I know a way to fight Citizens United without a Constitutional Amendment. It's "Civiliter Mortuus" (Civil Death). It's the legal concept that allows States to prevent convicted felons from voting, or possessing firearms, or being lawyers, or working in certain professions. It allows the Federal government to prevent convicted felons from enjoying full Constitutional rights. Among the most important of those rights is that to can be taken from you is the right to life. The States and Feds can kill you if you're convicted of certain crimes.

Many corporations have been convicted of federal crimes. Many more would have been if the U.S. Dept. of Justice hadn't come up with the idea of "defered prosecution" that allows a felon corporation to escape conviction by paying a fine. That nonsense needs to stop! What the Justice Dept. could do is forbid corporate felons from spending money in political races (corporate free speach) or hiring lobbyists to enfluence legislation. Free speach is a constitutional right that can be taken from a convicted felon.

The Supreme Court said that corporations are persons. If they're persons they can be convicted of felonies and as convicted felons they can lose their right to free speach. How could the conservatives on the Court get around that stumbling block to the corporate theft of our democracy?

(An interesting aside is that the Colt arms corporation pled guilty to a felony over 30 years ago for cheating the Federal government. That created a problem because they couldn't legal possess firearms. Congress rushed through an exception to the federal firearms laws concerning concerning convicted felons--of course Colt got the exception. But any convicted felon can apply for the exception to the rule that prevents them from possessing firearms.)

I only heard part of the discussion by the person who decried the influx foreign nurses and suggested an across the board lower level of skills. I believe that the nursing profession has the normal bell shaped curve for competence across all cultural backgrounds. If you look at one end of the curve it is easy to see significant difference from the norm. I have not seen research that supports the notion that the Midwest has faster turnaround in the critical care units. I am a 30 year + west coast RN and am familiar with the research that says higher RN staffing levels (nursing hours per patient days [hours]) results in faster patient response/recovery. California does have the highest mandated nursing ratios codified in the regulations. I reject his notion that the cultural backgrounds of the nurses imply less competent nursing skills. I don’t know if this comes from the tendency of nurses to “eat their own” the horizontal attack of peers in an oppressed group. I worked as an evaluator who investigated tragic and untoward events in hospitals and other health facilities. Nurses from all backgrounds are involved in mistakes which result in significant morbidity and mortality which are great tragedies. I do believe that cultural backgrounds can influence the way in which nurses respond to authority and seem to be less likely to assume the mantle of autonomous function and to confront authority figures; doctors, administrators. Many of the Registered Nurses of my generation with professional training have been encouraged to be more assertive and to stand up for their own professional evaluations and knowledge base. I believe that many nurses train in paternalistic institutions which expect the nurses to do what they are told. Administrators and doctors love those who do what they are told without question.

One more comment from me:

I'm Caucasian and my husband is Asian/Pacific Islander, and our son is exactly half of each. Yet when we have to choose a race on documents, what are we supposed to put? He's no more one race than another. When others fill out forms, they never put Caucasian for my son. I think it's inherently racist to assume that in order to be considered Caucasian/White you need to be 100% Caucasian because anything else taints the purity of the Whiteness.

By the way, my 11 year old son says he's half Black since my husband's skin is so brown. So we're all mixed up.

I remember an episode of some 60's TV show (I could have sworn it was That Girl, but that can't be right) where the stewardesses on a flight notice a gun in a shoulder holster on one of the passengers. Since they're worried about the plane being hijacked to Cuba or something, they manage to lure him somewhere and tie him up. Then he explains that he's actually a U.S. Marshal there to protect people, and that he obviously needn't worry, with a flight crew like theirs around. The episode may have been written to counter a stereotype, but the stereotype was never actually mentioned. It's amazing that a show that actually aired over 40 years ago was less sexist than what we have now.

This looks like a great time for my union pension fund to step up, hedge their bets, and finally make some money for a change. If only they would follow the banks investing strategies all of us members would benefit far more than we are now. I still cannot find out how all my monthly dues are distributed. Much information seems to be protected.

Goldman Sachs does not rule the world- they are only trying to through you off.

It's Jardines Fleming, and they are insanely jealous of Jewish gold.

"Her Majesty's a pretty nice girl, but she doesn't have a lot to say."

Here's a nice article on how the rich are paying less in taxes and the poor are paying more. Puts the right wing statistics in perspective.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/16/INIR1IV17F.DTL

N

Having these hysterical liars on the show detracts from the quality of the show. They have most of the media to lie on, and when they insult Mr. Hartmann, I either turn off the show or turn the sound down. Please, we don't need to hear these people. Why do this to us? These guests will not be converted by appearing on the show.

just listening to Peter Ferra raises my blood pressure...

Simply stated. Nothing personal, just business. The Grand Oligarch Partnership is liquidating the asset they call the middle class.

As a clinical psychologist who teaches about such matters, I must respectfully disagree with Thom's characterization of the cheering Republican audience as psychopathic.

As Thom stated, there is indeed some evidence that Wall Street is populated by a disproportionate number of persons who could be characterized as psychopathic (as defined by Robert Hare, the psychologist who pioneered the study of psychopathy). Just yesterday ThinkProgress reported on a stock trader who dreams longingly of another recession as an opportunity to make money, utterly indifferent to its social consequences.

That Republican audience is better understood as exemplifying the authoritarian personality style, as studied by Canadian psychologist Robert Altemeyer. (His work was cited extensively in John Dean's book, "Conservatives Without Conscience.")

Authoritarian followers do not meet the criteria for psychopathology. Their apparent lack of compassion for others -- be these deathrow inmates, persons without health insurance, or gay soldiers -- stems not from the biological incapacity for empathy characteristic of psychopaths, but rather from the harsh, rigid value judgments that distinguish between "us" (those who conform to the accepted norm) and "them" (those who differ in some respect).

Unlike the indifferent lack of concern for others displayed by true psychopaths, these authoritarian followers are actually very passionate. (It's very doubtful that a true psychopath ever would shout out the way we observed during the debates.)

Frankly, inasmuch as the evidence suggests that a neurological deficit underlies psychopathy, the callous disregard for others displayed by authoritarians is perhaps more egregious.