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.
Why are "Housing Starts" a consideration as the health of the economy? What's the good of starting house construction if too many people cannot buy them?
Why Not Elizabeth Warren?
This is simple. Warren wasn't part of the "establishment" (a.k.a. Good Old Boys). While Geithner may not have directly opposed her it was fairly well known that he didn't really embrance her to head the new agency. And, if you want to have a better understanding of just how the "movers & shakers" in the people surrounding the President think, all you have to do is look at how many of these same people treated Brooksley Born during the Clinton Administration.
Murdoch is using the Ronald Reagan defense, "I don't recall"
Re: Were America's Assets Looted Years Ago?
Forbes' Merrill Matthews argues that the multi-trillion dollar social security trust fund was looted years ago:
Either Obama and Geithner are lying to us now [in saying that social security checks won't go out if the debt ceiling isn't raised], or they and all defenders of the Social Security status quo have been lying to us for decades. It must be one or the other.
Is the real purpose in cutting Social Security, or even privatizing Social Security, an effort to not have to pay back the money that was "borrowed" from the trust fund?
Following up on caller John's comments Friday that Social Security is insurance and an increase in premiums (like raising the cap to $3Million) is the same thing as your health or car insurance company raising premiums...
I called the White House comment line Monday morning and asked the operator to "remind President Obama that Social Security is insurance into which I have paid, NOT an entitlement. Raising premiums is exactly the same as when an insurance company raises premiums, and no one in power seems to think THAT is a bad thing."
She said, "I've never thought about it like that before..."
That's one.
If enough people call and leave a similar message, it may just penetrate the wall of inside-the-Beltway voices and actually reach President Obama.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Compassion-of-Paul-R-by-Rev-Dan-Vojir-110717-561.html
Paul Ryan will see to it!
http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2010/01/is-alabama-being-run-by-bunch-of.html
Sociopaths exist across America!
Faux News will hiccup, cough and choke a bit, and then continue spewing the same old fear mongering and lies to control the automatons that actually believe their crap. They are the masters at getting folks to vote against their own best interest using one or two fringe issues that stir fear and emotions. I wish they were stupid at Faux News, but that assumption would be incorrect. The only person who can destroy that empire is Rupert himself.......and I would not rule that possibility out, but it is unlikely. What a cash cow for disseminating crap.
Michael: "Last weekend’s New York Times magazine had an interview with Sheila Bair, whose five-year term heading the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) expired last week. Now she can begin to tell what happened. She said that Mr. Obama promised her that he would try to prevent the mortgage frauds that were occurring, especially in subprime mortgages, and support better bank regulation. But then she would learn, just an hour before he gave a speech, that he would have changed the draft that she had seen, and took out what he’d promised her. The rewrites apparently were done mainly by Tim Geithner, who acts as a lobby for the big bank contributors. Instead of running the Treasury to benefit the U.S. economy, he’s benefiting his Wall Street constituency. Significantly, he was a protégé of Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who gave the name “Rubinomics” to pro-Wall Street opposition to bank regulation and a dismantling of public control over the banking system.
"Ms. Bair said that that when she opposed giveaways to banks, Obama’s officials would say that there would be a meltdown if they didn’t save Citibank, AIG and other financial institutions that had acted recklessly. She pointed out that the FDIC had successfully wound down Washington Mutual and other insolvent institutions. This was the FDIC’s business, after all. Even Citibank had enough assets to cover insured depositors. The problem was its gambles on derivatives and junk mortgages. The government could have taken it over and made normal insured depositors whole. But there weren’t enough assets in Citibank and AIG to pay the gamblers and the big players. She complained that in every case she was told the big gambling institutions – basically, the nation’s wealthiest one percent – couldn’t lose a penny.
