Will Republicans blink?

Congress hasn't yet prevented one potential government shutdown, and the next one is right around the corner. On Wednesday, U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew warned that our nation will hit the debt ceiling on October 17th. At that point, the Treasury Department will have only $30 billion dollars in cash on hand. In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, Secretary Lew wrote, “This amount would be far short of the net expenditures on certain days, which can be as high as $60 billion [dollars].” He warned that if Congress doesn't raise the debt limit, “it would be impossible for the United States of America to meet all of its obligations for the first time in our history.”

But, rather than working on a reasonable plan to prevent an economic disaster, House Republicans have prepared the long list of demands they want met before raising the debt limit. Those demands include approving the Keystone XL pipeline, weakening the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, cutting more than $100 billion dollars from federal health programs, and – of course – delaying Obamacare for another year.

Essentially, Republicans want President Obama to pretend he didn't win the last presidential election, and agree to nearly every major right-wing policy idea. And, House Republicans say they're willing to hold our entire economy hostage until their demands are met. President Obama has vowed not to negotiate over our nation's debt limit, but one side is going to have to give in to avoid a financial crisis. This is no way to run a government. This is an economic game of chicken that puts our nation at risk for a major disaster, and millions of Americans are waiting to see who blinks first.

Comments

steffb503's picture
steffb503 6 years 46 weeks ago
#1

They say it is all about The Affordable Care Act, When really it might be about voting....

Have you seen this articlehttp://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/09/26/gop-furious-that-1993-voter-registration-act-guarantees-right-to-register-when-applying-for-health-insurance/

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 6 years 46 weeks ago
#2

I say run the damn thing into the ground and let it die. Call this bluff. The Repugs don't have the stomach for it and the Dems know that. Too many Repug campaign contributors will suffer.

Any other course of action is pure Kabuki Theatre and more BS from the White House.

sandlewould's picture
sandlewould 6 years 46 weeks ago
#3

They seem to be chomping at the bit to crash the system. in '08, the elites made a fortune betting against the system and crashing it. This time, they will crash it either way...either by forcing the US into insolvency or with inhumane policy that will devastate millions. Here comes the crash in Thom's new book. The same old consumerist, growth economy solutions won't work this time. There are simply too many of us and Mother Earth is tapped out. As Chris Hedges says, the jobs are gone and there not coming back. The elite's goal?..create instability by denying access to resources to justify increased erosion of civil liberties, passive genocide, etc. Trying to fix this corrupt and broken system within the system itself is like trying to drive a car that won't run to the garage to be fixed. It simply won't work. Time for a new paradigm. Maybe something like http://www.thevenusproject.com or http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com . Did anyone catch the awesome doc on FSTV before Thom 2day? Occupy Love...I'm sure it will repeat...and don't 4get to donate!! 1-877-378-8669. Thom, thanks so much for all you give us!

MMmmNACHOS's picture
MMmmNACHOS 6 years 46 weeks ago
#4

I second that notion...Leeeet iiiit Crrrraaaashhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

MMmmNACHOS's picture
MMmmNACHOS 6 years 46 weeks ago
#5

Bulls on parade...Only in an Evil Empire. Rage!!!

Kend's picture
Kend 6 years 46 weeks ago
#6

isn't a debt ceiling a warning that you are spending too much. Running a Government is very simple. When you run out of money you tax more, spend less or borrow. This government has must borrowed . I am not a American but I have to ask you all. Since Obama has been president your government has spend over 7 trillion dollars. Do you think it has been well spent. The economy hasn't improved at all. CO2 levels hhaven't dropped at all. Your roads and bridges are in horrible shape. Can someone tell me where it all went?

RACadmin 6 years 46 weeks ago
#7

Running a Government is not very simple... it is more complex than tax more spend less or barrow... spending is required on a continual basis to pay peoples wages... How does Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin plan on fullfilling his promise to create 250,000 jobs in the state without spending any money? who's going to pay the wages of those 250,000 workers when the private sector is not hiring and government is not spending on job creation for the average individual?

An employer spends money everytime he makes out a pay check... some peoples wages come from tax dollars paid (the public sector or government workers) and some peoples wages come from the private sector (private business)... private business in order to pay its workers must be able to sell enough products or services on a continual basis and in sufficient quantites to be able to continue to afford to pay its workers wages...

If you're Wal-mart, you have an advantage... you have over 3000 stores people will flock to instead of the small business down the street facing bankruptcy... If the owners of those companies are becoming billionairs then they are charging too much for their product and or are not paying their workers enough to enable them to go out and stimulate the econemey by shopping at the store down the street going out of business that would otherwise prevent that from happening...

To have something left over after paying for food clothing and shelter along with utilities insurances and car payment if they have one and gas to put in it to get to work, one has to be making at least $20 an hour... so if living in poverty is living on $10 or less an hour, and a majority do, how the hell can they afford health care when inflation hits them the hardest at which the rich claim there is none... small business cannot increase their profits by rasing prices when sales are down due to lost sales to say wal-mart... and if they are a small company, cannot create jobs unless their profits enable them and demand is required for that to happen,That is, demand being an increase in sales at their store or for their service, not just wal-mart's stores or a bigger corporate competitor...

