Politico: Conservatives are pro-cancer!


Either that, or Politico hires some pretty sloppy writers.  Personally, I’m voting for the latter.

The background: Politico decided to write an article that attempts to answer the eternal question, For just how long will George Soros keep throwing money down the rathole which is the Activist Left*? It’s an interesting question in its own right – the article suggests that Soros is getting pretty darn tired of piling up his money in the policy equivalent of an empty field, then setting the pile on fire – but there was one throwaway line in the piece that made me roll my eyes at what fools these mortals be:

And — like Koch brothers’ philanthropy — the recipients of Soros’s largesse do not all fit into neat liberal-conservative constructs.

Soros’s Open Society Foundations, for instance, have contributed $431,000 since 1996 to the Cato Institute to fund its drug reform, civil liberties and anti-corruption programs. And the Kochs have contributed tens of millions to the arts and cancer research.

OK. Stop right there.

I agree with Soros’ funding of Cato being an eyebrow-raiser. That’s because: Soros is, bluntly, a liberal; Cato is, bluntly, a libertarian organization; and liberals and libertarians are natural ideological enemies.  Liberals like state action, libertarians do not; if one is funding the other, then there has to be an underlying reason for that**.  So far, so good… but Republicans, conservatives, and/or libertarians are NOT anti-arts and pro-cancer.  I am aware that all three are often sneered at as being anti-arts by, well, liberals – but then, the people doing the sneering also seem to think that self-indulgent, intellectual masturbation has a place in the arts in the first place***.  And I somehow missed the process by which private philanthropists funding critical medical research became contrary to the small-government principles that run through conservative, libertarian, AND Republican thought.

The ironic bit?  The author of the piece (Kenneth Vogel) probably thought that he was being fair and balanced to those dastardly cancer-loving Republicans, and everything.  But then, it’s the little things that trip up people.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

*We will table the discussion of the relative effectiveness of Soros and his funded groups in the political arena for another day.

**In this case it’s because the Democrats have graphically no interest in drug, civil liberty, and/or corruption reform anyway; and the Right returns CATO’s calls.

***Which I would be more or less resigned to concede that it does, except that I’m also expected to help pay for it.


Category: , ,

RSS feed

22 Comments Leave a comment

Post-It Notes!

phenne Saturday, April 30th at 9:10PM EDT (link)

Damn fine idea.

I will participate!

“Liberals ‘libel’ ’cause the can’t ‘stand up’”!

 

What struck me was$431,000 vs. tens of millions

mwmom Saturday, April 30th at 9:16PM EDT (link)

Soros gave $431K since 1996 … over 15 years, so that breaks down to a pretty paltry annual giving plan. Koch bros blow him out of the water.

Either you are reading it wrong or I am misunderstanding your point

Kyle-MI (Diary) Saturday, April 30th at 10:01PM EDT (link)

The $431K is only what Soros gave to CATO. It doesn’t state what he gave to other organizations. The millions given by the Koch brothers is to a lot of different organizations, although only for art and cancer research. I would bet that Soros has given a lot more to politically liberal groups.

Soros

Viator Sunday, May 1st at 6:48AM EDT (link)

He has given tens of millions and likely hundreds of millions to liberal(sic) causes. He gave $20 million+ to the Democrat Party and 501(c ) organizations during the 2004 elections alone. Much of the left is an astro-turfed Potemkin Village bought by Soros dollars.

 
 
 

Conservatives give to what they believe in

YnotNOW (Diary) Saturday, April 30th at 9:56PM EDT (link)

Liberals “invest” to get a Government (read “taxpayer:”) return on their investment.

YnotNOW
If not me, who? If not now, when?

They

gunslingr45 Monday, May 2nd at 10:13AM EDT (link)

know the taxpayers have more money than sorholes.

