Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
July 27, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Truthdig Bazaar
A Life in Oxford

A Life in Oxford

Anthony Kenny

Losing the News

Losing the News

By Alex Jones

more items

Ear to the Ground
Email this item Print this item

Koch Bros. Tell Their 50,000 Employees How To Vote

Posted on Apr 21, 2011
Flickr / freddthompson (CC-BY)

An article in The Nation reveals one practical implication of the Citizens United ruling, which granted free speech rights to corporations and made it perfectly legal for companies like Koch Industries to intimidate their workers into voting a certain way.  —YL

The Nation:

On the eve of the November midterm elections, Koch Industries sent an urgent letter to most of its 50,000 employees advising them on whom to vote for and warning them about the dire consequences to their families, their jobs and their country should they choose to vote otherwise.

The Nation obtained the Koch Industries election packet for Washington State—which included a cover letter from its president and COO, David Robertson; a list of Koch-endorsed state and federal candidates; and an issue of the company newsletter, Discovery, full of alarmist right-wing propaganda.

Legal experts interviewed for this story called the blatant corporate politicking highly unusual, although no longer skirting the edge of legality, thanks to last year’s Citizens United Supreme Court decision, which granted free speech rights to corporations.

“Before Citizens United, federal election law allowed a company like Koch Industries to talk to officers and shareholders about whom to vote for, but not to talk with employees about whom to vote for,” explains Paul M. Secunda, associate professor of law at Marquette University. But according to Secunda, who recently wrote in The Yale Law Journal Online about the effects of Citizens United on political coercion in the workplace, the decision knocked down those regulations. “Now, companies like Koch Industries are free to send out newsletters persuading their employees how to vote. They can even intimidate their employees into voting for their candidates.” Secunda adds, “It’s a very troubling situation.”

Read more.


Banner, End of Story, Desktop
Banner, End of Story, Mobile

Watch a selection of Wibbitz videos based on Truthdig stories:

Get a book from one of our contributors in the Truthdig Bazaar.

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every day.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, April 26, 2011 at 7:19 am Link to this comment

There is still no evidence, of any kind, that the Koch Brothers or Koch industries demands that their employees vote a certain way.

ITW’s odd conspiratorial argument concerning “regional voting averages” is impossible. - How would anyone, for example, deduce how 5000 employees voted in a small metropolis of, say, 300,000 registered voters? - Fanciful, unhinged, and queerish conspiracies are unhelpful.

Lastly, assuming Koch Industries must be evil because they’re different, particularly when those assumptions are born of spite, is never good enough.

This is the oddest reprinting of an article I have seen yet on TruthDig.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 25, 2011 at 2:24 pm Link to this comment


Did I have a choice whether to give or not? 

I have never been a member of a Union except in Ohio when I was a young man.  I went there in the late 50’s with a promise to work with a crew of special skills people.  But this Blue Collar Job happened to be in a Union State…..In order to work I had to join the Union.  And since I wasn’t a Union member, I had to pay an up-front fee.

A few years later in California I had to pay Union dues because it was a State where I didn’t have to join a Union but by law I had to pay Union Dues.

So your defense of Corporate malfeasance simply because Unions misuse funds collected is sick.

I keep saying that using the old dodge that “my thief is OK because your thief is worse”, is twisted logic.

The three you mentioned all complained about Corporate “White Collar” malfeasance which is
absolutely the same thing as “Blue Collar” malfeasance, so why not call criminal acts out and go after the criminals, whether they are your Political Party or not?

One sure way to recognize an enabler of corruption is to see a person defend his crook while pointing a finger at a straw man crook insisting its your crook.

This type behavior is what is killing America.  And the Rich and Powerful sure do appreciate you, but not enough to let you into the Elite.  That’s reserved for them.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, April 25, 2011 at 10:32 am Link to this comment

barefoot, Cliff, ITW:

All your corporate examples are about VOLUNTARY contributions, admitedly with lots of pressure attached. Would that union dues and their disbursements were so VOLUNTARY to the members. Unions don’t have to pressure their members when contributions are mandatory.

