Elizabeth Warren is on the congressional bank oversight panel. She was on Morning Joe today and said she wants more transparency, the way Sweden examined its foundering bank system. Otherwise, she says we are going the same way as the Japanese and their "lost decade" (actually 14 years!) Here's the video:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/#30225243

Somehow my note above came to "the end" as my note posted unedited. You should have a way to at least allow us to read and decide if we want our notes to go. Don't just snatch and post. I'm wanted to take out parts of my note above here and reword it. Now it has to sit. The dangling "W" is for whatever, I do not know. It startled me when I was taken to the box here! Shoot.

I just NEED (as do most people with any sensitivity right now) to feel I can trust my president to be doing his very best. I will write to him as often as I can. But just go a bit easier on him. He's got so many advisors with as many ideas. And for anyone who thinks Obama is so bad, why not go try to do his job for at least a week? Hmmmm? THIS IS A GREAT MAN, and given half a chance he just may surprise you. I know you believe a lot in him, but you have more and more doubt creeping in weekly/daily! You have NO idea how this affects people like me. I'm a Depression "baby"!!! I had a Victory Garden. I remember Roosevelt. I remember all that followed.

I am beginning to wonder if a lot of people want Bush back in office! There's a thought. Beginning to sound like MANY would appreciate having McCain in office. How about that? I'll leave radio and parts of cable news OFF if I hear personal opinions without explanations that it is just that, an opinion, not a fact. When people talk over each other we don't always here what is meant. But today was a huge disappointment to me, and I won't listen to this. I'll go back to my Wayne Dyer's methods of "what you think you are" or "what you say/fear you WILL have." Positive thoughts WILL win just as negative ones. Why not put forth the positive in such times as these (and keep it up when we heal up)?

Thanks Thom. I do enjoy your show, just be careful with the "Alex" type people and be sure to help us know your opinions are not truths or facts. Okay? :o)

Lindsay

P.S. I got to run spell check and edit this part. Not responsible for how the first part of my note turned out. PLEASE add the ability to read and correct our entries before it is whisked away like mine just was. Thanks.

Wow! Thom AND Alex Jones. GREAT!

But I missed the first two thirds of the segment. Can it be heard online someplace after the show?

Thanks for what I DID hear!

Point taken Andrew Jackson,

"I would love to pay more taxes,"

The financial world is crumbling
On our heads with a thump
Where can we find inspiration?
Just look to Donald Trump

We call ourselves progressives
But unsure where to look
Where can we find inspiration?
Donald Trump has a book!

He's such a font of wisdom
With style and such aplomb
If we can call him “The Donald”
Can we call you “The Thom”?

Thank you Thom. Of course, the real culprit is the broader culture of conservatism - the so called "rugged individualism" ie - the "every man for himself' social philosophy" which dominates so much of America today. If you put people who think this way in charge of the laws, they will make laws to make themselves rich. Simply put, these men crashed the system, hoarding their ill gotten gains along the way, oblivious to the immeasurable cost in human lives and suffering. With their control of the media, they manipulate a gullible and selfish minded American public - people who are willing to adopt any interpretation, no matter how dishonest, so long as if fits their pocketbooks. They view any attempt to regulate the fee market, even the levying of taxes, as a threat to their "freedom," and they scream "socialism!," as if it were a dirty word. Any attempt to provide protections agains the dynamics which gave rise to the era of the 'robber barons' they deem an undue imposition. Necessary to assuage their conciences, Republicans today espouse their faith in the 'infinite opportunity' available in America. "Anyone can be rich if they would only work hard enough" they say. How pathetic. With 'competition' there must be winners and losers. 'Losing' in America today means going without adequate health care, and even possibly adequate food and housing. Someone will ALWAYS stand at the cash register, pick crops, pump gas. In more civilized nations, like Canada, France, and Norway to name just a few, working citizens have their basic needs met. Though no-one wants to fess up to the truth, it needs to be said: "Shame on us this every-man-for-himself-wild-west-republican styled community of America." Of course, conservatives decry the so called "moral crisis' to additionally assuage their conciences. It is transparent, however, that the reason they make a fuss about sexual norms and the abortion issue is that these don't cost them anything to address. What a different place America would be if conservatives would adopt a consistently Christian agenda, and not just the agenda that doesn't cost them any money.

Hey Thom, great stuff as always!

