“One of the most chilling points to come out of this interview is that all of the illegal activity that Nixon engaged in which ultimately forced him to resign the presidency is now legal under the Patriot Act (up to and including the planned assassination of Ellsberg).”
boogie albert 53 on Jun 14, 2011 at 15:43:26
“The same Patriot Act that obama kept?”
Tom Sutpen on Jun 14, 2011 at 13:59:39
“There was never a planned assassination of Ellsberg. You're thinking of Jack Anderson.”
“The big fundamental problem from everything I've read is that Nuclear Energy has never, under any circumstances, been sufficiently safe.
We all want to blame Japanese officials who covered-up problems that were pointed out in 2008, etc., but the underlying fact is that proponents of Nuclear Energy have never been able to devise an adequate system for the disposal of spent fuel rods.
The whole catastrophe is that the water tanks (in which the disposed fuel rods must remain for upwards of 10 years before they can be sufficiently cooled before burial in concrete tombs) have to remain constantly flushed with water; water which is pumped through by electricity. Everything that has occurred is the result of the lack of electricity availble to operate the cooling systems.
In this particular circumstance, there is no reasonable way to stop a continued meltdown. Not because of incompetence on the part of the Japonese, but because no such technology exists. The reactors can be continuously doused with fire hoses for the next 10 years or until electricity can be restored to the cooling systems (whichever comes first), but that hardly seems plausible and from everything I've read and heard thusfar, that's about the extent of what can be done.
That the world continues to put its eggs in the Nuclear basket without first dealing with the disposal question is the fundamental problem here. (Kind of like deepwater drilling without sufficient failsafe measures.) All the rest is blather.”
splashy on Mar 16, 2011 at 17:48:19
“Very very true. That IS the bottom line.
The worst case scenario is what should be always looked at.”
bobdole1979 on Mar 16, 2011 at 17:47:47
“as for stopping the melt down yes we can stop it. It's called pour water and boric acid on it.”
bobdole1979 on Mar 16, 2011 at 17:47:07
“yeah over 500 nuclear reactors world wide running for the past 40 years with about 4 or so accidents. That is a less then 1% accident rating. No other form of energy has thta kind of safety record.
For gods sake we put nuclear reactors on Aircraft carriers and submarines.”
“Health, smealth, Glenn. Go ahead. Have a cupcake. Have forty. In fact, keep eating cupcakes so you can't talk with your mouth otherwise occupied. Just keep eating cupcakes so we don't have to listen to your moronic drivel another minute.”
16BitGenocide on Mar 7, 2011 at 02:57:55
“You actually DON'T have to listen to it... you must go seek it out to in order listen to it. OR of course read this website, which has an unusual obsession with the guy.”
“Absent from the Progressive agenda has been an affirmative, coherent "roadmap" stating the goals and objectives of progressives. As odious and idiotic as they were, the Right wing's "Contract for America" and later the "Roadmap for America" were very effective in creating the idea (in their case the illusion) of a coherent set of goals and objectives that voters could latch onto (whether voters apprised themselves of the specifics or not).
It's been a necessary and laudable effort to give the lie to Right wing propoganda, but in addition to that, there needs to be an articulated, coherent vision around which voters can rally. There needs to be an affirmative, cohesive set of plans and principles around which all Democrats and Independents, fueled by the progressive wing, can coalesce.
I think most of us thought we had that in Obama. Certainly his campaign perfectly articulated a progressive vision for the country. However, his presidency has represented one betrayal after another of progressive principles. It's great to see someone like Russ Feingold step up and try to bring some cohesion and force to bear. If we ever expect to hold Obama's feet to the fire, as well as the incoherent Right wing, there needs to be more than just the great work done by people like Jane Hamsher, Matt Taibbi, Rachel Maddow, Glenn Greenwald, etc. Additionally, Progressives need to put forth an affirmative, positive agenda around which we can affirmatively lobby for desperately needed changes in government.”
Hegemoneyhoney on Feb 16, 2011 at 11:07:34
“K.J. Dwyer - I agree with you but also hope you are backing up your post with some action by joining Progressives United now. Russ Feingold has given us a place and a way to do what so many posters here have been wishing for. Join Progressives United now!”
MiddleMolly on Feb 16, 2011 at 10:49:39
“I agree. And one of the problems with Obama's presidency has been the lack of a that coherent roadmap. The Republicans and the baggers have exerted far more power and have made far more noise, thus increasingly pushing Obama to and past the center.
