Thom's program talking about "THE BIG LIE" and showing FDR having to deal with the big lie likening the Republicans as using Nazi propaganda tactics was very good to point out. It is quite obvious to most of us liberals that the conservatives tell some really big whoppers and that there are a lot of Republican suckers that by in to them. It was stressed by Hitler's book Mien Kamph that the bigger the lie repeated over and over again would work to fool the people. I say that probably the biggest lie propagated by both the Republicans and the Democrats and the ruling elite who controls both is that "we have a democracy...oh, excuse me...a constitutional republic here in America that works". Bush already proved he doesn't care about the constitution ("just a piece of paper"..he said) nor the republic (because they committed treason when they did 911 and in so many other ways). Neither the Republicans or Democrats really care about democracy...unless you really warp the meaning of that term to fit their selfish definition. The real truth is that all these terms are just rhetoric that no politician really believes in or tries to achieve. They are all looking for that revolving door into the "carpet of gold" that the criminal elite will lay before them for having rigged the game their way. The US political system is a corrupt and venal outfit that serves only the wealthy. From time to time they will, perhaps, for show, throw us a bone. I really enjoyed watching that guest, Neil Borofsky, who wrote a book called "Bailout: An Inside Account of How Washington Abandoned Main Street While Rescuing Wall Street" that Thom had on. Thank goodness for people like Neil Borofsky...and, of course, for Thom Hartmann for the great work they do to keep the criminals from going unheeded.

If you want to see an unplanned city, try Santa Fe. There's a joking legend that the streets were laid out by a drunk man riding backward on a donkey. Or something like that; the phrasing I encountered left it ambiguous as to whether it was the man or the donkey that was drunk.

Like mosquitoes or leeches sucking the life's blood out of us.

Somehow the whole notion and going through the motions of putting together a platform was just that - going through the motions. The election from the republican perspective is ultimately in the hands of those who pay for it, and manipulate every possible angle to try to win it. Notice that gas prices are back on the rise ..with 1 lame excuse or another...but timed to peak out just before the election. Apparently, as the party is now, they don't even believe they could win an election legitimately or they wouldn't have to go to so much effort and expense.

Well, I hate to pile on, but it seems to me that you might be missing the point here (but don't worry, I expect the Republicans to use your figures rather than Thom's, so thanks for helping them out with the math). The facts are, first, that all these percentages are far less than the percentages any of us pay in taxes, so the rich are definitely not filling in any holes in the safety net with their charitable giving. And I've heard the same things from the Ayn Rand crowd: the rich will contribute more to charity if you just remove this horrible tax burden from them. Well...first, they won't contribute anywhere near the percentage to charity that they now contribute in taxes, because people who think they're being overtaxed will not start "overgiving" just because they suddenly have control of more of 'their own money' (as Dubya liked to say).

Oh, but there's another point I should bring up: central to Romney's tax plan (think of this every time you hear him utter the phrase "broaden the tax base") is this: he wants to cancel the deduction for charitable giving (as well as the deduction for home mortgage interest). Now, if you accept the idea that the rich are in a higher tax bracket than the poor (only true for some rich people, of course, but probably true for more than half of them), this means that the people at the lower end of the wealth scale aren't even getting the same or better tax break for the same number of dollars. You seem to like math, so here's some more math for you:

For each thousand dollars a taxpayer gives to charity...

If they're in the 15% tax bracket,their taxes are reduced by $150.

If they're in the 25% tax bracket, their taxes are reduced by $250.

If they're in the 31% tax bracket, their taxes are reduced by $310.

So let's go back to the numbers you thoughtfully provided for us, and for illustration, I'm going to assume (and I can tell you're a pretty eagle-eyed person when it comes to assumptions, so feel free to change the assumptions as you like) that these are middle class families with homes, and large enough families that they happen to fall respectivey into the marginal tax brackets I just mentioned.

So the family making $50K sees their taxes reduced by $570. It's like they gave $3230 to charity, and the government, touched to the core of its flinty little heart, kicked in an extra $570.

