The Pardu

Archive for the ‘Libertarianism’ Category

The Daily GOP Ignominious: Rand Paul …Ebola And "GOP Wants To Help African-Americans!"

In Libertarianism, MSNBC's Chris Matthews, Paul's use of the Ebola, Rachel Maddow, Rand Paul on October 12, 2014 at 2:22 PM

You know Rand Paul has issues with credibility (plagiarism, misinformation, shiftiness). I know Paul is not supportive of individual rights despite his claim to some sphere of Libertarianism. On camera, Paul  told Rachel Maddow he would have worked to modify the 1965 Civil Rights legislation as it related to open access for all people. In response to questions from Maddow, Paul clearly fell to a rambling mess of gobbledygook surrounding a themes of he would not be in favor of forcing private business owners to serve people they did not wish to serve with race as the differentiating factor.

Paul evasive (Maddow Interview Part 1…7:23 minute mark; Part 2 …6:00 minute mark)

In July of this year, Paul responded to a follow-up question about his remarks to Maddow. Paul denied his remarks as certainly and matter of fact as his Republican red tie. Watch the first 1:24, minutes of this clip.

Before we briefly probe Paul’s serial plagiarizing text and speech components (without any form of attribution), let’s make a quick stop with Paul at a Kentucky university speech to a group of medical studentsI will not devote moderate amounts of bandwidth nor web page space to an entire Paul speech of 39 plus minutes including questions. I have linked to the a speech segment in which Paul clearly tells of his affinity for and utility of misinformation. 

  1. Google   Misinformation
    1. false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive.
    Choose languageAfrikaansAlbanianArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CroatianCzechDanishDutchEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitianHausaHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIrishItalianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKhmerKoreanLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalayMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianNepaliNorwegianPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSerbianSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSwahiliSwedishTamilTeluguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduVietnameseWelshYiddishYorubaZulu

Paul and his take on mischievous misinformation with the unarguable purpose of deceit for personal gain. 

It is critical to note, Paul spoke to a group of young aspiring medical students outside the realm of politics. Credible people would probably not offer an inner core of deceit tot he young and influence-able, especially those who study for medical certification with a resultant Hippocratic Oath that direct relates to Medical ethics. An Oath with a foundation in honesty and impeccable veracity. Paul doesn’t possess either trait.

Paul’s pathological inclination to deceive and misrepresent has served him well in arenas where people offer fertile ground for sowing his deceitful seeds. Hence MSNBC’s Chris Matthews seeming allure for Paul, despite all evidence of Paul’s Chameleon-ism. The opposite manifest when Paul took his deceit to Howard University and sprinkled the audience with patronizing and condescending drivel about how the GOP was more historically beneficial for black people than the Democratic party. His remarks were insulting to the learned audience; he flopped. 

The Rand Paul Road show with GPS navigation settings on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue continues with exaggerated deceit, lies and comedic statements. 

Paul’s use of the Ebola virus to join other in his party on yet another pre-election fear campaign is typical and without surprise. A writer for The Fifth Column along with a sub-headline quote from The Daily Beast illustrates Paul’s penchant for use of sensational topics for political gain, while practicing ‘real’ GOP politics in the course of his Senate seat.

Rand Paul, Republican Senator from Kentucky, recently told conservative radio host Laura Ingraham that Ebola “could get beyond our control” and speculated: “Can you imagine if a whole ship full of our soldiers catch Ebola?”  

Saying “it’s a real mistake to underplay the danger of a worldwide pandemic,” Paul, doing his level best to overplay the danger, told Glenn Beck: “I think I said this the last time I was on your show a couple weeks ago, I said that I’m concerned that political correctness has caused us to underplay the threat of Ebola.” Er, um, because the people dying of Ebola in West Africa are black? I’m confused… Anyway, I thought the reason not to let panic spread was because, you know, panic is bad and we should have a rational and informed public rather than an irrationally fearful one.

Why do I sometimes think of Sarah Palin when I hear Paul’s ramble incoherent oratory? Ebola as an item of fear for political gain? Speaking of Palin, I hope no one from Wasilla contests the 1600 Pennsylvania address posted above.

