Recent comments

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   2 days 2 hours ago
    Quote Garrett78:
    Quote ronsears:

    Arggh! Have you "Never Hillary" irates noticed that EVEN REPUBLICANS (Kasich for example) are advising against voting for Trump?

    Two Republican Supreme Court appointments by 2018, and all of this ridiculously long 214 post "discussion" will be like so much Philosophical poop we got on our shoes as we held hands and walked together into hell.

    Please, please, get real and vote for every Democratic candidate you can in November, warts and all. The Republican alternatives are a disaster that our kid's kids will have to live with.

    Yep. I'll say it again (and echo Zenzoe), even Chomsky says as much. Sanders will likely do the same, eventually.

    Absolutely, to both.

    I like "Anti-Hillary Irates," folks I think of as Accidental Trump Activists. I can think of few news events that will be sweeter than a presidential election resulting in "Trump, The Loser!" and, if our friends here deny me that, I'm gonna be royally pissed.

    Btw, it interests me to see that among the first things the recent coup fascists in Brazil did was the elimination of social-issue ministers:

    Quote Democracy Now:

    Juan Gonzalez: And could you talk, as well, about his elimination of all these other ministers that deal with social issues within the—within the government?

    MARIA LUISA MENDONÇA: Yes, exactly. Just a few hours after taking power, he eliminated the Ministries of Women, of Agricultural Development, of Human Rights and Racial Equality, of Culture, of Communications. So, it was a huge structural change, with very serious consequences...

    I can see a President Trump doing the very same thing (not that we have a "Ministry of Women"), eliminating or seriously damaging social-issue government departments, as well as putting right-wing climate-deniers in control of the EPA, if he wouldn't eliminate the agency altogether. He's the scariest thing to come along, and I mean EVER!

  • Hillary Clinton Now Loses to Trump in Polls. Bernie Sanders Beats Trump by 10.8 Points   2 days 2 hours ago

    Well, If the Democrats want to win, I guess they need to use their supervoters to do one of the things they were designed to do.

    I think public opinion has changed and Bernie would win a single day national Democrat and hopefully democratic primary against Hillary if held today. Also, if Independents were allowed to vote as well, Hillary would have dropped out by now.

  • Clinton Emails on fracking   2 days 2 hours ago

    I was going to post that article.

    I was going to call it "Hillary Fracking Clinton"

    In Clintonese - She is against "fracking". She simply favors American energy independence via the development of clean safe shale gas.

    It's just like when she says she wants to get "unaccountable" money out of politics, or she wants "universal" healthcare "coverage".

    It's all slimy language of unaccountability.

  • Clinton Emails on fracking   2 days 5 hours ago
    Quote JimR:

    Good new article about new emails showing she pushed fracking around the world.

    https://theintercept.com/2016/05/23/hillary-clinton-fracking/

    Wow! With emails like that, it's no wonder she used a private server to sabotage FOIA and transparency.

  • change the wording to CLIMATE CATASTROPHE   2 days 5 hours ago

    What the Governor of Florida does not realize is climate change sneaks up on you in ways that you do not think of.

    http://www.npr.org/2016/05/25/477014085/rising-seas-push-too-much-salt-i...

  • Thom Asks "Can Hillary Woo Bernie Supporters?"   2 days 9 hours ago

    If Hilary is nominated the Democratic Party will be nominating a loser. Trump will be the POTUS.

  • Oil company records from 1960s reveal patents to reduce CO2 emissions in cars   2 days 9 hours ago
  • Why I am 100% For Bernie   2 days 10 hours ago
    Quote Garrett78:

    Quote DeMartMan:
    Quote Garrett78:
    Quote DeMartMan:
    Quote Garrett78:
    Quote Cocoamia:

    I am in 100% for Bernie but if he tells us to vote for HIllary we will have to part ways.

    In all likelihood, that's what he'll do. Just as Clinton conceded and endorsed Obama in 2008.

