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.
to drive you have to be taught responsibility, and licensed by the state to operate the death machine
Insurance should be required on ALL GUNS but assault weapons can only be carried by the FREAKING MILITIA!!!!
Not at all. Diplomatic relations just offer new avenues to destabilize the government. The US will not rest until Cuba is returned to its colony status, it dominates the whole world and all the workers are truly enslaved.
Roland
Thank you Mccowley. Sweet.
I Cannot agree more. I was a teacher of small children. Sandy Hook happened on my Birthday. I will never turn a year older without rememberring those sweet faces. We should ensure guns and gun carriers!! Insure the gun, like car, AND insure the gun carrier. Two separate policies, if you ask me.
Off topic now...re. Cuba...
Obviously, most Cubans and many Americans are very glad that Obama is “normalizing” relations w/ Cuba. Cubans have been denied access to goods and services that they have desperately needed which they now have access too, and undoubtedly will for a time anyway. Intuitively however, looking at the U.S.’s behavior over the last 14 years…I fear for Cuba in the long run. Let’s not forget the fake USAID scandal in Cuba, not to mention the recent efforts of a group, including Cuba, to escape the grip of the exploitative World Bank and IMF via what is now known as BRICS bank that would welcome Cuba. Oh, and what about the oil discovered recently off Cuba?
This may have no bearing on the subject, but for some insights on the effects our politicians have on small island nations;
What do Haiti, Disaster Capitalism and Mob rule have in Common?
Answer: The Clinton Foundation. Here is an excellent interview with Kim Ives, an editor with Haïti Liberté, a news weekly.
I love you Alice. Marvellous posts. My kinda gal.
Interesting psychology note: The reason people like to blast their music, particularly when driving, is usually because that's the only time those people have any power over anyone else. That is, the less power someone has in life, the more likely they are to turn up the music when driving, thus forcing a little bit of their tastes onto those around them. This crosses racial lines - the impoverished and young (the least powerful) from all races are more likely to play their music loud enough for others to hear while driving. As people getting older/more affluent, the volume gets lower. And, in my case, it went from blasting Pearl Jam and Nirvana, to low-volume AM talk radio.
According to my college psych professor, at least. But my personal observations confirm this.
Richard,
I understand your concern for what is happening in the Middle East, and how the event are affecting the Palestinian Arabs. I am equally concerned, but unlike you. I "live there", and know a few more things about what occurs. You are, by definition an outside observer, and there are facts that don't reach you, and are often discomobulated by the media, what they "don't tell you". I could go on forever, and I have something else to say, but allow me to offer you a "name" that you will not hear in the media that might enlighten you some, Mawan Barghouti, look it up in Wikipedia. Most Israelis and Arabs in this part of the word know who he is, but for some reason none of correspondents "have ever heard of him". They say he left the the PLO and the Hamas because he was fed up by their corruption, some people disagree, and explain the split for other reasons. In any case, he is in an Israeli jail for the time being.
Okay, this is my real point. I may not agree with you on what is to be done where I live, but the differenece between me and you is that I live where it is happening and you don't. That is one thing, the other thing is that if you really feel that Senator Warren is the candidate most suitable to be the President of the United States on account of her record, on account of what you feel she will accomplished were she elected as the president, that is what is more important.
The idea to elect a president that is good for the United States of America, Bush was hardly, and my sources, be they the Guardian, or Shmuffington Post, or the sources I learn about what is going on seven thousand miles away from where I live, they are all suspect. You know better, and I expect you be well informed enough to make an intelligent opinion. What Ms Warren thinks about foreign policy might be important, but I see a dystopia in the making.
As a ex-Pat, strange as it seems I feel more secure in Israel, than I would be living in the States. I am not afraid of a policeman stopping me and asking me to get out of my car and threating my limbs,, or my life, or ... my money. I can still have my opinions and and not be afraid that my phone is tapped, or my E-mails will be monitored. All of that is happening in the United States of of America. I am sure there other ex-Pats, in parts of the world that are percieved as less "dangerous" that enjoy the same sense of security where they live, and don't have the feeling that nation where they were born is what it was a while ago.
My wish to you is not to be as concerned about the area where I live and show some concern for what is happening in your "neighborhood". We are having our own elections soon, and Please God, that might affect what will occur in '15. for the better.
I don't think I can comfort you about the "my vote", because I make my decsion is based on what is best, in my opinion for "where I live" in all aspects of our national life,. I'll tell ya' I am more Traditional about Jewish values, and opt for one of the Clerical lists for all kinds of reasons you would not understand. You don't don't live here, and it's complicated, as i would not understand your political choices because you live in the States.
Again, please don't fret about the the conflict that is going on in my neighborhood. There are so many burning issues in the States that require healing for which you have an opportunity to correct, your concern for peace in our neck of the woods by definition is secondary.
Really............ Since when does the Geneva Convention state explicitely that it only covers State operated armies, and people that wear uniforms, just for starters? When you are talking to your friend Dick, would you ask him if he would like a free Rectal Feeding and Rehydration, he really, really deserves it.
