I guess you'll be back in to give him props as well.

The message and the messenger are not the same thing.

So although the message is right, it's fair to point out the hypocritical piece of shit saying it.

It's full of bullshit.
Carry on.

I went back and reread the piece about an hour ago and to tell the truth other than that condescending horseshit for the religious audience I didn't see a bit of his message that was off point.

So the task is up to you - where is the bullshit? Tell me that and then I'll be happy to carry on.

Because all that does is detract from the message itself and if the correctness of the message is the point then it is pointless to denigrate that message with irrelevant information.

how do you feel about his treatment of gays in Russia?

He's an evil dictator, period.

He can go pound sand and then deliver what he said to the President at the G20. Until, I could care less what he has to say.

I specifically acknowledged that Putin is an unsavory character who is guilty of plenty of his own misdeeds. That would include the treatment of LGBT folks (of particular concern to me since I am gay myself). But the substance of what Putin wrote is very consistent with views concerning American political (and geopolitical) culture and posturing that I have held for many, many years.

What a great guy ... he is so right about ... milk ....

i.e "Putin is NOT a great guy".

So Hitler loved milk? Does that mean I cant like milk now?

and when he spoke on these issues, he was right (in fact, those cars are still on the road today)

but his being right on these issues did not make him a good guy in general

nor did his not being a good guy in general make him wrong on these issues

you have to be able to think, to understand these concepts

what if David Duke had a weather object on his website, and it said 'rain today' and it did

would that be Klansman rain? would that rain be good for whites, but bad for Jews and African-Americans?

regarless of Putin's positions on some issues, that doesnt mean he cant be right on others

he was on this one - i dont care who hie is or why he said it - he's still right

'American exceptionalism' kills lots of people, and is making us BANKRUPT

Time-honored deflection and distraction techniques having nothing to do with the debate.

I agree with Putin. American exceptionalism has been dead for a while now, and its corpse is definitely starting to stink badly. Long past time to bury it.

I am opposed to any military intervention in Syria whatsoever. That is not McCain's position. Guess you don't read much past the headlines, eh?

and tell him how right you think he is. Im sure he'd be thrilled to use a gay person in his next propaganda piece. He thinks your sub-human though, so you never know. Its worth a try.

. . . and I agree with you 100%!

It completely ignores the original post, which, whether you like Putin or not, has some good points in it. The main one is that if the U.S. just decides to go bomb Syria without international support, it will do a lot more hard than good. Specifically, we will be acting as a rogue state and will increase the liklihood that other countries seek nuclear weapons as a deterrant to us bombing them. That's a valid point.

As for the gay issue, it's a lot more complicated than, "Putin hates gays, therefore nothing he says is worth considering."

nationalism stuff. So any thing even hinting at praise of a foreign leader or saying something not in line with "America, fuck yea!" is taken as personal insult.

The reality is much more nuanced, but for some, critical thinking isn't as fun as poo-flinging.

wrong with loving one's country - warts and all? With being grateful I live here and not some shithole where I wouldn't be able to leave my house because of violence or because my religion forbids it?

Sad.

I still love America and I'm eternally grateful that my grandparents emigrated here so that I could be born here. But I'd love it even more if we dropped the destructive and evil ideology of American exceptionalism.

Let's face it: NONE of us accepted it consciously. It was practically the air we breathed, and we ingested it almost from birth with our mothers' milk.

I was brought up in the 60s and 70s by two very liberal parents so I was always very well aware that our country isn't perfect by any means. When does pride in one's country become fanatiscism?

true, yet how it is applied is important also. Hanging people swinging in the breeze because they had the 'wrong' skin color never gave me pride. Having seven stitches to close a wound in my head because I didn't like spiro agnew, AFTER viet nam service did not give me pride. Being called derogatory names because of race, gender or sexual orientation does not give me pride. Having to fight, as an bonified amerikkkan citizen, mind you, for the right to vote, AGAIN, without hassle, does not give me pride. To view a picture of an unarmed 17 year old laying on the ground with a bullet in his heart does not give me pride.This is not exceptionalism, it's hypocrisy of the highest order.

It amazes me that even part of DU would still buy into it. You'd think the USA! USA! USA! crowd would be over in Freepland and not here.

you mean by jingoistic, mindless nationalism. What are you referring to?