I don't know if any of the progressives were really ready for the onslaught that the Democrats faced when they took office in early 2009.”
powerlift2201 on Feb 16, 2011 at 10:49:33
brendastouffer on Feb 16, 2011 at 10:48:17
“I could not agree more. I have been working to start a group with the same MO in California. But I have joined Progressives United and will devote my time and resources to this movement. Without this type of change, we are doomed.”
“Is anyone else a little surprised by the decision to continue with business as usual?
All of the news is about how "unfazed" the Russians seem to be; how flights continue to take off and land. How the Russians don't negotiate with terrorists; how impressively the Russians have dealt with this kind of thing in the past.
At the very least, shouldn't the airport be shut down? If a bomb could make its way through to baggage claim, how can they know that there aren't others in play?
The footage of the baggage claim area is littered with bodies and baggage and all the newscasters seem to care about is showing how Russia can "stay in business".
This reminds me of the scene in the movie "Brazil" where a bomb goes off in the restaurant and they just move the tables around while the bloodied musicians continue to play.”
missouriwatcher on Jan 24, 2011 at 11:56:49
“That is a problem with resorting to violence; it is only effective for a limited time before people become jaded.”
“So the fighters of the French Revolution were "indecent" and "not connected to themselves" (1:00 into the segment). That sounds a little like Pat Robertson's contention that the Haiti revolutionaries (who fought for the end of their own slavery and to create their own government) had made a "pact with the devil".
It's extraordinary to me that this just slips by and is tacitly accepted. Where are the journalists to challenge this kind of speech? I'm glad that Viera takes Beck to task later in the inverview, but the idea that someone can make a statement like the above unchallenged is a sign of not only how far the national discourse has deteriorated, but how decrepit American journalism has become.”
SoSorry on Jan 19, 2011 at 15:47:56
“Agreed. Although I often hear so many of these terrible statements in the course of one conversation or interview, and they are so wrong on so many levels, that there simply is not enough time (or words) to address everything.
Sadly, many people listen to and swear by Beck.
There is a proverb that I cannot translate well.. Goes something like this: "It takes 100 smart men to retrieve a boulder thrown into a ravine by one foolish person."”
ABraut on Jan 19, 2011 at 11:45:04
“It was called 'The Reign of Terror' for a reason and it's the origin of 'left' as a political term. Educate yourself.”
“"Complex financial instruments like certain derivatives, though, have a higher risk-weighting."
And as Wall Street continues to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to overturn and/or thwart financial services regulation, the bubble continues to expand. The 600 trillion dollar industry -- that's right, over 600 trillion dollars of derivatives currently exist -- could be nothing more than a giant gas balloon. The reason Wall Street is fighting tooth and nail against regualtion is that once a reasonalbe valuation is made, we could very well discover that the vast majority of this paper is worthless. The regulations adopted last year in Congress only deter banks from future trading practices, but do nothing to valuate what currently exists.
What the banks are doing is trying to re-package this potentially worthless paper and foist them off on foreign investors, thereby spreading the misery while continuing to line their pockets with millions in transaction fees and increase their leverage overall. Anything resembling transperancy must be avoided at all costs, less the hapless investor discover the true worth(lessness) of his investment.
The Financial Services Industry has learned nothing (except that the U.S. government is for sale, will do their bidding and bail them out should they fail). They will hold to their failed economic theories and practices even if it means driving the economy off a cliff, which, if there is not a serious course correction, is exactly where we're headed.”
“"Two years later it still stands in stark contrast to eight years of President George W. Bush's unilateralism and reputation for cowboy diplomacy."
This is the second sentence of this article and, as such, states a premise that a lot of people would not accept.
American foreign policy does not differ much between political parties and Obama is no exception. He continues rendition programs ensuring that torture ensues, Guantanamo continues operating unabated and the CIA has been authorized to assassinate anyone based on "information" it receives (begging the question: Who is vetting this information?).
Additionally, the drone campaign in Pakistan is killing 98% innocent civilians. This is turning our Pakistani allies into enemies. 6 of 10 Pakistanis now believe the U.S. is the enemy.
Regarding foreign policy, Obama is Bush-lite, differing only in rhetoric but not in any discernable action. This article states a false premise and then does no real analysis of Obama's actions.”
piul05 on Nov 4, 2010 at 10:00:01
Wisdo on Nov 4, 2010 at 07:43:43
“Well said. Obamas foreign policy differs only in style. The substance is the same: military domination of the middle east at ANY cost.
There is a saying that you cant fool all of the people all of the time. Well Obama may not have been fooling the american people about the economy and healthcare - but his administration is doing its utmost to fool them on his foreign policy. He's fooling no-one in the rest of the world of course. Foreign media actually reports the number of people killed by the military.”
