When I heard the Koch Brothers were looking to buy the Los Angeles Times, I thought it would be kind of historically ironic. After all, the paper was founded to serve business interests in the late 19th century, and under the right-wing Chandler family, helped make Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan presidents.

But apparently the staff aren't thrilled about the prospect of working for the Kochs.

At a Los Angeles Times in-house awards ceremony a week ago, columnist Steve Lopez addressed the elephant in the room.

Speaking to the entire staff, he said, "Raise your hand if you would quit if the paper was bought by Austin Beutner's group." No one raised their hands.

"Raise you hand if you would quit if the paper was bought by Rupert Murdoch." A few people raised their hands.

Facing the elephant trunk-on, "Raise your hand if you would quit if the paper was bought by the Koch brothers." About half the staff raised their hands.

I just don't see how this will work. California is an extremely reliably Democratic state which hasn't gone for a Republican presidential candidate since 1988, and Los Angeles is a liberal city (Obama captured nearly 70% of the votes cast in L.A. County in 2012). It makes sense that California's largest newspaper, therefore, will reflect left-of-center politics.

Maybe the Kochs think they can flip California back to 1968, when Ronnie was in Sacramento and Dick was elected president. But if that's what they're trying to do, it'll not only be a tough sell in L.A., it sounds like they'll have to import editors, writers and photographers from Orange County and Arizona.

After their crushing defeat in 2012, Charles and David Koch are more determined, not less. They're kicking off the re-launch of Koch Politics, Inc with a big donor meeting this Sunday and Monday, and a brand-spanking new arm of the Kochtopus.

The new organization, called the Association for American Innovation, is expected to ultimately funnel millions of dollars to other dark money groups nationwide. It's being staffed with Koch stalwarts, including Marc Short, who currently oversees other Koch-funded projects, according to a few GOP operatives familiar with the overhaul.

In a twist, the association has been established under Internal Revenue Service rules as a 501(c)(6) business league, setting it apart from many of the dark money groups into which the Kochs and allied donors have in recent years poured hundreds of millions. Adding a business league, which will have members, to the Koch-backed conservative orbit could boost corporate funding, while still allowing some political spending and letting donors remain anonymous, tax lawyers say.

By contrast, Americans for Prosperity, which was founded by the Koch brothers and spent close to $140 million last year on electoral and advocacy drives with little to show for it, has two arms: It is a 501(c)(4) social welfare group -- which can engage in some political activity and keep its donors secret -- and a 501(c)(3) charity.

Yes, they're going full-tilt US Chamber of Commerce. Not content to funnel money to just about anyone who breathes and can pronounce the world "liberty," they're now going to adopt the Chamber model where everyone pays megamillions in "dues."

You've gotta love this:

"501(c)(4) groups are getting a lot of heat these days, but (c)(6)s are like mom-and-apple-pie organizations," said Ken Gross, a political law expert at the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and many other business groups in Washington have 501(c)(6) status.

As if somehow the US Chamber of Commerce is a paragon of a "mom-and-pop" shop?

One might expect the rollout of this new organization to dovetail with their donor meeting this weekend, where they will be discussing "short term policy threats in 2013 while building toward free-market gains in 2014 and beyond," effective engagement of "growing demographic groups such as Hispanic and Latino voters," as well as brainstorming ways "to encourage principled and effective advocates of free enterprise to run for office." They also will discuss ways to engage women. Here's a hint, boys: Stop discussing rape, birth control, and abortion. Just sayin'.

And a bonus! "Governors, Senators, members of the US House leadership, top political analysts and commentators!" I wonder if Glenn Beck has a spot this year. I'll have to see who is missing from the Fox lineup on Monday. Will derpy Ben Shapiro from Breitbart be there?

All that money, so little time to buy the government. I hear through the grapevine that there will be more efforts to stir up town hall meetings again this summer, and more mischief coming from organizations fueled by Koch money even though we can't prove it right now.

Let the games begin!

The influence of right-wing money into judicial elections is a growing problem. Not only have the 1% decided they want to own our politicians, they want to own our judges, too. And because judicial elections mostly fly under the radar, they seem to be getting away with it:

The Club for Growth, a right-wing group that supports tax cuts for the rich, privatizing Social Security and writing Tea Party ideology into the Constitution, spent $300,000 to keep a key ally of anti-union Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) on the Wisconsin Supreme Court — and that was just in the primary:

Now, another member of the court’s 4-3 right-wing majority, Justice Patience “Pat” Roggensack, is up for re-election.Roggensack is being aided by the same outside groups that aided Walker in advancing some of his most controversial proposals. The far-right independent expenditure group Wisconsin Club for Growth spent an eye-popping $300,000 on television ads supporting Roggensack during the primary. Club for Growth was responsible for more than 75% of the nearly $400,000 in TV spending in the primary race, and more than 80% of the total ad spots, according to TNS Media Intelligence/CMAG estimates released by the Brennan Center for Justice and Justice at Stake.

