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.
I had problems with a company healthplan not paying a few years ago. I went to the HR office and told the HR Manager that I was not wasting my personnal time dealing with this anymore and called them from his office. He squirmed and squirmed listening to the excuses and then finally joined in. It was resolved almost immediately.
Was it in a red state? The Health Commissioner for the State of California would have been all over this company. A few years ago he penalized Blue Cross for screwing their customers. If this happened in California the Health Commissioner would ban the Company from business in California. If this is a red state, the ahole governor should shut them down. They probably do not have a health commissioner.
This story is disgraceful! The executives of this insurance company belong in jail. Not only do we have a broken healthcare system in this country we also have a very broken criminal justice system. When you visit a Doctor you have to waive the right to sue him in court for malpractice. However, I see nothing stopping a class action suit against the insurance racket. Time to knock these kingpins back down to size.
Tim Johnson's brain problem kept him out of work in 2007, not 2009, so he's not a factor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress#Senate gives the timeline that we're concerned with. The timeline does not show whether Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd were showing up to vote. Kennedy stopped voting in March 2009. Byrd was in the hospital from May 18th to Jun 30th, and he died slightly less than a year later. There was also stuff going on with Roland Burris, Al Franken, and Arlen Specter.
I hope that Thom Hartmann and all of his followers are no longer driving on internal combustion and running their homes with dirty electricity. Electric cars are now affordable for all but the lowest economic strata, and renewable electricity (RE) is cheaper in most states. RE is cheaper in all states if you add just a small tax for the external costs of dirty energy.
If you are posting things like this short film about the extinction of humanity, yet you continue to contribute to its cause, then you are a massive hypocrite.
Thom, what kind of car do you drive? And where do you get your electricity?
So, just because a lot of people use something, it belongs to the people? That's what the Occupy Wall Street people said about the park they were loitering in, even though it was a private park for the occupants of the building next to it, correct? I guess that falls under the "eminent domain" part of the Constitution. If that's the case, then the government has to reimburse the companies that actually bought/built/maintain/upgrade the backbone of the internet.
Concerning Thom's topic: If the problem is that we are subsidizing Wal-Mart's low pay, the answer might lie in taking away the subsidies. If they were faced with a workforce that suddenly couldn't feed themselves/or were motivated to find better work/ or were demotivated to work as well, then maybe Wal Mart would be forced to pay more. That is, if they know the government is going to help their employees, where's Wal Mart's motivation to change? Just a thought.
So how long had it been since the intro voiceover had been redone? I think it was the same since I started listening in 2007.
If we hadn't strangled democracy at birth in Iraq, by voiding the spontaneous local elections, we could hve followed a program of letting democracy grow from the local level up to the provincial and then the national. And as we did so, we could have incorporated Iraqis into the international coalition occupation forces, in order to slowly turn the nation's security over to its own people.
It would be a slow process; the schedule I came up with would have ended our occupation of Iraq this year, but it should certainly be more peaceful than what we actually did. Not just because we wouldn't have incensed the Iraqis in the first place, but because they would have been making steady progress toward self-government and self-sufficiency the whole time, rather than having the whole untamed situation dropped in their lap at once.
LOVE 'The Revolution of 1800', Thom; and its description of obstructing the will of the majority back then illustrates it's nothing new. Boehner, McConnell, Koch Bros, et al, do excel at that activity!
No way no how do I support Obama's amnesty by executive order. He may be frustrated but he doesn't get to write the laws---Congress does, and he doesn't get to rule by executive fiat. In addition to rewarding individuals who willfully broke the law, Obama is also telling the some 400,700 indivduals presently following the legal process that they're a bunch of saps. They should step out of line and just do it; forget about the law; forget about any medical criteria; forget about any requirements to speak minimum English or knowledge about US history or laws. Simply feel free to slid on it. If you wait long enough, the spineless federal government will fold. Obama's amnesty also tell millions of others to simple come on in; don't bother stopping at the border. We're a wide open country now.
as an avid user (wake and bake) of MJ since 16 (now 61) i remember my dreams nightly although i do remember them better after not using mj for 3 days. i am a business owner and have been self employed my entire life. you would be hard pressed to prove that my use of mj has any resemblence to shooting myself. more like healing the wounds of all the cheap shots made by uninformed people who make their living trying to tell me my life would somehow be better if i weren't so freaking happy. current research on cbd's in mj show the amazing cancer fighting properties of the plant and it is my understanding other current studies show a correlation between mj use and a lower incidence of alzheimers. introduction of infrared radiation and products of combustion directly into the lungs is probably never an optimal delivery method so i converted to eating my herb or vaporizing it as early as the 1980's. as far as a "good night's sleep" i bounce out of bed every morning fully rested and do not use stimulants like caffeine except for on extremely rare occaisions. the people i know weho are strictly cannabis users and eat extemely healthfully without using alcohol, caffeine, or excessive sugar all have more energy and healthier outlooks on life than anyone else i know.
