Branski- Again I ask, what is your definition of a "liberal" and how would you distinguish liberals and progressives from right-wing fascists?! I fully accept food and shelter as fundamental human rights, as does any like-minded person I happen to know. If you're going to make such a broad, sweeping generalization, you'd better be prepared to back it up with some solid evidence. - AIW

Dan -- You also part ways with Thomas Jefferson. He wanted no transfer of wealth from one generation to the next (i.e. a 100% death tax). Jefferson feared transfer of generational wealth more than about anything else, or at least a close tie with theocracy. Jefferson thought this generational transfer of wealth would keep the 1% in power forever. At least it was a key ingredient in every autocratical government in wester civilization.

What Mr. Hartmann does not say -- perhaps because he is too polite -- is "death tax" is a perversely accurate description. By refusing to pay it, the One Percenters inflict death on all the rest of us.

It's sort of like "death panels," which are real in the sense the insurance barons use cancellations, coverage exemptions and prohibitively expensive premiums to determine who lives and who dies.

In either case -- unpaid taxes that inflict death and impossibly expensive insurance that is equally deadly -- what the One Percent is saying is that it doesn't need us anymore and in fact wants us dead.

Here I part ways with Thom Hartmann. First, I don't think the government has any business profiting from the death of someone. Money that is earned by a family member for a family should stay in the family and not be touched by any other entity after death. There are many other ways to earn revenue for the federal government through taxing live people. We must fully exploit those methods and no others.

Secondly, tax loopholes through trust accounts are readily available to anyone. As I've pointed out before, trust documents can be set up by--or for--anyone by paralegals for under $200. The estate is transferred directly to the trustee--or successor trustee--at the time of death without taxes. For low wage earners this is a much better asset to keep on the books than it is for the excessively rich. It is poor people that are harmed more from an estate/death tax than the extremely wealthy are.

Thom's article and Paul Craig Roberts' articles are excellent. Thank you. I will dog-ear both.

Thom: This article by Paul Craig Roberts seems to me a very important look at what the USA is actually focusing on - which is, sadly, not our economy. I hope you can take a look at it. And I'd like to know your opinion. The article is below and here: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/12/14/washington-drives-world-towar...

Washington Drives the World Toward War — Paul Craig Roberts

December 14, 2013

Washington has had the US at war for 12 years: Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, and almost Syria, which could still happen, with Iran waiting in the wings. These wars have been expensive in terms of money, prestige, and deaths and injuries of both US soldiers and the attacked civilian populations. None of these wars appears to have any compelling reason or justifiable explanation. The wars have been important to the profits of the military/security complex. The wars have provided cover for the construction of a Stasi police state in America, and the wars have served Israel’s interest by removing obstacles to Israel’s annexation of the entire West Bank and southern Lebanon.

As costly and destructive as these wars have been, they are far below the level of a world war, much less a world war against nuclear armed opponents.

The fatal war for humanity is the war with Russia and China toward which Washington is driving the US and Washington’s NATO and Asian puppet states. There are a number of factors contributing to Washington’s drive toward the final war, but the overarching one is the doctrine of American exceptionalism.

According to this self-righteous doctrine, America is the indispensable country. What this means is that the US has been chosen by history to establish the hegemony of secular “democratic capitalism” over the world. The primacy of this goal places the US government above traditional morality and above all law, both its own and international.

Thus, no one in the US government has been held accountable for unprovoked aggression against other countries and for attacking civilian populations, unambiguous war crimes under international law and the Nuremberg standard. Neither has anyone in the US government been held accountable for torture, a prohibited crime under US law and the Geneva Conventions. Neither has anyone been held accountable for numerous violations of constitutional rights–spying without warrants, warrantless searches, violations of habeas corpus, murder of citizens without due process, denial of legal representation, conviction on secret evidence. The list is long.

A person might wonder what is exceptional and indispensable about a government that is a reincarnation of Nazi Germany in every respect. People propagandized into the belief that they are the world’s special people inevitably lose their humanity. Thus, as the US military video released by Bradley Manning reveals, US troops get their jollies by mowing down innocent people as they walk along a city street.

