romney causes cancer, Ted Cruz caused the government shutdown, and Republicans hate illegals. That’s the narrative in the MSM.

Happy Nomad on February 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM

I’m sorry, but whoever it is, for whatever reason, the ability to BUY our elections, to BUY our laws, and to BUY our government removes MY right to representation.

When the people we elect only ever have a chance at all when huge donors, companies, unions, or whatever finance their ability to compete while unbought independent representatives get drowned out. When the people we elect are met on the Tarmac upon their arrival in DC by powerful lobbying organizations bribing them to represent THEIR interests instead of ours. When the only way for those that we put in to power to ever have a even glimmer of a realistic chance of success is to pay tribute to those with all the power.

THAT becomes taxation without representation. You. I. We. We aren’t represented in Washington.

When the common sense things that everyone knows should be done end up not being able to be done because the pet projects of those that ACTUALLY got our representatives in power take precedent, good policy be damned.

THAT becomes taxation without representation.

We as regular citizens do not have the resources or capabilities to compete within the system. If a lobbying group can promise your representative all these things and we can offer them nothing of any comparable consequence.

THAT becomes taxation without representation.

The Koch brothers. George Soros. Unions. No accountability donations. Media collusion to only bring forth the “acceptable” candidates of their choices. The list goes on and on.

In the face of all of this, what WE get, regular citizens, is nothing but theater.

And inside the current constraints of our system there is no way, no chance, and no hope of ever actually fixing anything. Because it’s just a bunch of theater to keep us engaged in the facade of self representation, while behind the scenes the actual government runs however the big donors and big powers wish it to run.

Tax code is never gonna change correctly. Immigration will never be addressed correctly. Health care will never be addressed correctly. Regulations and oversight will never been done correctly.

None of this will ever change. Because it’s not real in the first place. It’s a theater, on all sides. And those with the actual power play in a league so far above us that we are literally powerless to compete.

Powerless.

Remember that next time you go all gung-ho for things that only make their control that much more cemented. Because you’re arguing against your own interests and have been duped into emotionally involving yourself in fighting for someone else’s right to screw you over.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM

“When it comes to writing big checks to favored candidates and causes, unions last year seemed to be taking greater advantage of the landmark Citizens United decision than corporations.”

I am confused as I thought unions were 501 (c) 5s? Thus, they had special treatment over Corporation before Citizens United. All Citizens United, and another case at the same time that I can’t remember the name of, did was to level the playing field for corporations. We were upset with the decision, not because of corporation personhood, but because we lost the advantage the unions had. Now we complained about corporation personhood, but that was a red herring. Maybe I am wrong. Now a 501c3 needs to be careful when working with a 591c5.

501c5 Organizations

Labor unions fall under Section 501c5 of the tax code, which applies to labor, agricultural and horticultural organizations. Contributions to them are not deductible as charitable contributions, but union dues are sometimes deductible within limits as business expenses. These groups are not restricted in their political activities, even if they are partisan or in support of a candidate.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/info_10026095_can-union-affect-501c3-nonprofit-status.html#ixzz2sqAHOTFF

HonestLib on February 9, 2014 at 11:03 AM

What is YOUR cat doing with MY MONEY???

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:21 AM

…did you notice…that he grabbed the Benjamin…and the Washington’s are laying there?

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 10:55 AM

My cat just yacked up a big wad…of something…not sure what…

ladyingray on February 9, 2014 at 11:04 AM

…did you notice…that he grabbed the Benjamin…and the Washington’s are laying there?

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 10:55 AM

He? That proves it is definitely a female cat.

Happy Nomad on February 9, 2014 at 11:05 AM

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 10:40 AM

well said, but as they are being interviewed on the MSM their messaging is “individual”….the Ds do it as a pack. About time the Rs learned the tactics that work and adopt some. Maybe I’m dreaming but I think they can do a H*ll of a lot better.

CoffeeLover on February 9, 2014 at 10:44 AM

The R’s message “SEEMS” to be individual, because the Media intentionally frame it that way, divide and conquer. Sarah Palin never said she could see Russia from her house, but that is what most Americans think she said because the Media repeated that line over and over and over again.