In addition, Roggensack is being handed big checks by some of the same wealthy donors that gave to Governor Walker in his recall campaign, such as Beloit billionaire Diane Hendricks and David Uihlein, Jr., as well as a variety of PACs and local Republican Party chapters.

Her opponent, Marquette Law Professor Edward Fallone, has been endorsed by a host of progressive organizations, but lags well behind in fundraising. If Fallone took the majority, the court could do a virtual 180 on some of the state’s most contentious issues. (Editor's note: You can contribute here.)

It’s not surprising that the Club and other well-moneyed conservatives are willing to spend big to keep Roggensack on the court. Roggensack was part of the 4-3 majority that upheld a law pushed by Walker to undermine public sector unions. She also cast the key vote to reject an ethics rule that would have prevented justices from hearing cases involving their major campaign donors.

Instead, Roggensack backed a rule written by corporate lobbyists.

I'm very sorry to hear this news, since this means more corporate media that's not only less reliable than usual, but will be pushing its own anti-American agenda. And even if it wasn't the Kochs, but another corporate group, I'd feel just as bad -- after all, six media groups own the vast majority of American media: Time Warner, Disney, Viacom, News Corp., CBS and Comcast/NBC. Obviously, the only real diversity you get is in the commentary on the media, which is why blogs are so popular:

According to “multiple sources” who spoke with L.A. Weekly, the conservative billionaire Koch Brothers are considering buying the Tribune Company, which owns the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Trubine [sic], and the Baltimore Sun, among other publications:

Now, these are unverified rumors that should be taken with a grain of salt if not a whole dollop. The Tribune Co. won’t comment on any specific offers they’ve received, although a source there says, “We’ve gotten a ton of interest. That was one of the reasons for hiring the outside financial advisors, to sift through the unsolicited interest.”

[...] Another rumor, passed along by a member of the L.A. Times Editorial Board, no less, has the Koch Brothers helping to finance a bid by “Papa Doug” Manchester, himself a right-wing multimillionaire who in 2009 bought the San Diego Union Tribune and promptly turned it into a propaganda organ for San Diego development.

Like many newspaper companies, Tribune Co. has faced hard times in recent years, complicated by the difficult rein of Sam Zell, who took the company into bankruptcy.

Greg Palast explains why the Koch brothers want that pipeline built!

One would think if this was not a foregone conclusion and President Obama was serious about weighing the environmental impact of the pipeline, he would have assigned this report to the Environmental Protection Agency and not the State Department. But I suppose we'll finally see how "serious" he is about climate change when he makes his decision. I'm sure he'll keep in mind the evidence collected by activists of bad pipeline welds that make environmental disaster that much more likely (ha ha, just kidding!):

WASHINGTON — The State Department issued a revised environmental impact statement for the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline on Friday that makes no recommendation about whether the project should be built but presents no conclusive environmental reason it should not be.

I suppose those environmental scientists and climate change experts who are freaked out enough by the impact of this pipeline that they chained themselves to the White House fence were consulted about this?

The 2,000-page document also makes no statement on whether the pipeline is in the United States’ economic and energy interests, a determination to be made later this year by President Obama.

But it will certainly add a new element to the already robust climate change and energy debate around the $7 billion proposed project. The new report does not make any policy recommendations, but its conclusion that the environmental and climate change impacts are manageable could provide Mr. Obama political cover if he decides to approve the pipeline.

I suppose this is all part of his new "bipartisan, market-based solution" to climate change. Oh, and his adviser tells us this "can't be a Washington-centric solution", so if you have a Republican governor, sorry about that. And the options that allow the president to make meaningful change without Congress? Might affect the economy, so those things aren't being considered. (Of course, Hurricane Sandy didn't affect the economy at all. Uh huh.) Bold!

Although the study will help guide the president’s decision, it does not make the politics any easier. Environmental advocates and landowners along the route have mounted spirited protests against the project, including a large demonstration in Washington last month. They say they view Keystone as a test of Mr. Obama’s seriousness about addressing global warming.