    Unless you have a crystal ball to look into the future, you do not know that! I know that you are told to say that in order to get paid for trolling, but you are just blowing smoke. I can just as easy say that Hillary cannot win in the general and as such should drop out of the race.

    You have an interesting interpretation of "in all likelihood."

    So, you admit to being a troll, thank you for finally being honest.

    What I admit to is making a prediction is not the same as saying "I know" such and such will happen. "In all likelihood" means I think such and such is likely.


    Why is it that Republicans want to run against Hillary? I'm not sure that the so-called Hillary trolls aren't in fact, Republicans.

  • Why I am 100% For Bernie   2 days 10 hours ago
    Quote DeMartMan:
    Quote Garrett78:
    Quote DeMartMan:
    Quote Garrett78:
    Quote Cocoamia:

    I am in 100% for Bernie but if he tells us to vote for HIllary we will have to part ways.

    In all likelihood, that's what he'll do. Just as Clinton conceded and endorsed Obama in 2008.

    Unless you have a crystal ball to look into the future, you do not know that! I know that you are told to say that in order to get paid for trolling, but you are just blowing smoke. I can just as easy say that Hillary cannot win in the general and as such should drop out of the race.

    You have an interesting interpretation of "in all likelihood."

    So, you admit to being a troll, thank you for finally being honest.

    What I admit to is making a prediction is not the same as saying "I know" such and such will happen. "In all likelihood" means I think such and such is likely.

  • Thom Asks "Can Hillary Woo Bernie Supporters?"   2 days 11 hours ago
    Quote ronsears:

    I suggest you are not asking the most practical question here. The real issue is whether the establishment Democratic Party has the bureaucratic ability and courage to field the most competitive Presidential candidate in November. There are three possibilities:

    1) The establishment Democratic Party could surprise the hell out of the Republicans and everyone else in our Nation, enthusiastically embrace the Progressive Revolution raging around them and clearly shown in Bernie's polling data, and make the most obvious and practical political choice. They could make Bernie the Presidential candidate and win big in November, with coat tails that retake the Senate with a super majority and maybe even retake the House. Then with their historic new coalition of Independents, previously disillusioned Democrats and even some Republicans, the new Progressive Democratic Party could dominate the US political scene for decades while maintaining our respect by successfully tackling Global Warming, Wall Street / Banking Investment reforms, Infrastructure / Jobs, Single Payer Health care, fixing rotten Trade Agreements, Immigration reforms, etc.

    Or,

    2) The establishment Democratic Party could compromise, take a really big chance on Hillary being able to successfully re-brand herself as a true Progressive, loudly embrace Bernie's Progressive platform, provide PROOF that their change of heart is real (Elizabeth Warren or Bernie as VP?), and probably win the Presidency and retake the Senate, but not a Senate super majority, and forget the House.

    Or,

    3) The Democratic Party could stick to their tired old Wall Street / Corp / Oligarch financed third-way politics, make Hillary the candidate with some transparently false nods to the Progressive Revolution, and count on voters being so scared of Trump that they vote for Hillary anyway. Democrats would then stand a very good chance of loosing the Presidency, and, with no coat tails, are unlikely to retake the Senate much less win a super majority, and forget about any significant gains in the House. Meantime, the Progressive Revolution will proceed anyway, bypassing the old establishment Democratic party hacks, under the de facto leadership of a guy named Bernie Sanders. The humiliation of loosing to Trump would no doubt make it much easier for the new Progressive Democratic Party to more quickly replace the old from the ashes of defeat, but Republican Supreme Court appointments and who knows what other destruction from a Republican President, Senate and House will set back any Progressive change for decades, if not forever.

    Now, critically, does anything in the three possibilities above suggest it would ever be rational to refuse to vote for Hillary should she be the candidate? NO! Just because establishment Democrats make stupid and even unpatriotic choices is no reason to “burn down the barn” we also occupy. Has the "Never Hillary" crowd noticed that EVEN REPUBLICANS (Kasich for example) are advising against voting for Trump? Two Republican Supreme Court appointments by 2018, and all of the discussions on Thom's site about not voting for Hillary to “teach the establishment Dems a lesson” will add up to some Philosophical crap we got on our shoes as we held hands and walked together into hell. So, please, please, get real and vote for every Democratic candidate you can in November, warts and all. The Republican alternatives are a disaster that our kid's kids will have to live with.

