Recent comments
ADHD: Hunter in a Farmer's World
Thom Hartmann has written a dozen books covering ADD / ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.
Join Thom for his new twice-weekly email newsletters on ADHD, whether it affects you or a member of your family.
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.
In February 2007, Nader criticized Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton as "a panderer and a flatterer." Asked on CNN Late Edition news program if he would run in 2008, Nader replied, "It's really too early to say...." Asked during a radio appearance to describe the former First Lady, Nader said, "Flatters, panders, coasting, front-runner, looking for a coronation ... She has no political fortitude." Some Greens started a campaign to draft Nader as their party's 2008 presidential candidate.
Best wishes,
Olivia Jane
Editor, Paid to click
The sad reality is no one is watching the so called News any more. It doesn't matter who they put on. Kids don't care, they get their news from Jon Stewart.
We need to teach civics again!
Let me guess. Now after Chuck's slip up, NBC will eventually be turning the 'Meet the Press' helm over to another Russert. That being Luke?
Palindromedary ~ No argument there! I think you know exactly what I'd do. I already told you what I did do. Of course, knowing what I know both about how police recruit as well as personal experience how can I act any different? Yet, you and I are smarter, better educated, and far more experienced than most--certainly more so than poor kids in the ghetto. They have no idea what they are up against until it is too late. It only takes a small spark to ignite a powder keg. I know that even an even tempered, well mannered, innocent and well meaning young man can easily bring death upon himself with nothing more than a poorly chosen split second bad decision. Everyone makes mistakes, especially young people. I for one do not want to live in a society that devalues life so much that they would allow such senseless murder to occur. Do you? Really?
DAnneMarc: I hope so too! Until then, I'll continue trying to keep my temper and act normal and respectful and do exactly what they tell me to do and not argue with them so that it minimizes the possibility of triggering any psychopathic tendencies they may have. I'll also continue to think that anyone else that fails to do those things are just asking for trouble. What would you do?
Palindromedary ~ Again, you miss my point. Allow me to retell my story. I have a very close friend who applied to become a policeman back in the 80's. He went through all the training and passed every exam except for the psychological exam. He was told he wasn't police material. Another friend of mine is a bartender in a very popular police hangout right across the street from the Police Department. In a casual chit chat with the Police Chief he learned that my friend flunked the exam specifically because he was TOO EVEN TEMPERED. THEY ONLY WANT TO HIRE PSYCHOPATHS! DO YOU UNDERSTAND!! They specifically want psychopaths so much so that they give them a vigorous psychology exam designed to filter out normal dispositions. I got it straight from the horses mouth. This nonsense about attributing this dangerous behavior to PTSD and other on the job experiences is false. These people are certifiable natural psychopaths--to one degree or another--before they are ever even given a badge. They are all ticking time bombs; and, thanks to the Military Industrial Complex, they now all have access to weapons of mass destruction.
You can not be held responsible for the behavior of a psychopath. That behavior depends upon which way the wind blows. Anything, and everything, can set them off. It could be the color of your skin, your tone of voice, the type of shirt you are wearing, or how their Donut tasted that morning. Sadly, you will probably never get it until it actually happens to you. Seeing is believing. For your sake, I hope that never happens.
He might be well paid, but Chuck Todd is still a mere tool of the arbitrary power that currently runs this country. His job, like his Fox News peers, is to make sure the truth behind the cause of economic and social injustice never sees the light of day. However the truth will eventually find that light of day, and when it does, the well paid tools like Todd who have played a role in the disinformation that has brought down our representative democracy will be exposed for the shills they are.
Meet the Press has always been an Oprah couch of safety for politicians. Name the last time anybody was seriously challenged on Meet the Press?
What Chuck Todd said has never been a secret to anybody with any amount of sense. The open admission to establishment friendly commentary with absolutely no scrutiny shouldn't surprise anybody. The surprise should be that anybody takes this kind of "journalism" seriously, if it can be called journalism at all.
A show called Meet the Press shouldn't have politicians waiting at the door for a friendly sit down with a collaborating host placing questions on a tee for politicians to knock out of the park.
In a democratic society (purely hypothetical), a show called Meet the Press would be an unwelcoming, challenging and combative forum with politicians only present because a democratic public demands they be held to account, however, capitalist control will never all for such scrutiny of the established political class.