“While I've read many who've alleged corruption on the part of the Kirchners, I think it's worth mentioning the incredible stablilizing force that they've represented and continue to represent in Argentina, which was in financial collapse when Nestor assumed the presidency in 2003 (due in large part to the over-ladening of debt by, among others, American investment banks).
The IMF at the time of the crisis wanted austerity meaures, including massive raising of utility rates and the like in order to collect on its debt. The Kirchner government took other measures which have resulted in tremendous growth and stability that avoided worsening what was already a disasterous situation for the vast majority of Argentines.
The Kirchners faced a 25% unemployment rate which is now around 10% (still high, but significantly better). They paid off the IMF, they've successfully re-negotiated and are paying off the outstanding debt, they wisely invested in badly needed infrastructure projects, they re-opened investigations into various criminals of the dirty war, they raised the pensions of retired Argentines, and, perhaps most importantly to me personally, successfully pushed for the legislation allowing gay marriage. All of this while the economy has grown at a rate of 8 or 9 percent a year since they took power.
I would respectfully request that those knee-jerk American physicians who decry the "corruption" of the Kirchners and Argentine politics in general to go heal themselves. Today is a good day to start. Vote.
Mientras tanto, vaya Cristina.”
Nicolas Lichtmaier on Nov 2, 2010 at 19:33:11
“When mentioning the "corruption" one must not forget the fight for having more plural press (no monopolies). Since that fight, corruption has been used and exaggerated by the media to fight the government...
The say "go Cristina!" is not translated to "vaya Cristina". A better translation would be "Vamos Cristina!" (let's go Cristina!).”
“This should come as no surprise to anyone who knows the history of Roman Catholicism.
The church was originally formed as the official religion of the the Roman Empire under Constantine. It's primary purpose was to codify what were hundreds of different Christian sects into one, official, state-controlled religion. During Constantine's reign, two thirds of Christian texts were cast to the winds in order to make "Christianity" and the Christian Bible more amenable to the empire.
Since then, every successive Christian religion has continued to refer to Constantine's "playbook", reducing all Christian enterprises to empire first, morality second.
That is why when Catholics such as those in Latin America and elsewhere fly against the the historical, hegemonic tendencies of Roman Catholicism, they're branded as "Marxist" and "Communist" and demonized by Catholic "conservatives" who seek to conserve their heirarchical power and authority.
Catholic conservatives are to Christianity what Tea Party loons are to democracy. Completely and totally antithetical.”
stephenlight on Oct 25, 2010 at 13:39:55
“Meant to say 'throughout the Middle East, North Africa and Europe"”
stephenlight on Oct 25, 2010 at 13:33:44
“Please go back and read the history. The Church was not 'originally formed' as the official religion of the Roman Empire. It existed prior to Constantine's adoption of it. There were communities through the Middle East, North Africa and the Middle East, many with Bishops. In fact, a cursory look at the Bishops of Antioch, show over 20 in succession BEFORE Constantine's conversion. His motives may have been state oriented or not, he isn't present to explain his motivations in full.
In addition, your comparison of Catholic conservatives to Tea party advocates and the extended remark that Catholicism is anti-thetical to Christianity are prejudicial and unfounded. The Church does have a point of view. It is expressed in authority by the Pope. You are welcome to ignore it, criticize it and rant about it, but please don't assert opinions as facts and veiled implications that Catholics, even conservative ones, are not Christians.”
cmalloy on Oct 25, 2010 at 13:16:07
“The church was originally formed as the official religion of the the Roman Empire under Constantine.
This came after Constantine.
It's primary purpose was to codify what were hundreds of different Christian sects into one, official, state-controlled religion.
During Constantine's reign, two thirds of Christian texts were cast to the winds in order to make "Christianity" and the Christian Bible more amenable to the empire.
Why is there no mention of the Opinion Research Business (ORB) poll which determined that there are closer to a million Iraqis dead as a result of the American occupation?
True, the majority of those violent deaths are not the direct result of American fire, however the spectacularly stupid decision to fire the existing Iraqi army (rather than vetting potential allies as we did in Nazi Germany) contributed greatly to the number of violent deaths of Iraqis. Those deaths, therefore, are layed directly at the feet of the American Occupation.
This also says nothing about the 5.1 million Iraqis who have been "displaced" (many of whom have fled the country).
“It's extraordinary to hear someone cut through all of the Media distraction the way Ratigan does. His points are irrefutable and the collective silence amongst the rest of the panel is testament to that.”
searles7 on Oct 16, 2010 at 12:27:25
“You noticed that too? It was like "Damn, why is he trying to make sense, we're just supposed to be shoving the caca from chair to chair. Doesn't he know we're not licensed to handle the truth. Him gonna get us in trouble."”
