Recent comments

  • Cop SHOT DEAD   1 hour 7 min ago

    #10 Blacks have a different culture than whites ( Thank God )

    Their culture is much more animated, more social, more Soul and they express it. ( just watch a black church revival meeting)

    In Farminton Hills, we had a subdivion of boring boxes with no people outside. They even took a homeowner to court because he painted his trim purple. Then a black family moved in. Young kids running around having FUN, teens playing basketball, visitors coming over to party on the back deck......THE HOUSE WAS ALIVE.

    And I am sure the rest of the homeowners locked their doors for fear of people having FUN...don't you know, that's a SIN, you have to SUFFER to be a good christian

    I used to drive in inner city Detroit. The black kids would pretend there was a race riot just to get a rise out of whitey. I used to smile and wave at them. And they would stop and wave back.

    My wife's third husband was black, and she told stories of the courage and fortitude of the Detroit blacks...the hard-working folks who came from the South and worked in the auto plants. the custom drapes ( that she sold) and French provincial furniture thay sat on ( my mother thought they ALL sat on orange crates.) the after hours gambling joint that would put Lost Vegas to shame.

    So palidromedary....please....SHUT UP

  • Huge Black Guy in Houston Sneaks Up Behind a Deputy Sheriff and Shoots Him Dead!!   1 hour 29 min ago

    #29

    Fast forward...

    Timothy McVeigh finally received the praise that was due him. He is the founder of the People's Revolution.

    He brought to everyone's attention the corrupt government that existed in the 20th century.

    The hippies of 1960 called it the military/industrial complex.

    The Veitnam war veterans came back devastated from killing children

    The Middle East war veterans are tramatized with killing civilians over oil.

    And the only person who DID SOMETHING was McVeigh.

    Unfortunately, the people were not quite ready then. Koch&Co had convinced them that science was bad, we have to fear, a police state is good.

    When we came close to losing the entire planet, the PEOPLE finally DID SOMETHING and took over and gutted Koch&CO and started living sensibly...all thanks to McVeigh

  • KILLER COP ?   1 hour 45 min ago

    Cops kill blacks...cops kill whistleblowers..cops kill bi-racial...cops kill Moslems...cops kill whites...COPS KILL YOU

    This is the police state that Koch&Co ordered. They do not want anyone interfering with their business....no whistleblower,,,no white activists...no government regulator.

    And Koch&CO want to change science...the world is flat, dinasaurs lived with man...life begins at conception....tar sands are good

    And forget those pesky constitutional rights people were supposed to have. WE ARE AT WAR !!!!!

    So, fight back

    I am a non-violent person, so I fight back with words, SOME OF THE NASTIEST WORDS YOU EVER HEARD. I go for the gut...I put 15 corrupt companies out of business and 6 people in jail with my words. A contractor tried to have me thrown off a high school construction job...I gave him a 7,554 item punchlist. Cost him $1.2M to fix

    IF you are a violent person, fight back with whatever you have.

    WE ARE AT WAR.!!!!!!!..AND THE PEOPLE ARE LOSING

  • Blackism: Straight From The Horse’s (Monkey’s) Mouth; or “My Black Won’t Rub Off” (Part III, Conclusion)   1 hour 46 min ago

    area51sea,

    I hate when people pile on, my Canadian kindness. compassion and sense of fairness , makes me cringe.

    I don't agree with you, but i love hearing you rant. You swear like a drunken sailor. I'd like to, sometimes, but out of respect for Thom, who has very little tolerance for bad language. i never do.

    Some of your points are colorfully interesting, everyone should have the right to be heard. As for you defending your lack of formal education, you express yourself quite well, in creative ,entertaining and imaginative ways and you sure have alot to say.

    If it wasn't for 'spell check', half of us would look like dopes.

    Who knows with enough talk, chatter, interaction, out of respect for other peoples viewpoints , you might come full circle or your detractors might be more respectful.

    Please Keep Blogging :)

  • I'm Calling it For Trump. He will be be the Next President of the United States   2 hours 6 min ago

    Garrett:

    I read the articles, but disagree with them, and I am not alone.

    There is clearly a large segment of America (on both sides of the aisle) who believe illegal immigration must be reigned in, and that makes the topic fair game for debate during a Presidential election. It shouldn't be swept under the carpet just because it is an uncomfortable topic.

    Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are on opposite sides of this issue, as they are on many issues.

    Many countries, including ours, have a legal immigration system that emphasizes bringing in desirable immigrants. For example: Look at the quality of the people companies like Amazon and Microsoft are bringing in: they are recruiting and bringing to our country the top students from the top universities of the world. I wish that a higher percentage of the best of the best were American, but that's a whole other discussion.

    My bottom line: Legal immigration is good, and can be used to make us a better country. People swimming across rivers to enter the country, jumping over fences, or over-staying visas, is bad and should be controlled. Trump tapped into a sentiment that was already out there. Claiming he invented the issue or fanned the flames would be wrong. He just said what many people were thinking, but didn't want to say, for fear of being branded "racist." Most politicians would run and hide rather than have this happen. But, Trump is forcing people to move past political correctness and take a serious look at the issues.

