July 11-13: At Netroots Nation

The Hidden History of Guns and the 2nd Amendment Book Tour Is Coming...

  • Saturday, June 22: Los Angeles, CA 3:00pm - KPFK Speaker Series: Thom Hartmann (Stephanie Miller will be joining Thom) on The Hidden History of Guns. UCLA Dodd Hall 147, 315 Portola Plaza, Los Angeles - Get tkts here https://www.facebook.com/events/2263735727213646/
  • Sunday, June 23: SEATTLE, WA 7:30pm
    Location: Town Hall, 1119 8th Ave, Seattle (West Entrance) w/Elliott Bay Book Company
  • Tuesday, June 25: SAN FRANCISCO, CA 7:00pm
    Location: First Church, 2345 Channing Way, Berkeley w/The Booksmith
    Here’s the Facebook event:https://www.facebook.com/events/2418269571727663/And here’s the link to purchase tickets: https://hiddenhistoryofguns.bpt.me/
  • Friday, June 28: CHICAGO, IL 7:00pm
    Location: Frugal Muse, 7511 Lemont Rd. #146 (Chestnut Court Shopping Center), Darien
  • Saturday, June 29: MINNEAPOLIS, MN 7:00pm
    Location: Common Good Books, 38 S. Snelling Ave, St. Paul
  • Friday, July 12: PHILADELPHIA, PA 4:15pm - At Netroots Nation
    Location: PA Convention Center, 1101 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA

Become a Thom Supporter- Click the Patreon button

IT was Ronnie Reagan's regime that propped up psychopathic right wing governments in central America ,invited them to the United States and gave them legitimacy by calling them friends of America and covertly supplied them with CIA training and US military equipment, which these monsters used to kill over 300,000 of their own people while Reagan was in power. Reagan was so anti communist he was prepared to kill every living man ,women and child ,innocent are not in Central America, which he claimed falsely is where it was spreading.

Reagan's power his presidency ,obtained by committing treason against his country, by colluding with the Ayatollah of Iran to hold American hostages till the 1980 elections were over to make President Jimmy Carter look weak and ineffectual. Reagan in the end turned to be a mass murderer passed off by his right wing spin masters and the corporate owned media as a stern but gentle and kind doddering old man. Nothing could have been further from the truth.

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/5130

http://m.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Global-Viewpoint/2013/0305/Argo-helps-...

Comments

Roland de Brabant's picture
Roland de Brabant 2 years 14 weeks ago
#1

While Ray-guns was guilty as you have charged, Zap, he was hardly unique. From the landing at Plymouth Rock until today treatment of the Native Americans has been execrable and criminal. It would have been better if, after the victory at the Little Big Horn Sitting Bull had adopted a policy of deporting immigrants. Immediately after the US Civil War the US embarked upon a campaign of conquering Latin America. Even prior to WWI the US started demanding "its place among the Big Boys" to participate in the colonialization of Asia and Africa. With WWII the US began a campaign to conquer the whole world that is still the basis of US foreign policy.

Recall that the Korean and Viet Nam wars both began during the Truman Administration. Eisenhower authorized mock air raids against the Russians.

Singling out Ray-guns is a little like singling out Capone.

Roland

rs allen 2 years 14 weeks ago
#2

So I ask once again roland of your contention that at one time, 'america was a great but flawed country'.

Just when was that exactly?

zapdam's picture
zapdam 2 years 14 weeks ago
#3

Roland, I'm well aware Reagan isn't the first presidential mass murderer, you can add Obama with his murderous drone program to the list Do you not think I find it an obscenity to watch the media or the democrats white wash his crimes , treat him like a rock star, but my post focused on Ronnie Reagan , Obama or not Reagan is no less a monster, a man who aided and abetted mass murder justified with philosophy.

Coalage3 2 years 14 weeks ago
#4

Here's another history lesson as offered by Shelby Steele: www.wsj.com/articles/the-exhaustion-of-american-liberalism-1488751826?mod=e2two

Excerpts:

Perhaps the Obama presidency was the culmination of the age of white guilt, so that this guiltiness has entered its denouement. There are so many public moments now in which liberalism’s old weapon of stigmatization shoots blanks—Elizabeth Warren in the Senate reading a 30-year-old letter by Coretta Scott King, hoping to stop Jeff Sessions’s appointment as attorney general. There it was with deadly predictability: a white liberal stealing moral authority from a black heroine in order to stigmatize a white male as racist. When Ms. Warren was finally told to sit, there was real mortification behind her glaring eyes.