“Shirvell is clearly closeted himself and is obviously projecting all his Christian homosexual self-loathing onto Armstrong. Truly sad and pathetic.
If he ever comes to terms with his own sexuality, he will feel the full weight of the pain he has caused and given the spectacular nature of his denial, the personal humiliation and embarrassment could lead to suicide.
Instead, as difficult as it will be for him, I hope he experiences some self realization and lives to be a proud, if contrite, gay man and spends the rest of his life helping to further the cause of gay civil rights.
"Come into the light, Andrew; all are welcome, all are welcome."”
“I hope Christopher Hitchens is not too ill to respond to this tripe. He, better than anyone, has analyzed and catalogued the war crimes of Henry Kissinger. I hope we hear from him.
To those who continue to treat Henry Kissinger as some grand elder statesman; you are complicit in the cover-up and white-washing of war crimes and you should be ashamed of yourselves.
Kissinger should be rotting in prison. It's disgusting enough to reflect on his his role in the "destruction of Americans faith in each other" without listening to him engage in revisionist history of his own complicity.
A little side note: The year Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Prize (1973) was the same year he participated in the overthrow of the Allende government in Chile, and three years after helping to orchestrate the assassination of Rene Schneider, the Chilean Army's Commander in Chief who refused to cooperate with American operatives intent on overthrow.
Please read Christopher Hitchens' "The Trial of Henry Kissinger"”
sokolof on Sep 29, 2010 at 23:20:51
“I don't understand, if he did ill to those at least innocent Americans, why is he walking free? Why aren't people asking for justice?”
MyTake on Sep 29, 2010 at 23:07:58
“And he didn't ever work for the U.S. Government, he worked for his real boss, David Rockefeller who funds, organizes and controls the 4000 elite membership base of the NY Council on Foreign Relations.
“Perhaps if the United States didn't engage in wars of aggression, wars of choice (just coincidentally connected to valuable resources, we're supposed to believe) and the overt and covert undermining of democracies (Iran in 1953, Chile in 1973, among others; read "Overthrow" by Stephen Kinzer) there might be some semblance of "patriotism" connected to American military service and volunteers would be more readily available.
That Gates frames his argument this way, that "service in the military – no matter how laudable – has become something for other people to do," completely disregards the illegitmacy with which the United States throws its weight around, including the fabrication of "evidence", indeterminate/permanent incarceration, rendition, torture and other war crimes, the killing of hundreds of thousands, indiscriminate displacement of millions (5.4 million in Iraq alone), destruction of infrastructure, etc.
Military service, in and of itself, is noble. The way in which the powers-that-be use and abuse that service, however, is despicable. Our present engagements, perhaps, especially.
Unless and until the United States gets right with the rest of the world -- and regards the other 6.4 billion human beings on the planet as something more than collateral damage in its quest for the control and exploitation of resources -- its only hope for military recruitment is the further expansion of an exponentially growing underclass with little education and no hope of alternate employment or "the semblance of a normal life" to which Gates refers.
“In 2002, in a little argument I was having with a Republican in the run-up to the Iraq invasion, I predicted that we were going to be in Afghanistan and Iraq for a minimum of 30 years. Among other things, I cited the fact that we were still in Korea. My Republican friend dismissed me out of hand, saying that we'd only be there a couple of years at the most.
It's cold comfort to be correct, while the United States continues its descent into attempted hegemonic, self-destructive oblivion. American foreign policy exhibits no sense of responsibility. It will continue to engage the U.S. in overextended fools' enterprises even as its own country declines in the process. It will continue to undermine democracy both at home and abroad. It rightly deserve the world's contempt and, if there is justice, the contempt of Americans, as well.
American contempt cannot come fast enough, however I see no real sign that such contempt will ever gain enough traction to avoid descending the U.S. into a further mire of wrong-headed, selfish exploitation of the world's resources and subjugation of the vast majority of its population.
The results of American hegemonic handiwork reduce those with a clear-eyed, historical context to "Cassandras" on the periphery. We watch in horror as propoganda machines, corporate takeover of government and the overall destruction of the political process wax unabated.
It is a pathetic and tragic spectacle that, left to continue, will auto-cannibalize American Democracy.”
taxpaying on Sep 29, 2010 at 14:33:19
ChrisDWard on Sep 29, 2010 at 14:20:41
“Your words are tragic, but true I'm afraid. Well said.”
“If there ever will be an accurate history written about the decline of the United States, Roger Ailes will be front and center as one of its prime architects.
