Recent comments

  • A Bush You Can Like   6 min 20 sec ago

    cont'd: off to the right is a menu that offered /read-10-free-articles-by-hunter-s-thompson.

    You’ll find out more in the Paris Review‘s interview with Thompson, in which he recounts once feeling that “journalism was just a ticket to ride out, that I was basically meant for higher things. Novels.” Sitting down to begin his proper literary career, Thompson took a quick job writing up the Hell’s Angels, which let him get over “the idea that journalism was a lower calling. Journalism is fun because it offers immediate work. You get hired and at least you can cover the fucking City Hall. It’s exciting.” And then came the real epiphany, after he went to cover the Kentucky Derby for Scanlan‘s: “Most depressing days of my life. I’d lie in my tub at the Royalton. I thought I had failed completely as a journalist. Finally, in desperation and embarrassment, I began to rip the pages out of my notebook and give them to a copyboy to take to a fax machine down the street. When I left I was a broken man, failed totally, and convinced I’d be exposed when the stuff came out.”

    Indeed, the exposure came, but not in the way he expected. Below, we’ve collected ten of Thompson’s articles freely available online, from those early pieces on the Hell’s Angels and the Kentucky Derby to others on the 1972 Presidential race, the Honolulu Marathon, Richard Nixon, and wee-hour conversations with Bill Murray. But don’t take these subjects too literally; Thompson always had a way of finding something even more interesting in exactly the opposite direction from whatever he’d initially meant to write about.

    The link is the 2000 article but is worth scrolling through for who knows what trivia like Billy Wilder's interview re:"Some Like it Hot" the Marilyn Monroe, Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis classic he directed, and co-wrote, sort of.

    From the link above at Hunter's ranch:

    The comic savagery of his best work will continue to electrify readers for generations to come.

    . . . I have stolen more quotes and thoughts and purely elegant little starbursts of writing from the Book of Revelation than from anything else in the English Language—and it is not because I am a biblical scholar, or because of any religious faith, but because I love the wild power of the language and the purity of the madness that governs it and makes it music.


    Well, wanting to and having to are two different things. Originally I hadn't thought about writing as a solution to my problems. But I had a good grounding in literature in high school. We'd cut school and go down to a café on Bardstown Road where we would drink beer and read and discuss Plato's parable of the cave. We had a literary society in town, the Athenaeum; we met in coat and tie on Saturday nights. I hadn't adjusted too well to society—I was in jail for the night of my high school graduation—but I learned at the age of fifteen that to get by you had to find the one thing you can do better than anybody else . . . at least this was so in my case. I figured that out early. It was writing. It was the rock in my sock. Easier than algebra. It was always work, but it was always worthwhile work. I was fascinated early by seeing my byline in print. It was a rush. Still is.

  • Large Group of Black Religious Leaders Expected to Endorse Trump   24 min 37 sec ago
    Quote mdhess:

    I suppose this depends on what's meant by "large number." I'm not impressed by 100 but I expect the opposite side if the receiving line will look pretty impressive.

    True, but the word "leader" implies "followers" so it depends on what kind of audience these people reach and how persuasive is their personal endorsement.

  • The Bernie Sanders 12-Point Plan Will Help Our Nation   25 min 5 sec ago

    How many other candidates have a plan like this?

  • "NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses"   47 min 13 sec ago
    Quote mjolnir:

    "I endorsed nothing.", which I noted, having trouble with vision as well as comprehension?

    Kilosqrd wasn't the one saying stupid things in that thread. Still waiting to hear what you are going to "seed the atmosphere" with, 'Einstein'? Lol.

    Come on 'TRAX, share with us the material that you said we might use to "seed the atmosphere". ABCee is waiting, Lol.