Atta girl Sandles! By the way, nice to have ya back. - AIW
Reply to #1: Roger, please learn the facts before spouting off your opinion about something you know little about. Marijuana is NOT a harmful as alcohol, even to those who overindulge. Unlike alcohol and hard drugs and even some (ahem) prescription drugs, pot is not physically addicting, although some people do become psychologically addicted to it. Your analogy is way off base, and as a chemical dependency counselor you should know better than that. I smoke the stuff regularly myself and it has not interfered with my REM sleep.
As one who loves cannabis and has smoked it for nearly a half century, I am tired of all the fearmongering and misinformation getting passed around about my chosen vice and tired of having to defend it. Thom’s perspective on this issue is truly a breath of fresh air. - AIW
Say, Roger. I'm sixty years old and I've been smoking Marijuana since I was twenty-three. I smoke frequently, and In all that time, I have never experienced any of the problems that you have mentioned here. I dream and I get my REM sleep just fine. In fact, I sleep better under the influence of Marijuana. As for your statment about it being better to be shot with a 22 than a 45 caliber bullet, I would say that people deserve the right to chose what recreational drug they prefer if they choose to do any type of recreational drug at all. Since I choose to use some type of recreational drug, I simply prefer to be shot in the foot by a 22 rather than losing my entire foot by being shot there with a 45. A better choice and a better recreational drug. In consideration of all that you said, I think you're full of it.
What would you rather have for America?: (a) More Mitch McConnholes and John Bonner's running around, or (b) more immigrants.
[and yea, you got my permission to deport McConnhole and Bonner]
Sorry Roger, that is probably the phone company's fault, and what it actually means is that all the lines are all full. Please try ringing as soon as you hear somebody ring off.
Re the callers advocating a Sanders/Warren ticket in 2016, money will be an essential to have any traction in a campaign. If the ticket develops, I pledge to put $5/mo. (maybe more) on my bank auto payment function. A million similar grass roots folks would generate $5 million a month (or more) freeing Bernie and Elizabeth from fund raising pressures/obligations. Anyone else?
Our candidates are always picked by the party bigwigs, This is a way around that bunch of sellouts.
Re the callers advocating a Sanders/Warren ticket in 2016, money will be an essential to have any traction in a campaign. If the ticket develops, I pledge to put $5/mo. (maybe more) on my bank auto payment function. A million similar grass roots folks would generate $5 million a month (or more) freeing Bernie and Elizabeth from fund raising pressures/obligations. Anyone else?
I am a former GOP voter but . NO more. GOP favors corps - billionaireas tax cuts- loopholes, sibsides.. Long Useless wars - war profiteers- policies that helped lead to global crash -. Then in a panic TARP scam was passed. aka Gift horse to Wall St - banks. Bush Cheney Rice 8 yrs was a horrible disaster. Needless maiming- deatrh- wasting trillions Trillions more to carefor our Vets . Wages are lower- pensions rare. Our pension was slashed after wo0rking long and hard for it. GOP fights any reasonable regs to protect our air and water from toxins. . GOP wants NO raise in min wage- wants to privatize & defund education- privatize SS -so Wall St can gamble it away- charge high fees. I am 71 so I will not have to live long with these anti middle class- pro corp Robber Barons for long . My offspting will . Years living with Reaganomics Bush trickle down - 1986 total amnesty - Iran cntra - huge war debt- bad foreign policy has left US with massive problems. Reagan & Alan Greenspan ' borrowed' from our SS trust fund and left IOU 's - in part to hide their enormous debt . 12 yrs of Bush's was too much NO more Clintons either
Warren Grayson Sanders
I've been trying to call in for over a week, and get this message: "Your call can not be completed as dialed." I called the 1-866-987-8466 number on both my land line and my cell phone. Please help.
