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.
From TPM
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is taking credit for defeating filibuster reform.
The Kentucky Republican’s 2014 re-election campaign fired off a fundraising email to supporters after the finalization of the bipartisan rules change agreement, which passed Thursday night. The rules change by McConnell and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) leaves the 60-vote threshold in tact but speeds up the legislating process.
The email, subject line “We Beat the Liberals,” bragged that President Obama was “furious” after liberal senators and left-wing groups failed to pass their “dangerous scheme” to break down the checks and balances in the Senate.
“You see, they had been pushing a plan to end the filibuster, allowing Harry Reid and the Obama Democrats to pass their agenda with a simple majority,” wrote Jesse Benton, McConnell’s campaign manager. “Well, Mitch McConnell stood strong and stopped that scheme dead in its tracks.”
Two hundred and twenty-two years ago, our Founding Fathers adopted the 2nd Amendment of our constitution. (The right to bear arms)
Today, our Founding Fathers in their wildest imaginations, could not conceive the technology we have at our disposal, including, assault weapons and the size of their magazines. The description (assault) and the word magazine pertaining weapons and ammunition, were not part of the English language yet.
What would the 2nd Amendment state if our Founding Fathers had the knowledge of assault weapons, the size of their magazine, and the horror they causes?
Our Founding Fathers wrote this amendment, (The right to bear arms) not for personal protection… but the right to aid our government in an approved Militia, for keeping the security of a free state.
With the use computer technology, along with satellites, and GPS that is assisting our military, there really is no need for a Militia. Militias today are connected to homegrown terrorism, which is pro-white, and supported by anti-government organizations.
It is about time that this country’s torchbearers of freedom, (our politicians) take it upon themselves, “With the support from public opinion,” to speak for our Founding Fathers; and attach a stipulation to our 2nd Amendment, requiring a strict control over who has the authority to possess these weapons that are designed to kill man. Or just rewrite the 2nd Amendment.
For Your Time, I Thank You,
D.A. Gonsalves
Gonsalves1964@gmail.com
What does it matter.......... whether or not the senate can pass legislation if the house is constipated with democracy-hating banana-republicans?
http://lis.virginia.gov/131/ful/HB2340.HTM
(a link to the actual bill)
Aliceinwonderland, you expressed it perfectly. Our "empire building", especially since the '80s, has placed the entire world in peril. I posted a link to a series of three books here a while back but I think it's worth repeating. Blowback is what you're describing, Alice, and it's documented very well in the "Blowback trilogy" by Chalmers Johnson: http://www.amazon.com/Blowback-Second-Consequences-American-Empire/dp/B0...
Not only gerrymandering. Lookie what else Virginia has going:
HB 2340 passed Committtee today down party lines 16/6; it will be voted on by the full House. This is the bill that in a nutshell would make it illegal for Virginia Law Enforcement to assist Federal law enforcement on any investigation, arrest, search or seizure of guns or ammo that is banned by new federal laws (not yet enacted..). Supposedly, the pro-gun lobby has become aware that the bill has some serious legal (read Constitutional) Issues and it's not certain the bill will pass the House.
One delegate opposing the bill told the Committee that they were "on the slippery slope of Treason." IMO, it's on the bottom of the slope and off the edge into the abyss; the bill IS treasonous.
Ken Ware replies: "I cannot follow the logic in your comments, as if war and threats to our world do not exist. Do you believe that someday the world we become a utopia and war and aggression will disappear?"
Ken, what you don't seem to grasp is the destabilizing impact U.S. foreign policy has had on the entire world. As long as this country continues operating like an Empire hell bent on world domination, attacking other countries without provocation, we will have enemies seeking revenge against us. I believe this is why the 9-11 attacks occurred. Frankly, I'm surprised we haven't had more attacks against us in the eleven or twelve years since the twin towers came down.
I believe our government's foreign policy has been the single greatest obstacle to world peace for decades; maybe even this past century. It is foolish to assume we can continue bullying the rest of the world, overthrowing democratically elected leaders in other countries, installing dictators friendly to U.S. corporate interests and trampling on the rights of the people in those countries without consequences. Our own leaders continue thumbing their noses at the United Nations and disregarding international law. As long as this continues, we will have perpetual war. Long as we fail to recognize the real culprits here, nothing is going to change, and we might as well resign ourselves to living in paranoia, looking over our shoulders and bracing ourselves for the next act of retaliation. That is the price we pay for allowing our government to operate as the Almighty Empire of the World.
