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.
mm52 and bblr --- Per Article I, Section 8 Militias are to exist to put down insurgency. This seem to be the opposite of what you are saying with regards to a tyrannical govt. -- c8
Kend, Kend, Kend... Earth to Kend! My recent posts speak for themselves. Ditto PD's; ditto Mark Saulys's, ditto-ditto-ditto... you're out of tune with the rest of the chorus! Keeps it entertaining, anyhoo. Tah-tah... - AIW
Ok Alice why isn't it safe, clean and ethical. What gave you been told. Was it a movie star or singer that educated you.
Good one chuckle. sad thing is you might be right.
Hey "chuckle8, thanks for the chuckles!
Clean? Not. Safe? Not. Ethical? Not. Sorry Kend, we hate to bear bad news... But ya know, like the sayin' goes my friend, one good turn deserves another! Cheers. - AIW
Highest office in the land? Is that the CEO of Exxon-Mobil or Goldman Sachs? -- c8
Hi Mark i hate to be the one to bring you the bad news but since you live in Illinois iI thought I would let you know that Enbridge alone ships 675,000 barrels per day to refineries in Chicago.
Chicap pipeline to Chicago. 360,000 bpd
mustang pipeline to Patoka. 100,000 bpd
woodriver pipeline to Woodriver. 215,000 bpd
so I ask why after 40 years of supplying safe, clean, ethical oil to you right to your state why is it a problem now. It is the same tar sands oil you called uncleanYou need it i think. The answer is simple it is political. Which is really stupid. Shouldn't the decession be made on science. 5 studies all show no environmental problems. All states involved approved it.
And please because I have no idea what you are talking about. Why is the tar/oil sands oil dirty. what have you being told.
dam -- No stretching required. Per Thom (I know nothing), Aritcle 3, section 2 says the congress can tell SCOTUS what to do.
dr818dr on #11 -- It depends on the what is in the immigration reform bill. I assume all the effects that you are implying have to do with the labor supply vs. the employer demand for labor. I think most of the effects that you mention assume an integration bil would increase the labor supply. That is, the bill would loosen the labor market. However, one item in the current bill requires extensive use of e-Verify. In the May 1, 2013 edition of the LA Times they report on e-Verify being used in three states in the South. Employers in those states say the new version of e-Verify works well. They say their only worry is that it will tighten the labor market. A few restaurant owners have noticed that when they start using e-Verify a lot of their employees no longer show up for work.
Also, the building of the fence would be a significant jobs program.
Yep! And the mind-rotting garbage junk media feeds America's inquiring minds has the public, in its quest for knowledge, eating out of that trough like hungry livestock. Peoples' curiosity is ultimately replaced by a calcified, rigid set of beliefs & opinions, based on nothing but corporate lies. A public thus numbed to passivity becomes reminiscent of those old "Stepford wives" who elevated obedience to virtually an art form.
Remember that old song "Lookin' For Love In All The Wrong Places"? How about a parody swapping the word "love" for "facts"... Hey Weird Al Yankovitch (sp?!), that's the ticket! - AIW
When some members of Congress, The Senate, former Presidential Cabinet members and other noted citizens made repeated appearances on MSNBC urging us to gather large public opinion to force campaign funding reform, the news media refused to carry their words to us so only MSNBC's small audience hold awareness to who those citizens are and their message to us. The last time our nation effected significant political reforms our news media was in the hands of thousands of citizens rather than that of a handful of industrialists who enjoy benefit of unfairly influencing government actions with wealth, and calls for reform were led by news media whose ownership makeup didn't present flagrant conflict of interest!
Sorry Kend, I argue very nastily but you piss me off. I don't doubt your capable intellect but I think you are dishonest. I hope you are well and happy but I hope you convert to the correct side.
Take care, buddy.
Kend, your steadfast denial that earthquakes are triggered by fracking is such a frickin' joke. Might even be funny were the stakes not so high. I'm amused by your strident demand that Palin "look at the science and not some phony movie." Well Kend, a few minutes ago I took the bait! I googled fracking & earthquakes and… voila, here we are! What grabbed my eye was an article published by AAAS, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, written by William Ellsworth and titled "Injection-Induced Earthquakes". Gee that was hard; took all of two minutes!
Just so happens that over 100,000 wells have been fracked in recent years. While the largest quakes directly resulting from this practice are a mere 3.6 on the Richter Scale, the wastewater disposal phase of the process entails significantly greater seismic risk.
We're talking about a highly invasive procedure like underground mining, which by design my friend, violates the geological integrity of the earth's surface. Under the "Outlook" heading further down this article, it is asserted that indeed, these injection-induced quakes pose a threat. How can you expect to extract one thing from deep underground (fossil fuel) and inject it with something else, and not have consequences? (Hello.) Just so happens, Kend, that the injection of wastewater into these deep wells can and does cause quakes much larger, such as occurred in Oklahoma between 2011 & 2012. One of these registered a magnitude of 5.6, destroying fourteen houses! Phony movie? I don't think so.
