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.
Chuckles: Oh by the way. on your point regarding how much control Obama has over winding down the wars? Let's not forget that he is the "Commander in Chief". As such, he can do it unilaterally.
Chuckle8:
From http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/a-decade-on-most-are-critic... :
"Ten years after U.S. airstrikes on Baghdad punctuated the start of the Iraq war, nearly six in 10 Americans say the war was not worth fighting – a judgment shared by majorities steadily since initial success gave way to years of continued conflict.
Nearly as many in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll say the same about the war in Afghanistan. And while criticisms of both wars are down from their peaks, the intensity of sentiment remains high, with strong critics far outweighing strong supporters."
From http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/28/senate-votes-to-extend-warrantless...
"As a Senator, Barack Obama vowed he would end warrantless wiretaps and initially opposed the FISA law based on the addition of telecom immunity, but ultimately voted for it with immunity intact just six months before winning the 2008 presidential election. Incidentally, the plan was opposed then by six in 10 Americans, according to a poll by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)."
From http://boldprogressives.org/poll-clear-majority-of-americans-oppose-chai...
The Washington Post/ABC News poll finds that 51 percent of Americans oppose chained CPI and only 37 percent support it. Parsing out the results further, the Washington Post notes that the major group supporting the change is American who earn six-figures."
So do you want to quibble about what constitutes a majority?
You said: "I assume all conservatives who think balancing the budget is a good thing, like the chained CPI."
I have absolutely no idea what you meant by that.
"You said: "Why do think background checks is his pet piece of legislation?"
It's his favorite piece of legislation du jour. He has a new one each week.
And you said: "I think he winding down our foreign wars as fast as he can, facing the repug oppostion. What kind of control do you think the executive branch has (especially with a constitutional lawyer at the helm)?"
WHAT??? He's had 4+ years to wind the wars down. Do you consider our current level of warfare a "winding down"? I include in this the continual saber rattling at Iran and North Korea. We are just BRISTLING for the next fight!
Constitutional lawyer? Anybody that can suspend habeas corpus in the way he has, declare himself absolute "decider" on who gets a drone, is one sick "constitutional lawyer".
Bravo! My sentiments exactly!
"Banks too big to fail are too big for the FDIC to insure."
That's for sure...it really means that we really aren't insured. I'm sure the people of Cyprus thought they were insured too. I just hope they don't start Cyprus-izing in the US.
And what just happened at the Boston Marathon just illustrates that very well. You don't need guns to cause mega-deaths. And unless you manage to make just about everything that could be made into a bomb...like gasoline and fertilizer...illegal and regulated so tightly it would drive up the prices of just about everything...you will still have a problem with people killing other people.
And there is still the examples of men, in China, breaking into classrooms of school children and murdering them with knives. What are you going to do ban knives?
What a hypocrite Obama is...saying:
"we will not accept that doing nothing is the appropriate response to a tragedy. We are better than that."
Are we, Mr. President? Are you? When you campaigned for the Presidency in 2008 you had us all convinced that you were going to really make a difference...that you were going to make "change we can believe in" and since then you have done nothing that we can believe in!
"We will not accept that doing nothing is the appropriate response to a tragedy"
Really? So, what have you done about the criminal Bush regime who lied us into a war in Iraq...and if Americans wake up and take off their blinders to just what really happened on 911...they would (but I doubt it) demand that you, Mr President, stop being an abettor to a massively treasonous offense against the United States of America and against it's people. Mr. President, you are so full of sh1t no one wants to listen to you anymore. Your words mean absolutely nothing...coward!!!
Many, many more people died on 911 than at the Boston Marathon or at any of those so-called massacres in our schools or in a theater. And you want to take away our guns yet you keep letting the real mass murderers go without a peep. What we really need to do is to take away all the guns from the damn military and put some treasonous powerful criminals, who did nothing but profit from our illegal wars, and their puppet politicians in jail..or do to them what our hypocrites did to Saddam Husein.
