Monday, January 9, 2012

Thom Hartmann: Will Mitt Romney sweep the Primaries?

Thom plus logo
Over the weekend, Mitt Romney had just two hurdles to jump before he cruises to a victory in tomorrow night's New Hampshire Primary - and those were back-to-back debates on Saturday night and Sunday morning. After escaping the first debate completely unscathed - Romney was attacked in the second debate for being a career politician, making a living killing jobs, and being far too moderate to represent the Republican Party. Romney himself fueled criticism when he seemed to suggest that only rich people should run for office, quoting advice that his dad gave him saying, "never get involved in politics if you have to win an election to pay a mortgage." But despite the attacks in Sunday's debate - polls out of New Hampshire show Romney with a sizeable lead. According to the latest poll out of the University of New Hampshire - Romney is sitting pretty at 41% - with Ron Paul in second at 17%. Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman are tied at 11%. A win for Romney in New Hampshire will be historic - making him the first non-incumbent Republican candidate to win in both Iowa and New Hampshire. Romney is also leading in South Carolina and in Florida - two primaries that will be held later this month. So, there's a good chance this race could be wrapped up fairly early if he pulls off the January sweep.
-Thom
(Who would you like to see beat him? Tell us here.)

Friday, January 6, 2012

Randi Rhodes; Jobs!

It's Friday, ya bastids!

The new jobs numbers are out. It seems that President Obama is beating the recession a lot more convincingly than Mitt Romney is beating any of his opponents. The private sector added 212,000 jobs last month. That beat the economic experts’ forecasts by 50,000 jobs. We’re doing better than the experts expected, and much better than the Republicans hoped. For all of 2011, government employment fell by 280,000, but the private sector added 1.9 million jobs. Republicans can shrink the size of government, but they can’t shrink the size of America!

If you thought that Rick Santorum’s statement about giving money to “black people” was the most racist thing you have recently heard from a GOP candidate, you haven’t heard Newt Gingrich recently. Newt said he would tell the NAACP, quote, “...the African-American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps.” A little advice, Newt—when you give that speech to the NAACP, don’t wait for applause after you deliver that line. Newt might have outdone Santorum. Newt! This isn’t a contest to see who can be the most racist. Wait! This is the Republican primary—maybe it IS a contest to see who can be the most racist. The sad thing is that Newt Gingrich says things like this. The sadder thing is that, on a certain level, he doesn’t realize that it’s racist. And the saddest thing is that, on another level, he does know just how racist it is.

Rick Santorum’s coalminer grandfather had dirt under his fingernails. And that’s not the only dirt in Rich Santorum’s past. Rick likes to talk about growing up in a working class environment. Well, after his time in the Senate, Santorum made millions of dollars in ways that had nothing to do with working... or with class. Like any Republican, Santorum cashed in on his years in the Senate, as detailed in the article in Bloomberg. Santorum says “I come from a little different background than most Republicans.” But he ended up in the same place—in the pockets of the big corporations.

Today’s Homework | Discuss

President Obama addresses today's jobs report...


Thom Hartmann: Republicans Don't Care about Voter Fraud....

Thom plus logo
Iowa Republicans are trying to dismiss claims that the vote count in Tuesday's Iowa Caucus was wrong. An Iowa voter told a local TV station yesterday that he noticed a 20-vote discrepancy in the count - and that Rick Santorum was the real winner of the Caucuses. Republican Party officials, though, are sticking to their first count - showing Mitt Romney as the winner by 8-votes - and there will be no recount.
The Republican Party has launched a war on voters around the nation this year with strict new laws that will disenfranchise over 5 million Americans. They claim these laws are necessary to combat so-called voter fraud. Yet in Iowa - where there are no such laws - and where a very, very close and questionable election was just held - Republicans don't seem to care at all about getting it right.
Clearly - the war on voters isn't about making sure the people's voices are represented accurately - it's about making sure poor people, young people, and minorities who tend to vote for Democrats - can't vote at all.
-Thom
(Who do you think won? Tell us here.)

What Race Leads in Welfare? Questions & Answers Via ChaCha.com

Q: What race has the highest percentage of people on welfare in the u.s?