Mr. Obama has bought this position. To save bondholders and speculators from taking losses on their bad bets, consumers and the rest of the “real economy” needs to pay. They have to pay via higher Social Security taxes and other regressive tax policies, instead of making the higher brackets pay as occurs under progressive taxation. Mr. Obama is willing to cut back Medicare. We can’t charge the pharmaceutical companies by bargaining with them for bulk discounts as Canada’s government does. We have to let them set the prices with no argument – as if this is the “free market.” So Mr. Obama has made an accommodation with the Republicans to pursue what really are Bush Administration policies, and now even Tea Party policies."
Bonnie: "China has warned the U.S., “Do not default.” What would be the ramifications of a default? Would it put the global banking system into crisis?"
Michael: "Nothing would happen. There’s not going to be a default. China will not lose a cent. Its leaders know that there’s a lot of American investment in China. In principle, it could use its dollars to buy this out at its book value. But the reality is that a U.S. default would mean that the dollar would not be acceptable again until the United States paid. This would mean that America would have no way of paying for its military bases. It would be unable to extend the wars that Mr. Obama has escalated."
Bonnie: "Would a U.S. default send interests rates soaring? If so, what would be the economic effect?"
Michael: "An interest rate wouldn’t matter if you default. If you tell me that I can write you an IOU but you’re not going to collect, I’ll give you 20 percent. But seriously, the bond market has not given any hint that interest rates will rise at all. As I said above, this is a just-pretend pseudo-crisis to give Mr. Obama the opportunity to do what politicians do – to sell out his constituency to his campaign contributors on Wall Street.
It looks like he will go down in history as a Herbert Hoover, being blamed for the depression that was not necessary and that the Republicans could not have gotten away with intensifying. Only a Democrat posing as a left-winger could support the anti-labor, anti-wage, pro-Wall Street policies that his advisors have been putting into his hands. This is what came out in the New York Times interview with Sheila Bair."
Bonnie: "So this kerfuffle about a possible debt default is a charade for public consumption?"
Michael: "The idea is to create an illusion of crisis, to create a pretense for introducing a solution that makes fortunes for financial predators – or at least gives them enough room to take their money and run, by swapping their bad loans for Treasury securities. The tragedy is that the way in which Mr. Obama is resolving today’s non-crisis of the budget limit is impoverish the population for the next decade, bringing on a depression rather than avoiding it.
This is a tragedy because it’s not really necessary. It’s a policy choice."
"So Mr. Obama’s advisors have convinced him to do what European political front men also are doing. A depression is deemed necessary to cut living standards and labor by about 30 percent. Mr. Obama’s aim is to lower American wage levels.
To do this, he needs an excuse, a cover story. The reality is that a depression will make the budget deficit even larger. Just as the plans to invade Iraq were written up before 9/11 provided a crisis atmosphere that became the opportunity to introduce them, so the response to the federal budget deficit is already outlined: Social Security and other “entitlements” will be cut back, as well as revenue sharing with the states and cities. So governments at the local level will have to sell of land, roads and whatever is in the public domain. The American government will look just like Greece and Ireland – so you may want to look at them as dress rehearsals."
"...the class war is back in business. We’re going into a depression that is unnecessary – except to drive down wage levels and strip away government obligations to pay for Social Security, Medicare and other public programs. This will enable the government to get rid of what remains of progressive taxation on the higher wealth and income brackets."
Bonnie:
"Mr. Obama wants to cut $4 trillion out of the budget, while Republican leader Boehner only wants a 2.4 trillion cut over a shorter period. I’ve read that it was Obama, not the Republicans, who proposed putting Social Security cuts on the table. Why would he be proposing much larger cuts than the Republicans?"
Michael:
"The main reason is that he is in a unique position to deliver enough Democratic votes to let the sell-out (“compromise”) go through. No Republican administration could get away with cutting Social Security. This is the most basic income protection program that Americans have. But now, it’s being depicted as a welfare program that is hurting the economy. Only a Democrat posing as a left-winger could really pull off what Mr. Obama is proposing."
The debt ceiling and default charade
Bonnie Falkner:
What is your assessment over the current debate in Washington concerning the raising of the debt ceiling? This debate seems to be taking place between the Obama administration and the Republicans without much input from Democrats.