    An old Chinese curse comes to mind; "May Your Children Live in Interesting Times." We will soon find out one way or another whether the establishment Democratic Party has the capacity to make the obvious politically expedient and patriotically correct choices.

    Hillary has made it very clear that she intends on waging more wars for regime change and intends on using them as a form of proxy warfare with Russia. Who knows what Trump's policy really is, but, he at least pretends to want to partner with Russia against al-Qaeda and ISIS instead of partnering with ISIS and al-Qaeda against Russia. We don't know for sure what the Donald's foreign policy will be, but we are pretty sure that Mrs Clinton's foreign policy is one that risks world war between the superpowers. And yet people keep repeating that this election is all about the Supreme Court. Do you really believe that Hillary is going to appoint Supreme Court justices who will overturn Citizen's United when the only reason that she is winning the Nomination is because of Citizen's United? No reasonable person could believe that is the case. So this whole, "Supreme Court' mantra is not about Citizen's United, it's about social issues like abortion and same sex marriage. Are social issues really worth more unnecessary, immoral, illegal wars against small defenseless countries and the possibility of all-out war with Russia? If you and Thom and Bernie want me to hold my nose and vote for Clinton in order to stop Trump then you need to spend more time convincing me that you will work to impeach her the minute she launches an illegal war for regime change and less time repeating slogans about the Supreme Court.

  • Why I am 100% For Bernie   2 days 11 hours ago
    Quote Garrett78:

    Quote DeMartMan:
    Quote Garrett78:
    Quote Cocoamia:

    I am in 100% for Bernie but if he tells us to vote for HIllary we will have to part ways.

    In all likelihood, that's what he'll do. Just as Clinton conceded and endorsed Obama in 2008.

    Unless you have a crystal ball to look into the future, you do not know that! I know that you are told to say that in order to get paid for trolling, but you are just blowing smoke. I can just as easy say that Hillary cannot win in the general and as such should drop out of the race.

    You have an interesting interpretation of "in all likelihood."


    So, you admit to being a troll, thank you for finally being honest.

  • Isn't it Time for Hilary to Drop Out of the Presidential Race?   2 days 11 hours ago
    Quote Garrett78:

    Quote DeMartMan:
    Quote Garrett78:

    Republicans have been throwing everything, including the kitchen sink, at Clinton for *decades* now. She's been thoroughly vetted and not much has stuck. Look no further than the Benghazi Hearing. It was a farce and an embarrassment for the Republican Party. Sanders is fresh meat. There's a reason Bloomberg considered running if Trump and Sanders were going to be the nominees. Because in that scenario, a 3rd party candidate would likely do better than ever before. In fact, I doubt anyone would get 270 electoral college votes, leaving it up to the House of Representatives to decide who the next POTUS will be.

    You sure know the GOP/Hillary talking point, unfortunately they are worthless! No one is foolish enough to actually think that the Republicans won't bring back all her scandals.

    You seem awfully confused about GOP talking points, which consist of things like "Clinton killed Vince Foster" and "Benghazi!!1!" All I'm doing is advocating reality-based thinking and sound reasoning. Again, I'm not a Clinton fan. I'm sure as hell not a Republican, nor do I get paid to post...would that I did.

    And I didn't say Republicans won't bring up various "scandals." On the contrary, I think that's exactly what they'll do, because that's what they've been doing for decades.

    Clinton will be the nominee. That's been clear since mid-March. Clinton, given her opponent and the electoral map, will be a heavy favorite to reach 270 electoral college votes. Those realities don't have anything to do with liking or disliking Clinton, nor are those realities altered by you not wanting them to be so.


    No, I see little difference in GOP trolls and Hillary trolls. The two, just make up crap without any truth.