How about this one from the inimitable Paul. First, he agrees to go on camera with the safe zone Wolf Blitzer and the ever obvious Right leaning CNN. The GOP pseudo-candidate claims the GOP wants to help African-Americans. You will notice he separates himself from the GOP (“they”) and shrouds his sophism in truism. The GOP not only hasn’t “gotten into the African-American community” the party has enacted innumerable measures that are so obviously anti African-American Paul’s remarks are an insult.

“I think in the Republican Party, the biggest mistake we’ve made in the last several decades is we haven’t gone into the African American community, into the NAACP and say you know what, we are concerned about what’s going on in your cities and we have plans,” he continued. “They may be different than the Democrats, but we do have plans and we do want to help.”

 For sake of clarity: “……say you know what, we are concerned about what’s going on in your cities and we have plans,” he continued. “They may be different than the Democrats, but we do have plans and we do want to help.”

Seriously Rand Paul, seriously? Even if there was one elected official in the GOP who might be inclined to “go there” think of the reaction from the 92% white party. A party m many with overt racists, bigots in the millions, and an equal number of the intolerant ? Does Paul seriously believe Fox News would support such? How about the reaction from Limbaugh, Beck and Ingraham. Paul’s (over-the-top) insults the majority of progressives. Do you believe uber wealthy oligarchs like the Kochs, Adelson and other would allow any member of the GOP to enact Paul’s lie?

If the NAACP officials in the St. Louis area find any redeeming qualities in the chameleon Paul, the organization should re-think its potential effectiveness. Paul’s only reason for journeying to Ferguson Missouri was to camera-hound for people who might be inclined to buy into his B/S. Did Paul visit the community days and weeks after Mike Brown was summarily executed by the white cop? Has Paul asked for any investigation into the shooting?


He is conspicuous in this list!

var icx_publication_id = ‘14291’; var icx_copyright_notice = ‘2014 TheProgressiveInfluence’;


Bergdahl Reading Ayn Rand, Jared Miller As Libertarian, and Edward Snowden As A Ron Paul Sycophant.

In Bowe Bergdahl, Hullabalo, Libertarianism, Race and Sexuality, Tea Party, the Kochs, University of Washington Institute for Study of Ethnicity, WISER on June 13, 2014 at 9:17 PM

Why are Ayn Rand’s writings and Libertarianism so prevalent in our news and current events? 

Over the past few years the word “Libertarian or Libertarianism” has eased into the everyday fabric of the nation. An ideology that seems to represent a false premise from its early infancy (In the US) through its current state of being. “Give me the liberty to do whatever I want and give me 100% privacy, I want small government, allow me to deny rights to others and do not charge me any taxes!” The ridiculousness of it all.

Libertarian ideology and the movement seems to attract Americans who seek an idyllic state without realization people destroy ideal states. People turn what could be utopia into movements that can and do attract crackpots and opportunist.  Example, there may have been conservatives who actually thought the Tea Party was going to be good for the nation. Is it a coincidence the very people who started and funded the Tea party are also Libertarian? Wonder those predominately older white Americans who embraced the 2009 Tea Party did so with consideration of existential opportunity for racist groups, militia, and a platform for talk of armed revolution? 

A 2010 WISER, University of Washington Institute for Study of Ethnicity, Race and Sexuality, study (poll) delineated a perspective on the Koch Tea Party and, for me at least, a perspective on the many Libertarians.

The data are compelling, and provides a validating foundation for my premise regarding the commonalty of the Tea Party and “so-called” libertarians. Progressives, independents and truly concerned conservatives (all seven of them) should take note. We should take note of the WISER Study and Hullabalo’s analyses while contemplating people like Edward Snowden (Ron Paul sycophant), Jared Miller (whacked-out Las Vegas killer embraced Libertarianism among all things anti-US), and guilty via his reading and rumors about his parents: Bowe Bergdahl. Bergdhal’s insertion with Snowden and Miller is for sake of points related to libertarianism and fringe elements vs. actual associative linkage. 

