• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Can we lighten up on the doomsday scenarios?

Their freedom requires your slavery.

If you are in line to indict donald trump, stay in line.

Republicans don’t trust women.

It’s pointless to bring up problems that can only be solved with a time machine.

The most dangerous place for a black man in America is in a white man’s imagination.

Polls are now a reliable indicator of what corporate Republicans want us to think.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

“Look, it’s not against the rules anywhere, but a black woman with power was dating and there has to be something wrong with that.”

It’s easier to kill a dangerous animal than a man who just happens to have different thoughts/values than one’s own.

Meanwhile over at truth Social, the former president is busy confessing to crimes.

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

Bad news for Ron DeSantis is great news for America.

There is no right way to do the wrong thing.

Let there be snark.

Republican also-rans: four mules fighting over a turnip.

Balloon Juice has never been a refuge for the linguistically delicate.

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

Trump makes a mockery of the legal system and cowardly judges just sit back and let him.

Bogus polls are all they’ve got left. Let’s bury these fuckers at the polls a year from now.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

Republicans would impeach Biden if he bit into a whole Kit Kat rather than breaking the sections apart.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / The Cure for Hurt Feelings

The Cure for Hurt Feelings

by $8 blue check mistermix|  March 5, 20118:38 am| 58 Comments

This post is in: Assholes

FacebookTweetEmail

After a $100 million donation to MIT, which prompts some serious ass kissing, David Koch’s boo-boo is all better:

“I read stuff about me and I say, ‘God, I’m a terrible guy,’ ” he said. “And then I come here and everybody treats me like I’m a wonderful fellow, and I say, ‘Well, maybe I’m not so bad after all.’ ”

And don’t tell me that a college won’t whore itself out for money:

His gift here means that one of the biggest donors to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, home to some of the top climate scientists in the nation, is an owner of a company that Greenpeace called “a kingpin of climate change denial.”

Koch Industries — which owns oil refineries, pipelines and consumer brands like Dixie cups and Lycra — responded that “it is Greenpeace that is the denier here — denier of any rational and honest dialogue on the underlying scientific debate regarding climate change.”

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Saturday’s European League Games on Television in the US
Next Post: Talk, Talk »

Reader Interactions

58Comments

  1. 1.

    The Raven

    March 5, 2011 at 8:44 am

    I think MIT is laughing all the way to the bank.

  2. 2.

    Comrade Javamanphil

    March 5, 2011 at 8:47 am

    It would have been $200 million if they’d swallowed.

  3. 3.

    Donut

    March 5, 2011 at 8:47 am

    Ah, there’s yer Librul New York Times, coming through with what amounts to a puff piece that rehabs the ol’ image just a little bit. Michael Cooper and editors give it just enough, some on the Left say he’s a bad guy but how could a guy who donates $100M to cancer research be all that bad? to make it “balanced” piece of “reporting.”

    Well-fuckin-done, Koch Industries media relations department!

  4. 4.

    JMS

    March 5, 2011 at 8:49 am

    All this has gotten me to thinking about what Koch Industries produces, anyway, and how complicit I am in enabling their evil, so I checked out their website. They seem to produce a lot of toilet paper (none brands that I use). Dixie cups I have used occasionally–doesn’t seem to be much in the way of alternative brands in bathroom size cups. I’m sure I have a certain amount of Lycra (but was it from before 2004?) in my wardrobe. The rest of it seems to be so far down the chain (lumber? minerals? chemicals?) that I imagine I’m supporting them somehow and not knowing it. Wonderful.

  5. 5.

    Clark

    March 5, 2011 at 8:49 am

    Sure they deny climate change, but what they are really interested in is gay marriage.

  6. 6.

    Donut

    March 5, 2011 at 8:49 am

    I mean, where oh where would Michael Cooper get all those details about Mr. Koch’s cancer? I’m sure David coughed all that up while supplying all those quotes in his hours-long interview with Michael Cooper.