  • Armed Attack On Colorado Planned Parenthood Clinic.. 3 dead, 9 wounded   50 min 47 sec ago

    This is a case where very little is being released to the public. It is the 4 day weekend so maybe more will come out Monday afternoon after he is arraigned. What has been found out is that he is from NC but recently moved to a rural part of CO and lives in a junked RV. Registered to vote as an Independant. Hates Obama. Has had numerous run ins in NC. I would like to know how he got the gun. Police rarely release that information and it is important to prevent future gun crimes. Just a few weeks ago in Colorado Springs a wacko walked down the street with an AK47 and a women called 911 and was told that open carry is legal in CO. Then he shot a Iraq combat veteran on a bicycle. The women again called 911 and said that he had shot somebody. 2 more were killed before police got to the scene and shot the killer. Nothing released about how he got the gun. But just maybe open carry is not such a good idea.

    Nobody ever answers this question. What were (past tense) the rights of the people that were killed/ What are the rights of the people that want to walk the streets in freedom?

  • "NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses"   53 min 11 sec ago
    Quote rs allen:

    Ultrax, I beginning to believe you and joiner have a bromance going on.

    I post because it's fun and you occasionally come across a nugget of truth in contrarian viewpoints. 'TRAX posts because it's an itch he can't scratch. His neurosis won't let him quit.

  • Corporations As Frankensteins: How Can We Regain Control?   1 hour 33 min ago

    Organizations of people come in different motives with different hierarchical forms. In a corporation, labor used to have a voice. As we move toward fascism, labor has been marginalized and capital speaks much more powerfully to the extent that they write the country's legislation. Thus they are allowed to merge and acquire other entities to form oligopolies and monopolies. In that manner they create barriers to entry that no competing entity can overcome.

    The huge corporation can stifle free speech from its employees and do through sheer intimidation. If you took a secret vote of the employees about an issue of labor practices, do you think the rank and file would agree with upper management? Very doubtful. Would the miners at Massey Energy agree to go underground amid noxious gases and die if they could vote on the matter? Yet Don Blankenship and top management sent them down there. So 29 of them died. All they knew is that if they didn't, they would lose their $74,000/year jobs.

    Do you think employees at Chrysler, RCA, Western Electric, and Bethlehem Steel voted to close down their plants and become unemployed? A corporation under its present structure is anything but a democratic entity. It's a system of lords and serfs similar to the old days of feudalism.

  • American Ignorance Defined   3 hours 16 min ago

    In a candid conversation with Frank Rich last fall, Chris Rock said, "Oh, people don’t even know. If poor people knew how rich rich people are, there would be riots in the streets." The findings of three studies, published over the last several years inPerspectives on Psychological Science, suggest that Rock is right. We have no idea how unequal our society has become.

    In their 2011 paper, Michael Norton andDan Ariely analyzed beliefs about wealth inequality. They asked more than 5,000 Americans to guess the percentage of wealth (i.e., savings, property, stocks, etc., minus debts) owned by each fifth of the population. Next, they asked people to construct their ideal distributions. Imagine a pizza of all the wealth in the United States. What percentage of that pizza belongs to the top 20% of Americans? How big of a slice does the bottom 40% have? In an ideal world, how much should they have?

    The average American believes that the richest fifth own 59% of the wealth and that the bottom 40% own 9%. The reality is strikingly different. The top 20% of US households own more than 84% of the wealth, and the bottom 40% combine for a paltry 0.3%. The Walton family, for example, has more wealth than 42% of American families combined.

    We don’t want to live like this. In our ideal distribution, the top quintile owns 32% and the bottom two quintiles own 25%. As the journalist Chrystia Freeland put it, “Americans actually live in Russia, although they think they live in Sweden. And they would like to live on a kibbutz.” Norton and Ariely found a surprising level of consensus: everyone — even Republicans and the wealthy—wants a more equal distribution of wealth than the status quo.

    This all might ring a bell. An infographic video of the study went viral and has been watched more than 16 million times.

    In a study published last year, Norton and Sorapop Kiatpongsan used a similar approach to assess perceptions of income inequality. They asked about 55,000 people from 40 countries to estimate how much corporate CEOs and unskilled workers earned. Then they asked people how much CEOs and workers should earn. The median American estimated that the CEO-to-worker pay-ratio was 30-to-1, and that ideally, it’d be 7-to-1. The reality? 354-to-1. Fifty years ago, it was 20-to-1. Again, the patterns were the same for all subgroups, regardless of age, education, political affiliation, or opinion on inequality and pay. “In sum,” the researchers concluded, “respondents underestimate actual pay gaps, and their ideal pay gaps are even further from reality than those underestimates.”

