No. The RW hasn't loved Putin since his pick up date with Dubya.

How revealing.................hmmmm? Says just about everything we know to be true about the RW in this country that they would latch on to this guy.

The President taking rational action on the Ukraine situation pisses the RW off!

They're targeting their anger at President Obama's reasonable plan of action in Ukraine.

They're no longer BFFs with Putin.

"They're targeting their anger at President Obama's reasonable plan of action in Ukraine. "

You're apparently trying to spin their praise of Putin as a reaction to Obama, but the fact is that they believe going to war is a sign of strength.

You also ignore the fact the RW was instrumental in pushing anti-gay messages in Russia.

Go to any RW site...... see what they currently think about Putin.

Then report back with the "love"! Thank-you!

Oh brother. Maybe you should stay out of kookville.

I mean, you're insisting that Republicans, pundits and RW bloggers aren't lauding Putin when their comments have been posted here over the last several days.

You're also denying that the RW admire's Putin for his anti-gay stance.

Religious right leader backs Russian crackdown on gay rights
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023450229

Fox's Ben Carson: Putin Is Right For Calling America "Godless"
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/02/12/foxs-ben-carson-putin-is-right-for-calling-amer/198028

Sure they love Putin for his anti-gay stance..... but they are still in the cold war mode about him otherwise.

Like I said, show me an example of your RW love for Putin.

On Fox, Giuliani Praises Putin: He's "What You Call A Leader," In Contrast To Obama
http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/03/03/on-fox-giuliani-praises-putin-hes-what-you-call/198316

Pat Buchanan really, really likes Vladimir Putin
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/17/1263409/-Pat-Robertson-really-really-likes-Vladimir-Putin

Sounds like an objective analysis

But it was the fund-a-mental-case version of Buchanan who was touting the moral righteousness of the eastern European dictator.

pampango posted that excerpt last night, here:

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10024599960

Thanks, pampango!!

I hope some posters around here take note of this stuff before they accuse other DU'ers of being part of a "Putin fan club" or something

the anti gay laws and the power of the religious right in Russia.

Thanks for that video!

"Is this the new meme..... the RW loves Putin?"

...not a love based solely on his current invasion of another country.

Religious right leader backs Russian crackdown on gay rights
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023450229

The righties have been lovin' Putin because his relationship with President Obama is somewhat confrontational and rather icy.

http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/03/03/on-fox-giuliani-praises-putin-hes-what-you-call/198316

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024605593#post3

Man, I get tired of repeating this over and over.

I'm not sure if you can't ...... or just DON'T want to understand the truth.

Which is it?

And the Oligarchs!

That would make a great name for a Skinhead band! "Pravy Sektor and the Oligarchs"!

Putin makes his decisions right away - while "President" Barack Hussein Obama, on the other hand, has to think it over and then ask people what they think and then he has to think it over again

?w=500

The "Rob Ford Effect" is starting to spread

Got to him more than we thought.

I'm watching it now. So far I don't see him looking "unhinged", but I don't know that I can make it all the way through.

Here it is:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/03/04/full_video_vladimir_putin_holds_press_conference_on_ukraine_crisis.html

He begins answering questions at 3:11. As far as any incoherence I notice nothing different than his regular press conferences. Maybe these outlets have never watched one of his press meetings before. He tends to go all over the map and covers all subjects. It's his normal routine. This "Putin is losing it" meme seems like another ridiculous media driven narrative from our side once again. He's usually very candid in press conferences and that seems to be the case here. Go to the 22:40 mark to hear what Putin says about the US.

Update 2

Okay, the big crazy takeaway from the WaPo piece are these Putin quotes:

"Unbelievable, but Putin is saying that he has NOT sent troops to Crimea! Those masked gunmen at the airport, according to him, are...Ukrainian Freedom Fighters??? Wow."

More bad news for them..

4 Reasons Putin Is Already Losing in Ukraine

http://world.time.com/2014/03/03/putin-ukraine-crimea-russia/

Thank the gods & goddesses that Obama is in office and not some wacko.