The public is misinformed about nuclear power. Newer nuclear power plant technologies could replace fossil fuels. There are more people killed in one year from fine particulate pollution (mostly from coal) than all nuclear accidents (including the WWII bombs in Japan). Ten ex EPA administrators have endorsed nuclear power. We need to be building nuclear power plants. Nuclear power is not without some risk, but compared to global warming it is miniscal.
DAnneMarc: Well, I guess I can now see why you are so much against policemen. You've been personally shunned by someone you thought you were pretty buddy-buddy with and he turned on you for whatever reason at the time.
Policemen experience things that most of us never will. They frequently see the very ugly side of things and can develop very human emotions and biases. Their lives depend upon being able to analyze possible threatening situations before they happen and taking the necessary actions to prevent being victims themselves. They can suffer the same kinds of PTSD that our soldiers fighting in wars can suffer. Once you see a child with his guts hanging out or ripped in two whether it is from a bomb in a war or an automobile accident at home it affects people, even tough and 'trained' professionals like policemen. Or, when he sees friends die when it could very easily have been him, it changes and hardens a person to an extent most family members or other civilians, who never has gone through that, can never understand. When people are put under a constant stress in life or death situations they can often snap...perhaps make the wrong decisions...all things they have to constantly worry about. There is no amount of training that can overcome that reality even though some seem to think otherwise. But then, they are not the ones who have to constantly experience what the police have to go through.
A cop's job is tough enough even without having antagonists challenging or mocking them or resisting arrest all of which usually leads to an escalation that usually never turns out for the good of the antagonist. But, I guess if people are dumb enough to cause an escalation with the police they will suffer the consequences. The police have a job to do and if someone gets in the way of them doing their job they will pay the price. I don't feel sorry for them. They usually deserve what they get. And in the case of MB attacking Wilson, I most certainly don't think MB deserves any sympathy. He caused his own problem.
Yes, I believe that there are a few cops that just can't wait for someone to escalate a problem and even some psychopathic killers out there. But, I don't believe that they are all like that. I think most of them want to serve and to protect the non-criminals...but not the criminals. It's their job to detect and apprehend the criminals...and they have to analyze characteristic behaviors of people in that endeavor. If a person acts like he is guilty of something he may very well be.
Most non-criminals will not escalate a problem by being disrespectful, argumentative, excessively nervous, or resist being arrested. It never does any good anyway. It's like the jaws of a trap..the more you struggle...the more the teeth dig in.
Actually, AIW, I've never had a bad personal problem with any blacks ... and I've known, went to school with, and worked with quite a few over the years. And none of them, that I know of anyway, has ever been in trouble with the police.
But, I do watch the news. When I see a surveillance video of some guy approaching people on the sidewalk...even women...and they sucker punch them and steel their iphones or purses or jewelry. I wouldn't be upset if that guy was beaten up himself or hit by a car trying to get away. And given time, they'll most likely shoot each other anyway...hopefully before they victimize more people. I wouldn't mind it if all those gang members and worthless individuals who do such things end up shooting each other so the cops don't have to. But even if it were whites doing these things I would not care a whit if they suffered the same fate. It's not the color of their skin...it's the criminal activities they commit. But it is easy to see who is committing most of the crimes.
This is another fundamental reason why citizens must become empowered as owners to meet their own consumption needs and financial security and government would become more dependent on economically independent citizens, thus reversing current global trends where all citizens will eventually become dependent for their economic well-being on our only legitimate social monopoly –– the State –– and whatever elite capital ownership class controls the coercive powers of government and our communications.
Todd's slip shouldn't be news to anyone. There is very little political news, except for very superficial accounts, in the mainstream media. It has been a disgrace for years. I no longer depend for information from those sources. Thankfully, we do not have to rely on a single or one of a very few sources.
I used to think big business money in politics was the single most urgent problem in America. Now I know beyond any doubt its the corporate media ownership, that makes the voting public STUPID AND DYSFUNCTIONAL; in other words, a high enough percentage of voters have become drones (to media propaganda) having the opinions big money wants them to hold near and dear (as though their own opinions). So the voters say ok to citizens united, and anything corporations want. This is an intolerable situation, because Americans have lost their freedom, and become nothing more than a cog in a wheel of the profit making engine of multi national corporations.
The Corporate owned media has an agenda to meet. I have yet to hear any local media reporting the work that John Bolenbaugh has done for our community for the last four years here in Michigan after Enbridge leaked between 844,000 and 1.1 million gals. of tar sand oil into the waterways from Marshall to Kalamazoo. John did not take a settlement offered. He wanted a Jury trial for the people of his community effected by this spill. Judge Kingsley let our community down just weeks before retiring. You can read a summery of his story at http://www.gofundme.com/christmas-eviction. or go to his website at www.tarsandtruth.org.