It cannot be over stated how powerful the ability to edit and frame an interview by the Media is. Think about the incredibly dishonest editing that went into the Sarah Palin Katie Couric interview. Every R’s receives this kind of treatment from the Media, though usually to a somewhat lessor degree, and usually it doesn’t get exposed. But it is the way the Media treats the R’s.

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 11:06 AM

It’s more insidious than that. They openly squelch free speech and then wrap themselves in the First Amendment in moral outrage when they’re called on their bias. There is no way that LIVs are getting a fair picture of the GOP and conservatives. So, Mitt Romney causes cancer, Ted Cruz caused the government shutdown, and Republicans hate illegals. That’s the narrative in the MSM.
Happy Nomad on February 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM

You guys are absolutely right. But how do you not see that it’s the exact same thing going the other way as well, and that’s what YOU buy in to?

THAT’s the problem. People on both sides THiNK they’re informed when they’re really not. Democrats buy the bs about Republicans and republicans buy the bs about democrats. While in the back ground they’ve both been. Lying for the same things for as long as they’ve been voting in the modern era.

THAT’s the problem. It’s all theater. And you all buy into it just as much as the other side you decry.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:15 AM

*while in the back ground they’ve both been voting for the same things for as long as they have been voting in the modern era.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:16 AM

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Great assessment.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 11:18 AM

I wonder where you would go to buy tar and feathers. I already have a pitchfork.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 11:20 AM

I have a mental picture of you guys sitting at your computers hoping to be the first to comment on a new story…thanks for the laugh.

mike_NC9 on February 9, 2014 at 10:32 AM

It’s a proud day in the life of a HA newbie to snag his/her first Bishop.

307wolverine on February 9, 2014 at 11:21 AM

Happy Nomad on February 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM

You guys are absolutely right. But how do you not see that it’s the exact same thing going the other way as well, and that’s what YOU buy in to?

THAT’s the problem. People on both sides THiNK they’re informed when they’re really not. Democrats buy the bs about Republicans and republicans buy the bs about democrats. While in the back ground they’ve both been. Lying for the same things for as long as they’ve been voting in the modern era.

THAT’s the problem. It’s all theater. And you all buy into it just as much as the other side you decry.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:15 AM

A lot of people get what you are saying, which undoubtedly explain the massive increase in people identifying as Independents. Their is a poster here who goes by the name APACHEWHOKNOWS who calls it to two party money cult.

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 11:27 AM

You guys are absolutely right. But how do you not see that it’s the exact same thing going the other way as well, and that’s what YOU buy in to?

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:15 AM

Are you honestly suggesting that the MSM is not being fair to Dems and liberals. Nixon was brought down by a cover-up of a office break in. Despite the NSA snooping, IRS targeting, Benghazi slaughter, abuse of executive order, etc. The media defends Obama and the Dems. Come back when the media starts covering Dems instead of repeating Valerie Jarret’s morning talking points.

Happy Nomad on February 9, 2014 at 11:30 AM

canopfor on February 9, 2014 at 10:24 AM

(waving) thanks for the updates. Missed seeing them. Hope you are feeling better.

CoffeeLover on February 9, 2014 at 10:41 AM

CoffeeLover:Updates,..anytime, and feeling a wee bit better, thanks:0

canopfor on February 9, 2014 at 11:38 AM

You guys are absolutely right. But how do you not see that it’s the exact same thing going the other way as well, and that’s what YOU buy in to?

THAT’s the problem. People on both sides THiNK they’re informed when they’re really not. Democrats buy the bs about Republicans and republicans buy the bs about democrats. While in the back ground they’ve both been. Lying for the same things for as long as they’ve been voting in the modern era.

THAT’s the problem. It’s all theater. And you all buy into it just as much as the other side you decry.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:15 AM
.
.
.
Small tweak. It’s not that the right and left are colluding with each other and then lying about this “collusion”. It’s that the left is better organized (and winning the culture way is a big plus on our side) and the right/RINOs, out of political fear, have joined the left and is pushing our agenda against conservatives best interest and base.

This is not an equal partnership that you speak of, we on the left dominate the partnership to the determent of the right. Small, but important difference.