The family making $100K sees their taxes reduced by $1050, but typically only gives $400 more than the $50K family. So they pocket the difference. Sweet! Here, it's like giving $3150 to charity, and having the government pony up a relatively astonishing $1050. But make no mistake, they actually give less to charity in absolute terms (once you factor out the corrupting 'social engineering' aspects of the tax code) than the family making half as much.

The family making $200K sees their taxes reduced by $1736, but gives $1800 more than the $50K family. Here it seems to me to be pretty much a wash (but hey, you're the math guy, so you tell me). If they'd contributed nothing beyond what the $50K family contributed, they would of course keep their money, but their tax bill would exactly offset the charitable contributions they retained. So for families in this bracket, it seems that they're not so much giving to charity as re-directing some of their tax dollars to those charities. Viewed a little differently, though, we can say that the average family making $200K gives $3864 to charity, and the government matches it with another $1736.

But here's the real nub of the problem: if Family A is making twice as much as Family B, you really do need to explain why Family A isn't giving twice as much (in absolute terms) to charity. I mean, the percentages are all pretty small (well, I guess 7.8% isn't really small, but the percentages for the higher brackets certainly are). Do you know some reason why families in the $100K bracket would be less able (or willing) to give (on a percentage basis) than families in the $50K bracket? The only reason I can think of is that they might feel less sympathy for the poor. But the data won't necessarily support that. It could be that the $100K family is contributing their entire 4.2% to soup kitchens and homeless shelters, while the $50K family is directing their 7.8% charitable contributions to symphony tickets. I think that's unlikely, but it might be true. Who knows?

If I were in charge of re-writing the tax code (and you should probably be glad I'm not, 'cause I certainly am...) I would probably give everyone a flat 25% credit on their income taxes for whatever they gave to charity, and of course no deduction other than that.

I'd also like to see what people with incomes in the $500K or $5M range give -- particularly since there might be a new tax bracket above $250K. Any data on that?

I suspect you may be correct on this. Money will stop at nothing to get what it wants. But even if Obama wins...money will still win.

I don't know about civil war, though, too many people have given up their guns...it would be a pretty lopsided battle...but then again so was the war against the British. I think if the Republicans win...it could happen a lot sooner than if Obama wins. Obama panders hope, however futile, which will delay things a bit. Some people will still be confused thinking we still have a democracy.

Interesting observation that it is not the Obama administration that is behind arming the government agencies but right-wing forces. There surely is a government within a government that operates in secret, on black budgets, and are not accountable to Congress or the President. I sure will be awfully ticked off if the Republicans win...that's for sure. But that is not enough for me to vote Obama this time. As far as I'm concerned he blew it and will continue to blow it if re-elected.

A voice of moderation and sanity.... And it would be nice to be able to have some modicum of belief that everything is going to be ok...even if it was merely fooling myself that the non-sense I chose to believe in had some merit...even though it tended to clash with science. Don't worry...be happy!

It does feel good to meditate and listen to my hemi-sync, brain-wave entrainment CDs...got quite a few of them. I can also do super low frequency vocal intonations with simultaneous varying high frequency intonations...like Mongolian Throat singing. Very relaxing for me...not so sure about for everyone else within ear shot...neighbors...etc. But, there is no superstition elements...no gods or devils. No ridiculous dogma!

But it does seem pretty scary...some of the articles I read..about the possible, and very soon, fate of our planet...as predicted by hard scientific facts. I sure wouldn't want to look like all of those people throughout history that thought the world would end soon....many of those people...however, were inspired by some preacher who got food poisoning, had a bad dream, or swallowed too many shrooms and "had a vision" or thought he interpreted the scriptures correctly....not many were inspired by scientific facts.

We are much more likely to die of some self-inflicted disease...like eating the wrong food and much to much of it...or dying from a Hell-Fire missile sitting at a desk because some bureaucratic nitwit from TSA or NSA thought we were not true blooded Americans and/or threats to national insecurity...than to see the actual end of the world. One thing is pretty certain, though, and that is none of us, who are not very well situated monetarily...like, say, many millions of dollars net worth...will be able to afford health care or even food and will likely perish much sooner than those at the top of the economic ladder.

That article on the unprecedented rapid melting of Greenland's ice shelves is a dire warning, and so are all of the weather changes, drought-like conditions, and fires.

