At Strategy Seminar, Koch Refers To Obama As ‘Saddam Hussein’ To Be Defeated In ‘Mother Of All Wars’

[Emit]

Today, Bradblog’s Brad Friedman reports for Mother Jones about a secret meeting that the right-wing oil billionaire Koch brothers held at a Colorado resort in June with hundreds of wealthy donors who plotted to finance right-wing causes and elect conservative politicians.

Friedman reports that audio he obtained from the conference reveals that Charles Koch alarmingly referred to President Obama as “Saddam Hussein,” saying that the right had to fight the “mother of all wars.” He rallied his guests to donate millions of dollars to help defeat Obama and boost other right-wing causes. Listen to audio of these remarks obtained by Friedman...

~snip~

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/06/312067/at-strategy-seminar-with-wealthy-guests-charles-koch-referred-to-obama-as-a-saddam-hussein-to-be-defeated/

[JustAnotherGen]

1. I wonder if anyone at DU

Who wants Hoffa to apologize because his language was 'inciteful' wants John Boehner to apologize because the Kochs' language was inciteful.

Someone making an argument that it is 'war like' what Hoffa said . .. Yet the Kochs come right out and say 'war' in regards to President Obama and no one is screaming for their heads on a platter at DU.

Go figure.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. It is stupid and repugnant and they hurt only themselves

The last part may be a silver lining but it's still wrong qand disgraceful. The Kochs should apologize and anyone else associated with those dreadful statements.

The rhetoric has to be toned down. Tempers need to be held in check.

I understand both sides are fighting for the existence of their paradigm but whipping up crowds to a fevered pitch will not help. It can only ruin the very society both sides claim to want to improve.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. The Kochs though are engaging borderline in sedition

you do understand this right?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

5. If they are referring to actual violence I support full prosecution under the law

If they are using asinine militant metaphors I support the fullest prosecution in the court of public opinion.

Ditto in both cases for anyone who claimed to be a progressive.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Alas thtey are engaging in sedition

like their forefathers did in 1933

[Nuclear Unicorn]

8. Political contributions are not sedition. Nor is political activism

The rhetoric is disgusting though.

Sedition is the crime of revolting or inciting revolt against government. However, because of the broad protection of free speech under the First Amendment, prosecutions for sedition are rare. Nevertheless, sedition remains a crime in the United States under 18 U.S.C.A. § 2384 (2000), a federal statute that punishes seditious conspiracy, and 18 U.S.C.A. § 2385 (2000), which outlaws advocating the overthrow of the federal government by force. Generally, a person may be punished for sedition only when he or she makes statements that create a Clear and Present Danger to rights that the government may lawfully protect (schenck v. united states, 249 U.S. 47, 39 S. Ct. 247, 63 L. Ed. 470 <1919>).

The crime of seditious conspiracy is committed when two or more persons in any state or U.S. territory conspire to levy war against the U.S. government. A person commits the crime of advocating the violent overthrow of the federal government when she willfully advocates or teaches the overthrow of the government by force, publishes material that advocates the overthrow of the government by force, or organizes persons to overthrow the government by force. A person found guilty of seditious conspiracy or advocating the overthrow of the government may be fined and sentenced to up to 20 years in prison. States also maintain laws that punish similar advocacy and conspiracy against the state government.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/sedition

Unless they literally advocate violence there is no sedition.

Militant metaphors are protected by the 1st Amendment and democraticundergound.com

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. They have in the past

And that is my point. And I am almost positive they are in the present. Like 1933 though they will be careful to keep those words off public eye.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. You can't prosecute people for your psychic feelings

Either there is an effort to violently overthrow the government or there isn't.

And you can't keep sedition out of the public eye. Either they use violence or they don't. It's pretty tell-tale when people use violence.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Psychic powers have little to do with actual historic fact.

But whaever. I realize now history is part of my psychic powes, who knew?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

14. You can't claim events in 1933 are a legal basis for prosecution in 2011

That's my point.

The actors and parties aren't even the same.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Actors are descendants, parties are descendants

And if you think this precise language has not been used we part company. Like 1933 we don't have the actual recording. Alas past is indeed prologue.

I chose not to put head in sand.

It gets worst, the modern day RNC has a lot in common with Calhoun Democrats in the 1850s as well.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

19. You claim parties are descendents

But then you claim a democrat is the reason republicans are guilty.

And treason does not work "corruption of the blood" in the US.

"Like 1933 we don't have the actual recording."

What do you have? Are we supposed to bring charges in courts of law? Do we detain people without charges? Pre-emptive civil war? What exactly do you propose we do to be on guard?

"I charge you with sedition and the lack of evidence proves the conspiracy" is not how any law-abiding civilian government acts. Let the GOP be the party of Gitmo, I want no such thing for progressives.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. You realize the kochs were part of that conspiracy?

Never mind...

For the record conspiracy is a legal term.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

21. Political activism is legal. People coming together in groups to discuss that activism is legal

That's not a conspiracy. Their policy preferences may be stupid, self-destructive and self-centered but unless you have evidence of an actual crime there is no crime.

It's no better than those silly Tea Party types claiming progressive policies are socialist and socialism is unconstitutional so that makes progressives guilty of treason. Progressives have a right to participate and elect their candidates to enact their policies when they carry majorities. Progressive campaign strategy sessions are NOT a conspiracy against the US government no matter how much some TPers want them to be.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. Alas we are talking past each other

Suffice it to say I do not believe they are JUST doing political activism.

Have a good day.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

24. Based on what evidence?

That's all I'm asking.

"I think" is not the basis for an indictment. You're certainly free to think but even then what would you have people do?

Sedition implies violence and so force is justified to stop it. Are you advocating using force to break-up meetings by the Koch brothers?

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. Based on their history

I realize that if they are, you will not learn of it until they act.

in this case truly...past is indeed prologue.

I realize people do not want to believe this...and will call it all kinds of Name's, but hell we are also facing a party that' has openly talked secession...

Have a good day.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

26. Whose history?

If people can be indicted for things other people did decades ago who would be safe? Are all democrats today guilty for JFK's involvement in Vietnam and the Bay of Pigs? Let's prosecute Obama for those fiascos just to be on the safe side.

Good grief.

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. Read on their role in the John Birch

Society, and I mean dad...let's not go into grandad.

This family has such a history.

I suspect you do not know, or want to learn...this.

[Scurrilous]

3. K & R

:thumbsup:

[otohara]

7. Why Saddam?

I just called Koch and asked why the Husein reference and the nice lady transferred me to a comment line.

[KamaAina]

18. What's Obama's middle name?

There you go. :eyes:

[gordianot]

9. In the end the Republican agenda is dismantling what Americans like most about Government.

So Democrats want to save Social Security, Medicare, Public Education, the right to Organize. If this is a truly conservative nation Democrats are potentially the real conservatives. Republicans are the radicals. 2012 promises to be a real watershed as long as Democrats do not embrace defeat from what should be real victory. To your values be true, compromise will not work in the current environment.

[Zax2me]

13. Pointing to bad behavior to justify yours?

What are you - five years old?

[w4rma]

16. Wars aren't won by the meek. (nt)

[Initech]

17. The Koch brothers are the real American terrorists.

[Angry Dragon]

22. I feel that the kock brothers are just terrorists

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. Selfish stupidity is not terrorism

[Angry Dragon]

29. What they are doing has nothing to do with stupidity

they have a well laid out plan to weaken this country
and that is terrorism