This liberalism evolved within a society shamed by its past. But that shame has weakened now. Our new conservative president rolls his eyes when he is called a racist, and we all—liberal and conservative alike—know that he isn’t one. The jig is up. Bigotry exists, but it is far down on the list of problems that minorities now face. I grew up black in segregated America, where it was hard to find an open door. It’s harder now for young blacks to find a closed one.

Today’s liberalism is an anachronism. It has no understanding, really, of what poverty is and how it has to be overcome. It has no grip whatever on what American exceptionalism is and what it means at home and especially abroad. Instead it remains defined by an America of 1965—an America newly opening itself to its sins, an America of genuine goodwill, yet lacking in self-knowledge.

This liberalism came into being not as an ideology but as an identity. It offered Americans moral esteem against the specter of American shame. This made for a liberalism devoted to the idea of American shamefulness. Without an ugly America to loathe, there is no automatic esteem to receive. Thus liberalism’s unrelenting current of anti-Americanism.

Let’s stipulate that, given our history, this liberalism is understandable. But American liberalism never acknowledged that it was about white esteem rather than minority accomplishment. Four thousand shootings in Chicago last year, and the mayor announces that his will be a sanctuary city. This is moral esteem over reality; the self-congratulation of idealism. Liberalism is exhausted because it has become a corruption.

zapdam's picture
zapdam 2 years 14 weeks ago
#5

Coalage3, friends and supporters of a party that produces consecutive mass murderers as presidents, who also betray their own country through treason , cannot post righteous comments, because your vote aided and abetted their treachery and the murderous spree while in power, so you're indirectly as guilty as they are in murder they carried out. You'd think if you had one once of remorse or compassion for those who died by the hundreds of thousands, if not millions as a result of right wing American regimes, you'd spend the rest of life trying to atone for the crimes you participated in, but instead you come here on this site and try to defend yourself and these monsters you gave power too. There is no hope for people like you.

DdC's picture
DdC 2 years 14 weeks ago
#6

“History is a set of lies agreed upon."
~ Napoleon Bonaparte

Coalage3 2 years 14 weeks ago
#7

You are a joke Zap. Your democrat presidents have killed just as many people in this world as republican presidents, maybe more. You can take that BS nonsense somewhere else where someone will actually believe it. Try Democratic Underground...the posters there will believe anything. You'll fit right in.

Legend 2 years 14 weeks ago
#8
Quote Coalage3:

You are a joke Zap. Your democrat presidents have killed just as many people in this world as republican presidents, maybe more. You can take that BS nonsense somewhere else where someone will actually believe it. Try Democratic Underground...the posters there will believe anything. You'll fit right in.

Typical right wing troll non-factual post on this site. Bush alone is involved in more than all of the Democratic Presidents combined. Compare what Nixon did in Vietnam. Look at facts before you post.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_war_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%932014)

zapdam's picture
zapdam 2 years 14 weeks ago
#9

Richard Nixon in order to gain political advantage in the 1968 presidential election contest, committed treason with an act of sabotage against then sitting President Johnson sincere attempt at peace talks with the receptive Vietnamese, who by the end of the war would lose approx 4 million citizens.

In 1968 the US was at war with the communist north Vietnamese and had by that time seen approx 17 thousand US servicemen killed in Vietnam. Tricky Dick's act of treason against his country would result in another 41 thousand young American boys ( average age 19) dying in Vietnam from 1968 to 1975.

Once elected, Nixon secretly bombed neutral Cambodia, killing hundreds of thousands of Cambodians, in it self a war crime. The resulting Nixon/ Kissinger illegal bombing would weaken Cambodia and give rise to the fanatical Khmer Rouge take over of the country, who would later kill 2 million of their own people in what would become known as the 'killing fields'.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_in_the_Vietnam_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide

Coalage3 2 years 14 weeks ago
#10

Your beloved Kennedy and Johnson are responsible for Vietnam. WWI? Democrat Woodrow Wilson. WWII? Democrat FDR. Nuking the Japanese? Give 'em Hell Harry Truman. Korea? Give'em hell Harry again (He makes the list twice). Nam? Kennedy and Johnson. Nixon inherited Nam. But of course, left wingers like to forget that fact.

