Thursday November 5 2009
By Louise
Hour One: Why did Goldman Sachs get their swine flu shots before high risk pregnant women & children?
Hour Two: Is it time for Big Government?
Hour Three: "Time to let gays serve openly in the military?"Thom debates "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" with former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Reagan Admin.) Frank Gaffney www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org
Comments
#2
Broll,
In my opinion, Obama's most significant policy action is extremely difficult to demonstrate to the average person. Since I think everybody on this blog is way above average, I'll try my explanation, and you can tell me how it be said better.
Last January, Rachael Madow showed a graph of job losses in previous months. The chart looked like the value of trigonometri tangent as it approaches 90 degrees. It appeared that the unemployment rate of 1932 would be surpassed in less than a year. The very unpopular deficit spending that Obama undertook applied a brake to that fall that I did not believe he could do.
#3
@Quark
You are right. Yesterday's posts are still missing. Thom & Co. have today's posts on Wed's blog roll. Sneaky Sneaky I just saw Mark's name and assumed it was yesterday's work.
@ Louise I must take my Merci back. Alors, Bon Aniversaire next Mercredi? 38 years?
Mon Dieu!
#4
my login name is chuckle8 not chuckle
#5
For the record, I live in the American center of military and religious fervor, Colorado Springs....and ironically, the home of Ted Haggard, who successfully combined the above with his feined abhorence of homosexuals until his St. Peter got him in more trouble than his legions could forgive.
Regarding the "Gays in the Military" segment, a friend's military policeman husband volunteered for an elite group of Commandos, and was given 'special' training where all the men & women had to strip down together as preparation in case they were captured by the enemy. Many of the men of course, made crude comments about the women's bodies, in keeping with the theme of the day, I suppose...what military leaders thought up such perversion to be conducted in our armed forces?? I suppose your anti-gays guest Elaine Donnelly doesn't know our military is conducting such training sessions, or she would be ranting against it.
#6
@Quark: heh! There's a school of history that says its function is to inculcate virtue, rather than relate facts; so historical facts that are contrary to your notions of virtue are to be ignored or even rewritten. It's a profoundly conservative notion (...even when promoted by Stalinists.)
2B Roll : tell ya what: men can vote on whether vasectomy is legal, women can vote on whether abortion is legal. Deal?
#7
rewinn,
THAT school of history is taught at Oral Roberts University which, incidently, Michele Bachmann attended.
#8
@ B Roll
Special treatment? I can't ever get any response from a Hartmann. It appears I'm but an insignificant flea. You, on the other hand were singled out for Thanks from the Grand Poobah himself last week. weren't you?
Doesn't the show have Cryptonite? Or some sort of thing? I want our posts back!
#9
William Henry and Whitley Streiber (remember Communion?) Discuss "V"
'Just came across this:
#10
Alexander the Great was gay. So what did that have to do with his greatness? Something. Nothing. Who knows. Who cares. He was Great and that is what is important.
#11
When I joined the Marines back in 1973 I didn't know about "gay" yet. Shortly after my base (29 Palms) put me up for Marine of the Month in early 1975 I had become worldly enough to think I might be gay and so, to the astonishment of many of my fellow Marines, I did not re-up later that year (since it wasn't really an option for me at that point). But that's just my story.
What I view as the biggest danger in not letting people serve openly (in any government position) is that this makes them vulnerable to blackmail/coersion by anyone who "knows their secret".
While this works for those that are in the business of manipulating others, I don't really see the value of it to the country as a whole.
#12
What was the cancer fighting supplement Thom and his father took that Thom spoke of today (11/5) in his first hour
#13
rewinn
you wrote:
2B Roll : tell ya what: men can vote on whether vasectomy is legal, women can vote on whether abortion is legal. Deal?
I reply:
Sorry, no deal. This is an issue of major societal importance although I don't think it should be. It is because it's been made a moral and religious issue by cynical politicians and politically motivated religious leaders.
Further more, gender isn't as big an influence on views on abortion as religious beliefs and affiliations and even geography. If we put it up to a vote, I have a feeling that abortion would be illegal in many red states.
What gender does seem to influence on the question is the intensity of the feelings on the issue, with women having more intense views on both sides of the issue than men do. Higher percentages women than men are strongly in favor or strongly opposed to greater restrictions on abortion than men are.
I think it's a false assumption that men are against abortion and women favor it. There are many women who are against abortion mainly based on religious beliefs or the belief that our humanity begins at conception.
Here's some poll results about views on abortion from the PEW Research Center http://people-press.org/commentary/?analysisid=88
Note the results in the second graphic in the article. On the question of whether there should be more restrictions on access to abortion, if you add the "favor" and "strongly favor" responses women and men have the same score of 35%. If you add the "oppose" and "strongly oppose" number, it's women 59% and men 57% which is explained by the "Don't know ". The 2% difference is explained by the "Don't know" results with 6% of women and 8% of men saying they don't know.
If we decided to limit voting on the issue by gender, people find other issues they could claim where only members of certain groups should have the right to vote?
If you're looking for a certain outcome, in this case, guaranteeing a woman's right to choose, look at the second to last graphic. When you look at which religious groups are more likely to oppose restrictions on abortion, Jews are the hands down winners with 87% opposing more restrictions.
So let's say only Jews can vote on abortion. Deal?
#14
TeriM
I believe he said it was the spice "cumin".
#15
So?...If the TSA strip searches your wife would you prefer a)straight man, b)straight man, c) a Gay man or d) a Lesbian? Regrettably, this whole discussion is indicative of the Rise of American Militarism!
