Post by EGKPost by Adam H. KermanPost by EGKPost by Adam H. KermanPost by EGKPost by Adam H. KermanPost by EGKPost by Adam H. KermanPost by EGKPost by Adam H. KermanNikki Haley wins backing from powerful Koch network as she aims
to take on Trump
By STEVE PEOPLES
AP
Updated 12:02 PM CST, November 28, 2023
https://apnews.com/article/nikki-haley-koch-network-endorsement-desantis-trump-938d932aaf2b9b299c32b4d736aaade4
I've wanted to like her ever since she showed guts after
Charlottesville. But she's gone completely over to the dark side.
Riggggght! The Dark side as opposed to all the Democrats taking
money from Soros.
I am under no obligation to make a moral equivalency to make a comment
on Nikki accepting these monies.
No, but when you pretend to be on some moral high horse by labeling it as
"the dark side" don't be surprised when you get some push back.
Your push back is fuck, given that I've never defending the policies you
object to and they are irrelevant to Nikki Haley.
Post by EGKIt's not the Koch money that's turning this country into a free for all
crime spree.
You have no fucking clue whom the Charles and David Koch are, or were.
Yes, yes, yes. As usual, Adam Kerman tries to bully his way through when
challenged on anything. Do you ever get tired of playing that game on
Usenet, Adam? I'm not someone who abides your shtick on here. So get
fucked.
Every comment you made was irrelevant to anything I'd written.
And you DON'T know who the Koch brothers are and why I labeled it going
over to the dark side.
I know who the Koch brothers are. I also know who George Soros is and If
there's a dark side, I'd say Soros is way worse than the Koch brothers with
his funding of soft on crime and anti-cop DA's nationwide.
Meanwhile, the Kotch brothers routinely get labeled right wingers yet are
pro choice, support same sex marriage and criminal justice reform among
other things.
I didn't label them right wing. You did that. They're really not.
I didnt label them at all. I said they are often labeled right wing.
The way third parties described the brothers' politics isn't relevant
since they aren't participating in this discussion.
Post by EGKPost by Adam H. KermanThey used the facade of libertarianism to successfully push policies
that were beneficial to their companies because they didn't want to
mitigate and clean up pollution that their industrial processes created.
Somehow they equated freedom and liberty and free markets with repealing
'70s era environmental laws on the state level.
They ruined the Cato Institute but that's gotten out from under their
influence in recent years.
They co-founded the Cato institute.
Actually, that was just Charles. You may recall that Murray Rothbard
wanted it to be scholarly, but Charles wanted to move Cato into
politics, forcing Rothbard out. You gonna deny that it wasn't intended
to be political in the very beginning?
Post by EGKPost by Adam H. KermanThey co-opted the Libertarian Party but that didn't allow them to
achieve their business objectives, so they co-opted the Republican Party
establishment instead. If they had thought the Democratic Party would
have allowed them to achieve their objectives, they'd have co-opted that
instead. They truly aren't ideological but pragmatic in pursuit of their
goals.
Whatever they personally believed on social policies, they never pushed
them. Instead they created mechanisms like ALEC that created model
legislation and built support for actual passage of laws that gave their
businesses undeserved privileges over the rest of society. They happily
allowed all those imposition of religious beliefs as legislation model
legislation to be created through ALEC as long as they got what they
wanted.
If you fucking want to talk about Soros, start your own fucking thread.
I can comment in any old thread I like, Adam.
But you aren't commenting. You were trying to force a change of topic to
prevent discussion of the topic I raised. Don't lie. You're gaslighting.
Post by EGKPost by Adam H. KermanWhen I post to Usenet, I decide what I want to discuss, not you.
And now you're right back to you're usual bullying tactics.
Nice gaslighting.
If you had truly wanted to discuss Soros, you'd have started a thread to
discuss Soros. You didn't do that. Instead, you tried to prevent
discussion from taking place of Nikki taking Koch monies.
Post by EGKAgain, just Fuck the hell off, Adam.
Why are you bitching, EGK? You succeeded. You achieved your goal. You
murdered this thread.
Victory.
Post by EGKI realize you think you're the arbiter of what is allowed on Usenet
and in rec.arts.tv in particular but you're not.
I am not the arbiter. I do get to criticize people like you who
delibertely ruin threads to prevent discussion of the topic the author
raise. This is exactly what you did. You've pulled this crap on me many
times in the past and will do so in future.
If you were honest, which you never are, you'd simply start separate
threads to discuss what you'd rather discuss. It's interesting that you
prefer to ruin threads rather than starting separate discussions.
Post by EGKPeople can post what they want in any thread they like.
If the motive of the author of the followup is to prevent the original
topic from being discussed, I'll call you on exactly the shit you
pulled. See, I can criticize you for bad behavior too.
Post by EGKYou're shtick was tired years ago and i'm only surprised more people
aren't sick of it.
I'll help you with your kill file.
Again, you had zero interest in discussing Soros, which is why you
refused to start a separate thread and chose to ruin this thread. You
made your ill intent quite clear.