It all boils down to supply and demand in the private sector and that can very greatly from county to county and state to state and thus to talk in terms of national percentages is meaningless when it comes to unemployment... and, to keep those balanced, you cannot have class warfare or discrimination in lending or discrimination in credit limits such has been that has caused such a gross disproportion of wealth in this country with some in debt up to their eye browes while others with very little debt but no credit without a pot to piss in ... Nor can you have discrimination in healthcare or the amount in premiums policy holders of health insurance pay regardless of the amount of claims filed by any individual... as the whole idea of insurance in the first place was to provide what could otherwise not be affordable to all in that all chipped into a pool of funds made available for those holders in their time of need... knowing that it wouold be a minority of claims being filed at any one time of all the policy holders such that there would be plenty of adaquate funds to cover expenses as claims were filed... which would be the case if all had Medicare and private insurrance companies and sales men were to receive a wage like unto a teacher instead of a commission... thus, become government workers as all should be considered who pay taxes to themselves... thus would nolonger speak of government as some entity other than themselves so as to eliminate the separation between we and they and them and us...

That is, the banks fault for not lending to those in need that would spend the money to satisfy that need and thereby stimulate the econemy... instead you have banks denying the poor of loans and lending only to the rich who should not be barrowing to put up another wal-mart store for example due to greed and never being satisfied... the rich get richer and got richer for having gotten more credit from the banks... The problem is that we have had a minimum wage for far too long without a maximum one... It is time to set a cap and a maximum corporations can earn in profits in which anything above is taxed and goes back to the people (the government) especially if they as a corporation get their revenues from selling resource energy elements from the earth... an econemy where in few are buying or spending any money or being conservative if they have money to spend and hord it is not going to stimulate the econemy or create jobs in the private sector or the public sector... prices can't be raised causing inflation and expect to sell more no more than government can simply raise taxes on the poor while giving the rich all the tax breaks for is it not the rich who want to sell more to the poor? and how can they do it if they raise prices or the poor are denied finacing?

It is part of a flawed system whrein credit bureaus are consulted by banks to determine ones credit worthyness rather than rasing their debt ceiling limit as congress does for itself so should it see that banks do not deny others lest others in the pivate sector are forced to shut down... That is my view on the subject.

michaelmoore052's picture
michaelmoore052 6 years 46 weeks ago
#8

steffb503- thanks for the good link & I think you hit the nail (Pubs) on the head. Their zeal for redistricting and their ID demands show their hand. They certainly don't want the masses to rush to the poles.

Mark Saulys's picture
Mark Saulys 6 years 46 weeks ago
#9

Oh Kend! Isn't it easy to take cheap shots when you don't know (or pretend you don't know) what you're talking about? Are you accusing the president of pulling a fast one and pocketing the money, Kend?

We're still fighting one of the TWO wars that Bush kept OFF THE BOOKS and Obama put on the books that gave him a massive debt to start with. The deficit, by the way, has been HALVED in Obama's time.

I haven't researched all the aspects of this but I do know that the debt ceiling is ROUTINELY raised, by Republicans and Democrats (even in the Bush years when Republicans also controlled BOTH houses of Congress for 6 of the 8 years), and that it's nothing so innocently simplistic as "a warning that you're spending too much". This is simply another way for the Republicans to sabotage the functioning of the United States for the profit of their little cabal at the expense of all other Americans.

What's you're idea of "prosperity" anyway, Kend? Is it mass poverty with exception of a tiny, wealthy elite (with practically no upward mobility)?

Don't you know, Kend, that if your clients succeed they're not going to bring you into their fold. They're gonna give you your last $20 after their successful putsch and it'll be, "You're fired; so long sucker; go dig around in the dirt of the shanty town for your living like all the rest of the loyal, hard working dupes! Ha!"

Or are you sucking up in advance hoping that they might let you sleep on their floor at night as long as you bring them their newspaper and bring them their slippers everyday?

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 6 years 46 weeks ago
#10

What if the Democrats had a majority in the house with an extreme faction of their own known as the Sons of Liberty? Imagine that this group unlike the Tea-billionaire Party is fighting for the best interests of the vast majority of citizens and decides to create its own list of demands before raising the debt ceiling. Demands that include...... reinstatement of pre-Reagan tax rates, single payer like the rest of the world has, repeal of free trade laws, reinstatement of Glass-Steagal, and a massive expansion of the the Social Security Program.......and it doesn't matter one bit that in this reverse world the Senate majority and President are Republican.

Just imagine how the Corpse media would explode with outrage about the anti-government terrorism by this extreme group of left wing rebels known as the Sons of Liberty......

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 6 years 46 weeks ago
#11

2950-10K ~ I can't help but think back to when The President was first elected and the Dems controlled Congress and The White House. You remember those first few uncomfortable months, when the President suddenly realized that Single-Payer was too "disruptive" to even discuss publicly. Don't you remember? We all had to settle for this monstrosity called Obama-care. The Affordable Care Act. That was the best we could get with the dice loaded.

Now you think we can do better with some Tea-Party wanna bees composed solely of an extreme faction of Democrats? Very imaginative my friend. It sure does look good on paper. It might just even work. However, the last time I checked, "extreme" is a flavor that doesn't come in Democrat.