As the principal director of American Conservatives' propoganda, his incessant appeal to fear-based racist, xenophobic, misogynist and homophobic tendencies, the decline of the Middle Class, the corporatization of government, and the hegemonic expanse of American subversion of democracies all over the world are just a few of the "successes" he can list on his infamous C.V.
He is the "Uncle Sam" of the Neo-conservative cabal that has rendered our present American Democracy, for all intents and purposes, an utter farce. Morally bereft, intellectually dishonest, and utterly and completely mean-spirited, he is the dough-faced, cowardly portrait of true American Elitism masked in a faux-populist disguise.
That Ailes' qualms about Beck's rise to prominence center around Beck's "toxicity" to ad revenues (having nothing to do with Beck's general toxicity to a functioning democracy) speaks volumes about his own underlying sick character.
Roger Ailes is an observation, not a name.”
ebanks84 on Sep 29, 2010 at 20:03:55
“F&F for the absolute truth. Thank you :).”
Democrat in the South on Sep 29, 2010 at 14:51:28
Abena in Africa on Sep 29, 2010 at 14:23:51
bigfated on Sep 29, 2010 at 13:45:22
Roger Ailes is a PIG! 'Nuff said!”
KOSMOCITIZEN on Sep 29, 2010 at 13:35:55
“when i look Roger's face he reminds me these Alien frickish looking characters from Star Wars
Cornelia36 on Sep 29, 2010 at 13:32:48
Bill Naquin on Sep 29, 2010 at 13:32:46
“You misspelled propaganda in the second paragraph.”
barney123 on Sep 29, 2010 at 13:29:27
“f and f”
conscioushope on Sep 29, 2010 at 13:27:48
“Wow, KJ, thanks so much!!
Fanned and faved with pride!!
darcdante on Sep 29, 2010 at 13:26:53
“Amen, brother! If only everyone were as brillitant as all of us, we could solve the world's problems in a day or two! World peace! No more rich people! No more conservatives! Kill them all! Down with hate!”
“I've said for years that if only people would read the Bible and study its origins there would be far fewer people of religious affiliation or that religious affiliations would be far more amenable to change.
Most Christians don't realize that the Bible was edited by Constantine in order to serve as the official religion of the then Roman Empire. Virtually two-thirds of what was loosely regarded as "the Bible" was literally tossed to the winds in order to codify one Christian church which served the empire. Christianity up until that point had many different sects and beliefs; some of which belived in re-incarnation and had very different ideas of Jesus as man vs. Christ as son of god. Read Charles Freeman's "The Closing of the Western Mind"
When people describe themselves as "born again" Christians, therefore, they are in fact identifying themselves as born-again medieval catholics. I would bet that well over 90 percent of Christians in the United States have no idea of this.
My question to all people of a religious persuasion: If the Bible was a book being written over centuries, then edited to serve as a means of supporting an empire, with everything we've discovered since that time (scientifically, socially, environmentally, etc.) why, for over 1,500 years, have we stopped writing the Bible?
This obviously applies to all religions and their respective screeds; not just Christianity. The entrenchment and obstinate and arrogant conceit of religion, in general, renders it ultimately worthless.”
“Actually, I just re-watched the clip to make sure, and what Stewart was saying was that the "strategy" of attaching the repeal of DADT (not the enactment of DADT 17 years ago) to the Defense Appropriations Bill was somehow "assholic". The reference to Collins breaking a Democratic filibuster (on another bill altogether) under then Majority Leader Frist (Republican) just shows how, when push comes to shove, Republicans will vote party over what's right.
Collins' whole point about "shutting down debate" is ludicrous. It's only allowing the Bill to come to the floor for debate that allows debate and amendments to take place. If Republicans were then shut down, it's at that point that they could choose to filibuster. They took the somewhat historic step of filibustering the bill before it could even be debated. As Rachel Maddow points out, this is the first time in 48 years that a Defense Appropriations Bill hasn't passed.
There was nothing wrong with attaching the "repeal" of DADT (again, it wasn't an actual repeal; it authorized the Military to repeal DADT based on their findings to be determined in December) to the Defense Appropriations Bill and for that, I think Carl Levin was unjustly lumped in to what was, for all intents and purposes, another Republican obstructionist tactic. That there were a couple of Democrats (Blanche Lincoln and Mark Prior both from Arkansas) who voted in favor of filibuster before it could even be debated is beyond unconsionable and they should pay dearly.”
VTVinnie on Sep 23, 2010 at 16:54:00
“Thank you for checking that out. Unfortunately I'm not able to watch videos during the day so I couldn't go back and watch, I was just remembering when I watched last night.”