The Pardu

Posts Tagged ‘Thom Hartmann’

Thom Hartmann "The Lie of the Free Market"

In Ronald Reagan, Thom Hartmann on March 9, 2014 at 8:28 PM

A few months ago, I sought and received permission to post Thom Hartmann screeds, treatises or, if you prefer, writings on my web page. I work to avoid over use of the privilege, but the following is a must post. 

You may notice, my intent is not didactic in any way.  My intent is to continue work towards exposure of a political movement that has so obvious gone rabid. Their “free market” mantra is nothing more than a “rebel-yell” for Tip 20% (ters) and a glass ceiling for the remaining 80%; you and me.


The Lie of the Free Market by
Thom Hartmann

“Listen to the right-wing pundits–the people I call the cons–and they will tell you something completely different. They suggest (and some actually believe) that a middle class will naturally spring into being when the kingdoms of corporate power are freed from government restrictions.

“The way to create good jobs, according to the cons, is to ‘free’ the market. When business gets to do whatever it wants, they say, it will create wealth, and that wealth will trickle down to the rest of us, creating a middle class.

“The con’s belief in ‘free’ markets is a bit like the old Catholic Church’s insistence that the Earth was at the center of the solar system. The free-market line is widely believed by those in power, and those who challenge this belief are labeled heretics–and it’s wrong.

“Here’s a headline for these cons who are masquerading as economists without having studied either economics or history:

“There is no such thing as a “free” market. Markets are the creation of government.”

“Governments provide markets with a stable currency for financial transactions. They provide a legal infrastructure and court systems to enforce the contracts that make the market possible. They provide educated workforces through public education, and those workers show up at their places of business after traveling on public roads, rails, and airways provided by the government. Businesses that use the ‘free’ market are protected by police and fire departments provided by the government, and they send their communications–from phone to e-mail–over lines that follow public rights of way maintained and protected by the government.

“And, most important, the rules of the game of business are defined by the government. Any sports fan can tell you that without rules and referees football, baseball, basketball, and hockey would be a mess. Similarly, business without rules won’t work. In a corporate kingdom–a corporatocracy–those rules are made by the businesses themselves and will inevitably screw workers and citizens. In a democracy those rules are made by We the People, both through our elected representatives and through union negotiations with the business kings/lords/CEOs.

Returning to Classical Economics, Ronald Reagan’s favorite punch line was: ‘I’ve always felt the nine most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”‘

“Sure, it’s easy to laugh along and think that government is bad–until you need government. Until you’ve been taken advantage of and want to use the government court system, or you get old and sick and need Medicare, or your house catches fire and you’d like your local fire department to come by and put it out.

Reagan often used to say that the government is stealing your money. The cons love that mantra: ‘It’s your money.’

“Nobody likes to pay taxes. And nearly three decades of deceitful PR convincing Americans that there’s no need to invest in our nation–and, thus, no need to pay for it with taxes–has left us with an electorate that so hates the word tax that cons can use it to turn voters against almost anyone advocating any government program. If you’re a politician and someone calls you a ‘tax-and-spend liberal,’ that generally means ‘good-bye to your votes.’

“The cons exploit this with the ‘It’s your money’ lie. ‘It’s your money, and the liberals want it!’ shout cons on the radio. They’re talking about taxes, of course. But are our tax dollars really ‘our’ money?

“If I walk into a 7-Eleven store with a dollar in my pocket and say, ‘Gee, I’d really like that Hershey bar,’ and if I tear it open and take a bite out of it, that Hershey bar now belongs to me. And that dollar belongs to 7-Eleven, even though it’s still in my pocket. It’s pretty simple. As soon as I used the candy bar, I’d entered into an agreement to pay for it. It’s a form of a contract even though I’ve never signed anything with a convenience store in my life. It’s not my money anymore, even though it’s still in my pocket, once I take possession of the candy bar.

“We make an agreement by staying in this country that we will live by its rules.

“I get up in the morning and the lights come on because my government is regulating the local utility for both safety and reliability. (FDR had to force electric utilities to serve many communities–thus the Rural Electrification Administration.) I open the tap to brush my teeth, and the water is pure because my government has purified it and delivered it to me from miles away in a safe fashion. The toothpaste I use isn’t poisonous because the government passed laws that make it possible for aggrieved consumers to sue if they’re harmed. Its ingredients are listed because the government requires it.

