Highlights for Monday August 24th 2009

more-humanity-imagesHour One - Who's winning the battle at the townhall meetings...public or "for profit" for healthcare? Thom mixes it up with Dan Gainor of the Business and Media Institute www.businessandmedia.org

Plus - Cynthia Wilson www.montanademocrats.org Baucus on the public option

Hour Two - Why do conservatives want to keep American children stupid? Don Soifer www.lexingtoninstitute.org

Hour Three - CIA torture memos being released this week - what's there? Majorie Cohn www.marjoriecohn.com

Comments

Mark (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#1

I have to confess that I am much less impressed with these “passionate” pro-Palestinian advocates than some other people seem to be; too bad the Palestinians and their advocates are not as passionate about peace. "Idealism" and realism are rarely compatible. A dispassionate knowledge of history would cure the disease that afflicts one or two of the commentators on this page, but do we really need to rehash old stories? Or would it simply be a waste of time?

It is a waste of time pointing out that Palestine is a geographical construct, occupied by different peoples at different times through-out most of its history, ruled by one empire or another—with the exception of the periods that the Israelites/Jews maintained an independent state there. The word “Palestinian” simply denotes the Arabs who live there, and who share a common religion (Islam) and language (or at least the "literary" Arabic that is taught in schools) with the rest of the Arab world, with some small differences in regional culture. Thus the “Arab World” is unique in history in that it comprises of many separate “states” across a broad, interlocked geographic area that seem almost interchangeable (Egypt’s Nasser dreamed of becoming the ruler of a “Pan-Arab” empire). The modern Arab states (Egypt might be an exception) are for the most part chunks cut-up by the British and French mandates after the break-up of the Ottoman empire.

It’s also a waste of time pointing out that the current demands by the pro-Palestinian advocates were already in place by the partition of 1948 (anticipated by the Balfour declaration in 1917). The Palestinians had no factual historical claim to their own state, but they refused to co-exist with an “infidel,” Jewish or Christian, even when it meant a state of their own. Although it is true that hard-line Zionists wanted all of Palestine, there wasn’t any way the international community was going to allow that—until the Palestinians essentially gave-away their state by conducting a mass exodus, becoming refugees not by necessity but by abiding by the commands of their decidedly unvisionary leaders.

It is seems a waste of time pointing out that even after having been beset by enemies on all sides bent on its destruction, the Israelis were still willing to barter all the land they occupied in the 1967 war for peace, but the Arab world allow that chance to slip away. In the more recent past, the lack of true Palestinian statesmen allowed chances at a legitimate peace slip away; Arafat, who at best was a capricious opportunist, did not deal in a honest way with serious peacemakers like Rabin, and after his assassination, Peres. Hamas suicide attacks in Israel derailed that first real chance for a lasting peace, but the Palestinians were given a second chance with Barak. Barak went against the wishes of even his own party by offering to “share” Jerusalem, but Arafat refused to compromise on this and the issue of the refugees returning to Israel—a right they had vacated 50 years earlier. Arafat’s all or nothing gambit failed. The Israelis tired of his game and voted Barak and the last best peace plan for the Palestinians out. That peace plan was taken off the table for good when the next round of Palestinian uprisings began.

And it is also useless to point out that the Palestinians are still unable to get their act together and speak as one coherent voice in favor of peace with Israel. If impoverished peasants in Mexico decided to lob mortars and missiles into Texas, it wouldn’t be hard to imagine the reaction of Americans, regardless of the grievances of Mexican peasants who have been harmed by price restrictions that benefit American farmers under NAFTA. Yet Palestinians in Gaza have chosen as their representative an organization, Hamas, that is bent on the destruction of Israel, and has repeatedly tested the patience and willingness of the Israeli people to deal with the Palestinians, who lobbed for months mortars and missiles into Israel without provocation before the Israeli army retaliated. All Hamas ever needed to do was recognize the right of Israel to exist. They will not do so. The Israelis want peace. The Palestinians, at least in Gaza, have chosen “leaders” who apparently do not. They had their opportunities, but the hand they played was violence and murder, and outside the Muslim world, events like Munich were far from public relations victories for the Palestinians and their cause. Now they must deal with the bad hand they left themselves with.

Israel can be justly criticized for continuing to build settlements on the West Bank, which calls into question their sincerity. But the lack of reciprocity to the concessions the Israelis have made in the past have with some justification produced distrust on the part of the Israelis in the Palestinians commitment to peace, which has always been a questionable commodity. All that Israel has asked for is recognition of its right to exist, but for Iran and the Arab world this has proved too difficult a pill to swallow, particularly since anti-Jewish propaganda has proved such a useful tool to focus the population’s attention away from domestic problems.