Michael Hudson:
It’s a good cop-bad cop charade. The Republicans are playing the role of the bad cop. Their script says: “You cannot raise taxes on anybody. No progressive income tax, no closing of tax loopholes for special interests, not even prosecutions for tax fraud. And we can get a lot of money back into the economy if we give a tax holiday to the companies and individuals that have been keeping their money offshore. Let’s free the wealthy from taxes to help us recover.’
Mr. Obama can turn around and pretend to be the good cop. “Hey, boys, let me at least do something. I’m willing to cut back Social Security. I’m willing to take over what was George Bush’s program. I share your worries about the budget deficit. We have to balance it, and I’ve already appointed a Deficit Reduction Commission to prepare public opinion for my cutbacks in the most popular programs. But you have to let me get a little bit of revenue somewhere.”
In the end the Republicans will make some small token concessions, but they’ll get their basic program. Mr. Obama will have sold out his constituency.
The problem is, how can Mr. Obama move to the right of where George Bush stood? The only way he can do this is for the Republicans to move even further to the right. So the Republicans are accommodating him by pushing the crazy wing of their party forward, the Tea Party. Michelle Bachman, Eric Cantor and their colleagues are coming with such an extremist, right-wing attitude that it gives Mr. Obama room to move way to the right as he triangulates, depicting himself a the less crazy alternative: “Look. I’m better than these guys are.”
He’s hoping that people will vote for him just because he’s not as extreme as the Tea Party. But the reality is that there is another alternative. People can “vote with their backsides” and stay home. There may not be many people showing up to vote on the Democratic side. So it’s possible for the Republicans to get in, now that there is so little real difference between their position and that of Mr. Obama. What’s the point of voting?
Michael-Hudson to Bonnie Faulkner on July 16 Guns and Butter: “When I was in Norway one of the Norwegian politicians sat next to me at a dinner and said, “You know, there’s one good thing that President Obama has done that we never anticipated in Europe. He’s shown the Europeans that we can never depend upon America again. There’s no president, no matter how good he sounds, no matter what he promises, we’re never again going to believe the patter talk of an American President. Mr. Obama has cured us. He has turned out to be our nightmare. Our problem is what to do about the American people that don’t realize this nightmare that they’ve created, this smooth-talking American Tony Blair in the White House.”
"The Obama administration raised the financial sector’s bailout to $13 trillion. This has vastly increased the government debt. And now, Mr. Obama wants to bring it back down by cutting back Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other social spending – to transfer wealth and income to the top of the economic pyramid. At the start of his administration he appointed a Deficit Reduction Commission led by advocates of cutting back Social Security and Medicare: Republican Senator Alan Simpson (McCain’s economic advisor!) and Clinton chief of staff Erskine Bowles, representing the right-wing Democratic Leadership Committee cite above. The aim of this commission was to give Mr. Obama an “experts’ report” supporting the diametric opposite of the liberal constituency that voted for him."
Transcript of this show at:
http://michael-hudson.com/2011/07/the-euthanasia-of-industry/
Listen to this show at:
http://michael-hudson.com/wp-content/uploads/audio/Hudson_July2011_Bonni...
I think that just like Pelosi did with Bush, Obama will ask Murdoch for permission to prosecute him. And if Murdoch refuses to go to the White House and personally hand Obama all of the evidence that it needed in order to convict him- along with a signed and notarized confession, of course, Obama will then tell us, "There is absolutely nothing I can do, because no president has ever orchestrated the conviction of any criminal. Ever, in the entire history of America. And as far as Eric Holder- the guy I appointed to head the Justice Department- finding incriminating evidence against Murdoch, or even having had that evidence spoon-fed to him while he sits in a high chair wearing a bib, you can pretty much forget about it, because Eric has to get his bunions scraped this week, and next week he's getting a manicure, and as a rule I never ask him to plan beyond two weeks, so unfortunately there is simply nothing he can do, Besides, what Murdoch did was in the past, and I am proud to say that my administration only looks forward, which, as it turns out, makes it impossible to prosecute anyone for anything, ever. Why, if I had been in charge of the courts at the Hague after world war two, I wouldn't have convicted Adoph Eichmann, because everything he did was in the past. So, prosecuting Murdoch is off the table. Besides, he killed the guy who squeeled on him, and there isn't anyone else in the entire world who could testify against Murdoch."
