A short time ago, on Facebook, I commented in a thread about 'Progressive' radio host Thom Hartmann. My succint premise was this guy isn't anything 'special' he's just another paid tool doing his show, and in terms of 'quality' he is not that much different from his peers on the other side of the dial. You would have thought I called Mother Theresa a whore. Immediately, I was asked for 'proof' that he is the same...
I could have pulled many various quotes of his to prove my point, but in the intetest of brevity, and to avoid getting into the mire, I responded that when I heard him interview V Bugliosi on his tome 'Reclaiming History' he did not seem like the 'reasoned, intellectually honest' host that he was being described as. As a matter of fact, he sounded alot more like Alex Jones or Jesse Ventura (a man I once had great respect for ). He sounded like a guy who was 'married' to his particular theory that the Mafia whacked JFK, and was unable or unwilling to be persuaded otherwise. It makes it even more telling, in that V Bugliosi isn't a 'far right' guy at all, he in fact is pretty 'progressive himself', citing GWB as a War Criminal.
Well, it turns out that TH is the co-author of a book ( soon to be made into a movie starring Leonardo DiCaprio!) that posits just that" The Black Hand had JFK killed. So that might 'splain why he did not want to hear any 'common sense' from VB, that would work against his own self-interest. And there is a reason that none other then Tom Hanks agreed with VB's assumption of 'Who Killed Kennedy' and will undertake a short series to put it out there. I think it's important to put ugly conspiracy theories to rest, as they only serve to bring further harm to eveybody involved. But, that's just me( and Tom Hanks and VB ).
Shortly after the Tuscon Shooting his name pooped up in the news again as one 'pointing fingers' very,very soon after the event. Enjoy this lil gem:
or from his show:
To be clear, if you're using this event to criticize the "rhetoric" of Mrs. Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you're either: (a) asserting a connection between the "rhetoric" and the shooting, which based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie; or (b) you're not, in which case you're just seizing on a tragedy to try to score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. 3 broadcast days after the event? C'mon now. Thsat is pretty bad..
His belief, correlation proves causation, is a logical fallacy by which two events that occur together are claimed to have a cause-and-effect relationship. The fallacy is also known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for "with this, therefore because of this") and false cause. Like say, Sarah Palin's 'crosshairs map' contributed to the vitriolic environment that brough about Giffords shooting.
The old Correlation does not imply causation come to mind. It is a very scientific theory which has been used to shoot down these weak types of arguments, say violent video games cause Columbine type attacks, Judas Priest' music causes teen suicide, and on and on. There is strike 2.
Strike 3 in my opinion, is that he is not even trying to hide his sickening message.He is saying here that people like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are 'intending' to activate 'Lone Wolf Terrorists'. That's just plain wrong. To assert that kind of stuff, so soon after the shooting, as a woman lay in coma and a little girl dead, is so very,very wrong. Had the tables been reversed, and the right was pulling this crap, I and Thom Hartmann would be calling them out. If McCain was POTUS, and Joe Biden put out the 'crosshairs map' ( and admit it, it's not such a stretch: that guy has been doing Palin-like gaffes just like that for decades) and a GOP Represenative got shot: and Rush Limbaugh had said 'well what do you expect? Joe Biden is activating Lone Wolf Terrorists' this guy would have gona ballistic. For the record, the right did JUST that kind of crap with the whole Terry Schiavo scenario. They used a tragic situation to further a political end. Just sickening.
I will say I do believe Bill O Reilly is at least somewhat responsible for the death of Dr Tillman. The continued use of 'baby-killer Tiller' most likely DID factor in to the death of the DR. At least in my opinion.. But it's the 'intent':does anyone think BOR 'intended' to have the guy killed? Of course not. But for the present lets just focus on Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.
In his televised monolougue, he pulls an old broadcasting trick. First, he intentionally and decidely put quotes from Micheal Savage and Mark Levin, and Adolf Hitler, and put them all in one big 'this is what people like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin say' and that is dishonest. Secondly, he used the old 'out of context' to say Glenn Beck was 'serious' when he said 'I think I could just kill Micheal Moore'. Please. It is obvious to anyone with a pulse that he was joking. It may be a bad joke, but his intent was never to 'kill Micheal Moore'. This is a tried and true trick the righties use all the time, and it bothers me when they do it.
That's why I wasn't suprised when Obama, Jon Stewart and Bill Mahrer put this matter to bed. They all called out those (like TH ) who were doing this, and while I may disagree with all of them, they still have my respect. Mr Hartmann does not.
Fianlly, he also engages in what we used to call 'Barrel-Fishing'. Hannity vs Colmes was never a 'fair fight'..Now Hannity vs Ed Schultz? Thats more like it. When I was producing the Mike Rose Show on WALR in 2004 we had the option of having a Kerry campaign operative on the show, but chose to feature a Nader spokes person:because the 26 year old college student was an easier target then the 52 year old Kerry supporter. Was this wrong? Yep, sure was. I thought at the time it was a little BS, and I said so. But it was in the best interest of keeping the show somewhat entertaining and making the host look like he was winning the day. Thom Hartmann has the WORST and most fake libertarians come on the show to debate him. If any single person such as Thomas DiLorenzo or Mark Thornton were on his show, he would be annihilated. But he instead usually makes the "libertarians" on there look like idiots because they aren't real libertarians at all...I'm talking people like John Lott, Yaron Brook, and various Catoites -- some of the "libertarians" who are constantly on his show. Now for all I know, he reached out to these guys and they refused. But I highly doubt it.
I've listened to the guy. I listen to them ALL. But they are all paid whores, the lot of them. I hope I have explained my position, and it makes sense. Thom Hartmann is not that far off from Glenn Beck. They both have crazy 'theories' that defy logic and common sense. They both engage in using info 'out of context'. And they both whore themselves out to thier fanboys. Thom Hartmann uses a incorrect Daily Kos story about 'stochatic terrorism' and links it to recent horrible crimes. Glenn Beck has done the same thing:using recent things like the Ft Hood shooting, the guy who crashed his plane into the IRS building who was a leftist and the eco-terrorist that stormed the Discovery Channel taking hostages as examples of elements of Islam of the Far Left gone awry. It's wrong and dishonest on both sides.