#16
WHEN the "Draft" is re-instituted will "they" ASK and will the draftee "TELL"?
#17
chuckle8
It sounds like you’re saying that you think that Obama’s most significant policy action was his economic stimulus package because you believe that it slowed down job losses.
I guess that the issue will be what the longer term effects of that spending will be. It’s quite possible that aspects of the stimulus plan. A lot of people are concerned that the money wasn’t and isn’t being used in the most productive manner.
As far as explaining it to the average person, I’d drop talk of trigonometric tangents. I have to take my shoes off to count to 20, so I have no idea what a trigonometric tangent is.
It’s been my opinion for a while the issue that’s going to make or break the Obama presidency will most likely be the economy. If it improves in a way that affects average citizens positively Obama has a good chance of being re-elected to a second term. As an important side benefit, if the economy recovers during his administration, it could have a positive affect on race relations. If this black president manages to preside over the recovery of this economy, it would boost the opinion of many people about the abilities of black people. But that might be a bit much to expect.
#18
regarding the concept of an "opt-out" option in the health care reform "debate," can we convince the "righties" to extend that concept to war and bailouts and congressional pork and . . .
#19
DDay
Well, when you wrote instructions on how to find the missing posts and I couldn’t find them… what was I to think.
As for a personal note from Thom, that was actually on Monday evening. I also once got a note of thanks from Louise for pointing out that when this website was created someone forgot to provide a link to from the home page to the message boards.
That being said, one of my posts was deleted from Wednesday’s blog, apparently for making a joke that contained a word that I’ve heard Thom use on the air from time to time. And that’s just part of the story.
#20
To BRoll,
Inadvertently, I guess I made my point. How can one understand the complexities of the economy if you have to take off your shoes to count to 20 (I assume that was an exaggeration but it is illustrative). Complexities is probably the wrong word. It should be the word that describes how can we understand the long term effects of economic policy, especially when the short term effects seem bad. The inverse example is Thom's favorite whipping boy, Ronald Reagan (of course, it was really Alan Greenspan, since as Oliver Stone said on Bill Maher, Ronnie was a moron). He made the economy look great by tripling the national debt ceiling during his 2 terms. A significant portion of our current annual debt (like 50%) is paying off the compound interest of that economic policy.
#21
sorry - a blog was loaded wrong and it kicked out yesterday - it's back!
#22
chuckle8
Understanding mathematics is good, but the people who got us into this financial mess can do a lot of problems in their heads with their shoes on. The only way we can tell if someone understands the financial situation is for them to implement their programs and see if they work. Even being able to predict the failure of the plan of someone else doesn't mean that you know what to do.
I think complexities is a very good word to describe the economy which is no longer just a national economy and I doubt that any one person or even school of thought can fully understand it. The best hope would be for the world to recognize that we're in this together and we have to learn to cooperate. There are too many people with too much power and the ability to fool many more people for that to seem likely.
To make matters worse, we aren't dealing with just economic issues. We're facing major climatic changes and political unrest and conflicts.
Your post raise an important question, how do we communicate with the part of our society that is less inclined to theoretical analysis. You're not going to reach them by talking about Nouriel Roubini and Ravi Batra; when your talking about schadenfreude and doppelgangers you're not speaking the language of the average American. And when we feel that we're superior they can tell.
These are some of the problems I see, even if they're slightly off topic.
#23
re: comment. (I love a good debate) I remember one assertion which I expected flack for: “The Obama campaign was more about pigment and personality than policies or principals. It appears that this continues today.”
My reply:
Many factors come into play in elections. We know that there were many people (even Democrats) who said they wouldn’t vote for Obama because of his ethnicity and others who voted for him because of it. I don’t know how that balanced out in the end.
I don’t think there’s anything to groundbreaking to say that an election had more to do with personality (let’s include appearance in personality) than policies or principals. More people probably vote based on party loyalty and personality than knowledge of the issues and after 8 years of Boy George the odds really favored any Democratic candidate over any Republican.
Being black (and youthful) definitely energized and boosted the black and youth vote. His calm demeanor helped too, as did his appealing family. It also attracted liberals who were swept up in the historical significance of the moment, but you can’t leave out what an unappealing team McCain/Palin turned out to be. How many times can a campaign jump the shark? I don’t know but it seemed that the McCain campaign was playing Double Dutch with sharks as jump ropes.
#24
TeriM,
You can find the links to many of the articles Thom refers to in the show in the free daily newsletter, which goes out within a couple of hours of the show, often within an hour. The archive of yesterday's is at http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs028/1102605880949/archive/110280788.... It includes a link to an article, "Curry spice 'kills cancer cells".
#25
@B Roll - Whoosh! Right over your head!
You want to control the wombs of women but you don't want them to control your testes.
Understood!
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Images of Thom
Thom & Louise at a "private audience" with His Holiness Pope John Paul II at his summer palace, Castle Gandolfo, Italy
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"In an age rife with media-inspired confusion and political cowardice, we yearn for a decent, caring, deeply human soul whose grasp of the problems confronting us provides a light by which we can make our way through the quagmire of lies, distortions, pandering, and hollow self-puffery that strips the American Dream of its promise. How lucky we are, then, to have access to the wit, wisdom, and willingness of Thom Hartmann, who shares with us here that very light, grown out of his own life experience."
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."
From Screwed:
"The powers that be are running roughshod over the powers that OUGHT to be. Hartmann tells us what went wrong — and what you and I can do to help set American right again."
As far as women being the only ones allowed to vote on abortion, although I can understand where you're coming from, isn't abortion part of what is called "family planning"? Men are parts of families, aren't we?