- Aliceinwonderland
DAnneMarc, you crack me up: "Does this uniform make me look fat?" I think arming the gals with full ordnance will, at very least, seriously reduce the number of sexual assaults, reported or otherwise. Speaking of which, has anyone read about any of these ninja women jumping the bones of cute 18 year old newbie guys? Maybe one solution would be to modify David Abbot's fart machine to shriek "RAPE" every time a licentious thought crept into the mind of a GI of any (as opposed to either) gender within a distance of, say, 100 yards. David, I've looked over the circuit you filed with your patent disclosure and believe that if you cut the gain of Q2 by 5dB, changed C14 from 68 to 33pF and re-flashed the ROM with the appropriate digital file, it'd be a real money maker for you. Plus, can you imagine the combat implications of a battalion of unisex Marines, each equipped with a fannie pack screaming "RAPE!" charging an al qaeda position? Those camel jockeys would drop their weapons and run for their lives! (No disrespect intended to any rag heads hanging out on the blog....) Kick ass and take names, boys and girls! We gonna make this planet safe for the American Way of Life or go broke trying! Shades of the Crusades! Kinda gives me goose bumps ... how 'bout you, Ken? Ah, but we've wandered quite far from the subject of Thom's blog ;-)
DAnneMarc: I'm not so sure the world is already a Utopia. If that were so there wouldn't be any greedy, murderous psychopaths. And the most dangerous ones are the ones that we take for granted are on our side...looking out for us because we are all Americans. The biggest mistake is to think that foreigners, especially ones who may differ in some way...definition of morality..religious beliefs..are more dangerous than those who wave the American flag and sell us hot dogs. Sure, there are small cliques of people who believe themselves to be enlightened, who want to change the world for the better, but I believe that if you are foolish enough to enter a lion's den (without an AK47) thinking some mystical power was going to keep that lion from devouring you then that is just plain crazy. The problem is when murderous psychopaths control the armies that are supposed to defend us against other murderous psychopaths they tend to murder many innocent people...all for reasons of greed and power. And psychopaths gravitate to positions of money and power. The scum rises to the top.
"Lizzy Bordon took and axe
and gave her mother 40 whacks.
And when she saw what she had done
she gave her father forty one."
Maybe we should ban axes.
I never watched many Brady Bunch episodes but that was kinda funny...took me a while to realize who Marcia Brady was. I certainly remember Lizzy Bordon...that little jingle has stuck with me all these years.
Yes, you are probably right! I noticed the looks on Leon Panetta's face and on the face of that military guy sitting next to him when Leon Panetta made the announcement. It didn't look like either were too thrilled with having to do this.
What a coincidence David Abbot, I too am an inventor, among other things. That fart machine sounds like a great idea. If you can't deactivate it I'd recommend bringing it to a Republican Presidential Primary Convention and just let it burn itself out.
As far as those shouting matches are concerned, that's why I refuse to allow myself to be labeled in any way. Once you label yourself you arouse hostility from the other side that shuts down their critical thinking ability and turns on their noise maker.
Palindromedary, you make an excellent point about resorting to women in the military as a result of a shortage of troops. Equally, you make an excellent point that they will go for children next. I might add that that is exactly what Hitler did at the end of WWII was to extend the hand of the third Reich to "Hitler's Youth"--almost like he was honoring and doing the kids a big favor. Oh, how unfortunate that history repeats itself!
The thought of being trapped in a fox hole next to Marcia Brady at the moment her Aunt Matilda decides to visit and watch her suddenly become Lizzy Bordon and realize that instead of an ax she had an AK-47 with 30 round clips, a thirty eight special, a bayonet, and a hand grenade would pose quite a pickle. When she would turn to me with that steely glare and ask, "Does this uniform make me look fat?" What do I do? Do I remove the safety from my own rifle and charge the enemy and brave the hale of bullets shot at me, or do I try to be a real hero and answer her question? Oh how I feel for those brave men in uniform. I for one am glad that I'm old enough to know better and too old to care.
Palindromedary wrote: "DAnneMarc: Yes, of course, you are correct! I certainly agree with that! I say the only time war is ever, ever justified is if the US was ever attacked and we were fighting on our own soil to defend ourselves against an attacking enemy. I suspect you may even differ with that."
Actually, Palindromedary, I don't differ with that at all. If someone were to attack this country I seek out a weapon and head for the front without a second thought. It would be pure instinct to defend one's country. I expect my neighbors, Ken and you would probably do the same.
