David Koch, one half of America’s most politically influential pair of brothers, said Sunday that he doesn’t understand why people think he’s an “evil billionaire” and identified as a “social liberal.”
During her interview with Koch for ABC’s “The Ten Most Fascinating People of 2014,” Barbara Walters told the reclusive billionaire that he wasn’t “well liked” because of his conservative politics.
“I’m basically a libertarian and I’m a conservative on economic matters, and I’m a social liberal,” Koch responded.
Walters then asked Koch why he uses his wealth to elect socially conservative candidates if he supports gay rights and a woman’s right to choose.
“Well, that’s their problem. I do have those views,” he said.
“What I want these candidates to do is to support a balanced budget,” he added. “I’m very worried that if the budget is not balanced that inflation could occur and the economy of our country could suffer terribly.”
Asked whether he thought it was fair that he’s able to influence elections because of his vast wealth, Koch said that he obeys federal limits on how much he can contribute to individual candidates.
But Koch and his brother, Charles, also donate large sums to support the arts and other philanthropic causes. Walters asked why, then, Koch has developed a reputation as an “evil billionaire.”
“Well, I don’t understand that,” he said.
Watch below via ABC News:
Oh, he’s evil alright…
http://dangerousintersection.org/2014/04/11/david-kochs-1980-insane-libertarian-platform/
What would the Devil tell you he was if you asked him?
An Angel or a Devil?
Please.
Hmmm, wonder why Mr. Social Liberal pours millions of dollars into opposing same sex marriage. And then there’s his obsession with Voter ID laws, too…
A recent issue of Forbes magazine showed how much various super-rich people have donated to charity over their lifetimes, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of wealth. I don’t have the issue handy, but while the “evil” George Soros has (so far) given away about 35% of his fortune, David Koch has given away about 3% of his. While 3% of $40B is a lot of money, it pales in comparison to his political contributions.
It is also disingenuous to say he has only given in compliance with the law when he has bribed every pocket possible to change the laws to allow him to contribute vast amounts of money in order to change even more laws.
I believe he might be socially liberal. It doesn’t matter though, for him it’s all about the $$$$ and whoever will help him have more.