  7. 7.

    bkny

    March 5, 2011 at 8:50 am

    koch’s personal wealth is est to be $12 billion. $200 million is a fraction of what it’s gonna cost mit to run that institute. amazing how that fucking pig can note the diminished funds going to nih — when it’s his bankroll that funds that idiotology that rejects scientitifc research.

  8. 8.

    Bernie Latham

    March 5, 2011 at 8:51 am

    Hardly any surprise that we would see a PR initiative with the goal of putting a friendly face on these two given the number of big, expensive PR firms in their employ.

    And not terribly surprising that Cooper would allow himself to used in such a manner.

  9. 9.

    katjam

    March 5, 2011 at 8:58 am

    My letter to the Editors of the NYT:

    David Koch’s gift to MIT is indeed generous, but his donation does not negate the damage he is attempting to do to our democracy, In Michael Cooper’s article Koch admits that government research funds for cancer may soon dry up perversely because of the political efforts of his Koch-backed Tea Party groups to clamor for government austerity. As a wealthy cancer survivor he can insure research continues in his personal area of interest. If all other areas of research dependent on government funding dry up, Koch’s attitude like Speaker Boehner’s is “so be it.”

    There is a delicious irony to this gift. The Koch brothers’ extensive oil, gas and paper businesses pollute our environment every day with potential carcinogens. Their political efforts are, however, directed towards eliminating the EPA and any other government regulation that might actually reduce the occurrence of these deadly substances.

  10. 10.

    Steeplejack

    March 5, 2011 at 8:59 am

    I think you want “ass kissing” instead of “ass kidding” in your first line. Unless there is some non-Internet tradition of which I am not aware.

  11. 11.

    grumpy realist

    March 5, 2011 at 9:00 am

    Heh. As an MIT alum, I can predict we will happily take Koch’s money, use the cash for fantastic cancer research, then turn around and bite him in the ass.

    $200 Million is trivial by comparison to the value of the companies MIT has founded, and don’t think that MIT doesn’t know it, either. Heck, it’s trivial by comparison to the value of the IP MIT’s got in its present portfolio.

    To misquote a celebrated southerner (Huey Long?): “Son, if you can’t take their money, wine, and whores, then turn around and vote against them the next morning, you have no business being in politics.”

  12. 12.

    Cat Lady

    March 5, 2011 at 9:01 am

    Another reason why Ian Murphy at the Buffalo Beast should be given some kind of Awesomesauce Award of the Year is Koch’s comment that now if he really does want to call a politician they probably won’t take his call. Koch’s going to have to deliver the moneybags in person.

  13. 13.

    AhabTRuler

    March 5, 2011 at 9:03 am

    What’s Mr. Levenson’s take on this?

    @grumpy realist:

    I can predict we will happily take Koch’s money, use the cash for fantastic cancer research, then turn around and bite him in the ass.

    I don’t know that it is that simple. It is a bit “unrealistic” to say that the donation will accrue no benefits.

  14. 14.

    dan

    March 5, 2011 at 9:03 am

    I wanted to do a little “ass kidding” this morning, but my wife said no.

  15. 15.

    JPL

    March 5, 2011 at 9:09 am

    And while he has become a major financier of cancer research around the country, one of his companies, Georgia-Pacific, which produces formaldehyde, has been trying to convince the government not to list formaldehyde as a human carcinogen. Koch Industries said it would respect and comply with any new governmental regulation.

    Oh goodie. Koch could do more if he used the money to clean up his own companies. I’m glad that he can afford all the experimental drugs to treat his cancer.

  16. 16.

    nitpicker

    March 5, 2011 at 9:18 am

    Poor guy has to buy friends…what a sad little rich kid.

  17. 17.

    christian mistermix

    March 5, 2011 at 9:20 am

    @dan: Ha! Fixed it.

  18. 18.

    El Cid

    March 5, 2011 at 9:24 am

    Rockefeller Foundation. The famed Carnegie 22.

    Oh, heck, for that matter, just let the Carnegie Foundation tell you why robber barons weren’t robber barons and dedicated their lives to building America’s economy and funding the progress of all.