I'll settle for Campaign Finance Reform and Move to Amend. The result of those radical changes will lead naturally to the demands of which you speak.

Kend's picture
Kend 6 years 46 weeks ago
#12

RAC, I think the problem down there is you need to somehow convince the wealthy to invest there money. There is trillions of dollars down there sitting in low risk stocks because there is no confidence in this government. I for example was investing down there until they changed the non resident rules And are threading to tax us more. With the constant threat of increasing taxes and a completly new health care system, no wonder people are sitting on their money.

Kend's picture
Kend 6 years 46 weeks ago
#13

Mark you are way off About me. I like your president I think his intensions are good, I just don't think he knows business. i guess I forgot about the wars. My country has been in Afganistan for twelve years and we aren't spending near what you are per capita.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 6 years 46 weeks ago
#14

Kend ~ The only way to convince the wealthy to invest their money HERE is to repeal free trade and raise tax rates. The wealthy have no problems investing money overseas because is doesn't cost anything. We have to make it expensive for them. Low risk stocks are a middle class investment. The super wealthy want a bigger bang for their buck. Only overseas can they get that; and, avoid the high taxation rate here as well. You are right Kend, changing our tax policy is the solution to this problem. However taxes have to go up, not down. Import tariffs have to go way up. So does high end individual and corporate tax rates. There has to be a maximum income over which the tax rate is 95%. That way the wealthy have no choice but to hire more people, raise wages and reinvest in their companies to avoid the higher tax rates. The money that is distributed amongst the workers is recirculated back into the economy and into the profits of the corporations. Come on Kend, this is Economics 101.

Loren Bliss's picture
Loren Bliss 6 years 46 weeks ago
#15

When oh when will Mr. Hartmann and the other pundits of the mainstream (pseudo) Left end the charade of a two-party nation and start reporting what is really happening: that the Ruling Class* has decided to exterminate more lower-income people by eliminating food stamps, slashing Social Security, looting Medicare to fund Obamacare, etc. ad nauseam -- and disguising it all as "democracy in action."

Come on, Mr. Hartmann, surely you can see past the Big Lie. Or are you still too beholden to the Democrats to dare report they are as much to blame as the Republicans?

_________

*The One Percent, their politicians and their institutional servants (bureaucrats, lawyers, academics, stenographic journalists, police and military officers, etc.).

Kend's picture
Kend 6 years 46 weeks ago
#16

DAnne. You mean raise taxes like they did in Detroit. That worked great. They chased the money right out of town.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 6 years 46 weeks ago
#17

Kend ~ If they want to leave town, fine. Adios! Just make sure that it costs double to sell their goods back into town if manufactured somewhere else. This isn't rocket science. The tax system is allowing this disaster to happen because it protects corporate profits instead of workers. That's what happens when the corporations write the tax code; and, not We The People.

bobcox's picture
bobcox 6 years 46 weeks ago
#18

The treasury has the constitutional authority to mint couns and print currency. There is no limit to the amount. The Treasukry should mint single one Trillion dollare coin, deposit it at the Federal Reserve Bank and continue business.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 6 years 46 weeks ago
#19
Quote Loren Bliss:When oh when will Mr. Hartmann and the other pundits of the mainstream (pseudo) Left end the charade of a two-party nation and start reporting what is really happening: that the Ruling Class* has decided to exterminate more lower-income people by eliminating food stamps, slashing Social Security, looting Medicare to fund Obamacare, etc. ad nauseam -- and disguising it all as "democracy in action."

Loren Bliss ~ A very good question. Thom is a very compassionate person; and, as such, he tends to give most people the benefit of the doubt. He assumes the highest level of character in most of our Democratic leadership. I would suppose that the answer to your question will depend on how The President handles this latest repeat of this debt ceiling two step tango. The American people are getting tired of seeing the same old rerun. The President really has no choice but to defend his own health care plan and the social safety net. Closing the Government will do far more harm to the Republicans than anyone else. He also has his Executive order privileges available to prevent any real damage. The President holds all the cards here. He can only lose if he wants to lose.

If, as you suspect and I agree, he folds like a poorly constructed house of cards and gives in to the demands of the Right like a powerless victim trying to save the families of the military and federal employees over the needs of everyone else than Thom will have no choice but to call it what it is, a meaningless charade designed to inflict genocide on the poor. Imagine them withholding the one bone that this Administration has been able to produce in 5 years and causing greater erosion to the social safety net at the same time. Unthinkable! Yet obviously predictable. Like holding an Apple on a stick in front of a horse to make it move. It would prove that Obama-care--or any form of national health care--was a corporately funded illusion to begin with--designed solely to help dismantle the social safety net.

In any event, even a victory may turn into the same outcome. After all, we are not fighting for Medicare for all, are we? That is the real "bone" we asked for in the first place isn't it?

In many ways this choreographed struggle in government resembles a Mexican wrestling match. Both sides masked to hide who and what they really are. One side pretending to be "good" and the other "evil". And the audience buying every bit of it. In the end, the outcome really means nothing; but the audience leaves believing it got it's moneys worth. "Lucha!" "Libre!"

