Remarks at New York University forum with NYACT.net
The primary problem with weaponized drones is that the weapons murder people. And they murder people in a way that looks more like murder to a lot of observers than other forms of military murder do -- such as murder by indiscriminate bombing or artillery or infantry or dropping white phosphorous on people. When President Obama looks through a list of men, women, and children at a Tuesday terror meeting, and picks which ones to murder, and has them murdered, you can call it a war or not call it a war, but it begins to look to a lot of people like murder.

After the nebulous, ill-planned government crisis that occupied the airwaves over the past few weeks, business has assumed its normal course inside the beltway. Some legislators are hopeful about the future, others remain skeptical, but one thing is for certain; Democrats on the Hill will continue to miss the ball.

The public was so relieved that Republicans decided to release their hostages after painstaking stubbornness that many failed to realize one question had gone unasked. How much will government be spending when it opens? The answer is as simple as it is startling. Today the government is operating at sequester spending levels, despite a chance to change that lugubrious narrative. Of course, this news won’t cause Republicans to blink. The larger question is why Democrats refused to even raise the issue when it stared at them from across the aisle. To add to an already grim track record, the negotiating position was one demarked by immediate concession.

What if we had politicians who believed in the abolition of war with as much passion as the Republican right believes in the abolition of taxes?

For me, the question that immediately follows is: What kind of politics draws power from resources other than the deep pockets of billionaires? Just because the world is sick of war, how will that ever translate into serious political action to defund standing armies and ongoing weapons research? How will it ever cohere into a consensus that has political traction? Does Washington, D.C. only have room for one consensus?

For the Democrats to stand moderately tough against GOP right-wing zealots in defense of the Affordable Care Act, Medicare and Social Security, there’s no way they could also — even if they wanted to — stand tough on, let us say, nuclear disarmament or a movement toward demilitarization. Such concepts aren’t on or anywhere near the fabled “table” of national debate; they’re as marginalized as segregated restrooms. This is a deep problem from the point of view of anyone looking clear-eyed into the future.

“‘They were all dying,’ she said, ‘and there was no medicine,

When video of the October 14th edition of Thom Hartmann's TV show appears online (here) it will include him asking me to justify not attacking Hitler. Thom has asked me this repeatedly during multiple appearances on his show, each time a little differently, and each time provocatively. He's right to ask it, and he's been right in some of the answers he's helped provide in the asking.

Without Hitler, the U.S. military would collapse.

For 68 years, wars on poor countries have been justified by the pretended discovery of Hitler's reincarnation. Each time it has turned out to be a false alarm. Every post-WWII war looks disastrous or at least dubious in retrospect to most people. And yet, the justification of the next war is always ready to hand, because the real, original Hitler remains alive in our memories, and he just might come back -- who's to say?

Actually, I think anyone vaguely aware of basic facts about the current world ought to be able to say that Hitler is gone for good.

How do I justify not going to war with Hitler, beyond explaining that Assad isn't Hitler, Gadaffi isn't Hitler, Hussein isn't Hitler, and so on?

On last Tuesday October 8 at 10:00 a.m. the day that the United States Supreme Court was hearing oral arguments on McCutcheon vs. FEC, Ohio PIRG held a press conference outside the Ohio Supreme Court on Front Street, just south of W. Broad. Street in downtown Columbus. Speaking at the press conference were representatives of Ohio PIRG, Common Cause, Move to Amend, Communication Workers of America, and the Sierra Club.

Alabama political donor Shaun McCutcheon has asked the court to strike down the overall limit on what an individual can give to federal candidates, parties, and PACs in a two year election cycle. That limit currently stands at $123,200 – over twice the average household income in the U.S. In 2012, only 1,219 donors came within 10% of hitting the aggregate limit. New research from U.S. PIRG and Demos projects that if the limit is lifted, this small set of donors would raise their giving and inject an additional $1 billion in campaign contributions through the 2020 elections.