Report this

By barefootdesigns, April 24, 2011 at 6:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I, too, worked at a very large corporation where the CEO was the local chairman of United Way.  The company’s goal of 100% donations showed up as a voucher on my desk one morning with a very high donation amount already printed in.  As a young secretary, I was at my limit for discretionary spending just to live.  I was outraged at the pressure and tore up the voucher, notifying my immediate boss of my actions—he agreed but was afraid to resist himself.  They next sent me to the Director of Personnel who made it quite clear that this threatened my job.  I mentioned coercion and stated my documented distrust of United Way.  A week later they called me upstairs to the slick top public relations executive who served me tea in a china cup and told me that my refusal was foolish—United Way was wonderful.  I asked for figures on just ONE of the represented charities and said I’d give if it looked effective.  The answer, two weeks later, was appalling and I said no, I like to give directly, which I do.  I managed to keep my job, and could go on for pages about other workplace pressures, like being asked at the time of job application if I’m going to get pregnant, etc.  Suffice to say that this type of workplace pressure is rampant and disgusting.  It should be entirely illegal, of course.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 24, 2011 at 4:00 pm Link to this comment

So did I Inherit the wind

But they asked ever salaried employee to authorize an amount (based on salary ) every month and donate it to the Republican Party.  Their stated Rationale was that the Republican Party was the best for the Company business and therefore for the employees of the Company.

You didn’t have to contribute, but since the deduction was from the paycheck they knew who did and didn’t.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, April 24, 2011 at 2:39 pm Link to this comment

I once worked for a corporation that pushed very, VERY heavily for employees to have regular deductions taken from our salary to:

a) Make donations to charities like the United Fund because it made them look like a corp with a “public minded workforce”, ie, a marketing tool that cost US, them employees, but not the corporation.

b) Contribute the PAC they supported. I looked at the list of people they supported with this PAC, like Alfonse D’Amato, and decided I would rather be unemployed than be blackmailed into supporting a prick like D’Amato, who was against anything and everything I was for, and vice-versa.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Kochs employed some high-powered statisticians to enable them to make reasonable guesses how their employees were voting.  Suppose, for example, they have 5,000 emps in a congressional district and, based on demographics, they can presume that 3,000 of them are Democrats.  And suppose in that race they don’t see the basic numbers change.  They may WELL assume that those 3,000 didn’t “obey” their voting instructions and seek to ensure they don’t advance or get the bonuses, etc.  Would the Kochs do it if it’s legal? I’d bet they would. Would they go further to the illegal? I wouldn’t doubt it.  If Steve Jobs will (His use of a tracking file in iPhones and iPads may be an FCC legal violation—and he hasn’t yet answered Sen. Franken about it), why wouldn’t the Kochs?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, April 23, 2011 at 8:54 am Link to this comment


So it’s obvious that the Koch Brothers are telling their employees how and who to vote for.  What you have to do now is equally obvious.  Tell us all how you know this.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 23, 2011 at 5:05 am Link to this comment

In the union I belong to I vote for the public candidates who best represent what I want in governance, same goes for the elected union officials.

As for Koch and company, I vote with my wallet.

Report this
Virginia777's avatar

By Virginia777, April 23, 2011 at 2:09 am Link to this comment

Go Right Young Man:

I would also say to take your marbles and go elsewhere, but since you have no marbles, and clearly won’t leave, by all means stay and post your lame denials of the obvious.

Report this
Virginia777's avatar

By Virginia777, April 23, 2011 at 1:50 am Link to this comment

rico, suave:

Yes, the Koch Bros., are telling their employees how to vote.

Report this

By samosamo, April 23, 2011 at 12:48 am Link to this comment


I agree with you on this rico. When I worked for a larger than
most banks, a memo and email went around recommending
people to vote for that would be helpful for the bank’s
agendas. Being not of the same mine I voted how I wanted
which if I remember may have included one of the people the
bank recommended. I hope the kochs are not more intense,
demanding and observational with their employees.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, April 22, 2011 at 7:45 pm Link to this comment


“There seems to be a difference between telling someone how to vote or else (Koch Brothers) compared to a recommendation.”

Is that really what the Kochs are doing? Or is that the way The Nation wants you to think that’s what they’re doing?