I sincerely hope we are wrong in our assessment of the character of our leaders and Thom is right! Perhaps I'm just being too desperately optimistic as well.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 6 years 46 weeks ago
#20

Kend: Perhaps, It would have been better to have used Raid..."It knocks them dead...before they spread!" We don't want those vermin escaping to other nests. They'll just suck dry the life's blood out of the working population wherever they go. Read Matt Taibi's recent article in Rolling Stone about how those parasitic Hedge Fund Managers worked in collusion with the top executives of companies, in the private sector, and with government to bilk millions of workers out of their pensions. He was also just on with Amy Goodman on Free Speech TV talking about it as well. There is even a transcript.

bobbler's picture
bobbler 6 years 46 weeks ago
#21

"""Republicans want President Obama to pretend he didn't win the last presidential election, and agree to nearly every major right-wing policy idea. """
Worse, Obama was not the change America voted for.. Obama-care is the perfect example, because its the same thing as Romney care, or even Hillary care 20 years ago. Change would be single payer that progressives, and the majority of Americans have wanted all along (simply to join the rest of the civilized world in providing healthcare for its citizens)..

Loren Bliss's picture
Loren Bliss 6 years 46 weeks ago
#22

DAnne...Sorry it took me so long to get back to you. Though I twice voted for Obama as the less-evil alternative, I now believe the truth of his personhood is perfectly manifest in the slogan "change we can believe in," which has since been revealed as the biggest Big Lie in U.S. political history. I believe his sole purpose is to amass sufficient riches to protect his family from the horrors that are now our inevitable future, and I believe he is doing so with the conscious knowledge his race -- so useful in getting him elected -- will never allow him or his family entry to the One Percent or even the real Ruling Class. Hence -- and of course I cannot prove what I am about to say -- he governs from a position of absolute hatred. His psychological intent -- the personal motive behind his seemingly endless litany of betrayals -- is to reduce the entire U.S. 99 Percent to the fear, wretchedness and unrelenting despair that was formerly characteristic only of the African-American underclass. Thus he has allowed himself to become a genuine Manchurian candidate -- not, of course, from the real Manchuria but rather from the Manchuria known as Wall Street -- for which he is being handsomely rewarded in terms of the riches essential to buy long-range protection for his family. His more Machiavellian motives, no doubt dictated to him by his One Percent masters, seem to be twofold: One is totally discrediting the Democratic Party, thereby ensuring the Republican Party -- the real voice of the One Percent -- achieves unchallenged rule. The other is cleverly discrediting or rather nullifying all the aspirations of blacks: remember this nation remains so savagely racist the entire African-American community is always judged only by the most dishonorable or criminal conduct of its single individual members. Terrible as it is -- and I truly hope I am wrong -- this is the only rational conclusion Obama's record to-date allows. And the fact no mainstream journalist dares point out what is so overwhelmingly obvious tells us all we need to know about the state of media in this subtly but nevertheless relentlessly subjugated nation.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 6 years 46 weeks ago
#23

DAnneMarc: You missed my point, maybe my fault......I was pointing out the absurdity and arrogance of Tea-billionaire minority rule. The threat to shut down government if the billionaire agenda doesn't get advanced is anathemna to representative/majority rule government. I don't think for one moment we progressives would ever turn into a pack of brats and throw a tantrum.....a threat to shut down government ....... if we can't get our way. That approach is for spoiled rich people directing their goof-balls in the House. I also pointed out that the corp. media owns some of the blame here due to putting profit before truth in reporting.

What I do think is the anti-democratic party sentiment being constantly echoed on this blog, although deserved, is also misguided. A third party will tilt the power, due to pulling votes from the Dems, and totally give all control to the billionaires. The only way we would ever get it back would be via violent revolution. I'd much rather we infiltrate the Democratic Party with a progressive majority and become a truly representative democracy peacefully.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 6 years 46 weeks ago
#24

Loren Bliss ~ Thank you for that eloquent, provocative, and most disturbing theory. I too hope you are wrong. However, the theory does make perfect sense and explain a lot of peculiar behaviors that otherwise remain a mystery. The President's overwhelming use of deadly military force and prolonging the unconstitutional policies of the Bush administration for instance. I will keep you theory in the back of my mind and pray it stays there. However, in searching for reason in these troubling times we face I will no doubt call upon it in the future; though, with great reluctance. Thanks again!

RACadmin 6 years 46 weeks ago
#25

And the money the insiders (as investers goes) are sitting on in this state is debt owed to the poor that have funded their ass, including walkers ass and his healthcare that comes with his so called job... and, Tammy Baldwin was exactly right in her letter addressing Scott Walkers latest actions... but for you to understand more of what is going on down here as well as everywhere else, including my post addressing this issue and the reason Tammy wrote, you would need to read that thread... I provide it here. http://www.thomhartmann.com/users/racadmin/blog/2013/09/gov-scott-walker-two-faced-jackass-refused-federal-grant-money-help-fund#comment-232943

RACadmin 6 years 46 weeks ago
#26

DAnneMarc wrote

Infiltrating the Democratic party is a great idea. However, infiltrating it by We the People without BIG money I doubt is going to happen. That is the problem the way I see it. The only solution is to get the money out of politics first. Then it can be infiltrated successfully on a level playing field. We the People have to demand Campaign Finance Reform and Move to Amend and we have to demand it at a grass roots level on a grand scale. I believe that until these measures are implemented in Government there will be no infiltration by We the People on any level of government that will have any success.