My comment is about marijuana from last week. I live in Washington and voted to legalize pot because so many people are harmed due to the black market. But that doesn't mean that I think it is a harmless recreational drug. It does little harm to those who use it infrequently. But a few people become potheads and smoke pot daily and even many times a day. Saying it is less harmful than alcohol is like saying shooting your foot with a 22 is less harmful than a 45. People do become chemically dependent on marijuana. Pot is unique and complex. As a chemical dependency (CD) counselor, I spent 3 hours on the various bad effects of marijuana, and only an hour on cocaine where the damage is less subtle and easier to demonstrate. Tom, as much as love you, I think you go too far when you start sounding like a commercial for pot. Because of the absurd classification as a schedule 1 drug, I don't think it has been studied as much as it will be now that it is legal. A very subtle negative effect of marijuana is that it interferes with REM sleep. This seems to be fairly common knowledge in the CD treatment field, but not known else where. I worked with criminal offenders and cannabis dependent people for 34 years, and have had many report, once they got sober, that they are dreaming again. To my knowledge this has not been studied. The only reference I have been able to find in the literature is from the Height-Asbury clinic. REM sleep is critical to mental health and feeling rested. This could explain a-motivational syndrome. Over and over again, when a cannabis dependent person finally gets clean, they have reported to me that they have more energy, are getting more done, and like it. One more Idea: Pot might interfere with the healing from PTSD. Some of our best trauma researchers think that nightmares are the body trying to heal itself from trauma just like a fever helps to heal an infection, or swelling symbolizes a broken bone. A nightmare allows you re-experience the trauma in a safe non-life threatening way just like talking about it in therapy. I have had vets report marijuana is a benefit because they don't have nightmares. Perhaps marijuana interferes with healing from PTSD? I don't think this has been studied. You said on the air that you had a "great night's sleep". Perhaps you did not? Not having REM sleep, is easy not to notice. A problem with marijuana is that some people think they are doing much better when high, than they really are.
I heard the show this morning - I'm a new listener. As an Independent, I'll add my comments, and you can ignore what you don't like.
1) Your complaints about high meal costs and higher minimum wage seem self-contradictory. Those jobs will always pay at the same rate compared to jobs that require skills. Why don't you think that those costs will always be passed on as higher menu prices so that restaurants can maintain the same profit rate? If you bump up the minimum wage by 25%, then I'll expect menu prices to go up by 30%, and everyone's back where they started.
2) I share your cynicism about "buying politicians." Sure, the Kochs will profit big time if the pipeline increases the value of their land, so that's how they want to lobby. But I don't think you're cynical enough. This isn't new. Throughout the last century -- even the century before that -- people contributed to and promoted the politicians that would benefit them the most. And I think it's also short-sighted not to recognize that just like the Republicans have their billionnaires that fund their party, the Democrats have their billionnaires that fund their party. I really don't see much difference between the parties. Obama's doing the same things that he criticized Bush for doing as president. The Republicans criticized the Democratic Congressional leaders for making rule changes to support the party in power, but I bet the Republicans don't change the rules back. To me, both of the parties are evil, and that's why I've got to vote based on issues and not based on parties. Along that thread, with the risk of being accused of changing the topic too much, I resent politicians who think they can get a position because their parents or spouse had an office. This US doesn't have royalty. I never want to see another Bush or Clinton on a ballot.
The catch: Who agrees on what actually serves to promote "the general welfare"? In the 1980s, Americans decided that this meant redistributing massive amounts of taxpayer dollars upward, largely to corporations, on the theory that they would use it to create that mass of "good, family-supporting jobs." Results: We now have a fraction of the jobs needed, at wages (for most) that have fallen well behind the cost of living. In the 1990s, we decided that it would serve the general welfare to end poverty relief for our jobless poor and many of the unemployable. The theory was that the people would quickly tire of "the poverty lifestyle," get a job and all would be swell. That, too, turned out quite disastrously. By the turn of the century, we decided that serving the general welfare could be achieved by simply removing our long-term jobless from both the statistics and the public discussion. Throughout this time, we simultaneously embraced a range of policies (mostly, against the poor) that have been working very well to phase out the middle class. Does anyone have any ideas of what sort of agenda would be needed to actually "promote the general welfare"? Face it, even today's liberals support promoting the welfare only of the better-off, the middle class, and have helped to deeply pit Americans against each other by class. This does promise to turn out very badly for this country.
I wonder how much of a role the Kochs have had (if any) in the "re-education" of the public/liberals in particular. Do Americans even grasp the absurdity of a "left" that calls for us to "Stand in Solidarity to protect the status quo of the bourgeoisie," the advantages of the middle class alone? What can we say about a left that so strongly believes in the superiority of our hyper-capitalist system that they think everyone is able to work, and there are jobs for all who need one, therefore no need for poverty relief? Who would want to change a system like that? Wouldn't it take a Koch-financed, long-term political and media effort to retrain otherwise-decent people to believe that those who aren't of current use to employers are undeserving of the most basic human rights of food and shelter? The inexplicable contempt of the middle class, liberals and Democrats toward our surplus population -- those who can't work (health, etc.) and those for whom no jobs are available -- is a complete revereasal of American values. This reversal could only be achieved by a well-financed political/media campaign against the poor.
I thought 100 billion sounded low..... probably more like 150! Is that what the Kochs admitted to?
How about this lie...."climate change is not man-made!"
That's the one Carbon Barons like the Kochs and their bought and paid for Teapublican Party are pushing!......lots of pants on fire all over the world, just ask folks in California, Washington State, Australia.........