SoylentNews

Billionaire David Koch Dies at 79

posted by martyb on Saturday August 24 2019, @12:28AM   
from the R.I.P. dept.

Quickkeen writes:

Billionaire industrialist David H. Koch, who with his older brother Charles was both celebrated and demonized for transforming American politics by pouring their riches into conservative causes, died Friday at 79.

The cause of death was not disclosed, but Koch Industries said Koch, who lived in New York City, had contended for years with various illnesses, including prostate cancer.

https://www.twincities.com/2019/08/23/ap-source-billionaire-david-koch-has-died-at-age-79/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/23/us/david-koch-dead.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/david-koch-died-conservative-donor-and-philanthropist-dead-age-79-2019-08-23/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/08/23/david-koch-dies-billionaire-leader-koch-industries-79/2094016001/

---

Original Submission

• Re:Wow, 15 minute hate. Re:Wow, 15 minute hate. (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 24 2019, @02:42PM (1 child)

  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 24 2019, @02:42PM (#884761)

  Citizens United has nothing to do with the first amendment. The first amendment only applies to interactions between people and the government. Corporations are not people. They are comprised of people that never gave up their rights to give money or engage in free speech.

  What's more giving money isn't speech. At this point it is nearly improved to be convicted of bribery because of the judges that the Koch. Brothers had appointed.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	0		points
  Moderation		+1
  Insightful=1, Total=1
  Extra 'Insightful' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		1

• Re:Wow, 15 minute hate. (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday August 24 2019, @11:13PM

  by khallow (3766) on Saturday August 24 2019, @11:13PM (#884956) Journal

  The first amendment only applies to interactions between people and the government. [...] They are comprised of people that never gave up their rights to give money or engage in free speech.

  It's always interesting how dishonest people can get - here, deciding what free speech isn't really free speech. The obvious rebuttal here is that if you speak on behalf of a soulless corporation, you are engaging in free speech. Despite your claims to the contrary, it remains that the campaign finance law in question did violate the First Amendment rights of the people who comprise the corporation.

  What's more giving money isn't speech.

  Giving money for speech in an election. Not only is it a matter of free speech, it's a matter of the most vital exercise of free speech.
  
  But perhaps I'm thinking about this wrong? Perhaps, your speech isn't really free speech, but rather a noisy sucking of air, and the First Amendment doesn't really apply to those who disagree with me?

  Parent