    These two studies imply that our apathy about inequality is due to rose-colored misperceptions. To be fair, though, we do know that something is up. After all, President Obama called economic inequality “the defining challenge of our time.” But while Americans acknowledge that the gap between the rich and poor has widened over the last decade, very few see it as a serious issue. Just five percent of Americans think that inequality is a major problem in need of attention. While the occupy movement may have a tangible legacy, Americans aren’t rioting in the streets.

    "The constituency that listens to Sarah Palin and the like wear rubber noses and have bells on their shoes " Ron Reagan (the smart Reagan). "They are all republican but only half of the party" Ron Reagan. Of course that same group are armed and attack Obgyn Clinics at will as evidenced in Colorado Springs the hot bed of conservatism in CO (AirForce Academy). PP wisely hid their position within office buildings, whereas in Boulder they are allowed to go about their legal activities openly. Conservatives openly flaunt the law, violate the law, and the rich know full well they will not be prosecuted for breaking the law. Reagan (the dumb one) had more administration officials indicted or sentenced than any other, I think usurping Nixon's record.

  • How Stupid Has the Democratic Party Become?   5 hours 17 min ago

    ConservativeCor..., that's kinda illogical. "More balanced" is just "more Republican" and there isn't really a need for two Republican parties and trying to be a "pale pink" Republican or "Republican lite" is a losing recipe. Republicans will always be better at being Republicans than Democrats can be. If people want to vote for a Republican they'll vote for the real thing, not an imitator.
    Anyway, Democrats are much more tolerant of Democrats deviating from party norms. Republicans enforce rigid, lockstep adherence to extreme ideology.
    Pat Brown, Jerry Brown's father and former governor of California, in his book about Ronald Reagan, "Ronald Reagan, the Political Chameleon", put forth that the Democratic Party has been a victim of its own success. It moved the country out of the Great Depression, nurtured the labor movement and presided over the formation of the blue collar middle class and ushered in an economy of care free opulence of the '50s, '60s and early '70's in which people only had to worry about getting high and getting laid as their comfortable survival was practically assured. It ensured that everyone could go to college, beginning with the G.I. Bill and continuing with Pell Grants and Guaranteed Student Loans, so that children of those blue collar workers could all become highly educated and highly skilled professionals.
    So our society went from poor in the Depression to middle class in the '50s and '60s to upper middle class and rich in the '70s and beyond. So what happens when people start making money? They start buying stock and voting Republican or, in any case, as new bourgeois they start humming the bourgeois tune, adopt bourgeois values and a bourgeois perspective. Their values change as their vested interests change.
    Another thing that happened, in addition to the deindustrialization of the United States and the destruction of the labor movement - all attributable to Ronald Reagan and his Republicans - and the consequential defunding of the Democratic Party and causing it to start taking money from the same people as do the Republicans that Thom describes, was the Civil Rights Movement and the Democrats adopting civil rights as an essential part of their platform. JFK and RFK were greatly overrated by legend in this area, even to the point of Hollywood making a completely fabricated picture of their purported heroism. Their rhetoric was good but their actions were wanting if not absent. RFK's FBI wouldn't raise a finger to help protect the civil rights workers and activists, for example, and just let them get beat up, hosed down, attacked by dogs, arrested and murdered. The Administration was too afraid to alienate the Southern Democrats who eventually defected anyway, as LBJ predicted, and THAT may be the biggest thing to beat back the Democratic Party and send it into a rag tag retreat that it has yet to come around from.
    Democrats have the unenviable duty of keeping the people united leaving no group out or marginalized. No racial, sexual or other minority or other relatively powerless group is to be excluded.
    Therefore the Democrats must overcome some deep and ancient animosities and rivalries and sometimes can manage, at best, uneasy coalitions.
    The Republicans, on the other hand, need only destroy and undermine the coalitions, alliances and unities Democrats work so hard to build. They only have to say, in many cases, only two or three words, "gay marriage", Willie Horton", "Welfare queen", and it's all over and the Republicans have turned the people against each other and got people voting AGAINST somebody else instead of FOR themselves.

