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.
I applaud your faith in the Supreme Court, but I respectfully submit that it may be somewhat misplaced. I also respectfully disagree with your assumption that they are immune to political pressure. They are partisans of the Republican persuasion, and their loyalties and values will sway their thoughts, whether conciously or subconciously in favor of the views of their party. I personally think the Supremes are fearless in their decisions, regardless of their outcomes. If I were a betting man, I would lay odds that the Supremes will not only go down the stupid road again, but that the results will be exponentially worse than the Citizens United ruling.
Then the law in Florida is very different then in my state. To be able to defend yourself with deadly force you must be in a situation where any reasonable person would have a fear of great bodily injury or death. Two people in my town have recently died from being punched in the head, so it's very reasonable.
Maxrot, if the scenario I laid out turns out to be true, you know a man is guilty when he's on top of you pounding your head on the concrete, and at that point you have every right to defend yourself.
Clearly we are not ready as a nation to turn sick and injured away form the emergency room doors. What strikes me as odd is that people protesting mandated insurance don't seem to realize that they if they pay taxes, they are paying for the emergency room free ride used by both those who cannot pay, and those who can pay but choose not to ( gaming the system). Aside from the intermittent increases in insurance coverage in the name of greed, the hospital and insurance rates are increased to cover the losses incurred due to those who cannot or choose not to pay. Logically, mandated insurance would decrease loss of revenue in the hospitals, and cast a more critical eye on insurance rate increases.
The claim that mandated health insurance " infringes on the rights" of those forced to buy insurance or pay a penalty, is invalid if citizens can be mandated by the states to carry automobile insurance. Whether it is Federal or State, a mandate is law if passed by the Federal government or State government. How the Supreme Court could not see the parallel and uphold the Constitutionality of the mandated health care plan would be difficult to explain given the similarity. Constitutionally, the Supreme Court is not empowered with the right to strike down laws passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. Of the three bodies of government, Congress and the Executive Branch have powers granted by the Constitution that the Supreme Court is not granted. Of the three bodies, the Supreme Court is ranked third in Constitutionally granted powers.
I am not only afraid, but am dead certain the the Republican controlled Supreme Court will render the health care plan useless by dismantling parts of it, or striking it down altogether. If they have the power to do that, the Constitution is not worth the parchment it was written on. They would render the Congress and President powerless to stop them from ruling the country from their lofty thrones.
Yes, we can do without credit. I don't pretend to know much about finance, however, about 15 years ago I decided that paying my hard earned money in the form of interest was a little stupid.
I made a decision to finance nothing else. I also figured out that buying a home was a bad choice. Soooo.... I have not paid a penny of interest in 15 years. I have savings accounts for expensive things like cars, appliances, furniture and electronic gizmos. Just takes a little discipline. If I can't pay cash, I don't buy it. Sure, you can get by without credit and you are better off if you do.
To Mr "The Real World" what an unbelievable genius you are, I'm truly impressed by your argument, especially the last part where you point out the obvious lack of people being able to apply "Innocent until proven guilty". Your make a very excellent point and a lot of people should take that principal to heart... starting with people like... oh I don't know GEORGE ZIMMERMAN!!!!
N
Wow, Real World, you're really attributing a lot to me that I didn't say. Why are you addressing this to me?
The problem with the stand-your-ground law is that everything falls under it. You and I could pass each other on the street, and I might think you look threatening and you might think I look threatening, so we could pull guns on each other when nothing was really going on in the first place. Mutual suspicion becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. At the very least, the law needs to be repealed.
"is that a legal definition of a chase?"
No, but it's the argument I would make in court. I might have to include turning some corners, just like in movies when someone thinks they're being followed in traffic. But when the following person pulls a gun against someone who's walking faster and faster away, it demonstrates that they didn't just happen to walk in the same direction.
Sadly, those people who vote for GOP are "we the people" as well. We shouldn't forget that.
My hope for November 2012 is, that the Republicans make themselves so much ridiculous, that they will loose lots of votes. If Romney should really be nominated (you can never be sure before July/August), the fact that he's very unpopular within the Republican Party might make right-wingers stay at home.
On the whole I see the chance to really get a progressive dominated Congress this time -- where Republicans and blue-dogs together can't disturb the change. Remember, we had issues with blue-dogs already in 2009, who objected the Affordable Healthcare Bills as well as the Republicans. And all that right-wing opposition was a result of the votes of "we the people". We liberals should be honest : many Americans are pretty conservative.
We can occupy legislature by voting accordingly. But we can't start a revolution if this shouldn't work out. The millions of right-wingers would respond to that violence by violence. And you know they tend to be well armed. America is divided and we can't afford risking another civil war, which would totally destroy the country.
After all our options are trying to convince our fellow Americans and then voting progressive.
Hey Mathboy,
If they find Zimmerman not guilty what happens then? If the facts turn out that Martin doubled back and attacked Zimmerman while he was returning to his vehicle, what then? If Zimmerman stopped following Martin, as the 911 call seems to show, and was returning to his vehicle after looking for an address to spot his location for the police, as he was asked to do by the 911 operator, and was attacked by Martin, as the witness told police, does this not then come under the stand your ground law? If these turn out to be the facts of the case, will all you whack job libs who have jumped to convict this guy before the trial say you're sorry? I doubt it. It's not okay for vigilanty justice against blacks? But it's ok against whites, or white hispanics. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty with you libs. I thought justice was supposed to be blind, and that means color blind as well. One more question, does that make Obama a white black? Just asking.
Wally George wasn't a satirist, he was an extreme right wing nut. If you watch his show, it is easy to see why some would think it might be satire.
Mathboy, is that a legal definition of a chase?