  • history notes; pre- and post- WW2, events and ideology   2 hours 39 min ago

    Its been a while since I first started this post, somewhat impulsively. My attempt to make sense of how people ground their arguments by reference to theory and historical precedent has of course of necessity been somewhat ad-hoc. But the material which suggests itself has been pored over often by those with entrenched positions. I have not made good on my promise to sketch the period between the French Revolution and World War II. Instead, I have become mired in the implications of the latter event to the dispute between communists (Leninists) and anarchists (the ones who actually read anarchist theory such as Bakunin).

    Recently I was tipped off about an important feature of this history through the mention of one Nestor Makhno. One might come across this figure if one peruses anarchist discourse. It is a good place to start I think because the debate and conflict between anarchists and Marxists sharpened the ideas of each. However, some people might dispute this assertion and argue that one should go back further and review the development of anarchist theory as it happened independently of Marxism. After all, the fallout between the two happened in Marx's lifetime as he was a party to that series of events.

    At any rate, the replete and complete history might not make any sense in a linear form in respect to the development of ideas except from the perspective of a given individual thinker or polemicist. I make no attempt here to discuss these problems in respect to the early versus late Marx for example. To me it is all simply a reminder that the linear development of ideas only occurs in relation to the course of events within which individuals attempt to grapple with the necessary problems inherent in fostering whatever set of beliefs, attitudes, social relations, etc. they are motivated to pursue.

    Back to Makho. Given what I said about the poring over of this history, one must I believe take with a grain of salt the presentation one finds at Wikipedia. Nonetheless, a compelling case is made there in respect to three issues:

    1) the redistribution of wealth

    2) the relationship between agriculture and industry

    and

    3) the right of independence of small nations.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor_Makhno

    Makhno in 1918
    After liberation from prison, Makhno organized a peasants' union.[9] It gave him a "Robin Hood" image and he expropriated large estates from landowners and distributed the land among the peasants.[9]
    In March 1918 the new Bolshevik government in Russia signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk concluding peace with the Central Powers, but ceding large amounts of territory, including Ukraine. As the Central Rada of the Ukrainian People's Republic (UNR) proved unable to maintain order, a coup by former Tsarist general Pavlo Skoropadsky in April 1918 resulted in the establishment of the Hetmanate. Already dissatisfied by the UNR's failure to resolve the question of land ownership, much of the peasantry refused to support a conservative government administered by former imperial officials and supported by the Austro-Hungarian and German occupiers.[10] Peasant bands under various self-appointed otamany which had been counted on the rolls of the UNR's army now attacked the Germans, later going over to the Directory in summer 1918 or to the Bolsheviks in late 1918–19, or home to protect local interests, in many cases changing allegiances, plundering so-called class enemies, and venting age-old resentments.[11] They finally dominated the countryside in mid-1919; the largest portion would follow either Socialist Revolutionary Matviy Hryhoriyiv or the anarchist flag of Makhno.[11]

    ...

    In areas where they drove out opposing armies, villagers (and workers) sought to abolish capitalism and the state by organizing themselves into village assemblies, communes and free councils. The land and factories were expropriated and put under nominal peasant and worker control by means of self-governing committees; however, town mayors and many officials were drawn directly from the ranks of Makhno's military and political leadership.

    ...

    At this point, the emphasis on military campaigns that Makhno had adopted in the previous year shifted to political concerns. The first Congress of the Confederation of Anarchists Groups, under the name of Nabat ("the Alarm Drum"), issued five main principles: rejection of all political parties, rejection of all forms of dictatorships (including the dictatorship of the proletariat, viewed by Makhnovists and many anarchists of the day as a term synonymous with the dictatorship of the Bolshevik communist party), negation of any concept of a central state, rejection of a so-called "transitional period" necessitating a temporary dictatorship of the proletariat, and self-management of all workers through free local workers' councils (soviets). While the Bolsheviks argued that their concept of dictatorship of the proletariat meant precisely "rule by workers' councils," the Makhnovist platform opposed the "temporary" Bolshevik measure of "party dictatorship." The Nabat was by no means a puppet of Mahkno and his supporters, from time to time criticizing the Black Army and its conduct in the war.

    ...

    New relationships and values were generated by this new social paradigm, which led Makhnovists to formalize the policy of free communities as the highest form of social justice. Education was organized on Francisco Ferrer's principles, and the economy was based upon free exchange between rural and urban communities, from crop and cattle to manufactured products, according to the science proposed by Peter Kropotkin.[citation needed]

    Trotsky's Red Army put down the Makhnovist experiment.

    To suss out all the complexities of the interplay between representatives of different ideologies to the ideas and realities of elections, democracy, and so forth, Lev Kamenev is another figure to know about. He was dispatched by Lenin to attempt some kind of Rapport with Makhnov at one point. Kamenev figured prominently in the struggle of the Marxists of the Russian Revolution, during the period when Bogdanov, Trotsky, Stalin, Lenin and so forth put forth their ideas at various points regarding the merits of participating in the Duma (after the Tzar was deposed but prior to the Communist Revolution), "democratic centralism", the New Economic Project and so forth.

    This history is rehashed by those who today see it as relevant to the development of some kind of leftist or anti-capitalist politics. You can see by reading the previously mentioned essay by Slavoj Zizek ("The Revolution Must Strike Twice") that the tension between Communism and Anarchism lies largely along the fault line of "idealism" and "realism".