Hullabalo provides and “easy-to-read” assessment analysis of the charts. My reason for posting the graphics relates much more to modern-day manifestation of young white males perpetrating acts based on ideology that is not only divisive it is negatively effusive.

Libertarian ideology is not only shaping GOP politics, it is influencing society via attracting some who in the long run will be judged as undesirable. 

The Kochs via the Tea Party and the 2010 mid-terms shaped federal governance for many years to come.

Let’s consider for a second…..

The Kochs gave conceptual birth to and funded the early Tea Party.

The US public has turned on the Tea Party like falling off the face of Mount Rushmore. 

Gallup December 13th, 2013
Opinions of the Tea Party Movement Since 2010

As of May 2014, the Koch’s assessment of the political environment and current strategy of forsaking the movement are Libertarian.

The Koch brothers have claimed the ideology for many years with only recent declaration from Charles Koch he is not a Libertarian. From David Kochs 1980 vice-presidential run for the White House to nascent mega-million donations to the GOP, Charles Kochs last month commented to the NY Times as follows:
Writes the Times’ Nicholas Confessore: 
Since 1980, the Republican Party has moved closer to the Koch family’s views on government regulation. Its rising members now court the Kochs and like-minded donors at twice-yearly “seminars” that the brothers organize. In 2012, David Koch was a delegate to the Republican National Convention. 
“I think the Republican Party has a great chance of being successful and that’s why I support it,” Mr. Koch told reporters at an American Prosperity reception in Tampa, Fla., that year. “The Libertarian Party is a great concept. I love the ideals, but it got too far off the deep end, and so I dropped out.” 
Ron Paul is a Libertarian celebrity. As a ‘star’ libertarian, he stands as a man who has a history of a disgusting racist newsletter (during the 1990s) and who has been reported as far closer to white supremacist for comfort. I have avoided mention of his mantra of legalizing heroin during times when very young white people are using the substance as a drug of choice. As I re-read the last sentence it looks like I failed to avoid mentioning heroin abuse after all.

Yes, Paul and the Kochs are Libertarian. 

My central reason for mentioning Libertarianism relates to a millennial white male demographic group that has denizens who embrace the ideology. There appears an increasing affinity for the ideology among young men who are shaping our world in ways that could prove terminal. Media is reporting this week, Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s has a libertarian connection. Bergdahl’s parents are reported as libertarian (unable to confirm to date) and the Washington Post and other sources are reporting the captive often wrote zany passages and was a follower of Ayn Rand:

Bergdahl and Ayn Rand 

“Bergdahl also developed Ayn Rand–ian ideas about finding “complete freedom”: On June 27, he sent an e-mail to his friends titled “Who is John Galt?,” a reference to the hero of Ayn Rand’s novel “Atlas Shrugged,” about individualism in a dystopian America. 
I will serve no bandit, nor lair, for i know John Galt, and understand . . .” Bergdahl wrote. “This life is too short to serve those who compromise value, and its ethics. i am done compromising.”
Three days later, Bergdahl walked off his post.

On the last page of his journal, the Post reports, Bergdahl imagined “a story about one going-crazy-to wander the earth alone.”

Apparently Bowe Bergdahl former POW, had a fascination with Ayn Rand and carried a copy of “Atlas Shrugged” wherever he went. It was one of the possessions he mailed home to his best friend Kim Harrison before he went missing.

The Raw Story recently published a piece that adds additional perspective on Libertarian impact on our society. Since, I have acquaintances who embrace Libertarianism, at least in part, I will not comment farther after The Raw Story piece. My over-riding point is the impact of conservatism that reaches the psyches of people who show signs of deep rooted psychological issues.

Basically, I am hearing the name Ayn Rand for more than is comfortable and her name is prevalent based on philosophies other than her commendable writings on civil rights.

Salon published a piece on June 14th, 2014, that you must take a few minutes and read. You simply must do so, even if it means skipping the piece from the Raw Story posted below.  

