Charles and David explicitly funded efforts in 2012 to help Romney beat Obama. That's using billions to influence the state.
-
-
Replying to @mtracey
Bull. It's self-defense. Or Charles' idea of it. You have an obligation to engage in politics to defend liberty.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @JustinRaimondo
Trying to elect Romney was a "defense of liberty"? HA
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @mtracey
Charles thought so: I disagree. But the guy's a libertarian, no doubt about that. Just strategically disoriented.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @JustinRaimondo
And his strategic orientation is to exert political influence by oligarchic means. Silly to deny.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mtracey
Oligarchs use state to stop their competitors. Charles doesn't do that: quite the opposite. Words have meaning: don't abuse them.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @mtracey
Affable - a softie, really. Very different from Charles.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JustinRaimondo
The term "oligarch" doesn't necessitate using the state to advance business interests. Just exerting political influence.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @mtracey
So anyone who contributes to a political campaign is an "oligarch"? What's the price ceiling for not being one? Ridiculous.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Starting your own advocacy organization(s) and contributing countless millions to help a candidate = obviously oligarchic
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Replying to @mtracey
Oligarch - rule by a few. Where does Koch advocate that? Nowhere.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.