General Discussion

phylny

(8,818 posts)

167. Thanks, I recall posting in it.

Fri Apr 28, 2017, 01:22 PM

Apr 2017

I'm not in any way affiliated with Thom, and I listen to him fairly regularly. I've heard him consistently asking for an investigation into Trump's ties with Russia (probably not a Russian talking point), consistently supporting Democrats/Bernie (also not a Russian talking point), lambasting the Republicans/Trump (not a talking point). I didn't respond to the OP in that thread because without hearing the segment or reading a transcript, I am taking someone's interpretation as fact. It may well be an accurate interpretation.

I am sorta tired of Democrats eating their own. Yes, I used to like Ed Schultz, until he said things over and over that made me understand he was not on our side. I no longer listen to him or even pay attention to him. On the other hand, Thom says too many things in support of our cause/against the Republicans and Trump to make me believe that one thing he may have said makes him a mouthpiece for Russia and Putin.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

184 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I'm so GLAD Obama took the going rate for his speech really early on. [View all] LAS14 Apr 2017 OP

thom Hartmann says this is a bad idea Ohioblue22 Apr 2017 #1

he's an idiot OKNancy Apr 2017 #2

+1000 And a willing participant in Russian Propaganda TV. OnDoutside Apr 2017 #16

You can say it, I cant. Eliot Rosewater Apr 2017 #51

Elizabeth Warren appears to agree with Thom Hartmann BeyondGeography Apr 2017 #20

on this subject yes, but she wasn't obnoxious about it OKNancy Apr 2017 #22

So can Obama for deciding to give this speech for $400k BeyondGeography Apr 2017 #23

If someone said that, then they are idiots too OKNancy Apr 2017 #27

It's who's paying BeyondGeography Apr 2017 #30

Just in: A new statement from Obama spokesman Eric Schultz, Cha Apr 2017 #107

He just made $400K for an A&E interview with Doris Kearns Goodwin and nobody will ever care BeyondGeography Apr 2017 #117

Sorry, President Obama does Not "look bad". Cha Apr 2017 #118

It isn't worth the grief he's getting, that's clear to me at least BeyondGeography Apr 2017 #120

People need to hear his speech first.. I trust President Cha Apr 2017 #122

She's not an idiot, for sure, but I don't agree with her here. LAS14 Apr 2017 #28

yep a recording of her comments has come through my facebook newsfeed about 3 times m-lekktor Apr 2017 #49

True. Squinch Apr 2017 #58

Actually, Thom Hartman is a very intelligent person... Trial_By_Fire Apr 2017 #78

He's a hypocrite.. he takes money from RT Cha Apr 2017 #115

They may not have the unity of the progressive and Democratic ProfessorPlum Apr 2017 #131

And you have an inside track on others' agendas? George II Apr 2017 #154

Is the rest of the gang at RT "pro America" too? FSogol Apr 2017 #156

Thanks for the laugh! Trial_By_Fire Apr 2017 #160

Because he is being willingly used.. Adrahil Apr 2017 #184

+1 BannonsLiver Apr 2017 #144

Thom Hartmann is literally a mouthpiece for Russian propaganda, pnwmom Apr 2017 #4

I disagree with your statement about Thom and RT, phylny Apr 2017 #6

I listened to Hartman today on this. He is against Obama doing the speech for 400k. An ex-pres... brush Apr 2017 #9

+1 happy feet Apr 2017 #31

+1. n/t FSogol Apr 2017 #159

Hartmann is a $paid$ mouthpiece of the Russian government's "news" outlet. Full stop. nt Tarheel_Dem Apr 2017 #11

I listen to him almost daily. phylny Apr 2017 #15

Considering what RT and Putin did to the Democratic Party nominee, and other Democratic OnDoutside Apr 2017 #17

So right now there are no examples of him being a mouthpiece for Russia. n/t phylny Apr 2017 #36

The point is that by taking the rasPutin rouble he has placed monetary consideration above integrity OnDoutside Apr 2017 #37

Capitalism, yes, and perhaps not the best judgment. phylny Apr 2017 #166

There was a long thread on this just last week. Chiyo-chichi Apr 2017 #148

Thanks, I recall posting in it. phylny Apr 2017 #167

Spot on. brush Apr 2017 #168

You would think after the Intel reports came out that Russia interfered in our democratic process... Tarheel_Dem Apr 2017 #19

So he didn't leave. Is this proof that he's somehow phylny Apr 2017 #35

If he doesn't want to be a paid mouthpiece for Russia, then stop taking their money. pnwmom Apr 2017 #59

It shouldn't be that difficult mcar Apr 2017 #82

I'm honestly confused. phylny Apr 2017 #89

You are the company you keep. Ever hear that? Hartmann's presence legitimizes RT to the extent.... Tarheel_Dem Apr 2017 #66

It appears you keep changing the criteria. phylny Apr 2017 #88

My criteria never "changed". He's a traitorous, money grubbing mouthpiece for a country that.... Tarheel_Dem Apr 2017 #91

Okay. I listen to the man's words. You define "mouthpiece" phylny Apr 2017 #92

That is what he would do if he didnt have an agenda that was akin to Putin's, right? Eliot Rosewater Apr 2017 #54

I think so. And I'm waiting for someone to figure out Jill Stein's relationship with Russia too. Tarheel_Dem Apr 2017 #84

Read post #9. Today was a good example of his not so subtle undermining. brush Apr 2017 #38

So far, one thing. phylny Apr 2017 #41

Just being on RT is acceptable to you? Not me. The money must be good because Hartman can surely... brush Apr 2017 #52

Who did he meet with weekly and then BASH the democratic party for an hour Eliot Rosewater Apr 2017 #56

Exactly. brush Apr 2017 #69

He's taking money from Russia for his views. Russia doesn't pay people to be on RT pnwmom Apr 2017 #60

You have heard him spouting many Russian talking points -- you just don't recognize them. pnwmom Apr 2017 #57

no you are going way too far. If something is said that you don't like being said, and it criticizes JCanete Apr 2017 #74

It is a Russian talking point when Russia pays people, on its government controlled station, pnwmom Apr 2017 #79

oh my fucking God. Of course. I hope no Russian propagandists have ever said the sky is blue. JCanete Apr 2017 #93

Did you read Clint Watts testimony about Active Measures to the Senate Intelligence Committee? pnwmom Apr 2017 #94

+1 happy feet Apr 2017 #33

Then you're disagreeing with a fact. Thom is either a witting or an unwitting participant pnwmom Apr 2017 #46

And what are people who take $400,000 dollars from Wall Street for an hour's work? Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2017 #119

What is surreal is a Democrat comparing former President Obama's being paid by a Wall Street firm pnwmom Apr 2017 #121

Yeah, I forgot Putin trashed our economy, defrauded millions of investors,... Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2017 #142

Putin just helped put DT and his collection of moles throughout the US govt. pnwmom Apr 2017 #143

What is RT? LAS14 Apr 2017 #62

Russian Television network, which is state-sponsored. n/t pnwmom Apr 2017 #63

What? Dyedinthewoolliberal Apr 2017 #12

Clint Watts testified to the Senate about the Russian active measures campaign. pnwmom Apr 2017 #47

ummmm Dyedinthewoolliberal Apr 2017 #137

He didn't mention TH in particular. it is my conclusion based on the fact that he is paid by pnwmom Apr 2017 #139

Who is paid? Dyedinthewoolliberal Apr 2017 #172

He earns money based on the fact that his show is on the RT platform. That is his choice, pnwmom Apr 2017 #175

Better you say it than me... Eliot Rosewater Apr 2017 #53

do better than that. nt JCanete Apr 2017 #73

No, Thom Hartmann is NOT a mouthpiece for Russian propaganda... Trial_By_Fire Apr 2017 #86

His point about Obama not being justified in taking the speech money is a PERFECT EXAMPLE pnwmom Apr 2017 #87

Hartmann's viewpoint on this is... Trial_By_Fire Apr 2017 #90

It has everything to do with Russian propaganda. He is a paid mouthpiece for the Russian network. pnwmom Apr 2017 #140

Thom Hartmann works for a Global Oligarchy's Media . stonecutter357 Apr 2017 #5

Yes, since Russia is a global oligarchy and he works for their media. pnwmom Apr 2017 #141

LOL NurseJackie Apr 2017 #10

It certainly is convenient to let radio personalities decide for us. LanternWaste Apr 2017 #14

Who? mcar Apr 2017 #26

The dude who sold out to Russia Today? Who gives a flying fuck what he thinks anymore. nt JTFrog Apr 2017 #50

A man being paid by Putin??? GulfCoast66 Apr 2017 #55

That's nice. Kahuna7 Apr 2017 #68

One of my favorite sleeping pills Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2017 #83

idk but I'm surprised at the amount of negative responses..... eom Ohioblue22 Apr 2017 #96

so is taking money from RT.com CreekDog Apr 2017 #101

I think working for RT is a bad idea. lapucelle Apr 2017 #153

I say good for O. Take the banksters for every dime they're willing to pay. Vinca Apr 2017 #3

I begrudge him NOTHING for all the travail he and his family have endured elfin Apr 2017 #7

I wonder what trumps going rate is for speeches....oh, that's right - asiliveandbreathe Apr 2017 #8

Soon Donald will only be able to command a fee treestar Apr 2017 #45

OMG - where do I send the check???? asiliveandbreathe Apr 2017 #48

If you have a fainting couch, quick! Get it on eBay gratuitous Apr 2017 #13

I hope he makes... 3catwoman3 Apr 2017 #18

President Obama isn't running for office DefenseLawyer Apr 2017 #21

Hillary wasn't running when she gave those speeches either. nt LAS14 Apr 2017 #24

Another tiny detail! LisaM Apr 2017 #34

riiight loyalsister Apr 2017 #42

What would be the difference from her getting a forward payment from banks etc for righting a book uponit7771 Apr 2017 #70

Same difference loyalsister Apr 2017 #97

That's if a person saw WS as 100% the problem, if not then that position of hanging out with the ... uponit7771 Apr 2017 #98

Were you alive in 2008? loyalsister Apr 2017 #99

Not only alive but worked in finance and knows the root of the issue more than 99.7% of the people uponit7771 Apr 2017 #100

didn't lose your house, or your job, or your retirement fund, or your kids' college fund? loyalsister Apr 2017 #104

Yes, and still know WS well regulated is like any other industry not evil uponit7771 Apr 2017 #105

This exchange has not been about you loyalsister Apr 2017 #124

Maybe I lost the translation here bottom line; not everyone saw WS as the boogyman so Clinton gettin uponit7771 Apr 2017 #145

I agree Caliman73 Apr 2017 #149

+1 uponit7771 Apr 2017 #169

A lot of people did see it as a deal breaker loyalsister Apr 2017 #155

A regulated WS is not a deal breaker to me, her speeches when they came out were about oppurtunity uponit7771 Apr 2017 #170

Obviously, her intention was to run and it was not a secret karynnj Apr 2017 #174

Why shouldn't he or any other person asked to give a speech be paid for it? mcar Apr 2017 #25

It's weird isn't it? OKNancy Apr 2017 #29

Purity tests, but only for certain politicians mcar Apr 2017 #32

Repugs get paid left and right but you don't hear a peep from the Dem critics about that. brush Apr 2017 #39

Yep! mcar Apr 2017 #40

Do we ever bring up the speaking fees for white males? ismnotwasm Apr 2017 #43

I'm HIP !!! uponit7771 Apr 2017 #71

Well maybe your friend needs to pay more attention melman Apr 2017 #76

To this degree? ismnotwasm Apr 2017 #80

+1 betsuni Apr 2017 #85

It was tried with Sanders during the primary... TCJ70 Apr 2017 #95

As I recall, though it has been a while, Reagan was pretty white. QC Apr 2017 #103

Same with Hillary - if someone wants to pay that much treestar Apr 2017 #44

BFD... 400k buys exactly 2 Mar-a-lago memberships MedusaX Apr 2017 #61

The fees are not important Freethinker65 Apr 2017 #64

I have zero problem with President Obama being paid the going rate Gothmog Apr 2017 #65