    Of course, there are also the questions related to postmodernism and the development of a different social, economic, and political landscape in the intervening decades in the west. For example one might ask how different interest groups which are organized in some sense (non-profit, campaigns, etc.) might find some kind of common ground or common strategic orientation. These types of political formations are peculiar to the period in which many of these interests maintained anti-capitalist and anti-liberal positions while acknwledging the strategic necessity of working within the system at least to some degree. But then there is also the curious phenomenon of classical Marxism surviving on the fringes of the public while what is loosely referred to as Marxism has survived in the academic world.

    http://www.alpineanarchist.org/r_anarchist_hypothesis.html

    Since when does anarchism equal a rejection of global organization? While anarchists have been involved in what was once called the "antiglobalization" movement, anarchists were also the first to point out that globalization per se wasn't the target but rather "corporate" or "neoliberal" globalization – alternative terms like "alterglobalization movement" are results of these debates.

    Secondly, while some contemporary anarchists might frown at the idea of any kind of organizing – globally or not – it is by no means true that the contemporary anarchist movement as a whole is anti-organizational. In fact, so-called platformism, an anarchist communist movement based on the "Organizational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists" written by Nestor Makhno and his comrades in Paris exile in the 1920s, has seen a strong resurgence in recent years. The Anarkismo network – a true grassroots example of global organizing – is among the strongest anarchist projects of our times. Interestingly, platformists are regularly criticized as "Leninists" by anti-organizational anarchists – maybe there is more in anarchism for Žižek than he thinks. Žižek's ignorance might of course stem from the simple fact that in order to truly understand social movements one has to listen. As David Graeber has justly asked, "Could we really imagine someone like Žižek, even in his fantasies, patiently listening to the demands of the directly democratic assemblies of El Alto?" (12)

    ...

    3. Most importantly, anarchist ideas are at the core of most of today's social movements. While Marxist ideas do of course continue to play a role for social movements, their current strongholds appear to be traditional Marxist parties and academia. Autonomous social activists mostly adhere to anarchist principles whether they use the term or not: anti-authoritarianism; horizontal organizing; direct action; democratic decision-making processes. Ten years ago, David Graeber summed up the credo of the "New Anarchists" in New Left Review thus: "It is about creating and enacting horizontal networks instead of top-down structures like states, parties or corporations; networks based on principles of decentralized, non-hierarchical consensus democracy." (21) These core values of early twentieth-century activism remain the same. In 2005, Richard Day offered a comprehensive testimony to these developments in his book Gramsci Is Dead: Anarchist Currents in the Newest Social Movements. Day's assessments that "an orientation to direct action and the construction of alternatives to state and corporate forms opens up new possibilities for radical social change that cannot be imagined from within existing paradigms" and that this "offers the best chance we have to defend ourselves against, and ultimately render redundant, the neoliberal societies of control", still ring true. (22)

    ...

    One might of course argue that anarchists got it all wrong and that their influence on social movements does more damage than good. Žižek makes some important points in this regard:

    "I'm becoming skeptical of the Leftist anti-State logic. It will not go unnoticed that this discourse finds an echo on the Right as well. Moreover, I don't see any signs of the so-called 'disappearance of the State'. To the contrary. And to take the United States as an example, I have to confess that 80 percent of the time, when there is a conflict between civil society and the State, I am on the side of the State. Most of the time, the State must intervene when some local right-wing groups want to ban the teaching of evolution in schools, and so on. I think it’s very important, then, for the Left to influence and use, and perhaps even seize, when possible, State apparatuses. This is not sufficient unto itself, of course. In fact, I think we need to oppose the language of 'ligne de fuite' and self-organization and so on with something that is completely taboo on the Left today – like garlic for the vampire – namely, the idea of large State or even larger collective decisions." (26)

    It would be too easy to simply dismiss these reflections. At the same time, they are hardly new. Noam Chomsky has long been causing outrage among anarchists with statements like the following:

    "Many anarchists just consider the state the fundamental form of oppression. I think that's a mistake. Among the various kinds of oppressive institutions that exist, the state is among the least of them. The state, at least to the extent the society is democratic […] you have some influence on what happens. […] You have no influence on what happens in a corporation. They are real tyrannies. As long as society is largely dominated by private tyrannies, which is the worst form of oppression, people just need some form of self-defence. And the state provides some form of self-defence." (27)

    In the Scandinavian context, we are facing the irony that the activities of many self-declared anarchists have focused on the defence of the social welfare state in recent years. However, this only goes to show that Žižek's arguments are not necessarily arguments against anarchism, only against the immediate and universal abolition of the state – which not all anarchists would argue for, especially not as long as the state might be replaced by Social Darwinism rather than egalitarian communities. Still, it does not seem necessary to call for a "large state" – the state can be small, it must just focus on social justice rather than on protecting the ruling class's riches.

    The eventual anarchist – and communist – aim, of course, remains to overcome the state. This, however, can only happen by a strong collective movement unified by a common name. Therefore I find it unfortunate that anarchism is still very often "the politics that dare not speak its name". (28) Of course there are plenty of reasons why people would want to rid themselves of all political traditions and introduce a new term for their revolutionary politics. I am in no way opposed to this. However, as long as we see no promising new name emerging, we might as well give anarchism a try. There is little to lose.

