CATO Institute, "How the NSA Spies on Americans":

[ucrdem]

Ain't it grand to know that "progressives" are making common cause with the Koch-funded CATO institute?

catoinstitutevideo, uploaded 4 days ago.

Webpage: http://www.youtube.com/user/catoinstitutevideo?feature=watch

[MADem]

1. Glenn Greenwald, the "breaker" of this story on his Guardian blog, was a paid consultant to the

CATO Institute for a period of more than a year. He wrote a couple of white papers for them, and was on their payroll while he did his work.

If he's not in their hip pocket, he's tucked next to the handkerchief.

Strange bedfellows, wouldn't you say?

[ucrdem]

2. Coincidence I'm sure.

[MADem]

43. I'm sure he put hands to cheeks in a "Home Alone" pose, and asked himself "However did that

big fat cheque signed by a guy named Koch find its way into MY pocket? My, my, my!"

[ucrdem]

47. "I have here in my hand a list"

I think I've seen this movie before . . .

[pnwmom]

34. Interesting. Thanks. n/t

[noise]

3. That's like saying

progressives are huge fans of FOX news because they object to Fox reporter James Rosen being targeted by the DOJ.

Very weak argument.

[ucrdem]

4. No, it's like saying Greenwald is a paid propagandist

spreading Koch-funded propaganda. Because that's what's going on.

[noise]

7. So why is Greenwald

such a strong supporter of the ACLU? Could it be because this is about the 4th amendment?

[ucrdem]

8. It isn't about the 4th amendment I can tell you that right now.

It's about 2014 and a few languishing items on the Koch brother's to-do list.

[markiv]

14. Koch's opposed the PATRIOT Act during the Bush era

so i guess they've been looking at 2014 for quite some time

[Cha]

53. Do you have a link for that?

[markiv]

56. link

http://www.lasocialdiary.com/node/125921

(launching the 2008-2009 season would be Bush era)



Last Tuesday night the New York City Ballet launched its 2008-2009 season with An Opening Night Celebration .........

David Koch has had a prominent social presence.........He and his brother Charles, along with George Soros, the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation each contributed $10 million to the ACLU to defeat parts of the USA Patriot Act.

[Cha]

60. My, haven't they changed. thanks for the link

[markiv]

61. how have they changed?

David Koch was the libertarian candidate for VP in the 1980 election.

Libertarians have always been against this kind of (PATRIOT Act) stuff

There's a lot of things people can question the Koch's and libertarians about (such as advocating unlimited private corp power), but you cant just automatically lump them in with everything one considers 'bad'

for instance, they're no fans of wall street, hence being the 2nd largest private company in the country

[Cha]

62. Yeah, gee.. no thanks for defending the Lying Ass KOCHS.

Oh, and Fuck libertarians

[markiv]

63. where did i defend them?

advocating unlimited corporate power is a pretty serious issue

but as far as the other things go, yes, i'll defend anyone against things that arent true

[DisgustipatedinCA]

48. Baseless claim

You sound confident. That's nice. You have nothing to base this on, however.

[rhett o rick]

52. Do you have any proof that Mr. Greenwald is a paid propagandist for the Koch Brothers?

Do you think that this Admin problem with embracing the Patriot Act and domestic spying will go away if you criticize Mr. Greenwald?

Funny how conservatives hate whistle-blowers. Maybe you can tell us why that is. I think they dont like anyone exposing their authoritarian leaders.

[markiv]

5. Koch gave 20 million to the ACLU during the Bush administration

to fight the PATRIOT Act

Their comments on this through the CATO institute (which I usually dont agree with), are consistent with their opinions during the Bush era

[ucrdem]

6. Great, so start an "I Stand with CATO" thread

and see how many recs it gets.

[markiv]

9. ????? I said I usually *dont* agree with CATO

but I'm not afraid to agree with anyone, when I think they're right (on a specific topic)

ever hear of the expression 'politics makes strange bedfellows'?

It means you dont have to be blanket for or against anyone 100 percent of the time

try it sometime, more enlightening than living completely by 'guilt by association', like Senator McCarthy did (speaking of associations)

[ucrdem]

10. Look, CATO doesn't give a sh#t about your civil liberties or anyone else's.

They care about two things: 1) Koch profits and 2) Koch taxes. Period.

[markiv]

11. you're right about their intentions

but intentions do not prove whether something is right or wrong, it's a separate issue

my point is that you're making a McCarthy-esqu guilt by association of people bothered by the NSA issue, by calling it Koch propaganda

the issue is that Koch's agree, but for different reasons, you're trying to insinuate that anyone bothered by the issue is 'in with' the Kochs

[noise]

12. Who said they did

You are probably the only person who has mentioned CATO.

Your conflation tactic is not very convincing.

[ucrdem]

13. If CATO is pushing this, and they are, it's a ratfuck.

If you don't know what that means go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2988897

[markiv]

16. it's not a fake scandal, you really think the ACLU is in on it? nt

[ucrdem]

20. It's a fake scandal.

As for the ACLU, didn't you just get through saying politics makes strange bedfellows?

IOW I don't know but it answers to its funders, not me.

[markiv]

22. so you think the ACLU is now an arm of CATO/Koch?

you do realize, that most with tinfoil hats like yours, consider the NSA a scandal

so where does that leave you?

[ucrdem]

25. It seems they're both singing from the same page, doesn't it?

I didn't vote for ACLU, and I won't be giving them money anytime soon, though I have in the past. To be honest I don't really know all that much about them, and it's their business who and what they support.

[markiv]

28. so you gave the ACLU money, JUST LIKE THE KOCH'S DID!!!!!!

you know what that means.....

[ucrdem]

32. Fool me once?

[markiv]

33. and now you're talking like W Bush

you're just like Bush and Kochs

[ucrdem]

35. Funny that's what leapt to mind.

Do you think about him a lot?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

49. Don't bother. Really.

This one is WAY off the cra-cra chart. You wouldn't believe their list of suspected "ratfuckers".

[MADem]

44. You might want to look at this. Keep in mind this source is well left of center.

http://exiledonline.com/glenn-greenwald-of-the-libertarian-cato-institute-posts-his-defense-of-joshua-foust-the-exiled-responds-to-greenwald/

Glenn Greenwald claiming he only wrote “2 freelance articles” for the Cato Institute is offensive it’s so utterly absurd. We know it. Glenn knows it. For one thing, one of those “free-lance articles” was nothing resembling a “freelance article”—it was a major policy whitepaper, a one-year massive report that included numerous speaking engagements on behalf of the Koch-founded Cato Institute. And let’s not forget, the Cato Institute was originally founded as The Charles Koch Foundation of Wichita. We merely copied the phrase “Glenn Greenwald of the libertarian Cato Institute” from the description used by numerous mainstream media outlets across the country over the past few years. For example:

Here: http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/will-republicans-take-lessons-from-british-conservatives-1.169415

....Moreover, as Greenwald himself knows better than anyone, his ties to the Cato Institute and the Koch-funded libertarian nomenklatura go deeper than this. For example, Glenn Greenwald was one of the keynote speakers at an elite “Cato Benefit Sponsors” event, featuring Glenn and Cato fellow P.J. O’Rourke and winger Michael Barone. Who among progressives is invited as a top entertainer for the elite Cato Institute Benefit Sponsors event? Glenn Greenwald, that’s who.

[ucrdem]

45. Like a boss.

[freshwest]

64. OMFG! Spanked!

[DesMoinesDem]

15. Progressives like Senator Ron Wyden?

I have no problem with progressives fighting for progressive causes wherever they can. You are exactly the opposite. You are only interested in where people advocate for something, and have no regard for what they advocate. You irrational arguments only prove you have no rational arguments.

[markiv]

18. +1000

i absolutely cannot stand that 'mentality'

[ucrdem]

19. Fine, let him make common cause with the Koch brothers

if that's what his constituents want. Is that what you want?

[noise]

23. The Koch brothers like icecream

...and so does Sen. Wyden AND Glenn Greenwald!

Everyone must stop eating icecream!

[markiv]

24. so you're saying that Koch's opposition to the PATRIOT act justifies per se

support of it

wow

just wow

[neverforget]

50. I stand with Senators Wyden and Merkely and not with John Yoo.

It's easy to play guilt by association.