Those who forget the past, as they say, are bound to repeat it. Is this what you “passionate” pro-Palestinian advocates are suggesting—that we continue the several millennia-long pogrom against the Jews? It sure sounds like it to me.

Loretta (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#2

I think I will take a little break from the belittling, arrogant, egoism creeping up on this blog from a few commentators who think they are right and don't seem to have much room for opinions other than their own. I used to love this community but I think I need a bit of a break. Have a terrific week.

DDay (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#3

I just began contributing to this blog last week. I hope that my few posts didn't contribute to Loretta's decision to flee. It wouldn't be the first time I was judged as being arrogant, belittling, or egotistical. It does seem from my narrow perch that some contributors to this conversation seem to have an agenda which they keep returning to. Personally I'm never that consistent in beating a single drum.

Tom Y (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#4

What's with the Rush Limbaugh advert on KTLK 1150? Oh well, take his money. I doubt that it will result in very many people changing the dial...

DRichards (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#5

Has Obama Lost the Trust of Progressives, as Krugman Says?
Paul Krugman has an excellent column today arguing that progressives have backlashed so intensely over the prospect of Obama's dropping the public option because -- for reasons extending far beyond specific health care issues -- they no longer trust the President. Citing Obama's steadfast continuation of Bush/Cheney Terrorism policies, the administration's extreme coziness with crisis-causing banks, and the endless retreats on health care, Krugman says that "a backlash in the progressive base . . .
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/21-14

To quote a friend on mine regarding the article;
"He nailed it for me. I've been greatly disillusioned by Mr. Obama. What party can I join as a lifelong Democrat when my party has left me behind?"

B Roll (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#6

DDay,

Since Loretta didn’t name any names it’s hard to tell what posts and posters upset her. Clues may be found in several of the last comments she posted on Friday’s blog.

She seemed to think that I was being unfair to Thom in my criticism of how he has dealt with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. She wrote that I should ask Thom (about his views) rather than putting words into his mouth. I don’t think I put any words in Thom’s mouth. I did summarize some of the things he’d said and I did give my opinion and interpretation of what he’s said and how he’s dealt with the conflict, including why I think he’s take that approach.

As far as asking Thom directly, Thom has explicitly said that he prefers that we address him in the blog rather than through email, and if you read what it says below his email address on the CONTACT page, he doesn’t debate politics through email. But he says that he reads every day’s blog. So I am addressing him when I post here.

She also objected to some comments that are critical of Barack Obama, perhaps by Richard L. Adlof, Quark and especially Joey. I think she may also be unhappy about the idea that Obama has lost the trust of many progressive (which you mentioned).

Loretta is a great person and seems to be loyal to people she admires; that includes Thom and President Obama. She’s out there working hard to get health care reform passed.

If you’re interested, you can find last Friday’s blog at

http://www.thomhartmann.com/2009/08/16/friday-august-21-2009/#comments

B Roll (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#7

oooops... It was DRichards, not DDAy who mentioned Obama losing support among progressives.

Richard L. Adlof (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#8

Dan Gainor . . . Oh good, it's opposite day.

Richard L. Adlof (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#9

President Obama is not Progressive. President Obama has NEVER been Progressive. President Obama is a wishy-washy, mediocre, just-right-of-the-middle-of-the-road, pro-corporatist centrist.

Frankie Dailey (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#10

I can't find the cartoon on public option mentioned at the start of the program

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#11

Say there- me and multi tasking again Does anyone have a link to that Democratic Underground Cartoon Thom was discussing after [thankfully, he explaned why I was throwing up as Rush Limbaugh was on my beloved am1090.seatttle.com! lol]

I have been screaming for the lefties to get out pictures. Per Thom's cracking the code and the instruction we get at our college, learning modalities are critical to getting Americans reading at the 5th grade level to understand.

Also, in Facebook this morning we now have a group of folks trying to boycott ABC for running a health care 'infomercial' http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=90389774460&ref=ts follow the link or put in search engine at Facebook 'health care Obama' and find some of these against their own self interest and tell them to join Thom's show!

Richard L. Adlof (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#12

LIEberman is Demoncrat turned Independent . . . Not Republicant turned Democrat.