On a side note, I read today that Limbaugh's "success" is due to giving his show away in smaller markets - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mann/limbaughs-dirty-little-se_b_1859... - I have to admit, it's a brilliant move, and one that the left needs to adopt quicker than it finishes ridiculing it. We all like a good validating news story that confirms our belief that Limbaugh is a hack, but I think we prefer a well-educated populace!

Thom's characterization of the radicals of Christianity and Judaism being a tiny minority is dead wrong. Murderous Christians have committed genocidal acts in the very recent past in Croatia, West Africa, and Northern Ireland. And widesprerad violent acts by Jews against Muslims, especially in Israeli occupied areas in the middle east is a public embarassment to Jews everywhere. And Muslims trying to characterize Islam as a peace loving religion that doesn't force membership at swordpoint is a joke, especially in countries permitting the Sharia law.

The terrorism of killing of innocent people -- for any reason -- is inherently immoral, in or out of the context of religion. While attacking military targets might be perceived as some distorted semblance of retaliation, the killing of innocent civilians, especially women and children, on the planes, and in the buildings, discos, restaurants, resorts, and embassies throughout the world, can never be justified.

This is the difference: When Christian radicals go overboard, like the ethnic cleansing by Milosovich in southern Yugoslavia, we don't give them sanctuary or safe haven. In Christendom, such men become pariahs, war-criminals, or worse.

Compare that to what has happened to Osama bin Laden and other terrorists throughout the Islamic world. Osama is being protected and supported -- even sponsored -- by a number of Islamic governments and individuals. If such a great number of Moslems don't support what he did, why are they hiding him?

Many websites supportive of Islam claim that terrorism is "abominable, abhorrent and permeates society and it is against the fundamental teachings of Islam" and rhetorically ask "Could a faith that has 1.3 billion followers the world over and over 7 millions in America actually advocate the killing and maiming of innocent people?" So my question is this: Why does Islam depend on the USA to keep the likes of Momar Khadafi, Saddam Husein, the Ayatollah in Iran, and Osama bin Ladin in check, and more specifically, if terrorism is not Islam, why doesn't Islam weed out its own hypocrites and imposters?

Until they do, the rest of us have no alternative but to suspect every woman wearing a burka of being a possible suicide bomber, and every Muslim man as a potential murderer of innocent women and children.

According to their Holy Books, Muslims cannot morally have Christians or Jews for "friends and protectors," Christians morally can't be "yoked together with unbelievers," and Jews are called to "come out from it and touch no unclean thing". It is a useless fallacy to assume they can ever "live together in peace" or even tolerate each other in any semblance of mutual respect. The best they can hope for is an uneasy truce, each knowing that any moment might spark the next round of violence against them, with religion once again taking the blame for mankind's inhumanity to mankind...

There are two unrelated points I'd like to make regarding today's show:

1) Regarding the first guest, who's main point seemed to be that the best, and possibly only, way to fight extremeist Islamic terrorism is to convert all the Moslems to Christianity - Can anyone point to a historical example where forcing a people to abandoin the faith of their ancestors for that of the "masters" (for want of a better word) turned out to be a good idea?

2) Regarding the economy - It often seems to me, Thom, that you are taking Limbaugh's infamous statement about FDR (He's dead! - Some of his policies are still hanging around, but we're trying to do something about that!), and substitute Ronald Reagan's name. Now, I personally have no problem with that, but can the guy who wrote "Cracking the Code" really fail to see the problem with this tactic? I just don't think that "REPEAL THE REAGAN TAX CUTS" is gonna play in Peoria.

-- Of course the "New Right" is wrong - that doesn't make WRONG the new RIGHT!

Thom: When talking about how Jews lived in peace in Islamic countries you left out the fact that they were treated as second class citizens. The Koran may say don't force anyone but it also says that anyone or any entity that is not Islamic is inferior and needs to be under the rule of Islam.

This is one reason they hate us, we are not an Islamic nation so we are supposed to bow to them. We don't have to convert we just have to acknowledge that they are the rulers.

does anyone know the name of the book that Thom talked about today, written by a man that took part in the boston tea party

thanks Thom for the info about the real Boston tea party.

thinking about what I was thought in school (during the 90's) I don't remember the reason being stated for the tea party was a corp tax cut but instead raising taxes on people (for example the stamp act)