After word came out that Koch-affiliated groups plan to spend thirteen gazillion dollars in the 2016 election, several media outlets cried foul. Ron Fournier had a piece concerning the evils of dark money:

Now we have the worst of all worlds: Gobs of money showered over Democratic and Republican candidates with precious little transparency. The 2016 presidential campaign will give rise to the next grim iteration of dark money: “The arrival of candidate-specific nonprofits, personalized vehicles for a politician’s supporters to raise and spend unlimited cash—completely clandestinely,” writes my colleague Shane Goldmacher.

Salon today is now predicting the end of the world.

This is not really an exaggeration. The yearlong project of hundreds of scientists to assess the current state of climate change concluded that its impacts are already being felt “on all continents and across the oceans,” and that we’re increasing our chances of experiencing “severe, pervasive and irreversible” consequences the more we continue to emit greenhouse gases. The absolute best-case scenario would be for us to reach peak emissions by the end of this decade, and abandon them entirely by the end of the century. That’s going to require the kind of effort that should have started decades ago, and, at this late hour, a near-Herculean push for major reform. We’ve literally run out of time for climate denial.

Let’s start with the Fournier piece. Let’s say that we do reveal the donors of these different Koch-backed organizations. Liberal activists are well-known for their ability to respect the private lives of people who donate to causes they don’t like (see: Mozilla CEOs and gun-owners in New York). If the various liberal lobbies get their hands on this information, they can and will go after them. And, it’s not just the lobbies that go after them, but federal agencies who are in charge of taxation and granting tax exemptions. It’s power waiting to be misused.

Sure, it’s annoying not knowing who gives money to what. In an ideal world, it wouldn’t matter who we donate to because, at the end of the day, we’re all humans entitled to our own opinions. However, this world is less than ideal, filled with dark and evil spirits that seek to haunt those who donate to the wrong side of the political spectrum. This trend of funneling money will only grow because groups like the gay marriage lobby and the IRS will drive people to doing so. There is nothing to encourage free and open political donations.

As to the Salon link, I’m sometimes unsure as to whether or not to even give these types of panic attacks a response other than a mighty guffaw, but I’ll attempt to be civil – None of your predictions have been accurate so far, Climate Change Enthusiasts/Cultists. Why on earth should we believe you when you have a panic attack about this?

Now, unless the Koch’s are in a tower somewhere on a dark and stormy night, chanting “Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn,” I don’t see how they are going to destroy the world. Nearly a billion dollars in political donations won’t do it. Even the U.S. government admits a Death Star costs a lot more than that. So, unless someone can tell me how, exactly, the planet ends in delicious, freedom-loving destruction, I’m inclined to not believe them.

This is entirely typical for the media to react this way. Nevermind that, as has been mentioned many, many times, liberal donors have led the pack in terms of donations. Tom Steyer is consistently at the top of the charts, along with Bloomberg (funny, as it appears the more they spend, the less successful they are). Still, if the liberals want to soil themselves in panic over political spending against their interests, then let them.