Suspend your concerns about Hartmann for a moment and read this....

[Joinfortmill]

https://hartmannreport.com/p/is-the-anti-mccarthy-crowd-in-the

'There’s absolutely no doubt that a default by the United States would cripple our economy and lead to a crisis not seen since the Republican Great Depression....Congressman Ralph Norman was asked if he and his colleagues actually intended to force McCarthy (or any other Speaker) to “shut down the government rather than raise the debt ceiling,” Norman replied: “That’s a non-negotiable item.” When asked if he was talking about shutting down the government or actually defaulting on the debt, Norman said: “That’s why you need to be planning now what agencies — what path you’re gonna take now to trim government. Tell the programs you’re going to get to this number. And you do that before chairs are picked.”

'Is the Anti-McCarthy Crowd in the Bag for the Billionaires, Putin, or Both?''...investigative journalist Dave Troy noting that America’s rightwing billionaires aren’t the only ones who want the US government to fail. So does Vladimir Putin...I plugged the names of each of the 20 Republicans who voted against McCarthy...along with the word “Russia.” Here’s what I found about 15 of them:

Andy Biggs voted against legislation to document Russian war crimes in Ukraine, as did Paul Gosar and Scott Perry.
Matt Gaetz, Dan Bishop, Paul Gosar, Ralph Norman, and Scott Perry all voted against suspending normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus.Dan Bishop, Matt Gaetz, Andy Biggs, Paul Gosar, and Chip Roy all voted against a bill to ban imports of Russian oil and gas.Those four also voted against legislation to strip Russia from “most favored nation status” by the World Trade Organization.Paul Gosar and Matt Rosendale both voted against a resolution that reaffirmed US support for Ukrainian sovereignty.John Brecheen is new to Congress...Voting against Sweden and Finland joining NATO, a pet Putin peeve, were Michael Cloud, Andy Biggs, Dan Bishop, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz, Bob Good, Ralph Norman, and Chip Roy.Eli Crane says of the US supporting Ukraine...Paul Gosar tweeted: “Putin puts Russia first as he should.” Mary Miller, Bob Good, Ralph Norman, Andy Biggs, and Matt Gaetz co-sponsored legislation to forbid any further delivery of military equipment to Ukraine.Mary Miller tweeted: “I will vote NO on sending additional money to Ukraine…” Scott Perry voted against aid to Ukraine....'

[dchill]

1. Good stuff! 👍

[Arazi]

2. K&R. Dave Troy has been on this for months

Now it’s all out in the open.

If anyone decides to dismiss this because it’s Hartmann, the original research and reports are actually Dave Troy’s work. Thom is just amplifying it

[dalton99a]

3. McCarthy could improve his chances by promising a bill to prohibit any aid to Ukraine

[live love laugh]

4. Hartmann's a great resource. Why the "concern"?

[OMGWTF]

10. THIS! THIS! THIS!

I listen to the Thom Hartmann show almost every day. He's written more books than I have read. His research is impeccable, and he will freely admit if he's mistaken about something.

[live love laugh]

11. IKR !! 🤷🏽‍♀️🤷🏽‍♀️

[Magoo48]

115. Yup, he's well informed, and when he's not, he says so.

[elleng]

24. Right

[markodochartaigh]

44. "Hartmann's a great resource". I definitely agree

Full disclosure: I give $10/month to support his program and $10/month to support FSTV. I realize that neither are popular in many Democratic circles, but I believe that they both align closely with my personal values.

[Hortensis]

88. On the plus side, there's no reason to assume Russian information

warfare themes their targets admired are also believed by Putin or in some way align with Putin's "values," -- only that they further his purposes.

I do wish, though, that more people thought beyond their values (and "Thom's," of course!) to the Russian hard-liners' very well known goals. How would burning their furniture to keep from freezing in the winter fit with admirers' values if Russia succeeded in bringing down the U.S.? While they still had furniture, or a place to burn it? Standing in line to fill bottles with water and get a paper bowl of rice while it lasted?

The flip side of not sharing the "values" of Russia's much scarier and far more competent version of the Republican chaos caucus and those who "share their values."

[Kid Berwyn]

5. Hartmann's a great read and a great Democrat.

DUers who don’t know that should learn more.

