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.
When the they succeed having voter reductions, they'll break down the fundamental values and key to our democracy of this country.
Sven -- How about a fact from you? You should look at charts of CO2 and Methane concentrations in the atmosphere since man arrived on the planet. Have you heard of 3 sigma events? These charts look like 10 sigma concentrations.
McDons pays for their waste disposal via property taxes.
For the defense industries to pay for their waste disposal, would be the government taken for a sucker. They would just add it as cost of doing business, add a percentage and charge the government. Also, the defense industry is a government function.
Amira Willighagen is just 9 years old but she won the Holland's Got Talent contest by singing Opera songs that sounded so unreal for a 9 year old. It was commented that she sings like Maria Callas.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDqTBlKU4CE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy00lD2bYT0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUnrLMvpQLk
And this is the funniest and strangest thing that she did that had everyone gasping in disbelief:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbt2yo4u1cU
Some may note with interest what Debra Sweet had said / predicted about Obama back on November 3rd 2008 (nearly six years ago). From the rarehero.com site:
Reasons to not vote for Obama: He isn't real change
Debra Sweet, from the World Can't Wait, put it much better than I could have:
All of us living in this country will confront change after tomorrow's election, but not the change most people think they are getting. If Obama wins, he will preside over changes we don't want and shouldn't get sucked into supporting.
I'm calling on you to keep resisting the crimes being done by your government. Tuesday, let's go out among the people at the polls, and in the evening, be among those celebrating a presumed Obama win to challenge them on the facts, and on their consciences, and raise these questions:
What are people even getting to vote about after this two year long campaign? Did you get to vote on whether the U.S. should occupy Iraq? Or whether the CIA, the private contractors, or the military should use torture and secret detentions?
And what is there to celebrate in an Obama presidency? Making us feel good about the country again when Obama is trying to unite us to fight the "good war" in Afghanistan? Happy that some combat troops will be removed from Iraq, while air strikes kill more civilians in Pakistan and Syria? How could we celebrate "national unity" when Obama's vote for the FISA law opens the way for unprecedented political repression and spying on the people?
I know, from talking to many people, that lots of people have "settled" for Obama, as opposed to McCain. Others are hoping against hope...and will be open to hearing what we have to say. If what we say is unpopular, or angers people, then so be it. You don't change political terms by shying away from controversy. And you can't learn what people really think without challenging their assumptions.
This is not the time to "wait and see" what Obama will do after January 20, or after 6 months or a year...or never, because if he does what's in the peoples' interests he won't be re-elected? He's telling us what he will do, and the worst thing would be to get passive in the face of it.
Wednesday, November 5, World Can't Wait is holding the first anti-war protests while Obama is president-elect. (see sidebar: if the election is stolen for McCain, there will be 5 pm protests at federal buildings that day which we will join with our message).
Millions of people will be overjoyed to see Bush gone after 8 disastrous years. But they project their hopes on a candidate who is not even promising what they want. To be blunt, most people, when you ask them, don't know what Obama's program is. They need to know what Obama is planning, not that which they are being hood-winked to believe in, as Dennis Loo calls it.
What matters now, the busy/cheney legacy.
1) Obama, the "anti-war" candidate wants to leave 50 to 80,000 troops in Iraq, but move the combat brigades to Afghanistan, and add then add more troops. My friend Missy Beattie, whose nephew was killed in Iraq in 2006, wrote on Counterpunch, "I'm sick of Obama's 'right war' in Afghanistan." He first promoted sending drones and special forces into Pakistan last spring. The Bush regime publicly disagreed, but secretly began attacks on Pakistan in July, which have killed scores of civilians.