DRichards (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#13

From George Washington's Blog

Could a Third-Party Candidate Actually Win in 2012?
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/

Famed trend forecaster Gerald Calente is predicting that a third party candidate will be elected President in 2012. (If you don't know who Calente is, read the postscript below.)

Is he right?

Well, some of the most widely-read liberal writers are saying that progressives are fed up with the Democratic party, and feel that they have been tricked and ripped off by the Democratic leaders.

As Glenn Greenwald writes:

In a superb post the other day, Digby recounted what fueled the Naderite movement in 2000 and warns, presciently I think, that the willingness of Obama/Emanuel so blatantly to disappoint those to whom they promised so much (especially young and first-time voters who were most vulnerable to Obama's transformative fairy dust) will lead them either to support a third party or turn off from politics altogether:

Rahm Emanuel believes that the key to Democratic success is a coalition in which Blue Dogs and corporate lackeys mitigate progressive change on behalf of the moneyed interests which he believes the political system must serve. Regardless of his malevolent view of how the political system should work, on a political level, I think he's living in the past. . . .

But on a political level, the left has been betrayed over and over again on the things that matter to us the most. The village is pleased, I'm sure. But the Democratic party only needs to look back eight short years to see just how destructive it is to constantly tell their left flank to go fuck themselves. . . .

At the time [in 2000] nobody believed that an incumbent Vice President in a roaring economy would have a race so close that the Republicans could steal it. But we know differently now don't we? And you would think that the Democratic establishment would also know that because of that, it may not be a good idea to alienate the left to the point where they become apathetic or even well... you know. It can happen. It did happen. Why the Democrats persist in believing that it can't happen again is beyond me. . . .

Obama mobilized a whole lot of young people who have great expectations and disappointing them could lead to all sorts of unpleasant results. Success is about more than simply buying off some congressional liberals or pleasing the village. It's worth remembering that a third party run from the left is what created the conditions for eight long years of Republican governance ...

After 2000, what is it going to take for the Democrats to realize that constantly using their base as a doormat is not a good idea? It only takes a few defections or enough people staying home to make a difference. And there are people on the left who have proven they're willing to do it. The Democrats are playing with fire if they think they don't have to deliver anything at all to their liberal base --- and abandoning the public option, particularly in light of what we already know about the bailouts and the side deals, may be what breaks the bond.

It's really not too much to ask that they deliver at least one thing the left demands, it really isn't. And it's not going to take much more of this before their young base starts looking around for someone to deliver the hope and change they were promised.

On most fronts that matter -- civil liberties, national security, economic policy, servitude to corporate interests, even rising opposition to Obama's long-promised escalation of the war in Afghanistan -- that defines rather clearly what the Obama/Emanuel approach has been thus far.
What About the Right?

The Washington Examiner writes:
The fact that just doesn't register with Washington GOP establishmentarians is that the Tea Party Protests seen around the country in April were aimed as much against them as they were against the tax and spending policies of Obama and the Democratic Congress.
There are millions of libertarians and traditional conservatives (or "paleo-conservatives", in contrast to Neo-conservatives) in the U.S. who are very unhappy with the direction the Republican party has taken in recent years.

Post-Partisan Coalitions

There are many millions of liberals and conservatives who have become disgusted by their parties and have started judging candidates based upon what they are actually doing.

As just one example, there are millions of Americans who would support either Ron Paul as president and Dennis Kucinich as vice president or the other away around. Why? Both challenge the status quo, and have proposed legislation which will actually help the American people.

Conclusion
Based on the above trends, I believe that Calente could be right. A third-party candidate could win in 2012.

Al North Carolina (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#14

Thom,
I know you are an optimistic sort of guy, but really do you still think there is a prayers chance in hell that we will have any kind of public option health care?The currenty article by Chris Hedges, http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090823_this_isnt_reform_its_robbery/ just about sums up the current situation.
I think it's time we started thinking about alternate solutions to this problem. Our Corporate owned government is simply not going to provide a viable solution. Perhaps it's time to fight fire with fire, Maybe the answer, (in this Capitalist system), is for the people to just form there own not for profit, competing, insurance company. I would like to think that there is still some philanthropist out there that would provide the seed money for the start up and that we the people, could buy shares to support the effort. I would so much rather send that company my $1000 a month payment for health insurance then the current leach that's using my money to prevent me from getting good coverage.
Thanks for your great program and the socially conscience work you are doing to improve the country.
Will

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#15

Good one Thom! I figured this caller was an opponent.

