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.
How about this......economic martial law....closing all the banks....Gerald Celente on RT....very, very, scary....buckle up kids we are in for a very rough ride...very soon. Suitcase nukes....dirty bombs....blow back all throughout the western world? Or is it yet more staged terrorism by the fascists to justify the draconian measures they want all along?
http://www.trendsresearch.com/SubscriberArea/gerald-celente-on-adam-vs-t...
I watched a very interesting, and disturbing, documentary on HBO called Hot Coffee. It is about how companies are using tort reform and a clause in all contracts saying that we can not sue companies in a court of law but have to use mandatory arbitration in the event of a dispute. The movie goes on to say that this practice has become so prevalent and sneaky that most people don't realize that they sign away their rights of protection under a court of law.
The arbitrator (an independent, company-paid "judge" not part of the traditional legal system) is paid by, and selected by, the companies who get you to agree to mandatory arbitration. The documentary also says that since the arbitrators are paid by the companies...they have an interest in siding with the companies...and have even been blackballed by companies that didn't like the way a case was ruled. In fact, according to the documentary, Halliburton has won 80 percent of their cases through arbitration. And even if they lose...the awards to the plaintiff is not worth much.
A common practice has been to, for example, send you little piece of paper along with your monthly bill (a credit card bill, or telephone, or gas bill for examples), that has the clause which says, in small print, that you agree to mandatory arbitration clause if you use your credit card, or object, after receiving this this notice and bill. Most people just throw away all of the "junk" inserts which usually include lots of sales fliers.
If you buy anything now...no matter what it is...or start a checking account...or whatever...you will likely have to agree to this mandatory arbitration.
In the movie Hot Coffee...there were several examples of victims of this system...but one was about this young 19 year old girl who went to work for Halliburton (or KBR...which was owned by Halliburton...Dick Cheney's old company). She was sent to Iraq with the story that she would be put in a trailer unit with one other woman. Turned out that they put her in a barracks with 400 men. She said she was drugged and gang raped...had to have reconstructive surgery from it...was then put in a shipping container for 24 hours without food and was not allowed to leave with armed guards guarding the unit. She convinced one guard to let her use his cell phone and she called her father...who called Senator Poe...and they managed, eventually, to get her released. She had been threatened and the "rape kit" was "disappeared" when it was handed over to the Halliburton people.
So after a lot of pressure by Senator Poe and others to have a jury trial, despite objections by Halliburton who even tried to have the Supreme court prevent a trial, she loses her case.
This is one of the latest articles (July 9th, 2011):
http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/07/09/jamie_leigh_jones_loses_rape_c...
Bottom line...if you have people you care about...especially if they are young females....then you should think very hard about this case...and how a rich and powerful company using the mandatory arbitration clause can virtually get away with anything.
I believe that most companies now use the mandatory arbitration clause...does that mean that precedence is being set that will allow the Clarence Thomases of this world to go way beyond just making smirky verbal sexual advances...to actually raping or even maiming or killing their employees....and get away with it? Well, I guess if someone like Clarence Thomas can make it to the Stupreme Court then anythng is possible.
Thom, I'm afraid this is one of the very few times when I disagree with you. I think we should erode our legal system with Murdoch-style sensationalized infortainment. And here is why:
The Twain Report
All The News That Mark Twain Says He Would Report If He Was Alive Today
Three days ago, conservative radio talkshow host Rush Limbaugh, who-
although everyone in West Texas loves him- had become increasingly
concerned about securty, so his wife got him an attack dog.
Appropriately, she named it Rush. Unfortunately, the first day that
Rush was "on duty," he burst through a window and attacked a mailman,
who managed to fend the dog off with bear spray. He reported the
incident to the police.
The police gave Mrs. Limbaugh a choice: have the dog taken to the
pound, where it would be put down, or, as they put it, "Do it
yourself." Mrs. Limbaugh wrote a memo to her assistant that said,
"We're going to have to kill Rush. I just can't bring myself to do it,
so you're going to have to. It's for the best, and everyone wants it
this way."
After reading the memo, the assistant shook his head, and said, "I
can't believe that Rush wants me to do that. I'm going to go ask him."
He drove ten miles to the radio station where Rush was doing his show,
and walked into the studio just as Rush was saying, "These liberal
idiots have got me so upset, I just wish someone would shoot me and
throw me out the 50th story window of my radio studio. Really and
truly I do, and you whiney liberal crybabies can quote me on that."
Witnesses heard the assistant say, "Wow, talk about a dream job," as
he shot Rush, rolled him over to the window, and enlisted the help of
bystanders to throw him out the window. On his way down to the street
level, Rush was heard calling birds welfare mothers and entitlement
junkies. He landed on fifteen people, including Pat Robertson, John
Boehner, and Mitch McConnel, squashing all of them flat.
