Comments by "Animal Farm" (@animalfarm7467) on "Thom Hartmann Program"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Hartmann would have you believe all will be well when Trump is gone from office. He would like you to forget that Clinton brought in NAFTA; deregulated Wall Street, and stripped much of the social security safety-net away from the people. All with the help of the Koch funded Democratic Leadership Council and the Clinton-Gore "New Democrat" "Third Way". Then we had Obama who refused to prosecute the Iraq war criminals "Don't look back"; failed to prosecute the Banksters that stole trillions from the American people; started nine new imperial wars and continued Bush's imperial wars while trying to sell Obamacare written by lobbyists for the benefit of Wall Street. Maybe it's time the majority learned the makeup of the political stratification in the US.
I would like to start with the name change of Democratic Party to Liberal Democratic Party so as to differentiate them from the Progressive movement. First there are the Neoliberal-Neoconservative Republicans; these have the same political goals as the Neoliberal-Neoconservative Liberal Democrats except the Liberal Democrats feign interest in the working class and use identity politics to differentiate themselves from their bipartisan cohorts in crime. Political differentiation is important as it gives the illusion of choice. Unlike the Liberal Democrats, the Republicans are rather honest in their intent. Neglecting the Trump primary deception, the Republicans don't pretend to consider the working class or the poor; they revel in their attempts to introduce Malthusian-Eugenic Darwinian Capitalism and exploiting those who need a religious crutch, food to eat, and shelter. And secretly the Liberal Democrats are with them all the way to the bank.
Then we have the “Progressive”. The label of “Progressive” has been so badly corrupted I don’t know where to start. Sometimes Hartmann describes himself as progressive while he attempts to sell you Pelosi who is for imperial wars, the interests of Wall Street and is silent on Medicare for All; Hartmann also tries to sell you on individuals such as the Wall Street puppet and Chair of the DNC, Tom Perez. To many, this deception of conflating “Progressive” with “Liberal” should be obvious, but far too many who haven’t been paying attention to current events still believe they are synonyms. Nothing could be further from the truth!
The second most accurate description I have ever heard for a “Liberal” is as a “Political Ratchet”. A Political Ratchet is sometimes known as the “Ratchet Effect on American Politics” and is used to ensure Wall Street always wins. To benefit Wall Street, the Liberal Democrats are in bed with the Republicans to continually move the Overton window to the right. The Liberals may feign outrage at some Republican policy but as the Republicans retreat, the Democrats give a little ground. Yes, this death of a thousand cuts is an excellent strategy to deceive the population over decades. Even Obama admits his policies thirty years ago would have been considered moderate Republican. And the last major role of the Liberal Democrats is to feign progressivism with their Trump rants and feign support of the “Minorities” through their identity politics. The most accurate description I have ever heard for a “Liberal” Democrat is someone feigning as being of the people while conspiring with the Republicans to ensure the Real Progressives never take power.
So I hope you can tell the difference between a Progressive and a Liberal. Examples of Real Progressives are Chris Hedges and Max Blumenthal and examples of Liberals are Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, and yes, Hartmann . If you read his work, even Charles Koch describes himself as a “Liberal”. For anyone who believes the Democratic Party has ever been anything different, I suggest you research the demise of the most popular candidate Henry Wallace at the 1944 DNC convention. If you wish to go further into the history of the Democratic Party, may I suggest you read about the alliance between the Democrat William M. (Boss) Tweed and the Rail Robber Barons of the late 1800s.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Notice how, when explaining the historical progress and the demise of US Democracy, Hartmann starts with the Powell Memo in 1971 that was the Republican strategy to subvert US Democracy, and then Hartmann says, 02:40 “Boom, that leads directly to Citizens United and then you got a billionaire oligarch running Fox News Network”; HOLD ON, you have left out the best parts of history. You have only included the Republican criminals, what about the criminals in the Democratic Party? Yes, Hartmann continues his rant with emotive labels such as “Rupert Murdoch” and then “Donald Trump”, and apparently, intentionally misses the contribution to this scam by the party he tells everyone to vote for, the Wall Street owned Democratic Party.
Notice how Hartman leads Thomas Frank over the part of history where Bill Clinton and Al Gore created the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) funded by the Koch Brothers; yes, the same GOP Libertarian Koch Brothers that introduced “Citizens United” to allow the oligarchs to buy the elections. The same Koch brothers that introduced “Money is Free Speech” where one’s voice was only limited by the size of one’s wallet. It’s interesting why Hartmann left out this piece of information especially when his diatribes against the subversive Koch and their Libertarianism are legendary. But as soon the Kochs interact with his Democratic Party and Corporate Democrats, you don’t hear a word. Hartman is neither an ignorant nor stupid man so I can only conclude this deception is intentional.