 
 

Why do lefty extremists HATE anybody that oppose them and then write about it?NT

bobojake (Diary) Saturday, April 30th at 10:06PM EDT (link)

So why does Soros fund those CATO programs?

kipling (Diary) Saturday, April 30th at 11:55PM EDT (link)

“Liberals like state action, libertarians do not; if one is funding the other, then there has to be an underlying reason for that**.”

What is that underlying reason?

See the second footnote.

Moe Lane (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 1:11AM EDT (link)

If Soros wants drug decriminalization, the Democrats won’t give him that – but maybe the Republicans will, if the libertarians are sufficiently eloquent on the subject of the War on Some Drugs.

Why does Soros want drug decriminalization?

kipling (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 10:31AM EDT (link)

Thanks Moe.

Why do you think Soros wants drug decriminalization? It does not seem to fit with his statist mindset.

I have my own theories but I do not want to diverge too far from your central point or start a war with the libertarian.

So they can tax it

catt (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 1:32PM EDT (link)

Soros is on the “legalize and tax it” side … libertarian types usually just want the legalize part of that.

Besides what part of the “statist mindset” is supposed to be against decriminalizing marijuana? The people who most strongly oppose decriminalization are SoCons. That doesn’t make them statists.

Statists and the Decriminalization of Drugs, catt

kipling (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 3:37PM EDT (link)

First, let me say that I am not calling Social Conservatives statist.

Second, statists are not a monolithic bloc. Their objectives, goals, and tactics often differ. My question is why a statist like Soros would want to take the control of drugs away from the state by decriminalization. Furthermore, he is using the libertarians – the supposed opposite of statists – to further his goal. My question was why.

Third, the “legalize and tax it” position makes sense [for a statist] because the revenue would probably go toward more statist programs.

Please do not jump to conclusions. I am simply exploring the deeper motive.

statism and decriminalization

catt (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 4:18PM EDT (link)

The state has far less control of marijuana distribution today than it would if marijuana were legal. If it were legal … in the way most liberals envision it … the cigarette companies would be growing it and selling it and the consumer would be paying taxes on it. And just like beer and tobacco today if you wanted to sell any of it you’d be breaking the law if you tried to do that without licenses and taxes and so on and so on.

In any case Soros wasn’t at Cato for anything related to marijuana. If you search for non-liberal sites discussing why Soros was there and what he said … the mystery disappears. It was a forum on Hayek and Soros has an indirect connection to Hayek and claims to be a fan.
http://reason.com/blog/2011/04/29/politics-has-made-george-soros

Thanks catt, So Decriminalization will lead to more state control

kipling (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 4:28PM EDT (link)

Thanks again catt. Your answer makes a lot of sense. Decriminalization will actually lead to more government and more government intrusiveness. We will need new regulators for the growing, production, and distribution of legal MJ. We will also continue to criminalize those who sell the product without government sanction. So now it will be a war on non-government sanctioned MJ.

Do the libertarians know they are being used or are they just happy to take Soros money?

overstated I think

catt (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 7:01PM EDT (link)

A war on non-government sanctioned MJ? I doubt it any more than there’s a war on non-govt sanctioned beer or tobacco now. Which is to say if you make your own beer or grow your own tobacco now it’s legal … share it with your friends and no problem … make a little extra to sell to people you know and it’s technically illegal but unlikely to get you into any trouble … do it on a large enough scale to attract attention without having the licenses and whatever and you’re asking for trouble.

As for whether the libertarians are being used … who was using who? Cato got a lot of publicity for an event that otherwise would have gone almost completely unnoticed. Soros said things … like saying he thought that regulation should be avoided whenever it can be avoided … that aren’t going to help him with progressives.

In any case the reason Soros was at the Cato event had zero to do with legalizing marijuana. Like I said just google for non-liberal coverage of the event and there’s really no mystery about why Soros was there.

Understated possibly

kipling (Diary) Monday, May 2nd at 12:22AM EDT (link)

First, let me just clarify that there is no war on drugs. It has become trendy to declare a war on everything these days – drugs, obesity, poverty, etc. These are not wars. They are not fought as wars. The strategy, tactics, and objectives of war do not apply. The stated enemy is not something you can use force upon to make it do your will. The whole war on _____ is simply a propaganda piece used to raise awareness and show how ernest we are.