  • "Cops Gone Wild"   9 hours 41 min ago

    Gun nut open carries everywhere, because Costco might have a customer waiting to get 'im.

    He was a mall cop, married, making unwelcome advances to a 20 year old. But he carries a gun, and a gun protects from rejection. 3 shots in the back of the 20 year old as she worked the Children's Museum, a dream job for her.

  • American Ignorance Defined   10 hours 12 min ago
    A poll conducted by Time/CNN on the estate tax issue in 2000 revealed that 39 per cent of Americans believe that they are either in the wealthiest 1 per cent or will be there ‘soon’.

    That's a pretty shocking statistic, and one which I don't recall hearing before. And, the actual poll is hard to dig up.

    In a New York Times op-ed piece (Brooks 2003), columnist David Brooks interpreted this survey to saythat “nineteen percent of Americans say they are in the richest 1 percent and a further 20 percent expect tobe someday.” Genauer’s (2003) interpretation was similar. In fact, the question did not ask respondents toplace themselves in the American income distribution. Rather, it asked “As you may know, Al Gore hasclaimed that George W. Bush’s proposed tax cut will largely benefit those with high incomes, who heclaims are the top 1%. Thinking about your own situation, do you think that you are in the top group thatwould benefit from Bush’s proposed tax cut now, do you think you will be in this group that will benefit inthe future, or do you think you will not benefit fromBush’s tax cut.” The question defines the “top group”as those who would benefit from Bush’s tax cut, and incidentally notes that Gore thinks the group that will“largely benefit” is the top 1%........................................................................................................................ A respondent can know he is not in the top 1% (or even in the top 10%)while still believing that he is or will be in the “top group that would benefit” from Bush’s proposed taxcuts, and thus respond affirmatively to the question.

  • Why should I vote for Bernie??   10 hours 17 min ago
    Quote MMfrompa:… when i log off here i feel like a brain surgeon.
    OK, but Ben Carson has revealed to the world that the intellect of brain surgeons - outside of brain surgery – really isn’t anything special, even among the people of Wal-Mart.

  • Why should I vote for Bernie??   10 hours 22 min ago
    Quote Mmfrompa:Ok here is my answer. The biggest problem with a minimum wage is that there is one.
    Of course, workers must be paid less to increase the amount of mansions and caviar for the owners. All while taxpayers make up the difference to support said workers.

    Quote MMfrompa: All that happens is everyone gets paid the same and gives no incentive to produce more to become more valuble to your employer and get paid more.
    That’s not the current model. The last several decades, workers produce more to become more valuable to employers and get paid less.

  • Corporations As Frankensteins: How Can We Regain Control?   10 hours 27 min ago
    Quote gumball:Too bad that pesky constitution gets in the way of the lefts repeated attempts to use the power of government to shut down political speech they don't like.
    So you’re approving crony capitalism under the “free speech” banner?

  • This idea that we can't attack Hillary, because she could be the nominee, and therefore...   10 hours 29 min ago
    Quote cynicalliberal:

    Kobe Bryant is better than Michael Jordan. I want to debate Jordan v. Bryant in full detail. But first, let me state this. Bryant has his flaws, but if you don't like him, then you must like Lebron James. Now, tell me Bryant is better than Michael Jordan, because if you don't, then I'll tell you how disgusted I am that you love Lebron James.

    I guess I kinda get what you’re saying, but I will overlay my point onto your metaphor which would be do not go home and not vote if Jordan kicks Bryant’s butt, otherwise Lebron James is dunking balls off your forehead. But it is your right to get balls dunked off your forehead by James.