A: Statistics say that whites form the largest racial group on welfare; half of all welfare recipients leave in the first two years.

Stop Being Cynical About Corporate Money in Politics and Start Being Angry

Citizens United handed our country over to corporations. Time to take it back.

Whose Money? Whose Washington?

I don't want to be hopelessly naïve. I want to be hopefully naïve. It would be relatively easy to change this: you could provide public financing for campaigns instead of letting corporations pay. It's the equivalent of having the National Football League hire referees instead of asking the teams to provide them.

Public financing of campaigns would cost a little money, but endlessly less than paying for the presents these guys give their masters. And it would let you watch what was happening in Washington without feeling as disgusted. Even legislators, once they got the hang of it, might enjoy neither raising money nor having to pretend it doesn't affect them.

To make this happen, however, we may have to change the Constitution, as we've done 27 times before. This time, we'd need to specify that corporations aren't people, that money isn't speech, and that it doesn't abridge the First Amendment to tell people they can't spend whatever they want getting elected. Winning a change like that would require hard political organizing, since big banks and big oil companies and big drug-makers will surely rally to protect their privilege.

Still, there's a chance. The Occupy movement opened the door to this sort of change by reminding us all that the system is rigged, that its outcomes are unfair, that there's reason to think people from across the political spectrum are tired of what we've got, and that getting angry and acting on that anger in the political arena is what being a citizen is all about.

It's fertile ground for action. After all, Congress's approval rating is now at 9 percent, which is another way of saying that everyone who's not a lobbyist hates them and what they're doing. The big boys are, of course, counting on us simmering down; they're counting on us being cynical, on figuring there's no hope or benefit in fighting city hall. But if we're naïve enough to demand a country more like the one we were promised in high school civics class, then we have a shot.

A good time to take an initial stand comes later this month, when rallies outside every federal courthouse will mark the second anniversary of the Citizens United decision. That's the one where the Supreme Court ruled that corporations had the right to spend whatever they wanted on campaigns.

To me, that decision was, in essence, corporate America saying, "We're not going to bother pretending any more. This country belongs to us."

We need to say, loud and clear: "Sorry. Time to give it back."

Bill McKibben is Schumann Distinguished Scholar at Middlebury College, founder of the global climate campaign 350.org, a TomDispatch regular, and the author, most recently, of Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet. To catch Timothy MacBain's first Tomcast audio interview of the new year in which McKibben discusses how the rest of us can compete with a system in which money talks, click here, or download it to your iPod here. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Randi Rhodes: Awkward Pairing

Mitt Romney’s big event after his victory in Iowa was to fly to New Hampshire and have John McCain endorse him. It was a very pathetic post-victory event, but then it was a very pathetic victory in the first place. What does it say about Mitt Romney when his big post-Iowa endorsement is somebody that everyone knows hates Mitt Romney? Of course, what is Mitt going to do? Find someone who personally likes him to endorse him? Even Mitt Romney doesn’t have the time, money, or staff to do that!

John McCain may actually be the perfect endorser for Mitt Romney
. It’s like McCain is telling other Republicans “look, if I can stomach this jerk, you can too.” John McCain endured torture at the hands of the North Vietnamese. So he’s one of the few people who can get up on a stage with Mitt Romney and endorse him without cracking under the pressure. Still, I suspect that if you look carefully at the video, while he’s giving his endorsement to Romney, John McCain is blinking Morse code for S-O-S.

The visuals for the event were horrible. I would blame the planners, but then they were working with Mitt Romney and John McCain. It would be like trying to design a Super Bowl halftime show featuring William Huang. With grandpa McCain and plastic-man Romney on stage, it looked like a retirement party for a boss nobody liked, thrown by his successor, who is even more unpopular. And that is exactly what it was. McCain actually checked his watch while he was onstage and Romney was speaking! In a sense, every Republican is checking their watch when they see Mitt Romney. They’re thinking “Crap! Is 2012 over yet?”