WHY SHOULD HEALTH CARE INSURERS EXIST

WHY DO I NEED TO CALL YOUR FRICKEN CEO FOR PERMISSION TO SEE MY DOCTOR?

Richard L. Adlof (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#16

The government can be sued. Folk sue it all the time. Suing the farging government is a major progenitor of change.

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#17

We the People are the government. This is a major concept vital to getting our Republican brothers and sisters to see reason and in their own best interest.

mstaggerlee (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#18

Can we all just calm down for a minute, take a step back, and pay a little attenton to what's REALLY going on, rather than what the MSM would have us believe?

Has anyone, anywhere, heard President Obama (HIMSELF, not an "unnamed White House official") make any kind of statement about abandoning the public option? I sure haven't - in fact, I observed the "Organizing for Health Care" webcast on Thursday, in which Mr Obama stated repeatedly that the public option is still a VERY IMPORTANT part of his agenda. The public option is NOT off the President's table, folks!

Please remember that this is NOT the Bush White House - some officials occasionally actually speak for THEMSELVES, rather that spout the "approved" opinion. You've all heard the "hearding cats" meme to describe the Dems - heck, it's even a challenge to keep VP Biden "on message" sometimes! Fuax News, of course, has severe problems with this - so if anyone who's even slightly associated with the White House says anything that's even a little off-message, they'll play it up as waffling by the administration - which is something they love to portray anyway.

BTW - lotsa discussion hereabouts about Paul Krugman today - his Times Op-Ed today is spot-on!
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/24/opinion/24krugman.html?em

Richard L. Adlof (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#19

Dobson's Focus on Pornography has zero to do with family standards.

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#20

THX for that Texas article, it was in our National Earth Science Teachers news, too.
http://texscience.org/pdf/Earth_and_Space_Science_Proposed_TEKS_2009Jan5...

DDay (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#21

Hey B Roll, Thank you for the info and for being careful and fair in attributing comments.
Hey DRichards, I'll add my voice to the idea that Obama is losing support from progressives. It is merely a statement of fact. I wish it was not the case and I am not about to bail out myself, but, i have been checking out my parachute, and looking for a suitable landing area if the engine cuts out. So far this hasn't been the flight I signed up for. P. Krugman could use a humor transplant, but, he's too smart, sober and earnest to ignore. Besides, it has been a long time since the radical left came out of their stoned and timid stupor and flexed any muscle politically. I can say this because I count myself amongst their ranks; not that I'm ever really very timid.
I can't say I'm firmly in Mr. Adlof's camp regarding Obama's true colors, but I cannot dismiss them with any certainty. I hope he's wrong. Time will tell and time is short.

DRichards (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#22

Re: It does seem from my narrow perch that some contributors to this conversation seem to have an agenda which they keep returning to.

I apologize for beating the same old drum, it's just that if I beat it loud and long enough I keep hoping that the Democratic party will once again represent me instead of corporate america. It seems to me that we have to keep their feet to the fire to prevent them from ignoring us. (The right has clearing shown that the squeaky wheel gets the grease).

Perhaps the time has come to support a third party that is not beholden to the corporations...
I remember when Ross Perot scared the bejeebies out of the democrats and the republicans so much so that they took the organizing of the presidential debates away from the League of Women Voters.

Tom Y (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#23

That burger looks pretty good. I saw that on Wonkette a few days ago. Another low-carb fast-food option in addition to In-N-Out "Protein Style" and Carl's "Low carb $6" offerings...

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#24

Wweb site is still up for me as well

Loretta (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#25

Alright, I'm back. Now you are putting words in MY mouth B-Roll:-) That seems to just be a habit of yours--that you think you can make assumptions about what other people feel or believe and act as if the assumptions you make are true. So please don't do that to me. If you would like to ask me a question, please ask it, but don't then answer it for me as well.

I was responding to Mark's post about the Israeli/ Palestinian conflict, because it assumes his version of history is the only accurate one.

I enjoy reading everyone's posts. We are living with hot issues, so of-course there are disagreements and at times they are subtle. I get hot under the collar when people put words in my mouth or belittle my opinions, but I imagine everyone does.

Tom Y (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#26

Texas educational standards? Check out that great classic "textbook" "Texas History Movies" -- especially the earlier editions.

Mark (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#27

It's unfortunate that people like Loretta don't have much interest in factual information, other than the ones they make-up to suit their own opinions. Arrogant? What is so arrogant about pointing out reality. I've read on this page absurd "discussions" critical of Thom's alleged pro-Israeli "bias." Being pro-Israel and being progressive are incompatible? Now who is way out there now? Don't these people have ANY knowledge of history? Any idea of cause and effect? Well, if I'm "arrogant," that is certainly preferable to being purposefully ignorant, esepecially to the point of being anti-Semitic.