Can you show us any proof that the Kochs have threatened to fire people for voting the wrong way?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, April 22, 2011 at 7:16 pm Link to this comment

Mr. Carson,

I am making fun of, and completely making light of, a matter which I consider to be one of the dumbest reprints of an article from The Nation.

This narrative which has the Koch Brothers depicted as evil cartoon characters, characters who should never be allowed to voice their opinions, say, as labor unions do each and every day, is the very epitome of childishness and censorship. 

Let me see if I understand.  The Koch Brothers are suspect of evil deeds by way of “Telling Employees How To Vote” for simply using a medium available to the Girl Scouts and labor Unions?  Do I not have this straight? 

Most on this thread have found the Koch Brothers guilty of forcing or demanding votes from their employees.  Based on what? Simply by voicing their collective opinions to their employees?  Is this too not correct?

Look around you.  In the United States everyone is entitled to their opinions.  That includes the Koch Bothers and Koch Industries. 

The hypocrisy here is glaring.  And you’re here to say that Rico and I are childish and should take our marbles someplace else?  Because we have different opinions?

This entire subject is the perfect illustration of how most here simply cannot abide by others viewing the world differently.  Look in the mirror.  The idea of Rico holding a different point of view angers you.

Report this
RayLan's avatar

By RayLan, April 22, 2011 at 7:09 pm Link to this comment

It doesn’t really matter who they vote for since Oblahma and Boner do whatever they (Koch) say anyways.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 22, 2011 at 5:08 pm Link to this comment


I agree with you and am dismayed that two on this thread who profess to be adults can act like such jackasses on such a serious problem.

rico and GRYM act borderline stupid.  Since I seriously doubt they are ( Remember isn’t GRYM a 25 year investigator? ) they seem to be here to annoy the others on this thread.

Could you two guys go out and play with the rest of the children and leave us adults alone to seriously discuss this issue?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 22, 2011 at 4:54 pm Link to this comment

Koching UP

If one does not see the parallels with the following tenth point of Fascism, they are blinded by tea bags, we have seen the Republican Koch connection;  in Wisconson, Michigan, New York, now Washington and other states! Piece by Piece, bit by bit!....... 

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated

Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

Hey girl scout guy, the girl scouts are challenging your hegemony, maybe they need to be crushed or made powerless with the Unions!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 22, 2011 at 4:34 pm Link to this comment

Koch This!

Hey guys, this is number nine from the who, dat dog fascist handbook. This reads like the well choreographed Republican play book!  Piece by Piece, bit by bit! ......

9. Power of corporations protected

Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.

Hey GRYM your fetish with the girl scouts is starting to worry me!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 22, 2011 at 3:29 pm Link to this comment

Yeah right, the Koch brothers would not try to influence anything, just because they are billionaires and put their pants on different than everyone else!

It is a never ending game for the wealthy, to accumulate more wealth, all I can say is the Koch brothers are so lucky to have unhired or hired shrills like GRYM to sell their well hashed rehash!

Go GRYM,..... after all the racket of making money off of other peoples labor is the noble way, especially if one can keep them controlled or manipulated by any means they can!

As the Robber Barron wqs bragging to the other Robber Barron ‘I can hire cronies (GRIM) to screw the rest of the people anytime I want’!

Little by little we see the evolving of this opportunist monster, taking away the unwashed peoples rights ....bit by bit,.... piece by piece, this is so obvious to me, and would never have been able to happen 10 years ago, and some of the crap like in Wisconson not even a year ago!

The grand Scheme is working very nicely don’t you think!

Report this

By Existentialist, April 22, 2011 at 2:36 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hey all,

Don’t bother debating potential persona management bots like rico
suave.  They need to be called out for what they are: polemicists.

They contribute only a sound and a fury signifying nothing.  Debating for
the sake of debating is to be a dog chasing its own tail.  It’s not
contributing to a rich and engaging discussion that’s full of learning.

He said it himself when he wrote he does not care what Chomsky has to
say about the world.  That was a straw man.  It wasn’t about Chomsky
personally, but a well-sourced article that was written.

Call out the polemicist, and move on.  Share knowledge and info, like
Hedges articles, and then start organizing at the community level.