Libertarian host who inspired Vegas killers: They were ‘victims,’ murdering cops saves lives (via Raw Story )

A libertarian gun activist — who was convicted on weapons charges after he carried a loaded shotgun in downtown Washington, D.C. — this week defended two people who recently went on a shooting rampage in Las Vegas, killing two police officers and…

Libertarianism…Be Careful A Launch Point For Plutocracy

In 1980 Libertarian Party platform, Chris Hayes, Clive Bundy, David Koch, Eric Bohlert, Far-right conservatism, Libertarianism, Media Matters, MSNBC ALL In, Public Religions Research Institute on April 14, 2014 at 7:55 PM

I from time to time, hear people (always a white male) self-identify as ” libertarian.”  They use the word and ideology with a great deal of affinity while expressing disdain and contempt for the GOP.  Some  even express they are not conservative.

Of course, you and I both know libertarians are as far from the original construct. I believe I took a liberty there that my friends who claim libertarianism might find not to their liking: the original construct. While, early theorist may have coined the phrase around an ideology with a core nucleus of freedom to do as one wishes, modern day libertarianism is nothing more than a metastasized conservative movement with denizens who are predominantly younger white males. 

The movement has also attracted segments of the population that are far from tolerant of others, and segments who have taken individual freedom to the level of elitist individualism. Moreover, the movement has two uber wealthy plutocrats (Charles and David Koch) who have openly espoused selfish-degraded levels of anti-federal government views, while advancing state’s rights as a core principle.  

Is there any wonder Clive Bundy, the Nevada farmer, has been reported to have received support from the Koch’s Americans for Prosperity? Chris Hayes, MSNBC ALL In and Eric Boehlert, Media Matters, discuss the classic example of libertarian state’s rights. It is truly unfortunate the movement also attracts an element of white supremacy and white nationalists. Let’s be honest, Ron Paul, noted celebrity Libertarian,  not only placed his name on his 1990’s (racist) newsletters, he has been captured in close cohort with the Ku Klux Klan, and other supremacist groups. In that context, the following definition of Libertarian does not seem to apply to all Americans.

What is Libertarian?

The libertarian or “classical liberal” perspective is that individual well-being, prosperity, and social harmony are fostered by “as much liberty as possible” and “as little government as necessary.”

These ideas lead to new questions: What’s possible? What’s necessary? What are the practical implications and the unsolved problems?

Below are a number of different takes on the libertarian political perspective from which you can deepen your understanding; also be sure to check out the videos in the sidebar.

According to The Machinery of Freedom by David Friedman, Open Court Publishing Company, 1973.
The central idea of libertarianism is that people should be permitted to run their own lives as they wish. 
According to Libertarianism: A Primer by David Boaz, Free Press, 1997. 
Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others. Libertarians defend each person’s right to life, liberty, and property-rights that people have naturally, before governments are created. In the libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves used force-actions like murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, and fraud.
According to Funk and Wagnall’s Dictionary
lib-er-tar-i-an, n. 1. a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or conduct…. advocating liberty or conforming to principles of liberty.
According to American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition, 2000.
NOUN: 1. One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.
The Challenge of Democracy (6th edition), by Kenneth Janda, Jeffrey Berry, and Jerry Goldman
Liberals favor government action to promote equality, whereas conservatives favor government action to promote order. Libertarians favor freedom and oppose government action to promote either equality or order.

I have referred to the following study in the past. I will re-post key components of the study and link the full report (via pdf and via Scribed) for you perusal. The Public Religions Research Institute shows the movement is outside the realm of a main-stream society and has not developed with inclusivity for all as a underlying reality. 

Public Religions Research Institute The 2013 American Values Survey: In Search of Libertarianism in America 

Libertarians By the Numbers: A Demographic, Religious and Political Profile

By:  | 
110613.Libertarians1 320x207 Libertarians By the Numbers: A Demographic, Religious and Political Profile
Larger Version

The recently released American Values Survey found that consistent libertarians make up seven percent of the American public, while an additional 15 percent have libertarian leanings. The Graphic of the Week explores the unique profile of this increasingly important political constituency. 

Compared to Americans overall, libertarians are composed of a much larger portion of men than women. More than two-thirds (68 percent) of libertarians are men, while 32 percent are women. They are also racially homogeneous, with nearly all (94 percent) libertarians identifying as non-Hispanic whites. They also skew significantly younger. More than 6-in-10 (62 percent) libertarians are under the age of 50, including one-quarter (25 percent) who are under the age of 30. 