[SalviaBlue]

6. K & R

[Ninga]

7. Yes, Hartmann's historic take always passes the verify test.

This article is outstanding as well.
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2022/12/18/dying-phase-reaganism-and-its-hideous

[Jeebo]

8. Who has "concerns" about Thom Hartmann?

He's great. "Thom Terrific" I call him.

-- Ron

[dchill]

9. He was on RT for some time. That's a concern.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

14. Seven years on the payroll of Putin's propaganda network.

[dchill]

18. OK. Big concern.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

19. Yeah, because the Russian propaganda machine did nothing to disrupt American democracy.

How silly to have "concerns."

[FoxNewsSucks]

63. the current direction of CNN

is insidious and far more dangerous

[Just A Box Of Rain]

70. You are too funny

[FoxNewsSucks]

93. I'd rather be funny. It's far preferable to being the corporate shill

some are. Few things are lower than a craven lickspittle, wouldn't you agree?

[Just A Box Of Rain]

94. I think enemies of our party who claim good Democrats are corporate shills

are about as low as they come, frankly.

[FoxNewsSucks]

95. Corporate/billionaire interests ARE the enemies of the Democratic party

One can only wonder about those who take the side of corporations and billionaires over working-class Americans. No corporate shill is a good Democrat, obviously, as that is clearly the epitome of opposition to what Democrats are supposed to stand for.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

96. One can only wonder about those who come on a forum for Democrats to falsely accuse

good Democrats of being "corporate shills."

Seems suspicious, to say the least.

[FoxNewsSucks]

98. Certainly by those with a purpose, it's claimed to be "suspicious".

To everyone else, it's all quite clear.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

99. Shades of 2016

[FoxNewsSucks]

100. Whatever keeps you calm, right?

Good night to you.

[betsuni]

102. Yes, that Conservadem/corporate shill/neoliberal/corporatist slander needs to stay in 2016.

Amazing it's still around -- today an "I'm an FDR Democrat" sighting. Hilarious!

[yaesu]

46. At the time Hatmann and several other progressives were on RT,

RT was as progessive as MSNBC which is.t saying much. This was long before we found out Russia was interfering with our elections. RT also let progressives talk about any topic without interfering, unlike US networks. I have been listening to, watching the Hartman show for around 20 years.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

47. "Progressive?" I don't think we share definitions of that term in common.

He served a purpose that served Putin's interests.

[yaesu]

67. Proof? nt

[Just A Box Of Rain]

69. Try not to get sick:

[scarletlib]

52. Thank you. At one point you could get RT on cable. I watched it myself for a while.

And I am not nor ever have been a Putin lover. However, at least in the beginning there was still freedom of press and expression in Russia.

A lot of progressives did a program with RT because there were none to few options on the public airways in US

Fortunately that has greatly improved.

Thom stated on his radio show that he was never compelled or obligated to support Putin viewpoints or propaganda. I believe him.

[yaesu]

72. You are welcome and you made some great points nt

[Just A Box Of Rain]

68. RT allowed so-called (but not really) "progressives" to slam the Democratic party

as "corporate Democrats" and neo-liberals (etc) as a way to destroy our party's electoral possibilities and to help elect Donald J Trump.

That's not "progressive." That was subversion.

[Rural_Progressive]

78. I'm an old school FDR Democrat so forgive me if I ask

but are you claiming the current party is not very much in the corporate "bag"?

Please explain to me, based on the past 40 years of history how you have come to that conclusion. You can start by explaining Diane Feinstein and and her husbands fortune made by serious investing in the Military/Industrial complex and then continue from there.

And before anyone decides to get stupid and claim I'm not a "real' Democrat I'll point out that I am currently serving my second term as my county's Democratic Party First Vice-Chair. So yeah, unless you're putting in as much time and effort as I am in trying to get the party back to the one that used to represent working people like it did than you probably need to rethink any nasty responses you might make.

[FoxNewsSucks]

79. good post.

I wish there were more progressives like you and less of the corporate shills

The ones who post here don't even seem to realize how obvious they are.

[progressoid]

87. +1

[betsuni]

90. FDR saved capitalism, a capitalist who hated socialism.

Norman Thomas, Eugene Debs' successor, when asked if FDR is carrying out his socialist program: "Yes, he's carrying it out in a coffin."