Campaign Finance Reform and Move to Amend is the biggest enemy of the billionaires right now. You can tell by the way their pundits consistantly dismiss such a notion as being "dead in the water." Any such movement to pass that legislation is going to be met with the best opposition money can buy and we have to be ready to persevere over that opposition. Anything else is a waste of time and resources. We can't afford to waste any more of our time or any more of our resources. We must take the fight to the heart of the problem--Big Money! We must dio it now--before we get any weaker!

RACadmin reply:

I just got this email from Calvin Sloan to help with Move to amend's efforts... I'm not on top of all of Move to Amends efforts to date to overturn Citizens United and am throwing this out there for those that are to see if this is a part of it... I myself do not see how Citizens United ruling can nullify or overturn campaign finace laws already on the books... I thought the law was that no new law shall be written that causes a conflict with the intent of previous laws written... it is not the courts athority or position to legislate or write laws from the bench nor are any of their rulings in cases to result in missinterpretaions of the law... and when that happens, they should be challenged in court not just accepted and then look for ways to amend the law, rather look for ways to enforce the laws already on the books... say campaign finace laws which set the limits one be he one individual or one corporation as now defined ( aside from corporate law definition) as in websters, the plural, as in corporation(s) being people... people as in the plural of person... thus also setting the limits any one corporation as a person being one of a people can contribute... Why not run that up the flag pole and see if it flys?

below is that letter...

On October 8, the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in a case that some are calling “the next Citizens United” and, once again, the Court’s ultraconservative five-justice majority could take steps to seriously undermine democratic principles and open the door for more big money in elections.

At issue in McCutcheon v. FEC are “aggregate contribution limits” -- the overall limits on the total amount a person can give directly to candidates, PACs and parties in each election cycle. The Supreme Court has upheld these limits as constitutional for nearly four decades. However, the Roberts Court has decided, for no justifiable reason other than possibly to tilt the scales of justice towards the powerful, to hear McCutcheon and potentially gut those important limits.

We’ve assembled a toolkit to help activists raise awareness of McCutcheon and rally for reforms that can solve our growing money-in-politics problem.

Check it out now at www.pfaw.org/McCutcheon.

Use the toolkit to:

  • Learn more about the case, the issues at stake and how to talk about them to your community;
  • Write a “Letter To the Editor” of your local newspaper;
  • Attend rallies and lobby events taking place both in Washington, DC and across the country on the day of the oral arguments;
  • Amplify #McCutcheonvia social media tools;
  • And more!

Click here to read and use the toolkit now!

As always, we’re here to help. Please reach out to us at amendment@pfaw.org if you need help with your Letter To the Editor submission or any other issues regarding McCutcheon or other “Money Out” reform and activism.

Thank you for fighting back against the corrupting influence of big money in our elections and the pro-corporate activism of the Roberts Court in order to restore Government By the PEOPLE.

Sincerely,

Calvin Sloan, Legislative Representative

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 6 years 46 weeks ago
#27

2950-10K ~ Sorry I missed your point buddy. You make perfect sense. I too worry about my decision to pull out of the Democratic party. There are still some members that I would reelect; however, only about half of the ones that are in my voting district. As far as the President is concerned, we will have to see who is nominated. Maybe the Democratic party will surprise everyone the way the Vatican has and nominate another FDR. I'm not going to hold my breath.

I understand your fears of letting a Republican back into the White House. That could be a disaster. However, the way things are going a disaster will happen anyway. We need progressive leadership in Government. The way the billionaires have both parties and the media under their thumb I don't see how any modern status quo election is going to resolve this problem. Of course there is nothing wrong with trying. After all, what else is there to do on election day than vote?

Infiltrating the Democratic party is a great idea. However, infiltrating it by We the People without BIG money I doubt is going to happen. That is the problem the way I see it. The only solution is to get the money out of politics first. Then it can be infiltrated successfully on a level playing field. We the People have to demand Campaign Finance Reform and Move to Amend and we have to demand it at a grass roots level on a grand scale. I believe that until these measures are implemented in Government there will be no infiltration by We the People on any level of government that will have any success.

Campaign Finance Reform and Move to Amend is the biggest enemy of the billionaires right now. You can tell by the way their pundits consistantly dismiss such notions as being "dead in the water." Any such movement to pass that legislation is going to be met with the best opposition money can buy and we have to be ready to persevere over that opposition. Anything else is a waste of time and resources. We can't afford to waste any more of our time or any more of our resources. We must take the fight to the heart of the problem--Big Money! We must dio it now--before we get any weaker!

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 6 years 46 weeks ago
#28

RACadmin ~ Thanks for that heads up. It's smoke and mirrors again. Look at the Wizard stop the government, and pay no attention to the nine Justices behind the black gowns.

dglsdxn 6 years 46 weeks ago
#29

It's simple really. Just start voting OUT every Republicain incumbant there is. They want to play hard-ball? I'll certainly play along. They want to play with my income? Well, it's time to play 'Pin-the-tail-on-the-Donkey'! As far as I'm comcerned John Boner and his wealthy buddies can start looking for another JOB!

