Tea Party: grassroots? Try funded by wealthy businessmen

[Punarbhava]

summary from The Week here

The billionaire Koch brothers: Tea Party puppetmasters?
The New Yorker makes a case that a pair of wealthy brothers is the force behind the Tea Party movement. Here, 5 key assertions from a new article
posted on August 24, 2010, at 3:45 PM

The New Yorker's Jane Mayer has investigated the political funding networks of Charles and David Koch, two of the wealthiest people in America and generous donors to conservative political causes. In her 6,000-word story, Mayer makes a case that the billionaire brothers have funded and fostered the Tea Party movement as a well-disguised means to pursue their private political agenda. The brothers vehemently deny the claim, and Mayer's story has been written off by conservative bloggers as a "coordinated character assassination." Here are some of the key assertions in the article:

The family has a complicated relationship with communism
The family business, Koch Industries, was built up by the brothers' father, Fred, an "arch-conservative" and member of the staunchly anti-communist (some might say "paranoid") John Birch Society. But, ironically enough, the firm's financial success was built on the back of work done in collaboration with the Soviet government under Stalin in the 1930s, according to Mayer. By the 1950s and '60s, Fred Koch was raising the alarm about communists infiltrating U.S. society and government. In addition to a vast fortune, says Mayer, the Koch boys also inherited their father's "distrust of the U.S. government."

They funded a proto–Tea Party movement
The brothers' first step into the political arena came in 1980, when they were the key backers of Libertarian Party candidate Ed Clark's run for president, a campaign that "presaged the Tea Party movement." David Koch even became Clark's vice presidential nominee — though this, says Mayer, was mainly to overcome the legal limits on campaign donations. Despite the fact that David "spent more than $2 million on the effort," the ticket received just 1 percent of the vote in the election that made Ronald Reagan president.

The Kochs promote global warming skepticism
During the 1980s and '90s, the brothers spent more than $100 million creating the "Kochtopus" — a term coined by critics to describe their "network" of ideologically motived organizations. In 2008, Mayer reveals, the three main Koch family foundations gave money to 34 political and policy organizations, many of which promote a skeptical view of global warming. The Kochs, for instance, funded the launch of the libertarian Cato Institute, which has been a fierce opponent of environmental reform. They also have given large sums to the Heritage Foundation and the Independent Women's Foundation, both doubters on the question of man-made climate change.

They are 'waging a war against Obama'
In 2004, David Koch helped found conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity, which Mayer says has been "instrumental in disrupting the Obama presidency." The Kochs' involvement, she writes, has been "intense"; one source even says it is "micromanaged" by the brothers — a charge they deny. "By giving money to 'educate,' fund, and organize Tea Party protesters, [the Kochs] have helped turn their private agenda into a mass movement," says Mayer. FrumForum's Tim Mak, a conservative, treats this with skepticism. "Try telling a [Tea Party] activist that they're an agent of the Koch family!" he says. "The Tea Party just can't be seriously controlled, only educated."

Are there Koch-funded political messages in the Smithsonian?
David Koch has become a top donor to the arts and sciences in recent years, particularly in his home city of New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Lincoln Center, and the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History have all benefited from his largesse. Mayer suggests that those donations might influence the recipient institutions, noting that — much to the frustration of some climate scientists — global warming exhibits in the Smithsonian's David H. Koch Hall of Human Origins "uncannily echo the Koch message." The museum dismisses these charges.

The original piece from the New Yorker

Posted without comment.

[Broomstick]

It was the tea party movement that spurred the coinage of the term "astroturf movement" for a fake grass-roots movement. While the accusation has not always been specifically that this is funded/puppeteered by the Koch brothers, there is no question that at least some parts of the tea party agenda serves the viewpoint of the conservative and wealthy, and there certainly are wealthy funders and participants.

[Night_stalker]

Nope, there is absolutely no coincedence that the Tea Party wants to promote interest of the rich, all the while they're being funded by the rich people. It's all the fault of Obama, he must be orchestrating the whole thing! (note, the last sentence was sarcasm, don't take it literally)

[Knife]

Let alone Freedom Works which is Armey's group full of lobbyists.

[Temujin]

They are 'waging a war against Obama'
In 2004, David Koch helped found conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity, which Mayer says has been "instrumental in disrupting the Obama presidency." The Kochs' involvement, she writes, has been "intense"; one source even says it is "micromanaged" by the brothers — a charge they deny. "By giving money to 'educate,' fund, and organize Tea Party protesters, [the Kochs] have helped turn their private agenda into a mass movement," says Mayer. FrumForum's Tim Mak, a conservative, treats this with skepticism. "Try telling a [Tea Party] activist that they're an agent of the Koch family!" he says. "The Tea Party just can't be seriously controlled, only educated."

I know they want to believe that they are all a bunch of Founding Father type independent thinkers, but the reality is these are a bunch of people who are allergic to truth, facts and critical thinking being told exactly what they want to hear and believe, which makes it easy to lead them around by the nose.

[TithonusSyndrome]

If you were looking in from the outside at the anti-Bush protest movement of most of the 00's and missed absolutely every last one of it's messages, it's issues and the fundamental moral position it acted from, but retained things like the tactics and the appearance and wanted to appropriate them for your own ends, you might end up with something like the Tea Party... provided you amplified it into unbalanced violence and genuinely seditious rhetoric. For a couple of billionaires, bankrolling their own reverse-engineered anti-war movement tailored for their own ends is a ridiculous firesale-priced deal.

[Thirdfain]

I for one am completely shocked that a major political movement has wealthy backers.

[Xisiqomelir]

This is another perk of being part of a private corporation instead of a public one: You're invisible until you decide to strike.

Aside: I get The New Yorker and this is a really great issue overall. The Churchill article on page 75 by Adam Gopnik is a damn fine piece of writing. I encourage you all to subscribe!

[Terralthra]

It was the tea party movement that spurred the coinage of the term "astroturf movement" for a fake grass-roots movement. While the accusation has not always been specifically that this is funded/puppeteered by the Koch brothers, there is no question that at least some parts of the tea party agenda serves the viewpoint of the conservative and wealthy, and there certainly are wealthy funders and participants.

This is just flat wrong. Astroturfing was coined in the 80s by a Senator in Texas talking about a deluge of mail about insurance reform, and has been in continuous usage since then.

[Surlethe]

Why can't it be both a grassroots movement and funded by wealthy businessmen?

Nope, there is absolutely no coincedence that the Tea Party wants to promote interest of the rich, all the while they're being funded by the rich people. It's all the fault of Obama, he must be orchestrating the whole thing! (note, the last sentence was sarcasm, don't take it literally)

Remember, the Tea Party is also wealthier than average, older than average, and whiter than average. It's white backlash all over again (if it ever went away).

[Big Orange]

I know that the Tea Bag movement has got big corporate bucks behind it and it's been covered by the media for a fairly long while (from August 09):

[StarshipTitanic]

Why can't it be both a grassroots movement and funded by wealthy businessmen?

This is a frightening point to make because the American Revolution was basically a grassroots movement funded by wealthy businessmen. However, the infighting and the cynical nature of the Tea Party leadership seems to prevent the movement from escaping its fringe stigma. Palin is no Washington.

[Karza]

The Koch family's involvement in starting the whole Tea Party mess was discovered a long time ago.

[LionElJonson]

Why can't it be both a grassroots movement and funded by wealthy businessmen?

This is a frightening point to make because the American Revolution was basically a grassroots movement funded by wealthy businessmen. However, the infighting and the cynical nature of the Tea Party leadership seems to prevent the movement from escaping its fringe stigma. Palin is no Washington.

Indeed she isn't. A pity she's so dumb; I actually quite liked her until she wound up torpedoing the Republican bid for president.

That said, it looks like it's a matter of time before something happens. The election of Obama (whose rhetoric was basically "I'm not like all those other politicians"), the hung parliaments in Australia and Britain, the abysmal approval rating for the US legislature, the Tea Party movement... sooner or later it's going to boil over, and when it does, well, the results probably won't be pretty. I was watching an old educational film on Youtube, and well, where do you think modern America is on those scales?

[Broomstick]

It's not nearly as despotic as some Americans would like, but closer than I am comfortable with.

[J]

Why can't it be both a grassroots movement and funded by wealthy businessmen?

Funny you should say that, because that's exactly what it is. The Tea Party idea was spoken by a forum member a few days before this message was posted by the message board owner. Shortly thereafter, it "went live" when Rick Santelli held up a teabag and referenced the idea on CNBC during his now infamous rant, and the rest is history. From there everyone else jumped in and the movement took off, it started as a grassroots movement but was co-opted by wealthy business interests.

[Surlethe]

Why can't it be both a grassroots movement and funded by wealthy businessmen?

Funny you should say that, because that's exactly what it is. The Tea Party idea was spoken by a forum member a few days before this message was posted by the message board owner. Shortly thereafter, it "went live" when Rick Santelli held up a teabag and referenced the idea on CNBC during his now infamous rant, and the rest is history. From there everyone else jumped in and the movement took off, it started as a grassroots movement but was co-opted by wealthy business interests.

It naturally serves wealthy business interests; there doesn't need to be "co-option" for the Tea Partiers to take wealthy business money and at the same time stir themselves up into a froth by watching Glenn Beck and feeding back on their own paranoia, then go out and protest the Sovietization of the US.

[Patroklos]

Can someone please point out the American grassroots movement that has not garnered the support of wealthy patrons?

Rich people donating money does not a puppetmaster make. There is no organization, right or left, that does not have such people providing support. Of all the valid arguements against the Tea Party, why do people always line up behind the losers?

[Rogue 9]

Why can't it be both a grassroots movement and funded by wealthy businessmen?

Funny you should say that, because that's exactly what it is. The Tea Party idea was spoken by a forum member a few days before this message was posted by the message board owner. Shortly thereafter, it "went live" when Rick Santelli held up a teabag and referenced the idea on CNBC during his now infamous rant, and the rest is history. From there everyone else jumped in and the movement took off, it started as a grassroots movement but was co-opted by wealthy business interests.

No more bailing out people who came to Congress to demand the removal of leverage limits, got what they asked for, then blew themselves up with the very leverage they demanded to be able to use.

Emphasis in the original.

So... is he saying he supports government intervention in the form of leverage limits?

[Surlethe]

No more bailing out people who came to Congress to demand the removal of leverage limits, got what they asked for, then blew themselves up with the very leverage they demanded to be able to use.

Emphasis in the original.

So... is he saying he supports government intervention in the form of leverage limits?

No, he's saying he does not support government intervention to help people who shot themselves in the foot. Free markets, reward success with wealth, punish failure with annihilation, all that.

[StarshipTitanic]

Why can't it be both a grassroots movement and funded by wealthy businessmen?

This is a frightening point to make because the American Revolution was basically a grassroots movement funded by wealthy businessmen. However, the infighting and the cynical nature of the Tea Party leadership seems to prevent the movement from escaping its fringe stigma. Palin is no Washington.

Indeed she isn't. A pity she's so dumb; I actually quite liked her until she wound up torpedoing the Republican bid for president.

I'm not sure what you mean by torpedo because McCain never had a credible chance against Obama.

That said, it looks like it's a matter of time before something happens. The election of Obama (whose rhetoric was basically "I'm not like all those other politicians"), the hung parliaments in Australia and Britain, the abysmal approval rating for the US legislature, the Tea Party movement... sooner or later it's going to boil over, and when it does, well, the results probably won't be pretty. I was watching an old educational film on Youtube, and well, where do you think modern America is on those scales?

I have a feeling that Obama will regain some popularity if the best the Republicans can do is Palin, Newt or Romney in 2012. Hung parliaments don't mean that society is broken, they mean that the voting system is broken. Americans have long hated their legislature. The Tea Party movement has doomed itself by self-limiting its constituency to the shrinking angry white conservative demographic. Look at Scott Brown's veer to the left (sort of) after his election. When it's time to axe him in 2012, you won't see him appealing to the fringe element that helped get him elected this year.

[J]

So... is he saying he supports government intervention in the form of leverage limits?

No, he's saying he does not support government intervention to help people who shot themselves in the foot. Free markets, reward success with wealth, punish failure with annihilation, all that.

Well, in that post he doesn't say either way, but for the record he does insist on a 12:1 leverage limit which is strictly enforced by the government in countless other posts.

[kouchpotato]

Thanks for the video LionElJonson (whom was a repressed homosexual, just in case you didn't know. Not saying you're gay but it's funny a right wing dipshit like you would have his handle of a gay poet), it really shows how the teabaggers are nothing but authoritarian douchebags. "lack of common courtesy on account of their political attitude" hmm, like when the teabaggers chanted nigger and faggot during protests? Or their blatant hate towards anyone to the left of them politically?

"Rude to others because they think their wealth and position gives them that right" matches their beliefs that people on welfare are "scum" and obviously lazy because they don't have a job. "Or because they don't like a man's race, or religion". most of 'em think Obama is a muslim, most oppose the ground zero community center with a mosque in it, many are racists (including their leaders).

"Equal opportunity for all citizens to develop useful skills" BUT BUT BUT PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE COMMUNISTS AND LIEBERAL BRAINWASHING CENTERS! "equal opportunity to put these skills to work" like, say, affirmative action? Or the Equal Employment act?

"Concentrated power in the bosses" workers rights? What a liberal idea!

"Opposition is dangerous" like the senator who had his gas line cut? Not official opposition, and not by the ruling side towards the other side, but still opposing the teabaggers' point of view.

I could go on and on, but I won't.

[xt828]

I think the name is Lion El Jonson, Primarch of the Dark Angels Space Marines in Warhammer 40k, not Lionel Johnson, repressed homosexual, though the former is named for the latter.

[kouchpotato]

Thanks for the video LionElJonson (whom was a repressed homosexual, just in case you didn't know. Not saying you're gay but it's funny a right wing dipshit like you would have his handle of a gay poet), it really shows how the teabaggers are nothing but authoritarian douchebags. "lack of common courtesy on account of their political attitude" hmm, like when the teabaggers chanted nigger and faggot during protests? Or their blatant hate towards anyone to the left of them politically?

"Rude to others because they think their wealth and position gives them that right" matches their beliefs that people on welfare are "scum" and obviously lazy because they don't have a job. "Or because they don't like a man's race, or religion". most of 'em think Obama is a muslim, most oppose the ground zero community center with a mosque in it, they contain a large number of racists (including their leaders).

"Equal opportunity for all citizens to develop useful skills" BUT BUT BUT PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE COMMUNISTS AND LIEBERAL BRAINWASHING CENTERS! "equal opportunity to put these skills to work" like, say, affirmative action? Or the Equal Employment act?

"Concentrated power in the bosses" workers rights? What a liberal idea!

"Opposition is dangerous" like the senator who had his gas line cut? Not official opposition, and not by the ruling side towards the other side, but still opposing the teabaggers' point of view.

I could go on and on, but I won't.