The 40-years-Democrats-corrupt-Wall Street-corporatists-who-ignore-the-working-class thing is a myth, obviously. Saying you're an FDR Democrat means you're a regular liberal Democrat. Liberal policies: unemployment insurance, universal health care, Social Security, etc. That's what Democrats are. It's like saying "I'm a vegetarian who doesn't eat meat."

[Rural_Progressive]

92. I so much love people on both sides of the political aisle who make statements like

"The 40-years-Democrats-corrupt-Wall Street-corporatists-who-ignore-the-working-class thing is a myth, obviously." with absolutely nothing to back them up.

Here's the truth friend, the Democratic Party bellies up to the corporate donation trough using the excuse that without those funds they can't get elected. Even after they promise not to take those funds some of them figure out ways to get around their promise.

https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/democrats-corporate-pac-money/

It's tough to get tough on the very entities that are destroying the middle class if you're taking their money. Just iike it's tough to get tough on the corporations that are destroying our health by producing "food" that isn't good for us when you're taking their money.

https://www.fooddive.com/news/where-they-stand-political-donations-from-10-of-the-largest-food-and-bever/585516/

Since I'm a recently retired farmer committed to sustainable agriculture, I saved this for last.

https://theintercept.com/2020/12/11/democrat-tom-vilsack-usda-secretary-farms/ (you'll need to sign up, it's free, to read the article) but here's the headline)

Tom Vilsack for Agriculture Secretary Is Everything That’s Wrong With the Democratic Party: Our planet and rural communities cannot afford four more years of Vilsack’s aggressive corporatism.

I'm not in the business of doing other people's research so I've just provided a few examples to get you started. Next time you feel like making a blanket statement you might want to have something to back it up.

The Democratic Part can and must do better but that will only happen if we hold their feet to the fire and force them to change the way they are doing the people's work.

[betsuni]

97. This is a forum for supporters of the Democratic Party, not The Intercept.

The Democratic Party is not corrupt and has not moved to the right, there is absolutely nothing to back up this claim. Saying things doesn't make them true. Populist attacks against Democrats only help Republicans.

[ymetca]

103. What an odd response

I am not sure what you are trying to defend. There has been plenty of corporate influence over both parties, and pretending one party is stainless seems pretty naïve.

I thought it was the other party that couldn't take any criticism.

[betsuni]

104. What corporate influence has there been over the Democratic Party?

Because candidates receive donations from employees of corporations? How is the Biden administration corrupt?

The U.S. is a capitalist country and the party with policies to tax corporations and the wealthy and regulate business are the Democrats. Not both sides.

[ymetca]

107. Not really...

We live in a representative democracy.

Capitalism is just an economic system we use.

We can construct a completely new and different one, if we all so choose.

[betsuni]

108. No, the majority of Americans have no interest in a populist "working class" revolution.

Americans saying they want affordable health care, good education and wages and living conditions, environmental protections, the wealthy and corporations to pay their fair share in taxes doesn't make them secret socialists, these are usual liberal Democratic policies. The attempt to rebrand them as "democratic socialist" and FDR/LBJ as democratic socialists and that the Democratic Party has been shifting to the right because of corruption, having the same economic policies as Republicans, must be "transformed" back to its socialist roots is absurd.

Voters do not carefully examine the policies of Republicans and Democrats and think, Oh no I won't vote for Democrats because they're not progressive enough, better let Republicans destroy all the social safety nets and do nothing about climate change to punish those corrupt Democratic establishment elites. This will totally ensure the revolution. Solidarity, brothers and sisters.

[ymetca]

101. Thank you!

Bill Clinton's "triangulation strategy" comes to mind.

[thesquanderer]

58. The fact that, for a time, Putin's interests may have aligned with supporting Hartmann's voice...

...doesn't mean that Hartmann was in any way doing Putin's bidding.

But more to the point, the info in this piece is interesting; the connections made are valid/verifiable, and it is good to have them brought to people's attentions. (And I doubt Putin would have approved of this piece.)

[Just A Box Of Rain]

64. "Putin's interests may have aligned with supporting Hartmann's voice..."

On that point we are entirely in agreement.

Would Putin approve of Hartmann's latest plan to cut of US energy exports at a time when our allies are trying to replace Russian sources?

Is that a good plan, or one that might help break the pro-Ukrainian alliance?

[FoxNewsSucks]

60. those who whine, but don't listen to Hartmann

are just blowing smoke out of their asses.

Particularly those who promptly lick the boots of Licht.