While he was on Bill O’Reilly (ahem), Rick Santorum defended his out-of-nowhere comments that he didn’t want to “make black people’s lives better” with other people’s money. Rick claims he wasn’t saying “blacks.” He said he started saying something, and it came out “blrrrgghhh…” So who were you talking about, Rick? Blue people? You don’t want to spend welfare dollars on all those lazy Smurfs? Let’s not go there! Next thing you know, Newt Gingrich will want to have young Smurfs cleaning the toilets at the elementary schools.

Today’s Homework | Discuss

The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson summed out Santorum perfectly last night: "He's not a little weird, he's realy weird..."


Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

thom hartmann: Is the Corporate Media acknowledging the death of the American Dream?

Thom plus logo
The New York Times is finally catching on to the fact that the American Dream is dead. An article running in the paper today points out the disturbing fact that the United States is one of the least socially mobile nations in the developed world. As in - it's harder for someone born poor to become rich - or even just join the middle class throughout their life. Only 8% of Americans born in the poorest fifth of the population - ever make it to the top fifth, which is an income a bit over $100,000. The Times goes on to cite persistently high poverty rates, which "leave poor children starting especially far behind" as one of the reason for low social mobility. So much for the idea that America is a class-less society. Every day, millions of Americans are living a real life version of The Christmas Story - complete with corporate Scrooges and fully a quarter of American children living in poverty like Tiny Tim.
-Thom
(Will this change anything? Tell us here.)

LISTEN LIVE NOW!

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Crackpots Do Not Make Good Messengers —By Kevin Drum

So then: Ron Paul. Should we lefties be happy he's in the presidential race, giving non-interventionism a voice, even if he has other beliefs we find less agreeable? Should we be happy that his non-mainstream positions are finally getting a public hearing? This is a depressingly common view. For example:

Can we talk? Ron Paul is not a charming oddball with a few peculiar notions. He's not merely "out of the mainstream." Ron Paul is a full-bore crank. In fact he's practically the dictionary definition of a crank: a person who has a single obsessive, all-encompassing idea for how the world should work and is utterly blinded to the value of any competing ideas or competing interests.

This obsessive idea has, at various times in his career, led him to: denounce the Civil Rights Act because it infringed the free-market right of a monolithic white establishment to immiserate blacks; dabble in gold buggery and advocate the elimination of the Federal Reserve, apparently because the global economy worked so well back in the era before central banks; suggest that the border fence is being built to keep Americans from leaving the country; claim that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional and should be dismantled; mount repeated warnings that hyperinflation is right around the corner; insist that global warming is a gigantic hoax; hint that maybe the CIA helped to coordinate the 9/11 attacks; oppose government-sponsored flu shots; and allege that the UN wants to confiscate our guns.

This isn't the biography of a person with one or two unusual hobbyhorses. It's not something you can pretend doesn't matter. This is Grade A crankery, and all by itself it's reason enough to want nothing to do with Ron Paul. But of course, that's not all. As we've all known for the past four years, you can layer on top of this Paul's now infamous newsletters, in which he condoned a political strategy consciously designed to appeal to the worst strains of American homophobia, racial paranoia, militia hucksterism, and new-world-order fear-mongering. And on top of that, you can layer on the fact that Paul is plainly lying about these newsletters and his role in them.

Now, balanced against that you have the fact that Paul opposes the War on Drugs and supports a non-interventionist foreign policy. But guess what? Even there, he's a crank. Even if you're a hard-core non-interventionist yourself, you probably think World War II was a war worth fighting. But not Ron Paul. He thinks we should have just minded our own damn business. And even if you're a hardcore opponent of our current drug policy — if you think not just that marijuana should be legalized, not just that hard drugs should be decriminalized, but that all illicit drugs should be fully legalized — I'll bet you still think that maybe we should retain some regulations on a few of the worst drugs. They're pretty dangerous, after all, and no matter how much you hate the War on Drugs you might have a few qualms about a global marketing behemoth like RJ Reynolds having free rein to advertise and sell anything it wants, anywhere it wants, in any way it wants. But not Ron Paul. As near as I can tell, he just wants everything legalized, full stop.