  • Isn't it Time for Hilary to Drop Out of the Presidential Race?   2 days 11 hours ago
    Quote DeMartMan:
    Quote Garrett78:

    Republicans have been throwing everything, including the kitchen sink, at Clinton for *decades* now. She's been thoroughly vetted and not much has stuck. Look no further than the Benghazi Hearing. It was a farce and an embarrassment for the Republican Party. Sanders is fresh meat. There's a reason Bloomberg considered running if Trump and Sanders were going to be the nominees. Because in that scenario, a 3rd party candidate would likely do better than ever before. In fact, I doubt anyone would get 270 electoral college votes, leaving it up to the House of Representatives to decide who the next POTUS will be.

    You sure know the GOP/Hillary talking point, unfortunately they are worthless! No one is foolish enough to actually think that the Republicans won't bring back all her scandals.

    You seem awfully confused about GOP talking points, which consist of things like "Clinton killed Vince Foster" and "Benghazi!!1!" All I'm doing is advocating reality-based thinking and sound reasoning. Again, I'm not a Clinton fan. I'm sure as hell not a Republican, nor do I get paid to post...would that I did.

    And I didn't say Republicans won't bring up various "scandals." On the contrary, I think that's exactly what they'll do, because that's what they've been doing for decades.

    Clinton will be the nominee. That's been clear since mid-March. Clinton, given her opponent and the electoral map, will be a heavy favorite to reach 270 electoral college votes. Those realities don't have anything to do with liking or disliking Clinton, nor are those realities altered by you not wanting them to be so.

  • Why I am 100% For Bernie   2 days 11 hours ago
    Quote DeMartMan:
    Quote Garrett78:
    Quote Cocoamia:

    I am in 100% for Bernie but if he tells us to vote for HIllary we will have to part ways.

    In all likelihood, that's what he'll do. Just as Clinton conceded and endorsed Obama in 2008.

    Unless you have a crystal ball to look into the future, you do not know that! I know that you are told to say that in order to get paid for trolling, but you are just blowing smoke. I can just as easy say that Hillary cannot win in the general and as such should drop out of the race.

    You have an interesting interpretation of "in all likelihood."

  • Why I am 100% For Bernie   2 days 11 hours ago
    Quote Garrett78:

    Quote Cocoamia:

    I am in 100% for Bernie but if he tells us to vote for HIllary we will have to part ways.

    In all likelihood, that's what he'll do. Just as Clinton conceded and endorsed Obama in 2008.


    Unless you have a crystal ball to look into the future, you do not know that! I know that you are told to say that in order to get paid for trolling, but you are just blowing smoke. I can just as easy say that Hillary cannot win in the general and as such should drop out of the race.

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   2 days 12 hours ago
    Quote ronsears:

    Arggh! Have you "Never Hillary" irates noticed that EVEN REPUBLICANS (Kasich for example) are advising against voting for Trump?

    Two Republican Supreme Court appointments by 2018, and all of this ridiculously long 214 post "discussion" will be like so much Philosophical poop we got on our shoes as we held hands and walked together into hell.

    Please, please, get real and vote for every Democratic candidate you can in November, warts and all. The Republican alternatives are a disaster that our kid's kids will have to live with.

    Yep. I'll say it again (and echo Zenzoe), even Chomsky says as much. Sanders will likely do the same, eventually.

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   2 days 12 hours ago
    Quote Ulysses:
    Quote Garrett78:

    Here's an article that should make clear how interrelated social and economic issues are, and how sociocultural realities can actually be a driver of economic policy: https://medium.com/@YawoBrown/the-subtle-linguistics-of-polite-white-supremacy-3f83c907ffff#.x6pfd3qeb

    To keep the record clear, I NEVER said they were not interrelated; I said, and still say, that BASIC human ecnomic needs, food, shelter, clothing, medical care, and education, should be human rights and they should all be addressed before anything else. People can't philosophize very well when they're hungry and homeless.