    Gabriel Kuhn
    (August 2011)

  • The Obvious Problems With Thom's "Get The Base Out" Theory...   2 hours 42 min ago

    Wrong again. The "system" that you seem to so despise was constructed upon an economic model, not vice versa. A very exploitative economic model that has evolved into a less violent but more pervasive and still unnecessarily harsh economic model.

    Irrespective of your tendency to employ pejoratives, likely as a device to disguise your own insecurity, the fact remains that systems are exploitable and no amount of whining about inherent flaws or praising of inherent democratizing characteristics will solve that problem. Take Indonesia for instance; it's had a multi-party "democratic" representative government since the end of WW2 and yet Indonesia's government was a brutal, murderous authoritarian regime for half a century. Should Indonesian governance be held up as a triumph of democracy worth emulating because it had a multi-party democratic system in place? Is form or intention the most intractable obstacle?

    Who appointed you the arbiter of democratic principles by the way?

  • Podcasts?   4 hours 8 min ago

    Since Wednesday 8/19 the newsletter has been reporting that the show is moving locations. I'm happy to hear it, as it gets frustrating when they phone lines get dropped and Thom has to shut down or reboot his software (or both). I note, as has been noted that no repeat podcast were posted. I agree that the only thing worse than no repeat podcasts is no podcasts. I'm hoping that the cast and crew are celebrating the new studio and taking that break on a job well done. They promisted to start new podcasts tomorrow 9/1. I'm looking forward to that. I'm trusting that they're not all losing sleep getting the new site into a functional state. I'd rather another week of repeats if needed. As for those that are newcomers, trust me, the site is well maintained and has been for the last 8 years that I've been subscribed. when there's a schuffle, there's a great reason. Be well. Keep breathing. Get involed in a local political race. I'm volunteering with the Bernie Sanders campaign here in the Eugene, OR area. It's going to be tough to join the meeting during this holiday weekend, but when I can get there, it's a lot of fun. Also, the local "Lane County For Bernie Sanders" group is on facebook. Got some kick ass volunteers. We were part of the "record" 28,000 people in the Portland campaign stop. It was wonderful. Very energizing. www.BernieSanders.com has an events calendar. Maybe there's something in your area.

  • Podcasts?   4 hours 32 min ago

    I joined last week and have been seeing nothing but re-runs lol.... Today nothing is posted? I'm hoping the site is better maintained and shows are posted daily. I love Thom, but I did buy a subscription to get his podcasts - does he usually post his podcasts every day?

  • Thom's JFK theory is wrong   4 hours 53 min ago

    THE JFK CASE: THE TWELVE WHO BUILT THE OSWALD LEGEND (Part 3: Counterintelligence goes molehunting with Oswald's file)
    By Bill Simpich

    http://www.opednews.com/Diary/THE-JFK-CASE-THE-TWELVE-W-by-Bill-Simpich-...

    The 'marked cards' on Oswald multiplied and set up the patsy.

  • Deduction for Podcast Reruns   5 hours 19 min ago

    You are obviously joking. The show is easily worth more than a dollar a week, and with Bernie on, a "must listen" for any progressive Democrat.

    I miss the live show as well.

  • Thom's JFK theory is wrong   5 hours 27 min ago

    "In their book, Ultimate Sacrifice, published in 2006, Larmar Waldron and Thom Hartmann argued that in 1963 Almeida was involved in a plot with Che Guevara to overthrow Fidel Castro. The authors wrote: "In 1963, Juan Almeida was the powerful Commander of the Cuban Army, one of the most famous heroes of the Revolution - and he was going to lead JFK's palace coup against Fidel. Commander Almeida had been in direct contact with John and Robert Kennedy's top Cuban exile aide since May of 1963, and both men would be part of Cuba's new, post-coup Provisional Government. By the morning of November 22, 1963, Almeida had even received a large cash payment authorized by the Kennedys, and the CIA had placed his family under US protection in a foreign country."

    John Simkin argued that: "This seems to me like a CIA limited hangout.... This has more to do with David Talbot’s forthcoming book
    (The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America's Secret Government
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Devils-Chessboard-Dulles-Americas-Government/dp/... )

    than Ultimate Sacrifice. The CIA has been willing to accept the naming of CIA agents like David Sanchez Morales and Rip Robertson as being involved in the assassination. They are much more concerned with the exposure of top figures such as Richard Helms and James Jesus Angleton being involved in the cover-up."

    Larry Hancock, the author of Someone Would Have Talked (2006) agreed: "I'm pretty sure we will hear more detail on how they (the CIA) were forced into this position by the additional documents that we are beginning to see."

    The Cuban government took the view that this was a CIA plot to destabilize the regime and took no action against Almeida.

    Juan Almeida Bosque died of a heart-attack in Havana on 11th September 2009. Fidel Castro issued a statement that said: "I didn't know, neither did any of us, just how much pain news of his passing would bring. I was a privileged witness of his exemplary conduct during more than half a century of heroic and victorious resistance."

    http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKalmeida.htm

    ""Further, there were too many things the anti-Castro people could not have controlled, e.g., the parade route, the taking of JFK's body from Parkland at gunpoint, the autopsy, fake Secret Service men on the grassy knoll, ad infinitum, all of which contributed to Oswald being 'a lone, demented gunman.' And certainly they could not have controlled forty plus years of 'Oswald did it' propaganda by the U.S. Government and the mainline media, propaganda that has continually ignored credible evidence of a conspiracy and Oswald's innocence. There is much more to the JFK hit than anti-Castro Cubans, and to be fair, some of which Mr. Hancock reviews within his work."" from the Thomas M. Durham book review of Larry Hancock's 'Someone Would Have Talked' at

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Someone-Would-Talked-Larry-Hancock/dp/0977465713...