You're back!


Que pasa?

have an agenda to prop up putin. Whatever the hell that may be.

Other than that they don't know what they want. They'll criticize millions of people getting health care for crying out loud.

was spoken by such a powerful leader. I worry that he has the kind of popular support that he does.

The Patriarch has anointed Putin as God's chosen leader.
He said that Putin as leader is a "miracle."
Russia IS Holy Russia..
The adoration for Putin can only be understood when you look at the role of the Orthodox church.
The Orthodox church has said they are engaged in a holy war of sorts with “Holy Russia” on one side and "foreign devils" on the other.
Everything "evil" is foreign.
AIDS, homosexuality, drug use, Pussy Riot, etc.

But, yes, it really is frightening to see this happen.

much christian conservatives in the U.S. admire the church's role in Russia.

It's no fun when a nut has his hand on the button.

are negative Pres O anything. If propping up Putin who even his media delegation thought weird thoughts about his last press conference makes him look "superior" over that gosh darn that Black man in their "White House" than GOPers will belittle him relentlessly. Even countries have picked up such venom from these assholes about Pres O and laugh at the dumb, dumber, dumbest approach these jerks instill and pray to GOD these motherf**kers don't get total control of the USA.

and a large part of the paragraph written above is fanciful, at best. It's a Google Translate, but it sure sounds like the reporter is trying to advance an agenda by mashing things together, creating things that were never said, etc.

Here's a little piece of it, but it all seemed par for the course - where's the "not in touch" stuff? He sounds just like any other person in the text. That leaves out a lot, but I'm not ready to trust that reporter at all.


http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gazeta.ru%2Fpolitics%2F2014%2F03%2F04_a_5935109.shtml


"15.14

"Ukraine's political life was turned into a farce", - Putin said, recalling the "orange revolution".

15.11

Russia took part in the fate of Yanukovych humanitarian grounds, in Ukraine it could kill the Russian President said.

15.06

"We're not going to fight with the Ukrainian people", - Putin said, answering the question of "Gazety.Ru".

"If we take such a decision, it is only for the protection of Ukrainian citizens, and try to let someone from the military to shoot at their own people, for which we stand behind. Not in front and rear. Let them try to shoot at women and children, "- said the president.

15.04

"There is information that among the protesters were fired on supporters of opposition parties", - Putin said, answering the question of "Gazety.Ru" about who could give the order to fire on protesters in Kiev.

15.03

Russia did not participate in the preparation of self-defense forces of the Crimea, Putin said.
"We believe and we assume that Ukraine is not only our close neighbor, but fraternal republic. And our armed forces - this comrades in arms, friends, many of them know each other personally. And I am sure that Russian and Ukrainian soldiers will not be on opposite sides, and on the same side. By the way, about this thing, I'm talking about, and occurs in the Crimea. After all, note that, thank God, there is not a single shot, "- said the president.

15.02

"We are continuing to prepare for the summit G8», - said Putin.

"As for the" eight ", I do not know. We are preparing for "eight", will be ready to accept at our peers, but if they do not want to come - do not "- said the president.

15.01

"In Ukraine, there is no president," - Putin said, answering the question of whether he intended to contact with the new authorities in Kiev.

15.00

"We do not want to interrupt cooperation ... We try to keep the interaction (with the new authorities in Kiev) on the economy", - said Putin.

14.59

"As far as sanctions ... In our world, everything is interconnected," - said Putin.

14.57

Russia also operates legitimately, Putin said. "We have a humanitarian mission, we are not going to enslave someone or something to dictate," - said the president of Russia.

14.55

Putin reminded partners such as the United States acted in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. "Our partners, especially the United States, always articulate their geopolitical interests, pursue them clearly, and then dragged under the whole world," - said the president.

14.54 "

People should be ashamed for buying into this childish "Putin is going crazy" bullshit.