    Businessweek at least found someone with sanity to review a biography of Carnegie.

    Of all the Gilded Age magnates, philanthropy came most naturally to Carnegie. John D. Rockefeller became a major donor–but only after a public-relations expert, Ivy Lee, told him that donations could help salvage a damaged Rockefeller image. The Vanderbilts, Morgans, and Guggenheims came to an awakening late in life. By contrast, Carnegie began preaching the responsibility to give back beginning in his mid-30s, and it became a second career for him in retirement. But as biographer David Nasaw makes clear in Andrew Carnegie, his roles as philanthropist and rapacious businessman were closely linked. The “decision to give away all he earned…paradoxically encouraged him to be even more ruthless a businessman. Recognizing that the more money he earned, the more he would have to give away, he pushed his partners and his employees relentlessly.”

    The largest non-profit and charitable foundations are actually among the key institutions by which the topmost classes network and interact with the public and with governance.

  19. 19.

    Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal

    March 5, 2011 at 9:32 am

    people who say there is no chance that elvis is still alive somewhere, with jfk, and marilyn monroe, einstein and tupac,they are the deniers. they deny an honest and rational debate on the possibilty that aliens are already in control of our galaxy and they are disappearing iconic celebrities and taking them to a special resort somewhere, not able to be seen on google world.

  20. 20.

    cathyx

    March 5, 2011 at 9:33 am

    So sad, paying someone to like you.

  21. 21.

    Omnes Omnibus

    March 5, 2011 at 9:35 am

    @Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal: How do you know that google isn’t involved? My b-i-l works there and he has told me things. I can’t tell you though. They are secret.

  22. 22.

    Poopyman

    March 5, 2011 at 9:47 am

    @Comrade Javamanphil: WIN!

  23. 23.

    Meg

    March 5, 2011 at 9:55 am

    They just took a page out of the tobacco industry playbook, funding heavily on bio-science in order to find friendly voices and trying to play the role of genuine debater. It worked very well before many times.

  24. 24.

    cathyx

    March 5, 2011 at 9:56 am

    BREAKING NEWS! MIT has new evidence to question the veracity of global warming.

  25. 25.

    Joe Bauers

    March 5, 2011 at 9:59 am

    “I read stuff about me and I say, ‘God, I’m a terrible guy,’ ” he said. “And then I come here and everybody treats me like I’m a wonderful fellow, and I say, ‘Well, maybe I’m not so bad after all.’ ”

    No, Mr. Cock. Believe you me, you’re still a horrible guy.

  26. 26.

    ppcli

    March 5, 2011 at 10:01 am

    MIT has been in this game for a long time and they know what they’re doing. They know that this will provoke cancer to donate even more money to the fight against David Koch.

  27. 27.

    Omnes Omnibus

    March 5, 2011 at 10:04 am

    @ppcli: Fundraising is a complicated process.

  28. 28.

    jcgrim

    March 5, 2011 at 10:07 am

    Just another typical example of US oligarchs buying patronage to sell their versions of reality to the dismal mass media vortex.

  29. 29.

    Ellie

    March 5, 2011 at 10:35 am

    Mr. Koch joked that the call could cause him problems. “I was thinking to myself, ‘My God, if I called up a senator or a congressman to discuss something with them, and they heard ‘David Koch is on the line,’ they’d immediately say, ‘That’s that fraud again — tell him to get lost!’ ” he said with a laugh

    Well, guess what? “Get lost” is exactly what congresscritters would say if any of us called and tried to get them on the phone. What a pathetic, whiny asshole.

    Sadly, the truth is that they’ll still take his calls.

  30. 30.

    Origuy

    March 5, 2011 at 10:42 am

    @grumpy realist:
    That was a quote from Molly IvIns;

    As they say around the Texas Legislature, if you can’t drink their whiskey, screw their women, take their money, and vote against ’em anyway, you don’t belong in office.

  31. 31.

    ppcli

    March 5, 2011 at 10:43 am

    @Ellie: Good eye. These guys are so embedded in their own world that they have no idea how much they reveal about themselves with every utterance.