(Interestingly, Pat Robertsone's will, which this reporter obtained by
hacking into the cell phone of Robertson's lawyer, says, and I quote,
"When it's my time to go, I want a big fat man to fall on me from 50
stories up," which would seem to confirm that Robertson was in fact a
prophet.)
Naturally, because this all occured in New York City, within five
minutes street vendors were selling "T" shirts that read, "I was
almost crushed by Rush Limbaugh."
At Rush's funeral, hundreds of thousands of mourners gathered from all
over the country. But when they found out that the funeral was for
Rush Limbaugh the talk show host rather than for Rush the dog, the
minister and Rush's family and friends all left, pursued by Rush's
bookie, his drug dealer, and his madam, who were screaming that he
owed them money.
Rupert Murdoch, who happened to be in the studio when Rush met his
demise, told Rush's assistant, "Son, I like the cut of your jib. Rush
has flaked off on the job for the last time, I'm firing him. Would you
like to have his time slot?"
Proof positive that this is, indeed, the land of opportunity.
Look at Temp agencies if you want to find out who's hiring illegals.
Here in Illinois, temp agencies have two sets of employees, Temp and Temp to hire.
The Temp won't pass any kind of background check, and as a rule speak little or no english.
The temp agency asks if you need temp or temp to hire . This is code to see if you need someone with a valid ID. In our case we only use temp to hire, and aboue 25% of these individuals (who initially passed a SSN check) get flagged around day 60 when their recently purchased identity shows up as being used for work in 3 states t the same time.
I think that most social psychologists would agree that the hyper-wealthy people in America and around the world behave just like little children, continually testing the boundaries to see just how much they can get away with. And when we have decades of presidents- both republicans and democrats, and decades of congressmen/women who act like hyper-indulgent parents, never correcting the wealthy peoples' outright theft of trillions of dollars of our money and the abrogation of our constitution, refusing to enforce laws like the Sherman Anti-Trust act, sooner or later, the people will realize as a group- a potentially very dangerous group- that the American government is pointblank refusing to take any steps to protect the American people from enemies foreign and domestic and in fact is very actively helping to destroy America. And if our government does not act to protect us before the situation reaches the rather rapidly-approaching social critical mass, oddly enough the wealthy will almost certainly end up regretting their part in the destruction of America; but they can't moderate their behavior, which is why, sooner or later, someone else is going to do it for them, and the longer it takes for the correction to happen, the harder it will be on them. It's like, ok, so you really, really, really, really, really, really, really want to do this the hard way. Ok, but don't say you weren't warned.
And if Obama continues to refuse to look between his legs and realize that he has balls (and if Michelle continues to refuse to remind him), it might happen during his watch and then he will have two distinctions going for him: 1) The first African-American to be president of America; and 2) the president who by default- who, because he just didn't have the courage to keep the very clear campaign promises that he made to us even though well over half of Americans fully supported him having that courage- presided over America's fall into mob rule and/or military dictatorship. Congratulations Obama: you are a very smart, erudite, highly-educated, totally spineless, hypocritical wimp who understands exactly what he is doing and does it anyway.
And congratulations to all of you fake democrats in our government, although you are somewhat less to blame because few of you are intelligent enough to realize the inevitable, easy-to-predict results of your actions and inactions.
Just registered, but I'm a longtime fan.
Not sure about which number is right (yeah — lazy): but re Clinton you say he raised the debt $1 trillion, while at the same time the graphic overlay behind you shows $1.4 trillion. Just the sort of thing pickers of nits, including me (obviously), will notice. Difference is that I'm encouraging clarification, while others will use such discrepancies to undermine your credibility.
Good stuff, as always. I'll embed the video on my own website.
FIGHT TERRORISM: VOTE PROGRESSIVE!
BE A PATRIOT: END THE WARS.
No way, if this goes to the Supreme court. they've already shown they value "corporate free speech" over any other.
Let's see what happens with the Murdoch scandal; if Obama "justice dept' starts and investigation, there may still be hope. but I think the only way will be if the US is embarrassed enough to by Britain's investigation.
Murdoch is flying over today to "contain" it. It ought to cost him a pretty penny. But hey! He's one of the most important MOTUs so, i doubt much will come of this. Remember how many time s we thought we had Kkkkkarl Rove and he slimed away from us?
Ah, Thom...I think you said it: Up next the Supreme Court.
Right? Right. Right...
And there's the rub — for maybe the next couple of SCOTUS appointments at least. The lower courts can rule in favor of the best interests of the majority, but we already see where the Roberts Court wants to steer this country, and it's definately not to end Big anything. I don't know if WTP can pull this off, but we need to keep the Nominator In Chief in friendly (more liberal) hands not just in 2012 but maybe 2016 or 2020 to ease the SCOTUS back to merely being right-of-center, rather than the 5-4 Hard Right space they currently occupy.
