Daily Topics - Monday October 1st, 2012

Catch The Thom Hartmann Program LIVE 3-6pm Eastern!
Hour One: Meet The Press...where's the beef?! / Plus, "Taking Our Country Back" - Cheri Bustos (D-IL, 17th District)
Hour Two: Will the "Billionaires & Ballot Bandits" win? - Greg Palast
Hour Three: Supreme Agenda...Affirmative Action could be dead w/in a month - Horace Cooper, National Center for Public Policy Research
Comments


Thom may have mentioned this today when I wasn't listening, but I overheard a right-wing conspiracy-believing co-worker claiming there's some sort of phone giveaway scam by the Obama campaign. I don't know where this BS came from but a caller into Randi Rhodes referred to it, so it must be everywhere already.

On race and whether it has a genetic basis: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2012/05/02/human-races-may-have-biological-meaning-but-races-mean-nothing-about-humanity/
You don't have to deny that race exists to deny that it should be used as an excuse to treat people differently.
The point is really that definitions of race are about superficialities of phenotype, and therefore cannot be counted on to indicate anything else.
Another interesting article, especially for the term "hypodescent": http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/02/the-social-and-biological-construction-of-race/
Also worth remembering:
With one brief exception, the federal government has been in debt every year since 1776. In January 1835, for the first and only time in U.S. history, the public debt was retired, and a budget surplus was maintained for the next two years in order to accumulate what Treasury Secretary Levi Woodbury called “a fund to meet future deficits.” In 1837 the economy collapsed into a deep depression that drove the budget into deficit, and the federal government has been in debt ever since. Since 1776 there have been exactly seven periods of substantial budget surpluses and significant reduction of the debt. From 1817 to 1821 the national debt fell by 29 percent; from 1823 to 1836 it was eliminated (Jackson’s efforts); from 1852 to 1857 it fell by 59 percent, from 1867 to 1873 by 27 percent, from 1880 to 1893 by more than 50 percent, and from 1920 to 1930 by about a third. Of course, the last time we ran a budget surplus was during the Clinton years. I do not know any household that has been able to run budget deficits for approximately 190 out of the past 230-odd years, and to accumulate debt virtually nonstop since 1837.
3. The United States has also experienced six periods of depression. The depressions began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893, and 1929. (Do you see any pattern? Take a look at the dates listed above.) With the exception of the Clinton surpluses, every significant reduction of the outstanding debt has been followed by a depression, and every depression has been preceded by significant debt reduction. The Clinton surplus was followed by the Bush recession, a speculative euphoria, and then the collapse in which we now find ourselves. The jury is still out on whether we might manage to work this up to yet another great depression. While we cannot rule out coincidences, seven surpluses followed by six and a half depressions (with some possibility for making it the perfect seven) should raise some eyebrows. And, by the way, our less serious downturns have almost always been preceded by reductions of federal budget deficits. I don’t know of any case of a national depression caused by a household budget surplus.
Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/02/wray-the-federal-budget-is-not-like-a-household-budget-%E2%80%93-here%E2%80%99s-why.html#pogx8X7Bpqqawhks.99