I have to tell you- and I can't tell you how much it galls me to quote Sarah Palin in doing so-, but Obama's hopey-changey stuff is NOT working for me at all. I think he will go down in history as the president whose only distinguishing characteristics were that he was the first black man elected president of America and that he was completely content to rest on that laurel and achieve nothing else.
Now that Sean Hoare has been found dead, the plot seems to thicken.
I can only hope that the FBI will investigate NoW reporters that have been operating here, to see if they have violated any wiretap laws In the UK, members of parliament are calling for a review of media ownership laws, Hopefully that ill carry over here as well.
We can't say it enough, ALEC, ALEC, ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) until everyone knows what a dark and evil force they are. Today. They write boiler plate laws that will impose right-wing laws on us, in stealth. They get candidates elected in powerful positions to enact them. It's nazis all over again.
I sincerely hope that this is our "Father Laughlin" moment, a time when the sleepy U.S. electorate comes to its senses.
Left Right - Lotsa Fright! Middle is where it all comes together. Fox is no better/worse than MSNBC....
Gotta listen to both sides then filter out the BS....Fact is both Libs and GOP are on the take....just different bank accounts....want change.....vote smart....change them all. How about Rubio and Sanders a colalition government not a divided gov. WE ARE BANKRUPT, will NEVER get out of debt....I feel bad for all you under 35's your gonna pay for all the sins of the past. Left, Right......FRIGHT FRIGHT....what ever happend to Leave it to Beaver....???? 1950's were best times in America....thanks Dad!
I agree that it seems pretty ridiculous to see some "ball player" or other athlete hauled before a congressional sub-committee and take up all the attention away from more important issues...like the economy, the illegal wars and wasting of money and murdering innocent civilians in other countries.
Here's something you don't hear a lot of in our news:
"We Americans have rewritten our laws, as the Argentines did, to make criminal behavior legal. John Rizzo, the former acting general counsel for the CIA, approved drone attacks that have killed hundreds of people, many of them civilians in Pakistan, although we are not at war with Pakistan. Rizzo has admitted that he signed off on so-called enhanced interrogation techniques. He told Newsweek that the CIA operated “a hit list.” He asked in the interview: “How many law professors have signed off on a death warrant?” Rizzo, in moral terms, is no different from the deported Argentine doctor Bianco, and this is why lawyers in Britain and Pakistan are calling for his extradition to Pakistan to face charges of murder. Let us hope they succeed.
We know of at least 100 detainees who died during interrogations at our “black sites,” many of them succumbing to the blows and mistreatment of our interrogators. There are probably many, many more whose fate has never been made public. Tens of thousands of Muslim men have passed through our clandestine detention centers without due process. “We tortured people unmercifully,” admitted retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey. “We probably murdered dozens of them …, both the armed forces and the C.I.A.”
Tens of thousands of Americans are being held in super-maximum-security prisons where they are deprived of contact and psychologically destroyed. Undocumented workers are rounded up and vanish from their families for weeks or months. Militarized police units break down the doors of some 40,000 Americans a year and haul them away in the dead of night as if they were enemy combatants. Habeas corpus no longer exists. American citizens can “legally” be assassinated. Illegal abductions, known euphemistically as “extraordinary rendition,” are a staple of the war on terror. Secret evidence makes it impossible for the accused and their lawyers to see the charges against them. All this was experienced by the Argentines. Domestic violence, whether in the form of social unrest, riots or another catastrophic terrorist attack on American soil, would, I fear, see the brutal tools of empire cemented into place in the homeland. At that point we would embark on our own version of the Dirty War."