"We are governed by those who refuse to represent us," and if I might add, overwhelmingly it's the Republicans who refuse this representation. In fact most of the time they seem more than obliged to purposefully misrepresent us, and of course we all know why.
Glaring examples of this misrepresentation include not only the recently failed background checks legislation, we also have seen the Republicans defeat legislation that would have ended tax breaks for companies moving jobs overseas. That alone misrepresented at least 99% of us. Talk about being against the will of the people, how about the Ryan budget plan? The vast majority of Republicans have voted yes to this more than once! They get away with all of this misrepresentation, thanks in part to a corp. media that refuses to do its job as an adversarial component necessary for a functional democracy.
John Locke, one of the great enlightenment thinkers, whom I can proudly say my wife is related to, claimed that good government was a human agreement, among men, and those selected to represent us get their authority from we the people. We also have a right to resist if their representation violates that agreement. In our case, the resistance hopefully will manifest itself in the 2014 midterm elections.
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/wtc-demolition.htm
The WTC buildings were designed to withstand the impact of airliners...fuel fires and all. The only way they could have come down like they did...ie: straight down in their footprints... and very close to free-fall speed...is if the supporting structures beneath the crash area...all the way to the ground..were timed to sever relatively uniformly on each floor....and progressively timed to do so all the way down. The outer vertical beams, like I said, were not the most important part of the structure except to provide lateral stability. But the many (about 50) massive vertical load-bearing central-core beams (36"X12"X2" thick at the upper levels and 36"X16"X4" thick at the lower levels) needed to be severed for the building to come down like that.
The WTC buildings had massive central core beams that largely took the compressive forces and the outer structure..the outside vertical beams..took the lateral forces as would be caused by the wind (up to 140 mph winds...and crashing airliners traveling at much faster). Damage to the outside beams would do very little to make the building unstable enough to collapse. The many massive vertical central-core beams would have had to be severed to cause any of the upper structure to fall down. And if all of the central core beams were not severed all at the same time...the top portion would have toppled over the side and not come straight down in the building's footprint. The largely aluminum airliner only took out a few of the outer beams. The airliner's momentum had to have been very much impeded by running head on into the floors of concrete and the floor support H beams (they were not flimsy double trusses as NIST tries to say they were which they tried to pass off as a valid theory called the truss theory). The truss theory is a lie.
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/wtc-demolition.htm
The floors had poured concrete in them which would have had the effect (depending upon whether or not the airliner smashed into the steel and concrete floor or went in between floors which wasn't very likely). Therefore the concrete floors that were hit on edge against 6" slabs of concrete in each floor 12 feet apart suspended by the beefy steel H beams between the central core and the outer wall had to absorb a lot of the energy of the crashing airliner even before reaching the central load bearing beams.
And, again, if the so-called pancake theory was true then where was the massive central core beams...they should have remained stuck up into the air...or have fallen over striking other surrounding buildings. If that was the case then we all certainly would have seen evidence of this even in the videos and pictures. But somehow, the massive central core beams were all of convenient lengths at the bottom of the pile to not be sticking out of the center of the rubble...now how can that be..unless the logical reason was that they were all severed by explosives....just like in a demolition.
I think this is the elephant in the room...nobody wants to talk about that...they avoid it like the plague.
It looked just like demolitions because it was demolitions.
MMmmNACHOS wrote yesterday ~ "DANNEMARC...What if instead of stacking them (3 sold out Raiders games), we just put them side by side. I think it would be easier to do structurally!?!? ;)"
This is concerning the structure necessary to house all 172,907 Iraqi casualties of the Illegal Iraq war. I suggested 3 Oakland Coliseums with sold out Raider fans stacked one on top of the other. That's about 53,200 Iraqi victims seated per Coliseum.
Certainly MMmmNACHOS, it would be easier to physically construct such a model side by side; but, I am interested in constructing a Spiritual model. Such a Spiritual model must be constructed one on top of the other with the playing field removed from all but the bottom Coliseum. On the bottom Coliseum in the middle of the 50 yard line would be a circle with a mike and mike stand.