Bottom line: Ron Paul is not merely a "flawed messenger" for these views. He's an absolutely toxic, far-right, crackpot messenger for these views. This is, granted, not Mussolini-made-the-trains-run-on-time levels of toxic, but still: if you truly support civil liberties at home and non-interventionism abroad, you should run, not walk, as fast as you can to keep your distance from Ron Paul. He's not the first or only person opposed to pre-emptive wars, after all, and his occasional denouncements of interventionism are hardly making this a hot topic of conversation among the masses. In fact, to the extent that his foreign policy views aren't simply being ignored, I'd guess that the only thing he's accomplishing is to make non-interventionism even more of a fringe view in American politics than it already is. Crackpots don't make good messengers.

Now, if you literally think that Ron Paul's views on drugs and national security are so important that they outweigh all of this — multiple decades of unmitigated crackpottery, cynical fear-mongering, and attitudes toward social welfare so retrograde they make Rick Perry look progressive — and if you've somehow convinced yourself that non-interventionism has no other significant voices except Ron Paul — well, if that's the case, then maybe you should be happy to count Paul as an ally. But the truth is that you don't need to. Ron Paul is not a major candidate for president. He's never even been a significant presence as a congressman. In a couple of months he'll disappear back into the obscurity he so richly deserves. So why get in bed with him? All you'll do is wake up in March with a mountain of fleas. Find other allies. Make your arguments without bothering to mention him. And remember: Ron Paul has never once done any of his causes any good. There's a good reason for that.

Randi Rhodes: And the Winner Is... Nobody

Amazing! We still don’t have a winner in Iowa. Not that it was too close to call. It was incredibly close, but Mitt Romney did get a few more votes. I’m just saying there is no winner in Iowa. Romney, the GOP establishment-anointed candidate, barely squeaked past Rick Santorum—a guy who couldn’t get re-elected to his own Senate seat. And Mitt “beat” Rick Santorum by 8 votes. You could deliver a more convincing beating with a feather duster.

HOUR TWO GUEST: Frank Rich of New York Magazine will ruminate on Iowa and discuss his latest essay, “The Molotov Party: For the new GOP, conservative isn’t nearly radical enough

Rick Santorum reacted to the results by declaring “Game on!” Face it Rick, when it comes down to it, you couldn’t even beat Mitt Romney—and 75 percent of Republicans are begging for someone to beat Mitt Romney. I have a great idea for Rick Santorum. If he wants to win the rest of the primaries, he should just change his name to “Rick Not-Mitt-Romney.”

Ron Paul came in a very close third. People aren’t talking about Ron Paul’s performance as much because he isn’t viewed as a serious candidate—which immediately brings up the question “And Rick Santorum IS?” Ron Paul made all those arguably racist statements years ago… unlike Rick Santorum, who made a very arguably racist statement this last weekend.

Newt Gingrich came in an embarrassing forth place. He boarded a plane out of Iowa before the clock even struck midnight. Nice try, Cinderella, but you can’t escape the fact that your time is up. Newt was in a very bad mood on that flight out of Iowa. The only thing that could have made him more angry is if Bill Clinton had appeared at the airport and told Newt he couldn’t sit in the front of the plane. Still, Newt isn’t quitting the race. Hey, don’t give up your amateur paleontology.

Michele Bachmann came in last place (if you don’t count Jon Huntsman, and we don’t). That’s absolutely perfect, but then it would have been perfect if any of these losers came in last. It’s just a shame that only one of them could do it. It seems that even she couldn’t convince herself that she still had a chance... and this is a woman who has convinced herself for 43 years that her husband is heterosexual. Come on, Michele—stay in the race. It can’t be any more difficult or delusional than staying in that marriage of yours.

Today’s Homework | Discuss

Earlier today President Obama steamrolled obstructionist Senate Repubs with a recess appointment of Richard Cordray to the post of director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...