Report this

By Big B, April 22, 2011 at 2:30 pm Link to this comment

OK rico and GRYM..we get it, corporation=good! union=bad!

Large corporations have been trying to influence the votes of their employees for decades. The end game of course, is to eliminate their votes alltogether.

Hey, this is capitalism and democracy in its purest form. Money buys influence and votes, and thus eliminates the self determination of the masses.

Keep that nose to the grindstone people, the american dream can still be achieved by the lowliest serf. All you need is some ambition and a dream! (and a truck load of cash)

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, April 22, 2011 at 2:11 pm Link to this comment


First, according to the narrative here, the Koch Brothers have no reason to mandate how their employees vote.  These men can control other’s thoughts and minds.  Let us, at the very least, get that part straight.  There is no need to invent some odd narrative about the Koch Brothers threatening employees to vote their way.  That’s just being gullible and stupid.

Second.  The Girl Scouts are pure evil.  If your local union supports the Girl Scouts, well, then your local union is evil also. - Wake the hell up!  Back away from the cookies!!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 22, 2011 at 1:54 pm Link to this comment

Hey Mack!  The Koches issued 50,000 Ipads and want employees to turn on the camera when voting, thank goodness for GPS!

I sent the Koch Brothers a letter asking them to send you and Ipad, but they said they need to have the capacity to fire someone before they issue Ipads!

Yes, Mack you are right, it is control and manipulations the little things to keep the people off balance. This is a more comprehensive list of 14 fascists points than Britts, but check out the end paragraphs, I believe written in 1938!..... I found it very profound:

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 22, 2011 at 1:38 pm Link to this comment

There seems to be a difference between telling someone how to vote or else (Koch Brothers) compared to a recommendation.

So the Koch Brothers are forced representing 50,000 employees, as usual it is all in the telling!

Girl Scouts are not even allowed to see their cookies at Home Depot where I live, but our local Union shop building suppliers allow girl scouts to sell cookies, so this means unions are nicer!

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, April 22, 2011 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment

Mr. Carson,

Where in the above article or in this thread did you find an argument defending immoral conduct by claiming that the immoral conduct of another is worse and, therefore, “our” immoral conduct is thus acceptable?

I see nothing immoral or unjust when labor unions send out newsletters advocating positions and candidates which favor their respective causes.  It’s correctly referred to as freedom of speech.

I do, however, have a problem with those evil little Girl Scouts plying us with their materiel inducements in the form of tasty little cookies.  Now that’s pure evil at play.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, April 22, 2011 at 12:44 pm Link to this comment


You used the word “corrupt” and now you’re describing the conduct as “immoral.” I only asked if the behavior really was corrupt, and now immoral. I don’t know. I certainly agree with you that we need to fight corruption and immorality, particularly from our employers and public officials.

When I compared the Kochs to the SEIU, I wasn’t trying to excuse, defend or condemn any behavior. I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of those who are in high dudgeon over the Kochs while giving the unions a pass. If you think the Kochs are corrupt and immoral, then you must hold the SEIU to the same charge. I’m not making the claim of corruption and immorality. You are.

I only cited Chomsky because he is one of the champions of the contingent, and therefore fluid, definitions of words. Is he not primarily a linguist? I don’t care one way or another what Chomsky thinks about society today.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 22, 2011 at 12:30 pm Link to this comment

Lets see now, the Koch Brothers do not like unions so they promoted Wisconson Walker to end the heinous concept of collective bargaining, you cannot run a business or a state with stinking unions around.

So the arguments from the few anti Union folks here seems to make the Unions sound to be bad guys, because they lobby governemnt to close down governemnt and all business like the Koch brothers? This is your pointless point, over and over a point of the witless. Saying something is the same over and over makes it so?

One more thing many,  many Union people are consecutive Republicans and where born that way, so they too for many years have been strong union supporters.  Just because they are Republicans does not mean they have their own lobbyists. Many have been voting against their own best interests for years, only now some of the brighter ones have finally begun to realize it.

Unions have fought long and hard to protect the working folks and labor. This has been the same damn fight since the Robber Barron Days. Wonder where this opposition comes from, sure it comes from the unwashed masses!  Unions have had their corruption and other problems, now it seems to be governments turn in the barrel of corruption.