With the exception of the ACLU, constitutional rights groups and independent Internet voices, the American people including the Christian churches have accepted their government’s criminality and immorality with scant protest.

The absence of moral denunciation emboldens Washington which is now pushing hard against Russia and China, the current governments of which stand in the way of Washington’s world hegemony.

Washington has been working against Russia for 22 years ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In violation of the Reagan-Gorbachev agreement, Washington expanded NATO into Eastern Europe and the Baltic states and established military bases on Russia’s borders. Washington is also seeking to extend NATO into former constituent parts of Russia itself such as Georgia and Ukraine.

The only reason for Washington to establish military and missile bases on Russia’s frontiers is to negate Russia’s ability to resist Washington’s hegemony. Russia has made no threatening gestures toward its neighbors, and with the sole exception of Russia’s response to Georgia’s invasion of South Ossetia, has been extremely passive in the face of US provocations.

This is now changing. Faced with the George W. Bush regime’s alteration of US war doctrine, which elevated nuclear weapons from a defensive, retaliatory use to pre-emptive first strike, together with the construction on Russia’s borders of US anti-ballistic missile bases and Washington’s weaponization of new technologies, has made it clear to the Russian government that Washington is setting up Russia for a decapitating first strike.

In his presidential address to the Russian National Assembly (both chambers of parliament) on December 12, Vladimir Putin addressed the offensive military threat that Washington poses to Russia. Putin said that Washington calls its anti-ballistic missile system defensive, but “in fact it is a signifiant part of the strategic offensive potential” and designed to tip the balance of power in Washington’s favor. Having acknowledged the threat, Putin replied to the threat: “Let no one have illusions that he can achieve military superiority over Russia. We will never allow it.”

Faced with the Obama regime’s murder of the nuclear weapons reduction treaty, Putin said: “We realize all this and know what we need to do.”

If anyone remains to write a history, the Obama regime will be known as the regime that resurrected the cold war, which President Reagan worked so hard to end, and drove it into a hot war.

Not content to make Russia an enemy, the Obama regime has also made an enemy of China. The Obama regime declared the South China Sea to be an area of “US national security interest.” This is akin to China declaring the Gulf of Mexico to be an area of Chinese national security interest.

To make clear that the claim to the South China Sea was not rhetorical, the Obama regime announced its “Pivot to Asia,” which calls for the redeployment of 60% of the US fleet to China’s zone of influence. Washington is busy at work securing naval and air bases from the Philippines, South Korea, Vietnam, Australia, and Thailand. Washington has increased the provocation by aligning itself with China’s neighbors who are disputing China’s claims to various islands and an expanded air space.

China has not been intimidated. China has called for “de-americanizing the world.” Last month the Chinese government announced that it now possesses sufficient nuclear weapons and delivery systems to wipe the US off of the face of the earth. A couple of days ago, China aggressively harassed a US missile cruiser in the South China Sea.

The militarily aggressive stance that Washington has taken toward Russia and China is indicative of the extreme self-assuredness that usually ends in war. Washington is told that US technological prowess can prevent or intercept the launch of Russian and Chinese missiles, thus elevating a US pre-emptive attack to slam-dunk status. Yet the potential danger from Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is said to be so great that a pre-emptive war is necessary right now, and a massive Department of Homeland Security is justified on the grounds that the US remains vulnerable to a few stateless Muslims who might acquire a nuclear weapon. It is an anomalous situation that the Russian and Chinese retaliatory response to US attack is considered to be inconsequential, but not nuclear threats from Iran and stateless Muslims.

Not content with sending war signals to Russia and China, Washington has apparently also decided to torpedo the Iranian settlement by announcing new sanctions against companies doing business with Iran. The Iranians understood Washington’s monkey wrench as Washington probably intended, as a lack of Washington’s commitment to the agreement, left Geneva and returned to Iran. It remains to be seen whether the agreement can be resurrected or whether the Israel Lobby has succeeded in derailing the agreement that promised to end the threat of war with Iran.