“When I drive to work, the streets are paved by my government, and the streetlights work because my government planned them right and keeps them in good working order. The radio station where I broadcast from can do business because my government provides a stable currency and a framework of contract laws that allow a corporation to exist and function. The food I eat for lunch at a nearby restaurant is safe both because it was inspected at its source by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and because the local government checks our restaurants for sanitary conditions. I can eat without worrying that bandits are going to run into the restaurant and demand every body’s wallet because the police are on the job. And I can go about my day without worrying that we’ll be bombed by invaders from another country because the State Department and the U.S. Army both negotiate and protect our nation. With a little bit of thought, you can add dozens of other things to this list–all provided with taxpayer dollars.

“Living in this society and using these services is like picking up and biting into the Hershey bar at the 7-Eleven: I’ve agreed to pay for them because I live here and I use them. The form of my agreement is called taxes. Therefore the money from my paycheck that goes to pay my taxes is not my money. It’s the money I owe to cover the cost associated with the things I use each and every day. To suggest that it’s ‘my’ money is to spit in the face of our Founders–to suggest that somehow each of us is above and separate from the social contract we’ve all agreed to by living in this great nation.

“When the cons say, ‘It’s your money,’ what they really mean is that they don’t believe in the social contract. They don’t believe in paying for the services we use every day or in taking care of the poor and the sick and the elderly who can’t take care of themselves. They are anti-American, anti-democracy, anti-Christian (and anti-Jewish and anti–every other major religion) zealots. They are a danger to our democracy and our country.

“Progressive taxation has a long history. Jefferson advocated for progressive taxation in his letters to James Madison back in 1784 and 1785: ‘Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property,’ Jefferson wrote, ‘is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise.’ In short, Jefferson said, ‘Taxes should be proportioned to what may be annually spared by the individual.’

“But the cons–who since the days when John Adams called working people ‘the rabble’ –fought back. A true middle class represented a threat to America’s aristocrats and pseudo-aristocrats because a middle class will always create a democracy. The cons would have to give up some of their power, and some of the higher end of their wealth might even be ‘redistributed’ –horror of horrors–for schools, parks, libraries, and other things that support a healthy middle-class society (but not necessarily the rich, who live in a parallel, but separate, world).

“When today’s cons make tax a dirty word, they are really saying they don’t care if the middle class gets screwed. As president, Reagan cut the top tax rate for billionaires from 70 percent to 28 percent while effectively raising taxes on working people via the payroll tax; he added insult to injury by allowing inflation to increase a whole range of taxes (sales tax, property tax, vehicle license fees, and so on) on working people. Following in that tradition, the Bush Jr. administration gave, in its first four years, tax cuts totaling almost half a trillion dollars to the best-off 1 percent of Americans.

“Even as taxes on the rich go down, they’ve gone up on the middle class (in part because they’ve gone down for the rich and somebody has to pay the cost of all the commons we use). If you made $75,000 in 2001, you saw only $350 in tax cuts from the federal government. In 2005, 80 percent of Americans got only 32 percent of the total tax-cut pie. That means the wealthiest 20 percent of Americans got 68 percent of the money the government was ‘giving back to the people.’ Unless you were making more than $218,000 a year in 2005, you got screwed by Bush’s tax cuts.

“It’s all part of the cons’ undeclared war on the middle class.”

Don’t let the Sheeplets’ mantra of “free markets” trump you anymore. Save or remember this post for future confrontations with the Sheeplets — who knows, maybe they’ll actually learn something.

Cancellation Letters Via Thom Hartmann’s Webpage

In ACA, Obamacare, Thom Hartmann on November 5, 2013 at 3:02 PM

Re-Blog from thomhartmann.com
 

So, about those cancellation letters…

Submitted by THP Danielle on 4. November 2013 – 9:29

Surprise, surprise… Insurance companies are trying to cheat customers out of more money. Since the start of Obamacare, we’ve heard various reports of companies canceling insurance policies, and charging customers hundreds of dollars more each month to continue coverage. Well, it turns out that many of those cancellation letters were misleading, and failed to mention that customers could find better policies at lower prices on a healthcare exchange. 