The president faces equally strong pressure from industry, the Canadian government, most Republicans and some Democrats in Congress, local officials and union leaders, who say the project will create thousands of jobs and provide a secure source of oil that will replace crude from Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and other potentially hostile suppliers.

Even though that oil will be exported on the world market, not for the U.S., and incidentally will make the Koch brothers even richer by an estimated $2 billion a year.

The draft report, which updates a 2011 study that essentially gave the project a green light, weighs the impacts of the pipeline, which would carry about 800,000 barrels a day of heavy crude oil from tar sands formations in Alberta across the Great Plains to Gulf Coast refineries.

Send this one to your teabagger relatives and watch their heads explode:

A new academic study confirms that front groups with longstanding ties to the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers planned the formation of the Tea Party movement more than a decade before it exploded onto the U.S. political scene.

Far from a genuine grassroots uprising, this astroturf effort was curated by wealthy industrialists years in advance. Many of the anti-science operatives who defended cigarettes are currently deploying their tobacco-inspired playbook internationally to evade accountability for the fossil fuel industry's role in driving climate disruption.

The study, funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health, traces the roots of the Tea Party's anti-tax movement back to the early 1980s when tobacco companies began to invest in third party groups to fight excise taxes on cigarettes, as well as health studies finding a link between cancer and secondhand cigarette smoke.Published in the peer-reviewed academic journal, Tobacco Control, the study titled, 'To quarterback behind the scenes, third party efforts': the tobacco industry and the Tea Party, is not just an historical account of activities in a bygone era. As senior author, Stanton Glantz, a University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) professor of medicine, writes:

"Nonprofit organizations associated with the Tea Party have longstanding ties to tobacco companies, and continue to advocate on behalf of the tobacco industry's anti-tax, anti-regulation agenda."

The two main organizations identified in the UCSF Quarterback study are Americans for Prosperity and Freedomworks. Both groups are now "supporting the tobacco companies' political agenda by mobilizing local Tea Party opposition to tobacco taxes and smoke-free laws."

Freedomworks and Americans for Prosperity were once a single organization called Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE). CSE was founded in 1984 by the infamous Koch Brothers, David and Charles Koch, and received over $5.3 million from tobacco companies, mainly Philip Morris, between 1991 and 2004.In 1990, Tim Hyde, RJR Tobacco's head of national field operations, in an eerily similar description of the Tea Party today, explained why groups like CSE were important to the tobacco industry's fight against government regulation. Hyde wrote:

"... coalition building should proceed along two tracks: a) a grassroots organizational and largely local track,; b) and a national, intellectual track within the DC-New York corridor. Ultimately, we are talking about a "movement," a national effort to change the way people think about government's (and big business) role in our lives. Any such effort requires an intellectual foundation - a set of theoretical and ideological arguments on its behalf."

The common public understanding of the origins of the Tea Party is that it is a popular grassroots uprising that began with anti-tax protests in 2009.However, the Quarterback study reveals that in 2002, the Kochs and tobacco-backed CSE designed and made public the first Tea Party Movement website under the web address www.usteaparty.com.

DOWNLOADS: (146)

PLAYS: (2219)

Embed

Fox & Friends hosted former California Republican Senatorial candidate Chuck DeVore this morning to hype discuss his book promoting Texas' zero income taxes and corporate taxes as a model for the rest of us. In case you were wondering, DeVore has left California and is now Vice President of Communications for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a Koch-funded institution dedicated to “educating and affecting policy makers” among other goals. But he was merely introduced as an author. If you blinked during the brief period that Fox fessed up to his current job title (without pointing out the Koch connection), you might never know. Also not discussed? How Texas' no-income-tax policy likely means higher taxes overall for most of us.

DeVore couldn't seem to say enough bad things about the state he hoped to represent in the U.S. Senate just a few years ago. Host Clayton Morris, who talked about having family there, joined suit. Morris started with the Freudian slip of saying that the “burdensome tax rate in that country.... is a major problem.” He also complained about the “burdensome regulations” his father-in-law faces running a “large landscape business” there. He said he has other family members in California who “want to move their business out of that state.” He didn't say anything about anyone planning to do so, however.

After some more California bashing, Morris said, “I want to know what is Texas doing right that California is not.” He put up a graphic with Texas' supposedly favorable poverty and unemployment rates and noted that it has zero income taxes compared to California's “highest bracket” of 9.3% and zero corporate taxes compared to California's “flat 8.8%.”

“Remember during the election we were talking about Texas as a model for the nation? What were they doing right?” he “asked.” On cue, DeVore talked up not only the lack of taxes but how the lack of funding for state government supposedly prevented it from ruining everybody's lives through regulations. He claimed that taxes and regulations in California were causing a “massive out migration.”