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#28

Ha! History - you should see what passes for nutrition college texts today - look at the size of the American's butt - true evidence! And many nutrition teachers themselves - and 'health care' professionals even - Dead Dr don't Lie - Joel Wallach - what a great guest he would be too.

DRichards (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#29

Loretta,
I think a few of us ended up on a guilt trip; wondering who you were referring to.
I did think of asking for you to clarify who you were referring to, but you wrote that you would be taking a break (perhaps for the week?)

I'm glad you are back

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#30

Health care claim denial or policies a liberal myth?

Real Scary health care stories http://stories.barackobama.com/healthcare?source=actioncenter

Loretta (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#31

But let's forget my complaints. They mean nothing.

Something interesting happened last week. Like most progressives, I don't have much money, so I shouldn't be going to a restaurant that offers $9 appetizers, but i went and had one anyway, (warm goat cheese rolled in hazelnuts and to die for red peppers--gosh it was good) And I watched all of the beautiful people milling around in their beautiful outfits with their flawless skin and expensive hair-dos. (I'm showing prejudice against the rich, sorry)

But the man who sat next to me happened to be one of the auditors for the city of Portland and we had a heated healthcare debate. Because I have read everyone's informative blog posts and listened to this program and done my reading. I held my gorund very well with him, and I got him to admit that he didn't know as much about the issue as I did and he would read up on it more before he made his decision.

But this accountant shared with me some very interesting facts, not only about Portland, but about cities across the US.

It turns out that many businesses and cities that have budgets approved year to year haven't been putting into those budgets the huge number of retiree benefits that will come due soon. Basically they haven't taken into account the health care costs they will be paying for people who have retired.

So what I took that to mean is that unless we do have a single payer plan when all of these benefits come due, many businesses and cities could have even more serious monetary problems when the baby boomer generation retires and they are forced to pay the health care premiums for people who are no longer working for them.

He said that Portland has started to fix this problem, but other cities haven't. This is heresay and I'm not an accountant, but it would be something interesting to look in to and if this is true it could help support the need for single-payer health care reform.

Loretta (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#32

I'm sorry I did that to you all. It was childish. :-(

DDay (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#33

For what it's worth Loretta, so am I. (Glad you are back) DRichards, your corporate concerns are shared by me also.

Loretta (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#34

Thank you for the kind, sweet comments. We all want the same thing; we want the homeless to have housing, the sick to have medical care, healthy non-mutant fruits vegetables and grains for everyone and a planet that can survive us living on it. But we argue like a family does, at times, about the details, and we have to do it, to strengthen our resolve.

DRichards (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#35

May we always remember to attack the idea, and never the individual.

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#36

I do not trust Rom Manuel, I think Barack put him right in front of him where he can keep an eye on him.

mstaggerlee (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#37

@ Loretta & Mark -

I'll with the admission that I'm easily as guilty as anyone - if not moreso - of the behavior that I'm about to admonish both of you for.

That said - This is NOT a chat room. There IS a chat room associated with this web site (www.thomhartmann.com/chat.php) but this ain't it.

This is a BLOG area - a place for people to post OPINIONS, of their own. Mine, yours, and another person's opinions do not need to be in absolute agreement with one another's. We should NOT take these to the realm of the personal, nor, imho, should we take what others say here personally.

Loretta - I understood instantly that Mark's initial post here today was a reaction to the frequent posts by the ultra-reactionary Rasta (NEVER a good idea - first, because I don't think Rasta bothers to actually read anything posted here, he just posts his nutso, hate-filled message of the day, then goes off to infect another blog, and second, because we should always seek to avoid feeding trolls). What made you think he was talking to or about you, I wonder?

Mark - Have you ever heard that where one stands is generally a function of where one sits? We're all entitled to our own interpretation of the historical record - Loretta's is as valid to her as yours is to you, and mine is to me, and while we may differ in certain ideas, none of us is entitled to berate the other over them ... not in here, anyway.

You two wanna argue? FINE - but take it outside ... to the chat room, where that kinda stuff belongs.