A special report by Talking Points Memo found specific examples of insurance companies contacting people before the October 1st start date, and trying to lock them in to higher priced plans than they could find on an exchange. The companies warned customers that their plans were being canceled and offered them new, higher-priced plans, but made no mention of healthcare exchanges, or subsidies that people could qualify for under Obamacare. One of the women interviewed by TPM would have had to pay more than $1,000 a month for the new plan offered by her insurance company, and it offered bare minimum coverage with a $6,300 deductible. After logging on to her state’s insurance exchange, the Seattle resident found a plan for $80 dollars a month with a $250 dollar deductible. 

When TPM asked her insurance company why they were using such deceptive methods, a spokesman just said that customers know they have other options. Although it’s not clear how many of the cancellation letters being received throughout our country are a result of the same dishonest tactics, it’s likely that many other companies are pulling the same scam. These cancellations aren’t because of Obamacare, they are simply insurance companies trying to rip off more people while they still have a chance. 

This is the exact reason why we needed the healthcare law to begin with. Insurance companies will always put corporate greed over people’s health and wallets. And, that’s the reason why we should continue to push for single payer, Medicare for all, and get the profit out of our healthcare.

See more and comments 

Fox News And The Network’s Non-news Business Model (VIDEO)

In CNN, Fox News, Right-wing propaganda, Thom Hartmann on October 13, 2013 at 8:24 PM

And We Dress it up!

Fox News is Fox News. Despite Fox News leading the nation’s cable channels high information voters (people) know the network’s business model. We also know the network is a major factor in low information Obama Derangement Syndrome (ODS). Fox promotes lies, incites Right-wing derangement, and serves the prurience of some viewers.

The network actively promoted tea party rallies even as it became obvious the tea party had become infested with very public racist. We have come to expect the network to employ people who attract LIVs (low information voters) for daily feedings of virulent ‘red meat.’ Red meat often based in lies, deceit and Right-wing propaganda. How many times have you read, heard or watched Fox News busts for manipulated video tape, or using bloggers and satirist as news sources?

Watch a few very short clips.

http://youtu.be/adX-2AmxIDA

http://youtu.be/UoAm2znFExM

http://youtu.be/JAxFQ7UEbvg

Anna Kooiman delivers the Muslim Museum lie with Tucker (The Daily Caller) Carlson sitting one foot away.

When a network employs on-air leggy….. I mean employs on-air personalities for the serious business of delivering news, shouldn’t we expect competence and the prospect of credible reporting?

When a network employs with a focus on the following images, well……

  


Female hosts who are well equipped for the Fox News “couch model” is one thing, an inclination to fulfill the role should not be accompanied with an expectation of professional and competence. Fox appears to also understand and leverage the closet truth of men with foot fetishes.  “The network will spare no views.”  Fox News producers and stage managers seem to focus more on attracting the 35 to 55 year old morning male vs. research and validating news stories . Whatever maintains the ratings, right?

The images above is a good indication why Fox News often follows with this.

Just met w producers- I made a mistake yday after receiving flawed research abt a museum possibly closing. My apologies. Won’t happen again.

Oh, but it will happen again. How could Fox Producers spend time appealing to the prurient fantasies of the mid-life crisis male via allowing on-air bimbos to run roughshod in delivering false news reports?

We are confident it will happen again because such flawed reporting is a by-product of “the on the couch” model. Do you recall E.D Hill’s on air derangement about Michelle Obama and Barack Obama’s fist-pump (and thumbs-up) after candidate Obama won the Democratic Nomination? 

The after math, but only half the story.

Oh, the phoniness of Fox News

Hill did not include previous comment about seeing the Al Qaeda fist bump on the internet. It seems ED Hill’s internet adventure would be repeated by Michelle Bachmann years later as she out-right lied about the scope and expense of President Obama’s trip to India. Bachmann’s lies were rooted in an India blogger’s web page and well reported on Fox News.


I ask, how many of the libido driven men (and women)  sat for the initial Anna Kooiman lie will actually see the Tweeted apology? Actually,  how many of those viewers would view an on-air retraction if one was issued? The low information was delivered and readily soaked up  by LIV/LIPs (low information voters/low information people) like a sponge in the Death Valley Nevada. 

Alas, Fox News does not stand alone in the leggy news model, CNN will not be outdone.

