Soros group raises stakes in battle with US neo-cons

FT.com Financial Times ^ | 1/11/02 | By James Harding in Washington

[griswold3]

I heard that yesterday and am searching for a non-Jew neocon. Can't find any. More and more evidence that the Democrats are bigots and racists. Has Al Sharpton returned to the plantation?

[purpleland]

"Socialism in America, bought and paid for by billionaires."

Socialism and "egalitarianism" are neoMarxists' schemes to overtake economic and ruling powers. I've never met an anti-capitalism socialist who was not an elite and who did not covet the power of Das Kapital! It's paradoxical.

[jagrmeister]

Every leftist crackpot agrees that right-wing "think-tanks" are the cause of GOP success. I don't but it for a moment. Sure, Heritage Foundation and their like influence inside-the-Beltway deliberations. But rarely do their views filter down to the people. I hear repeatedly from the Left that conservative think-tank opinions are sought and reported in the press but I can't think of the last time I read a Heritage Foundation thinker quoted in the news. So I don't believe it. And I think this is another case of the Democratic Party buying its own BS and chasing down a rathole. The Democratic Party made a temporary resurgence with Clinton and New Democrats. In other words, by moving right. You can't spend enough money to make leftist (sorry: progressive) ideas popular.

[inquest]

Even the "conservative" think tanks have to be wondered about. Take, for example, the American Enterprise Institute. One of its largest donors is the Smith Richardson Foundation. If you scroll to the bottom of its link you'll see that most of the groups it supports are either mildly or greatly left of center.

The Heritage Foundation and Cato Institute have similar issues. I highly recommend poking around the Green-Watch site that I linked to. It's quite fascinating.

[Nick Danger]

Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace — Left

Check that one again. I doubt many would label Hoover as 'leftist.' Milton Freidman? Newt Gingrich? Ed Meese? Thomas Sowell? Victor Davis Hanson? Leftists? Not in this Universe.

[jdege]

I was relying on http://www.csuchico.edu/~kcfount/thinktanks.html, which includes a quote from Hoover's mission statement.

The phrase "The overall mission of this Institution is, from its records, to recall the voice of experience against the making of war, and by the study of these records and their publication, to recall man's endeavors to make and preserve peace, and to sustain for America the safeguards of the American way of life" triggered my leftist-bullshit meter.

Had I seen the earlier part of the mission statement, "This Institution supports the Constitution of the United States, its Bill of Rights, and its method of representative government. Both our social and economic systems are based on private enterprise from which springs initiative and ingenuity..Ours is a system where the Federal Government should undertake no governmental, social or economic action, except where local government, or the people, cannot undertake it for themselves" I'd have judged the organization differently.

[white trash redneck]

Good money after bad.

[white trash redneck]

When Soros was circumcised, they threw away the better part.

LOL!!!

[inquest]

I doubt many would label Hoover as 'leftist.' Milton Freidman? Newt Gingrich? Ed Meese? Thomas Sowell? Victor Davis Hanson?

Follow the money, not the personalities. Among Hoover's top foundation donors over the past few years - the Bradley Foundation, the Monell Foundation, the Starr Foundation, the Peninsula Community Foundation, the Smith Richardson Foundation, the Packard Foundation, and the MacArthur Foundation - only the first three mentioned do not donate liberally to conspicuously leftist organizations (and even the third one's a bit iffy). The rest do.