N
I just can't parse the incomplete, unconnected sentences. I'd love it if Nuula elaborated a bit. There's probably a good point in there somewhere.
The chase thing is that Trayvon couldn't lose George Zimmerman by walking faster. And the stand-your-ground law is what would let you punch the guy that chases you, because you'd be "standing your ground". I keep thinking of the line on South Park, "He's comin' right for us!", which the hunters always yell so that they can immediately shoot whatever they want.
The wording describing each choice, beyond just a mere yes or no, is very "Thom-ish"! And I totally agree that we have a monarchy of sorts. Unelected (that's why I say their a "monarchy"---they're there for life!) lap dogs, er, pit bulls, that do whatever the GOP and their financiers want! And some of these guys aren't even considering both sides of a case. I'd hate to imagine what would happen if something like Dred Scott or Brown v. Board of Education (litigated by the Solicitor General's office, in the person of Thurgood Marshall. Anyone remember him? He was one of the more brilliant members of the court. When I was in school, we learned about the Constitution backwards and forward, up and down, and had to pass a comprehensive exam in order to pass from 8th grade into high school. When I think about it now, I'd be almost positive that at the time, I knew more about the Constitution than some members of the current court! I'm currently reading The Thom Hartmann Reader, and it is making me interested in once again going over the Highest Law of the Land, and learning it all over again! I highly recommend the book, and if you're a listener or a viewer of Thom's, (which sadly, since I live in Northridge, CA, I can't get Thom's show on KTLK 1150AM anymore, and I can't seem to find the radio broadcast on our cable TV. I can get "The Big Picture", but I much prefer The Thom Hartmann Program. If anyone who reads this knows of a station (I tried KPFK, the Pacifica outlet here, but no luck) where I can get the radio program here in Northridge,CA, please reply to this post.(I think it's important to note that it's called "The Thom Hartmann Program" and not "Show". I think that speaks volumes.) My mentor (an amazing woman affiliated with CalTech and Planned Parenthood both) told me on her death bed to "Always choose your battles. But always fight the good fight." I whispered to her in her hospital bed that I would do just as she said, and she squeezed my hand in approval. Thom's program always helps me choose my battles wisely.
Thanks Thom!
Mathboy I think that was Nuula's point.
Anyway since the Daily comments section is still not up, I'll put my general comment here.
In regards to Thom's recent call in which he proposed to the caller that if someone is being chased by someone else, the person being chased has a right to turn around and punch the chaser. I have two problems with this scenario, 1 what is defined as a chase? 2 punching someone is assault, as far as I know there is never a case of initiating justified assault.
Good lord by Thom's loose definition of having the right to punch someone chasing me, I guess I can turn around upon anyone following behind me on a sidewalk and punch them. I don't think there is such a right... at least I hope not.
Though I also don't think Zimmerman should have the protection of law after following someone, intimidating them and then shooting for whatever type of response that brought on. I don't care even if Trayvon did have a gun on him, Zimmerman had already violated Trayvons public safety by tailing him and accosting him.
Frankly I don't think Zimmerman is going to be found guilty of anything since the law does pretty much protect him. Fact of the matter is, the public demand should be for the repeal of this ridiculous law so wack jobs like Zimmerman are held accountable.
N
The U.S. wants to impose "democracy" on the end of the barrel of a gun, but doesn't see the need to actually democratic at home. This is the only western democracy that this purchasing of the electorate is tolerated, why?? It's unethical and hypocritcal to talk about "our freedoms" when we don't have the freedom of fair elections.
I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to say, Nuula. Direct deposit requires a bank account.
Well Thom, we can ALL manage without credit if we adjust our material wants of life. Many of the poor use credit for day to day living like food and shelfter, as I have many times. What troubles me is Direct Deposit which is over-taking the whole system of payment for Gov't to employers. No bank account - no money - no option. THAT, to me - is the truly dirty deal!!!!!
Yes, but not so much by choice. Still, debit card affords the purchasing power, and we still have money in the bank, which is more than we ever had when we had credit cards
Apparently Zimmerman has gone AWOL...His defence team has walked away. Zimmerman knows his days are numbered.
I couldn't agree more! Simmilar is drawing line, after line in the sand; eventually you have to enforce that line otherwise the law is moot.
As well many laws are written waaaay to broadly which leads to loop holes & abusive interpertation and enforcement...or lack there of.
3 step to fixing things.
1. Stop the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq.
2. Tax the wealthy.
3. Single Payer healthcare system based on existing Medicare.
That community had no official Neighborhood Watch. Therefore, George Zimmerman is a self-appointed cop wannabe with an "I kill, therefore I am" mentality.
The pending economic collapse caused by our greedy elite will significantly reduce the demand for fossil fuels. After this collapse we can change the concept of money by spending it into existence rather than loaning it into existence. Then we can spend on all the needed infrastructure projects to transform our transportation, energy, housing, manufacturing, and agriculture systems. The concept of money must change before we can truly address climate change. As it is now we must continually grow our economy to pay for interest on debt but the planet we live on is finite. We cannot grow our way out of our problems any longer! Fundamental change is needed this time around.
Yes, laws are routinely ignored by those in power or are only enforced against those they want to discriminate. Yes it is unconstitutional to assassinate Americans yet Obama does it anyways. But laws are important. Why else would they create the Patriot Act if they can just spy on us anyways? They pass these laws for the illusion that we have a Constitutional Republic. We need sensible laws and they should be uniformly enforced, period. We the people are sovereign under our constitution and we need to act like we are! Occupy the legislature!
We all know - and seem to be resigned to the fact - that sea levels will rise. But the media fails to mention that life on earth can NOT persist without plenty of ice. Ice is critical to earth being able to provide a life sustaining habitat.