In a perfect after life with perfect justice, Every single American who ever supported or defended the Iraq war after death would have to stand in the circle on the lower level. He would have a 360 degree view of 9 tiers of victims of the war towering over his head. He would be able to look every victim in the eye as he turned in the circle. The empty space next to the seats would be filled and 22,907 additional victims who would be lining the corridors and standing between the rows and chairs.
Before these Americans would be allowed to enter Heaven, The Kingdom of God, Paradise, or whatever you consider a pleasant afterlife they would have to use the microphone in front of them to successfully do one of two things. They can explain to all the victims of the war why it was right and just to kill them in exchange for their sense of safety and security in such a way that the vast multitude of victims would all agree. Or, they would have to apologize to the multitude in a degree of sincerity whereas the multitude--all 172,907 victims--would all accept and forgive. Many Americans may spend a considerable amount of time in this circle of trial.
Far be it for I to second guess the judgment process of the Master of the Universe. However, were he to ask my opinion, this would be my suggestion.
Thank you MMmmNACHOS for your question!
What percentage is that broad public condemnation? I assume all conservatives who think balancing the budget is a good thing, like the chained CPI. I am sure the percentage is nothing like 90%.
Why do think background checks is his pet piece of legislation?
I think he winding down our foreign wars as fast as he can, facing the repug oppostion. What kind of control do you think the executive branch has (especially with a constitutional lawyer at the helm)?
....or blowing each other up!
I think there are a lot of solutions to all the problems you have stated. The solution I like is the tax structure (income tax, sales tax, tariffs, property taxes, pensions cannot be taken during bankruptcy etc.) of 1950's. I think the key roadblock to overcome is the idea that money is speech.
Do you not think the regional banks, if given the lack of capital requirements as the big banks (plus all the other things the big banks have), could take over the assets of the big banks?
NYTWEED - I couldn't agree more. Everything you said was exactly right on!
As for our illustrious president's "cluck clucking" and "tut tutting", here's a copy of what I wrote to him today - it pretty much sums up my feelings about these sanctimonious a**holes:
President Obama: After the failed Senate vote on stricter gun laws on Wednesday you went public with the statement “The American people are trying to figure out how can something have 90 percent support and yet not happen?” You appeared angry.
Let me turn that around by stating that the American people are trying to figure out how issues as wide ranging as the ongoing foreign wars, badly eroded civil liberties and most recently your "chained-CPI" calculation initiative for the Social Security COLA are being pursued by your administration despite broad public condemnation. And these are issues that you, personally, have huge leverage over.
Please don't feign outraged indignation over the Senate's rejection of your pet piece of legislation. It seems ingenuous while you continue to rain death by drone (oh, I'm sorry, "collateral damage") on innocent civilians in other countries and ignore the strong opinions of the American Public on the other issues mentioned. You are no longer convincing to many of your former supporters.
I'm looking for a list of who voted what way as detialed as possiable.
I'm angry with Harry Reid all over again because he blew it when he didn't get rid of that Filibuster when he had the chance. If he had fought for the change of rule on the Filibuster, we would have had background checks with a simple majority. I'm calling all the senators who voted down background checks, including H. Reid, to tell them they better vote for reasonable gun safety laws the next time they have a chance or risk losing their next election, because progressive Democrats are going to make sure they lose. No appealing to their "better nature" because these are people who care only about money (from delayed rewards from the gun lobby after they are out of office) and/or power (they want the prestiege and power of the Senate and have forgotten why they are there.
...well regulated is doing my first rock show in some 20 years at the queen marry in long beach CA. a monster of a show, 7 stages and every kind of head banging death metaler you could ever meet. only 2 ways in and both = dam near strip search. But you know what? i felt safer for it. Sure maybe some loser could slip something in but at least that weekend no one charged the stage and shot a great guitarist and killed a few others...America, what an odd lot we have become!