CNN’s News Days morning leggy…. I mean new morning co-host provides early charm for their morning viewers. During the course of the following six minute interview I counted 16 shots with full front legginess.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video…..

End Fox News and CNN legginess comment. Let’s visit with Thom Hartmann for another perspective in Fox News: the court case that granted the network the right to lie. Hartman on Foxhttp://youtu.be/jDKLFn0pty4
Snopes Messages

“In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States. 
“Fox” argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.”

http://youtu.be/YRx5ethd8JU More about Fox and the 2003 Jane Akre and Steve Wilson case: The Origin Of Fox News’ Blatant Lies

Thom Hartmann: O’Reilly’s Racist Commentary

In Thom Hartmann on July 26, 2013 at 11:48 AM



We have posted a few pieces about Bill O’Reilly’s hardcore racial rant of early week. 

Right-wing Affinity For And Antagonism Regarding Race (VIDEO)
The Progressive Influence: O’Reilly Hoodies For Sell? Really? 
The Progressive Influence: The “Invisible Negro” And “The Mirrors Of …

We offer the O’Reilly re-run, if you need a re-run. If you decide to his view comments notice O’Reilly’s demeanor. On-air performance that I liken to Third Reich propaganda against a specific minority group for which leaders of a party enacted terminal and genocidal policies. He took his rant to a finger pointing and threatening crescendo that reminds of demagogues past. 

We are re-visiting O’Reilly strategically enacted rant for a few reasons. First, as the most watched figure on cable news networks, he has an audience that must love his so obvious loose handle on his emotions. (emotions? emotions?) His viewers must relish his pointing fingers in the face of his guest and associated levels of screaming for effect. If his audience did not care for his antics, they would not return for more and more almost on a daily basis.  If his audience did not return day to day, he would modify his act in a more retentive manner. Let’s face facts his acts garner revenues which subsidizes his opulent contract. Second, O’Reilly is a primer example of what some on the Right have labelled counter-productive as to social and political rhetoric.  O’Reilly and Limbaugh may have large audiences in relation to all who view cable news or people who listen to AM talk radio, but those audiences are not truly representative as a form of national barometer. Many millions more do not watch cable news nor do they listen to AM (predominantly conservative) radio. A tertiary reason for re-visiting O’Reilly’s rant is embedded below.  Thom Hartmann deals with O’Reilly’s demagoguery with facts and rational/logical comments.

Thom Hartmann

Segregation Now, Segregation Tomorrow, Segregation Forever!!!

In Thom Hartmann on March 25, 2013 at 12:26 PM


1/14/1963
Montgomery, AL
Inaugural address 


George Wallace’s inauguration proclamation appears to serve as an anthem for a growing number of Republicans. Despite Wallace’s membership in the Democratic Party, his social views seem to permeate a growing number of today’s young conservative whites (and a couple of GOP ideology leaders who use electronic media to spread their highly compensated message).  The most vocal long for times well past simple alleged fear of being pushed into a social state (a lower strata of deprivation and persecution) apparently reserved for others.  And, they do so without one obvious reflecting on how the nation’s past impacted African-Americans, Native Americans, Asians and Latinos. Alas, because they do not care. The Circa  2012 segregationist are also quite vocal of their wish to return to their desired state: white supremacy. 

“Diversity is not a strength,” (Matthew) Heimbach told the Baltimore Sun, adding, “We’re being displaced from our own country,” in reference to immigration. He also told The Blaze that the issue of “forced segregation” should be left to the states.


 

CPAC Tea Party event.  Avowed racist Matthew Heimbach and slavery rationalist Scott Terry attend with clear plans to disrupt the black conservative speaker.

This years CPAC event topped last years event, which topped the previous years event related to outright affection for and exhibitions of racism. A tea party organization hosted a CPAC break-out session focused of helping people deflect charges of racism: “Trump the Race Card.” The session organizer hired well know “money-grabber” K. Carl Smith, Frederick Douglass Republican  to host the session. The rest is history and well known by anyone who watches MSNBC.  I know that Fox News did not carry the interchange between he racist Scott and the ‘money-grabber” Smith. I also suspect CNN gave the interchange limited broadcast if at all. 