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/americas_disappeared_20110718/
Murdoch's shareholders have lost 100's of millions in a matter of days. The old goat is pouring billions of his own money into a share buy- back scheme, with the aim of stabilizing the plunging stock. He very well could lose all of his own dough too. At any rate, in my opinion, this is what will bring the Emperor down. I'm not sure how well he plays the fiddle but Fox is burning down!
It would be nice to see the Obama administration abide by the law of the land and go after him too. In general I wish Obama and the Democrats would fight just as hard for what is RIGHT, as the republicans are fighting for what is WRONG.
Palindromedary, I guess Dickey and HALLIBURTON sure the hell pigged out at the "FEAST" !
It is a fallacy that only the Democrats want to raise taxes. If there were no taxes then there would be no maintained roads, waterways, infrastructure. Corporations would not be able to make any money and would no longer be able to buy off politicians. The Republicans want to raise taxes alright...on the people who don't make a huge amounts of money. They want taxation to be on the little guy and not on their Mammon-worshipped ruling elite who have the gold to fill their pockets as well. And they spend and waste just as well or even better..they are happy to waste tax dollars on stupid, illegal, and immoral wars and murdering other people. Democrats usually use taxes for beneficial things...at least that is supposed to be the traditional wisdom...although, now, after Obama, we can't really make that claim anymore. But I think Obama is really a Republican anyway.
We moved over and let someone else drive during the 8 years of Bush fiasco...where did that get us? Where we are now, of course. I'll agree to "move over and let someone else drive" if we are not considering yet another Republican wanna be dictator for the ruling elite or a wimpy "lets just compromise" Democrat. I agree Obama has not been very much better as he has continued Bush's idiocy in so many arenas. Yes, let's give a third party a chance for a change. Break away from the good old boy network of the two party system that are both owned by the ruling elite. I want a fire and brimstone snorting no-nonsense, no-compromise (unless it is in our favor) for a change. Not "hope you can believe in (not)" but "actions that you can see and feel" that will make life better for the masses of hard-working (or at least, once hard-working before they were fired or laid off) people.
Votes determine who represents us (barring any rigged voting machines and corrupt partisan supreme court justices) and if the public is too stupid to realize that the Republicans (and some Democrats) are working against their best interests...yet still vote for them, then they deserve what they get. If people can be bought off with all the glitz and glamor that money can buy....then they will continue to be snookered. If people vote for a third party candidate with a high turnout (how about 71%...the percentage of people polled who are not happy with the Republican handling of the debt ceiling) this will shake up the entrenched system even more than the League of Women Voters did when they got tired of representatives ignoring their letters, emails, and phone calls and took out their own commercials (ads) reviling the arrogant, ignorant politicians. It made a big difference!
Like most international corporations, they'll probably get away with it. Sure, there'll be stories about this almost every night in the corporate media, then Rupert will announce that he's REALLY sorry, maybe retire to one of his multi-billion dollar estates in another part of the world to plot how he can retain his power base.
The game is fixed! Because there is so much money in it. And those with that kind of power do not relinquish it without a real bloody fight! All the other networks would have to turn against Fox, and that just ain't gonna happen. Other than that, the only thing that will tumble Fox is if all the empty headed idiots that watch and read their crap were to reach for their remotes; there are other channels out there, are there?
There's the rub: "if the Obama administration will actually investigate and prosecute."
They'd rather go after baseball players and byciclists who've used steroids, e.g., Roger Clemens and Lance Armstrong, than the bankers, brokers, lobbyists and fraudsters that brought our economy to its knees. Why in the world would the Obama administration break their track record and go after media moguls like Rupert Murdoch?
That is because they are the only ones to submit a plan. The democrats have zero ideas except raise taxes and continue to spend like it is someone else money. What courage from that leadership! Move over and let someone else drive.