Joe Mowrey wrote on Obama's "progressive warfare" in a piece that begins with why Colin Powell, salesman for the Iraq debacle with his own war criminal history, should have driven people from Obama with his endorsement. "Let's catalog of few of Barack Obama's progressive qualifications to be next President of the United States of Imperialism. Well first, there's his adamant condemnation of the war in Iraq. Why, he was against it from the very start. Of course, that hasn't prevented him from voting continually to fund the Occupation. But hey, he has to get elected before he can implement all his wonderful changey policies, right? You know, like maintaining a presence of 50,000 to 80,000 troops in Iraq, along with a dozen or so permanent military bases and the world's largest foreign embassy. Then there is his pledge to escalate the "good war" in Afghanistan. We've only killed about 10,000 or so innocent civilians there in the last few years. I won't feel safe until we can push those numbers much higher. And Pakistan? Sending robot drones out to drop bombs on people is my kind of progressive war. Obama has assured us he'll continue that policy and actually increase the number of illegal violations of that country's sovereignty."
Name that Candidate
2) The June 2008 FISA Bill: Lots of people have told me this is where their hope for Obama flew away. Obama campaigned against Bush's FISA law. Then he voted FOR it, including immunity to the telephone companies, so no one can sue them for violating federal law for years by handing over email and phone traffic to the NSA. Bush could never have gotten his FISA bill through Congress in 2006, but by 2008, when the Democrats controlled the House, they gave him everything he wanted. People expected Obama, who taught Constitutional law, to protect their rights, but Obama went out of his way to make an unpopular vote to bolster the "war on terror" and set the basis for expanded political repression. He voted for an amended USA PATRIOT Act that had more draconian curbs on political protest than the 2001 version.
3) Obama vows to expand Bush's "faith-based initiatives" that have wrapped the delivery of shrinking social services in Christian fundamentalist messages. Chris Hedges, a scholar of right wing populism, makes the point in American Fascists that the hard core Christian "fascists" running the reactionary movement of which Sarah Palin is a rising star, don't want to come to an agreement with gay people, women who won't submit to their prescribed role in the family, or people who don't share their religious views. "They are out to eliminate you," said Hedges.
American Fascists
Hedges new piece today on Truthdig.com
As a defender of women's reproductive rights, and abortion doctors specifically, for 26 years, I know they have, and want to eliminate us. In this context, Obama wants to find "common ground" with the program of ending abortion and birth control. He voted against the ban on so-called "partial birth" abortion in the Senate, but now says it's up the states, as long as there's a health exception for the woman concerned. Obama: "I don't think that 'mental distress' qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions." Barack Obama on Abortion
Obama is not protecting women's endangered rights with his goal of "ending the polarizing debate on abortion."
A McCain/Palin presidency would be dangerous. If they win, it will be as illegitimate as Bush's selection was; a terrible further leap in the fascist direction Bush took this society in after 9/11. We should lead people -- who will correctly be horrified -- not to accept a stolen election.
But putting our principles aside just to keep McCain from being elected won't stop this juggernaut of war and repression.
As all this settles in, people who get alarmed need to know there's a force to join with that will firmly oppose this program. Malcolm Shore writes in "What Now - The Difference Four Years Can Make" about what it means to have World Can't Wait on the political scene. It's more essential now than it has ever been that we be out among people with a sober, clear reality to help people see the responsibility we who live in this country have now.
We are a minority. If what we say is unpopular, or angers people, then so be it. We have a responsibility to act on what we know to be true. Our strength can be an anchor to others, as they discover the program they will be forced to accept, or resist.
We will be here, organizing a movement of resistance with a realistic aim -- to bring these crimes and this whole direction to a stop. If you don't want to join us now, remember us and join us when it does become clear to you that the crimes of your government have to be stopped. Then, join with the kind of movement that CAN make it happen.
Only the independent action of the people can create the conditions where those in power can be forced to act in accordance with our demands. This is the change we can believe in.
How about this? Stop thinking like an American, and start thinking like someone who cares for the whole planet.
I'll write when we know the outcome of the election!