Libertarians have a distinct religious profile as well. A majority of libertarians identify as white mainline Protestants (27 percent) or religiously unaffiliated (27 percent). Roughly one-quarter (23 percent) of libertarians identify as white evangelical Protestant, while only about 1-in-10 (11 percent) identify as Catholic.
Although libertarian political beliefs—supportive of marijuana legalization while opposed to minimum wage hikes—make them somewhat unique, their political behavior closely resembles that of other conservative constituencies. In the 2012 presidential election, fully 8-in-10 (80 percent) libertarian voters say they supported Mitt Romney, while only 5 percent say they supported Barack Obama. Notably, however, 14 percent of libertarian voters report that they supported a third-party candidate. Close to half (45 percent) of libertarians identify as Republican, compared to only five percent who identify as Democrat.

Taken together, the demographic, religious and political characteristics make libertarians unique in American politics today. To learn more about this constituency and for other findings from the 2013 American Values Survey: In Search of Libertarians in America, please check out the full report (pdf.).

Or you can view the report via Scrid (below)

Report graphic highlights

Awesome Screenshot Capture and Annotate report pages. We will comment below in compliance with Public Religions Research Institute guidelines and policy.

Read More after the break below

Report via Scribd

I posit there is little to no difference in modern-day libertarianism and Far-right conservatism. In fact, as the ideology exist today, I find libertarianism shares GOP demographics and in many cases espouses ideology further Right then the GOP.  If you read the 1980 libertarian party platform (from which David Koch ran as a VP candidate), you will quickly see the GOP of today …follows the money.

As to the graphics above, on second thought, I will not comment farther. 

When a political movement exist almost exclusively with one racial demographic, it attracts elements of society that can and will take society to its lowest denominator.

Kochs of Old, Kochs of New: Money And Persistence

In Ayn rand, Libertarianism, Top 20% on October 29, 2013 at 3:40 PM


David Koch on his uber wealth…..

“……David Koch joked about his good fortune in a 2003 speech to alumni at Deerfield, where, after pledging twenty-five million dollars, he was made the school’s sole “lifetime trustee.” He said, “You might ask: How does David Koch happen to have the wealth to be so generous? Well, let me tell you a story. It all started when I was a little boy. One day, my father gave me an apple. I soon sold it for five dollars and bought two apples and sold them for ten. Then I bought four apples and sold them for twenty. Well, this went on day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year, until my father died and left me three hundred million dollars!

In 1979 and 1980 Charles Koch joined Ed Clark seeking the “right-wing America” presidential nomination. The libertarian ticket leveraged Charles Koch’s ability to fund their campaign, yet lose the opportunity to represent the American Right while garnering only 1% of the conservative vote.  The libertarians lost the nomination to Ronald Reagan.  Ronald Reagan went on to defeat Jimmy Carter, and the United States took an elitist economic spiral for the nation’s top 20 percenter (s). We are seeing the tragedy of Reagan’s trickle-down (supply-side) economics as we watch the nation’s top 20% income earners separate from the majority of the population at a level that is nothing shy of astounding. 

A quick peep at Ayn Rand

Ayn Rand Quotes: 

Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual). Ayn Rand

Man’s unique reward, however, is that while animals survive by adjusting themselves to their background, man survives by adjusting his background to himself. Ayn Rand

The quotes show Ayn Rand as a model of libertarianism and by default an influence on the Kochs and the libertarian movement.

A Wiki perspective


She supported rational and ethical egoism, and rejected ethical altruism. In politics, she condemned the initiation of force as immoral[3] and opposed collectivism and statism as well as anarchism, instead supporting a minarchist limited government and laissez-faire capitalism, which she believed to be the only social system that protected individual rights.


