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.
Can someone tell me the facts about this Wisconsin Collective bargaining issue? I am from Ohio and we had SB5 that was defeated as Issue 2 on the ballot in November. How do they compare?
Reply to post 18
Please don't give "US" your legal opinion??????
Who designated you to speak for anybody other than yourself? Maybe you haven't noticed but this is a progressive site. Anyway read again....... I said dictionary definition!... Treason:1, betrayal of trust or faith;treachery 2, VIOLATION OF THE ALLEGIANCE OWED TO ONE'S SOVEREIGN OR STATE; BETRAYAL OF ONE'S COUNTRY, SPECIFIC, IN THE US (AS DECLARED IN THE CONSTITUTION).
I've noticed a trend in your posts, very little contribution other than short criticisms, judgements, and attacks against those of us wanting a better society for all. Maybe it's time to reflect on your own pompous pretentions and admit why you would make a comment like you did!
Being a diligent reader and fan of Walt Whitman (and yourself Thom), I thought you would appreciate this quote. I feel it is quite right for the times. Cheers!
"There is no week nor day nor hour when tyranny may not enter upon this country - if the people lose their confidence in themselves - and lose their roughness and spirit of defiance." - Walt Whitman
If people cannot understand that the only organizations that speak for working people are unions. How soon they forget and how easy it is for union to be blamed for everything. It was unions that helped form the middle class and companies had to raise their pay and benefits to compete. All those companies that provided health insurance did so because union jobs provided that plus a secure retirement plan. Once the pay scale goes down and the benefits disappear we are going to see a whole population without a safety net for anything. What is the point of having a great country if you can only earn enough to exist but not live and plan for the future. God forbid we should actually become like socialist Europe with their high standard of living. Americans seem to think that only America has very wealthy people. In fact it is now easier to climb the ladder in many other countries. With education, pensions, and healthcare provided by their own tax money. Our taxes only seem to make the military industrial complex rich.
Oh yes. They will all be recalled-- Gov. Scott Walker, Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, and Sens. Scott Fitzgerald, Terry Moulton, Pam Galloway, and Van Wanggaard. As one of the many thousands of "feet on the ground" folks, I can say with certainty that we will successfully recall them all. We are that angry and that frustrated. They may have money, but do not underestimate the people of this state. (We are donating money, too, you know. Every week I send at least $10, and so do many others.) POWER to the people!)
Governor Scott deserves to be recalled. He betrayed the trust of the people. He has already revealed that the Koch brothers are his puppet masters. Let him go.
Yes but Walker supporters may have more dirty tricks up their sleeves
I am an active member of the Ohio Education Association, National Education Association, and my local teachers' association. And I teach history. Here in Ohio we have shown the true strength of unity among all the unions in the state in handing John Kasich a resounding defeat on his attack on workers' rights. We are also "blessed" to have had as one of our senators in the distant past a Mr. Robert Taft, the Taft of the Taft Hartley Act of 1948 that makes it completely illegal to compel anyone to join a union. In appreciation for accuracy, I hope that your show will include this in the continuing argument with the Tea Party Twits who are seekking to emasculate the unions with cries of being forced to join unions. NO ONE IN THE UNITED STATES IS FORCED TO JOIN A UNION. Paying a service fee for gaining the benefits of the union's work is allowed, and should be. After all, if one wishes to swim in the pool, so to speak, one must first buy a ticket.
Thank you for your time, and please keep the pressure on these bozos as they try to mislead the public with their lies.
The Tea P(F)arty stinks of corporate perspiration! Corporations are not men, and women...men and women make up a corporation, it does not breathe, have values, or ideas on its own. Corporations being given personship seems redundant to a group, and discriminative to those not part of that group. It is unequal service, it is the richest problem in America, right now.
"Right to Work" actually means the "right" to step into a workplace, accept a wage and benefit package that was negotiated by the union, and have union representation in disciplinary proceedings, all without paying any dues to the union.
This is an "entitlement" mentality (that one should enjoy what others sacrificed for, without being willing to make a like sacrifice).
That said, it is illegal in every state to force an employee to join a union against their will. Folks who do not wish to join the union should not receive the wage/benefit package negotiated by the union, which may include vacation, health insurance, and sick leave, but they are welcome to work in union shops...
I wonder if Mitt Romney is resistant to releasing his tax returns not because of what the public would think but rather because he has not been tithing to the Church of Latter Day Saints. I believe tithing is a requirement of the followers of the Church of LDS. I have Mormons in my family and they tithe. If he is ripping off his church he would not look too good to the country at large.
