What’s the Difference between the Koch Brothers and the NAACP?
Is this some sort of trick question? Wait, don’t tell me: uhh…the Koch Brothers were a couple of brave civil rights protesters who were repeatedly beaten, clubbed, shot at, and attacked with fire hoses and police dogs in their tireless fight for civil rights during the 1950s and ‘60s. The NAACP is a small shadowy group of billionaires who purchase elections — entire legislatures, for that matter — through anonymous multi-million-dollar contributions to phony “charity” groups that aren’t required to disclose their donors.
Did I get it???
The Koch Brothers — and other secret billionaires who want to keep operating and controlling Congress without having to identify themselves — are falling back on a 1958 Supreme Court ruling, NAACP v. Alabama. NAACP v. Alabama was the ruling which allowed the NAACP to keep its membership list secret. Because of, you know, lynching, firebombing, shooting and every other imaginable punishment of any Nigra who just might be gettin’ a little too uppity.
A lawyer for Koch Industries claims that there have been Twitter threats against the Koch brothers. ooooohhhhh!!!!!
So far, this NAACP/Koch Brothers comparison has been upheld by a U.S. District Court judge, who stated:
[Americans For Prosperity and its employees and supporters] “face public threats, harassment, intimidation and retaliation once their support for and affiliation with the organization becomes publicly known. And although the Attorney General correctly points out that such abuses are not as violent or pervasive as those encountered in NAACP v. Alabama or other cases from that era, [gee, ya think?!?] this court is not prepared to wait until an AFP opponent carries out one of the numerous death threats made against its members.”
[sigh]
This ruling has been appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit where, hopefully, logic and sanity will prevail.
Labels: Koch Brothers, NAACP v. Alabama
posted by Tom Harper @ 4:02 PM
7 Comments:
I really wish this surprised me, but it doesn't. The Koch Brothers have no shame about using whatever legislation they can for their own ends. The problem is that for most Americans, they are WAAYYY under the radar. How can we change that? I think a lot of people would be totally outraged by their methods if only they knew about them!
SM: The Koch brothers have been dragged out of the shadows and onto the public radar to some extent in the last few years. But in a country where more people can name all of the Kardashian sisters than can name a single Supreme Court justice, I don't know how much more sunlight we can shine on the Kochs and other billionaires hiding under their rocks, or how much difference it would make.
They're good at confusing people. I see they recently put out a new ad talking about how they want to help the people of this country be more united. Such utter bullshit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qtxobump1BU
Jim: LOL. These damn regulations are what's causing all of America's problems. That ad would be hilarious if it weren't for the fact that a lot of viewers might actually fall for it.
"Knock! Knock!" Wake up folks, ever since the 14 Amendment was passed the Rich and the Corporations have been pushing court cases through trying to get themselves judged as people just so they can use this Amendment created to equalize freed slaves with everyone else.
Of course when a person makes a legal mistake or commits a crime including anybody in their household, EVEN if they didn't know about it - they are liable unlike a Corporation and yet the Corporations want a double standard, all the benefits of being people with none of the liabilities.
Citizen's United is just the latest of these legal victories but they aren't done yet. As you can all see
Erik
Erik: That's exactly what they're getting -- all the benefits and protections of being a person with none of the liability or responsibility. Scalia's death has been a slight setback in the corporate personhood agenda, but we need more than that. The 9th Circuit is supposed to be the most liberal, so hopefully they'll overturn the decision that NAACP v. Alabama applies to anonymous donors to phony "charity" groups.
Post a Comment
<< Home