HonestLib on February 9, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Hopey has driven the economy car, off da slow lane,..and into the Ditch:

AP Politics ‏@AP_Politics 28m

The US economy may be stuck in the slow lane for years to come: http://apne.ws/1aK5C9Z
========================

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/us-economy-may-be-stuck-slow-lane-long-run

canopfor on February 9, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Small tweak. It’s not that the right and left are colluding with each other and then lying about this “collusion”. It’s that the left is better organized (and winning the culture way is a big plus on our side) and the right/RINOs, out of political fear, have joined the left and is pushing our agenda against conservatives best interest and base.
This is not an equal partnership that you speak of, we on the left dominate the partnership to the determent of the right. Small, but important difference.
HonestLib on February 9, 2014 at 11:39 AM

You are a fake. And I’m not that stupid.

There’s been a few of you pop up since this enrollment. Your goal is not debate or conversation but to attempt to get people to believe you’re a liberal and that the stupid sh*t you say is what a liberal actually would.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:53 AM

That is not a healthy kitteh. Even if it’s one of Allah’s, I’m calling the ASPCA.

hawkdriver on February 9, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Are you honestly suggesting that the MSM is not being fair to Dems and liberals. Nixon was brought down by a cover-up of a office break in. Despite the NSA snooping, IRS targeting, Benghazi slaughter, abuse of executive order, etc. The media defends Obama and the Dems. Come back when the media starts covering Dems instead of repeating Valerie Jarret’s morning talking points.
Happy Nomad on February 9, 2014 at 11:30 AM

Were you not awake when Bush or Reagan were in power? The media follows whoever owns the day. It wasn’t until EVERYONE basically gave up on bush’s presidency that the media got hard on him. Did you not watch how many hard questions NEVER got asked? How easily rumsfield or wolfowitz were allowed to NEVER answer any questions straight? How big sensitive questions were repressed any never brought up by the msm? Did you never watch a Tim Russert interview with Bush? Softball deluxe.

It’s not my fault that you’re not aware of it because you buy into it. It’s only because you don’t trust Obama and you for once WANT these types of questions asked and answers pushed for that you suddenly think the media is toothless.

It’s always been. And whoever owns the day gets a pass for the most part until they begin to lose their clout.

It’s the way it’s been for decades. You’re just too one-sided to be objective and see it when the people you like get a pass, but furious if the media doesn’t ask those questions of those you dislike.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:59 AM

PAC-to-PAC giving not shown.

Hmm. But Unions seem to do their political largess using PACs — and the most common way of interaction between those PACs is to donate to still other PACs.

There are aggregator PACs, and operator PACs, and it’s all designed to prevent traceability.

Now, I don’t mind non-traceability, for that is an essential component of freedom of speech, but I wish the charts had shown in some way that interaction.

unclesmrgol on February 9, 2014 at 12:05 PM

HonestLib on February 9, 2014 at 11:39 AM

You are a fake. And I’m not that stupid.

There’s been a few of you pop up since this enrollment. Your goal is not debate or conversation but to attempt to get people to believe you’re a liberal and that the stupid sh*t you say is what a liberal actually would.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:53 AM

And you are different how?

oscarwilde on February 9, 2014 at 12:07 PM

Did they mention Warren Buffet’s railroad transporting 180,000 bbl of crude/day that would be replaced by the Keystone pipeline??

That probably doesn’t count because Buffet is a Democratic environmentalist.

KenInIL on February 9, 2014 at 12:11 PM

If the Dem party is decimated in November, GREAT! But that’s not the attitude you want headed into game day. We need to fight as if the Dems are poised to take it all.

Especially since we also have to battle the Republican establishment.

crankyoldlady on February 9, 2014 at 12:17 PM

Chart of the Day: Who’s in politics for “investment”?
Feb 9, 2014 9:31 AM by Ed Morrissey
63 Comments »
Who are the real fat cats in politics?

Which party is the fat cat party?
By Michelle Malkin • September 1, 2010 12:38 PM
——————
Which party do “fat cats” really favor?