  32. 32.

    Prometheus Shrugged

    March 5, 2011 at 10:43 am

    @cathyx: Actually, MIT IS home to Dick Lindzen, who is virtually the only credible atmospheric scientist that doubts the projections of global warming. Lindzen’s ideas have been effectively shot down over the past 10 years or so, and he has stubbornly hung on to them–maybe relishing the perceived role as a “maverick”. But at least the ideas were somewhat plausible to begin with (as opposed to those simply trying to obscure the issue.)
    Plus, there are alot of MIT-trained engineers out there that are deniers as well–probably an ego thing in their case.

    So your joke isn’t actually a joke.

  33. 33.

    lester freamon

    March 5, 2011 at 10:43 am

    That would suck if we like, you know, cured cancer and no one had to suffer anymore, but it came from money from a guy we don’t like so we all went Galt and let our cancerz go untreated and died.

  34. 34.

    Amy

    March 5, 2011 at 10:53 am

    I am following the Wisconsin situation via Twitter (#wiunion) and some guy, who says he’s a Fox News contributor keeps posting things about how the Kochs give a lot of money to charity and how much do libs give. Evidently in our new Gilded Age, we’re supposed to be happy with another union-busting rich guy who funds some good causes.

  35. 35.

    Amy

    March 5, 2011 at 10:54 am

    I am following the Wisconsin situation via Twitter (#wiunion) and some guy, who says he’s a Fox News contributor keeps posting things about how the Kochs give a lot of money to charity and how much do libs give. Evidently in our new Gilded Age, we’re supposed to be happy with another union-busting rich guy who funds some good causes with a little piece of their big bucks.

  36. 36.

    liberal

    March 5, 2011 at 10:56 am

    @bkny:

    koch’s personal wealth is est to be $12 billion.

    This is why it’s key to remember that assets, not income, comprise wealth, and why people who are against oligarchy should consider wealth taxes (particularly on rent-producing assets).

  37. 37.

    Pongo

    March 5, 2011 at 10:57 am

    So is MIT now the ‘Massachusetts Institute of Texas’ where the Koch brother’s hail from?

    The NYT article is another demonstration of why donor-prioritized philanthropy is a bad idea. While he points to NIH cuts (that he was instrumental in securing) as a reason why billionaires like him need to step in and provide research funding, he totally ignores that many, many, many diseases do not have access to self-serving billionaires to help with research funding. I work in the rare diseases community–30,000,000 Americans with one of more than 6,000 different disorders, often genetic, incurable and devastating (the media insists on only presenting the bizarre and freaky when it comes to rare diseases–even the ‘liberal’ media. Huffpo had an egregious ‘freak show’ article up in honor of Rare Disease Day last week). Rare diseases get the crumbs left over after the NIH institutes have funded all the major disorders. Not only is this short-sighted, since many of these disorders are natural genetic laboratories for understanding common diseases, it is also fundamentally ‘unequal.’ Industry can’t take on rare diseases because there is no way for them to recoup developments costs with such small population. Now Koch, et al, through their support of idiotic Tea Party candidates, want to take away even the crumbs, while laying claim to a philanthropic interest in medical research. Take about having your cancer and curing it, too.

    If, as libertarian free-marketeer’s contend, the govt’s only proper role is where the market can’t solve problems then medical research should be a major focus of the govt’s budget (not 6% or whatever dismal number it currently is). There is something incredibly perverse in allowing personally motivated billionaires to decide what constitutes a public health issue.

    I met with Senator Franken (D-MN) and some other elected reps regarding the NIH budget cuts last week. The general consensus is that it is ‘amateur hour’ in the House and that a shocking number of Tea Party freshman reps have zero idea how the federal budget even works, much less how to manage it. If they decide to be as stupidly intransigent as, say, some Tea Party governor from certain coldish midwestern state, it could be an ugly battle, but the sense was that there is bipartisan support in the Senate to spare NIH in the budget cuts, or at least not hit them as hard as the House wants to.