Debra Sweet, Director, The World Can't Wait - Drive Out the Bush Regime
@Chuckle8
To say refuting a clearly stated claim such as Thom's:
"Right now, the fossil fuel industry is the only industry in the world that doesn’t have to pay to clean up its own waste."
is a defence of the fossil fuel industry is not correct. By refuting such a claim I merely point out that it is not correct. Thom clearly singled them out as 'the only'. I am no defender of any corporation or industry.
I referenced the biofuels debacle and the windmills fiasco as a nod to the nonsense and poorly thought out knee-jerk reactions to climate change we have had to endure.
Bio-fuels are a great idea in theory, but have proven hugely damaging in practice. Windmills as a baseline power generator are all but useless in that they cannot operate if the wind is too high, are prone to bursting into flames, kill large numbers of bats and birds, are a detrimental affect on the local micro-climate, an eye-sore, and what they do produce is very expensive energy given the strike price and per unit charges..... and are mostly only a boon to their owner/operators and the landowners who host them.
I mentioned them in passing and did not suggest or mean to imply that Thom had mentioned them in his post.
Alice, Thom's piece said:
"Right now, the fossil fuel industry is the only industry in the world that doesn’t have to pay to clean up its own waste."
I called BS on that, because it is simply not true.
I have not defended the fossil fuels industry at all. To claim otherwise is demonstrably untrue. I do not minimise their role 'in our demise' as there is no possibility of our demise - such rhetoric is patently nonsense and is an appeal to emotion and fear-mongering at it's most blatant.
If you think saying extreme weather is not caused by global warming makes you a denier, then you would admit that the IPCC are deniers? The consensus of opinion as stated by the latest IPCC report states a low confidence in man made global warming causing extreme weather events. Again, easily demonstrable.
You ascribe opinions to me that I have not stated, but okay then - given a dramatic, chaotic system such as climate with the vast amounts of energy involved, and the huge complexity, there will always be extremes. If you don't accept this, then you do not understand the concept of extremes. The weather (and climate) is not a static, unchanging system.
You keep mentioning 'the vast majority of scientists worldwide' when not only has the alleged 97% consensus been debunked, but the supposed arbiters of the consensus do not concur that extreme weather is caused by man made global warming.
'Industry shills'? Behave! Do you not realise how lazy and lame that sounds? Do you not realise how childish and desperate the insult of 'denier' is?
You do yourself no good by such poor arguments and obvious slurs.
Whether you 'buy this' or not makes no difference - you are welcome to your opinions, of course, but not your own facts - no matter how often you try the argument from authority approach or naming names.
I do not doubt there are serious threats to the environment, nor do I doubt the changes occurring in the climate. However, I do doubt the nonsense constantly forced down our throats by agenda driven organisations, complacent media, and those prosthletyzing with an almost religious fervour.
Nachos, I appreciate you acknowledging a legitimate need for universally accessible, basic services known as the commons. You've elaborated on this theme as long as you've participated here, which goes back a long ways. This is why I was so baffled by that statement in your previous post, the one I'd emboldened in quotes, which was so contradictory to that premise. You always seemed to know full well what a predatory system this is. So why criticize young adults for enrolling in college? Any system that sucks people into a lifelong debt trap over things like education and healthcare is a predatory, carnivorous system, and when you say shit like that, (i.e. "they knew what tuition cost before they signed up" ad nauseam) you're blaming those who've been victimized by that system instead of the parasites who perpetrated and are benefitting from it. I don't even like saying "the victims" because of how it labels people. But we the 90+%, we the citizens of ordinary means, have been ruthlessly victimized by this predatory regime.
Corporate fascists use financial terrorism as a means to break us, keeping us demoralized, scared and subordinate. Like Thom Hartmann, Noam Chomsky and others have said, after dealing with the civil rights movement and antiwar protests of the 1960s & '70s, the power elite decided to reconfigure this system in ways that disempowered us, putting us peasants back in our "place". Since Reagan's reign in the oval office, they've stripped us of legal and regulatory protections, leaving us exposed to usury, extortion and fraud over simple necessities like healthcare, education and housing. I can't help it, Nachos; it sets me off when I hear invalids and young students slammed for "living beyond their means". If you're not rich, it seems just living is beyond your means nowadays.
