Regardless of their relative contributions, I would be willing to bet that not a single Democrat on that list had so much as an inkling to return the Kochs' money despite the Kochs being so "evil".
I expected such a response and you gave it up. Thanks rlm. A few differences though as it seems you didn't read my analogy enough or just chose to ignore the intended message. My wife and I adopted our dog. She lives IN our house because we chose to take care of her. Hence the fact that I feed her with no fear of being bitten. Got it so far? The "coons" are not mine. They are wild animals. I don't feed them because I have no intention of taking them under my care. I don't want them in my house. If I lived in an area that supported wild bears, for example, I wouldn't feed them either. I figure it would be even more dangerous and they would definitely have the ability to bite my hand off or worse. This is what the Koch brothers are doing in essence. Taking that risk but are they feeding raccoons or bears? Some may remember a story from several years ago. A wildlife photographer from California moved to Alaska and was photographing bears. Much too closely. The locals warned him about it and he chose to ignore them. Eventually he did, indeed, die for his risks. I doubt $316,000 will kill the Kochs just as much as I doubt the $5,550 donated to our current President catapulted President Barack Hussein Obama to that office. What say you? Or anyone for that matter.
So what is your definition of "returning the Kochs' money"? Writing a check to repay a DONATION or just voting for what they tell you to?
Isn't a wee bit hypocritical of the left (including those of you on this site) to bash the Kochs while your people are taking their money too?