That is a fine point that needs to be understood.

Merc, that looks like it's just a diversionary argument.

What do you mean ?

Rich individuals, like Soro's can hide behind organizations in an attempt to effect national elections, seems fitting that private corps can do the same thing. Not that I agree with it but they are one in the same to me in their ability to influence elections with millions of dollars.

Why single out Soros?

Why not include people like the Koch brothers who have poured more than $100 million into astroturf organizations to fight health care reform, clean energy legislation, etc...not to mention funding many Tea Party activities:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...0fa_fact_mayer

Again, it seems like your view is anti-libertarian, questioning the right of people to "participate" in the process with their money.

My point was if you are going to bitch about corps you should bitch about Soro's.

Sure ..and the Koch brothers as well.

I'm still not sure where you stand.

Are you for or against the Koch brothers dropping $1 million just this week into the ballot initiative in Cali to suspend the state's climate bill....

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gree...te-change.html

...an initiative funding almost entirely with out-of-state oil money.

Who cares, that convict Soro's made his money overseas, among other places, and he used it to defeat anyone who did not follow the liberal socialist agenda in US elections. I guess that is the way things work now days.

So your answer is that you dont care that about the Koch brothers influencing policy?

I'm just trying to understand your position.

Just Soros?

From Hope To Nope

A November catastrophe for the Democrats brings out the conspiracy theories.


http://www.forbes.com/2010/09/02/bar...schannellatest

I'm still not sure where you stand.

When you said "who cares" does that mean you have no problem with the Koch brothers and Texas oil companies funding a ballot initiative in California?

Or are you now suggesting it is a conspiracy theory to talk about the Koch brothers, but not a conspiracy theory when it is about Soros?

Soro's is a convicted felon. No real conspiracy theory there. I guess I don't think that convicted felons should attempt to influence our election process, but I guess as long as it is legal he has every right to do what he wants within the law.

Damn, you really should look a little more carefully here you put those feet of yours, cuz you keep stepping in it. It really sounds like you are just against money that goes toward liberal/democrat policies. I seriously doubt you care whether the money comes from a convicted felon or not.

Soro's among many other leftists are really worried about the Tea Party people...

http://www.infowars.com/globalist-so...nst-tea-party/

Linking to the ultimate conspiracy site (infowars) to "prove" Soros is behind every organization on the left? :eek:

One might think you are obsessed with Soros.

But only questioning the Koch brothers is a conspiracy?

Koch Brothers = good
Soros = bad

No double standard there.

Regardless of the source, what part of the post is bs?

Prior to the article in the NYer no one ever heard of the Koch bros, who are not supporting republickin causes. Everyone knows who Soro's is and how he has tried to buy his influence in the election process of the US. As I said I guess I just don't trust people who made their money on the failure of the British banking system, who is a convicted Felon, and is an avowed socialist. Other than that he can do what ever the process in the country would allow him to do legally, I guess just as the Koch bros. It is the way our system works.