    Indeed, the devil's chessboard, and unspeakable forces within the US government. I'm waiting for David Talbot's book to come in November ! Maybe Thom will debate him on the air. Stay tuned.

    Oh, PS:

    James Jesus Angleton's deputy Ann Egerton is listed in Lee Harvey Oswald's notebook

    http://issuu.com/ajweberman/docs/1adressbookcolor/1

    Bio on Angleton (see 'CI/SIG and Oswald' at

    http://www.ctka.net/pr700-ang.html

    and more on Oswald's Notebook
    http://www.amazon.com/The-Oswald-Code-Secrets-Oswalds/dp/1490463674

    and Leo Dicaprio as James Jesus Angleton in 'The Good shepard'
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Shepherd_%28film%29

  • Blackism: Straight From The Horse’s (Monkey’s) Mouth; or “My Black Won’t Rub Off” (Part III, Conclusion)   5 hours 44 min ago

    I don't read history books, i barely got high school diploma, But looks like you read a whole of the white man history books and got one of the white mans white privilege education. But good on you for correcting my broken English sell out.

    You were one of those square ass bitches in school weren't you. You probably got one of those diplomas from a white man college don't you. I see you keep trying to be like Shakespeare and writing all fancy like these other white people trying to out write them with your big white words.

    As you can see when you get a white privilege education instead of the one you get from the school next to the projects , the white man values your opinion over the under educated one.

    I am not a black man, I am not white man, I am not Indian. I am all three , I am the future bitch.

    But keep proving my point, why the fuck are you not answering my question, what the fuck about Hillary and bills racist record.

    R kenyatta a shill for the white women Hillary

    and what the fuck is klingon? lol

  • The Obvious Problems With Thom's "Get The Base Out" Theory...   5 hours 45 min ago
    Quote mdhess:

    ...these "rights" [inherent rights due small states] can include anything particular to more rural or agricultural states. What they do NOT include is that the people in small pop states have any right beyond their numbers to interfere with more general issues... and the way to deal with this is to keep the system democratic but write protections into the system

    "...write protections into the system", haha, gee, I guess nobody ever thought of that before. Could you possibly be MORE vague? Lofty rhetoric and a buck will get you a cup of coffee.

    I already listed two key ways this could be done in while keeping the system democratic. Try reading for comprehension. I don't see any comprehensive ideas for reform coming from you. But then you support antidemocratic state suffrage... so that does limit your options.

    Quote mdhess:You're right, I was a speech and debate debate champion in high school. My anti-war speech in front of the Lions Club probably cost me a scholarship but that was then, this is now.
    I could care less how full of yourself you are. You seem to believe past accomplishments... as unimpressive as they may be, makes your beliefs and contradiction immune from criticism. This is a discussion about PRINCIPLES.

    Quote mdhess:I keep telling you that you assume too much but you refuse to heed what I say in that regard. You are concerned about representation and I understand that you are arguing the moral imperative of one person one vote, although you don't seem to have any clear prescription for how to get there much less the preceeding problem of convincing the general public that it is where we need to go.
    I've been for years proposing strategies for getting around our antidemocratic/reformproof system... AND people like you who are stuck in the civic religion they learned 4th grade history. I've found is that most US liberals are just as unable to confront their contradictions as so-called pro-lifers who support needless wars, the death penalty, and are against taking care of the living. You again proved that observation true..

    Quote mdhess:But, setting that aside, I told you that my loyalty is to the people only to have you scoff and label me a typical liberal unwilling to look at the system with regard to that moral imperative.
    Gee... it can't be because in supporting STATES having a vote... you're shafting the People you claim to support? Have you get come to the realization that to give SOME people a bigger vote can lead to minority rule... and ultra-tiny minorities thwarting the majority? I guess not.

    Quote mdhess: Well, here is something I wrote a year and a half ago regarding liberalism:
    And it comes as no surprise that there's NOTHING in there about liberal Dems supporting an antidemocratic system while wearing democracy on their sleeves.

    Quote mdhess:We have a government built on a tyrannical economic system and tinkering around the edges of government without addressing that fact is just pounding sand.
    Hey... if you support antidemocratic and braindead system... then live with the consequences.

    Quote mdhess: Equality in the representation of people who have been brainwashed into believing that capitalism equates to freedom will only yield the same tyrannical economic order that has led us into the neoliberal nightmare we are in now
    You're conflating several issues. We do NOT have equality in representation. Elections represents the views of only about 35-55% of the voting age population. We don't know how many are holding their nose when they vote for the lesser of the evils. We DO have an system that constricts political opinions into an arbitrary range where some topics are simply off the table. And the system is antidemocratic so even if "the People" favor of X... it can easily be thwarted. Those are the structural problems. Big Money only complicates the mess.

    Quote mdhess:So you may think that you are an exemplary radical advocate
    Cut the crap. I'm ONLY critiquing our system from the vantage point of democratic principles. The real question is WHY DON'T US LIBS DO SO?