Putin's statements don't make sense.

As for this claim in the other poster's comment:

That is not an attribution to Putin from the NJ piece. It's a comment by the Daily Kos poster about Merkel's statement.

"People should be ashamed for buying into this childish 'Putin is going craz' bullshit."

Maybe people are sick of bullshit Putin apologia.

I know an orchestrated attempt at character assassination when I see and hear one. This same angle was taken by an NPR report I listened to yesterday afternoon. Our vulture capitalists (not to mention the MIC of this country) will do almost anything to discredit the one person who can thwart their greed-fueled desires in regard to Ukraine.

That was clearly an oversight on my part.

This is an editorialized piece. It doesn't tell us how his language is coming across.

Bush said today, "There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on ... you." Referring to the statement "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me," Bush added, "... you can't get fooled again." Alluding to the fact that once one is fooled by someone, they may not wish to allow themselves to be fooled again by said someone.

http://www.gazeta.ru/politics/2014/03/04_a_5935109.shtml



Bush - "I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee"

A raw transcript of his words, not an editorialized piece that translates what he's saying, what he actually, literally said. Like Clinton's 2012 DNC speech where he ad libed huge parts.

of someone who seems almost (to me) to have a low opinion of him or herself to begin with (the person writing about his speech). That's enough for me to want more before I take the word of some Internet hack. Especially when there seems to be so much loose talk around about who has the bigger missile, Obama or Putin.

But that's just me, other's mileage, etc.

It looks like Putin being the same Putin he always is. I think these western outlets may have never witnessed one of his press conferences before.

Obama and Kerry Fact-Check Putin and Russia
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024605783

Do we really think can made our overthrow of a democratically elected government alright just by claiming the President of Russia is out of his mind to oppose us? That is not going to fool anyone who doesn't already want to be fooled.

That is a terrible translation, intended to give the impression a very sane and logical man is neither of those things. I assume this is the fault of whoever it was who wrote that gibberish and nonsense, not you, ProSense. Still and all it is an awful thing to see anywhere, especially here.

I'm sorry, I didn't realize Putin was your hero.

Let me ask, do you think his anti-gay position is "sane and logical"?

Did you think Bush was "sane and logical" for invading Iraq?

Do you think it's "sane and logical" to invade a country and then try to justify it by claiming that its former leader who fled to Russia gave permission after the invasion took place?

Just so our bankers and vulture capitalists can install a pliant replacement government which will allow them to loot the pitiful place and destroy its working people (and economy generally) with Greek style austerity conditions. That's what I'm against.

installing a pliant replacement government which will allow them to loot the pitiful place and destroy its working people (and economy generally) with Russian style cronie capitalism?

Again, one can't be against both?

If you don't, all you know is what our spin masters are telling you.

and see it's not irregular behavior on Putins part but it's much easier for them and less time consuming if they can quickly jump on a bandwagon that already fits their preconceived notions. They're funny to read. Alas, their ignorant desire to suck up any meme presented to them and having a group circle jerk without doing a bit of research is completely the norm around here these days. The site used to be a bit more in depth. Not so these days. Reading this thread is like glancing at Free Republic back in 2004.

Unless I miss my guess, (and I'm pretty damn sure on this one) some very wealthy and powerful interests see in the collapse of democratic authority in Ukraine a prime opportunity to make some quick and easy cash, and to extend yet further the scope of their austerity economics. Those kinds of people can pressure, or outright buy off, any number of normally trusted politicians and news commentators, politicians and news commentators who, in turn, can sway public opinion to approve some of the most undemocratic and ill-advised of national policies.

...dismissing criticism of Putin's statements in order to offer a wild CT about what you think happened.

Please explain why you feel a need to be so insulting?

You observed "powerful interests" seeking the "collapse" of Ukraine?

Tell me which parts of that are "observable facts"?

Who are you suggesting wants to see the Ukraine "collapse." Who is it you want to blame for Putin's actions.