Huffington Post published a good recap of the racist resistance to African-Americans at CPAC and resistance to African-Americans in the GOP.  
While Reince Priebus and others are traveling across the country claiming to throw (bad) money at outreach to minorities, the future of the GOP and a specific wing of the party, is seething with racial animus, hatred, and paranoia.  
Yet another example from the mind of young Matthew Heimbach.
Priebus as RNC Chair can speak false mantra as  much as required to advance the GOP fallacy based and superstitious efforts to allegedly attract minorities, the realty speaks differently and the reality speaks to the core of the party. 

Mediaite also published a piece to accompany the longer version video posted above.  The Mediate piece shows yet another perspective of the interchange between Scott and Katy Jordan a documentary filmmaker.  Despite the more widely broadcast version of  the K. Carl Smith video (with some in the audience showing obvious signs of dismay at Scott’s racist tirade) Jordan published a different perspective of the interaction. Kim Brown, who was seated near Heimbach and Terry she was shouted down by members of the CPAC audience.

The Blaze published an expose` on Townson University White Student Union (WSU)  founder, Heimbach.  The Blaze piece includes a link to the WSU Blog.  Of course, my inquisitive mind facilitated a click of the link.  Two articles standout as noteworthy.  One article title refers to Heimbach as “Commander.”  The other noteworthy piece was a march 4th, post related to WSU’s plans to attend a Ron Paul speech at George Washington University.

Both Rand and Ron Paul have documented expositions and archived information related to their anti-Civil Rights beliefs and positions, their angst about EEOC Title VII Fair Employment legislation and their Libertarian lust for states rights. “States Rights” is a euphemistic idyllic state of libertarian and racist Land of OZ.

The Atlantic Wire’s March 15, piece revealed yet more about the “Trump the Race Card” session. 

Before we move to a short video Thom Hartmann interview with Matthew Heimbach, let’s finish on the very vocal Scott Terry.  

On March, 16, CBS News writer Jake Miller published a piece related to the segregationist in the CPAC session. 

After the panel, the blog reported that Terry asked, “Why can’t we just have segregation?”

Terry, who was sporting a Rick Santorum sticker and claimed to be a direct descendant of Confederate President Jefferson Davis, told ThinkProgress he’d “be fine witha society in which African-Americans were permanently subservient to white people. He also said African-Americans “should be allowed to vote in Africa.” 
At one point, when challenged on the heritage of the GOP by a female onlooker, Terry responded, “I didn’t know the legacy of the Republican Party included women correcting men in public.”
Also note these mean espouse segregation even within their political party.  “Segregation Now, Segregation Tomorrow, Segregation Forever!!!

Thom Hartmann and Matthew Heimbach.



The Atlantic Wire link above has telling remarks about the extent to which Heimbach longs for a time when black people were overshadowed and oppressive under Jim Crow Laws.

Even more revealing than the words of the two white supremacists is their affinity for all things “PAUL.”  I offer the GOP’s CPAC “straw dumpling” winner is an apple that fell not far from the trunk of his fathers tree.

And there-in lies the very reasons minorities and informed women will shun the GOP. We hope they party continues to shoot itself in the foot as we approach the 2014 Congressional Elections.  We fully expect the party to stumbled farther into the abyss of regressivism and shame as we look forward tot eh 2016 presidential election.

Thom Hartmann On Mass Killings: Is There An Ethnic Considerationt?

In NRA, Thom Hartmann, Wayne LaPierre, white male mass killers on December 21, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Wayne LaPierre goes on national television today and  provided the perfect example of exactly why the US voters must keep conservative governance away from our three branches of federal government   LaPierre’s remarks were as shallow in scope as they were shallow in delivery. 
 
His ‘commercial’ for increased gun sales is linked here.
 
Yesterday Thom Hartmann published a video the touches upon a topic we do not like to consider  Mass killers seem to fit a profile.  While police frequently profile young black males and young Latino males, they are unable to profile the white mass killer.  
 
Thom Hartmann and his guest provide enlightening insight into a serious national scourge: mass killings via firearms.   The problem has to be addressed. We unfortunately believe conservative America and millions other Americans are not going to give-up their firearms, nor are they going to stand for serious restrictions in purchases of firearms.  
It is not a topic that readily attracts participants.  We are fortunate, to have the likes of Thom Hartmann who do not hesitate to address issues as issues arise.  Our politicians will certainly not undertake exploratory dialogue comparable Hartman and his guest.  Factually, speaking you and I will not undertake such dialogue.
 