    Quote cynicalliberal:
    I came into this thread mad about what you guys were doing, but now I'm mad at myself. I'm mad that I got mad about something so deliberate, intentional, planned and choreographed.
    Here, in the Hartmann discussion forum, I believe there has been robust discussion of Hillary’s weaknesses vs. Bernie. If your frustration is with Thom Hartmann himself, for not allowing the “circular firing squad,” or with DWS for stacking the deck for Hillary, then I will share your frustration.

  • This idea that we can't attack Hillary, because she could be the nominee, and therefore...   10 hours 36 min ago
    Quote cynicallliberal:We should discuss Bernie v. Hillary.... but if you take your marbles and go home if Hillary wins, then you're a loser.
    Sorry, this is still my position. Although I would rephrase it as this is a "losing" proposition, as opposed to calling you a "loser." I would respect anyone's right to not vote in protest, or in frustration.

    Quote cynicalliberal:Notice what wasn't in that sentence? Is it:

    A. Words

    B. punctuation

    C. A discussion of Hillary v. Bernie

    I like the new debate format. State the desire for a debate, then jump straight to a future ultimatum that makes sure there is never an actual debate... doing so by using a boogie man.

    I really don’t get your point, cynicalliberal. So we all have to go all out for Bernie, bash Hillary, then if Bernie loses, all’s good because we tried our best for Bernie…even if we then go on to support Hillary in the General? Or do we have to sit at home if Bernie loses, and not vote to pass the purity test? I am not trying to be snarky here, only trying to understand the thinking.

  • This idea that we can't attack Hillary, because she could be the nominee, and therefore...   10 hours 40 min ago
    Quote cynicalliberal:This thread was about not doing what you just did though. If you can't have a Hillary v. Bernie substantive debate that doesn't turn into...

    Pretend Hillary has already won, and you're a traitor because you just want a Republican

    I don’t see how anything I wrote suggested to you that I “pretend Hillary has already won.” I wrote this:
    Quote al3: I see absolutely no problem with attacking Hillary...indeed that's part of the rough-and-tumble way we vet candidates.
    I am not sure how you interpret anything I wrote as “pretending Hillary has already won.” I’m also not criticizing those who attack Hillary, and have criticized Thom for not allowing that.

    Quote cynicalliberal:
    Then you don't really want that debate.

    It's a total canard and it's just going to be repeated ad nauseum in hopes that there never is an actual debate about the two.

    You can't go anywhere, even progressive talk radio, without any Bernie v. Hillary discussion going like this...

    There is actually a pretty robust debate right here on the forum. Now I will agree Thom neuters any debate criticizing Hillary, and I am on record questioning why does he do that. I think maybe that is why you are so frustrated.

  • Corporations As Frankensteins: How Can We Regain Control?   11 hours 14 min ago

    I guess we will go down this rabbit hole again. If organizations of people are not covered by the 14th what is to stop the state of Texas from confiscating all the assets of planned parenthood within the state?

  • "NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses"   12 hours 11 min ago
    Quote rs allen:

    Ultrax, I beginning to believe you and joiner have a bromance going on.

    M is still pissed that some years back he accused me of not being a gun owner. In his mind he must believe all gun owners are Gun Nuts who believe in a bastardized version of the Second which negates the militia clause. I posted my old FID card and my gun's manual and he's been hoping to get back by scoring cheap points ever since. He doesn't seem to realize that the effort often makes him look peevish and silly as in this thread.

  • Corporations As Frankensteins: How Can We Regain Control?   12 hours 20 min ago
    Quote Combad57:The only one in a corporation who has "freedom of speech" is the CEO. Clerks and floor workers best keep their mouths shut especially if they disagree with the CEO.

    Corporations by design are private tyrannies designed to aggregate wealth and maximize profits. We can not let them use their wealth and power to hijack the political system that created them.

  • Corporations As Frankensteins: How Can We Regain Control?   12 hours 23 min ago
    Quote gumball:

    Too bad that pesky constitution gets in the way of the lefts repeated attempts to use the power of government to shut down political speech they don't like.