The last civil war was fought over what? The nice answer is "to end slavery" and is correct from the moral perspective. However there are enough historians that acknowledge the war was fought over competing economic philosophies (to use the cheap labor of free people in factories over using slaves on yesterday's equivalent of factory-farms) to have resonance with where we stand today. Meaning the brink on which we stand today.
The monied interests were denied the cheapest form of labor — slaves — by that last war, and are mightily struggling to put the next best thing in place: We the Peasants. This 30+ year long effort by the monied elites is an attempt to end democracy and replace it with a new corporate fuedal state (literally a variance of Fascism, by definition). And they are very nearly there. They, as a class, are acting so boldly (re: WI, MI, VA, etc.) because they know how close to their goal they are already.
The majority of WTP needs to wake up to that fact, and maybe we are starting to wake up. Civil unrest will surely follow that waking if our elected representatives do not start heeding our plight and act on our behalf in defense of our way of governing.
Really THOM, Actually Sheriff Joe is my hero as he is dealing the situation at hand. First of all, these people who are enjoying tent city, should have thought longer and harder before they did what they did that got there, living off the state. The Republican party continues to run around in circles looking for theeee canidate that can beat Obama. They really have a canidate, AZ Governor Jan Brewer is the only one who is dealing with the serious problems the illegal immigration has caused in her state and dealing with the budget problems by heaven forbid, raised taxes to cover the free spending practices before she came into office. When we get all local law enforcement agencies at all levels to arrest and deport the illegals that are taking away good paying jobs which have lowered the pay scale and taken away benefits the employers of these people are allowed to do.
Amen, the ONLY voice speaking up for US is Bernie Sanders!! Reagan was the first to apply the bludgeon and extortion to enable the Greedy and Unscrupulous to destroy Our Once Proud Nation. The Republicrooks are what they have always been, rampant Greed and Corruption, using any dirty, unscrupulous, treasonous means to plunder what Honest, Hard Working Americans built. The Democrats are GUTLESS and don't even pretend to represent decent America. The President (Hope & Change) has betrayed US at every turn, we are left with the inevitable return to the
Feudal System!!!
Unfortunately, the legislate-from-the-bench fascists who comprise the majority of the Supreme Court will side as they always do: with the corporations and against humanity. But at least this lower court ruling in favor of humanity is welcome sign that not all of our courts have been packed with robo-judges.
That these men know exactly what they are doing and that it is indeed political was proven by the Citizens/United case in which they had to reach and create a reason to judge and go beyond it's requirements. That alone is impeachable for a Justice.
Bob
Pres. Obama is going too fast and thinks his thoughts are, uh well founded. I just avoided superior. However; the problem of loss of humility is a dire one with this man. It takes some slowing down and the fast version has no depth and therefore yes; the reasoning of the shallow/selfish/greedy can make sense at that speedy and proud level.
Obviously the man could do better but he has been attracted to the VIP's from the very first to validate his position and he is using the criteria of the right to do that.
Government in the dictionary is not listed under business. So we do not run government like a business, no more than we operate a family like a business or a church at it's existence level. Government is not family and so we don't do all of the same things that a family does. If we don't keep those very important differences at a decision making level, we obviiously will see what the far right does see in their blindness. The simple old dictionary might just help. Government is a government. The President , is not a CEO of the government as that position does not exist. He is a public servant with the presiding position in the government of the United States. He has to get back to that.
Bob
"I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Thom: I have to disagree with you in the spirit of the law/Constitution regarding the Supreme justices and over-ruling of legislation.
Legislation is law. The Supreme Court justices take an oath to uphold the Constitution. When a case comes before the court that requires either that they uphold that legislation, or law, or the Constitution, by their oath of office they are required to stand for the Constitution. How can they judge by the law if the law abrogates the Constitution itself. Obviously they must defend the Constitution.
Justice Marshall wrote in his opinion in the Madison Vs Marbury decision... "The question, whether an act, repugnant to the constitution, can become the law of the land, is a question deeply interesting to the United States; but, happily, not of an intricacy proprtioned to its interest. It seems only necessary to recognize certain principles, supposed to have been long and well established to decide it."
"That the people have an original right to establish, for their future government, such principles as, in their opinion, shall most conduse to their own happiness, -----"
I hesitate to break into the track of the words for the sake of brevity because those words are all incredibly important.
"If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the constituin is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constituion, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.
Those then who controvert the principle that the constitution is to be considered, in court as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the constitution, and see only the law."
I think that this is your requirement by not looking to their oath as well as to the exact wording of the Constitution.
Yes; Thom; Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, etc. are not true to the Constitution, nor perhaps can they be, as bent as they are by other forces. They should be relieved of the duty that they cannot help but violate. They know that they are doing politics rather than judgement and that is unforgiveable.
