Anonymous v. Koch brothers

http://www.dangerousminds.net/comments/koch_brothers_tea_partiers_union_bashers_anonymous_/

by entangld • 15 years ago

15 29 15 years ago

dangerousminds.net

entangld4• 15 years ago

They're becoming a pretty sharp political group.

Semiapies2• 15 years ago

How so? By hopping on the 2011 version of the George Soros freakout GOP supporters had years back?

By announcing that they're "targeting" an organization, knowing that that will be reported and that people will completely forget this "conflict" by the time whichever person or persons within Anonymous made this announcement lose interest in this "operation"?

OK, that last is almost kinda sharp.

entangld4• 15 years ago

1. They're jumping on hot topics like the Koch brothers.

2. They're bringing up politically salient points like the "clause would allow the sale of publicly owned utility plants in Wisconsin to private parties (specifically, Koch Industries) at any price, no matter how low, without a public bidding process."

3. Their writing sounds populist and they're boldly declaring attacks against powerful opponents which gives them a David v. Goliath story which is easy for the public to get behind.

4. Colbert did a story on them so their name is growing.

5. I'm not saying they're good or bad. But, whatever their ideology, they're becoming a stronger presence and they're getting better at diplomacy.

makeramen• 15 years ago

digital warfare goes commercial

bonch2• 15 years ago

The sudden attacks on the libertarian Koch brothers from the Left is pretty silly and closed-minded.

jbooth2• 15 years ago

They're not libertarian, they're movement conservatives.

And anonymous isn't part of "the Left".

In fact, almost any sentence involving a capitalized "the Left" is probably missing the mark.

TomOfTTB6• 15 years ago

As I pointed out in my reply the Koch brothers opposed most of what the Bush administration did and both sides play the "money for a movement" game (again going back to George Soros and friends).

glenra2• 15 years ago

> They're not libertarian, they're movement conservatives.

They've donated at least $20 million to the ACLU to fight the Patriot Act. They support the Cato institute. One of them ran for president on the Libertarian ticket.

The Koch family isn't unified in its views; collectively the group does support some "movement conservative" causes. For that matter, they've supported a few democrats and democrat-favored causes. But "libertarian" actually fits pretty well if you need an overall label.

bonch2• 15 years ago

The Kochs have donated to several libertarian causes, many of which would be considered "liberal," such as in favor of abortion. Hell, David Koch was the 1980 vice-presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party.

The people attacking the Koch brothers are from the Left--left-wing blogs, left-wing radio hosts, and so on. You don't give any reasons why my statements missed the mark, so I can only assume you have none. You may not like the phrase simply because you don't like being labeled--I'm sure the Right feels the same way.

Anonymous is just a label any anonymous people can use, and I didn't make a determination about who any anonymous people belonged to. I simply described the recent attacks on the Koch brothers, which is most definitely coming from the Left.

TomOfTTB6• 15 years ago

Considering the Koch brothers right wing at all is an act of ignoring inconvinient facts. The Koch brothers have given more to the ACLU than they have to all political candidates combined (http://reason.com/blog/2011/02/25/the-koch-brothers-right-wi...). They oppose the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act, torture of suspected terrorists, and the war on drugs. They're in favor of Abortion rights, stem cell research and Gay Marriage.

As for the rich creating so-called grass roots organizations I don't see Anonymous going after George Soros. So they can't be all that opposed to the practice.

michaelcampbell4• 15 years ago

> Governor Walker’s union-busting budget plan contains a clause that went nearly un-noticed. This clause would allow the sale of publicly owned utility plants in Wisconsin to private parties (specifically, Koch Industries) at any price, no matter how low, without a public bidding process.

Wow. I was skeptical at this claim, but it appears to be true?

* http://drudgeretort.wordpress.com/2011/02/23/walker-to-make-...

* http://wisconsin.onpolitix.com/news/36834/governor-walker-an...

Bizarre.

TomOfTTB6• 15 years ago

I don't see how this is bizarre. He's trying to jettison anything that loses money. Selling a business for nothing is a net profit to you if the business is losing money.

As far as Koch Industries they specifically said (in the 2nd link you posted) that they have no interest in the power plants.

jlv• 15 years ago

I'd argue that what's bizarre about it is the uncompetitive nature of the bidding. Sure, jettison anything that's losing money right now (as short-sighted as it seems) but at least get top dollar for it. As is, it seems a little shady - no?

entangld4• 15 years ago

Just because a business is losing money, doesn't mean it has zero value.

Paul Collier, author of the "Bottom Billion", said poor countries get screwed for their resources because they don't put them up to bid. He even said the British government valued certain frequencies at 2 billion, but they later sold for 20 billion during bidding, so it's better for all governments to auction assets instead of pricing them or giving them away.

blueben2• 15 years ago

It's a little disingenuous to call public utilities a money losing proposition. They're infrastructure. Communities invest in infrastructure to see dividends in prosperity, not cash.

potatolicious• 15 years ago

For a moment let's assume that it is indeed in the government's interest to sell these properties.

Why is there a no-bid clause? Should the government not be obligated to try and get the best price it can on a major property sale?

The no-bid part just reeks of corruption - there's no solid reason to have it there. If someone bids ten dollars for a power plant and nobody else comes forward with a better bid, so be it, but at least the process needs to be competitive and transparent.

michaelcampbell4• 15 years ago

Yes, I saw that, and perhaps I'm a bit skeptical yet but I'm not prepared to take a huge corporation's PR soundbites at face value.

Anonymous v. Koch brothers

Related Stories