    Corporations are NOT People. They never had the rights of People. Corporations are mentioned NO WHERE in the Constitution... neither are rights for corporations. Are you suggesting that the 14th Amendment... CLEARLY MEANT FOR HUMANS... should be hijacked to mean artificial paper entities created by government for economic purposes? If so... please find it in the actual wording:

    14.1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    Corporations clearly can not be born or naturalized. Any rights they may have a purely statutory... not constitutional. And the proposed Move To Amend amendment makes no distinction between corporations and unions. So your claim that the left wants to stop speech it disagrees with is just more of your typical Orwellian Right bullsh*t.

    Section 1. [Artificial Entities Such as Corporations Do Not Have Constitutional Rights]

    The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only.

    Artificial entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law.

    The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the People, through Federal, State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.

    Section 2. [Money is Not Free Speech]

    Federal, State, and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate's own contributions and expenditures, to ensure that all citizens, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process, and that no person gains, as a result of their money, substantially more access or ability to influence in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.

    Federal, State, and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed.

    The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the First Amendment.

    Your retraction is noted even if not offered.

    When corporate money was banned from politics a century ago by the Tilman Act... it was because the abuses had become intolerable and had corrupted the political system. Your idea that it we should NOT be able to protect our political system from such corruption undermines the very constitution you believes guarantees this right.

  • Al Quida Encourages Jihadists To Go To Gunshows!   12 hours 49 min ago
    Quote gumball:

    Do you honestly think that requiring private sellers to do a background check will make any meaningful difference?

    Leaving aside over a million sales have been blocked already... the answer is YES. The Bloomberg sting PROVES there are private sellers who will gladly sell to people who admit they probably not past a background check. It also proves that even licensed FFL who have to do background checks will gladly sell to a straw purchaser who's standing in for someone who admitted they'd probably not pass a background check. Next question.

    DIRECT QUESTION: So how many preventable robberies, rapes, and murders have to be stopped before YOU consider the effort as "meaningful".

  • Tea Party and the Second Stage of Fascism.   13 hours 48 min ago

    cont'd from At Nuremburg prosecutors faced a dilemma, to prosecute those that promoted the ascent of fascism they would have to charge capitalism itself. The US had major corporate supporters of fascism, GM, Ford, and US Steel among them, all having armed Franco behind FDR's back. The 1% adores fascism.

  • Tea Party and the Second Stage of Fascism.   13 hours 58 min ago


    Fascism Inc.Aris Chatzistefanou, Featured 2014 1:23:40

    Fascism Inc. examines a series of historical events to compile a view of the past, the present and the future of fascism and its relation to the economic interests of each era—including the current era. The film travels from Mussolini’s Italy, to Greece under the Nazi occupation; the civil war and the dictatorship; and from Hitler’s Germany to the modern European and Greek fascism. Following on from the foundations of earlier films such as Debtocracy and Catastroika which described the causes of the debt crisis, the impact of the austerity measures, the erosion of democracy and the sell-out of the country’s assets;Fascism Inc. aspires to continue to motivate anti-fascist resistance movements across Europe, and the world.

    In post WW2 OSS sought advice on what to do with the corporate echelon that assisted Germany. Marcuse said prosecute them with the nazis.

  • Large Group of Black Religious Leaders Expected to Endorse Trump   15 hours 36 min ago

    I suppose this depends on what's meant by "large number." I'm not impressed by 100 but I expect the opposite side if the receiving line will look pretty impressive.

Latest Headlines

Obama to veto legislation on refugee screening

President Barack Obama would veto a Republican bill introduced in the wake of the Paris attacks to toughen the screening process for Syrian refugees

New York officials: No credible ISIS threat against city

There is no credible threat to New York City at this time, officials said

China denies torturing political prisoners

A Chinese delegation denied mistreatement of prisoners held in police stations and deaths in custody

Community Archive

Why the Kochs Really Embraced Criminal Justice Reform...

It looks like the Koch brothers have scammed us once again.

When news first came out that Charles and David Koch -- the Koch brothers -- were supporting criminal justice reform efforts in Congress, many of us thought, "Wow, they're actually doing something good for once."

And for good reason, too.