And, the problem goes un-addressed, again.

ANONYMOUS, Thom Hartmann, Karl Rove’s ORCA

In Anonymous, Karl Rove, Ohio Vote, ORCA, Thom Hartmann, TPI on November 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

  

Earlier in the week I published a piece about ANONYMOUS’ claim of hacking Karl Rove’s ORCA.  The piece included a situation summary of the “HACKAVIST” group’s claim that was written by an associate: Benjamin T. Moore.  As I was developing a follow-up piece, I was alerted of an even more descriptive piece from Mr. Moore.   I am posting Mr. Moore’s piece, with permission,  from The Whirling Wind.com.

Any information related to the ANONYMUOS claims will involve a bit of reading.  Your reading is the output of much work by the writer in putting together a cogent treatise about ORCA, hacking into the system, and how, if true, the actions may have impacted our lives.  Therefore, the following is not a short read. As is always the case with The Progressive Influence, read a bit and comeback for additional reading.  This piece is one such piece!
Benjamin  T. Moore

How Anonymous Saved America and the World

thank you anonymous header How Anonymous Saved America and the Worldby Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

How Anonymous Saved America and the World

Those of us who’ve been paying attention to our electoral process have noticed some very disturbing trends and subsequent anomalies. I am probably giving some indication of my age, but I grew up in the era of real voting booths, curtains, tabs and levers.

voting lever 01 300x190 How Anonymous Saved America and the World

One of the most important levers you will ever pull.

I remember as a child holding my mother’s hand in a voting booth and watching her flip the little tabs and then pull the lever which opened the curtains and registered her vote. My personal belief is that all parents should take their children to vote with them. It is good training and exposes them at an early age to the most important of our civic responsibilities.

I am not a technophobe. I fully appreciate progress and the role technology plays. Our population is growing, more and more people are voting and we still expect to know the outcomes of our elections on election night. The notion that we could count these votes by hand and still have timely results has become an unreachable proposition.

Enter Computers

Using computers to record and count the votes makes receiving timely results easy. If properly deployed, you could know the final count from any precinct the moment the last person in line votes. Computers are machines, they’re non-partisan and they’re extremely efficient crunching numbers.. or are they?

ed felton computer scientist uncovering flaw in voting machine 300x205 How Anonymous Saved America and the World

Computer Scientist Ed Felton uncovering a computer flaw in a New Jersey voting computer.

The facts are, computers have vulnerabilities too. For one, they will do whatever they’re programmed to do. If the person programming them is partisan, computers can be programmed to return partisan results. Computers can also be hacked. They can be given a virus which rewrites their code. I can look at another human being and tell if something is wrong with them. They may appear feverish, sluggish, their speech may be slurred, their eyes may be red. There are thousands of subtle signs we pick up allowing us to know that one of our fellow human beings is just not right. Computers? Not so much.

A computer can be programmed to switch votes to any candidate a programmer, hacker or virus writer chooses and the persons casting their votes would be none the wiser. In many jurisdictions which have now gone to all electronic voting, they have also passed laws mandating the destruction of the paper trail. Those places that use paper ballots where you darken in a circle beside your choice, feed them into an optical scanner, many of those jurisdictions have passed laws mandating the immediate destruction of the paper ballots. The question is why?

Hacking Democracy

joseph stalin quote on voting How Anonymous Saved America and the World

This has always been the hard reality of democracy.

In the words of Joseph Stalin, “those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.” The way things work today is, you cast your vote either using a “touch screen” computer system or a paper ballot you’ve filled out and fed through an optical scanner. At the end of voting those electronic votes are sent over the Internet to a central computer where the votes from all the precincts are tabulated and the election results are published.


Sounds simple enough. However, there are problems. As I’ve pointed out, what if some or all of the precinct computers… or, for that matter, the main frame computer doing the final tabulations gets hacked or gets a virus? What if the data is intercepted and changed while being transmitted to the central computer?

Manufacturers of these voting systems have gone to great lengths to assure the public of the security of their systems. They have lied! Bev Harris of Black Box Voting.Org has gone to great lengths to highlight and document these problems. No matter whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Liberal, Libertarian or Independent, your vote matters and your vote should count. Our democracy is no stronger than the confidence our citizens have in our electoral process. How difficult is hacking some of our voting machines? Would you believe me if I told you it was so easy a Chimpanzee could do it?