Peace,

Marc

Mark (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#38

In regard to Dan Gainor's comments, I think it should be pointed out that googling Bush and Hitler does not necessarily mean both words are on the same page. it is also useful to note that implying Nazi motives on mainstream TV news is a relatively recent phenomenon, that should be placed on the laps of the Becks and Hannitys of the world. And speaking of Sean Hannity, I heard last night on a far-right radio show a completely serious discussion of a Hannity run for governor of Florida in 2010, and a presidential run in 2012 or 2016.

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#39

Hi MS Staggerlee-

Are you employed by the Thom Hartmann Show to moderate this blog- just curious -

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#40

Mark- yuck about Hannity - on the other hand, would not it be fun to unload the ammo we have on that crummy scum bag (My mother has a crush on him I swear). It might be an opportunity to reveal the little creep for what he is.

Mark (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#41

mstaggerlee:

I accept your comment in the spirit it was given.

DDay (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#42

Drats, we must attack the ideas and not the individual? Sometimes it is just so fun to be beastly. Does this mean i can't make fun of O'l Turd Blossom, or even M. Bachmann? Life is loosing all joy for me at this moment. They have few if any ideas so I'm only left with ad hominem attacks. Life is meaningless. (Now you'all can attack my spelling.)

Mark (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#43

Food Fascist:

If he does "run," the Democrats ought to have enough "sound bites" from this idiot to bury him under a thousand campaign ads against him.

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#44

DDay- I am right there with you, bro. I cannot imagine a Hartmann Show rule in which the fundamental action is to just ignore those we are trying to get to communicate with us. The sterotypical snooty 'we're too good for them so just ignore them or 'do not feed the trolls' liberal belongs at NPR. Thom teaches us daily to engage with those who disagree while not requiring us to be stiff shirts about it. Have fun DDay- !

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#45

Do those who hate the government hate America? They certainly hate the American government- Consider Wacko, TX is pronounced Wack oh

Loretta (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#46

mstaggerlee, and DRichards: Beautiful wise words and peacemaking.

Food Fascist (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#47

Debbie is an Ellen Radner in training! Good work reporting! - Pharma the enemy.

Mark (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#48

In regard to textbook changes, I would agree that it is completely inappropriate and a disservice to our children to deprive them of knowledge of the various political, social and cultural conflicts that have shaped this country. And unless they go to college and study history as a discipline, even then knowledge of history (let alone American) is rather thin and restricted to what people decide interests them. That the Texas textbook board wants to excise Cesar Chavez is particularly intriguing to me, since he is virtually the only Hispanic that textbook writers deemed worthy to including in a textbook by name. I saw him speak in front of the Capitol building in Sacramento in 1990, sharing the podium with Gerry Brown and Jesse Jackson--speaking against, curiously enough, a proposal to limit health care benefits for public employees.

DDay (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#49

Back at you Food...At the risk of inflaming Mark I'd like to call you a Mensch, but it might be construed as too pro Israel to employ Yiddish, besides I don't know very many Arabic/Palistinian words. It's happened again...I've given myself a headache. I need a drink and some weasel stole the cork outa my lunch. Cheers

Mark (not verified) 11 years 4 weeks ago
#50

DDay:

I don't know what Food Fascist or you said today should "inflame" me, although apparently a few people seem to think that some of what I said at first blush is--even when I try to be "dispassionate" as in my opening post.

Trump has told us how he and the Republicans plan to steal this election: can we stop him and save our republic?

Thom plus logo Donald Trump became president by exploiting a loophole called the Electoral College. The majority of Americans did not want him or vote for him as president, but he's there anyway.

Now he's planning on using a different loophole, the 12th Amendment, to hang onto power.
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom is a national treasure. Read him, embrace him, learn from him, and follow him as we all work for social change."
Robert Greenwald, political activist and founder and president of Brave New Films
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann is a creative thinker and committed small-d democrat. He has dealt with a wide range of topics throughout his life, and this book provides an excellent cross section. The Thom Hartmann Reader will make people both angry and motivated to act."
Dean Baker, economist and author of Plunder and Blunder, False Profits, and Taking Economics Seriously
From Cracking the Code:
"No one communicates more thoughtfully or effectively on the radio airwaves than Thom Hartmann. He gets inside the arguments and helps people to think them through—to understand how to respond when they’re talking about public issues with coworkers, neighbors, and friends. This book explores some of the key perspectives behind his approach, teaching us not just how to find the facts, but to talk about what they mean in a way that people will hear."
to understand how to respond when they’re talking about public issues with coworkers, neighbors, and friends. This book explores some of the key perspectives behind his approach, teaching us not just how to find the facts, but to talk about what they mean in a way that people will hear."