    The sociocultural aspects are a driver of those disparities. They help enable those economic disparities.

  • Daily Topics - Tuesday May 24th, 2016   2 days 12 hours ago

    Outstanding show today, Tuesday, May 24, '16! Thank you Thom, Louise & staff.

    I especially loved:

    Quotes from the classically Democratic Party leaders FDR, FFK, & references to Truman. My favorite was the tongue-in-cheek FDR audio describing Republican 'handling' of progressive government: "We'd do it better and without charging anyone." Haven't we all heard those claims; and from a sarcastice (?!) Roosevelt, that clip was a hoot!

    You and Clinton-Supporting Steph Miller (love her, AND I am a Bernie suppporter). Your demonstrating respect and refusal to be divided by rascals/high jinx from the Right was a very important thing right now! Please, do more of this and host some other Clinton-supporting friends. It's great role-modeling! We can all use that.

  • Thom Asks "Can Hillary Woo Bernie Supporters?"   2 days 13 hours ago

    Hillary having Bernie or Liz Warren as VP doesn't prove that Clinton is serious about being "progressive", it's just nice window dressing and nothing more given how much of a do nothing position VP is. Again, you want to vote for Hillary, fine and dandy, but I vote for those that have earned it, and don't recieve it by default.

  • Big Oil Could Have Put A Dent In CO2 Emissions In 1970s — But Did Nothing   2 days 14 hours ago

    Obviously for the oil barons, the seduction of wealth was too much to overcome, even when armed with the science of a global environmental catastrophe. It's going to take selfless and strong leadership to pull us out of this one.

    We all know the choice Dangerous Don will make......along with someone like Palin as his running mate, it will be drill baby drill. Bernie is the selfless and determined leader we need for this time and place in history.

    The corpse media has already crowned Dangerous Don as leader of the largest military the planet has ever seen...it could end up being game over by nukes before game over by climate change. Trump supporters are "Fox" sleep walking right into a hellish nightmare, and taking the rest of us down with them.

    Meanwhile our government is now trying to arm Vietnam with lethal weapons.. ...we're an evil empire for sure....it's not going to end pretty.

  • Now available : The Thom Hartmann iPhone App   2 days 14 hours ago

    I am still unable to buy podcasts so all I can say is good luck. It's hard to believe that the webmaster will not help anyone.

  • Hillary Clinton Now Loses to Trump in Polls. Bernie Sanders Beats Trump by 10.8 Points   2 days 15 hours ago
    Quote Legend:

    The worse case scenario is Trump as POTUS. The best and only way to stop this is nominating Bernie as Democratic Candidate for POTUS, Bernie has a 10% lead on Trump. Hilary will lose to Trump and he will be POTUS. Polls back this. We will be the total losers if Hilary is nominated. We will be the winners if Bernie is nominated. What do any of you not get?

    I get it. I agree. Hillary will lose this election. Those huge margins she won by in the Old Confederacy? That are giving her her primary victory? Wont do her a bit of good in the General. The Democratic vote in those states has not had any bearing on the presidential election post the civil rights era.

    By normal election standards the electorial college map does favor Hillary. But this is not a normal election. This election is the first where a candidate is openly running against the trade deals that have made the rust belt rusty. This is the first election where a candidate understands the new social media - just like FDR understood how to use the new media of his day (radio) to communicate with voters enmass, as did JFK with the new TV gadget.

    The electorate is becoming more liberal at a time when the Democratic Party is running the most conservative candidate in modern Democratic Party history.

    The Democratic Party is dillusional. They seem to think thanks to demographic shifts they can ignore their traditional base, do nothing, continue to court Wall Street, and let time destroy the Republican Party. This at a time when Republicans are enjoying unprecidented success everywhere but in the executive branch of the Fed. Delusional.