Not according to Reuters. They cited findings from a September 2012 review of state tax records by the Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality:

In fact, more millionaires came to the state than left after California's so-called Millionaire's Tax was introduced in 2005 - adding 1 percentage point of tax to incomes over $1 million. A 1996 cut to taxes for those earning $110,000 and up did not spur migration into the state, either.

The number of millionaires has risen or fallen by about 10,000 a year, but that change has been almost entirely due to the state economy, not wealthy people coming into or leaving the state. Such migration accounted for about 47 people, net, on average.

The very richest, who were likely to have houses and properties in many parts of the world with creative means to finesse their taxes, were the least likely to move after the tax hike, but even those at the bottom end of the millionaires scale did not pick up and leave, according to the September study.

These findings matched behavior in New Jersey after it raised its top rates, it was noted.

Meanwhile, there's plenty not to love about Texas' taxes. In 2011, when Rick Perry was talking up Texas economics as part of his bid for the presidency, the Texas Star-Telegram took the kind of look behind the numbers that “fair and balanced” Fox & Friends didn't:

What draws less attention is that sales, property and wireless service taxes are higher in Texas than in most other states.

...At the state level, Texas draws most of its revenue from federal funding and sales taxes. At the local level, property taxes play a major role.

...Combining state and local rates, Texas has the 14th-highest sales tax rates in the country and the 22nd-highest property tax rates, according to the Tax Foundation.

…Texas ranks near the top in property taxes as a percentage of home value.

"Once you start adding it all up and writing the check, you see there is no free lunch," (Texas Republican pollster David Hill) said. "Texas is a nice state with medium-to-high taxes."

...Texas has the fifth-most-regressive tax system in the country, according to a 2009 study by the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy.

But Morris was too busy slobbering over DeVore to go into any of those pesky details. He closed by reiterating the title of DeVore's new book and saying, “Knows what he's talking about”

I wonder why Eric Holder doesn't bring a RICO suit against Grover, Turd Blossom, and the Koch brothers? After all, you could make a reasonable case for extortion: Grover tells Republican officials to vote his way, or he will drown them in a primary challenge. It doesn't seem like that's how democracy is supposed to work. Lee Fang for The Nation:

Grover Norquist’s iron grip over much of the Republican Party is somewhat puzzling. Why should Senators and other lawmakers listen to a guy caught laundering money for Jack Abramoff?

But consider Norquist’s tax pledge and political power another way: that he’s just a proxy for the powerful interest groups that finance him. In the nineties, it was big tobacco that used Norquist’s tax pledge as a cover to lobby lawmakers against cigarette taxes (Norquist still uses an e-mail system donated to him by Altria to send out Tea Party action alerts against tobacco taxes).

Now, big PhRMA and other industry groups provide grants to Norquist while his foundation endorses other giveaways, like protectionist support against importing cheaper drugs from Canada and the classification of tax subsidies to refineries as “tax cuts” that must not be cut.

I took a look at the last available budget numbers for Americans for Tax Reform, Norquist’s group. Though they do not reveal their donors, we can cobble together much of Norquist’s donors using foundations and other nonprofits that donate money to him.

The disclosures show that only two billionaire-backed groups have provided over 66 percent of Norquist’s funding:

• The Center to Protect Patients Rights donated $4,189,000 to Americans for Tax Reform in 2010, 34 percent of the group’s budget that year.

• Crossroads GPS donated $4,000,000 to Americans for Tax Reform in 2010, 32.46 percent of the group’s budget that year.

The Center to Protect Patients Rights is the foundation used by the billionaire clique led by the Koch brothers to distribute grants to allied groups. In 2010, wealthy moguls like Steve Bechtel of Bechtel Corporation and Steve Schwarzman of the Blackstone Group met behind closed doors to help lend money to these types of efforts.

Crossroads GPS is the undisclosed group run by Karl Rove. The only known donors are folks like Paul Singer, the “vulture” hedge fund king who benefits enormously from tax strategies like the carried interest loophole. Norquist’s pledge largely benefits billionaires like Singer and Schwarzman, who pay almost nothing in payroll taxes and likely pay a lower rate than their secretaries.

DOWNLOADS: (135)

PLAYS: (1819)

Embed

On a conference call with House Republicans, Speaker John Boehner gave them some much-needed medicine as he tells them to fall in line.