Thom Hartmann: Why the German economy is surging

Thom plus logo
Even though a debt crisis is gripping the European continent - the German economy is surging. According to the latest economic data - German unemployment fell in the month of December - bringing the average number of unemployed people in that nation to a two-decade low. Economists are now openly wondering just how long the German economy can be immune from the chaos surrounding it in places like Greece where unemployment is at 18% and Spain where unemployment just topped 23%. But the better question is why their economy is doing so well. The answer is they do what we used to do. They protect domestic manufacturing with high barriers to imports, and they encourage labor unions. In fact, nearly the entire German auto industry is unionized, allowing the nation to produce twice as many cars as the United States - while at the same time paying their workers more than $60 on average and still make healthy profits. On top of that - the German government has recession-proof programs like the "short-week" that pays businesses to cut back on the hours of workers rather than lay them off during economic downturns. Plus, Germany's constitution gives the labor force a say in everything from pay to working conditions in the factories they work for. All in all - Germany has given more power and protection to workers in their economy - and as a result their economy is growing. We should be taking some notes over here.
-Thom
(Do you think the United States will learn from Germany? Tell us here.)

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Thom Hartmann: Will the Occupy Iowa Caucus be successful?

Thom plus logo
It's Iowa Caucus day!
Despite endless debating, campaign ads, and TV punditry over the last few months - the Republican race to the White House officially begins this evening as Iowans gather to choose which Republican they'd like to see run against President Obama this year.
Polls show a dead heat at the top between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul - with a surging Rick Santorum in third and a collapsing Newt Gingrich in fourth. And considering Iowans have a history of choosing oddball candidates - like Mike Huckabee in 2008 and Michele Bachmann in last year's straw poll - it's anyone's guess who might come out on top in the Hawkeye state at the end of the night.
One thing that is certain is that Republicans are temporarily putting a hold on their war against voters. Iowa is just one of nine states in the nation that allows for same-day voter registration, meaning people can go to the polls, register to vote, and then immediately vote all at the same time.
Studies show that same-day voter registration boosts voter participation by as much as 7%. Also - Iowa will not be checking any voter photo IDs as so many other right-wing states are now demanding. So whoever does come out on top - will be there thanks to the voice of the people. That is unless the Republican Party - using the excuse of a threat of an Anonymous hack attack - sabotages the caucus to prevent Ron Paul from winning.
Or - if the Occupy Iowa Caucus movement is successful in catapulting "uncommitted" to the top of the Republican field for the win. Either way - it should be an interesting night - stay tuned.
-Thom
(Who do you think will win? Tell us here.)

Randi`s Back!

Happy 2012! It’s already taking place at full speed—the Iowa caucuses are today! Some polls from Iowa show Mitt Romney back in the lead. After all this time, we’re back to square one—and there is no better description of Mitt Romney than “Square One.” Maybe the secret to Mitt’s success is that he is so wooden. Wood doesn’t sink. It just floats on the top.

Other polls show a Santorum surge. A Santorum surge? Isn’t that what wiped out Pompeii? Until this last week, Santorum has been pretty much mired at the bottom of the polls. Some candidates try to remain above the fray. I guess you could say that Rick Santorum has survived this long by remaining below the fray.

Ron Paul also has a share of the lead in Iowa. Ron Paul has two problems—he doesn’t appeal to mainstream Republicans, and he has a long history of arguable racist and homophobic statements. And if that doesn’t make him appeal to mainstream Republicans, nothing will.

Former American Idol winner Kelly Clarkson has tweeted her support for Ron Paul. Kelly seems unconcerned about racist and homophobic comments in Paul’s past. But then if having something ugly in your past disqualified a person in her eyes, her own career would have stopped after the movie “From Justin to Kelly.” Endorsing Ron Paul says one of several possible things about the person doing the endorsing, the least damning of which is “I have no idea what Ron Paul is really about.” Kelly Clarkson has a very lucrative career, but she must not be in the top 1 percent, or I assume she would be endorsing Mitt Romney.

Finally, former Senator Arlen Specter recently did standup comedy at a club in Philadelphia. Overall, he performed a lot better than he did in his last Senate race, but then that’s not a very high bar. I would do the obvious jokes about a politician doing standup, but Senator Specter pretty much covered those. Arlen Specter is very old, but not as old as some of his material. Still, not bad, Arlen—as former Pennsylvania Senators who lost their seat go, I would say you have a brighter future than, say, Rick Santorum.

Today’s Homework | Discuss

Trying to prove that he's got what the freaks want, Rick Santorum whipped out a dog-whistle the size of a pickup truck in Iowa...