Really............ Since when does the Geneva Convention state explicitely that it only covers State operated armies, and people that wear uniforms, just for starters? You might also define "enemy combatants" while you are at it. When you are talking to your friend Dick, would you ask him if he would like a free Rectal Feeding and Rehydration, he really, really deserves it.
There is a book called The Keys to the White House by a historian named Allan Lichtman, in which he analyzes every US Presidential election since 1860, when the Republican Party came to prominence. He identifies a set of "keys," developed along with a scientist who developed models for earthquake prediction, which retroactively accounted for the winner of every election from 1860-1980 (before the system was devised), and predicted every winner since 1984. To my knowledge, the author hasn't yet predicted 2016, but others have used the keys to do so, which you can find online.
The point is, as of today the Democratic candidate, whoever it is, will win the Presidency in 2016 -- just barely. If a single key is tipped the other way, the Republican candidate, whoever it is, will win. One of the keys that can be tipped between now and then relates to whether there is a vigorous contest for the nomination of the candidate for the incumbent party. In other words, if the Democratic nomination process is hotly contested, the Republican wins. If the Democrats solidly back one candidate, that candidate wins.
It doesn't matter who the candidates are. The idea that we elect candidates is, according to the "keys" model, a misconception: we elect parties. Provided that a candidate doesn't flake out somehow, any candidate will do, from the perspective of a pragmatic electorate which perceives a change of party as the important factor when change is deemed necessary.
If Clinton runs unchallenged, she will be the next President, provided no other "keys" are flipped. If she has a strong challenger, then one of them had better bow out of the race or they will hand it to the winner of the Republican nomination.
I'm not suggesting that Clinton should be the next President. I'm a socialist, I don't support any pro-capitalist candidate, and that includes all Democratic Party candidates. But I do have preferences, and someone like Sanders or Warren would certainly be preferable to Clinton, from my perspective. I'm only suggesting that progressives had better hope there's only one strong candidate for the Democratic Party nomination. Better Sanders or Warren than Clinton, but better Clinton than any Republican.
Yes we have only been fighting for legalization for who knows how lobg... and were moving the thing along finally...thanks for the good story/news here
As Roosevelt indicated, you have to make him do something!~ We khave to "make" E. Warren run for President!
Before the 2012 election, I remember hoping Obama would, in his lame-duck presidency, morph from his Lincolnesque demeanor to Teddy Roosevelt. He did change, but not enough to really fix this country. He still has his Wall Street connections. Our bought government even has its bought Democrats. I was just reading that in Indiana the governor before Pence was a Democrat, and he really believed the way forward for his state was tax cuts for the rich and trickle-down neoliberalism. Talk about a "great forgetting."
With two years to go and the intense choke-hold that money has on Washington -- not to mention the general economic ignorance there is in the voting public (young people polled before the mid-terms tended to think Republicans would do better fixing the economy) -- we would have to see a massive populist movement to bring Warren or Sanders to the fore.
Meanwhile, the GOP election-rigging and game-playing in Washington will continue with gusto. The most likely run-off for president in 2016 will be Bush vs. Clinton. Sounds more like we have an aristocracy than a democracy.
But history is full of surprises.
Sorry to hear that Vegasman. I think sometimes the message to allow java to run does not pop up. Please can you email webmaster@thomhartmann.com and tell him about it, including which browser you are using.
Ken Duerksen - You are right, the FCC and USPS are two gov't agencies that should have some responsibility for internet communications. I prefer management and oversight by "we the people" compared to cable & phone companies. I don't know what such management would look like, but it's unlikely that for-profit companies will support net neutrality and open internet unless they are required.
florencev - I agree fully with your initiative, and I signed the petition. Then I shared info with family. Some of them get it. Unfortunately, others who watch Fox "news" haven't a clue.
Response to #15: Matt, in the context of political & social upheaval, guns -- assault rifles, whatever -- are the obsession of those with knee-jerk reactions to everything, and no imagination. Thom does not fall into that category.
Thom, if I didn't know any better, I'd think you were trying to convince me to buy a gun - preferably as assault rifle - and get ready to fight the "authorities" when they come to my compound.
Sometimes I get the feeling that the Republicans look at the presidency like a nice thing to have, but not necessary to get what you want. Since, for the most part, the current system is set up to favor Republican ideals, they have the easier job of stopping any change, rather than trying to make the change. So they don't really need the presidency as long as they control at least one part of Congress.
As we've seen with Obama, it doesn't really matter how populist or progressive or liberal the president is - he or she will face a wall of opposition from the Republicans.
Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown is another excellent progressive "for the [REAL] people" candidate.
DAnneMarc, I made a personal decision not to vote for a war hawk of any kind. I voted twice for Obama using pragmatism as a justification. I will not be using pragmatic rationalization to undermine my own sense of right and wrong. Warren and Sander are both dead wrong about their positions on Israel's illegal occupation of the Palestinian people just like Scalia is wrong about torture.
I understand the reasoning that you are using and it's sound logic. I just don't have the pragmatic sensibility to allow myself to vote for the lesser of two evils anymore.
You are so correct.
Alice, Good on you. I agree.
Bryant Fisher really bombed. What a troll!