Second, for the leftist, the legalization of MJ will only lead to more statism. It will be taxed. It will be regulated from the farm to the production to the distribution – just like tobacco and alcohol. Police and law enforcement will still enforce the law against no taxed contraband MJ – just like they do against tobacco and alcohol. It will foster its own black market – just like there is for cigarettes and home brew. What about the health problems caused by MJ? Will the leftist let people experience the natural consequences of their actions or will it lead to more demand for universal healthcare and government sponsored programs to aid the addicted. Will the MJ companies be sued just like the big tobacco companies? Will the MJ companies be forced to spend their profits on ads discouraging people to buy their products? The whole thing is a farce.

Third, Moe Lane spoke of funding not an event. I spoke of the funding not an event. The CATO institute accepts Soros money to conduct research that he will then use to further his own – not libertarian – goals. Clearly CATO plays the harlot here. Soros can say anything he wants and the progressives will not bat an eye. He is not running for office. He buys and sells them. They need him.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The problem is the premise

Frederick (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 1:37AM EDT (link)

Many liberals call conservatives “anti-art” or “anti-medical research” because we oppose Federal funding of same. They claim we want NPR and PBS to die because we want to remove them from Federal funding.

Nothing is further from the truth. I listen to NPR often enough, and don’t tell me it isn’t already commercialized, as I hear the names of all the corporations and foundations that “support” “public radio”. I like art, but I want it to be art that can be produced without my tax dollars paying for it (unless we’re talking about a monument, say, to American soldiers or a recently deceased ex-President or something like that). I want medical research, I just want the private sector to pay for it (they’re much better at figuring out what works, anyway).

The premise of so many liberals is that without Federal funding, there is no progress. It’s ludicrous, of course, but that’s their ideology. The government didn’t develop the iPhone. The government didn’t develop the personal computer. The government didn’t invent the airplane or the communication satellite. But stop funding for [liberal preferred program] and conservatives are suddenly anti-[special interest].

Follow Me on Twitter

“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
– - Thomas Jefferson, to Archibald Stuart, 1791

Socialists are like this, to the core

BA Cyclone (Diary) Monday, May 2nd at 10:01AM EDT (link)

And frankly, it’s nothing new. They just cannot help themselves — but they hate admitting that they are socialists.

Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.

We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

– Frédéric Bastiat, The Law — 1850

“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.” — James Madison

“Electing Republicans who don’t have the courage of their convictions may be easier in some circumstances, but it won’t save our country.” — Jim DeMint

BA Cyclone’s blog

BA Cyclone on Twitter

 
 

Hey Moe, You posted this about 40 some minutes after Mine went up on the same subject.

AceInTX (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 5:34PM EDT (link)

OOPS....I thought that was 3:40...and you posted that yesterday....

AceInTX (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 5:36PM EDT (link)

Heh

<—Wiping egg from my face

MarkTwain 3

Wait...I clicked to reply to your Raw Milk Story...how did I get on your "Conservatives Are Pro Cancer" post?

AceInTX (Diary) Sunday, May 1st at 5:39PM EDT (link)

I’ll try to post to that one again…we’ll see if I end up back here

MarkTwain 3

 
 
 

Soros has taken much more than given

ramjr Monday, May 2nd at 9:43AM EDT (link)

This administration has given, far more than been given, by George Soros. I wouldn’t doubt there are many ties we don’t know about yet with Soros and the Obama administration. I do know BILLIONS it tax payer funds went to ONE company that Soros is a huge part of. The Brazilian oil Company this administration gave the right to drill here in the United States and said openly by Obama, “We will be your biggest customer.” That’s JUST ONE entity we know of. I’m sure there are many, like the closed door deals we’re still finding about just in Obamacare slush-funds being exposed last week. Can’t wait to find more on the ‘transparency’