Although she rejected the labels conservativeand libertarian“,[167] Rand has had continuing influence on right-wing politics and libertarianism.[7] Jim Powell, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, considers Rand one of the three most important women (along with Rose Wilder Lane and Isabel Paterson) of modern American libertarianism,[168] and David Nolan, one of the founders of the Libertarian Party, stated that “without Ayn Rand, the libertarian movement would not exist”.[169]

The 1980s Clark/Koch Ticket

If you can avoid the likeness to modern-day conservatism you are probably a conservative. If you are not aware of just how the 30 plus years old platform serves as a basis for 2008 (forward) Kochism, you are undoubtedly unaware the influence of the plutocrats on the GOP.  Money speaks!  If the Kochs will expend $200 million on initiatives to repeal of defund the ACA, imagine the money spent to work towards removing Barack Obama from the White House. You might want to take it a step farther. Imagine the money they will spend to uproot and bury any vestige of progressive thought and democratic principles (lower case “d” intentional). 

An author from History Commons compiled an interesting an apropos screed on the 1980 Clark/Koch run for the presidency. The short piece is based on a New Yorker article and delineates the 1980 effort to dismantle the preponderance of federal regulation (and associated agencies).

Oil billionaire David Koch runs for vice president on the Libertarian Party ticket. David and his brother Charles are the primary backers of hard-right libertarian politics in the US (see August 30, 2010); Charles, the dominant brother, is determined to tear government “out at the root,” as he will later be characterized by libertarian Brian Doherty. The brothers have thrown their support behind Libertarian presidential candidate Ed Clark, who is running against Republican Ronald Reagan from the right of the political spectrum. The brothers are frustrated by the legal limits on campaign financing, and they persuade the party to place David on the ticket as vice president, thereby enabling him to spend as much of his personal fortune as he likes. The Libertarian’s presidential campaign slogan is, “The Libertarian Party has only one source of funds: You.” In reality, the Koch brothers’ expenditures of over $2 million is the campaign’s primary source of funding. Clark tells a reporter that the Libertarians are preparing to stage “a very big tea party” because people are “sick to death” of taxes. The Libertarian Party platform calls for the abolition of the FBI and the CIA, as well as of federal regulatory agencies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Energy. The platform proposes the abolition of Social Security, minimum-wage laws, gun control, and all personal and corporate income taxes; in return, it proposes the legalization of prostitution, recreational drugs, and suicide. Government should be reduced to only one function, the party proclaims: the protection of individual rights. Conservative eminence William F. Buckley Jr. calls the movement “Anarcho-Totalitarianism.” The Clark-Koch ticket receives only one percent of the vote in the November 1980 elections, forcing the Koch brothers to realize that their brand of politics isn’t popular. In response, Charles Koch becomes openly scornful of conventional politics. “It tends to be a nasty, corrupting business,” he says. “I’m interested in advancing libertarian ideas.” Doherty will later write that both Kochs come to view elected politicians as merely “actors playing out a script.” Doherty will quote a longtime confidant of the Kochs as saying that after the 1980 elections, the brothers decide they will “supply the themes and words for the scripts.” In order to alter the direction of America, they had to “influence the areas where policy ideas percolate from: academia and think tanks.” [NEW YORKER, 8/30/2010]

As we consider GOP attacks on specific federal programs, with consideration of the posted image, it seems Koch money still buys the focus of the GOP. 

The GOP is enacting significant reductions in SNAP funding over the next 10 years.  Cantor, himself, sponsored a bill to eliminate required payment of over-time pay. Imagine that; who do you believe that benefits? Is it possibly disproportionately beneficial to industrialist vs middle class workers?  You should have knowledge of Koch efforts to re-segregate schools in at least one North Carolina county. GOP efforts to change Social Security and Medicare are well documented. The 1980s list of government agencies earmarked for elimination would not pass even the most conservative 2013 GOP agency butchers.  The 2013 list, as stated by Ron Paul, is closer to five key agencies, including FEMA, EPA, and the Federal Reserve. 

Major Premise: The Kochs contribute lavishly to GOP candidates and initiativesMinor Premise:   Money buys influence in politicsConclusion:     GOP politicians are tethered to the endowed bidding of the Kochs

Yet, 47% of actual voters in 2012 voted for the Romney/Ryan Ticket.  Unfathomable!

%d bloggers like this: