Comments by "silat13" (@silat13) on "Thom Hartmann Program"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
The only known indictment under the Logan Act was one that occurred in 1803 when a grand jury indicted Francis Flournoy, a Kentucky farmer, who had written an article in the Frankfort Guardian of Freedom under the pen name of "A Western American." In the article, Flournoy advocated a separate nation in the western part of the United States that would ally with France.
Guess we can arrest and charge the K0CHers that call for secession. LET'S DO IT NOW.
Logan Act:
Passed under the administration of President John Adams, during tension between the U.S. and France, it was informally named for Dr. George Logan of Pennsylvania, a state legislator (and later US Senator) and pacifist who in 1798 engaged in semi-negotiations with France during the Quasi-War.
The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.” The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held that “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President. It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not. The Republicans cannot, accept that yes, “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President;” regardless of the fact he is an African American man or that Republicans’ allegiance is to a foreign power; in this case Israel.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
No Way The KoCHs fight any attempts at mass transit or green energy. They have the infrastructure and the money to win for many decades.
The Koch Brothers' Dirty War on Solar Power
All over the country, the Kochs and utilities have been blocking solar initiatives — but nowhere more so than in Florida
"The Smart Solar amendment is financed, nakedly, by the state's top investor-owned utilities, which ponied up $4 million through December, more than half the campaign's total haul. "We are proud of who supports our campaign," says spokeswoman Sarah Bascom. Other supporters include conservative pressure groups funded by fossil-fuel interests. 60 Plus – a seniors group that has received $15 million from the Koch donor network – donated more than $1 million. The National Black Chamber of Commerce (NBCC), a tiny organization with an oversize name, added $100,000. The NBCC is funded by major polluters, including Exxon; its latest convention was sponsored by Koch Industries and Gulf Power. NBCC founder Harry Alford, unabashed, touts the "cozy, productive relationship we have with the fossil-fuel corporations." The Koch grassroots political group, Americans for Prosperity, does not appear on Smart Solar's donor rolls, but did issue a call to arms for its Florida activists to fight solar choice."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-koch-brothers-dirty-war-on-solar-power-20160211?utm_source=huffpostlive&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=partner
Kochs Killing Electric Cars
http://evworld.com/focus.cfm?cid=313
https://cleantechnica.com/2016/02/22/koch-brothers-cant-stop-trying-to-kill-people/
http://billmoyers.com/2014/10/03/koch-brothers-war-transit/
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
GOP/LiEbertarian/Drumpf/K0CHsucker plan for America and beyond:
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society/LiEbertarian dogma that they learned from their antiAmerican government bigot father who was a bigwig in the Bircher movement.
Keep this list handy. Pass it on as often as possible.
You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Davey Dogooder PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Moses Bullrush It makes every difference.
SCALIA or SOTOMAYER
PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
REPUBES are for Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas
DEMS are not.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
1
-
Moses Bullrush PARTIES ARE NOT THE SAME
May 27, 2015 12:35 PM
The Tired Old “Both Sides Getting More Extreme” Meme
By Ed Kilgore
In my recent book and elsewhere, I’ve noted that the meta-narrative Republicans were promoting—and much of the MSM was echoing—during the 2014 midterms was that the Great Big Moderate Adults of the GOP had gotten the crazy extremist Tea People under control, and were ready to govern in a serious way that Serious People could appreciate. An important sub-narrative to the completely phony Republican Shift to the Center was that Democrats were moving to the left so fast that they’d probably start singing the Internationale at party events before long.
A lot of people who don’t completely buy the GOP Shift to the Center are happy to promote the false equivalency classic of Everybody’s Polarizing at Exactly the Same Pace. But there’s one species of observers who are deeply invested in the Democratic Lurch to the Left meme: Republican “moderates” who spend a fair amount of time criticizing their zany brethren and need an excuse to reassume the Party Yoke when elections come around.
Peter Wehner is one such person, and so he pens the classic so’s-your-old-man-and-actually-maybe-your-old-man’s-worse op-ed for the New York Times. Ignoring the fact that most actual lefty Democrats think Barack Obama is too much like Bill Clinton, Wehner’s case almost entirely depends on contrasting the noble centrist Big Dog (who, of course, conservatives denounced as a godless socialist when he was actually in office) with the left-bent Obama.
And it’s a really terrible argument. Exhibit one for Wehner involves Clinton’s support for three-strikes-and-you’re-out and 100,000 cops, as though they are the same thing, with Eric Holder’s de-incarceration commitment. Keep up, Pete: Clinton, along with two-thirds of the Republican presidential field, has called for a reversal of “mass incarceration” policies. It’s not an ideological move in either direction so much as a rare and belated bipartisan recognition of what does and doesn’t work.
Exhibit two is welfare reform, and aside from ignoring everything Clinton did on low-income economic policy other than signing the 1996 welfare law, Wehner blandly accepts the race-drenched lie—and he’s smart enough to know that it is indeed widely interpreted to be a lie—from the 2012 Romney campaign that Obama has “loosened welfare-to-work requirements.” Then he tries to pivot to a contrast of Clinton’s shutdown of the “welfare entitlement” with Obama’s creation of a health care entitlement—without noting that Clinton had a health care proposal that was distinctly more “liberal” than Obama’s. Pretty big omission, I’d say.
It gets worse. Wehner suggests that unlike Clinton Obama wants to boost taxes on the wealthy, which conveniently ignores Clinton’s first budget. Speaking of the budget, Obama’s fiscal record is contrasted with Clinton’s without noting that Obama inherited not only a huge deficit but the worst economy since the 1930s. Wehner makes a fact-free assertion that Obama isn’t as friendly towards U.S. allies as Clinton was. And in a telling maneuver, he suddenly shifts the contrast from Clinton-versus-Obama to Clinton-versus-Clinton in mentioning the dispute over the Trans-Pacific Partnership, where HRC has been “non-committal.” Well, the crazy lefty Barack Obama hasn’t been “non-committal,” has he? Yes, a majority of congressional Democrats oppose him on TPP. But a majority of congressional Democrats also opposed Clinton on NAFTA and GATT, and denied him “fast-track” trade negotiating authority. Plus ca change….
Nonetheless, Wehner stumbles on to his pre-fab conclusion:
The Democratic Party is now a pre-Bill Clinton party, the result of Mr. Obama’s own ideological predilections and the coalition he has built.
In the very next breath he acknowledges that on the one issue where the Democratic Party really has “moved to the left,” same-sex marriage, the country has moved with it (and the “pre-Bill Clinton” Democratic Party had to move as well). And then he leaps to the circular argument that Republicans must be better representing the “center” of public opinion, because they’re doing so well in midterms!
Well, Pete, guess you have to take the position that makes it possible for you to spend so much time calling out the crazy people of your party. But the facts are not friendly to your argument.
Ed Kilgore edits the Political Animal blog and is a contributing writer to the Washington Monthly. He is managing editor for the Democratic Strategist, a weekly columnist at Talking Points Memo, and the author of Election 2014: Why Republicans Swept the Midterms, recently published by the University of Pennsylvania Press
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_05/the_tired_old_both_sides_getti055757.php
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
bohemianwriter1 ReaganVooDooTrickleDownGoldenShowerPizzOnYou economics 101. Nationalist Reagan Socialism, promoting a fascist aristocracy and disposable human beings.
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
1
-
1