Nothing offends my sensibilities quite like anti-union (or even anti-union-shop) union members. Whenever anyone has a complaint with any other aspect of the workplace, they're the first to parrot the "libertarian" slogan "nobody's holding a gun to your head." Good union jobs are wasted on such people. Ironically, they're also the first to tell me "there's legions of people who'd give their left arm to have your job."
Any place that Howard Zinn's, A Peoples History Of The United States isn't allowed to be taught, is exactly where it SHOULD be taught!
2950-10K Unless you are a judge, or a least a constitutional lawyer, please don't give us your legal opinion. I've noticed a trend in posts by you. You want everyone else to do the work, while you sit back and pontificate. What a hypocrite.
Clarissa, I'm not familiar with Stefanie Miller, so I can't comment. You stated, "Yes, Reagan was hypocritical in this matter indeed, for he treated labor unions really mean." Other then firing the air traffic controllers, who broke the law with an illegal strike against the government, give me examples of how he was mean to Unions. I'm a former officer in a union. I quit unions, not because of Regan but because of unions themselves. Unions need to listen to its "rank and file" members. Until they do that, unions will continue to see membership dwindle.
Of course this joke proofs, Mitt Romney's "Corporations are people my friend" is entirely ridiculous. We liberals talk and talk, trying to convince the last Americans who don't understand so soon. This great joke reaches the brains of the very least Americans just like that. And makes Romney look entirely ridiculous. More, more, more of that kind!
I'm against radical overdoing and all kinds of revolutionary rushing.* I think the reasonable goal right now is to go back to the tax rates before President Bush. I don't think Thom is advocating European tax rates in the U.S. -- he just showed those foreign examples to proof that we tax extremely low.
What is socialist? Lenin, Stalin and all the Soviet dictators who followed him called their system "socialist". European right-wing Social Democrats (vague comparable to our blue-dogs) were speaking about "socialism" at the same time. The German National Socialists (Nazis) abused this term too. This term has been abused by communists and fascists a lot. They even abused Karl Marx himself. Marx was just a philosopher and he didn't appreciate those who called themselves "Marxists". Once he said in France: "Je ne suis pas Marxist." ("I'm not a Marxist"). The real socialists were the Social Democrats who wanted nothing but democracy with social security. Communists always hated that, because if you ease the distress and pain of the poor, they won't be ready for revolution anymore. A social democracy is constructive and deals with realities. Communism is destructive and aims at visions that are entirely different from reality.
As I read your lines, I see you're pretty socially thinking too. What is my ideology? I just woke up last summer, when the teapartiers scared me, Congress gridlock worried me and the U.S. downgrade made me angry. Then I followed the Iowa straw poll. I heard Michelle Bachmann advocating actually 0% taxes, when she was like, "Every dollar you make is yours!" I also heard Herman Cain ect./ect. .... All this made me overreact radically at times. This is kinda radical temper, but actually I'm not a radical. I call myself a liberal Catholic or progressive Catholic. Why not say "socialist Catholic"? I like this kind of unionizing conflicting counterparts.
What makes me wonder are people who live on food stamps, publicly advocating to abolish food stamps. Or those who are radically against "big government", but want social security. I mean, social security is to organize by "big government" -- it's a whole lot of work! Many people don't understand. We can call ourselves lucky to have Thom, who educates those Americans. He should really NOT emigrate to Germany! ;)
_________________________________
* As Ron Paul is unreasonably radical in global issues: All U.S. Forces home at once and do away with Department of Defense -- this kind of rushing and overdo is harmful
Rock Center with Brian Williams had Colbert on last night talking about this issue. Ted Coppel was the interviewer. All the Rethuglican presidential candidates interviewed claimed they did not like the Super Pacs. A wealthy contributor to the SPs was not shy in admitting that he expected to get something for the money he had contributed--he mentions getting rid of the EPA so that he could do unfettered business--code for unhampered profits--isn't that bribery--caught on tape and aired on public airways. An advertising exec talked about how commercial ads have to be vetted by the FCC before they air, but that political ads fall under free speech, protected by the Constitution. I don't know about you but I'm pretty sure that slander and lies are NOT protected under the Constitution. So I guess Colbert can call Romney anything he wants--but I don't think that Colbert is exaggerating on his point.
The sooner we get a Constitutional amendment to declassify corporations as people (undoubtedly the most idiotic of Supreme Court rulings ever) and have publically funded elections, the sooner we can get back to the democracy.
"We are right-wing hypocrites!"
Yes, Reagan was hypocritical in this matter indeed, for he treated labor unions really mean. But I think it was arrogance as well -- the typical GOP arrogance, despising those who they rank lower than themselves. Although Reagan actually has never been a great actor.