Another point you've made that bothers me, and that I've heard a lot from conservatives, is this assumption that many people in society will be deadbeat "blood suckers" and "abuse" the system if allowed to get away with it. I get tired of hearing that, Nachos, and I think it's wrong. I happen to believe the overwhelming majority of us want to live productive lives and contribute to society. To be able to keep one's ship afloat, to have a sense of purpose, is a basic human need, at least for most of us.
Please explain to me how these so-called moochers would "abuse" a healthcare system, as if being poked, prodded and stuck with needles was anyone's idea of fun. "I think I'll go down to the doctor's office today and hang out" or "Gee that enema was such a blast... guess I'll go have another one just for kicks!"
Yeah right, Nachos. And how does one "abuse" an education system? Please enlighten me.
I happen to believe in the merits of a guaranteed basic, minimum income for every man, woman and child, in any country rich enough to afford it. Then we wouldn't need a welfare system. Crime would go down, there would be no homeless people on the streets, and with money in everyone's hands the economy would thrive. With enough of a basic income to survive on, everyone would have housing, utilities and adequate nutrition. With healthcare also guaranteed as a universal right of citizenship, we'd have a healthier population and lower healthcare costs. Besides, when you're working to boost your standard of living a notch or two and achieve higher status, rather than simply to survive, it's much easier to say "Take this job and shove it" when you're not treated right. Thus employers no longer hold so much power over employees. This would help level the playing field between employers and employees, empowering workers while making labor less dispensable for business owners.
This may not be the only solution to our socioeconomic problems, but it would be a huge step in that direction.
I can't remember which countries have adopted such a policy; Thom has mentioned at least one, along with another country that was seriously considering it. Can't remember which ones though. (Does anyone else recall hearing about this?) I googled and saw Switzerland cited as one country considering such a policy. The European Union has also considered it. Could have been a country like Norway, Denmark or maybe Iceland Thom identified as having already established a basic, guaranteed minimum income for all citizens. (Geez Thom... wish you were here to set me straight and cover my ass!) But this isn't a new idea, nor is it just some lah-lah fantasy of ours. With labor having become so dispensible here, verging on obsolete thanks to outsourcing and automation, hordes of hungry Americans are crowding food pantries, now stretched to the limit on supplies. Something's gotta give, Nachos. And in this environment, accusing unemployed workers of "laziness" is not only absurd, it is downright abusive. - Aliceinwonderland
Nachos, thank you for your gracious response. Much appreciated. - AIW
Most of what influences people, especially children, are the movies and television shows they are exposed to. Corporations have effectively used those media to drain the viewers of reality, of their money, and kept them at the bottom of the socio-economic structure.
I haven't seen too many movies or TV shows, that would appeal to most people, which would help them out of that chasm. They are stuck there. And it is by design.
These media use psychological ploys to give the semi-false impressions that they don't have to sacrifice and work hard to educate themselves. I say "semi-false" because some people are born into wealth and/or some people are just lucky and manage to get wealthy through other means...like criminal activities and manage to keep from being caught or prosecuted. And when it is institutionalized, as it is now, there can only be one solution and it ain't gonna be pretty!
Even our cherished and celebrated system of Capitalism is mostly all about: "do unto others before they can do unto you". And it is rarely seen apart from our current system of corrupt Democracy. And for both of which, the US is willing to murder millions of people...even willing to murder thousands of US citizens in false flag operations in order to scare the rest into giving up their freedoms. Spreading Capitalism and Democracy (our versions) around the globe is the worse kind of virulent proselytizing by the Capitalist jackals. Greed personified! Evil personified!
DANNEMARC & ALICEINWONDERLAND Just a heads-up...I responded to both of your responces to me on TUESDAYS thread. I do enjoy this conversation and both of your perspectives.
My Friends DanneMarc and ALICEinWONDERLAND.