I'm somewhat older than you (born in 1946). Here's the Wikipedia definition:

Jingoism is patriotism in the form of aggressive foreign policy.[1] In practice, it is a country's advocation of the use of threats or actual force against other countries in order to safeguard what it perceives as its national interests. Colloquially, it refers to excessive bias in judging one's own country as superior to others—an extreme type of nationalism.

The term originated in Britain, expressing a pugnacious attitude toward Russia in the 1870s, and appeared in the American press by 1893.

Etymology
The chorus of a song by G. H. MacDermott (singer) and G. W. Hunt (songwriter) commonly sung in British pubs and music halls around the time of the Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878) gave birth to the term.[2][3] The lyrics had the chorus:

We don't want to fight but by Jingo if we do
We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too
We've fought the Bear before, and while we're Britons true
The Russians shall not have Constantinople.

The phrase "by Jingo" was a long-established minced oath, used to avoid saying "by Jesus". Referring to the song, the specific term "jingoism" was coined as a political label by the prominent British radical George Holyoake in a letter to the Daily News on 13 March 1878.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jingoism

I know the dictionary definition - I just understand know where many seem to be drawing the line at loving their country and when that love becomes fanatical. If it means that we shouldn't call for reform anywhere until we ourselves are perfect, that's a very hypocritical thing around here. Specifically, should any US citizen be bitching about an Israeli occupation until we give the US back to the Native Americans? Should we have only fought the Japanese in WWII and left Germany alone?

Re "If it means that we shouldn't call for reform anywhere until we ourselves are perfect, that's a very hypocritical thing around here."

I agree with you. I see calling for justice at home and calling for justice overseas, and being equally passionate and sincere about both, as two sides of the same coin.

Re "Specifically, should any US citizen be bitching about an Israeli occupation until we give the US back to the Native Americans? Should we have only fought the Japanese in WWII and left Germany alone?"

Again, why not do both at the same time? That's what I do. Giving the U.S. (the whole country) back to the Native Americans isn't practical or desirable, but we can still do whatever we can to increase their self-sufficiency and quality of life on the few scraps of marginal land they still control or would like to control.

For example: Two days ago I signed a petition asking the government to buy back the site of Wounded Knee and Pine Ridge and turning it over to the Oglalla Sioux. It is currently owned by a greedy profiteering non-Native individual who is asking $4.9 million for it--when the actual assessed value of the land, not counting its priceless cultural and historical value--is $14,000! I kid you not.

This morning I made a small donation to Amnesty International for the assistance of Syrian refugees, which I'm happy to say was sponsored by my heroine Joan Baez. I'm kind of surprised (although I shouldn't be) that with all the talk about those two million Syrian refugees, that there haven't been a lot more high-profile relief drives to help them directly. It seems they are being invoked basically as propaganda fodder, and not being seen as real people.

As far as Israel/Palestine goes I favor a two-state solution. That's way too complicated to get into here, though--in fact it's a whole other DU forum.

Yeah, so I'm a bleeding heart liberal! I don't see that as anything to be ashamed of.

I'm also getting more than a little bit bored with zero-sum arguments.

zero sum arguments. Nuance has no place in today's politics and that is a real shame. It's nice chatting with someone around my age because we both remember when it wasn't like this. When the loyal opposition was just that. When the two sides could duke it out on the floor and then go out for dinner together. I was raised to do what we can do, to speak out when you see an injustice (which, incidentally started in the 7th grade when my mother wasn't happy with how our social studies textbook glossed over what happened with the Native Americans and mom gave me Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee - teacher was a right winger and was not at all thrilled). The nastiness in Washington has infected all areas of life - I've truly never seen the country this divided.

Stalin says,
"Round up and shoot all the democrats, and then paint the inside of the Kremlin blue."
"Why blue?" Putin asks.
"Ha!" says Stalin. "I knew you wouldn't ask me about the first part."




Right thread for this?

There is absolutely NOTHING in my OP that is remotely "pro-Putin," ProSense. But this is so pathetically typical of the way you roll.

You're asking why people are dismissing a piece filled with distortions, hypocrisy and misinformation.

We should have all simply accepted it and validated Putins' nonsense.

