Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Your cancer research funding at work (attacking the Tea Party)

    Your cancer research funding at work (attacking the Tea Party)

    What “medical research” will look like in the age of Obamacare

    Had I but world enough and time, I would write something original about the sickeningly stupid argument that the Tobacco industry and Koch brothers began planning for the Tea Party movement over a decade ago and long before anyone had even thought up the Stimulus and Obamacare legislation which actually sparked the movement in 2009-2010.

    The theory was developed because a study funded by the National Cancer Institute found that the Tobacco industry and Koch brothers advocated and organized for limited government, and even used the term Tea Party.  Because, as we all know, before the Tobacco industry and Koch brothers advocated for limited government and used the term Tea Party, no one had ever done that in the entire history of the United States.

    It is so stupid, and such an abuse of taxpayer funding, that one would have hoped it would die in the laboratory, but it was just the sort of crackpot theory to which the left-blogosphere inevitably would be drawn.  And it has.

    But since I don’t have world enough and time, I’ll quote from the post by Hans Bader (a sometimes guest contributor to Legal Insurrection and College Insurrection) at, Shades Of McCarthyism: Federal Government Funds Smear Campaigns On Tea Party, Kochs:

    A government-funded study — paid for by the National Cancer Institute! — says (ridiculously) that Big Tobacco and Koch brothers created the Tea Party. The study is now being parroted by Al Gore. The study is based on strange reasoning, such as the fact that one group funded in small part by tobacco companies used the word “Tea Party” in passing in 2002, a group largely unrelated to the groups that later came into being and used it in 2009. (Because, obviously, no one had ever used the words “Tea Party” before the 21st century.) Never mind that much of America’s non-profits get money from tobacco companies, which fund countless causes, such as arts funding, domestic violence shelters, and non-profits across the political spectrum — the family behind Lorillard Tobacco is famously liberal and donates to liberal politicians. But Al Gore trumpets the study, relying on its taxpayer-funded status to buttress its credibility:

    A new study by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Medicine reveals that the Tea Party Movement was planned over a decade ago by groups with ties to the tobacco and fossil fuel industries. The movement was not a spontaneous populist uprising, but rather a long-term strategy to promote the anti-science, anti-government agenda of powerful corporate interests.

    As the Huffington Post notes, this “study” was “funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health.” The federal government has become so politicized that it can even use money intended for cancer research to demonize the administration’s critics. Here’s a link to the government-funded study by left-wing activists Stanton Glantz and Amanda Fallin. “Co-author, Amanda Fallin, PhD, RN, adds: ‘The records indicate that the Tea Party has been shaped by the tobacco industry, and is not a spontaneous grassroots movement at all.’” The reasoning is based on associating the Tea Party not only with groups that used the word “Tea Party” at some point in time, but also with completely different groups that existed back in the 1980s and didn’t use “Tea Party” terminology at all, but merely happened to share their opposition to big government. As syndicated columnist Jacob Sullum notes, the study argues that supporting “private property rights, consumer choice and limited government” can make you a tobacco-industry tool regardless of whether you get any tobacco money or not. He quotes from the study:

    “Echoing well-established tobacco industry arguments and the patriotic rhetoric of the [industry-backed] smokers’ rights groups, they argued for private property rights, consumer choice and limited government.”

    According to Glantz et al., then, supporting private property rights, consumer choice, and limited government makes you objectively pro-tobacco, whether or not you are getting any money from cigarette manufacturers. After all, those are “well-established industry arguments.” Likewise, if you oppose ObamaCare, you are doing the bidding of Big Tobacco, even if you don’t realize it.

    Despite the study’s logical leaps, the Huffington Post ate it up: “A new academic study confirms that front groups with longstanding ties to the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers planned the formation of the Tea Party movement more than a decade before it exploded onto the U.S. political scene. . .The study, funded by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health, traces the roots of the Tea Party’s anti-tax movement back to the early 1980s when tobacco companies began to invest in third party groups to fight excise taxes on cigarettes.”

    Your tax dollars at work! Whatever government bureaucrat funded this “study” doubtless took solace in the fact that this kind of thing is rewarded by the Obama administration.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    Something I read earlier in the week from 2006 was explaining the mindset of community organizing and how and why it seeks to gain power. The point was to gain control of political institutions or force those who control them to listen to you.

    This is the mindset of community organizing but this time it has the federal treasury to use to go after political opponents.

    We are dealing here with rule-redefining politics that involve seeking a Metamorphosis of the role of the state and the entire concept of the legitimacy of the individual in this country.

    Theories now exist not to be true but to gain implementation using political institutions to then change what people believe, what they value, and even the ability to think at all. All of this is under fire because we are dealing with an organized attempt to shift to a Common Good for the majority orientation. Just yesterday I was able to find a report from one of the principal’s involved with this shift to a Systems Thinking, planned society admitting that the theory was grounded in a rejection of the Technico-Rationalist mind.

    That kind of rejection should not be within the purview of any elected official or bureaucrats. The Tea Party exists because enough people still remember enough history to recognize the Individual has no legitimacy where political power now knows no real boundaries.

    David H. Koch is the 1st mentioned, primary sponsor of NOVA on PBS.

      Ragspierre in reply to secondwind. | February 15, 2013 at 11:59 am

      Yeah, it’s almost like he supports science or something…

      The Koch brothers are benefactors in a lot of areas, including the arts. Kinda like they care about the culture…

        theduchessofkitty in reply to Ragspierre. | February 15, 2013 at 12:21 pm

        Yep. The Koch brothers are big supporters of the arts and culture.

        But if I were their closest adviser, I’d tell them to follow the idea put forward by Professor Reynolds. Invest your money in more worthy endeavors – buy a few women’s magazines and a few media sources, thus directly or indirectly influencing the culture.

    Insufficiently Sensitive | February 15, 2013 at 11:44 am

    We can just imagine what a bonanza the leftist propaganda insustry received after the first, merely 850 billion dollar, Stimulus bill was enacted in early 2009. Talk about slush funds, the Democrats will need no others for decades – although, need or not, they’re making hay with taxpayer dollars while the sun-king Obama shines, as this ‘cancer’ study shows.

    cbenoistd | February 15, 2013 at 11:55 am

    We would have gotten away with it if it hadn’t been for those darn kids.

    LukeHandCool | February 15, 2013 at 12:01 pm

    Who knew Rick Santelli was a Koch Brother? Santelli doesn’t sound Dutch.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend