When will the revolution begin?

[1chichimec1]

WHEN THE REVOLUTION BEGINS, IT WILL END BEFORE IT BEGINS! WE ARE TO LAZY TO FIGHT!...UNITED THAT IS! WE'RE MORE PRIMED TO BE LOOTERS & CHEAP GUN FIGHTS BUT NO UNITY!!

[emerson24]

The revolution will only begin in America when either they:

1)  Try and take the guns

2) People begin to starve

3) You remove the internet

[WarmongerWW3]

@emerson24" "begin"? It is already happening. The U.S. Department of Agriculture study shows that in 2009, almost 50 million people, including 17 million children, were "Food insecure".

And the people remains silent, like a good little sheep.

[emerson24]

@WarmongerWW3 Our definition of revolution differs. Mine means people protesting and causing upheaval.

I find it amazing how even the "intellectuals" don't get it. I was with my buddy last night, has his PhD in Science, and he actually told me the illuminati didn't exist. I could go on..

[wildwes66]

Comment 10). Someone out there reading this understands and is familier with the process of making youtube video's. Perhaps Thomhartmann himself. Please feel free to contact me, we need to find ways to utilize youtube as a means of bringing the people togather, we need to inform people, speak more of solutions then proplems. The people are ready the time of opportunity is short. Economic meltdown immenent. "THE TIME IS NOW" we need Ron Paul and those like him. Thank you for your time. Wes

[wildwes66]

Comment 9). We need a speaker to go overseas and get the support and finacial backing of allies willing to asist us in removing our corrupt government. We want to avoid violence as the final and last resort. Wars are all entirely corrupt and create wealth for the corrupt. If a revolution starts it would be at risk of never ending. Those with the power and means to arm us would do all they could to misled us to continue killing each other as long as they could continue to mislead us.

[wildwes66]

Somehow we have got to take our Government back, we need to take control over the broadcasting stations radio first they are less currupt get any of them willing to put us on the air. We need speakers perferably pefessional speaker, that are informed and can responsed to public questions with real and sound answers. We need to unite the gangs of the country convince them the country is at the mercer of their patriotism, we all need to arm ourselves, no one solution will fix this. Continue...

[wildwes66]

Comment 8). Lets find a solution togather if we look at this situation as if it has already happened we can then possibly use the same means the bankers will use to misled us as a means of a solution. Our current broadcasting media is currupt between the news and the crime shows you would believe humanity has lost their minds. This is propaganda at its bests and is only there to prepare you for false happiness when they eventually take over and suddenly begin to broadcast just the opposite.

[wildwes66]

Comment 7). Now you are seeing the big picture. So where do we start, how do we change it. That is a big question but somehow we have to come togather as a people and be enlightened to the truth we have all been misled by these bankers, we somehow have to take our government back and re-establish the REPUBLIC it was originally set out to be. And thirdly we have got to somehow for the media to start broadcasting the good side of people and their good deeds instead of crime.

[wildwes66]

comment 6). For those of you that are misinformed this is slavery at is best and communism in the least. Yes everyone is working and hopfully able to eat, drink and be housed. But now we have zero middle class, you are working for a global set wage with no hope of prosperity, being paid electronically, with funds that do not truely exist other then the government says it does. Coporations and Bankers own everything, your home, auto, your job and even you.

[wildwes66]

Comment 5). What is there solution ONE WORLD CASHLESS SOCIETY!!! Suddenly after decades and decades of watching the new talk about nothing but the bad in people now and for years to come the all the tv's around the world are showing only the good side of people and their deeds convincing you humanity has finally came togather we have evolved into a new world order, one of peace, with a unified health care for all rich or poor regardless of ethnic color or background and work for all.

[wildwes66]

Comment 4). Now Imagine after a set time of this continued caos, suddenly the order is given for Governments around the world intensify their military martial law efforts turn the power & water back on for the first time in over a year people suddenly have a glimer of hope after starvation and witnessing sinceless killing after Killing. The TV is back LOOK LOOK the news is on the Governments makes a statement and ears around the would listen intensely. They proclaim to have a solution.