Yes,i think so..Then i wanna ask you something.By the way,from where will we get all the details regarding this topic?
plantillas web
*ACTIONS speak louder than words*
I think the networks understand it just the way they want to and there is nobody, with any spine (or even desire) to change it. The Democrats are in the same game of deception, even more so, than the Republicans. It is a grand old game of deception by those with the money to keep those without....deluded that voting will make a difference... and will only amount to false hope for change. This keeps the voters placated, or distracted, for a little while until they realize that the game is rigged. Some people still don't get it and still think that voting for Obama will make things all better. Obama is out to destroy social security and keep us in the games of war and conquest and tightens the noose around the necks of the 99% ever as much as any Republican...his actions prove it.
i believe there is a larger republican agenda in play here, given the growing list of Supreme Courtesan rulings that scream out for an amendment to The Constitution. Imagine, if the USA becomes so entangled by our own reprehensible high court rulings that there is a widespread call for a Constitutional Convention!!! And imagine if it were to take place with republicans having substantial power, and democrats still behaving like spineless wimps. Even without a clear republican majority they could extort and bully the wimpy democrats into scenarios that plays out like these: I'll trade you one amendment to do away with Citizens United, in exchange for 3 amendments for 1) supermajority for tax increaase, 2) balance budget, 3) prayer in schools. And then we'll do away with Buckley vs Valeo in exchange for 1) electing senators by state representatives, 2) abortion is banned, 3) flag burning... If there is such an agenda in play, don't fall for it! A Consitutional Convention will be the end of American as we've tried to build it.
So, all that said, I believe it is really worth considering OTHER ways to fix Citizens United. Of course these proposals would be challenged and would ultimately be decided by the high court. BUT by then hopefully we'll have different judges on the high court who'd take the opportunity to reverse Citizens United. And that effort would be more attainable than a consitutional amendments.
Finally, let me share some proposals as I'd written in a NY Times response to a piece by Gail Collins:
Granted, Citizens United and Buckley-Valeo are appalling decisions that beg for amendment remedies. But simpler, less arduous fixes could be tried, such as limiting the price charged by networks for political ads thus putting them in the price range of any citizen - not just SPACs. Another idea is requiring networks to air opposition ads before the next billionaire's SPAC ad can be run again. Neither proposal requires amending the constitution, and can go a long way in fixing the damage done to our election process by the Supreme Courtesans to our election process. Networks might complain, but they need to understand we don't have elections in America to bolster their bottom lines. And yes of course, it would also help enormously to appoint better justices to the highest court than we've had in recent years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/14/opinion/collins-who-still-wants-to-be-...
Mitt Romney is a murderer?
On the other hand, just what do you think Obama has been responsible for....all of the murders of innocent civilians in the Middle East...the drone attacks and helicopter gunships mowing down civilians...even children...was all done on Obama's (and Bush's) watch and with his consent. I think he has Mitt Romney beat. May the best mass murderer win the Presidency!! not!! !! !
mitt career as killing companies and selling off there assets ; then sending work overseas should be great debate material for the presidency
Let me ask you this. Are you ok with paying 50% plus in Federal income tax? If so, why. If not, why not? How are we to sustain these high levels of spending and entitlements without getting to this point. Do you think it is right for the government to take half of your income so that it can be spread out to others? I agree that the tax system is broke. I do agree hat we should have a progressive tax system, where the wealthier pay more in proportion to their income. How about we fix some if our wasteful spending and channel these resources into legitimate programs that help people. I definitely disagree with you that we are heading to a socialist democracy. That is hundreds of years away (thank GOD).
As far a fear from losing employment, this can be debated. People, not all but say half, don't want to work because they are freeloading on our money. You have to agree that this happens. At my evil corporation (which happened to donate over $70 million last year to charities by the way), we are alway hiring employees for good paying, union jobs. We can't fill the demand because it is tough labor. Why us it is hard for us to fill these positions if there are so many unemployed? My sisters company has over 500 job openings that they can't get enough applicants for. These pay over $40 k per, with great healthcare, 4 weeks vacation upon hiring, and a 37.5 hour work week for salaried folks. . I agree with Obama when he said we have become somewhat lazy in America. We expect things to be handed to us because we are Anericans and have been spoiled for decades with prosperity. Now we have our backs to the wall and we crumble? We need to look in the mirror and take accountability for our lives and well being. It was never the job if the government to do this for us. Sure. It is a good thing that we have unemployment benefits to help us when we are down, but for two years? Really? What is the incentive to bounce back. We have many many jobs that need done. How about, if you a going to be on public assistance, you work for it. There is plenty of litter needing picked up, tons of grass to be mowed in public parks, plenty of walks to be painted, etc. I just do not understand this entitlement "right" that the progressives subscribe to. Help meunderstand this. I do appreciate your replies and dialogue. I also respect your ideology, though I disagree.