Unions have brought and kept workers wages, benefits and rights on the table, otherwise the sweat shops of Bangladesh or Egypt would be more likely what we would be seeing, where wages of 30 cents a day in Bangladesh are normal and $2.00 dollars a day in Egypt,.....I bet those numbers sound mighty good to Wal Mart!

Yeah, I trust the trick-down Koch’s to call their compassionate shots, and I trust them to tell me what they will give me, this is so much better than using collective bargaining through a stinking Union…....So in effect, We should just Take the candy from the nice man, and we don’t need your parents or anyone else running interference.

People should be aware, ....only because of Unions have non union wages been higher then they would otherwise be. Only a moron or liar would argue this point. Of course their are an inordinate number of liars and morons.

Wal Mart,Home Deposit both do not want no stinking Unions, because then higher wages or benefits would cut into their meager profits. Boy how dose Wal Mart suffer through operating with unions in Europe?.......Those damn Commies!  Ignorance such a great tool!

Its a class thing folks, so it works like this, money controls things,.... the more money the more manipulation and control, so screw the little guy,  the idea of the unwashed masses collectively asking for a anything, especially a better life, wages, and benefits, this is what the benevolent elite created the trickle down theory for, ungrateful sots!

Part time,.... part time jobs the thing of the future, well after all,......they do keep the unemployment numbers down!  Yeah, its all those stinking Unions fault! ..... Viva La Koch’s!

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 22, 2011 at 12:27 pm Link to this comment

What can I say rico?

I don’t see how what I wrote could be interpreted as you seem to do.  And the Chomsky article also was not about that at all.

Read carefully what I said and what Chomsky says about what is wrong with our society today.

That is what it is all about - not Girl Scouts, and any one point of view.

It is about defending immoral conduct by claiming that the immoral conduct of another is worse and therefore our immoral conduct is thus acceptable.

The point is all immoral conduct is immoral and when we as a people begin to realize that, and prosecute the immoral individuals, groups, Political Parties, Governments, Religions, whatever, then and only then, will peace on earth reign.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, April 22, 2011 at 11:46 am Link to this comment


Is it “corruption” for an organization to explain to its members why they should vote one way and not another in an election? I don’t know.

For the Kochs to tell their employees, “You may lose your jobs if you vote Democrat”, is emphatically not the same thing as the Kochs saying, “If you vote Democrat, you’re fired.” But in perfect Chomskyite linguistic slight of hand, that’s the way The Nation phrases it to sound.

When the Wisconsin Teachers Assn. told its members that children would suffer if the Governor got his way, do you think ANYBODY read that to mean that union thugs were going to go out and beat up little kids?

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, April 22, 2011 at 10:33 am Link to this comment


The hypocrisy in this article and on this thread is precisely the point.  For-Profit labor unions have been practicing these techniques for decades, however, it was never labeled mind control and/or intimidation until very recently.

How dare the Koch Brothers use union endorsed tactics for the purpose of their own political or social beliefs.  It’s not fair.


DAMN those Girl Scouts!  Look at what they started.  For all of our sake we need to read the fine print on those boxes of delicious cookies.  There is evil set in those boxes.

Come to think of it; it can’t be an accident or coincidence that those cookies taste good.  It never occurred to me until today.  It’s a barely veiled “inducement” to support the Girl Scout Advocacy Programs.

Holy shizal my eyes are open!

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 22, 2011 at 10:00 am Link to this comment

Seems that a great problem for the divided of America is that they embrace their type of immoral conduct with the excuse that the “other” guys are worse.

Our world is not a world of mutually exclusive events.

What the Koch Brothers advocate is not excusable because the Unions do it too.  Nor is the Republican corruption excusable because Democrats are also corrupt.

I don’t think our society will ever get out from under the yoke of the oppressive one, or the other, as long as our defense is to blame one and not the other.

What is needed is to blame the behavior and identify all who practice that behavior and go after those types no matter what they call themselves.

Go read Chomsky’s current article in Truthdig.  I think he sums it up as it is.