    Quote mdhess:but, as I have repeatedly stated (and been ignored about) is that any form of governance, regardless of how equitable or not, is only as good as the substantive administration of that governance. Implementing a proportionally representative scheme, for instance, to administer a tyrannical economic order does not achieve democracy but only a more democratically sanctioned tyranny.
    More conflation. It wasn't PR and democratic principles that gave us your "tyrannical economic order"... IT WAS THE ANTIDEMOCRATIC SYSTEM YOU SUPPORT. So take some goddamn responsibility. Why aren't you looking at democratic nations that HAVE better placed chokechains on corporate power and built a more robust safety net?

    To be continued.

  • Huge Black Guy in Houston Sneaks Up Behind a Deputy Sheriff and Shoots Him Dead!!   5 hours 59 min ago
    Quote Legend:
    Quote billsmith:

    If we got rid of all guns then only criminals would have guns. It's ridiculous to blame the instrument of death as the cause of death. But for those whose choose to believe that instruments murder and not the people, then we would need to get rid of cars too because they kill. So do airplanes, 18 wheelers, motorcycles, boats, knives, forks, axes, propane gas, electricity, water, etc... so basically everyone would have to walk anywhere and everywhere but without socks because socks can be used to strangle no one would be allowed to swim because they might drown. no food would be delivered because there would be no transportation. People's hands would have to be amputated because hands can kill but then how would we eat? SO it is better to blame the criminals who choose to murder than the instrument guns, knives etc... Regulate guns cars and so on so that only legally sane licensed people are allowed to own and operate them.

    Tell me why countries with sane gun laws do not have a murder rate anywhere near what the murder rate is in the USA. Why is he USA by far the leader in murder?

    Ok I am new to the statistics but which countries have "sane" gun laws better than than the USA? I think gun shows in the USA are horrendous. USA let criminals buy guns illegally. I'm with you for intensive background checks for gun purchases and if you take one look at the highways that we all drive on I see insane drivers putting other peoples lives in danger everyday. So I am for stricter "sane" drivers licenses ( above moron IQ ) as well as INTENSIVE BACKGROUND gun licenses. I always tell my friends "if you want to see the REAL person in someone? Then follow them in traffic and see how they drive. Also take a peek in their parked car to see if it's clean or not. THAT'S WHO THEY REALLY ARE.

    i agree guns made every man the same size. There is no doubt. because guns make it possible for smaller people to kill big people is no reason to take guns from sane people who are thoroughly vented and licensed.

    But in your statistics of the USA as highest in murder which I have not seen yet, does it say how many were licensed firearm murderers and how many were criminals who murdered?

    Could it be that the USA has a higher number of murderous criminals running the streets?

    Just one more question, could you explain the extremly high murder rate in US prisons where there are practically no gun deaths prisoner on prisoner? the prisoners have no guns. How does extemly high murder rates in prison happen then? Could it be the murderous criminals? or the lack of guns in prison? Which cause the high murder rates

  • The Obvious Problems With Thom's "Get The Base Out" Theory...   6 hours 27 min ago
    Quote Garrett78:
    Quote ulTRAX:Not sure what you mean by hypotheticals.

    I was referring to, for instance, 3.5% of the population preventing passage of an amendment. Technically true but that wouldn't ever happen.

    So would you be happy if a desirable amendment like Move To Amend was thwarted by states with only 20-25% of the population? We can't say antidemocratic outcomes are unlikely therefore we should not worry. Clarance Thomas was ratified by senators representing less than 50% of the population. Bush was installed after being rejected by the People. Thomas was a crucial vote in Bush v Gore. Is THAT real enough? Bush had the advantage of an antidemocratic Senate. We can't blame Citizens United for election 2000. The currents of antidemocratic government are insidious.

    Quote Garrett78:Some objectives, such as campaign finance reform, are more realistic in the immediate term and could eventually help lead to some of the systemic reforms you advocate. I think you have to go after the low hanging fruit first.
    Nice thought... and similar to Thom's singular fixation on money over democratic reforms. Did we get those reforms before Big Money was allowed into the system? The simple answer is NO.

    The defects in the US political and electoral system are so great that we can't place all our eggs in one basket. Big Money will find it rather easy to target that 3.5% of the population to thwart these reforms... and if some are more liberal states like RI or HI... they'll find some others. As I kept telling Steve.I.Am... move to amend needs a plan B.

    For instance the very amendment formula is so absurd it also must be reformed. And there must also be state based efforts to bring PR to state governments. Once people get a taste for more responsive government it will start the debate about the defects in the federal system.

  • Another Disabled Person Abused By Police   6 hours 40 min ago

    Paleydome ain't an expert on disablility. There was recently a radio program that had a segment on how different states and localities are attempting to find alternatives to arresting and incarcerating mentally ill people whose offenses are a result of their medical condition and are often quite trivial and not of any real threat to anyone. Society find certain people annoying. When you grow up in a bigoted family and have bioted views of black people, you were NEVER a progressive or liberal. Paranoid views go hand-in-hand with prejudice, which can be seen from the extremely selective and narrow and simple-minded comments that are made. Paleydome is not an academic, a college professor, and yet professes expertise that he did not make the effort due to laziness to achieve. But it is o.k. to condemn others who cannot afford the high cost of higher education for not going to college and taking on a very large debt.