American citizens seem to have little, if any, influence on their government or even awareness of its intentions. Moreover, there is no organized opposition behind which Americans could rally to stop Washington’s drive toward world war. Hope, if there is any, would seem to lie with Washington’s European and Asian puppets. What interests do these governments have in putting the existence of their countries at risk for no other purpose than to help Washington acquire hegemony over the world? Cannot they realize that Washington’s game is a death-dealing one for them?

Germany alone could save the world from war while simultaneously serving its own interests. All Germany has to do is to exit the EU and NATO. The alliance would collapse, and its fall would terminate Washington’s hegemonic ambition.

Without some action also against the telecom and internet companies who WILLINGLY give up our private information this is not likely to be ended in any way meaningful. Unfortunately I recently changed from Sprint - who is totally incompetent - to Verizon who, it appears, is more than willing to sell all of its customers out.

This is a good start but is far from being a big finish in any way. Anyone who believes that keeping our government out of OUR personal lives - yes, even IF we do NOT have anything to hide - must act to support any even small piece of legislation which adds to this attempt to stop the NSA from what they are ILLEGALLY doing now. It is YOUR government - even though I know it appears that is is not but that is because WE - you and me - have allowed this to happen by inactivity and apathy. WE can and MUST take back our government from lobbyists and those who would serve to bring us to our knees and create a super master/slave nation to do the bidding of the rich and powerful.

The ball is in our court and what WE do with it is now up to US!! Speak our! Become activist and loud or all hope is lost.

The rights of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated. We have to determine what the word unreasonable means. Can a computer that is searching through your phone calls, text messages, email or anything else to find keywords can it be considered as unreasonable. And no warrants shall be issued but upon probable cause. Out of that vast amount of data can be collected how can you justify probable cause. Supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the places to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This last part is impossible to perform with this vast amount of data and personnel. But it falls back again on the definition of the word unreasonable, that will be the key factor in my opinion.

NSA spying is "likely" unconstitutional??? Likely my... Oh well, I can't complain. Kudos for Justice Richard J. Leon. It just goes to show that we all have a common denominator that binds and hold us together. Regardless as to whether or not you are Democrat or Republican, Left or Right, anyone eventually is going to become resentful of living with the long hand of Uncle Sam up your Yin Yang.Time to end the unsedated slow motion colonoscopy and restore freedom and liberty to our nation. Anything less does disservice to all the brave souls who fought so valiantly to preserve it. It's high time to put aside our petty differences and fight for what we all hold dear and have in common. Stop the forth Reich in it's tracks!

My friends in California just told me that when they tried to sign up for ACA.. www.coveredca.com in California they got redirected to https://v.calheers.ca.gov , which seems to be a legitimate gov web site. But, someone could get just a little suspicious over that. My friends said that it would have been much more convincing that they were dealing with a legitimate web site if it had stayed "coveredca.com" and not redirected.

Then some of the problems they had, once they applied, was that after filling out that long questionnaire they gave them a chance to go back and "edit" any section. Problem is that once they clicked on any of those sections and made their corrections, they couldn't just jump back to the place where they clicked on "edit". They had to click on "Continue" on every page that they previously filled out to get back to the end where they clicked on "edit". At least they didn't have to re-enter all that they had previously entered. But, they said it just added to the confusion.

Another problem they had was that one section asked for "voluntary" information on race and ethnicity. The problem they had was that the question that asked whether they were of Hispanic origin ...they had to click either on a "yes" or "no" bullet. Once they clicked on one they couldn't change their mind and not answer that question. They were either forced to answer that question truthfully or lie. That's hardly voluntary!

Another problem they had was that when, at the end, they were asked to take a voluntary opinion poll asking questions relating to how hard it was to fill out the form on-line..they were warned that their comments were not encrypted and that any third party would be able to see the information they sent. Everything else was encrypted. True, not much in that poll, including comments, would have been really all that sensitive but it would have been more confidence boosting if it had been securely encrypted...with https and not just http.

rich in folsom -- are you writing new verses for John Lennon? You are doing a very good job.