So, repair would be grand but despair may be most appropriate. I don't know...maybe if we collect billions of tin-foil balls and litter Greenland with them...we can more effectively re-radiate the sun's ray in order to again lower the temperature...and in millions of years the ice shelves will reform and the libido will return. But, once melted...all that fresh water turns into salt water and raises the sea levels. Maybe we could hire those snow making machines in Tahoe to go up there and give it a go. I suspect that Mother Nature is p1$$ed and won't forgive very easily. If we don't adapt..we'll perish. Lizard skin anyone? Now, where's my rock?

When the news starts calling them by their correct name....maybe the average Republican will realize what they are buying into. The last real Republican was Eisenhower and even he KNEW that the GOP was done and over with. Reagan was the 1st of the "New Right" of Paul Weyrich and over 40 yrs of infiltration has given them power which even the Democrats can't beat. They now have over 600 corporations, 2000+ republican politicians, make our laws and have the courts. Their platform is NOTHING like the Republican platform of old and to continue pretending that they are republicans is hurting our country. Why do they NOT call them the New Right? Perhaps, republicans that strictly follow party lines will take a deep breath and realize that our Democracy is under attack and that they don't want Weyrich's Theocracy, either. Please Press....call a spade a spade and get it over with.

Not all Republicans or Conservatives are nutcases. (Nor are all Democrats or Progressives, not).

So it may be that some significant portion of the Republican Party are beginning to recoil from the extreme and untrue positions taken by the extremists. Somehow We People, must forge some sort of consensual coalition of rational people across some significant rational moderate portion of the political spectrum -- if there is any hope for the future of our country and world.

I'm beginning to think in terms of our 2nd US Civil War, only that this time rather than being physical conflict; it is at least still a war of ideas -- between two tribes now living in two inconpatible realities. Realitied so different, they are now literally unable to communicate between themselves sharing any common culture or language.

Meanwhile as is always the case, there are the manipulative-elites (1%) exploiting the disarray of the People -- while running off with the loot, to their off-shore global vaults. Whoda-thunk?

It's true there are bigger, more real and immediate things than listening to idiotic draconian knuckle dragging politicians, however, given the subject above, I am wondering how the republicants expect to win after alienating almost everyone except Wall St. hedge fund managers, big oil, the militiary industrial complex, radical zionists bent on attacking Iran and the various religious nutcases that abound aplenty. They will need to scare people and commit election fraud again. Be ready for anything my friends.

It is my impression that people who continually say that we are not a democracy, but a constitutional republic, are often Republicans who don't like the close association of the word Democracy with the word Democrat and who know that the majority of the people (democracy) know that people like Bush didn't give a sh1t about the constitution (just a piece of paper..he said) or the republic. And again, there is that close association of the word Republic to the word Republican. They must say it because they are keenly aware that they are really in the minority. And without their ability to outspend Democrats on bribing government officials and lying campaign propaganda and their ability to cheat in elections (they own the companies who build and program electronic voting machines....duh!!)...they would lose every time. They would never get into office. And so by their persistence in saying that we are a Constitutional Republic rather than a Democracy they are trying to use a cheap propaganda method of twisted rhetoric and play on words in their attempt to make people vote their way....ie: against their best economic interests. But it is not working...it is just silly.

I certainly agree with what you have said...but, Obama and Holder are wearing false teeth...all the better to service the criminal elite with. They will both contort to any position that the ruling elite dictates...just bend over and touch your toes now boys...here comes choo-choo! And so the US catches AIDS, withers, and dies a hard death.

The mumbled lies that these sycophants utter in pretense of catering to their flocks of true believers will only continue to serve their real masters who owns all the gold...because it might prevent the people from rioting in the streets just a little bit longer.

Obama continues in Bush's footsteps so he will never do or say anything to risk going after and setting precedence and risking suffering the same fate that his predecessor would experience. Obama is in too deep. He's dirty! But he wants your vote so he will get bolder in his lies and convince some incorrigibly hopeless voters to vote for him again.

Holder goes only after the cut and dry, sure thing, little guys who confesses. He has no balls to go after the big guys who can put up a fight. Holder is a pussy! The big guys know it and get away with mass murder...and looting the treasury.