    Most disabled people regardless of the type of disability are law-abiding citizens, but this is completely lost right-wing conservatives who believe that defective people are inferior and are life unworthy of life. If someone actually has knowledge of the often inadequate services for disabled people, it would be clear as to why some people may be rather desperate for no fault of their own. Only a licensed physician or other appropriate health care professional can diagnosis and treat someone with a medical disability, but many Americans judge others only on the basis of money, not education per se, and want to overule those who did the work and unlike themselves have the scientific ability and concern to become medical professionals. Stupid people make stupid comments. Hate, hate, and more hate based on ignorance and intellectual inferiority and a lack of ability to think all result in these types of stupid comments.

  • Imperfect People, Perfect Love   6 hours 53 min ago

    You added below the original that inevitable crises would if anything would catalyze change. When it this change going to take place? The economic system is adversely affecting the political system, and vice versa. When has there ever been a utopia in the democratic sense on earth, let alone in a given country such as this one? In order for there to be changes in policy, there have to be technologically and economically viable solutions. From discussions I have heard, I don't think engineers who design these things are quite there yet, and the public as a whole is not there yet, either, both attitudinally and in terms of being able to afford expensive investments in new personal equipment. I hope we have better technology in the future where people are not dependent on power companies and can simply dial a number and soon have a self-driving car stop in front of one's home. Traffic accidents might result in even more deaths than do guns. The amount of gun violence and the continuing unwillingness of both the public and most lawmakers to pass some form of precautionary gun control, and of government law enforcement agencies to do a better job of listing past arrests or convictions on gun-related charges, or past hospitalization in a mental hospital, and the degree of uneduated inner-city residents and others who resort to violence through shootings as a way of settling the score, these things all point to a lack of willingness to change on the part of Americans.

    California has a new program that would limit access to guns by certain people based on their previous record. Most states are lax in catching past violations on the part of those wanting to by firearms. Gun show dealers don't have to do any background checks. Illegal gun sales by unlicensed sellers are common in many places.

    I have heard any number of commentators recently who have said that as desirable as it would be to have a Constitutional amendment getting rid of the Citizens United decision and proclaiming that you can't give unlimited amounts of money to political candidates and office holders, and that corporations cannot be treated as people under the campaign finance laws, and that policians reform the Federal Election Commission so that it actually does its job and stops illegal contributions, it is just not realistic for the forseeable future, as much concern over this issue that exists, that there could be this kind of amendment to the Constitution. Maybe in 100 years, campaigns will financially be entirely different than there are now, perhaps with public funding. As one economics professor from a state university in Illinois who is relatively progressive said, capitalism is inherently instable. Many people are obviously in favor of the things you just mentioned, such as more cooperatives, unions, workers' rights, job safety laws and enforcement, and environmental regulations. But other than minimum wage increases in some local jurisdictions or states, and small number of votes on the part of employees in favor of joining a union, the trend so far is more often than not against these things. I just watched a report about a small town in Louisiana, populated almost entirely by African-Americans, that has been taken over by something like 6 or 7 seven chemical plants. Many of the residents have developed various medical symptoms or illnesses which they believe are a direct result of the chemicals that are being dumped into the environment. The newest plant that is being built there is owned by a huge South African company, which is offering to buy out any and all remaining residents of the town. The people have complained that the amount of money that they have been offered is not high enough so that they can buy or build a house in some other community. It is the price that the company wants to pay. But it is anticipated that all of the people residing there will eventually leave the community, because it simply has too much industry and too many chemicals. There is a proposal for still another plant that would make disel fuel from some kind of chemicals. The South African company did a study in which it is concluded that their new plant when it is fully operational will meet all state and federal regulations, but Lousiana and the federal government have previously granted exceptions to existing regulations for some of the companies located in the town, so that they can exceed the established limits without being cited. The public lacks both the expertise and the political clout to stop these kinds of situations from happening.

  • Blackism: Straight From The Horse’s (Monkey’s) Mouth; or “My Black Won’t Rub Off” (Part III, Conclusion)   7 hours 9 min ago

    I see why you were ignored, fool. Like I said, grown ups here. You are not a "black man", you are a white boy/girl in Klingon drag. This is apparent because you could not possibly be as illiterate as you are trying to make yourself sound. Nice try though.You could not possibly be that ignorant, yet be on a Thom Hartmann political site. You read "history books", but you can't string two sentences together. "This dude is Made".

    You are a racist white boy/girl trying to "sound black" in your writing so that you can carry out your sick agenda; which is a totally racist move. I know this because no self-respecting black man would come here and be that damned ignorant. Nice try...whitey. You are not sophisticated enough to pull that one off, fool.

    Does not much matter because...well, because. You should have taken my advice and hopped on that flying saucer. Nice avatar, funny looks just like Bernie Sanders.

    Goodbye.

  • Podcasts?   7 hours 19 min ago

    They don't seem to have posted a new podcast for today. The only thing worse than listening to a rerun is not listening to a rerun!