In the same way, no, I don't consider 9/11 to be an outside attack on this country. Personally, I don't know if it was an inside job or not because of the lack of facts. What we all do know, is that the blame for 9/11 falls squarely on the shoulders of President George W. Bush. He was official warned that this attack was going to take place and intentionally went way out of his way to do nothing about it. As far as I'm concerned that makes him responsible.
Incompetence is no excuse when you assume The Office of The President of the United States.
Good point Ken. Yes, I do believe that war will disappear. I also believe it has always been obsolete.
The world already is a Utopia, we simply are being denied that reality because it is currently being run by incompetent opportunists.
The proper way to defend yourself or anything else is by doing good business with your enemies. Instead of fixating on their weaknesses and how to hurt them, concentrate on their needs and how to help them. Find a way to help them and allow them the privilege of reciprocating. By MUTUAL aid and profit, you discourage the very thought of violent attacks. No one attacks the source of their own needs and the source of their own prosperity.
Mutual prosperity, trade, and good business is the answer to war. It always has been and it always will be.
The answer to this election rigging is to get rid of the electoral college which is a bad joke as far as I'm concerned. As for the gerrymandering it seems that common sense would dictate that the districts be created by the counties instead of wandering all over to benefit one party or another. I realize that large cities like NY, Miami, LA, etc., might have to be divided into a number of 'blocks' for state elections and for House of Represenatives.......... but this whole mess needs simplification.
What would it take to get rid of the electoral college?
Here you go again, Thom, framing the "battle" of the two parties in the US's two-party system.
The Dems are not yer 1930s FDR or yer 1960s JFK Dems. Please quit trying to fool the public — or the few, but loyal, readers of this blog — that the two-party system is alive and well!
First the "progressives" supported the Pentagon's Dream Act, for brown bodies to fill the body bags of the "dumb" wars that "progressive" (D) votes redeployed under the label of "necessary" wars.
Now the Democrats are recruiting Republican girls to be grunts, so the boys of nice white liberal parents won't be drafted into the ongoing resource wars and climate wars coming... wars their (D) votes made necessary that those deeply depraved Democrats don't want themselves at risk in.
The "Principles" of Liberal Voters:
http://chenangogreens.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id...
People don't have jobs because of failed Keynsian Obamanomics, which is just Obushmanomics writ large.
Off this subject, but.
The 2nd amendment.
The second amendment to the constitution had nothing to do with individual rights to own guns. It was all about the right of state militias to be operated within the states.
This was a carefully crafted amendment for stated rights, not personal rights.
I can break this down in part so that each part is made clear.
First of all, it state: “ A well regulated Militia,…
This is talking about an organization set forth by the state and under state statues.
Next: “Being necessary to the security of a free state…
This is to state that each state has some freedom from federal laws toward the militia they form as a state, not individuals, but the state government.
“The right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
Meaning that the rights of the people within the state regulated militias have the rights set forth by the states to keep militia arms and to use them as a show of force when needed.
At the time what was called arms was limited to muskets and swords. When a call to arms was set forth, all men with rifles and swords were to force. Pistols were not part of what they believed as an arm.
Next part:
Shall not be infringed.
Meaning the rights of the federal government to call to arms would not be limited to the federal government, but under those of the states as the states set forth for their militia. And that if the state decided the action was not in the interest of the state, they could withhold their militia from the action.
Nowhere within the 2nd amendment does it give the right for an individual to own a weapon, only to keep and bear them in times of need and only when they are a member of the regulated state militia.
I was a member of the military during the Vietnam ‘war’. I was ‘given’ a weapon and the ammunition for it. When my time was ended for the use of the weapon, it was not mine to keep, but went back into the armory of the military. As did all the ammunition I had not used.
When this amendment was written, many people did not own an “arm” as defined by the times and were ‘issued’ them and the ammunition. In many cases these people were able to “keep” the weapon so that they were ready upon call to service. But when the time came for them to leave that called service, the weapon and ammunition also was recalled.
Also, at the time, both military and civilian rifles were basically the same. The premiere rifle (musket) was a British rifle called the ‘Brown Bess’. It was not only sold as a military weapon, but also to sportsmen. It was NOT an assault weapon, everyone with the money could buy them. The assault weapon of the time was a cannon, by law and money. Only a government could own them.
History does not lie, only the people who tell it.
DAnneMarc: Yes, of course, you are correct! I certainly agree with that! I say the only time war is ever, ever justified is if the US was ever attacked and we were fighting on our own soil to defend ourselves against an attacking enemy. I suspect you may even differ with that.