If this disturbs you? It damn well should! What Baxter the Chimp just did was edit or alter the audit log on a Diebold GEMS voting system. Why is this important? According to Diebold for one, this is supposed to be impossible. Clearly a flat out lie. For two, this is one of their security selling points. They claim that should anyone attempt to alter the results of the votes, it would be caught in their audit log. Thus if you could edit the audit log, you can go in and change votes at will, then go back to the audit log and delete any evidence that you’d done anything. Think, stealing the “Hope Diamond” and replacing it with a cubic zirconium replica. The guards, the people filing by the display case would never know the difference.

The Man In The Middle Attack

Suppose you and I were working for an advertising agency and we were competing for the same client. However, unbeknown to you, I had hacked both the email account of the client and your email account. Not only could I read the mail going back and forth between you, I could intercept it and change it.

Man the middle 300x171 How Anonymous Saved America and the World

Bilateral communication between the server and the victim is actually being routed through a third party, unbeknown to either of them.

Imagine if the client sent an e-mail inviting you to a lunch meeting at “Joe’s Bistro” at 1pm. I intercept his e-mail and change the time to 3pm. You get an email you believe to be from the client inviting you to a luncheon meeting at 3pm. I show up at 1pm, close the deal and steal the client. You show up at 3pm and of course, the client is not there. This is a minor variant of the “Man In The Middle” attack. It is very powerful and difficult to detect.

Now let’s apply this to electronic voting. Suppose I have a server set up in… I don’t know, let’s say Tennessee. I hack into your voting system and reroute all precinct votes to my server in Tennessee where I massage them and then send them on to your “voting central” computers. You believe you’re getting them directly from your precincts when in truth, they’re coming from my servers in Tennessee.

The beauty of this approach is, I don’t have to hack any of your voting machines. I merely have to hack into your network or your routers. In so doing, I’ve compromised all the computers in your network from a safe distance and if I do it right, I’m going to be difficult to detect and trace. Has anything like this ever happened? As it turns out, yes it has. There is evidence it happened in 2004. Thom Hartmann gives a very clear presentation on his radio program.



Those of us who remember watching the election returns back in 2004, may recall that fateful night when it appeared that Kerry was winning. Then suddenly the numbers shifted and the news agencies calling the election simply attributed the sudden change in numbers, to uncounted precincts dumping their numbers all at once. We had no idea that the servers had gone offline for better than 60 seconds. Some of us, had we known, may have become suspicious back then.

Did Karl Rove Try To Steal The 2012 Elections?

I thought about this one long and hard… well, for about 10 minutes, before the evidence convinced me. I was not at all surprised by the election results because I do not get my news from Fox News, and I follow Nate Silver’s 538 blog. Nate has been the most accurate pollster out there for the past several election cycles. If I know this, Karl Rove and the rest of the Republican political strategist certainly know it as well. This brings me to my first point.

Come to find out, on the night of the election, Mitt Romney had not even prepared a concession speech. Yes, I know everybody believes they will win, however prudence demands that we prepare for all eventualities. You cannot become successful in business and rise to the top of the corporate arena without understanding fully how to implement a “Plan B” in the event your first plan doesn’t pan out.

It bothered me that Mitt Romney was so sure of winning what in his own words, he admitted would be an extremely close race, yet he did not prepare a concession speech. This really surprised me. Did he know something, none of the rest of us knew?

When I saw Karl Rove begin stuttering and disputing the election results for Ohio, this clinched it for me. There were two things to note about this. The first is, Mr. Rove seemed to have no problem with the returns in Florida or any of the other States for that matter. Why Ohio? As it turns out, President Obama could have lost both Ohio and Florida and still won the election. Given these facts, why would Mr. Rove nearly lose his composure over Ohio? If everything is fair and in the hands of the voters, why would you dispute the results unless, you believed you had some form of control over those results? Perhaps the truth is finally coming out?


Enter The Hacker Group Anonymous

There exists a group of elite hackers who goes by the name “Anonymous.” Nobody knows who they are. They seem to be distributed world wide so nobody knows where they are. The term “Hacktivist” was invented for Anonymous. It is beyond the scope of this piece to regale you with tales of their exploits, but suffice it to say, they’ve got skillz!