  38. 38.

    liberal

    March 5, 2011 at 10:58 am

    @grumpy realist:
    I’m an MIT alum, too (PhD). It’s an amazing institution, but let’s not forget how deeply entwined it is with the military-industrial complex.

  39. 39.

    gwangung

    March 5, 2011 at 11:01 am

    Plus, there are alot of MIT-trained engineers out there that are deniers as well—probably an ego thing in their case.

    Salem hypothesis,

    I am following the Wisconsin situation via Twitter (#wiunion) and some guy, who says he’s a Fox News contributor keeps posting things about how the Kochs give a lot of money to charity and how much do libs give

    Paul Allen. Bill Gates.

    Both of them make the Kochs look like pikers.

  40. 40.

    fraught

    March 5, 2011 at 11:04 am

    Lie # one:

    “I read stuff about me and I say, ‘God, I’m a terrible guy,’ ” he said.

    No, he doesn’t.

  41. 41.

    liberal

    March 5, 2011 at 11:04 am

    @Pongo:

    Rare diseases get the crumbs left over after the NIH institutes have funded all the major disorders. Not only is this short-sighted, since many of these disorders are natural genetic laboratories for understanding common diseases, it is also fundamentally ‘unequal.’

    But there are reasonable utilitarian arguments against focusing too much on rare diseases, with the important caveat you mention that rare disease research, to the extent it’s “pure,” can shed light on human disease and biology more generally in a fruitful way.

    Industry can’t take on rare diseases because there is no way for them to recoup developments costs with such small population.

    At the level of less applied, more pure research, industry can’t recoup the cost, rare disease or common disease, because there’s not really a good way of preventing other people from profiting from the research, unless you want a draconian intellectual property regime which would kill off research anyway. It’s why they focus so much on me-too drugs and drugs that sell well but are of little efficacy (e.g., Claritin, IIRC).

    Most of the research I see at NIH is really more pure than applied. Which IMHO is a good thing. It’s the kind that the private sector isn’t going to fund, period, unless we bring back state-recognized monopolies like Bell Labs (which merely brought us the transistor, IIRC).

  42. 42.

    Hillary Rettig

    March 5, 2011 at 11:05 am

    don’t forget this: “Mr. Koch said that he became passionate about cancer research after he learned in 1992 that he had prostate cancer.”

    conservative ethics: it’s only a problem if it affects me.

  43. 43.

    SP

    March 5, 2011 at 11:07 am

    “I was thinking to myself, ‘My God, if I called up a senator or a congressman to discuss something with them, and they heard ‘David Koch is on the line,’ they’d immediately say, ‘That’s that fraud again — tell him to get lost!’”
    You mean you might be treated like an ordinary person and not be able to speak directly to a congressman whenever you want? Boo fucking hoo.
    I’m glad they mention the formaldehyde thing, although I wish they’d find some estimates- how many more people will get cancer if formaldehyde is unregulated vs. how many people could possibly expect to be cured by the research he’s funding? He could prevent far far far more cancer by having his companies pollute less, even if it costs them $100M in profits, than his $100M donation will ever cure. If I were uncharitable I’d describe it as a future where Koch doesn’t care if everyone gets cancer, as long as those who can afford it can buy the cures he’ll fund.

  44. 44.

    Cacti

    March 5, 2011 at 11:18 am

    If you can’t make any friends, might as well buy a few.

  45. 45.

    SP

    March 5, 2011 at 11:19 am

    One consolation is that the big sign directly across the street from Koch’s fancy new building reminds him that he’s not all that:
    From Wikipedia Eli Broad:

    In 2010, Broad backed an initiative started by fellow billionaires Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates for rich Americans to give at least half of their wealth to charity.

    With an estimated current net worth of around $5.2 billion, Broad is ranked by Forbes as the 93rd wealthiest person in the world. A major donor to Democratic political candidates, the Newsmeat Power Rankings identify Broad as one of the top eight “most famous and powerful Americans whose campaign contributions result most often in victory.”