. . . that doesn't mean, however, that there isn't some considerable truth in some other parts. And yes, there's a good measure of hypocrisy in it coming from Putin. But part of the point I am making is that we, as Americans, and given our own history, are hardly in any position to judge other countries on their 'hypocrisy.' IF mere hypocrisy is a reason not to consider the truth of what a party is saying, then any pronouncement by any U.S. President ought to be dismissed out of hand.

Why the hell do you think it's appropriate to validate distortions, hypocrisy and misinformation?

It's a damn good thing not everyone is applauding this op-ed.

Hitler wanted high MPG cars. Does that mean I have to love gas-guzzlers?

Also, are you trying to kick the habit?

at least in this episode

the only question is

Ginger, or Mary Ann?

Obama: Well, all day long at school I hear how great Putin is at this or how wonderful Putin did that! Putin, Putin, Putin!

At least the trains ran on time.

That Hitler guy had it right on many things. Look at all the great infrastructure projects.

He's a materially involved head-of-state with basic motives that make any statement of principle something less noble than...a statement of principle. The other stereotype we see here is people on the Left who are so consumed with disgust for our global entanglements they'll cheer anyone who lands a rhetorical blow or two that resonates with them, regardless of who's throwing the punch or why.

. . . so please, tell me what, in Putin's Op-Ed, was factrually and substantively wrong. I'm all ears. (Or eyes.)

. . . the paragraph in which Putin discussed his theory of who is responsible for the attack is a single paragraph out of 18 paragraphs, and isn't even the primary point of his essay.

The entire dispute is over what to do about the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons.

He 's saying nothing to see here, move along now, Assad's got this, chill.

isn't the lecture or some of the accurate points he makes, it's the bullshit about Russia's position vis a vis the Syrian government. The claim that Russia isn't supporting the Assad regime is complete bullshit.

. . . but of course, that's not what people are so up in arms about. They're up in arms because he quite rightfully called us out on our belief in our own moral superiority.

. . . I said I've seen no one refute the substance of what Putin had to say. And this one point is far from representing the substance of the essay.

American "exceptionalism" is nothing but fascism.

to the average American, sucking treasure and blood, giving nothing in return

at least traditional warmongering in ancient times shared the spoils

Re "at least traditional warmongering in ancient times shared the spoils."

Instead we have the highest level of income inequality since 1928. Fucking parasites!

it is that, and the sheeple faction are the ones who scream the loudest at anyone pointing that part out.

Cheers!

As a nation, we are almost pathologically loath to engage in any kind of honest self-examination or reflection about much of anything.

tell you what

have Obama quit giving us fresh stuff that deserves criticism, and I'll be glad to take a break from criticizing him

i'd love to

such as why did we have proxy wars in south korea and vietnam against china, sacrificing lives limbs and treasure, when we were going to give china the economy anyway

or, why did we clear out one of saudi arabia's enemies in response to a terrorist attack by saudies in our planes

just a few issues, for starters, all part of 'American Exceptionalism'

it seems the so-called moderate and centrists of both parties have some common ground.

through NSA phone logging, 'free' trade agreements and guest worker programs (Obama included)

that take HIS credibility away, also?

If so I have some swampland I want to sell you...

no, it wouldnt surprise me if they did

all i was asserting, it that this is not a land that respects rights either

pot calling kettle black

that organization was not limited by any such things as courts, FISA courts, legislation, or the like.

We don't have to feel inferior over that, even if you put the worst spin on the NSA! There's no way we even touch Russia on those subjects!

more alike, than different

To protest the lack of humane treatment. We have practiced torture. Our death penalty is a form of torture.

If you use the civil rights violation as a basis for a national leader not to able to speak, well, neither does the president have room to speak.

and they die slowly in a matter of weeks....while watching their hair and teeth fall out.

I always find this way of thinking interesting, and sometimes it seems to go to this aspect.

business and I've been to some countries with real nasty regimes. Our system has it's faults (the right-wing has been gaining ground for the last 20 years) but I still love my country and appreciate how much freedom I have in comparison to many, many, countries.

in our military might? in our skewed income distribution? in our declining standards on just about every scale of civilized nations?
the belief in our exceptionalism explains a lot about why WE do little as our standard of living continues to decline.

this sort of discussion is not allowed. And as far as our standard of living, while it may have declined, American are fabulously wealthy by comparison to much of the world. Even poor Americans are rich by worldwide standards.