Some think "Well, we 'were' attacked on 9/11". But, I believe that it was mostly an inside job. How much money and lives could have been saved by those who were in positions of responsibility , the President, our 3 letter orgs, if they had only acted to protect us by...even shutting down airports on that day...there's ample evidence that many knew what was about to happen. Why did the authorities confuse that period with a war-games drill that was so similar to what actually happened....making many people think the real thing was a drill? But who eventually benefited? Those who gained the power over us that they didn't have before!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6g9NWs8aqU
That name on this youtube web site: "Alfreda Francis Bikowski" is, I am given to understand, the CIA officer that is depicted in the movie ZeroDarkThirty portrayed by Jessica Chastain. Although in the movie, it depicts her as being a relentless and smart CIA officer whose goal was to get Usama bin Laden...in reality, according to what I've read about her, she was in on a number of screw ups that embarrassed the Agency...including taking it upon herself to personally ogle over a torture session of KSM (Khaled Shaik Mohammed) which she was not authorized to do. Then, after UBL was killed and dumped in the sea, she was ticked off that others in her section were getting praised for getting UBL so she wrote emails to her coworkers trying to take all the credit. You can actually see her peaking between other people standing in the back of the crowded room when Hilliary Clinton and Leon Panetta and Obama watched the video of the killing of Usama bin Laden. She's very short.
http://cryptome.org/0004/cia-john/cia-john.htm
Comment deleted after thinking things over. Apparently agressiveness is okay if you host a show and go into a rage, but not exceptable when you make comments!!
Alice & DeAnnemarc- I do not understand the reasoning behind the statement that war has no place in a civilized society. How do you propose we defend ourselves if we are attacked or our embassy is attacked? Do we just ignore the incident and hope it does not happen again. We live in a world where threats to our society happen daily. I cannot follow the logic in your comments, as if war and threats to our world do not exist. Do you believe that someday the world we become a utopia and war and aggression will disappear?
Palindromedary - One of the reasons why Obama changed the rules of who can serve in a combat scenario is that several women have sued the government so they can serve in combat and he is just pre-empting the decision from the court case. And this president needs to take credit for the military allowing women to fight in combat. He has failed at everything else he has tried and this gives him the chance to distract people so this reality of his failures will temporarily fade to the background.
You say that, DAnneMarc, because you are mature enough to see it that way. But from a shouting match, people who are on the borderline between being republicans and being rational, won't get any of the facts that they need in order to help them vote for a sane government.
Plus, that libertarian clearly enjoyed the shouting match and enjoyed irritating Thom. All the more reason, I say, to cut that sucker's microphone off after two minutes, so Thom can talk facts.
I have had extensive discussions with a few regular people who claimed to be republicans and libertarians. A friend spent a month in Ohio going door to door for Obama. And our experiences echo Thom's: when people who think they are republicans or libertarians are presented with the actual, factual differences between the progressive, democrat, republican, and libertarian positions, it usually turns out that at heart they are democrats or progressives.
Most republicans and libertarians are not village idiots, or psychopaths who enjoy other peoples' suffering. In fact most of them are decent people who have been sound-byted, fear-mongered, and hypnotized into believing that they are republicans or libertarians. They just need to hear the truth.
I really like the courtroom format, where the only time one side can interrupt the other is on procedural grounds. In that format, the jury gets to hear both sides' positions in full. Which is the only way for them to arrive at an informed opinion.
And when the public hears the libertarian side fully and Thom's side fully, most of them are going to say, "Yeah, if I have $500,000 in medical expenses, I'll just email that libertarian and he'll send me a check for the full amount. And if he can't give me the full amount, Ron Paul will make up the difference, I just know he will. And right after that, pigs will fly. And the moon is made of green cheese, the check is in the mail, and a few others that I can't repeat in polite company."
I don't know if you're aware of this, DAnneMarc, but I am an inventor. I created a device that makes a very loud fart sound every time a libertarian lies. A simple circuit, really- just a few resisters, diodes, capacitors, and transistors, an encoded chip, an antenna, a speaker, and a special blessing from Mojo Mamma's House of Hexes, down in bayou country. But the damn thing never quit farting. I had to bury it in my back yard. And even now, years later, on quiet nights the neighbors call me and say, "Dude. You gotta change your diet."
Perhaps. But why would any sane person want to? That's the part I can't understand.
My apologize everyone. I wish I could stay here all night. However, once again the Sand Man beacons. I will happily answer any comments tomorrow afternoon when I get home. Till then I bid you all a Good Night!
I can't tell if good old "Give 'em Hell" Harry won us a victory here. "....cuts down on how many times they can filibuster a particular piece of legislation" ??? Sounds like just the opposite, somehow. It would be good to know who supported what.