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 6 years 46 weeks ago
#31

But sometimes you have to hit bottom before you realize you have to really fight back. When you are cornered, you have no other choice but to fight back or die a sniveling victim. So it is with drug addiction, for example...a rationale of "just a little taste" and "oh, I can quit anytime I want" and eventually, you are so whacked out you don't have any control at all... and never will.

Continually voting for the least evil choice out of fear of the worst evil choice will always keep us imprisoned, addicted, in the rigged game and we will all die slow agonizing deaths...as we are all enslaved, shamed and abused by the wealthy elite. We will be nothing but pathetic junkies riding the temporary highs of false hopes just to always be left with disappointing lows.

Quote 2950-10k:A third party will tilt the power, due to pulling votes from the Dems, and totally give all control to the billionaires. The only way we would ever get it back would be via violent revolution.

Yes, of course, that might be true...it may swing the political puppets back to Republicans instead of Democrats...but the real powers OWN both parties. The Democrats will always take the air out of the sails of real change because they pander false hope and always let us down by giving in to the hardliner Republicans.

If Republicans were elected, that would bring us that much closer to real change because the people would have no other choice but to cower in the corner or fight back in the streets. And fighting back in the streets is the only realistic way of real change. Sad, but true! History has proven this to be true and what is happening now in the streets of other countries is proving this to be true.

The Democrats under a Republican regime, wanting to get back into power, would do pretty much what the Republicans do now... obstruct everything the Republicans do...to a point..because they are still owned by the ruling elite.

And if the Democrats would then ever get back into power again, they would do exactly the same thing that they do now...shift their actions to favoring those that own them...the ruling elite. They would continue to pretend they are for the people and then continue to let the ruling elite get their way while blaming Republicans.

It wasn't just FDR who made big changes....he had a lot of help. The specter of mass rebellion made some, like FDR, realize that the ruling elite could not continue their full force attack on the majority of people...the workers. The ruling elite, only then knew that they went too far and had to back off or risk losing everything (to... maybe ...communism? ...like in Russia when those ruling elite lost everything to the masses! Have you never seen Dr. Zhivago where the wealthy had to share their mansions with multiple families?) Without the fear of Communism, the Capitalists could run roughshod over the people..and that is just what has happened since the fall of the Berlin Wall. And what we are seeing is the natural course of Capitalism destroying itself...as Marx had predicted. In order for Capitalism to thrive it needs ever more markets and slaves..and it needs to kill people...lots of people. And that's the economic system that is glued to a political system of Democracy. But both systems are massively corrupt as much as any two-bit dictatorship in any banana republic who tries to come off as a Democracy with a valid capitalist economic system. Those empires are falling all over the world and they are setting good examples for those of us in the US.

As long as the ruling elite can keep the people believing that their only options are voting for one of the two parties in the rigged system of so-called "democracy", then things will never change. The massive strikes and violence in the streets...are the only things that knocked some sense into the ruling elite back then. The Occupy Wall Street was a start...and it did scare the ruling elite. Instead of worrying about some stupid debt ceiling manipulation by the puppets of the ruling elite, the Republicans and Democrats designed to be a means by which they further push us all into our death beds, the people need to do some of their own manipulations by rebelling against the corrupt two party system.

Voting for a third party candidate is only the least that can be done...but not the last. Working within a corrupt system is throwing away any chance of real change.

This bought us some concessions for a time but now they have again turned their mega-greed against us. Back then, of course, they didn't have the massive outflow of American jobs to overseas wage slaves like they do now. So, strikes are pretty much out of the question now...unless it happened in the financial sector, perhaps.

When there was massive unemployment back then, nothing was manufactured and no one could afford to buy anything. Now that they have their very cheap slaves overseas the workers in the US don't have much bargaining power anymore.

The only things we can do is massively boycott everything produced abroad...which is just about everything...and/or massive unrest in the streets of the US. These things won't happen with a Democrat President constantly taking the pressure off by fooling people with false hope. It will be a slow death of the American masses unless they stop falling for the lie that the only thing they can do is work within a crooked system. You've got to get your heads out of the sand, quit fooling yourselves, get out of the box! You've got to rebel against it!

Does anyone ever read these long, rambling diatribes? ;~0

sandlewould's picture
sandlewould 6 years 46 weeks ago
#32

2950-10K,

On the one hand, you make a good point. On the other, while congress was largely controlled by Repugs during the Clinton years, Clinton could at least have vetoed the legislation that lead to some of the most disastrous consequences in our nation’s history; for example the Telecommunications Act of 1996 which allowed for media monopolies, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which restricts habeas corpus, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which forced down wages by making those needing public assistance take low-paying jobs. In one sense, this could be described as taking money from poor welfare recipients and giving it to the rich, creating a new source of corp. welfare. Other laws passed during the Clinton years with lots of support from fellow Dems; the infamous Defense of Marriage Act, the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, which replaced the Job Training Partnership Act, in effect making funds available to corporations for training of workforce instead of local governments, the Iraq Liberation Act...we all know what that lead to, the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act which made it illegal to file class action suits for securities fraud in federal court. And of course, lets not forget the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which gutted protections in and regulation of the financial industry. Clinton did not veto ANY of these bills, and Democrats gladly participated and in some cases sponsored them.