  • Article Presents Interesting Critique of Psychotherapy and Humanistic Psychology   7 hours 32 min ago

    When it comes to public policy concerning helpful or necessary government programs, there is not much serious discussion of this on this site or anywhere. The main purpose of many is to either express disdain for certain presidential candidates or groups of people. What mostly seems to be the case is tearing down of government. Pundits and many politicians, in connection with incidents of mass shootings, occasionally mention the inadequate nature of our mental health system. People with certain kinds of mental conditions have difficulty in retaining employment. A practice or program that is related to vocational rehabilitation called Supported Employment has been found to be effective in allowing employed individuals with mental illness to be able to continue working. The interpretation that apparently is used with some state governments is that since the research on Supporated Employment was done in coordination with psychiatric treatment, clients should be undergoing such treatment while receiving this form of help with employment. I disagree completely that only those consumers who are taking prescribed psychotropic drugs could benefit from supported employment. Another problem that might come up is for agencies to confuse job coaching with Supported Employment. There are not one and the same. Supported Employment is for people who are already employed, and is not a job search program, although the employment specialist might in some cases be able to assist someone in learning of how to receive a promotion or find a different and possibly better job. The main purpose of Supported Employment is to assist someone who is already employed continue with a job. Therefore, it only stands to reason that a person who has been working in a job for a certain length of time already knows how to do the job and does not need job coaching.

    The primary problem with this service is its lack of accessibility. Private insurance does not cover support services of this type. Employment specialists are unlikely to be licensed therapists, nor do they need to be. They have to have as much knowledge and experience as possible with jobs and with business. They also have to have a good working knowledge of mental health and psychology. In some states, the only source of funding for Supported Employment is Medicaid. This program has strict eligbility requirements so that a certain number of people who need this kind of assistance are not eligible simply because they are not Medicaid eligible. Vocational rehabilitation agencies only pay for so-called follow-along services for a limited time. Someone who is working might need to talk to someone every so often about one's job over a period of months and years. Again, the service may not be accessible. Some people might be able to pay a small fee, but if the person is low-income, that is money that could otherwise be used for rent, food, or medicine.

    A final issue would be the willingness and ability of an Employment Specialist to advise or assist a client in requesting a reasonable accommodation from an employer which would be necessary to make sure that the employee can function adequately on-the-job. This is part of the ADA. If an employer does not handle a situation in a way that is appropriate and reasonable for a mentally disabled person, whether there is overt employment discrimination or not, would the Employment Specialist after discussing it with the client be able to visit the workplace and raise the concern with the person's supervisor? Unless more is done that is currently being done, many mentally ill people will not be able to sustain employment. More does need to be done. There have to be enough personnel in the Supported Employment program so that they can have the flexibility to address the clients' concerns adequately, and so that they could spend enough time talking with the person, observing the person at work, or going to the employer to discuss an issue so that there would be an effective result that does what it needs to to help someone.

  • Huge Black Guy in Houston Sneaks Up Behind a Deputy Sheriff and Shoots Him Dead!!   7 hours 55 min ago

    #28 is that a serious question? , maybe if one of your children were in that building you could understand why it was so heinous.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/54/1b/c2/541bc2943d8daa48a33ec2464399d60c.jpg

  • The Move   7 hours 57 min ago

    I don't like rock music. It may be o.k. for a brief theme, but no music at all, with just a tasteful announcement, would be workable and not objectionable.

  • Blackism: Straight From The Horse’s (Monkey’s) Mouth; or “My Black Won’t Rub Off” (Part III, Conclusion)   8 hours 2 sec ago

    I wish i had said that, shut your corny ass up. The rejected 7 black Brady bunch member is a shill for the Hillary campaign.

    You can try to play these white people if you want but i know the game. I never saw the men in black or any other of those comic book nerd movies, i was to busy playing and watching sports, Any of you so called brothas hyped for the football season,or did you get your man card took.

    The only purpose of this rejected Brady bunch member is fuck with these white people, Either get them riled up talking about violence on white people or they try to kiss your ass so they can feel like they got a black friend. Hey man these black guys are talking about the stuff i read about in history books, i feel ya bro, Yeah shit was fuck up back then, but i am trying to eat right now.

    So he can write all the shit he wants, but the question is he gonna sit back and talk on a white liberal website or is gonna put this shit to action. If he wants to start a race war, why don't he go to ones these racist white sites and post that shit and create another weirdo like Dylan roof. He ain't doing nothing to help the problem, he is just alienating people from helping the black community. So if the average white person who has on average 1.1 black friend and they come here and see shit like this, all you do if confirm their stereo type of the angry black guy and their one black friend is the exception to the rule.

    So i guessing this dude is made because because in his rich white high school, he got rejected by the Brady bunch table, and now til this day he is mad at white people to this day. I could respect his blogs until he posted his privileged background

  • The Move   8 hours 31 min ago

    Thom probably needed the week off as well, in sptie of Labor Day being next Monday.

    But was a new studio really necessary ? What I feel they need is new theme music. The old theme has been badly dated for years ! A new, upbeat rock theme would be a lot better....providing they can get clearance from the band. They already have rock coming out of some of the commercials, which they can play because it's just instrumental music without lyrics.

Latest Headlines

Scott Walker: Building a wall at the Canadian border might be "legitimate" idea

It's not just the southern border: Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says it's "legitimate" to discuss building a wall separating the United States from Canada, as well

Malaysia's democracy is in worse shape than we thought

Malaysia's ethnic groups, and thus Malaysia itself, are looking more and more divided

Kanye West Will Run For President In 2020

Will Kim Kardashian be our First Lady?

Community Archive

"Unequal Protection: How Corporations Became People."

Thom Hartmann Here with an excerpt from my book “Unequal Protection: How corporations became “people” - and how you can fight back.”
-----