HELL-O! For all the months i've been reading on this i stiil don't see anyone mentioning that all too clear line in the 2nd amendment regarding, "a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state". now I know all y'all know an opinion is like, well you know, we all have one. think about the age of the writ. the very essence of the antiquated statement is in respects to war. the regs need to be changes as figuratively none of us are really free if going to the mall, or to church, or the grocery store, or sending the kids to school is hampered by a certain level of paranoia many if not all now have all because guns are in fact not "well regulated". Yet for all the blathering i hear and read there has not been one good article i have found making the simple point. FOr all the blogs i've trolled and read it astounds me that even with 90% of the general public in favor that there is so much violence even in the words of those opposed to better "regulation". I've had this argument with a few folks i know that own guns and it's funny how tough they all are as long as they are at home safe with thier units but i often have to wonder how terror filled they would become if, hypothetically, they were just sitting in the mall some afternoon waiting for a picture show to start and out of nowhere some lunatic that was able to buy a gun off the internet just strolls up to theM and puts a cap or two in them. pretty scary don't you think? well anyway a few weeks back 2 teenagers were sitting in the mall doing just that, and some lunatic walked up to them and just for the hell of it shanked them! ran off and as far as i know is still at large. think about that, could've been some lunatic with a gun and 30 round clip. just sayin'. WASHINGTON IS JUST A BUNCH OF CORPORATE PIGS FEEDING AT THE TROUGH...
...true but...an extended round clip with effective 2 inch grouping at 10 yds. can easily waste 30 people in a good marksmens hands. A shank on the other hand? At least i have a fighting chance and i'll be the only one cut. a nice classic saber? or some spears...
Ok, I get this: Our elected "representatives" no longer represent the wishes of the country. Now they only represent the interests of their big donors and their own re-election prospects.
This looks distressingly familiar. Maybe it's time to actually exercise our 2nd amendment rights and take up arms and march on congress And rescue our democracy. After all, isn't that what the 2nd is all about: Protecting ourselves from rogue government?
Seriously though, there is a better way. Publicly funded election campaigns would return control of the government to the people from the clutches of the oligarchs. It is necessary, but it won't be easy. The oligarchs who now dictate to government will fight like cornered cats to retain control. We now have the "military industrial complex" in control just as Eisenhower warned us. We have sat by passively while the wealthy colluded with politicians to bring this about.
...walter kronkite...absolutely! but what do we get? info tainment....
I know that job creation is often identified as the main issue facing our country right now. And I agree that it is a very important issue, as is the increasing violence in this country. While jobs are being created and while violence in the U.S. being dealt with, the same kind of energy also needs to be put into overturning the Supreme Court decision on Citizens United. Corporations have bought and paid for many of the people we elect to represent us. Corporations are not people and money is not speech. Until limits are put on the spending by corporations to influence votes and elections, we can continue to expect similar types of votes as what we saw yesterday with regard to the Senate bill on background checks. Too many of those elected to represent us are beholden to corporations.
One of the reasons weapons need to be registered to the owner is it is a great tool for law enforcement. Whenever your car gets stolen or is involved with a crime police use the owner’s registration to assist with the investigation. It will also make gun owners who are responsible MORE responsible because the weapon is registered. Many people are reluctant to loan their automobile to others because of the connection the owner has with the vehicle. Registering your gun means that you are responsible and if you don’t want to register your weapon than your full of !@#!@#%.
slag oil is
pronounced "by" two men
Do you have the name of single civil engineer that said the beams had to be removed before the buildings could fall? I remember long before 9/11 that the WTC was built very differently from other such buildings. It was described to be like an insect. That is the skeletal structure was on the exterior.
I have a doctorate in engineering, but not civil engineering. Therefore, I have no special insight. However, when I was a graduate instructor, I taught courses for a real civil engineer. The main relevance is that he described how architects keep freaking out over cracks in concrete. He, the civil engineer, had to calm the architects down by demonstrating to them that the cracks were part of design and in no way effected the safety of the structure.