Last but not least, the National Free Trade Agreement, which congress was not even involved in which effectively destroyed manufacturing, unions and descent wages in the US paving the way for subversion of our Constitution and the coming TPP and TTIP agreements that Obama will ram through without Congress if necessary as his final legacy.

When Obama went dark first on BP after the spill, then on single payer healthcare, then refused to simply do nothing in '10 AND '12 w/ regard to the Bush tax cuts I finally woke up. Obama could have let them expire then pushed for reinstatement of them for the middle class. Instead, he extended them in ’10, and in ’12 signed legislation that tied corporate subsidies which actually resulted in an INCREASE in corp. welfare and tax breaks for the richest, to keeping the Bush cuts for the middle class. Why didn’t Pres. Obama and the Dems hammer how important it was to get out and vote in ’10, not just for him, but for Democrats in the HOUSE? They fell silent. Why did Harry Reid refuse to reform the filibuster...TWICE, instead, trading away court appointments AND leaving filibuster intact? Dem elites want the same thing as Repug elites. What will it take for Dems to wake up and realize that the only difference between Dems and Repugs is that almost all Dems just PRETEND to care, where at least w/ Repugs, what you see is what you get?

sandlewould's picture
sandlewould 6 years 46 weeks ago
#33

Loren Bliss,

Sadly, I agree. You were ery eloquent. We can't prove it, but with a little common sense and intuition, what other conclusions can we draw? See posts #s 4 & 33 and my reply to Thom's editorial w/ regard to Pope's remarks.

sandlewould's picture
sandlewould 6 years 46 weeks ago
#34

Palindromedary

I do. (red long posts) Well said. The Gov. didn't have the resources to deal with the unrest had it occurred en mass durring FDR. Now, the governments destructive power is unlimited and as you say, our bargaining power, short of going completely off the grid, raising/growing all our own food, etc, we have no recourse..."they will not be able to buy or sell w/out the mark of the beast'.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 6 years 46 weeks ago
#35

To those who would persist that it is better to vote Democrat so as to not risk losing out to the Republicans....would you vote for say...Bernie Sanders..who is an Independent and not a Democrat? I sure would..without a doubt!

Loren Bliss's picture
Loren Bliss 6 years 46 weeks ago
#36

Apropos my #23 above, I should have explained why Obama would work toward "cleverly discrediting or rather nullifying" the aspirations of African-Americans. If I am reading the evidence correctly, Obama's effort is an exceptionally diabolical application of the classic capitalist/fascist strategy of neutralizing revolutionary leadership. Particularly since the U.S. Civil War, African-Americans have been a key part of what little genuinely revolutionary leadership the USian people have managed to produce, and in the era of the Civil Rights/Anti-Poverty/Anti-Vietnam War movements, they were the only such leadership that seemed capable of uniting the 99 Percent to the point of building solidarity across racial boundaries. Indeed, no other USian minority has ever demonstrated that capability. Fearing the emergence of another generation of effective African-American leadership, the One Percent will use any means possible to ensure it does not happen.

(The commercial co-optation of hip-hop is perhaps the most obvious part of the One Percent's effort to strangle at birth, as it were, any resurrection of black revolutionary leadership in this savagely oppressed nation. The re-segregation of public schools and the emergence of the prison-industrial complex should be viewed as identically motivated: literally, modes of oppression that generate obscenely huge profits. Thus there is no question the anti-African-American effort is already underway. Thus too the role now being played by the president in his transformation from Obama the Orator to Barack the Betrayer would, in this context, be nothing more than a logical expansion of the One Percent's offensive.)

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 6 years 46 weeks ago
#37

Sandlewould: Thank you, Sandlewould! But you know, the government had plenty of munitions...in fact they eventually fought the Germans and the Japanese so they had plenty of firepower and man power. What they didn't have was the will and resolve of the masses. Would US troops have slaughtered masses of Americans?

Yes, there were some isolated incidents but would all of the US military have resorted to large scale massacres?

Yes, there were smaller scale massacres largely by hired guns by the various powerful companies when people dared rebel. But still no large scale military movements against the people.

I believe that military personnel would be repulsed if they were ever given orders to massacre their own citizens, perhaps their own families, to support those that they all know are exploiting them to begin with.

True, outside forces, mercenaries could be brought in to do the dirty work. But I believe that once it is realized by the ruling elite that the masses could very well overwhelm the few with high tech weapons and the outcome would be to lose everything they have including being tried for atrocities against the people...not to mention that they could all be swinging from the end of a noose..or worse...ripped to shreds in their bunkers by enraged citizens...they would have to, as in FDR's day, stop their economic war against us and stop being so selfish and greedy.

I, for one, hope that American citizens will never have to resort to this kind of rebellion...that the greedsters will come to their senses and reverse their actions since Reagan, at least.

But I believe all out rebellion and violence is inevitable for our future. It will be citizens against the real terrorists of this world...the ones that have already massacred many civilians many times over. They've got to be stopped!

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 6 years 46 weeks ago
#38

Loren Bliss: I like your alliteration: Obama the Orator to Barack the Betrayer! So true! And it is particularly astute to differentiate between USians and Americans. The rest of the Americas are, more often than not, setting a good example for the rest of us "Americans" (ie: USians) in rebelling against their crooked leaders.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 6 years 46 weeks ago
#39

Sandlewould: Thanks for all those examples of bills passed with the help of, or proposal of them by, Democrats and the Clinton administration that benefited the wealthy and hurt the rest of us:

Quote Sandlewould:Clinton did not veto ANY of these bills, and Democrats gladly participated and in some cases sponsored them.

