Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 483 posts

Re: Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

#151

Post by legulere »

medium_burrito wrote: post #91
flavor8 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's 85, his brother died recently, and he's very likely concerned about "legacy". According to Greenpeace, these assholes have poured $145,555,197 into groups that worked counter to climate policy changes being enacted (from 1997 to 2018). _Partisanship_ should be the least of his worries - he'll be remembered as a key figure who spurred inaction at the exact time that we should have been taking drastic action.

Greenpeace is directly working against nuclear energy, which is the best way to have clean energy in the future for a large portion of humanity.

Renewables are cheaper and faster to deploy now and getting cheaper.

Re: Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

#152

Post by flavor8 »

the-dude wrote: post #88
flavor8 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuinely curious - are you seriously a fan of the Kochs? What do you find admirable about them?

I have no opinion on the Kochs, I have too little information, and since I don't have any influence, I couldn't care less. I do care about civil discourse though.

Well then, take it from me. They're assholes.

Re: Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

#153

Post by a-nikolaev »

medium_burrito wrote: post #91
flavor8 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's 85, his brother died recently, and he's very likely concerned about "legacy". According to Greenpeace, these assholes have poured $145,555,197 into groups that worked counter to climate policy changes being enacted (from 1997 to 2018). _Partisanship_ should be the least of his worries - he'll be remembered as a key figure who spurred inaction at the exact time that we should have been taking drastic action.

Greenpeace is directly working against nuclear energy, which is the best way to have clean energy in the future for a large portion of humanity.

Nuclear energy is still dangerous. For example, it is still not safe against possible natural disasters (Fukushima), as well as from possible terrorist attacks. Imagine a 9/11 type of accident with a nuclear plant as its target. Potential danger is still extremely high, even if the chances of it are very small. We still cannot correctly estimate the risks of nuclear energy, after all these years.

Re: Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

#154

Post by jrumbut »

ceilingcorner wrote: post #148
anarazel wrote: post #2

Main Koch PAC: https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=... Total Independent Expenditures: $41,016,106 For Democrats: $92,936 Against Democrats: $8,887,525 For Republicans: $32,035,645 Against Republicans: $0 Koch industry donations: https://www.opensecrets.org/search?order=desc&q=Koch+Industr... Edit: Added link showing recent Koch Industry donations

That’s actually not very much compared to someone like Bloomberg.

The interesting aspect here is not so much the amount as it is the one-sidedness.

It shows Koch is still very actively making the same mistake.

Re: Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

#155

Post by karaterobot »

akudha wrote: post #90
jonstewart wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. To illustrate Samuel Alito just gave a keynote address to the Federalist Society a few days ago. The NY Times and NPR have recaps: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/13/us/samuel-alito-religious... https://www.npr.org/2020/11/13/934666499/justice-alito-pande... You can watch the whole thing for yourself here: https://youtu.be/tYLZL4GZVbA The speech is an attack on science, expertise, and common sense. It’s a MAG…

I saw parts of the speech and it was crazy. This is why appointing judges for life makes zero sense to me. If I become a supreme court judge at 45 and live to 75, I have a full three decades to change the direction of the country forever. This is very very scary. There should be a term limit for everyone in government like presidents do - mayors, congressmen, senators, judges...

The reason Supreme Court justices are appointed for life is so they are independent. That cuts both ways, protecting both people I agree with, and people I disagree with from having their verdicts influenced by outside forces. Sometimes this is inconvenient for me, but on the whole I prefer it over the alternative. The key is to hold the people who nominate and confirm these justices to account, since they are elected.

Re: Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

#158

Post by chmod600 »

colinmhayes wrote: post #119
chmod600 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The supreme court partisanship is overstated. It's brought out all the time as though the sky is falling, but typically when the court is tilted, side-switching magically appears. Roberts, Gorsuch, Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter all switched sides on major issues. Conservatives switch sides a lot more often, but perhaps because the court has been tilted towards Republican nominees.

Sure, but partisanship is getting much worse. The precedent has now been set to completely reject any nomination from the opposing party. That will lead to even more partisanship as nominating "moderates" no longer makes sense. We're in for a future of nothing but Alito's and Thomas's.

That's partisanship of Congress, not the Supreme Court.

When it comes down to real decisions by SCOTUS, they usually come out more moderate and narrow than you might imagine.

Re: Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

#159

Post by jaggederest »

chmod600 wrote: post #134
pmoriarty wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"when the court is tilted, side-switching magically appears" Two sides of a conservative position.

I mean Republican-appointed justices joining the Democrat-appointed justices in an opinion. Are you saying all nine are conservatives?

Are any of them advocating the seizure of the means of production for the workers? Abolish the state or private property? Devolve control into local worker's councils or other non-hierarchical means of decision-making?

The US, in general, does not have any non-conservative judiciary. Stare decisis by itself ensures that there is a strong conservative streak in the available pool of jurists. So yes, the Supreme court has center-left (Sotomayor), centrist (Breyer, Kagan), center-right(Roberts, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch), and reactionaries (Alito and Thomas), but nobody as far "left" as it has "right".

Historically, for example, William O. Douglas was about as left as the court has gotten, and he was more in favor of environmentalism and ending the Vietnam war than really aggressive left wing concepts.

Re: Charles Koch Says His Partisanship Was a Mistake

#160

Post by FireBeyond »

catawbasam wrote: post #84
gamblor956 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See a transcript of Alito's speech this week. It's a hour of ranting against democracy. He didn't even hide the fact that he doesn't care that gay marriage or other issues were approved by voters; he would judicially end gay marriage in the name of "religious freedom." But this freedom only extends to particular forms of Christianity, as Alito is quite comfortable with restricting the religious practices of Muslims a…

There is genuine work to be done reconciling gay marriage with the first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" Unfortunately Alito is more likely to add to the problem than to help resolve it.

Not at all. Allowing gay marriage doesn't prohibit your free exercise of religion. Don't approve of or believe in gay marriage? Don't marry someone of the same sex.

No religion has the right to demand of others that they respect its belief.

"You cannot, because my religion disapproves" is the religious first amendment version of "Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins".

Post reply on HN