I don't care what ex-presidents make for their speeches. vi5 Apr 2017 #67

sorry, was anyone under the illusion he wasn't going to cash in? Skittles Apr 2017 #72

Sadly, no. But $60 million in book sales would be enough to feather their nest for.... Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2017 #147

I'm appalled HopeAgain Apr 2017 #75

For accepting money for work ?!?!?!? Your fvcking with us right? uponit7771 Apr 2017 #106

Lots of pearls of being Cha Apr 2017 #112

I'm not googly eyed over any politician HopeAgain Apr 2017 #132

Dodd-Frank, and they hated him for it BeyondGeography Apr 2017 #135

Dodd Frank and consumer protection GulfCoast66 Apr 2017 #180

Dodd Frank has done nothing for the working class HopeAgain Apr 2017 #181

Nice attempt at deflection GulfCoast66 Apr 2017 #183

President Obama is entitled to earn a living.. Has anyone heard the speech Cha Apr 2017 #111

You'll be alright. Just rub some dirt on it. Walk it off. etc. BannonsLiver Apr 2017 #157

Naw, I'm getting pretty used to this HopeAgain Apr 2017 #162

... BannonsLiver Apr 2017 #163

I'm with her HopeAgain Apr 2017 #164

Quid pro quo for a speech?? LAS14 Apr 2017 #179

I think the point is always, do we know why you are getting that kind of money from this JCanete Apr 2017 #77

The optics are bad cause people take money for work !?!?! uponit7771 Apr 2017 #108

that was cute but you actually know why the optics are bad. Tell me why they aren't, JCanete Apr 2017 #109

Nope, thought the argument against speaking fees last year was sexist are the least and ... uponit7771 Apr 2017 #110

well shit, it's the norm to take speaking money after holding office, and what ever could be wrong JCanete Apr 2017 #114

But he's a sellout Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2017 #81

They should wait until they at least hear Cha Apr 2017 #113

I was hoping he'd get more CreekDog Apr 2017 #102

One of the symptoms of Obama Derangement Syndrome is never ever ever ever never betsuni Apr 2017 #116

Exactly betsuni.. He's getting paid for his experience & work.. Shocking! Cha Apr 2017 #123

U rock Cha! ucrdem Apr 2017 #128

Mahalo, ucr! Cha Apr 2017 #129

Agree with you 1000%. The double standard is ridic ucrdem Apr 2017 #130

you don't have to go anywhere near that far to have a problem with this. Again, when we make it JCanete Apr 2017 #125

Great point; Democrats need to draw a much clearer line BeyondGeography Apr 2017 #126

President Obama is not "in politics" CakeGrrl Apr 2017 #133

Whoosh. BeyondGeography Apr 2017 #134

Being paid big bucks by institutions does not mean one is on the take. betsuni Apr 2017 #138

not what I said. at all actually. I said it makes it harder for us to call the GOP out. It muddies JCanete Apr 2017 #171

+1 uponit7771 Apr 2017 #146

He'll probably wind up donating it if he doesn't cancel altogether. ucrdem Apr 2017 #127

I just wonder why a black man and a woman are suppose all american girl Apr 2017 #136

What makes you think that we'd feel any different if it was a white man? FiveGoodMen Apr 2017 #152

I have never heard anyone be upset until it was a woman and a black man all american girl Apr 2017 #176

Thanks, Trevor Noah. Skidmore Apr 2017 #150

There's more than one point to consider. Orsino Apr 2017 #151

Question on number 3 BannonsLiver Apr 2017 #158

He is, or was, a domestic purchaser. Orsino Apr 2017 #161

Nicely put! Agree with you completely. Madam45for2923 Apr 2017 #165

You miss the point - Obama is not a future candidate for anything karynnj Apr 2017 #173

Some might say quid pro quo. guillaumeb Apr 2017 #177

What was the speech about ?? kentuck Apr 2017 #178

I'm tired of the BS. we can do it Apr 2017 #182