ITguy on February 9, 2014 at 12:23 PM

That is not a healthy kitteh. Even if it’s one of Allah’s, I’m calling the ASPCA.

hawkdriver on February 9, 2014 at 11:57 AM

hawkdriver: Good AfterNoon Hawk,

..speaking of animals, the Tolly-Bon have the
Brits Military dog:0
====================

Dog Held Hostage by Taliban Part of Long Line of Combat Canines

For centuries, dogs have gone to war. But it’s rare to hear of a canine held hostage by the enemy.
**************************

Published February 6, 2014

The dog is surrounded by Taliban fighters. Its eyes dart back and forth. Its tail wags tentatively. It is a military dog that apparently belonged to Western forces in Afghanistan and is being held hostage. A video of the dog, surrounded by gun-toting Taliban, has surfaced this week.

It appears that the dog was deployed by British forces.

The dog’s name and gender are not certain but its breed is believed to be Belgian Malinois, known for being fearless, driven, and able to handle the heat, making it especially well suited for places like Iraq and Afghanistan. The Malinois is often used by U.S. Special Operations troops, typically trained to detect explosives or narcotics.
(More,,,)

VIDEO:
========

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140206-military-dog-special-forces-hostage-taliban-afghanistan/

canopfor on February 9, 2014 at 12:36 PM

Did they mention Warren Buffet’s railroad transporting 180,000 bbl of crude/day that would be replaced by the Keystone pipeline??

That probably doesn’t count because Buffet is a Democratic environmentalist.

KenInIL on February 9, 2014 at 12:11 PM

…we would have to hear that from the politburo press a few times…. oh…wait!…that would dry up the money pipeline to who?

KOOLAID2 on February 9, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Most of y’all focus on the Koch Brothers, good or bad.

There was an equally rich Soros brother, who died last year.

He left his dough for an endowment which focuses entirely on re-educating kids into the communist agenda.

Schadenfreude on February 9, 2014 at 1:34 PM

Most of y’all focus on the Koch Brothers, good or bad.
There was an equally rich Soros brother, who died last year.
He left his dough for an endowment which focuses entirely on re-educating kids into the communist agenda.
Schadenfreude on February 9, 2014 at 1:34 PM

And you focus on tit for tats instead of the larger problems of both sides controlling and manipulating our system.

;)

And hopefully you noticed my inclusion of people and organizations from both sides.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 1:50 PM

Fools, unite!!!

Schadenfreude on February 9, 2014 at 1:55 PM

And you focus on tit for tats instead of the larger problems of both sides controlling and manipulating our system.

;)

You are lying.

And hopefully you noticed my inclusion of people and organizations from both sides.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 1:50 PM

We agree on this and I’ve posted lots against the Rs, incl. on what you said.

Schadenfreude on February 9, 2014 at 1:56 PM

How come CFP is better than most all US media are?

Schadenfreude on February 9, 2014 at 2:07 PM

OT: But worth a look…

http://dotcomjoe.com/0209c1

307wolverine on February 9, 2014 at 3:53 PM

You are a fake. And I’m not that stupid.

There’s been a few of you pop up since this enrollment. Your goal is not debate or conversation but to attempt to get people to believe you’re a liberal and that the stupid sh*t you say is what a liberal actually would.

Genuine on February 9, 2014 at 11:53 AM
.
.
.
Let me help you with that first sentence.

I am indeed a flake. And I never said you were stupid.

Or as my kids used to say with their thumb on their noses and fingers wiggling….nah na nah na takes one to know one! Chuckle!!

Lighten up dude and learn to laugh at yourself so folks won’t laugh at you. Took me a long time to learn that lesson.

HonestLib on February 9, 2014 at 5:10 PM

“individuals”

That’s misleading.

Also, I believe there to be tons of money that go to PACs of both parties that is never reported.

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 9, 2014 at 6:20 PM

Its shameful that someone would do that to a cat just for a photo op.
Cookie?
famous amos on February 9, 2014 at 9:59 AM

If you poured money over my cats it would annoy them.
ConstantineXI on February 9, 2014 at 10:02 AM

If you poured money over my cats, they would sneak it into their hidden, furry pockets and buy girl kitties, booze and cigs. They’re Peoples Republik of NJ cats…bad kitty, kitty.

AppraisHer on February 10, 2014 at 2:04 AM