Report this

By Maureen Carr, April 22, 2011 at 9:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The funny thing here is that the Koch bros are fooling their employees into
thinking that their votes even matter. Whatever the outcome of any election the
Koch bros will do just fine and their employees will continue to think that their
voices were heard and they helped change things for the better while it continues
to be business as usual.

Report this
rico, suave's avatar

By rico, suave, April 22, 2011 at 9:36 am Link to this comment

Can you imagine the SEIU or AFSCME or the UAW telling their members that if they didn’t vote Democrat, they stood to lose their wage scale, their Social Security, their health care, their pensions, education for their kids, even their jobs? Why, that sort of WalMart-esque intimidation would be beyond the pale! They would never stoop to such demagoguery!

Next thing you know, the Kochs will be skimming some of their employees’ pay to fund their favorite PACs. Can you imagine those unions doing that with their members’ dues; the dues collected manditorily in most cases from employees without their consent?

And aren’t most big unions “incorporated”? I know the one I belonged to is. So if you don’t think commercial “corporations” should enjoy free speech, are you willing to extend that disapproval to union “corporations” as well?

I smell a lot of hypocrisy out there.

Report this

By Jim Yell, April 22, 2011 at 9:17 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I agree completely with Berniem in his comment above. There really isn’t anything else to say.

Exept the Koch brothers would be in jail if they didn’t have so much money.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, April 22, 2011 at 8:58 am Link to this comment


Did you not read the entire article from The Nation?  The Koch Brothers have no need to pull the levers themselves.  The Koch Brothers control the minds and thoughts of their employees.

If anyone be interested I know where the Koch Brothers learned of this technique of Intimidation and Thought Control.  From the Girl Scouts Advocacy Network.  Yes!  The Girl Scouts have a Public Policy and Advocacy program right on their Web Site.  They actually endorse this, so-called, Advocacy Program in their newsletters!!!!!!!

This is frightening stuff. Pure evil. wink

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 22, 2011 at 8:54 am Link to this comment

Well said berniem

“but it is men who make laws and evil men who make the laws that now allow politicians and their masters to render equality and justice a tragic joke!”

And for the One World Government Financial Cabal who actually runs the World, never forget Ansel Rothschild’s statement of long ago “Give me control of a Nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws”. 

The Koch brothers bankrolled the Tea Party.  Their goal is to return the world to the Robber Baron days as a minimum, with an ultimate goal to get freedom for the Koch Brothers to do anything without restriction.  Something like the “Law of the Jungle” where the Power of Life and Death accrues to the most powerful.

The Koch Brothers family fortune originated in the Soviet Union doing business with the Communists and the family brought that philosophy with them to the
United States.  That is who the Tea Party is beholden to and whom we need to mightily resist.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, April 22, 2011 at 8:37 am Link to this comment

Thought Control and Intimidation.

Just prior to election day, usually the last weeks of October, every labor union in America prints and sends out their respective newsletters to millions of members with “recommendations” and “endorsements” on how to vote.  It never occurred to me that labor unions were practicing intimidation.  I honestly never understood that if this union endorsed intimidation failed to persuade, that mind-control would be employed.

This kind of thing cannot be tolerated.  There should be a law.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 22, 2011 at 7:13 am Link to this comment

Maybe the Koch employees should let the Koch Brothers pull the lever for them, then it would seem in much better taste? I am glad to see this article here. 

How does one boycott the Koch brothers?

It is nice to know the Koch Brothers have my best interests at heart. 

I remember reading something about Wal Mart telling their employees if they voted for something they could loose their jobs?

Why do we suppose, the old sudden interest in destroying the Unions? 

You know people like this, with their greedy value system, they just cannot help themselves, .....well actually they do!

Report this

By Jomo, April 22, 2011 at 4:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

@Miko, actually corporations do not have the same right to freedom of speech that natural persons have. Ask yourself: why do we not see cigarette or whiskey commercials on television? Is it because cigarette and whiskey makers don’t want to market their products on television? No. It’s because government regulations won’t allow them to do so. The government restricts their freedom of speech, and such restriction has been found constitutional.

The fact of the matter is that a corporation is merely a commercial entity. It cannot vote (at least not yet). It is illogical to me that a commercial entity lacking voting rights should have the same freedom of speech that a natural person possesses. Really all the Citizens United ruling does is shift power to the natural persons who control corporations.