[kentuck]

17. Everyone should listen to this for educational purposes.

It did not change my mind but...

[ucrdem]

21. But it makes you wonder what the hell is really going on?

I may be leaping to conclusions but I knew the minute I saw the leaked doc.

[kentuck]

27. What did you know?

???

[ucrdem]

31. I knew it was a ratfuck

like the last 501 ratfucks.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

51. Ol' Joe would be proud -

[ljm2002]

26. OFFS...

...now it's guilt by association. You can't be a good "liberal" ... er, excuse me, "progressive"... if you are "making common cause" with the CATO Institute on this topic.

You know, I remember, way back in the day, when sometimes Republicans and Democrats really would reach across the aisle for some reason, on a particular topic. People who were usually sworn enemies would smile and shake hands and push through some piece of legislation, and the commentators would remark on that old saying that "Politics makes strange bedfellows".

Fast forward to today. There is no question that we are more divided, more entrenched, less likely to work together. There is no question that this falls squarely on the shoulders of the Republicans and the vast right-wing conspiracy in general, and yes, the Cato Institute is part of that.

Still, it is good to remember that sometimes an issue stands on its own and does not have any natural affinity to one part over the other. The extent of NSA surveillance -- not to mention FBI, CIA, etc. -- appears to be one of those issues. It's an issue where you may find it surprising who does and does not object to the surveillance.

Me? I'm surprised at the number of people on DU who are willing to give up their rights without a whimper, who in fact demand that we all be as willing as they are to do so, and if we are not, well then we are making "common cause" with our political enemies and woe, woe! be to us on that account.

Pffft.

[ucrdem]

29. So now you want to reach across the aisle?

Well isn't that just hopey-changey!

[ljm2002]

37. Me? This isn't about me...

...and as for the across-the-aisle comments, I was just pointing out that historically there have always been cases of strange alliances on certain issues, and I believe this is destined to be one of those cases. Therefore putting up the Cato Institute as a bogeyman is bogus. Civil libertarians come in all political flavors, as do authority-worshiping numb nuts.

When Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul got together to propose auditing the Fed, I was all for it. That does NOT make me a Paulite! When massive domestic surveillance is revealed, I'm outraged at the scope of it. That does not make me a follower or an ally of the Cato Institute.

[markiv]

30. 'guilt by association' is a good guide

for people totally incapable of independent thought and judgement

[ucrdem]

36. How about plain old guilt?

If it looks like a duck, etc.

[ljm2002]

38. Really?

So your argument on this issue is that everyone who disagrees with you is incapable of independent thought and judgment.

Not a very meaty argument, to say the least.

Personally, I have found that those who worship authority are far less capable of independent thought and judgment than the average person.

[markiv]

40. that's not what i said

that's is not a reasonable interpretation

[ljm2002]

42. Here is what you said:

"'guilt by association' is a good guide for people totally incapable of independent thought and judgement".

I may have misunderstood, and if so, I apologize. What I thought you meant was that it is a good guide to use when talking about people who are incapable of independent thought and judgement. What I see now is it could be read with just the opposite meaning, namely, that guilt by association is often used as a guide by people who are incapable of independent thought and judgment.

I guess you meant to say the latter. If so we are in complete agreement, and again, I apologize for misconstruing your comment.

[quinnox]

39. the arguments in favor of spying are obviously getting really desperate and stupid

[ucrdem]

41. If you think Barack and Michelle are "spying" on you,

well, good luck with that!

[Marrah_G]

54. Incredibly stupid arguement

And frankly it stinks of the belief that politics is a sport and all that matters is your favorite team and favorite player, cheering for them at all costs, excusing any bad behavior.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

55. +1

[markiv]

57. sadly, too many think that way

and it makes them profoundly vulnerable to being sold out

[backscatter712]

58. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[muriel_volestrangler]

59. Ain't it grand to know that you're making common cause with John "Snowden is a traitor" Boehner?

See - this "you mustn't line up with anyone you have disagreed with in the past" move just doesn't work with this, does it?

Congrats on getting blocked from your own thread, by the way. Maybe you should think about who you make common cause with when you use a description of a minority to form an insult ...