And yes, Bush get credit for Iraq and Afghanistan.

According to Wikileaks here are the American casualty numbers:

WW1 116,516

WW2 405,399

Korea 54,246

Vietnam 58,209

Iraq-Afghanistan 7,222

There are your facts Legend. Looks like the Democrats are a bunch of blood thirsty war mongers. No wonder you guys nominated Hillary. She fits right in with this pattern considering her undeniable war monger roots. No wonder McCain, Graham, and Kristol supported her. Good neo-cons all. How does it feel to be a member of the War Party? The democrats should seriously change their party name. Maybe it might help them win back some of the elections they have lost lately.

Legend 2 years 14 weeks ago
#11

Okay. 620,000 died under Republican Lincoln.

Coalage3 2 years 14 weeks ago
#12

Ooh...that's a good one. You really got me there.

rs allen 2 years 14 weeks ago
#13

It pays to look at the reasons Germany got so far out of hand to begin with. Hint hint, it has to do with empire over reach.

It pays to look at why the US stayed out of European affairs for as long as we did. Uh uh, could it be because some interest within was busy helping build the German war machine?

I'll leave it to you to extrapolate those thoughts to todays world.

Legend 2 years 14 weeks ago
#14

In recent years, Nixon prolonged the Vietnam War 5 years with a loss of 22000 American soldiers Peace was at hand in 1968 when he bargained to prolong the war. He also expaned it into Cambodia and Laos killing millions and weakening the Cambodia Government to allow the killing fields of the Khmer Rouge. The Vietnam War killed about 1350000 total with it pretty evenly split between Nixon and Johnson. Kennady had minimal and had us on the road out before he was assasinated. The Iraqi war killed about 500000 Iraqi's. All based on a lie by Bush. Afganistan civilian deaths are at about 26000. On top of all of this is Wounded. It is not a pretty picture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

https://www.google.com/#q=vietnam+war+total+deaths&*

https://www.google.com/#q=how+many+civilians+died+in+afghanistan&*

Coalage3 2 years 14 weeks ago
#15

Well then I guess you wouldn't mind the firebombing of the German cities to be included with FDR's totals. Or the nuking of the Japanese.

By the way, there was a strong isolationist faction in the US during the 20's and 30's that said we should mind our own business and let Europe take care of its own affairs. But, things didn't work out that way.

As the saying goes...war is hell.

rs allen 2 years 14 weeks ago
#16

Screw it Legend, if you want to play footsy with a white nationalist I guess that's your business.

True story; at one time I was living on land allowed by some kind people (the wife). One of them happened (unknown to me at the time) to be a soon ret'd pilot of the USAF that flew bombing missions over Cambodia, now get this, he was happy to do it because he could get the extra combat pay. If if that wasn't venal enough on his part, across the road after he came home a new home was built and in moved a man that was an expat from WWii. A German soldier, he too had all the excuses.

Yeah they got along famously.

Enough said. F'kem let them starve.

Roland de Brabant's picture
Roland de Brabant 2 years 14 weeks ago
#17
Quote Coalage3:Your beloved Kennedy and Johnson are responsible for Vietnam.

Pretty remarkable since the US got involved in Viet Nam in 1948 under Truman,

Quote Coal Age: WWI? Democrat Woodrow Wilson.

WWI began in 1914 and the US involvement began at the end of it in 1917.

Quote Coal Age: WWII? Democrat FDR.

The US began supporting the German Nazi Party during the Hoover administration; George Herbert Walker and Prescott Bush were instrumental in making something out of Adolph Hitler.

Quote Coal Age: Nuking the Japanese? Give 'em Hell Harry Truman. Korea? Give'em hell Harry again (He makes the list twice).

Congratulations! You found a guilty Democrat, Coal.

Quote Coal Age: Nam? Kennedy and Johnson.

Wrong again, Coal. Repeating the same nonsense does not make it true. Actually, Jack Kennedy ordered US troops to withdraw from Southeast Asia, which cost him his life.

Quote Coal Age: Nixon inherited Nam. But of course, left wingers like to forget that fact.