Report this

By samosamo, April 21, 2011 at 11:58 pm Link to this comment


I saw a couple of birds the other day that I could not identify.
Upon finding the correct book I found that it was an old
species called koch-in-the-mouth-cum-sucker. The correct
book was wrong because it was for extinct species and like
the Ivory Bill Wood Pecker that was thought extinct, up comes
this other odd pair of the koch-in-the-mouth-cum-suckers.
Hopefully the government won’t put them on the endangered
species list.

Report this

By Miko, April 21, 2011 at 10:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“the Citizens United ruling, which granted free
speech rights to corporations “

This is incorrect.  Free speech rights are a
fundamental part of existence, the First Amendment
protects free speech rights, and the Citizens United
ruling did nothing but recognize the fact that the
First Amendment exists and as such that laws made
under the assumption that it doesn’t exist are
unconstitutional.  The CU decision is three steps
away from anything to do with free speech rights, and
certainly couldn’t grant them since they’re something
that all persons and groups of persons inherently

Report this

By purplewolf, April 21, 2011 at 7:12 pm Link to this comment

How nice that the Koch brothers have decided to make up your mind for you. “Elect to Prosper”? Certainly not you, their workers and the part of if the government thinks you should be paid $50/hr and you are only $30/ hr part, makes me want to cry for their losses, not. They don’t give a riff about their employees.

Governments minimum wage of $7.25/ hr is not even a living wage. Especially if you have a family to support. Actually Mitch McConnell-R wants minimum wage to be less that $2/hr and newly elected Teabagger Gov. La Page of Maine has rolled back the child labor laws for people 20 y.o. and under and that they are to be paid $2/hr less than those who are older.After the first 180 days the wage will go up, but wait, no one will hold the same job on day 180 and after and you can start out all over again. And who would encourage these Repugs and Teabaggers on the minimum wage issue-the Koch Brothers. Many people 17 y.o. and older actually work to pay for an apartment,a car, their bills and other needs and paying them 2 dollars an hour less should not be legal.Also it will discourage companies in Maine from hiring anyone older that 19. This is the future if we let these corps, billionaires and the GOP and their ilk continue to drag America “We want our country back,” to the dark ages of wage repression, no benefits or safe working conditions.

Now for the Koch voting and their recommendations. Regardless of what you are told, your vote is not a secret. When you register to vote, a number is written on the ballot next to your name. All one has to do is look at that ballot number and trace it back and see who you voted for who. How do you think know how many black, whites or other ethnic groups voted and for who. They trace it back to your name.

What I want to know is, are the Koch brothers going to send their hired goons-which I am certain they have-along with you to the voting locations and escort you through the whole voting process to assure you vote for their choices or are they going to have your ballots pulled to see just who you voted for and if you defy them, are you going to be fired? Or worse?

It’s been proven that there have been voting irregularities and lately it has been mostly to the GOP side. Between taking your voting rights away as some members in government want to decide the senators for you and not let you select them,big business telling you who to vote for and false ballots cast for one party over another, why waste your time voting in the n first pace.Others think they know what is best for you and you don’t.

You could always tell them you do not vote because of your religion. Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in voting, they say it is up to Jehovah to decide who is best for the position.

Report this

By samosamo, April 21, 2011 at 6:50 pm Link to this comment


I’m wondering if that goddamn supreme court decision
allowed corporations to mandate voting in the corporate
offices so as to track each employees vote.

That neocon supreme court decision needs overturning right

Report this

By berniem, April 21, 2011 at 6:48 pm Link to this comment

The threat to one’s livelihood based upon their political views or potential vote is as much a form of terrorism as Obama’s publicly acknowleged torture of Bradley Manning! Both are designed to discourage freedom of thought and expression and should be prosecuted as crimes against constitutional democracy. Our current system of governance as implemented is criminally corrupted and the means by which one faction or the other of our pseudo-two-party dictatorship vie for power and control is treasonous. Of course, as we all know, this is a nation of laws and not men; but it is men who make laws and evil men who make the laws that now allow politicians and their masters to render equality and justice a tragic joke!

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook