What gives anyone the impression that the Koch brothers have anything to do with XL Keystone project?
Congressmam Mike Pompeo (R-KS) sold his interest in an aerospace company connected with the Kock brothers five years before coming to Congress, yet reporters for the LA Times reported that he had sold his interest in the company right before he entered Congress. How could they mess up this detail when first publishing the story? (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/06/nation/la-na-koch-brothers-20110206/2)
This story seems to confused cause-and-effect to some degreee. . .
The Koch Brothers have financed opposition candidates to President Obama'a agenda.
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20110210/koch-brothers-positioned-be-big-winners-if-keystone-xl-pipeline-approved
At what point do we separate the candidates, their campaigns, and their contributors? Or better yet, at what point do we start insinuating conspiracies in connection with campaign donations and legislative interests? Just because the Koch Brothers offered extensive donations to GOP candidates does not imply that they have bought or were trying to buy their votes for the Keystone Pipeline.
It seems to me almost a specious argument to allege that GOP Energy Committee members are on the dole with the Koch brothers, since they have been stalwart opponents of President Obama and his aggressive, progressive agenda.
Are pundits now suggesting that donors must not only disclose the amount of private donations, but now we must know WHY they sent in the money?
And so what if the Koch brothers profit from the Keystone Pipeline?
It would also appear that the environmentalists are making the case for a connection of interest, more likely because they do not want any financial support for Obama's opposition:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/05/koch-keystone-xl-pipeline
In this report:
To be approved as an intervenor, Flint Hills [ a subsidiary of Koch Brothers] had to have some degree of "business interest" in Keystone XL, Carole Léger-Kubeczek, a National Energy Board spokeswoman, told InsideClimate News. Intervenors are granted the highest level of access in hearings, with the option to ask questions. The Energy Board approved Canada's segment of the pipeline with little opposition, and Flint Hills did not exercise its right to speak.
A spokesman from the National Energy Board made the above comment. And what difference does it make if the Koch brothers' subsidiary had a "business interest"? The United States and Canada also have a business interest in this project.
Congressman Waxman demanded that the Koch Brothers come before the House Energy Committee to ask if they had any interest in the Pipeline extension. Shortly after these requests were rebuffed, Waxman did not bring up the issues again.
The real issue, in my opinion, is that Democrats simply do not want a GOP fundraiser to profit, because without a doubt those profits will aid more candidates to edge out Democrats in November 2012, 2014, and so on.
Money is having a declining relevance in electoral politics. Besides, the Koch brothers are supporting causes as well as candidates who are carrying a greater degree of respect and agreement with voters across this country, people who are tired of tax and spend and waste and fraud that takes from the taxpayer to make government bigger, but not better.