I am not rich, in fact I would probably be considered poor by many people but, I just took a whole car load of perfectly good clothes, household items, etc. to St. Vincent's the other day.

My son is mentally ill and is on disability and while he gets very little money and some food stamps, he does get medical coverage.

So yes, while I criticize much of what goes on in this country, I also believe there are lots of things that are good about us.

35 in healthcare.

Death rates among new mothers are above those of Cuba.

Free discussion and free thought is far from exclusive to the US. In fact, a whole slew of European nations have that freedom, in fact the country to the south of you does.

No, we are not unique, or special, or city on the hill, or anything else. The Empire is closer to collapse than I realized. Perhaps then Americans will learn the lesson every imperial citizen before us has learned.

People need to leave this country and visit others more often.

I am too tired people do need to leave this country to really understand how the rest of the world lives. I don't think most americans have a clue...clearly.

I love living where I do and I love that Obama is the President. I actually appreciate the job is he is doing.

it's a constant battle to get things done and keep the Koch teabagger party at bay but our Democracy is worth for.

But there are also many where it would be and is permitted. We may have been unique at a certain point in our history, but we are not unique in that regard anymore.

an evil man like Putin.


American does have problem, but President Obama didn't create them.

sorry, my ears are open to opinions other than his at this moment

unless he just forbade dissent

and Obama is GOOD. how can you possibly expect to have a meaningful discussion when THIS is as far a many americans can go. putin = evil Obama = good it's impossible,

as far as I'm concerned

there are times you have to trust people, but it is always my preference to trust my own eyes on issues

i will never understand those who wont

all freaking day, it would still be bullshit.

It is so sad reading these comments where half of you can't go beyond a simplistic duality. I feel like I'm talking to four year olds.

get used to it.

particular.

Forbidding dissent may be closer than we think.....probably new
keywords at the NSA to detect such. Just look around here at
the immediate pouncing on dissent. How things have changed.

edit: correct spelling

dissent bashing... like that of the Occupy Movement:

a discussion on that today...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023655085

Amazing how some brush issues aside for the sake of misguided hero worship of a sort.

Pluralism of a kind not predicted or anticipated until recently or is it an old jalopy with a new paint job?

You realize people abroad think that of American Presidents? Why don't you tell us exactly where the essay was wrong in substance? Did you read far enough to realize Putin credited the US for the UN and the Security Council? Or that went over your head?

Perhaps you also missed the references to the International order we were once seen as champions off, even when we also ignored it at times, but we are no longer seen that way.

The world, for real, is far more complex than personalities. Don't bother responding, you are going straight to the children's wing, where I can't hear you and la, la, a are appropriate responses.

Putin pointing out that an attack on Syria without a UN resolution or a direct attack on the US would be an "act of aggression" is a bit rich. There are plenty of international politicians and statesmen whom I respect and would not dismiss and who have said or would say things very similar to what Putin wrote. If I still fall into the "ugly American" category, so be it.

Also, this would be a little like a similar lecture coming from Bush about acts of aggression - perhaps accurate on some level - but hard to take, nonetheless, considering the source.

next target is Israel?

Puh-leaze.

. . .it may very well have been Assad. That isn't what I"m talking about. The major thrust of Putin's essay, and the thing people are so up in arms about, is his calling out of America on its absurd belief in its own moral purity. Yes, there are things in the essay that are pure, self-serving bullshit. There are also things that I would expect Putin to say as Assad's ally. But those aren't the parts so many people are feeling stung by. People are feeling stung by Putin's criticism of America's hypocritical and arrogant self-righteousness == a point about which he is not entirely wrong. And even his own hypocrisy, which is considerable, doesn't alter the truth of that part of what he wrote, painful though it may be to read coming from him.

of the rebels for Assad's gas attack (combined with gratuitous pandering to the AIPAC crowd) while obfuscating Russia's role in enabling Assad's atrocities is indeed central to understanding that essay.

Out of one side of his mouth he says "run everything through the UN" and with the other he says "NYET" whenever anyone proposes that the UN actually do something.

NO...you don't. and since you don't, you cannot claim with certainty that is was not committed by the so-called Saudi-funded rebels.