And you have failed to establish how it wasn't.

Please refer to my earlier replies in regard to your misconception about the obvious illegality of that overthrow of a democratically elected head of state. (sigh)

Let me see . . .

Was it because the protest leaders had signed an internationally negotiated agreement to not seek Yanukovich's removal if he would agree to early national elections and remove all police from the streets (which conditions he quickly met) and then, as soon as the police had been withdrawn, they allowed scores of armed thugs to swarm the Rada building and drive off most members of Yanukovich's democratically elected majority, as well as intimidating the rest with physical violence unless they changed their party allegiance and voted for his removal (and, of course, driving the President himself from the country by threat of death).

Could that have been my reasoning?

It's the Russian form of stress management.

"The following is a serious paraphrasing of what Vladimir Putin said during his press conference this morning, from The New Republic: "

*stuff*

"And so on, for about an hour. And much of that, by the way, is direct quotes."

Which is which?

They were just dressed like Russian forces.

Wasn't he claiming that this:

Russia Claims Ousted Ukrainian President Asked For Military Intervention
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024598444

Engineering Failed States

The Strategy of Global Corporate Imperialism

by GILBERT MERCIER
CounterPunch WEEKEND EDITION FEB 28-MAR 02, 2014

Empires as National and Cultural Megalomaniac Dreams

Once upon a time, national entities and cultures aspired to build empires. The impulse was the erroneous assumption of being a superior civilization. It was about exporting an extensive set of aspirations, a culture, and a value system. Romans thought that bringing water through aqueducts and paved roads to the “savages” of the north were the selfless gift of a superior civilization. Much more recently, France’s empire built its colonial towns, such as Saigon and Algier, following exactly the architectural model of French towns of the XIX century. In what could be an indication that history is on an accelerated course, the life span of empires is getting shorter. For example, the Egyptian empire lasted more than 3,000 years; the Mayan empire survived 2,900; the Chinese empire more than 1,600; the Roman empire itself, as a united empire, remained for 500 years while the Eastern Roman empire or Byzantine empire lasted an extra 1,000 after the split from the Western Roman empire.

Empire strategy: destroy, rebuild, occupy and exploit Closer to the modern era, and following the progress of technology in weapons and transport, Great Britain or France, during the rule of Napoleon, and even more recently Nazi Germany and its Japanese ally, had the lofty borderline-psychotic goal of complete world domination. In the ruins of World War II emerged the two winning empires, the United States and the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). To the winners belong the spoils of war, and in 1945 the world was de facto split in two. The two parts of Germany were rebuilt from complete wreckage in the image of their new respective masters; the US Marshall plan was the remedy prescribed to deal with West Germany’s ruins. In Japan, General MacArthur took charge of the mass murder, demolition and later reconstruction for the US empire. Germany and Japan were not rebuilt as free national entities but occupied vassals on a short leash. Almost 70 years after the end of World War II, US military boots are still on the ground in both countries. According to data from the US Department of Defense (DoD), more than 50,000 US troops were still in Germany and almost 40,000 were still occupying Japan in 2011. Overall, according to the DoD, the US military has troops stationed in almost 150 countries.

Global Corporate Empire: Sovereign Nations are the Only Obstacle

Imperialism has long been a collective disease for humanity. In its current perverse capitalist incarnation, imperialism’s methods have become even more brutal and ruthless. If the physical destruction of a country’s infrastucture is still in the foreground, this is used in conjunction with the creation or revival of civil wars, ethnic or bloody sectarian conflicts in previously stable national entities. Corporate imperialism aims to break the national spirit. The few remaining sovereign nations are the final obstacles to the looming threat of a global transnational corporate empire. Corporate imperialism’s only concern is the bottom line: it is on a permanent quest to maximize profit. It is not about bringing the supposed gift of civilization to savages anymore, unlike the old-fashioned imperialist adventures. In this context, why bother to rebuild the shattered countries when the only goal is to plunder resources, either natural or human? Public resources are allocated to reconstruction, but these resources usually disappear in black holes of corporate war profiteers such as Halliburton in the US. Wrecked countries are never rebuilt because they are easier to exploit while they are in a shambles.