[wildwes66]

Comment 3). Imagine a world wide economic meltdown. No power, No water, No gas, No electricity, and most people too simple minded to believe this could happen in America having No back up food storage lacking the know how or land to grow food on. The have nots begin to turn on the haves. Caos takes the streets. The Governments retret to the undergound cities they have and continue to build and allow this catastrophe to take hold. For a year maybe more.

[wildwes66]

Comment 2). Their plan worked perfectly, by the time the great depression was over everyone was willing to give up anything in order for change. This economic crisis has been plotted and created by the same corrupt bankers that created the first one for the very same reasons. This explains why the banker received such huge bonuses." WAKE UP PEOPLE "don't let them distract you with slight of hand! While the economy is a big concern IMAGINE THIS SCENEIO. Continued...

[wildwes66]

Comment 1). We have to think about this situation as it has already happened and work our way backwards. This will gives the easiest frame of mind to solve this problem. Lets remember the 1920-30 great depression was a hoax. Morgan-Stanley and others got together with all their finacial backing decided to create a US / Europe economic crash. With one goal in mind, to later convince the US government to forfiet control over the dollar and remove it from the gold standard. 

[altops]

how offensive "tea bagger" you hack. your a hack.

[atoms2atoms]

I will link this video - even to my non-political friends.

[luvcheney1]

First, you state that 1 in 8 mortgages are in trouble (12.5%) Then you state that 11% of mortgages are in trouble in national banks, which is more than double the rate in state banks. So, double 5.5% is 11%. This is not possible, because you cant average 11% and 5.5% and get 12.5%. Did you know that 30% of all homes have no mortgage? So, 70% of homes do? Suppose 10% is the default rate. 10% of 70% is 7%.. So, 93% of homes are not in trouble. So, bailouts steal from those who pay.

[luvcheney1]

Thom, you refer to conservative talk radio as "hate radio". You seem hateful yourself. Banksters, greedy ceo`s, Gangsters in suits, tea-baggers (vile sexual reference YOU understand). About big crowds for gay rights, and smaller for Glen Beck rally: It really is NOT news when LIBS go and demonstrate, you guys are always doing it. Big Deal. But when conservatives start demonstrating it is big news, usually we are working. But, you are not hate radio, because no one has heard of you.

[JayHubbell]

This reminds me of what George Orwell wrote in his predictive novel "1984." Revolutions are engineered by the intelligentsia. The proletariat are easily manipulated and exploited by the wealthy elites as we can see from the tea bag party rabble which is highly funded by the mega rich Koch brothers.

[luvcheney1]

Of course, the left has no rich supporters. Yea, all those retired, gray, white people are pretty frightening.

[manliter]

We as a nation do not have the kahones for a revolution.We are too complacent. Long live Glen Beck He is one of the voices we need to turn this country around. Believe it or not but he will lead this revolution when it happens. We need more Glen Becks.

[manliter]

I am a tea bagger.

[nowellian]

When will the revolution begin?

When we get out shit together!

[jimlaregina]

Because corporations own the media, naturally news coverage gives more attention to tea baggers and other moneyed interests-driven movements than it does grassroots people's demonstrations.

[luvcheney1]

Media is just a business. Media delivers what the people demand. Talk radio is mostly conservative. Old school network news, cable (except Fox) is liberal. If you are to the left of MSNBC, for example, of course you think all news is conservative. Please come back! You are going to fall off the edge of the planet!

[jimlaregina]

I don't accept the premise of your liberal-conservative argument. History and the world today are nothing more than the wealthy stealing from and controlling the poor. Up-down, not left-right, luvcheney1.

M.S.N.B.C. is owned by General Electric. Do you think General Electric is fighting to correct the world's injustices? They fired Phil Donahue, who had the best ratings on M.S.N.B.C., because he presented arguments against invading Iraq. Does that sound like "just a business?"

