to argue with them and expose them for the disgusting pukes they are.

If Thom found common ground with one of the pukes over TPP, isnt that a smart thing?

You seem to be implying that Thom would take direction from pro Putin people, do you really believe that?

I think it legitimizes right wing nutcases to have them on over common ground.
Yes, I think Thom sometimes takes direction from the Putin people, or he just does what he thinks they might like. See http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/10/1283668/-Thom-Hartmann-Sticking-with-RT-despite-Resignations-over-Putin-s-Actions-in-Ukraine#

Others resigned, he didnt.

Show me one time, EVER, where he has said anything that puts him in the pro Putin camp, outside of articulate and intelligent observation.

Hey, I dont ike that he is still on that network, dont know why he is, but Thom is one of the good guys, period

you're right, I don't think a RW Kremlin network should be featured on a progressive website and I will note that every time I see it, which is appropriate.
What's not appropriate on a progressive website is Putin apologists who use any excuse to defend the dictatorship and its propaganda

read the article link for more answers to your question

Thom has a great show but when ever he has a right wing nut job on, which is too often, I turn it off. If I want that crap there's a 1000 stations I can tune to + fox snooze.

with kid gloves...without the actual interview being shown you are stating an unsubstantiated opinion and not any point.

here it is again http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017233289

There's definitely something really wrong with Hartmann. He's presenting Keyes as a legitimate voice. It's freaking bizarre and yes I think RT is twisting Hartmann's moral compass, unless it was fucked up in the first place

Which is the bigger concern: the fact that a talk show on RT has a RWNJ on as a guest, or the fact that Obama is so intent on pushing through the TPP? My vote is for the latter.

And he engages righties on his shows all the time. Contrasting with Keith Olbermann, another liberal journalist great, who as I recall rarely if ever engaged righties on his show.

I think Thom's engagement of the other side is GOOD CITIZENSHIP, as us bottom 99%'ers, Tea Partier or bleeding heart liberal, have a lot more in common than we have differences. I don't think either extreme and everybody else in the middle of the bottom 99% is in favor of our former Democratic Republic slipping further into full blown Oligarchy. The only American Citizens that want Oligarchy are perhaps thirty or forty of the most richest people in the nation. They have purchased our kingdom and appointed themselves our lords.

And in this particular segment, I find a lot to agree with with what Keyes has to say. I appreciated his brush up lesson on the meaning of the Constitution, as most of what I learned about American history is from a decades old baby boomer public education and needs to be refreshed now and then.


Engagement with others we disagree with is a lot better for the public good than the near civil war them or us groups we've splintered into. Probably because of MSM propaganda manipulation so we end up fighting each other instead of the Oligarchs, who have mae it crystal clear of late that they want to turn us all into medieval indentured servants.

Thom does have on some loathsome cringe-worthy hateful righties on now and then, I admit.

-90% Jimmy

liberal icon, all to attack DU with.

A respectful, intelligent discussion as we have come to expect from Hartmann, opposing the TPP, so what gives?

Transparent of the OP, no?

then fuck it, I am all for it.

Do people realize there are basically NO liberal or ADULT talk shows on the radio?

Thom and that is it unless you go to Sirius, then there is a channel which has several, but terrestrial?

Anytime you want to answer post #10, go ahead

Let's get this guy on TV for supporting gay rights:

It legitimizes a RW nutcase to have him on. Hence, "heart."
According to your logic, it would be okay to have a videos featuring all sorts of right wing groups who happen to have common ground with progressives on one or two issues. Is that what you want? DU having Cheney to support Gay Rights? Videos of the KKK defending Social Security or something?

Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, doesn't matter both sides are mostly in the 99%. As part of the 99% we have common problems. Most of the problems we have affect both sides equally. The only difference between us is how we would solve these problems. What a liberal commentator points out when he has these conservatives on is how much we have in common. It also points out how both parties are ignoring the wishes of the 99% and are increasingly lackeys for the 1%.

Perhaps you have a different agenda that needs to be satisfied? Do you see Republicans and/or conservatives as your enemy? Does opposing the TPP run counter to what your candidate for President in 2016 supports? Please let us know what you reasoning is that would have you oppose any and all support we have against the TPP and fast track. Why do you think it would be wrong to show right wing groups supporting our causes? Do you think the two sides have to oppose each other on all subjects?

It legitimizes a RW nutcase to have him on. With the rages of the RW, after the experience of the Bush era, with the death-grip of FOX and talk radio, we cannot cut the RW fringe any slack. But that is what Hartmann does in this clip.

I just rewatched this and it's horrible. Hartmann doesn't hedge in any way--he is acting like Keyes is a legitimate voice instead of a RW nutcase. More here http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017233377

No, it's horrible. We don't collaborate with these freaks for any reason.

So if you don't like the messenger then we shouldn't like the message? How has that been working for us lately?

Hartmann doesn't hedge because there is nothing to disagree with. Hartmann, and in this case me too, agree with everything Keyes says. What did Keyes say that makes you disagree with what he was saying?

Open your eyes and look around, we need all the help we can get on this issue. Even with both sides opposing this treaty we will probably lose, alienating a large group that agrees with us is not in our best interest.

But then maybe in your case it isn't the messenger, but the message. Try answering some of my questions from my previous post.

How about KKK vids to support workers' rights?
No, it's a big mistake to present these RW nutcase voices as legitimate. If there is a legitimate conservative organization that opposes TPP, then bring them on. Not Keyes or Bachmann or Palin.

If you think I'm writing all this as some kind of secret, indirect support for TPP, your view is cracked

and explaining what is wrong about it. If people who don't understand the consequences if the treaty is implemented see two people that represent opposite sides of the political spectrum agreeing on something don't you think that would have some meaning for the fence sitters?

I'm not a single issue voter but that is how the battles are fought, one at a time. There is an old saying: "politics makes strange bedfellows." Try to figure out what that means.

With your reasoning if we got into a war with China you would refuse any help for our side offered by Russia. How would that have worked out for WWII?

How about the Nazi-Soviet pact of 1939? How'd that work out for either of them? Try to figure that out.

Again, these aren't "opposite sides of the political spectrum" unless you're calling Hartmann a leftwing nutcase. He's not, he hasn't said anything nearly as radical and stupid as Alan Keyes, yet here he massages Keyes rep for the whole RT crowd. My god.

this conversation is over.