Why bother with regime-change policy when failed states are so convenient? The model for transnational corporate imperialism was set up in Iraq, then applied to Libya. This global imperialist strategy is in the works in Syria, the Ukraine, Mali, Central African Republic, and Venezuela. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) usually acts as the armed fist for this process, but sponsored proxy agents such as Jihadists in Syria or fascist factions in the Ukraine and Venezuela are also used to destabilize governments. In Venezuela on February 7, 2014, before the not so spontaneous protests started, Japanese car giant Toyota abruptly announced it was closing a plant employing 1,700 people. Is this pure coincidence or part of an overall ploy to crash Venezuela’s economy? There is a saying in Lebanon, that the country is “always five minutes away from civil war.” This tragic Lebanese reality has spread to the entire Middle East, Africa and is gaining ground in Eastern Europe. The old imperialist adage “divide and rule” is obsolete, the new motto seems to be “divide and steal from those divided.” The new strategy is to fuel ethnic or sectarian conflicts as much and as long as possible, and ideally maintain a permanent state of low-intensity civil war. In the Central African Republic, the clashes between the majority Christian population and the 15 percent Muslims gave France the perfect opportunity to send 2,000 troops. French troops are still in Mali to protect mining interests. In Iraq, the low-level sectarian warfare is a disaster for Iraqis but has worked well for corporate interests. The oil is flowing, and of course, just like in Syria, weapons dealers, mercenaries, and “reconstruction” contractors are making a killing.

Corporate Imperialism’s Legal Framework

In the disastrous case that they would be ratified, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) would provide the legal framework for the global corporate empire. When top elected officials travel abroad, they are supposed to represent and defend the national interests of their people; however, they function mostly as sale representatives of mega-corporations. For example, French President Francois Hollande travelled to Qatar, Saudi Arabia or Brazil to sell the fighter jets “Rafale.” One of the main goal of his recent trip to the US was to indicate to top technology executives from Google, Twitter and Facebook that, despite the misleading socialist label and such, France’s best friends are corporations, not people.

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/28/the-strategy-of-global-corporate-imperialism/

You might want to do a bit of research on Russian special forces. Russia has 2 brigades of Naval Spetsnaz.

I mean, this can't be good, right? Or does this mean that Putin can be talked down?

Sort of a Kim Jong Un deal to throw everyone off. Which isn't really any better, a nation's leader being willing to act like a paranoid nutcase when he isn't one--that in itself is kind of nuts.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26445666

07:58: Reports in the business daily Vedomost and in Izvestiya typify the positive press reaction in Russia to President Putin's news conference on Tuesday. Vedomost says that the president "proved himself a statesman, not just a tactician", while Izvestiya says that he communicated "calmly and confidently" to questions which were not agreed beforehand.

07:48: Commenting on Russian President Vladimir Putin's news conference on Tuesday, many Russian newspapers said that he showed himself to be a self-confident and competent politician, BBC Monitoring reports.

So either this article is bullshit or the Russian Media is putting Baghdad Bob to shame, or the real truth lies somewhere in between.

I really don't know much about Russia, but it seems from that film that Putin has sort of tried to take Russia back to the era of a strong leader who must perforce be worshiped almost like a god by the Russian people. Anyone who opposes him on certain issues is viewed by some of his followers as a fascist. The word is not defined well, but from that film I gather it is used a lot to villify people and stir up public sentiment against dissidents. Just like old times.

The concept of a democracy in which people quite naturally see things the same on some issues and very differently on others is apparently not easy for the Russian people to understand after so many centuries of monarchy and then decades of dictatorship.

Perhaps I am wrong. It is just one film, but that was my impression.

No wonder the wingnuts love him. His is the same essential weakness masquerading as strength that usually rallies them.