It seems that they have been watching our political system and in particular our elections. On October 22, 2012 a message to Karl Rove and his compadres from Anonymous, was posted on YouTube. Either Karl didn’t see it or didn’t take it seriously.


After the election, the following letter was released, presumably from the group, “Anonymous.”
letter supposedly from anonymous about karl rove hacking election computers How Anonymous Saved America and the World
Click here for larger image and Click one again.

This is a letter supposedly released by Anonymous following the elections explaining what they did and why.

Our Elections Affect The World

Whom we elect to the office of President of these United States, affects the World. Is there any doubt had Al Gore prevailed and George W. Bush not been appointed President by a U.S. Supreme Court, stacked by his daddy or if John Kerry had been elected, that our world would be different? With intelligent, competent leadership from a United States President, we would not have had an economic meltdown. Our housing market would not have crashed, causing world wide repercussions.

The integrity of our electoral process is not just of concern to each United States Citizen, our election outcomes also affect the rest of the world. Did Anonymous protect our elections? Personally, I believe they did. They identified the problem in advance, – October 22, 2012 – they posted a YouTube video announcing their intentions to prevent any attempted election fraud.

We know the night of the election, Mitt Romney and his wife Ann were nearly in “shell shock.” If I didn’t know that Mormons abstain from liquor, I would have bet that Ann Romney had one drink too many. I base this on the way she was moving when she finally joined Mitt on stage that night. She had that doe in the headlights look in her eyes.

Mitt had the foresight to have his transition website up and running, but no concession speech? Really? That showed a supreme amount of confidence in what should have been an unknowable outcome. When you add in Karl Rove’s reaction to losing Ohio, it all fits the claims of Anonymous. Karl Rove thought he was flipping a coin with two heads. He was smug as he called “heads.” When the coin came up tails, you could have bought him for a penny.

I am not a religious man, but in this instance I will have to say, “thank God for Anonymous.” I’m glad they were flying cyber- cover for this election. In a democracy, we say that people get the government they deserve. That is only true if their elections are untainted. Getting a government I deserve, I can live with. Getting a government given to me, is intolerable. 

US Chamber of Commerce under investigation

In Karl Rove, Kochs, Thom Hartmann on June 27, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Citizens United is facilitating never before fathomable amounts of political contributions from conservative Top 1 per centers and probably large sums from crony foreign concerns into the Romney presidential campaign.  The ‘Uber’ wealthy and GOP operatives like Karl Rove are funneling secret contributions into and through organizations that will eventually fall to negative scrutiny.   It seems the political Right learned nothing from other failed examples of ‘promulgating’ their agenda through organizations.  Susan Koman’s flop of temporarily dropping funding for Planned Parenthood is a clear example of just how ill-advised and ill-planned right-wing dogma ends in embarrassment.  The Koman affair was not related to unlimited campaign contributions; it was a testament of decisions and actions which often lead ‘Water Gate’ like revelations. The American Legislative Exchange Council was another such shadowy organization with corporate contributions funneled to state legislators.

Thom Hartmann of the Thom Hartmann Program is reporting on the classic Citizens United malfeasance.  Malfeasance that has led to an investigation of the US Camber of Commerce. 

The US Chamber of Commerce is under investigation 
Submitted by louisehartmann on 27. June 2012  

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is taking a close look at the Chamber of Commerce’s political activities.On Tuesday – Schneiderman issued a subpoena to executives with organizations that have funneled millions of dollars into the Chamber of Commerce under the disguise of charitable contributions, to determine whether or not that money was actually used for political purposes – like running ads against Democrats and lobbying Congress. 

Conservatives like Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers may have been violating the tax code, claiming tax-exempt status, to shield their donors, while they run blatant political advertising.  But now, Attorney General Schneiderman is on to them, and his investigation could blow open the doors of these giant pools of dark money – revealing exactly who is behind at least some of the cash flowing into the 2012 election.

Read More……

Louise Hartmann closes her piece with the following:

” Keep an eye on this one.”

We live in the United States. Unlimited secret contributions will end as any American endeavor involving huge sums.  The greedy will find a way to personally gain, get caught, hire high fee lawyers, beat any prosecution and all while we sit ‘collared’ with an undesirable ‘yes man’ as president of the United States.