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.
Yes! We have limits Thom tells caller concerned with wealth inequities. Time to re-visit Jonathan Livingston Seagall.
@Richard woah...did you leave it on the Just Fans thread? Because the entire page is empty...or scrubbed? lol Or, did you leave it in the most recent thread on the actual Barack Obama page, and did you leave it under Richard Adolf? When? -- I tried to look for it. But you can see, even OFA members are ravenous. And as Thom mentioned the other day- Bold Progressives is a good group of OFA members.
@FoodFascist: Tell folk to read MY comments at Obama on Facebook . . .
Ask Netscape what they think about the Browser Wars.
Oops, you can't, because they were driven out of business by MS's predatory practices.
Thom, the "civil rights" GOP of the 1960's couldn't win a single GOP primary in 2009.
USA life expectancy is going down over the last five.
Thom, if we have less "dynastic wealth", it is because we have more "new super-wealth". A billion dollars is not enough to even get you on the Forbes 500 richest Americans.
the rich corporate leaders thoughout history did everything to create more wealth with no regard for the human family. corporate leaders are lead by greed anger and folly.
Here is the answer- this is how the rich get rich
Alqaeda catches on! ...http://humantrafficking.change.org/blog/view/human_trafficking_is_al-qaedas_new_business_model
Did MEDFAT just call Thom Hartmann's argument illiterate- ha! Small vocabulary Fat Man.
@brian - shuks- was hoping for a dream come true this Christmas....
Mr MEDFAT,
IF wealth does not create poverty, then why are the rich all over our government. ITs because they get in the system and change the rules to hog all the resources you dumb shill.
food facist in the furture
if our progressive politicians want to create change they must speak out against personhood of corporation on the house and senate floors. what is needed is real statesmen that have the courage to speak up against personhood of corporations. dr. king gave his life for his beliefs . i would like to see a progressive that will stake his reelection to voice his outrage about personhood for corporations . lets push are progressive politicians to become real statesmen.
Pentagon's Role in Global Catastrophe: Add Climate Havoc to War Crimes
By Sara Flounders
URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16609
@brian, when you say 'you can see sanders'- do you mean you are watching the Senator on C-span now, or are you envisioning that it would be reasonable for Sanders to do such a thing in the future.
i can see senator sanders speaking out against personhood of corporations on the floor of the senate.
Sometimes I just don't understand why Thom klings to certain ideas. Let's not forget that the tea baggers (and their handlers) opposed the stimulus package and health care reform from the start. It isn't that they oppose spending money on nothing useful; they oppose spending money for anything if it comes out of their back pocket--especially if it helps "others."
Of course McCain would support getting corporate money out of politics. He's has a boat-load of money to finance his campaign. Almost all US senators are millionaires. Does anyone think that this club of 100 gives a damn about the working poor in America? The health bill is a joke.
Want to communicate back to Barack Obama? Check out Barack Obama on Facebook. You might be pleasantly surprised to read the comments there.
The comment that North America without European contact would look like Africa today is remarkably naive and self-serving, because we only know what Africa looks like in the post-colonial period, after European "contact." I guess I'll have to work on something for tomorrow to clarify what I mean.
I unsubscribed from 'Obama's' email list on Friday saying Obama "needs to stop listening to the likes of Rahm Emanuel and start listening to the likes of Dr. Howard Dean".
Anyway, regarding the current topic: in order to survive we need to realize one basic aspect that civilizations of the old have long believed - without 'others' there is no 'us'! In order for 'us' to survive and prosper, 'others' will have to be around and prosper as well!
our challenge as progressives is to work to end personhood of corporations and to have real campaign finance reform. we must create great unity in this pursuit. we have a great spokesman for this in thom hartmann who has raise his voice against personhood for corporations. other voices we have are david c. korten, john perkins,jim hightower and ourselves. i would like to see a great wave that will push our supreme court and our government to make our constitution strong again to represent the people and not corporations. we must understand that corporations are geared to make profit at all cost and are beholden to only the shareholders and the executives
I request that all progressives start referring to medical insurance CORPORATIONS as such. Companies are entirely different entities and medical insurance has nothing to do with health.
Thanks, karen
Most people seem fixated on the Israeli-Palestinian and Afghanistan issues as the principle foreign policy problems that Obama has inherited from the Bush administration. I happen to disagree with most people on this blog in regard to who is to blame for the failure of peace efforts in Palestine; the Palestinians have left too many opportunities to pass because of their lack of statesmen willing to compromise, and miscalculating the patience of the Israeli electorate. The failure of so-called leaders like Arafat, who foolishly attempted to grab for more than even an Israeli administration committed to a peace agreement was willing to give, ended-up creating conditions now much less favorable to the Palestinians.
In Afghanistan, the attempt to impose a centralized government flew in the face of reality on the ground and of history, particularly given the lack of sufficient troops early on to ensure its security, and Pakistan proving to be an unreliable ally. The only mechanism for insuring stability in a post-Taliban regime—infusing money to rebuild the economy and infrastructure—proved to be yet another disastrous failure of forethought by the Bush/Cheney regime. It is difficult to see how the proposed “surge” will ensure sufficient security to even begin the process of reconstruction, short of persuading the Taliban to accept a “national unity” political arrangement.
But there is, however, a more dangerous problem looming on the horizon that has been given little attention by the media. Iran’s alleged quest for nuclear weaponry is well-known, and its leaders doubtless believe that acquiring a nuclear bomb will “enhance” their power and prestige in the Islamic world (particularly since Pakistan with its bombs cannot even control its own borders). What is less well-known is that it isn’t just that the U.S. and its European allies that believe Iran is a “rogue” state, but that the Turks and Sunni Muslim nations think that Iran is. Once, Middle Eastern leaders claimed to desire a “nuclear-free zone.” Now, it’s a nuclear free-for-all. Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordon, Morocco, Libya and other Middle Eastern states all have plans to build nuclear power plants in the near future, with the help of Russia, the U.S. and France (most ironically, I might say). Several of these Muslim countries are doing so because they do not want Iran to get the upper hand in nuclear technology—and with it, the ability to produce a nuclear bomb to use to threaten them with. Given the restive state of the Middle East, the covert desire for other nations in the region to develop nuclear arms in response to Iran’s supposed ambitions suggests more instability—and in a region seemingly most susceptible to the kind of tensions that would lead to nuclear war.