Thank goodness for Free Speech TV and documentaries like the 4 Horsemen.
Palindromedary ~ (Post 28 and 29) You make a few good points; and, I'm glad to hear they're still hanging. However your remarks are somewhat presumptuous at best. I think you discount the recruiting effort that I've already mentioned in several posts that go into the officer selection process. Essentially, I have heard under the table though reliable sources that violent tempered people are the ONLY candidates that qualify for police work. They are the ONLY people the department hires. I've also experienced this first person myself; and, I'm probably whiter than you.
Where we used to live I had many an opportunity to get to know the beat officers. One in particular was very helpful in helping us to deal with some rather dangerous former neighbors. He was very nice and we got to know each others names. Whenever I'd see him I would approach him and chat. He even once helped us round up a missing neighbors cat. Under most circumstances, he was quite a gentleman. However, one day, I saw him outside with other officers and I thought I'd say hello. I called him by name and asked him how he was. He spun around and growled at me to "Get Back!" He reached for his gun. I got back. He then went back to casually chatting with the other officers. I waited for him to finish politely, thinking maybe he didn't recognize me. So when he finished, I called his name again. This time I identified myself and where I lived. I told him he knew me. Again he spun around like a beast and screamed at me. I did not know this man. His demeanor was completely different than ever before, more like an angry lion in a zoo. I decided to abandon the effort and cut my loses. I went home.
I never forgot that encounter. That officer had no reason at all to be upset. I did not want to find out how much more upset he could become over nothing. Yet, without a doubt, in his calmer state he was easily one of the friendliest officers I have ever met. What really concerns me is that all this encounter proves is what I have learned a long time ago. You have to be a psycho in order to qualify to wear a badge.
I think that the point you are missing, PD, is that these people don't only carry guns, but now military grade equipment. Sure, it is easy to justify that since this violence is directed toward a minority and "not you", they "probably" deserved it; and, it will never happen to you. Yet, this is wishful thinking at best. Even YOU, just admitted that there ARE better examples of police brutality than the Michael Brown case. You have just admitted that there is indeed a problem. Why must you then insist there isn't? The fact of the matter remains, whenever anyone is denied justice, everyone is denied justice. The way this system is currently rigged, we are ALL potential victims. That is why we should ALL be outraged.
protest changes little. it mostly makes protesters feel good about themselves, that they're "taking action," while changing nothing.
marching clogs streets, costs govt much in police overtime. the real job is to change monds and votes.
It's sad when we the people, as a whole, don't look after we the people, particularly those who have played their part and paid the price. I don't know about the actual charities.
Here are some statistics
http://nccs.urban.org/nccs/statistics/Charitable-Giving-in-America-Some-...
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=42#.VKGB... - you can register and research charities
Lately I've noted many TV adverts like "The Wounded Warriors Project" which ask for us to give a charity donation to support services for military veterans who need them. Briefly stated, our government which used these people is not paying for the consequences of the results of the veteran's service and asks other citizens to provide voluntarily to a charity to absolve the government (us collectively) of its moral obligation. Why doesn't everyone recognize this as a despicable system? What portion of donations to these charities actually provide services?
Reply to #28: Palin, I was pleasantly surprised by this post because there is so much in it that we agree on. But we part company where you say, towards the end: “And those people, who have had problems with the police, probably acted in a way that was not a normal, calm and non argumentative demeanor.” That’s too broad a stroke, my friend. What’s more, it is presumptuous and simplistic.
Every situation is unique in such encounters between law enforcement and the public. Like you, Palin, I’ve been very polite wtih police officers and have had no run-ins with them. But the fact remains that if your skin is black or brown, you might as well be living in a different country. A black or brown man cannot count on politeness to keep him out of trouble with police officers. This is a disparity you refuse to acknowledge, PD, but refusing to acknowledge something won’t make it go away.
We happen to live in a society and culture that nurtures extreme inequality, providing a virtual paradise for a privileged few while so many live out their days in paycheck-to-paycheck purgatory, never quite making ends meet, or left out in the cold. Long as we tolerate this, we will have petty thieves sucker-punching and robbing us in the streets, scamming us, burglarizing our homes, stealing our identities and so on. This is because socioeconomic inequality generates crime. From my perspective, crime is only a symptom, not the disease. The same could be said about white collar crime such as the Wall Street mob, banksters and insurance hacks are known for. Seems worth pointing out that white collar crime maims, kills and impoverishes way more people than the types of crime mentioned in Palindromedary’s posts.