I very much am in favore of a much better social system one that does not promote or encurage competiviness to the level that we Lie Cheat Steal and Kill in order to get ahead in "life".
I do agree that being able to receive a good education is important, and that having access to good and affordable health care is necessary and should be a RIGHT, at least make it available to anyone that wants it.
ALICE I NEVER in any way implyed that my friends and familey who live in countries that provide a thriving social system through good education, affordable health care and better wages are "more deserving". More my reason for sharing their good fortune was to show that it can be done and that the quality of life is better. People have a healthier outlook. My good friend who was born in and grew up in Finland and became an American citizen in his early 20's said he came here in the 80's for 7 years to "cash-in", and once he made his money went back to Finland because the over all out look on life and fellowship is so much better.
As far as my comment regarding people who CHOOSE to live above their means...I stand by what I said. My daddy raised me to work for what I want out of life and to not expect anything to be given to if I am not willing to TRY and provide for myself.
Now that does not mean that I am obtuse and not able to comprehend that even when people do work and live honest lives are void of get screwed. Especially when we are trying to live within a Corporate Capitalistic highjacked Government; one promotes an evil competiveness (as I mentioned above), and that shits on blue collar workers, and condems the poor as if they are a disease, and punishes you for getting/being ill. We truly would not need a wellfare system, at least not to a level of "bailing" people out, IF 3 things were to happen; Affordable Quality Health Care, one that even provides for preventative practice, Affordable Education, and increased minimum wages to a Living Wage, (somewhere around $18/hour is a realistic start, as aposed to Obama's proposal of 10 bucks an hour).
But let me ask you both, and any one else that has a brain, this; Sould it be a Right (Education & Health Care) protected by Law? If so, how would you suggest we handle those that are abusive of such a Right?
Lastly; I subscribe to the motto; "Reward Excellence and Punish Blood Sucking." Unfortunatly our current system (of the past 50+ years) seem to have a warped perspective on what excellence is.
And Yess DAnneMarc, I do consider those that continue to vote for Wall Street groomed Candidates to be bafoons and a HUGE part of a social problem...But you don't need to have a college degree to understand whats going on in this country and the world...You just have to wake the fuck up stop being selfish and use that gray matter between your ears. I don't have a college degree, in fact I dropped out and took up 2 trades starting at age 17 and yet I still have a better scense then most of my peers who spent $100k on a piece of paper...I also have never been without work. (I am a licensed Barber, and Landscaper)
Mr. Mills, I'm well aware that the fossil fuel industry isn't the only culprit in the rape of our planet. Like I said, they are among the worst of the worst.
You ask how you have defended the fossil fuel industry. By minimizing their role in our demise, sir. Example from post #55, where you said "extreme weather events are not caused by global warming". Excuse me, but whenever someone denies that connection, it makes him (or her) a denier. Considering the general consensus among climate experts worldwide, I am amazed at how many people continue questioning the "basis" for these "claims". Deniers are always claiming, as you've stated, that extreme weather conditions are a "given", that they're "natural" rather than a consequence of human activity. Sorry, I'm not buying it.
Yes, I'm aware that throughout the history of Planet Earth there have been shifts & changes in weather patterns that are completely natural. However Thom Hartmann has been a science buff his entire life while Bill McKibben is certified climate scientist. And if they take these "claims" seriously, along with the vast majority of climate scientists worldwide, that's good enough for me. - Aliceinwonderland
P.S. I forgot to mention your references to this so-called biofuels "debacle" and windmills "fiasco". This kind of language is often used by industry shills, with a vested interest in minimizing & denying how human activity causes global warming.
Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children
according to Old Testament law.....
Mark 7:9–11
9 And he (Jesus) said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ 11
So, Jesus is saying that you should listen to Moses. Remember, Jesus was a Jew, afterall.
-----------
God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole. The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell. (Matthew 5:27)
-----------
Matthew 6:5-6 condemn public prayer and command people keep it a secret.