    Voter surpression? Debald voting machines? Running against nafta? New social media skills? A candidate uncannily comfortable in his own skin? Trump will destroy the most conservative, most old school, most coldly calculating, most unpopular (second only to Trump himself in some demographics) presidential candidate in modern times. Bernie is our only hope. Hillary has announced she will put Bill in charge of the ecomony. Really? How badly do you have misunderstand the political zeitgist to do that? Trump is going to be all over that like a cheap suit.

    It is a big mistake to assume that Trump swept the primaries because of zeniphobia. That assumption, although not entirely false, is Dems seeing what they want to see. When you base your election strategy on your own self congradulating superiority....

    Really enjoyed the Thomas Frank interview on todays show. He is spot on.

  • My Blog on Wordpress   2 days 15 hours ago

    Sydeshow,

    I don't know you. However, I hate it when someone makes a statement but only backs it with a link to a website. What made you put it here? What is Your Point of view? I'm not necessarily interested in a random link.

  • Hillary Clinton Now Loses to Trump in Polls. Bernie Sanders Beats Trump by 10.8 Points   2 days 15 hours ago

    I suggest we need to ask the most practical question here. The real issue is whether the establishment Democratic Party has the bureaucratic ability and courage to field the most competitive Presidential candidate in November. There are three possibilities:

    1) The establishment Democratic Party could surprise the hell out of the Republicans and everyone else in our Nation, enthusiastically embrace the Progressive Revolution raging around them and clearly shown in Bernie's polling data, and make the most obvious and practical political choice. They could make Bernie the Presidential candidate and win big in November, with coat tails that retake the Senate with a super majority and maybe even retake the House. Then with their historic new coalition of Independents, previously disillusioned Democrats and even some Republicans, the new Progressive Democratic Party could dominate the US political scene for decades while maintaining our respect by successfully tackling Global Warming, Wall Street / Banking Investment reforms, Infrastructure / Jobs, Single Payer Health care, fixing rotten Trade Agreements, Immigration reforms, etc.

    Or,

    2) The establishment Democratic Party could compromise, take a really big chance on Hillary being able to successfully re-brand herself as a true Progressive, loudly embrace Bernie's Progressive platform, provide PROOF that their change of heart is real (Elizabeth Warren or Bernie as VP?), and probably win the Presidency and retake the Senate, but not a Senate super majority, and forget the House.

    Or,

    3) The Democratic Party could stick to their tired old Wall Street / Corp / Oligarch financed third-way politics, make Hillary the candidate with some transparently false nods to the Progressive Revolution, and count on voters being so scared of Trump that they vote for Hillary anyway. Democrats would then stand a very good chance of loosing the Presidency, and, with no coat tails, are unlikely to retake the Senate much less win a super majority, and forget about any significant gains in the House. Meantime, the Progressive Revolution will proceed anyway, bypassing the old establishment Democratic party hacks, under the de facto leadership of a guy named Bernie Sanders. The humiliation of loosing to Trump would no doubt make it much easier for the new Progressive Democratic Party to more quickly replace the old from the ashes of defeat, but Republican Supreme Court appointments and who knows what other destruction from a Republican President, Senate and House will set back any Progressive change for decades, if not forever.

    Now, critically, does anything in the three possibilities above suggest it would ever be rational to refuse to vote for Hillary should she be the candidate? NO! Just because establishment Democrats make stupid and even unpatriotic choices is no reason to “burn down the barn” we also occupy. Has the "Never Hillary" crowd noticed that EVEN REPUBLICANS (Kasich for example) are advising against voting for Trump? Two Republican Supreme Court appointments by 2018, and all of these discussions on Thom's site about not voting for Hillary to “teach the establishment Dems a lesson” will add up to so much Philosophical crap we got on our shoes as we held hands and walked together into hell. So, please, please, get real and vote for every Democratic candidate you can in November, warts and all. The Republican alternatives are a disaster that our kid's kids will have to live with.

    An old Chinese curse comes to mind; "May Your Children Live in Interesting Times." We will soon find out one way or another whether the establishment Democratic Party has the capacity to make the obvious politically expedient and patriotically correct choices.