[luvcheney1]

He was fired in Feb 2003, at that time the public was all for war, Bush`s approval was 20 points over disapproval then. Although Donahue was MSNBC`s highest rated show, (Bill O`Reilly was six times more popular then than Donahue) MSNBC made a BUSINESS DECISION that Donahue was presenting a face to the public that would damage them. Later, OBVIOUSLY, when it became popular to bash the War, and Bush, MSNBC did not have any problem with it, did they?? Ever watch Olbermann, Maddow, Hardball?

[jimlaregina]

How was the Donahue firing a "business decision" if he was their highest-rated show? What "face to the public" was it that would damage M.S.N.B.C. later?

[luvcheney1]

Its always about money. Being MSNBC`s best rated show means it is getting 1/6 of the O`Reilly factor audience then. Maybe they still had hopes of having a real network. Or, it is just they were afraid that having an anti-war Donahue when the public was still wanting war, would chase away the "war mongering" majority at the time. Maybe it is something else, but is always about money.

[jimlaregina]

M.S.N.B.C. fired highest-rated Donahue but kept lower-rated programs? Are you sure such fractured logic was "about money?"

[luvcheney1]

You are correct. MSNBC is an ultra right wing network who fired Donahue because they did not want money. Olberman, Maddow, Mattews are all Reaganites. And the "ed"show.

[jimlaregina]

But were Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow on M.S.N.B.C. when Bush was lying America into invading Iraq? They didn't replace Phil Donahue with either, you will note.

[luvcheney1]

Donahhue was in a prime time slot against O`reilly, where MSNBC was only getting 1/6th of Fox`s viewers. Olbermannnn went into Donahue`s prime time slot March 31, 2003, Donahue got fired Feb 2003. You caused me to find out when Olbermann came in. Ponder that, and reply.

Your assertion Bush lied interests me. Before Bush was elected, the world thought Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction" (womd) and applied efforts to inspect Iraq for "womd" See post 2 to finish

[jimlaregina]

I didn't know Keith Olbermann joined M.S.N.B.C. in March 2003. Was he kicking facts about Bush back then? I know he did later.

The only people who "thought" Iraq was building weapons before the Supreme Court installed Bush (Al Gore won the election) were the P.N.A.C. crackpots.

Besides, does having weapons mean a country plans to use them against the United States? (Now excuse me while I go pick a fight with Joe Frazier.)

[luvcheney1]

It is well documented that the UN FOUND WMD in IRAQ when Bush#1 invaded Iraq. You can google Bill Clinton WMD in Iraq, and virtually any politician, before Bush#2 was even elected, and they all thought he still possesed them. Keep in mind that Hussein had well over a year to get them out, while Bush#2 pacified Congress and the American people by letting Congress vote. Wiki estimates 36,000 people killed in Iraq chemical attacks.

[jimlaregina]

So you mean Iraq in the 1990s, not the 2000s? Fair enough, but does possessing weapons mean there is a plan to attack the United States? (Pardon me while I go pick a fight with Joe Frazier.)

(Okay, I'm back. Frazier won, by the way.) George Iran-Contra Bush invade Iraq because of the conflict with Kuwait, not because of any weapons program, right? (Iraq got rid of its weapons between U.S. invasions.)

George D.W.I. Bush was not elected, unless you count the Supreme Court vote.

[luvcheney1]

Quote Bill Clinton Feb 17, 1998..."We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq`s weapons of mass destruction program". Quote by Sen Ted Kennedy Sept 27, 2002..."we have known for MANY YEARS that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction". You deny reality when you pretend/believe that no one thought they had these weapons but Bush. Of course, after the war became unpopular, these liars pretended they never said these things. Other oil states would be targets

[jimlaregina]

When did Iraq ever threaten America, President Clinton? Even if it had such weapons, would that make Iraq a match for the good old U.S.A.?