-----------
Matthew 5:17-19 and MANY other verses say that the old law is forever binding.
http://www.evilbible.com/do_not_ignore_ot.htm
-----------
King James Version
1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,
2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
http://www.berenddeboer.net/sab/mt/15.html
---------
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124572693
chuckle8 ~ Why would you think he "had to do" that? So what? Let some high school newspaper cover his press conferences and have the scoop over all those stuck up, corporate fat cats. If the media wants to cut off it's own nose to spite it's face I say let them. Then they can calmly explain to their audiences why it was necessary to second guess the President of the United States and black out his press conferences. I would have loved to see that. Who rules this country anyway, the government or the media? I'm through cutting Obama any slack for anything. That is why my recent praise is conditional. I want to see results. That is precisely why I said "if true, Obama has just redeemed himself for every other failure during his administration." Whether or not that is true, actually remains to be seen.
DAM -- Speaking of redeeming Obama, I recalled something he did during his first month or two in office that made me overlook things he has done. I, of course, present lists of things he does that keep me in his favor. However, this is one I forgot, and no one ever mentions. He said faux news should not be allowed into his press conferences. He said they were not a news organization. The other corporate news organizations said they were not coming either unless he let faux news in. Obama backed down which in my opinion he had to do.
Apropos to #38 ~ Palindromedary, it took a bit of doing, but here is the direct quote to support my statement--ie. Apostle Peter is Satan.
I just wonder exactly what the Bible thumpers and members of the "Holy" Roman Catholic Church have to say about that little tidbit about their founder, Peter, "The Rock?"
Craig B -- What is the name of the new movie? The movie previews I have seen, portray m douglas as a crochety old man.
Palindromedary ~ I agree that the liberal Christians definitely have a far more healthier perspective of Bible stories. Until I found that website I never thought of Christians in a political sense. However, It certainly does make sense to look at them that way. If you notice they even consider the stories more of a myth with a moral lesson than actually history. I think that it is important to keep that perspective because real or not then, the only thing that is truly real today is reality. Whatever may have happened in the past--true or not--is still just a story.
I also agree that there is a significant amount of evidence to conclude that many of these stories--myths if you will--were 'borrowed' or 'shared' from prior cultures. It certainly stands to reason that any great legend, myth, or epic tale would stand the test of time and simply have the names and places changed in order to suit the new storytellers. However, I also see great value in any tale that stands that test of time. Certainly the people enjoyed telling and hearing those stories over and over again because they relate to some truth that they convey. Even the story of Goldilocks and the three bears has some intrinsic moral value.
The one thing I have to disagree with is that quote you cited above that states:
I'll admit that the New Testament is a bit tricky to read. I divide it between the four Gospels and the "letters" supposedly written by the Apostles. In the Red letter edition of the Bible, the words of Christ are printed in Red making the Gospels jump out from the rest of the books. I placed all my attention on these Gospels because they are the direct quotes of Jesus. The rest of the New Testament--with the exception of the book of Revelations--is nothing more than, at best, the opinion of alleged Apostles. Like I said before, I don't even waste my time with that irrelevant hearsay. Jesus rebukes his Apostles so many times in the Gospels and whatever they may have had to say after his death means less than nothing to me. At one point Jesus even referred to his Apostle Peter--the founder of the Roman Catholic Church--as Satan. I'm sure that wasn't just a freudian slip. At the last supper, Jesus even correctly prophesied that Peter would reject him three times before the Cock crowed that morning. The Apostles just don't impress me at all. If Jesus is actually quoted as saying anyone should be put to death for anything I'd really like to see that quote myself. I've read those Gospels many times and would be quite shocked to see anything like that which I've missed. If indeed he is quoted as saying anything like that it would completely cause me to rethink my opinion of Christ and Christianity. However, if its in the letters of the Apostles I'd take it with a grain of salt. The Apostles--other than Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John--have done far more harm than good to the cause of Christianity.