"This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written constitutions. It would declare that an act, which, according to the principles and theory of our government, is entirely void; is yet, in practice completely obligatory. It would declare, that if the legislature shall do what is expressly forbidden, such act, notwithstanding the express prohibition, is in reality effectual. --------."
The man is looking through the SPIRIT and purpose of the law, that foundation of Justice as seen in the purpose of our Constitution, the Preamble. As intelligent men were invited to do the same, one would hope that avoiding that purpose would soon stop and we could begin to use the purpose of our Constitution on our behalf as a people. Hopefully, you would read the decision slowly, yourself, to see the wisdom of the writing. Yes; the Supreme Court is either Supreme or it is just another clerical exercise.
Bob
What a wonderful idea.
turned on the tv when i got home today in time to see thom talking with a panel of three young women. the ignorance of one of the women was typical of many americans ignorance of the wealth disparity problem in this country. she could not understand why we might need to redistribute wealth in this nation. why bring the wealthy down from their lofty perches. leave them where they are and work to elevate the economic status of the poor.
one problem with this. dollars are nothing. dollars are merely a unit of measurment for resources. this country has a finite amount of resources. there are a finite amount of resources in the world. monetary units show how those resources are divided among the poulation. in order for one person to have more another must have less. the amount of total resources worldwide is a constant.
when the very rich continue to get richer and richer....in other words hoarding more and more of the resources.....eventually there is not enough to divide among the rest
What ever the Supreme Court decides we have to realize WE CAN QUESTION IT!!!
http://neocon-panic-attacks.blogspot.com/2010/10/scotus-justice-stephen-breyer-assumes.html
A bus heads to a factory, 2 bosses earning $1 Million each and 20 workers each earning $8 per hour. All started at the same parking lot and wikll end up at the same destination but each morning the bus needs to be fueled and it is the 20 workers who are to pay for the gas if they want to get to work and earn their daily wage. The bosses sit up front and control the speed and direction while paying little to nothing for the ride and also taking fare from the workers to board.
This is how I see the economy, how long will we allow them to take us for a ride and start demanding alternate transport and freedom to choose out own path?
WOW- where is the rest of THAT story hiding?
Well, we KNOW how thigns will go at the "supreme court"- don't we!
What a joke...
Posted 7-7, but could not find it..so here goes again on 7-8-11Each of us needs to serve as examples for a more authentic society. The struggles between political parties is so severe that little or no communication exists between them. With a dominant Corporatocracy running both parties, especially evident in the RepubliCON party, the scene is set for a GREED versus NEED societal mush and the conflicts therefrom.I propose that we need to go partyless and to have term limits in all political offices as two ways to attend to the GREED-NEED dicotomy.To put the appropriate sting into this partyless system, term limits installed at all levels of political life (Federal, State, Local) would do wonders to bring a level of participation in Democracy that does not now exist. Imagine what it would be like if an elected congressperson did not, from day one, look to the next election, but was performing as if this were the last term, which it would be. In this scheme, there would be no pensions for the one term politician in congress or the presidency, applying the one term rule, and those elected for their one term would, at long last, be in this for the service to his/ her country. The economy for the non-pensioned politician would, in itself, save millions for tax-payers. In this brave appropriate world, the same one term limit would also apply to justices, supreme or otherwise, who would be elected by the people and not appointed for life. Real change requires a new reality that is based on a participatory democracy which goes way, way beyond anything that now exists.Sooner than later, 85% of all issues would be voted on by the population of all voters, thus emphasizing real Democracy at work. The Presidential revolving committee serving as The President, would only be advisory and would take its issues to the voting public. I dream of a better America in so many ways and look to that betterment with enthusiasm.
Well, if Obama rapes us out of our social security, I will definitely not vote for him again...no matter what. If he does that., then he will most likely not appoint a supreme court justice progressive enough to suit anyone but the Republicans anyway. In fact, I believe he is a Republican. He has certainly given away everything else.
Of course "The Government" is not one unchanging evil monolith that taxes hard-working people so that they can continue to feed the "lazy worthless masses" as the Republicans would like us to believe. The Government works out just fine for most of the wealthy people, CEOS, banksters, and corporations that are on the dole. That part they don't want you to know about. But of course, we do! Corporate welfare is alive and well and taking over. We need to somehow keep stressing that it is not "the government" but more specifically "the corporate welfare government" differentiated from "our government" that needs to be denigrated and not the one that is by the people and for the people. The Republicans are good at using psycho-active sound bites( and bytes), no matter how idiotic or inane, to color issues to their favor. Maybe we need to start calling the Republicans Satanic Monetarists...bumper stickers....T-shirts...whatever. For hypocrites who wear religion on their sleeves..this should really torque their jaws a little.