I suppose we each have a certain amount of personal baggage that gets triggered in these forums occasionally. I don’t know what kinds of experiences you’ve had, Palin, that would feed into the attitudes expressed in your posts whenever issues like this are addressed. But I get the feeling you’ve had bad experiences with black people at one time or another, that left you with an attitude of antagonism and hostility towards blacks. I could be wrong of course; but that’s how you’ve come across, at least to me.
My final comment is in response to post #29, where you describe how you think protestors hurt their causes by annoying and alienating the public.. Regardless of the issue being addressed, the whole point of a protest is to disrupt things! That’s how protests draw attention to themselves, which is what they are meant to do. I don’t have a problem with this. And I question whether they are as self-defeating as you claim they are. They might not be the be-all-and-end-all for social change, but they have their place, just like these forums. - AIW
The fact is that there are very few people, of all skin colors, who suffer rough treatment by the police unless they have done something to deserve it. But those few who are roughed up by the police makes all police look bad especially if there is a concerted effort by some people to make them all look bad based upon what a few have done. And the criminals just love it!
In effect, the people demonstrating against the police are helping out the criminals that have victimized, or will one day victimize, them. And what are they going to do then? Call the police? It will backfire on them! Most law-abiding people know that the MB case, but not so much the EG case, was a bad example of police brutality. There have been much better examples of police brutality. And when the demonstrators go out and block the streets, so people can't go home after work, they will lose any hope of support from those that are being blocked and those of others seeing it on TV.
Palindromedary ~ Why don't you just hand over your dick to the nearest law enforcement professional? What ever happened to the Palindromedary who wanted to fight fire with fire? What ever happened to the Palindromedary who wanted to let the authorities know that they are treading on thin ice? What ever happened to the Palindromedary who had balls?
You want us to believe that everything will be fine as long as we cooperate with law enforcement? Than what is the problem? We've been cooperating haven't we? You and I, the white people. What do we have to fear? We know how to behave, don't we? Or, do you???
We are all in this boat together! We will either float together, or sink together! You be the judge. I'm gonna swim for the side who floats. Adios, Pendejos!!
Palindromedary asks: “When was the last time people protested when people are killed by criminals? So, Joe Blow down the street was murdered by another Joe Blow who broke into his home and raped his family then killed the occupants. How many people are going to block traffic over that?”
C’mon PD, Eric Garner & Michael Brown’s cases didn’t ignite mass protest all over the country just for being tragic and wrong. What drove people out to the streets was how these cases typified a pattern in our society directly related to racism, classism and an imbalance of power. They drew our attention to an issue of social and political significance, involving white cops and black male civilians. Few if any muggings, burglaries or murders share the distinguishing characteristic of profiling issues related to social justice, even if such crimes are themselves symptomatic of socioeconomic inequality.
“If it were not for the police”, you go on to say, “there would be absolute chaos with many more victims. We would all be huddled in fear. The biggest and most brutish would rule us all.”
If it were not for the police, Eric Garner & Michael Brown would still be alive. If it were not for the police, most if not all these peaceful mass protests would have remained peaceful.
Are we denying the need for a police force in this, or any, society? Absolutely not. It’s the racists and bullies among them we’re objecting to. It’s their abuses of power we want no part of.
You don’t think the biggest and most brutish are ruling the roost already, PD? Fascists like the KKKoch brothers own our government now. Directly or indirectly, the police are protecting the property and interests of the elite, at everyone else’s expense. Their fascist media poisons the air with xenopobic garbage, keeping people scared, distrustful, alienated from each other and therefore, easy to control en masse.
Shooting unarmed individuals is indefensible and criminal. It also is a cowardly act. When you are armed yourself, and in the presence of someone who isn’t armed, that’s a huge advantage in your favor in the event of a violent conflict. Your life will not be in danger under most circumstances.
Aside from that, were you to put white folks in the same situations so many blacks are now living in, under the same conditions, with the same socioeconomic limitations and so on, those white folks would act out in the same ways conservatives are perpetually whining about from their little moral pedestals… You know, the black-on-black crime argument and so on. So stale, it's not even funny. - AIW