Notice how Hartman leads Thomas Frank over the part of history where Bill Clinton and Al Gore also created the “Third Way”; the intentional strategy of formally changing the idea of working for the majority and asking Wall Street to fund the Democratic Party; and here’s the killer; to benefit the workers of America.
Notice how Hartmann totally forgets about the deregulation of Wall Street, started by the Reagan administration (Don Regan – Merrill Lynch) and finished by, you guessed it, Bill Clinton.
So Hartmann; did that turn out as expected? As you would expect it didn’t work without the Democratic Party removing its cloak of questionable intent and start formally working for Wall Street. The joke of Wall Street is they could hold out the money just out of reach, and move to the right, and the Democrats would follow them.
Notice this is the same Hartmann who told you to vote for Hillary. I can still see Hillary, the Wall Street employee and sycophant, paid by Wall Street and owned by Wall Street, and Hartmann leading his audience into the same old strategy of “voting for the lesser of two evils”, where no matter the outcome, Wall Street always wins. Sadly, the more intelligent voters that understand the scam become more and more disheartened.
So Hartmann, why the intentional deception; are you working for Wall Street? Are you being paid to keep at least one of the doors of democracy always open for the oligarchs should the Republicans become a complete laughing stock? What’s the scam?
Notice how Thomas Frank hints at the scam by saying, 03:10 “You have got to have a second political party if you want to do that; you have to have a party that opposes it if you want to reverse it”, to the query about why the actions of the Reagan era haven’t been reversed. And Thomas Frank is correct when he said, 03:35 “Everything you have said is exactly true”, but what Frank apparently overlooks is the contributions by the Clinton, Gore, the “Third Way” and the Kochs. I have been watching Hartmann for long enough to understand that something is on the nose; but the avoidance and failure to clarify history by Frank disappoints and saddens me.
So when I heard Thomas Frank avoid Obama’s complicity in the Wall Street scam, my heart sank. I would expect the Corporate Democrat Hartmann to distort the facts for his masters on Wall Street but I thought Frank was different. I’ve never heard Hartmann admit the Obama administration was selected by Citi Group, but I heard those words come out of Thomas Frank’s mouth when he wasn’t around Hartmann. Guess I was wrong about Frank; he is apparently part of the deception. I can’t watch anymore of this video, too depressing. I guess people get the democratic processes and the governments they deserve.
1
-
At last, Hartmann gives a somewhat accurate account of history. The only parts where Hartmann got it wrong was the 1933 against the Roosevelt administration didn't intend to kill Roosevelt, it was intended to sideline Roosevelt into a puppet ceremonial role (much like there is now in the White House), and have an army of 500,000 selective troops run the administration (If you replace the word "troops" with "Wall Street and Military Industrial Complex executives"; that's fundamentally how the government is run now).
And Hartmann was wrong about Roosevelt's intent; Roosevelt was a tool of Wall Street, and just like Obama, Roosevelt was a proficient thespian. Roosevelt betrayed the people when he failed to prosecute the plutocrats that instigated the coup, but he could have done little else as many of those plutocrats owned Roosevelt. I liken Roosevelt's betrayal of the people and democracy to that of Obama when he said, "Look forward, not back"; when Obama intentionally failed to prosecute the torturers and war criminals of the Bush administration. So always remember – “It’s a Big Club, and you ain’t in it”.
1
-
1
-
@josephmcnair5543 : Even the communication fails because people have their own definition of the meaning of words. If you look at the history of the word “Liberal”, it has changed many times over the years. Today, the term Liberal is so liberal, and political groups who profess to be “Liberal” have such a broad political spectrum, the term has lost all meaning. This broad “Liberal” approach and being “be all things to all people” is usually designed to attract the populous to a set of vague doctrines. But somehow I suspect that was the intent all the time by individuals such as the minion Hartmann. You can find a definition of Liberal that describes Martin Luther King, just as you can find a definition of Liberal that describes Charles Koch. A Progressive may unwittingly believe they are a Liberal, but that only shows their ignorance of the intentional corruption of the meaning of the word. In other countries like Britain and Australia, the “Liberals” fall on the Conservative side of politics and follow doctrine very similar to that of Libertarians. You may believe you understand the meaning of Liberal, but that is a delusion in isolation; remember most on Wall Street (e.g. Lloyd Blankfein) call themselves Liberals when they would be better described Libertarians. Maybe read a little Orwell, he is excellent at exposing the insidiousness of the intentional corruption of the meaning of words.