Last but not least, the National Free Trade Agreement, which congress was not even involved in which effectively destroyed manufacturing, unions and descent wages in the US paving the way for subversion of our Constitution and the coming TPP and TTIP agreements that Obama will ram through without Congress if necessary as his final legacy.

When Obama went dark first on BP after the spill, then on single payer healthcare, then refused to simply do nothing in '10 AND '12 w/ regard to the Bush tax cuts I finally woke up. Obama could have let them expire then pushed for reinstatement of them for the middle class. Instead, he extended them in ’10, and in ’12 signed legislation that tied corporate subsidies which actually resulted in an INCREASE in corp. welfare and tax breaks for the richest, to keeping the Bush cuts for the middle class. Why didn’t Pres. Obama and the Dems hammer how important it was to get out and vote in ’10, not just for him, but for Democrats in the HOUSE? They fell silent. Why did Harry Reid refuse to reform the filibuster...TWICE, instead, trading away court appointments AND leaving filibuster intact? Dem elites want the same thing as Repug elites. What will it take for Dems to wake up and realize that the only difference between Dems and Repugs is that almost all Dems just PRETEND to care, where at least w/ Repugs, what you see is what you get?

sandlewould's picture
sandlewould 6 years 46 weeks ago
#40

Palindromedary,

I guess I was referring to the federalization & militarization of our local police force and the instant knowledge the IT revolution has given the NSA, as well as the use of private security firms by huge corporations who are not only above the law, but control it. Yes, there were masecres locally. The coordinated national oppression of OWS was a new thing (I think) and that on steroids is what I fear.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 6 years 46 weeks ago
#41

"We have nothing to fear but fear itself."

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 6 years 46 weeks ago
#42

Who among Thom Hartmann's listeners would not vote for Bernie Sanders, an Independent, if he chose to run...instead of a Democrat? I believe lots of them would vote for Bernie Sanders instead of a Democrat even if they thought Republicans just might win.

Hammy's picture
Hammy 6 years 46 weeks ago
#43

I`m not American but I know with living in Northern Ireland the frustrations of a Conservative government. The Tories over here are like your Republicans and seem to delight in the misery of others. It`s about time politics was changed and a ruling that nobody from an 'entitled' background can hold any significant seats in any house. These people do not understand the pressures they are putting on people. If they do then more the disgrace as dogs have a better life than many of our humans living in todays 'civilized' countries. Whatever happened to co-ops? Why do all businesses have to be do or die type ventures instead of a co-ordinated effort between management and the workers? I feel for the US people as I do for all EU people these days. We live a lie!

George Reiter's picture
George Reiter 6 years 46 weeks ago
#44

President Obama maybe will invoke the 14th Amendment to avert a government shutdown.

The constitutionality of invoking Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment to raise the debt ceiling can only be determined after its use. I think that the Tea Party Republicans are challenging the President to invoke the 14th Amendment with the outcome to be determined by the Supreme Court.

These Republicans are determined to make President Obama’s service to our country difficult, as exemplified in their clandestine meeting at a private room at the Caucus Room restaurant in Washington on the night of President Obama inaugural balls January 20, 2009. Shamefully, the Republican leaders plotted to intentionally sabotage and undermine the Obama presidency at every turn, no matter how much damage it did to our country.

Maybe the Republican “Tea Party” is looking for a reason for impeachment?

Mauiman2's picture
Mauiman2 6 years 45 weeks ago
#45

Wow Mark Saulys are you way off base. The score card says that Bush added 2 trillion to the debt in 8 years while President Santa Claus has added 6 trillion in 5 years. There is a saying that says " A person has a right to their opinion, but does not have the right to mis represent the facts". Clearly you do not subscribe to that theroy when you state that President Santa Claus has cut the deficit in half.

If Biden Wins, Get Ready for Trump to Punish America

Thom plus logo What could happen to America if Trump were to further, severely crash the U.S. economy the day after Joe Biden is announced as the winner of the 2020 presidential race?

As Trump tweeted on June 15, 2019, "if anyone but me takes over... there will be a Market Crash the likes of which has not been seen before!"
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"With the ever-growing influence of corporate CEOs and their right-wing allies in all aspects of American life, Hartmann’s work is more relevant than ever. Throughout his career, Hartmann has spoken compellingly about the value of people-centered democracy and the challenges that millions of ordinary Americans face today as a result of a dogma dedicated to putting profit above all else. This collection is a rousing call for Americans to work together and put people first again."
Richard Trumka, President, AFL-CIO
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."
Jim Hightower, National Radio Commentator, Writer, Public Speaker, and author of the bestselling Thieves in High Places
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Through compelling personal stories, Hartmann presents a dramatic and deeply disturbing picture of humans as a profoundly troubled species. Hope lies in his inspiring vision of our enormous unrealized potential and his description of the path to its realization."
David Korten, author of Agenda for a New Economy, The Great Turning, and When Corporations Rule the World