On a conference call with House Republicans a day after the party’s electoral battering last week, Speaker John A. Boehner dished out some bitter medicine, and for the first time in the 112th Congress, most members took their dose.
--

It was a striking contrast to a similar call last year, when Mr. Boehner tried to persuade members to compromise with Democrats on a deal to extend a temporary cut in payroll taxes, only to have them loudly revolt.
--
“To have a voice at the bargaining table, John Boehner has to be strong,” said Representative Tom Cole of Oklahoma, one of the speaker’s lieutenants. “Most members were just taught a lesson that you’re not going to get everything that you want. It was that kind of election.”

Tea Partiers like Jennifer Stefano (who works for Koch's Americans For Prosperity group) were terribly upset by Boehner's words. Now when you're watching this clip, just imagine you lived in a far-off land where we didn't have a two-year election.

Cavuto: Tea Partiers made Boehner Speaker, and he better watch how and to who he is speaking. Jenn, you didn't like that?

Stefano: Well look, here's what I'd like everyone to say. Why don't we all talk about instead of who's getting in line and who's cooperating with who? What is the best thing for our country? Wouldn't it be nice if we had a leader in Washington who said hey, it's not about just working together for show, it's about what is best for our country. And Neil, there are some very hard decisions to be made and I don't think we should compromise on things that are not good for all of us as Americans.

Not only is she delegitimizing Obama's reelection, but she's saying NO to f*&king reality. Do these people come from the conservative section of Storybrooke?
Here's more lunacy as this short interview continues:

Cavuto: But the president's going to claim that elections have consequences and it was close, but I won and I won despite this call for higher taxes and maybe because of it and the rich just have to deal -- you say what?

Stefano: I say number one, just because you win an election doesn't mean you get to go of the rails and do what is NOT good for America because you have some weird ideological agenda. Number two, let's talk seriously about what tax cuts are and what they're going to do. You can take all of the wealth --100% of the wealth in this country, Neil, and from everyone making over $250,000 and you are not going to solve the problems we have in this country.

Hey Stefano, regarding your first point: Over 62,000,000 people voted for this "weird agenda", in your words, so in reality it's not weird at all. As for her second point: As I said before, we've just completed a long, serious and arduous process of picking the type of person we wanted to be in charge of the executive branch, and we've decided what we want to do.

Maybe not in Tea Party Nation, a world many light years away. But here in America. That's how democracy works.

But Stefano's not a fan of that system. She then refuses to say she's open to compromise and instead calls the problems with entitlements 'immoral.' She doesn't want to compromise, period. End of story. The message from many Tea Party groups is clear: Don't compromise, don't negotiate and become more conservative.

Cavuto: Jennifer says no, she's not going to budge on anything.

Stefano: I, I, I... it's not that I'm not going to budge. I want a serious conversation with this president outside, I won't compromise my child's future. And I won't throw the poor and the weak under the bus by hurting charities. Are you afraid I'm going to leap through and grab you?

Here's how the conversation would go. Obama: Jenn, let's have a serious conversation about fixing our problem. Why won't you compromise? Jenn: Because I hate you and your radical agenda. Obama: I understand that, but I won the election so America has chosen. Jenn: No they haven't because we never had a serious conversation about this. Obama: Yes we did. Jenn: No we didn't and you can't make me...etc...

We had A SERIOUS CONVERSATION!

Argh. Never mind. Transcribing this has turned my frontal lobe mushy. The stupid, it burns.

Mr. "All Hat, No Cattle" sexual predator Herman Cain is back out on the campaign trail, this time for the benefit of his patrons, the Kochs and their astroturf organization, AFP.

Via The Nation:

“The problem,” former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain told a ballroom of about thirty people in Philadelphia on Friday afternoon, “is we have a president who does not believe in a free marketplace. This is why his whole campaign is about class warfare. Playing the race card. Divisiveness. And as some of us know, deception.”

These are boilerplate attacks from Cain, but this was not a typical Tea Party rally. This was yet another stop on Cain’s “Job Creators Truth Tour 2012,” the fifth this week and one of thirty that will happen before the election. The audience was “job creators” from the Philadelphia area—small-business owners who were there to learn how to influence their employees vote in November.

This is part of the larger coordinated effort on the part of the oligarchs to recruit business owners into an employee intimidation plan. Mitt Romney kicked it off with his phone call to the NFIB encouraging them to let employees know their jobs just might depend on how they voted.

Some of these "small employers" have definitely taken the strategy to heart. This segment from "Up with Chris Hayes" tells us more about ASG Software's employee intimidation tour:

Continue reading »