As for Libertarians, that’s a whole different animal. There are three main types of Libertarian in this world; the wealthy Libertarian (Charles Koch) who gains advantage from Austrian economics; the Libertarian minion (Tom Woods – Mises Institute) who is recruited to promote the Austrian-Libertarian doctrine, and the army of rubes (e.g. Tea Party) that unwittingly and blindly follow the “Freedom, Liberty, Prosperity” garbage the Libertarian minions promote. Don’t just look at both David Koch and Bill Clinton both having tickets on Epstein’s Lolita Express; take a close look at the Clinton-Gore “New Way” Democratic Leadership Council funded by Charles Koch and promoted as a "Liberal" entity. Liberalism is a scam designed to be so nebulous it must create conflict between the poor rubes that latch onto and fiercely protect their own personal definitions of the word. This is why it’s so easy for “Liberals” to support US imperialism; this is why it’s easy for Madeline Albright to kill half a million Iraqi children in the late 1990s by sanctions, for which she has no remorse “It was worth it”, and still be able to promote Hillary’s 2016 campaign.
This is what happens when you base your reality on lies. The plutocrats and their Hollywood minions have been corrupting actual history for years. Forget that crap you learned in school and grab yourself a copy of Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States”. As for the founding fathers, maybe you should read Zinn's book and delve into the Federalist Papers to see what was really going on. Research actual history and you will soon realize you have been sold a scam and there is no difference between the founding fathers and contemporary plutocrats; it’s just that you have either accepted the lies taught to you in school or you like the fairytale and have intentionally blinded yourself to the truth. You appear to have no trouble accepting George Washington slaughtering Native Americans and stealing their land, but throw up your hands in disgust at the smallest personal infraction. Yes; that definitely a “Liberal”.
1
-
Yotn Pez : If you follow the same old failed simplistic strategy (Vote Blue no matter Who), I'll bet you the farm you're having this same conversation in 10 years under deteriorating circumstances; just as you probably had this same conversation 10 years ago. Bush jr. (Cheney) and Obama have set the road for the future in ways you can't even imagine. Mindless speculation, simplistic clichés, and anachronistic platitudes aren't going to prepare you for what is to come. If the people underestimate and fail to recognize their real enemies, and fail to organize, the majority is doomed. Much of the US will resemble the favelas of Brazil in 10 years. Think of this day as the slow start of a Malthusian Eugenics program using the Rahm Emanuel strategy of “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.” Through his writings, Roosevelt certainly gave the impression he want to save the system, but remember he had had the Communist, Socialist, and Union movements to use as leverage against the plutocrats. Due to the stupidity, ignorance, engineered fear (e.g. McCarthyism, Russiagate), and apathy of the population; those very useful tools for political change no longer exist. Understand the current system floats on a sea of corruption, as that has always been the Mission Statement of the United States. According to extraordinary gentlemen like Major General Smedley Butler, the good old days were exactly like today; nothing has changed in 100 years. Unlike the erratic and directionless fools of today, Butler understood the plutocrats were psychopathic, strategic, and very intelligent; and what strategic intellect they lacked was recruited to fill the role. What has changed today is the character of the people as the "extraordinary" are very thin on the ground. Those fools of today underestimate their enemy and all that remains is a dying mafia empire, a nation of cretins, the plutocrats positioning themselves using predetermined strategies, and a road to serfdom for the majority; while a few screaming rubes on Google and Facebook who have embedded in their ignorance, only some inclination of what is to come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bipolarbear9917 I would be hesitant to dismiss John Kasich's comments too quickly. Unlike Bernie and his pushing of Russiagate, John Kasich has shown his honesty and his commitment to democracy and the people time and time again. Just being ostracized by the corrupt media should give some idea of Kasich's integrity. Unlike Bernie, John Kasich is definitely a rare commodity - an honest politician with a track record to prove it. Kasich has battled corporate monopolies and corruption his whole life to the point where he had a bullet pass through his house just missing his head. If that ever happened to Bernie, you wouldn't see him for dust. Knowing the consequences of exposing the lies of Empire, Kasich went to Syria along with Gabbard to find the facts; you would never see that level of integrity from Bernie. The best you could expect from Bernie would be some off-the-cuff comment criticizing Putin to keep the Clinton-Democratic wolves at bay. The most favorable thing I could say about Bernie is he is politically flexible like so many others (e.g. The Squad).
Reforming the electoral system is a nice idea, but the plutocrats are in charge and they aren't going to shoot themselves in the foot. From Gerrymandering to Superdelegates; the whole system has been carefully designed so it can be manipulated by the plutocrats; and they aren't going to change something that works so well anytime soon. If you read the Federalist Papers, you will understand the “Founding Fathers” never intended for the US to be a “democracy”; and it has been ruled by plutocratic families ever since. The stories you are told about the original Constitution and democracy are just Disney folk tales. Over the years, these plutocratic families have coordinated their puppets (politicians) in Washington to get the outcomes they desired. This fake democracy is a useful tool of the plutocrats as it gives the illusion of freedom and democracy. Understand that slaves are much more easily controlled if they are under the illusion they are free. So it’s now the job of the people to make this illusory democracy real.