Does seeking weapons mean there is a plan to use them on America or an American ally, Senator Kennedy? (Rest in peace.)

Now excuse me while I go out and pick a fight with Joe Frazier.

[luvcheney1]

Post2). Iraq was denying the inspectors of the UN access, and they made many efforts to gain cooperation. At this time, still before Bush was president, Bill Clinton, Madeline Allbright (secrty of state), John Kerry, etc, all believed, and talked about Iraq`s "WOMD". Kerry had entered into the Congressional Record a letter, espousing military action against Iraq, in order to force compliance of UN mandates to allow inspections by the UN. These are easily verifiable facts. The Dems forgot later!

[jimlaregina]

It is not true that Iraq denied inspectors access. You can look it up.

But even if Iraq had such weapons, isn't that besides the point? Lots of countries have the bomb but has the U.S. invaded them?

[luvcheney1]

Wealthy people are smart enough to know that there is no profit in stealing from the poor, who have no money.

[jimlaregina]

Payday loans?

The sub-prime mortgage scandal?

[luvcheney1]

Can we agree on the concept that the higher the chance of loan default, the higher the interest rate has to be in order make the "group" of loans balance out? If we control, or limit the rate of interest, everyone whose risks exceed the permitted rate of interest will be denied the loan.

[jimlaregina]

If there was that high a chance of default, the borrowers should have been rejected when they applied, wouldn't you agree?

And you didn't answer me about the payday loan business. There are more of those joints than there are McDonald's restaurants. If 400% interest isn't the affluent stealing from the poor, what is?

[luvcheney1]

They should have been denied. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought those mortgages from the banks, bundled them, and sold them as securities.These are Govt sponsored enterprises. Have you looked into the Community Reinvestment Act? Libs were concerned about "red lining". The CRA`s mission was to get homes into the hands of the poor, no credit folks. Have you seen Acorn`s tactics to force banks to make mortgages in poor neighborhoods, or they would legally delay a bank from entering a market?

[jimlaregina]

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are no longer government enterprises; one look at what their CEOs make should tell you that.

Has ACORN been convicted of anything?

[luvcheney1]

My previous post applies to any loan. If there are high profits, more businesses enter, until equilibrium is reached. Or, you can set the rate, and deny the service to the folks whose risk is scarier than the return. Or, you can make the service illegal, and deny everyone. Thom,on another video, wants everyone whose credit card risk is greater than 16% to be denied credit. He doesnt put it that way though. He pretends to be a hero.

[jimlaregina]

But how can you give credit to people who don't qualify? The poor need a living wage, not more debt.

[luvcheney1]

Back to payday loans. Suppose you originate a $200 loan for 2 weeks, charging a $14 fee. Thats 183% interest. 20 loans makes $280 gross profit. (20x $14 = $280) Suppose you have a default rate of 4%. Then .04x 20loans is .8 loan default. .8 of our loan example is .8x $214= $171.20 loss. So, $280 profit potential minus $171.20 loss is $108.80 profit on 20 $200 loans. Thats $5.44 gross profit per loan. Of course, you need rent, labor, elect, gas, permits, insurance, a gun, etc, etc.

[jimlaregina]

Instead of hypothetical situations, I suggest looking at the loan shark rates payday loan joints are charging.

[luvcheney1]

Jim, apparently, the simple arithmetic of a $200, 2 week loan at a $14 fee(183% annual) coupled with only a 4% default rate yielding $5.44 profit shut you up. Funny how Libs base opinions on "feelings", emotions, not arithmetic. You are not unusual, if a Lib could do arithmetic, he wouldnt be a Lib now, would he?

[jimlaregina]

Thanks for following up, luv. Actually, I have not made the time to respond to your latest comments. I'll try to get to it later today.

[luvcheney1]

Fair enough. Reply or not, as you wish. Usually, I have found that numbers are not of interest to libs, just feelings. I have feelings too, but I base them on numbers, not emotions.

[JSparkleZ2]

Dude your name is luv CHENEY... That about says it all really...