Palindromedary ~ Thank you so much for that link. Pat Condell is spot on. He says nothing less than what I've been trying to say since I joined this blog and since I was enlightened over 25 years ago. Kudos for Pat. Kudos to you too Palindromedary for sharing that. Thanks again!! Keep it in the closet folks!!
I don't agree. I think that Ari Rabin-Havt is so informed on the subject of Benghazi that he did let himself get out of control for a slight moment on that one subject, but otherwise, I thought this was a good panel where all of the members had a chance to express themselves. Ari Rabin-Havt needs to learn a little more self control from Thom, who somehow manages to remain cool no matter how crazy his debate opponents are. The panel that is difficult for me to watch is any panel that includes Kevin Martin, who is rude, interrupts, and talks over everyone.
Boycott the new Mike Douglas movie. The billions in subsidies to the oil corp.'s are being used to publicize their planned takeover of public education. Mike sold his silky voice to propagate the falsehood that oil corps can do better by packing the system with their teachers that sell their agenda. As a teacher I oppose the privatization of our public schools that will result in economic segregation. Join the national teacher-student movement to force all institutions of higher learning to divest from the fossil fuel, petrol-chemical economy, entirely. End all subsidies to the oil corps. Vote out the politicians that favor subsidies. The fossil fuel economy must wither on the vine and go the way of the dinosaurs. Or we will.
MMmmNACHOS ~ I have to side with Aliceinwonderland about school debt. It is not the fault of the student. The fact of the matter is that an educated electorate is vital to any functional democracy. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable to expect and demand education to be free for everyone who wants it and part of the commons in any functional democracy. Quite frankly, we lag the world in education; and, as a result, are getting our butts kicked in the international market. The only reason we have any advantage at all is because when us older folks were growing up education was still free to anyone who wanted it. The benefits of that availability are still being felt because that generation hasn't completely retired yet. However, when it does it will be obvious what a disservice Reagan dealt the country as a Governor here in California when he stopped funding of institutions of higher education in favor of for profit privatization.
You need look no further than the Powell Memo to see just how important it is to the citizenry, the country, and our national security to put every resource we have into our system of education. The fact that we have allowed this system to slip into the obscurity of private for profit interests a a travesty, and national disaster that certainly doesn't need to be mocked. Our country is no better than how well informed our electorate is. If you truly feel that every US President since Carter was a "Wall Street Puppet" then you should look no further for the cause than the education of the electorate that voted for them. Instead of putting blame on the few brave kids who took on all that debt instead of staying safe and ignorant, you should look at the multitude of kids who chose the debt free route who are electing these morons. Education needs to be free for all as a matter of national security and for the common good of the country. Without an educated electorate we are all getting what we are all paying for.
Sven -- As AIW says, Thom has written blog paragraphs about most of the things you mentioned. When you say Thom is singling out big oil and big coal then it sounds like a defense of them.
However, I can't remember Thom talking about the bio-fuels debacle and the windmills fiasco. I would like to hear some details.
chuckle8 ~ No Chuck, I did not know that. Buried deep in the valley of our mainstream media no doubt. However, I did do a little web search and found that you are absolutely right.
http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2014/02/10/608861/10067656/en/President-Obama-Signs-Federal-Legislation-Removing-Barriers-for-U-S-Industrial-Hemp-Cultivation-CannaVest-Corp-and-US-Hemp-Oil-Poised-to-Lead-Resurgence-of-Domestic-Industrial-Hemp.html
If this all pans out the way I envision it, fossil fuels and climate change will both eventually be long gone memories of the past. This is spectacular news! Thanks Chuck!! Certainly, if true, Obama has just redeemed himself for every other failure during his administration. He will be remembered as the President who saved the planet. It might not be widely known yet, but we may be finally on the road to environmental and economic stability. Persistence pays off at last. Keep your fingers crossed.
MMmm -- Did you miss the nixon tape about the motivation for his "War on Drugs"? His key motivation was to bloat our jails. Of course, he wanted them bloated with all the anti-war protestors.