Just after we saw the Clinton “Shadow” App that compromised the Iowa primaries for Sanders, we watched as the Democratic establishment coordinated with their primary candidates to remove themselves from the race (2020) just so Biden would beat Sanders. At the time the establishment appeared to be unsure of Sanders motives and intent, but history has shown they had nothing to worry about. Over the decades, the Democratic establishment has carefully designed the system to filter out real progressives and either eject them from the party or just relocate them into an area where they can do no harm. The Democratic establishment has also designed the system to control the narrative and along with the corrupted media, filter that narrative to only pass what it deems "acceptable" speech. Anything other than "acceptable" speech is severely criticized by the establishment media and the culprits are usually ostracized. This is a coordinated network designed to keep real progressives out of the race independent of which voting system is in place, and independent of the will of the people.
If you wish to understand this scam a little further may I seriously suggest you read, "A People's History of the United States", by the great historian Howard Zinn. And if you wish to learn more about the unwinding of Roosevelt's New Deal and how the plutocrats crushed the fledgling democracy after WW2, may I suggest, "One Nation Under God; How Corporate America Invented Christian America", by Princeton history professor Kevin M. Kruse. I'm just speculating, but it may not be too long before Howard Zinn's book is banned.
1
-
1
-
What Hartmann doesn’t appear to understand about Murdoch is he is one of those plutocrats who moves politicians around as if they were pawns on a chessboard. Murdoch uses his vast media network to create the political landscape that best suits his ideological interests. He has removed prime ministers and installed presidents with the help of the weak minded rubes that believe everything that’s printed.
Sure, Trump was a grifter, a liar, and a petulant fool who was able to create fear in the weak minded. Trump was hated, not for his giving tax breaks to the wealthy as Obama did that and not a word was said; not for creating an administration out of Wall Street executives as Obama’s administration was selected by Citi Group; not for putting children in cages as Obama built those cages, but Trump was hated by those weak, pathetic liberals for his demeanor. The affliction of these weak minded cretins was soon named “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and it was real! “Trump Derangement Syndrome” removed the ability to reason from these poor fools and all they could do once afflicted was babble nonsense in one syllable words.
Understand Trump was just another in a long line of presidential puppets of the plutocrats. Trump didn’t have the acting or coercive skills required to manipulate the majority of the rubes like Obama. When Obama scammed the rubes by promising “Hope & Change” most actually believed this grifter, but when Trump promised “Drain the Swamp” very few believed him. So I can understand Trump being a one term president; he didn’t have the skills necessary to manipulate, and that’s fatal for a politician. And in that way especially, I’m going to miss trump.
If you asked Obama or Biden why the US invaded Iraq; they will give you some garbage about WMDs or some other proven fabrication of the time. But Trump is so stupid he blurts out the truth without even a second thought, “To take the oil”. And he even qualifies further by saying, “To the victor go the spoils”. You won’t hear that level of misplaced honesty from the rest of the lying sleaze in government or the mainstream media; and for that alone, he will be missed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Thomas, here you go again. Bush didn’t lie. To lie, you must be aware of what you are saying is false. Without Cheney, Bush would have had a hard time knowing what day it was. So it’s not rational to accuse an ignoramus of lying when they don’t understand their own intent.
As for Oprah, she would make an excellent president but not for the reasons you might think. The primary role of a puppet president is to manipulate their moron base and I believe Oprah would do that well. In fact, being involved in the entertainment industry and being able to act should be prerequisites for the role of puppet president. One of the most successful presidents was an accomplished actor and he knew how to manipulate his base (Reagan). Reagan was selected by the oligarchs to sell Supply-Side economics to the fools and they bought it hook, line and sinker. So when Reagan said on behalf of his oligarch masters, if we push all the wealth to the top and it will trickle down, no one questioned his statement.
Thomas, you assume the president uses their intellect to make decisions – wrong. The role of president is ceremonial as the real decisions are made within the Deep State. So yes, Oprah would make an excellent president. She has the ability to hold an audience of fools for an extended period of time and convince them they are super intelligent and have the world at their feet. What else do you need in a president other than to convince delusional people they are exceptional and live in an indispensable nation? When you have attained this level of self delusion, state propaganda filtered through a corrupt media works much more effectively.
So Thomas, you say Americans want an outsider – that’s not possible. Sure the Corporate Democrats may be more Main street friendly than the Corporate Republicans but neither side will ever allow an outsider. The system is setup not to allow an outsider into the race; you of all people should understand that fact. And even if an outsider slipped through the impenetrable filter they could only achieve two terms of damage to the oligarchs. And if they were too much of an impending threat, there is also the JFK option. So if Oprah were elected, she certainly wouldn’t be working for the people.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1