It's not nice to mess with Mother Nature, Kend. A process of extraction that entails the weakening of an existing fault line sure doesn't sound kosher to me! When Mother Nature gets mad, we're toast. With their reckless, greedy plundering of everything, fossil fuel hacks will be the death of us yet... if we don't get nuked to extincion first, with the dumb-ass wars these chicken hawk fascists keep waging all over the world. Anyway, sorry to blow your cover Kend, but Google makes it so easy; like taking candy from a baby! Got any more compelling arguments up your sleeve Fossil Dude? I'm listening… - Aliceinwonderland
Oops! There I go again, unwittingly shuffling the order of these posts with my obsessive-compulsive editing! Once again, my humble apology. (Thought I'd already finished editing within Text Edit, but... oh well...) What follows is my post PD was responding to. - AIW
Anyway, Kend, to say "If America truly wants to go green stop using oil. If there is no market for it it will go away." is to revert to one of your typically specious canards. For people to "stop using oil" in a society that is completely organized around its use is impossible unless they are either willing to completely drop out of society or unless they have a viable alternative.
Given the integral part of fossil fuels in the functioning of our society a complete restructuring of it would have to take place. That would have to be initiated by some authority or powerful entity, like the government or a large producer of the fuel. It could ultimately be initiated by a people's movement but for it to be a less devestatingly destructive revolution there'd have to be the cooperation of government and business.
I mean, give people an alternative and they'll stop using it with the right amount of public education on the issues and absent forbidding disincentives
Well said, Aliceinwonderland! I sure don't know who the heck Kend thinks he is going to fool on this blog site. When it comes to those dangerous tar-sands, I don't think anyone agrees with him...and he's not about to convince anyone...so why is he even wasting his time here? Why, he might even be so foolish as to eat a tar-sands sandwich in a vain attempt as showing how safe it is. Like that girlfriend of the owner of that chemical plant on the Ohio River claimed that she brushed her teeth using that polluted water.
Kend, I am in Illinois not Michigan. You can say we've all been benefitting from oil but that is a typically specious canard. We may've benefitted as much or more from an alernate source. Tar sands oil is the dirtiest possible, so much so that we think you Canadians are probably shipping it our way 'cause you don't want it, given your reputation for environmental clenliness. So I guess I mean "other oil sources".
Technology may be overrated and it may not hurt us to get used to less of it although I'm not convinced plastics can't be made from renewables, and certainly, recyclables.
Perhaps he learned from mistakes, and progressed into a liberal..
>>> The overall message in lib media today agrees with the right-wing ideology that only those who are of current use to employers/the corporate state (in a country that shipped out a massive chunk of our working class jobs) are real people and deserve to survive.
Don't bother replying, but you have to understand the liberal media is a myth, to have any Discussion based on reality.
Mark so why is keystone oil "unclean" .do you mean unclean compared to solar or unclean compared to other oil sources. interesting you live in Mich. you have been enjoying that same low cost oil for over 50 years. Why all the sudden is it unclean.
If America truly wants to go green stop using oil. If there is no market for it it will go away. of course you would not be on this blog as smart phones, computers, and tablets are all made from oil. Try going without those for a week.
BillMahr might, in fact, be turning against the poor but we might also be missing the subtlety of his humor. I didn't see the program you're talking about but I can see several funny innuendoes in what you're describing. I mean, he can't be serious when he says money spent on thebasic survival of the elderly is wasted but that they are a powerful voting bloc implies that everybody, especially the poor, would have similar power if they voted en masse.
Kend, I have no problem believing you have a personal stake in Keystone XL. For the rest of us - who also have rights and perhaps more important and basic ones at stake than your monetary gain - Keystone XL is not a source of clean energy but of the most unclean possible, and the pipeline is for export from North America.
That protecting birds hasn't been undertaken by builders of wind turbines doesn't mean it isn't possible or feasible. The well being of birds is not usually a priority unless we make it so.
Kend! We don't need any movie to tell us what fracking does. We have fracking going on on a large scale (and therefore a large, vibrant anti fracking movement) right here in Illinois. We see the stuff happening ourselves. We know and talk to people whose water turns brown and can be lit aflame with a match and so on. A movie isn't phony because it's about something beyond your range of experience (or threatens your vested interests).
Whatever problems come from the mining of materials for solar panels can't be worse than the problems of fossil fuel use which are driving us quickly, perhaps already irrevocably, to mass extinction. When they do become a significant problem you can be sure we'll complain about them. We've never been shy about that. I mean, it's not like we have monetary interests invested in solar, we're only concerned for the well being of the community and the planet.
dr818dr, scapegoating immigrants is not the answer. The reason there's been so much illegal immigration (or, more aptly, so much northward migration of economically distressed people - or economic refugees) to the United States in recent decades is because of the free trade agreements, more specificly, NAFTA. NAFTA caused peasant farmers in Mexico and Guatemala to be evicted from their land by the millions and go seek livlihood elsewhere. Mexico always had a big unemployment problem for which some relief was always provided by some sneaking across the border to the U.S. but after NAFTA the numbers of such refugees from Mexico in the U.S. increased up to four or five times as much as before NAFTA.
In addition, large part of why undocumented immigrants "mess up" our labor situation and other things is because of their illegal status. Because they are afraid to go the proper authorities when they have a problem, when they are abused or exploited - by an employer, a landlord or someone else - they are ripe for such abuse and the divisive strategies of the big business right wing. They are given preference in hiring and that brings everyone's wages and labor standards down, for example. Meaningful immigration reform would take that potential for abuse away and immigrants would be emboldened to demand their rights as workers and human beings along side of the U.S. born.
Content repeated, therefore, deleted.