    The Broads have given $600M to their biomedical institute despite being worth half as much as just one Koch.

  46. 46.

    trollhattan

    March 5, 2011 at 11:24 am

    @AhabTRuler:

    Somewhere in the agreement is this language: “And finally, Levenson must hereafter leave McMegan aloooooooooone!”

  47. 47.

    Zuzu's Petals

    March 5, 2011 at 12:09 pm

    Don’t forget that scummy, wing-nut lovin’, Swift Boat Liar-fundin’ blowhard T. Boone Pickens, who now appears on the likes of the Daily Show to discuss his alternative-fuel money-makin’ ideas with Jon Stewart.

  48. 48.

    Adolf Jones

    March 5, 2011 at 12:13 pm

    $100 million is chump change for individuals who take in more money in a year than most countries of the world. Remember kids, Jesus told the rich man to GIVE it ALL to the poor.

  49. 49.

    Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people)

    March 5, 2011 at 12:16 pm

    @lester freamon: Somehow I don’t think that getting Koch-backed Tea Party groups to successfully cut over $500 million in funding from the NCI (which has given billions for cutting-edge cancer research to many, many universities)and then turning around and donating $100 million to MIT is the way we’ll find a cancer cure. You may know something I don’t though.

  50. 50.

    Elizabelle

    March 5, 2011 at 12:17 pm

    @katjam:

    Terrific letter.

    Another point: Koch donates to PBS. I cringe whenever I hear an announcement of support by “The David Koch Foundation” (for NOVA) because PBS’s Newshour and Frontline are a last bastion of serious, in depth reportage for grown-ups.

    The Tea Party patriot-morons are working to defund PBS as we speak.

    The facts, it seems, often have a liberal bias.

  51. 51.

    zed

    March 5, 2011 at 12:52 pm

    http://www.theonion.com/articles/exxonmobil-ceo-really-hurt-that-college-student-is,19333/

  52. 52.

    David Koch

    March 5, 2011 at 12:52 pm

    Last laugh is on you. I only spent a faction to buy and control FDL.

  53. 53.

    Resident Firebagger

    March 5, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    @Hillary Rettig: No matter how much Koch donates to cancer research, the douchebag causes more with his business…

  54. 54.

    PurpleGirl

    March 5, 2011 at 1:23 pm

    @gwangung: Bill Gates gives a lot to world-wide health issues. He gives a lot to education reform via SCHOOL SYSTEMS or DISTRICTS which will start programs he approves of, not so much to individual efforts in any given city. He gave to local libraries for years. He isn’t really the best example of charitable giving, especially his education grants.

  55. 55.

    Church Lady

    March 5, 2011 at 3:00 pm

    Does this mean that Tom can’t write anything negative about the Koch brothers or any of the causes they support? Inquiring minds want to know.

  56. 56.

    Tom Levenson

    March 5, 2011 at 3:05 pm

    @Church Lady: No.

    SATSQ.

    Lengthier (surprise!) reply to come.

  57. 57.

    Jim, Once

    March 5, 2011 at 4:21 pm

    @David Koch: Just curious… which faction?

  58. 58.

    DougW

    March 5, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    @PurpleGirl:

    Bill Gates has done more than any other donor to help third world health issues. I don’t understand why you don’t think that he’s the incredible savior of lives that he is… Is it because the majority of his money is going to the third world? They need it a hell of a lot more than we do…

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • The Pale Scot on Tuesday Night Open Thread (Apr 17, 2024 @ 9:05am)
  • lowtechcyclist on Distribution of Medical Spending in the US Population (Apr 17, 2024 @ 9:04am)
  • Melancholy Jaques on Cold Grey Pre-Dawn Open Thread: Fading Neom Dreams (Apr 17, 2024 @ 9:04am)
  • narya on COVID-19 Coronavirus Updates: April 17, 2024 (Apr 17, 2024 @ 9:00am)
  • Melancholy Jaques on Cold Grey Pre-Dawn Open Thread: Fading Neom Dreams (Apr 17, 2024 @ 9:00am)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!