[progressoid]

75. Dish Network and DirecTV and other US providers carried RT to the public. One assumes you are just

as critical of them. Dish Network and DirecTV didn't drop RT until March of 2022.

Hartmann left 5 years earlier.

[live love laugh]

25. Was his content any different on RT?

[dchill]

27. He was paid for his content by Putin. So...

[live love laugh]

28. You didn't answer my question.

[dchill]

31. Yes. I did. It's a permanent (?) on his content.

[live love laugh]

32. So you don't know and have no proof. Got it. ✔️

[dchill]

35. His content is corrupted and therefore irrelevant.

[live love laugh]

36. Proof?

[dchill]

40. Jesus! He worked for Putin! That's ALL it takes!

The content here is not Hartmann's anyway.

[NullTuples]

53. Here, you can peruse all of his columns. Seems pretty US-liberal-progressive to me...

https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.rt.com+Thom+Hartmann&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[live love laugh]

65. IF there was any pro-Putin content, we'd know.

But there’s no proof.

Network owners change all the time. Ownership alone isn’t proof of anything.

[NullTuples]

73. But he has repeated Putin propaganda, and that's the problem.

"Hartmann and Cohen also referred the new anti-Russian Ukrainian government as "extremists." "The extremists came to power sharing, they are sharing power now," Cohen said, to Hartmann's agreement. "Obama unwisely keeps declaring the government in Kiev as legitimate," Cohen added."

"Hartmann suggested that the new anti-Russia government in Ukraine were neo-Nazis. "If you listen to the words of these guys in the cabinet, if you listen to the words of the party, they are openly antisemitic, they are openly nationalistic, they are open aggressive," Hartmann said. "Some may think calling them Nazis is a slur, some of them wouldn't refer to themselves that way, but some of them embrace swastikas."

Hartmann has in the past defended Russia on issues like gay rights, saying that Russia is not as bad as Saudi Arabia in terms of gay rights while pointing out that the United States did to give women the right to vote until 1920."

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2014/3/10/1283668/-Thom-Hartmann-Sticking-with-RT-despite-Resignations-over-Putin-s-Actions-in-Ukraine

[live love laugh]

62. So no proof then. ✔️

[Hortensis]

86. Using US authors is a way of laundering

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2023, 05:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Russian messages, fooling people into accepting them as respectable and trustworthy who might have doubts if they were signed by, say, the director of the Russian counterintelligence, disinformation division.

Well meaning left wingers are hardly the only targets. They also go after MAGAs on right wing forms and Fox viewers who are drawn to criticism of western nations and the U.S.,, and of course for the same purposes.

Perhaps someone could offer insight to those of us who don’t see the appeal. Why Russian assets instead of very well-regarded experts currently writing on this topic -- aside from the latter lacking records of assisting Russian information warfare? Presumably searches tend to pull them up, but is there more?

[betsuni]

89. +1

[ymetca]

106. Just because someone is a "very well-regarded expert"

doesn't necessarily make their assertions correct.

Then you have to consider what might be their personal agenda, regardless of the media conduit.

And then you shouldn't disregard someone simply because of how you got the message, or other reasons having nothing to do with the actual statements made.

Then there's the problem of context. We all know how statements taken out of context get spun wildly in the aethyrs.

Ugh! I got a headache. No wonder we're all confused...

[Hortensis]

114. Respect and referral from their fellow experts is THE way

to identify honest and competent information sources. Their opinions differ plenty.

Don't mistake an appetite for criticism of the West the U.S. is part of and dissension from the mainstream that makes people seek that out for a desire to be honestly and accurately informed. They couldn't be more different.

[Jeebo]

56. What is RT?

Several other posters in this thread also referred to RT. Hartmann was on IE America for several years, then he was on Air America, now he's on Free Speech TV and I watch him on his YouTube channel. I have no idea what RT is.

-- Ron

[Just A Box Of Rain]

59. Russia Today, a Russian state media propaganda network that answers directly to Putin.

Hartmann was employed by Russia Today for 7 years. He quit just before he would have had to register as an agent of a foreign government.

