Murdoch isn't with the right. He's a profiteer and a pornographer. Soros is everybit the profiteer that Murdoch is. To show this I'll quote a liberal columnist for The Nation, David Corn, who asked Soros why he purchased Bush's own oil firm, Spectrum 7 in 1986. Soros answered "He was supposed to bring in the Gulf connection. But it didn't come to anything. We were buying political influence. That was it." There you have it from the horses mouth.
"They are in almost unanimous agreement about the crisis of climate change." Not true in the least. If anything, scientists have been uniting against Al Gore's claims that there is consensous on this issue. Go to google videos and look up "The Great Global Warming Swindle". It's about 1 1/4 hrs long, but it's packed with the latest science by the most impeccable scientists in the field. The Nuclear Energy industry has pushed this issue, and political leftists have made it their religion.
I don't have a progressive view on Global Warming. I'm not a scientist. As a progressive pragmatist I find it beneficial to listen to the scientific community. They are in almost unanimous agreement about the crisis of climate change. So the question is what should I do. Read Internal Combustion by Edwin Black.
I didn't get a research grant to investigate Murdoch's business and philanthropic dealings. I suspect he'd prefer to keep them quiet. And murdoch is the right. He provides ample material and ideological support. Soros is nothing to be feared. This is S.O.P. Republicans start grasping at straws to try to prove corruption. It's their only card. The Democratic policies are better for the people, so you can't really argue the facts. You've gotta start slinging mud. Crooks and Liars
No grounds for suspicion? That's funny. You point to Murdoch and say he's contributing to the right-wing. He's running a business with his media interests just like all the liberal media owners are. Did he contribute $23,450,000 to special 527 political organizations in 2004 as Soros did? You're setting yourself up if you take Soros at his word.
I don't think you have any real grounds for your suspicion. I take him at his word. He's successful, respectable, and compassionate. Essentially the opposite of the public appearance of Murdoch. Btw, who is murdoch funding? He's contributing way more to the right-wing than anybody on the left. Hell, he's got an entire global news network dedicated to the right. I'd say Soros' influence pales by comparison.
It's laughable to see you supporting Soros and thinking that you know why he's doing what he is. Personally, I think he's decided that buying influence on the far left side is easier than trying this on the far right. I don't believe for a second that he is doing this for ideology, but rather for business purposes. Soros has bought the Democrats and they seem content with this even though it completely violates their professed beliefs.
Ah, the language says it all. There "responsible Democrats" are the ones who agree with republicans. That's a nice sentiment. By that Standard the only responsible Democrats are Fox News Correspondents. No, I'd prefer to be irresponsible by these standards. So in a sense the quote is accurate. If you claim to be a Democrat, but you position on the issues is in direct contradiction to the political philosophy progressive liberalism, then you will be called out as a PHONY.
- In 1992, Soros made a billion profit by selling the British pound short, badly damaging that country.
- In 1999, the president of China banned Soros from doing business in his country.
- In 2002, Soros was convicted of insider trading in France and fined $2.3 million.
vechorik 1 year ago
Murdoch isn't with the right. He's a profiteer and a pornographer. Soros is everybit the profiteer that Murdoch is. To show this I'll quote a liberal columnist for The Nation, David Corn, who asked Soros why he purchased Bush's own oil firm, Spectrum 7 in 1986. Soros answered "He was supposed to bring in the Gulf connection. But it didn't come to anything. We were buying political influence. That was it." There you have it from the horses mouth.
JohnnyPolitico 4 years ago
"They are in almost unanimous agreement about the crisis of climate change." Not true in the least. If anything, scientists have been uniting against Al Gore's claims that there is consensous on this issue. Go to google videos and look up "The Great Global Warming Swindle". It's about 1 1/4 hrs long, but it's packed with the latest science by the most impeccable scientists in the field. The Nuclear Energy industry has pushed this issue, and political leftists have made it their religion.
JohnnyPolitico 4 years ago
I don't have a progressive view on Global Warming. I'm not a scientist. As a progressive pragmatist I find it beneficial to listen to the scientific community. They are in almost unanimous agreement about the crisis of climate change. So the question is what should I do. Read Internal Combustion by Edwin Black.
DemianThomas 4 years ago
I didn't get a research grant to investigate Murdoch's business and philanthropic dealings. I suspect he'd prefer to keep them quiet. And murdoch is the right. He provides ample material and ideological support. Soros is nothing to be feared. This is S.O.P. Republicans start grasping at straws to try to prove corruption. It's their only card. The Democratic policies are better for the people, so you can't really argue the facts. You've gotta start slinging mud. Crooks and Liars
DemianThomas 4 years ago
I'm interested in your progressive view on Global Warming. Can you briefly tell me what you think of it?
JohnnyPolitico 4 years ago
No grounds for suspicion? That's funny. You point to Murdoch and say he's contributing to the right-wing. He's running a business with his media interests just like all the liberal media owners are. Did he contribute $23,450,000 to special 527 political organizations in 2004 as Soros did? You're setting yourself up if you take Soros at his word.
JohnnyPolitico 4 years ago
I don't think you have any real grounds for your suspicion. I take him at his word. He's successful, respectable, and compassionate. Essentially the opposite of the public appearance of Murdoch. Btw, who is murdoch funding? He's contributing way more to the right-wing than anybody on the left. Hell, he's got an entire global news network dedicated to the right. I'd say Soros' influence pales by comparison.
DemianThomas 4 years ago
It's laughable to see you supporting Soros and thinking that you know why he's doing what he is. Personally, I think he's decided that buying influence on the far left side is easier than trying this on the far right. I don't believe for a second that he is doing this for ideology, but rather for business purposes. Soros has bought the Democrats and they seem content with this even though it completely violates their professed beliefs.
JohnnyPolitico 4 years ago
Ah, the language says it all. There "responsible Democrats" are the ones who agree with republicans. That's a nice sentiment. By that Standard the only responsible Democrats are Fox News Correspondents. No, I'd prefer to be irresponsible by these standards. So in a sense the quote is accurate. If you claim to be a Democrat, but you position on the issues is in direct contradiction to the political philosophy progressive liberalism, then you will be called out as a PHONY.
DemianThomas 4 years ago