Nixon deliberately prolonged the Vietnam War, and most of the Americans and most of the Vietnamese who died in that war died during the Nixon Administration, so it is Nixon's war.

Quote Coal Age:And yes, Bush get credit for Iraq and Afghanistan.

I guess there is hope for you. US involvement in this chapter of Iraq's history was primarily during the Ray-gun years, expanded during GHWB's time and continued during Clinton's. Carter took the US into Afghanistan, Reagan and GHW Bush increased that involvement and Clinton continued it. But, of course, you are correct, it was W who really made them the big mess that they are still.

Quote Coal Age:According to Wikileaks here are the American casualty numbers:

WW1 116,516

WW2 405,399

Korea 54,246

Vietnam 58,209

Iraq-Afghanistan 7,222

There are your facts Legend. Looks like the Democrats are a bunch of blood thirsty war mongers. No wonder you guys nominated Hillary. She fits right in with this pattern considering her undeniable war monger roots. No wonder McCain, Graham, and Kristol supported her. Good neo-cons all. How does it feel to be a member of the War Party? The democrats should seriously change their party name. Maybe it might help them win back some of the elections they have lost lately.

While the Democratic Party has its share of warmongering criminals, they are no match for the Republicans. And this is why progressives must leave the neo-liberal (fascist) controlled Democratic Party and form our own Progressive Socialist Party.

Roland

Coalage3 2 years 13 weeks ago
#18

When Kennedy was inaugurated in Jan 1961, there were 500 military "advisors" in Nam. When Nixon was inaugurated in Jan 1969, there were 500,000 soldiers in Nam. I don't think Truman had much to do with that.

Who were the presidents when the US got involved in these wars? Your revisionist history of the democrats is just that. Your attempt to minimize their war-like tendencies is laughable and indefensible. Your last candidate for president had the support of Bill Kristol, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham. 'Nuff said...

Legend 2 years 13 weeks ago
#19

The parties have changed dramtically through the years. Would Lincoln be a Republican today? Hell, Reagan is not conservative enough to be a Republican today. Nixon helped to start the EPA and now Trump wants it dismantled.

Coalage3 2 years 13 weeks ago
#20

So what? And the democrats used to embrace religion instead of trying to run away from it. The democrats used to be for the working man but that went away too over the last few years.

Roland de Brabant's picture
Roland de Brabant 2 years 13 weeks ago
#21
Quote Coalage3:When Kennedy was inaugurated in Jan 1961, there were 500 military "advisors" in Nam. When Nixon was inaugurated in Jan 1969, there were 500,000 soldiers in Nam. I don't think Truman had much to do with that.

I agree; you do not think. Truman was a Democrat. It was Eisenhower who created the fictional "Republic of South Viet Nam".

Quote Coal Age:Who were the presidents when the US got involved in these wars? Your revisionist history of the democrats is just that. Your attempt to minimize their war-like tendencies is laughable and indefensible. Your last candidate for president had the support of Bill Kristol, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham. 'Nuff said...

Throw in the Civil War, the Opium Wars, the Boxer Rebellion, the Philippine Insurrection, the Spanish-American War, the Mexican-American War, the "War on Drugs", numerous little wars in Latin America and now the "War on Terrorism" and the answer is the same: Republican. My last candidate for President, Bernie Sanders, had no neo-con support.

Coalage3 2 years 13 weeks ago
#22

Your candidate was not nominated, let alone elected. Mine wasn't either so who cares? Go ahead and throw in all the other wars you want. The tally will not come out the way you think. But go ahead and be delusional. I know its a sympton of the democrat party-left/progressivism.

As I said, the last democrat candidate for president was a neo-con. Perhaps that is another overlooked reason why she lost.

Add comment

Login or register to post comments

Sign Up For The Thom Hartmann Newsletter Now

  • Discover the Videos of the Day
  • Get The Daily Stack - Each & Every Article that Is Researched for the Program
  • Read Thom's Daily Blog

Here's what the feud and reconciliation between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson can teach us about civility

Thom plus logo Donald Trump did not invent the art of the political insult but he's inflamed the level of vitriolic public discourse and incivility to a new low unmatched by other presidents. In a tainted tradition that has permeated our history, other presidents have not been immune to dishing out acerbic insults against one another.