[ankharris]

That's the funniest impersonation of Rush Limbaugh I've ever heard in my life! Where have you been hiding that one, Thom? Use it more often.

[luvcheney1]

Rush does a great imitation of Bill Clinton. He doesnt imitate Thom though, because nobody has ever heard of him.

[LemonSparkles]

I am THRILLED to hear someone address the common ground that teabaggers and and Progressives share. I ABHOR Glen Beck. However, the teabaggers are against corporate corruption, the theft of taxpayer dollars and the erosion of democracy. If we don't cure THOSE PROBLEMS, each side's social agendas are moot!

The politicians manufacture hate between us. If we unite against corruption--game over! We must find common ground and defeat these criminals. It's the ONLY way to save our country!!!

[luvcheney1]

Conservatism means small govt involvement. The bailouts, stimulus, are not conservative principles. For sure, if a corp can con a Lib or Conservative politician out of billions he will. Surprised?

[luvcheney1]

Bailouts are not theft of taxpayer dollars. The govts tax money is spoken for, spent. More Bailouts, stimulus, HealthCare are paid for by borrowing, printing. This debt, plus the unfunded liabilities of MediCare, Social security are so big it is mathematically impossible to pay back. There are only 2 possibilities. Default by a credit collapse, which we have just seen, and they are printing money to postpone it , or hyperinflation where the dollar collapses in value. This is OPPORTUNITY.

[Davetech23]

It should be a 90% tax due to "special circumstances" ie: blatant robbery of the taxpayers.

[julsHz]

The only thing I have in common with the teabaggers is my outrage- please don't ask me to give them any validity by joining with them. They scream "Socialism", but have no concept of social democracy. This country has serious problems, and it will take serious minds to confront them- not hyperbole, hypocracy, and slogans. Scream reason from the mountaintop, but not to the unreasonable- they are deaf.

[luvcheney1]

In 1920, Fed taxes as % of GDP were 3%. A couple years ago, it was 18%, now 26% (due to crisis) We have been moving in the direction you desire for 90 years already. You should be happy.

[burnodo]

Thom, your TV show (video with radio show) is very good. Kudos!

[PsychoticusRex]

Tax all earnings above 60k at 100% eat the rich. Save the rich, if you don't tax em, we the under people will kill them. Do it for mercies sake.

[luvcheney1]

Tax all earnings above 60k at 100% and the govt will have no revenue.

[JSparkleZ2]

He actually does a damn good Limbaugh impression...

[luvcheney1]

Not as good as Limbaugh`s of Clinton. Rush doesnt imitate Thom though, there is no money in it.

[gqsmoothie]

Thom,

I love your opinions and nearly always agree with you, but please, don't yell so much.

[luvcheney1]

Its not just the volume, It is the name calling too. But, Thom is a capitalist, playing a role. His rabid behavior reflects on the state of mind of his listeners. Read the comments left here to see vulgar, uncouth, angry lefties.

[Strutinan]

Fuck YEAH!

[luvcheney1]

Another gentleman for Thom.

[Mahoivlich]

People need to bleed to fix this. A revolution that would have any effect is impossible until divisions are dissolved. The right wing is just as corporate as the left and will throw any supporters under the bus to defend their corporate financiers. These right wing militias are more likely to shoot their neighbors than anyone else.

[PsychoticusRex]

weep for the people who are going to die getting there and die in the doing. Black water is the least of your problems, don't think they're above spinning this to blame the victim.

[luvcheney1]

Voting for Obama, and the Dems in Congress certainly moved us toward bigger govt. McCain would NOT have moved us as far towards bigger govt. Our votes have consequences, have effect. Promoting violence as a solution is admitting that your point of view is such a minority that it cannot gain any political traction. Also, us right wing wackos own more guns per capita than you lib wackos, in fact it is our favorite hobby.

[DrJolossus]

@Mahoivlich you first.

[agitcam]

Boycott corporate media.