[drmeow]

83. What is RT? never mind

Found the answer

[Just A Box Of Rain]

13. Sentient beings.

[live love laugh]

23. Why?

[cab67]

26. many sentient beings have a default distrust of anyone who spent several years on Putin's payroll

It's going to be a long time before I'm able to take him at his word. Sorry - that's just how it is.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

29. Memory.

[live love laugh]

30. Memory of what?

[Just A Box Of Rain]

33. Putin's plan to destroy our democracy and to subvert our party's nominee.

[live love laugh]

37. Sure. Via Thom Hartmann TELLING us as much.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

38. Uh, no.

[live love laugh]

39. Really? That's all you have? LOL

[Just A Box Of Rain]

41. No, read the indictments that came out of the Mueller Report.

Then you laughing dies.

Not a good look.

[live love laugh]

43. Where's Hartmann in the report?

[Just A Box Of Rain]

45. Don't be naive.

All part of Putin's plan.

That's why he funded the effort.

[live love laugh]

48. You. Have. Nothing.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

50. You. Are. Dead. Wrong.

[live love laugh]

54. NO proof but I'm wrong. 😀😃😄😁🤣😆😂

[Just A Box Of Rain]

55. What the heck are you talking about?

This is reality-denialism.

Goodbye

[Just A Box Of Rain]

12. The irony of this guy asking if others are in the hands of Putin is a bit rich.

And American billionaires would hardly desire a default on America's debt, as that would cause an economic catastrophe.

This is about the level of "insight" one could expect from this source.

[lonely bird]

34. Please list...

The things that Hartmann says that are pro-Putin.

[Kennah]

15. I read "concerns" and thought he was having health issues

[FakeNoose]

16. I have no doubt they are working for Putin

I'm sure some kind of reward or cash bonus has been promised to all of them for delaying this as long as possible.
The funny thing is that it sure seems like McCarthy works for Putin also.

[gab13by13]

17. Hartmann is one of the handful of people I go to,

[jaxexpat]

21. Have a problem with Thom Hartmann? Call "Stop Reaching for Things That Don't Exist" for help.

Not a part of or associated with "Stop Reaching for the Hot Skillet Handle" of any of its subsidiaries.

[Hortensis]

22. LOL, god, no. Remember, the brain stores known propaganda as information

the way it does known truth -- no matter what delivery vehicle is being used, even when we know the source is questionable, even when we spot disinformation itself. And how many have given this one the intense scrutiny that's appropriate?

Heck, the brain often even strips stories that reveal deceits of context and stores details as information.

Guarding the store of information we need to think against attempts at infiltration from all directions is more necessary than ever. Techniques have gotten sophisticated beyond what was imagined back when mindf*king was new science. And the stakes are huge.

[Prairie_Seagull]

42. During the years in question. (the rt years),

Thom always and repeatedly professed to complete editorial control. Worst case scenario Thom will spin something very occasionally. He never IMO outright lies. If something is misstated, he corrects.

I have been watching/listening for almost 2 decades and the rt time had bad optics. yes.

Lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Hell Thom is a member here. I will say I have not seen a post from him for a while but I haven't been looking. I find him to be a fantastic resource and will continue to quote him and the information he provides.

Are we in such a lofty place that we don't need/want proven allies?

[Just A Box Of Rain]

49. Allies? Not my ally.

His latest call to action is for the US to cut off energy exports at a time when our actual allies they have critical needs due to Putin's war of agression on Ukraine.

That would serve Putin and no one else.

He is NOT my ally.

[Liberal In Texas]

51. Well said. n/t

[Farmer-Rick]

74. I'm with you Seagull

Yeah, Thom being on RT was a problem. But back then, a lot of very liberal people were on RT. Not that it excuses it. But I have to admit even I was fooled by Russian propaganda. I believed some of the lies Putin was pushing through his agents here in the US.

But it was because of Hartmann that I stopped listening to Rush Limpball's, Dr Laura and Dave Ramsey. He kind of woke me up from those idiotic blowhards by using logic and reason.

I think Thom has done a whole lot more good for liberal causes then the harm being on RT has done. We need all the allies we can get.

[Prairie_Seagull]

85. I'm with you Farmer Rick.

I (maybe simplistically) at the time thought that Russia was trying to help its own PR and in doing so was willing to pay the folks you mention to be on their network, giving up editorial control.

I was in the USN just post Viet Nam so I was dealing with cold war stuff. The Russians were my adversary, due to this,
I always had a 'weather eye' out for them.

Even with this, I was willing to forgo some mistrust. I believe many of us were. I bought it too, with a modicum of hope attached. In the longer run we were wrong for hoping at the time that Russia was trying to engage with the west.