  • Thom Asks "Can Hillary Woo Bernie Supporters?"   2 days 15 hours ago

    I suggest you are not asking the most practical question here. The real issue is whether the establishment Democratic Party has the bureaucratic ability and courage to field the most competitive Presidential candidate in November. There are three possibilities:

    1) The establishment Democratic Party could surprise the hell out of the Republicans and everyone else in our Nation, enthusiastically embrace the Progressive Revolution raging around them and clearly shown in Bernie's polling data, and make the most obvious and practical political choice. They could make Bernie the Presidential candidate and win big in November, with coat tails that retake the Senate with a super majority and maybe even retake the House. Then with their historic new coalition of Independents, previously disillusioned Democrats and even some Republicans, the new Progressive Democratic Party could dominate the US political scene for decades while maintaining our respect by successfully tackling Global Warming, Wall Street / Banking Investment reforms, Infrastructure / Jobs, Single Payer Health care, fixing rotten Trade Agreements, Immigration reforms, etc.

    Or,

    2) The establishment Democratic Party could compromise, take a really big chance on Hillary being able to successfully re-brand herself as a true Progressive, loudly embrace Bernie's Progressive platform, provide PROOF that their change of heart is real (Elizabeth Warren or Bernie as VP?), and probably win the Presidency and retake the Senate, but not a Senate super majority, and forget the House.

    Or,

    3) The Democratic Party could stick to their tired old Wall Street / Corp / Oligarch financed third-way politics, make Hillary the candidate with some transparently false nods to the Progressive Revolution, and count on voters being so scared of Trump that they vote for Hillary anyway. Democrats would then stand a very good chance of loosing the Presidency, and, with no coat tails, are unlikely to retake the Senate much less win a super majority, and forget about any significant gains in the House. Meantime, the Progressive Revolution will proceed anyway, bypassing the old establishment Democratic party hacks, under the de facto leadership of a guy named Bernie Sanders. The humiliation of loosing to Trump would no doubt make it much easier for the new Progressive Democratic Party to more quickly replace the old from the ashes of defeat, but Republican Supreme Court appointments and who knows what other destruction from a Republican President, Senate and House will set back any Progressive change for decades, if not forever.

    Now, critically, does anything in the three possibilities above suggest it would ever be rational to refuse to vote for Hillary should she be the candidate? NO! Just because establishment Democrats make stupid and even unpatriotic choices is no reason to “burn down the barn” we also occupy. Has the "Never Hillary" crowd noticed that EVEN REPUBLICANS (Kasich for example) are advising against voting for Trump? Two Republican Supreme Court appointments by 2018, and all of the discussions on Thom's site about not voting for Hillary to “teach the establishment Dems a lesson” will add up to some Philosophical crap we got on our shoes as we held hands and walked together into hell. So, please, please, get real and vote for every Democratic candidate you can in November, warts and all. The Republican alternatives are a disaster that our kid's kids will have to live with.

    An old Chinese curse comes to mind; "May Your Children Live in Interesting Times." We will soon find out one way or another whether the establishment Democratic Party has the capacity to make the obvious politically expedient and patriotically correct choices.

Latest Headlines

Who rejected United States-North Korea peace talks?

There were conflicting reports on Sunday regarding a recent proposal for United States-North Korea peace talks which was allegedly made before North Korea"s recent nuclear test

U.K. Pound Falls As Markets Get Brexit Jitters

Bloomberg said on Monday the pound had sustained its biggest fall against the dollar in 11 months

Clinton: I'll defend Israel but push for 'two-state solution

Hillary Clinton believes both Republican candidates Donald Trump and Ted Cruz "missed the mark" with their approach to the Israel-Palestinian Arab conflict

Community Archive

Did the Fossil Fuel Industry Bring Us to the Point of No Return?

As runaway climate change continues to wreak havoc on the planet, it’s getting harder and harder to disagree with the idea that we’re in the middle of a potentially massive extinction event. It’s also getting harder and harder to ignore the potentially criminal liability of at least some fossil fuel companies for causing this mess.