Fool me once...

[NewHendoLib]

57. Thom is a treasure. Brilliant mind.

[Liberal In Texas]

61. Yep.....I've always said that he's a national treasure.

He's also a DUer.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

71. A nation treasure to which nation?

[live love laugh]

66. Agree. Many want to destroy our treasures.

[ancianita]

76. They all sound like a Fifth Column in the bag for their anti-democracy, anti-West global owners.

Thanks for the Hartmann piece. It's more perspective on this group's geopolitics.

[BootinUp]

77. Yes, the Russian connection. Nt

[mathematic]

81. Yeah, billionaires want the economy to explode. LOL what a clown take.

Let's try to hold these contradictory thoughts in our heads at the same time:
1. Billionaires exploit our economy to an unprecedented level in history to live lives of luxury unimaginable.
2. Billionaires want this to end.

But hey, Hartmann might have some insight into what Putin wants. As we all know and everybody should be reminded he used to be on the payroll not long ago.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

84. +1,000,000

[betsuni]

91. Yes, I thought the "status quo" was what billionaires wanted.

If not, why did we have to be tortured by the constant repetition of the words "status quo" for the last eight years?

It is confusing.

[TigressDem]

82. IF the top 10% actually paid their fair share of taxes, we could make HUGE progress on debt.

https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/the-case-for-a-robust-attack-on-the-tax-gap

Today, the “tax gap”—the difference between taxes that are owed and collected—totals around $600 billion annually and will mean approximately $7 trillion of lost tax revenue over the next decade. The sheer magnitude of lost revenue is striking: it is equal to 3 percent of GDP, or all the income taxes paid by the lowest earning 90 percent of taxpayers.




https://www.usdebtclock.org/

IF you look, you may gasp..... Rethugs are actually right to be concerned about debt... but cutting programs won't help. Biden's actions to help during COVID actually did good things to the economy and for business.

IF people can't afford to pay for the things they need to live, business doesn't prosper either.

[SouthernDem4ever]

105. They must be removed from Congress as Traitors

[Roy Rolling]

109. Party of Ideas or party of branding?

Do democrats represent lofty goals/ideas or just parrots of political bosses?

I don’t brand commentators for life. I judge them not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character, to borrow a phrase.

Democrats are like the light, Republicans represent the darkness. Darkness cannot overcome the light but light dissipates darkness. If Hartmann were darkness he’d suffer ETTD syndrome. Obviously he’s something else. What, who knows?

[ananda]

110. What concerns? I like Hartmann.

...

[no_hypocrisy]

111. Here's the thing:

While the majority in the House could vote against cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, you can't make a majority vote to raise the Debt Ceiling if it doesn't want to or if the SOTH won't bring it up for a vote, allowing a Default.

[Ferrets are Cool]

112. I've NEVER had concerns about Thom. He is a great person who cares about this country.

The Man.

[stonecutter357]

113. Suspend your concerns about Hartmann , HELL NO !

[RocRizzo55]

116. I would say something about your "concerns" regarding Hartmann

But I would get kicked off of here.
So I shall say nothing and let others take that risk.

[PatrickforB]

117. I have never had 'concerns' about Thom Hartmann. He is top notch in his

incisive description of end-stage capitalism.

People have unfairly attacked him because he ended up on a Russian network for awhile, but truth is truth, and Hartmann speaks the truth. And, yes, that truth is uncomfortable for many here, and for virtually all Republicans, who would consider Hartmann a version of Satan incarnate, and of course the Wall Street greed-lizards hate him.

Remember that in the face of the Lewis-Powell-engineered right-wing propaganda apparatus and the near stranglehold corporate power has on this republic, individual voices of truth like Hartmann, Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, and others struggle to be heard, but they are points of light in the darkness of greed-fueled profit-over-human-life-every-single-time capitalism.

And don't anybody dare 'cancel' Chomsky for a statement he made about a MIC-serving book about Pol Pot that came out in the 70s. He actually said that our MIC's role in the creation of Pol Pot was underplayed in the book. Much like when Bill Maher got cancelled back in 2001 when he implied that Al Qaeda had been at least partly created by us and our policies in the mid-east. Certainly the drone death-toys created more terrorists than they killed...

[calimary]

118. Making a note about this one.

Wanna keep it for later reference.