Putin is a Right Wing Fascist Thug

[arely staircase]

Anybody who thinks this guy is some kind of liberal or in anyway of the Left is seriously delusional. He locks up his opposition, oppresses LGBT Russians, invades his neighbors, shuts down all the internet sites that disagree with him and is loved by Franklin Graham of all people.

If you support this guy you need to stop calling yourself a liberal, because you are not. And you are making an ass out of yourself for all eternity.

[L0oniX]

1. Oh stop it ...your giving the repukes ideas about who to have run for POTUS.

[Warpy]

110. Look at that pretty uniform with the gold braid and medals!

Yeah, he's a fascist's dream.

Even the supposedly Communist leaders were fascist pigs who didn't trust the population enough to insist on the dictatorship of the proletariat, something that would have given them democracy instead of the feudalism they sank into.

[Hekate]

261. Yeesh, after reading more of the thread...

...decided to delete and not play. All the rest of you carry on.

[L0oniX]

278. Fox friendly colors.

[RKP5637]

453. I have no doubt some are already getting measured up for some uniforms and fake badges of honor. I

don't have the link now, but Nixon at one stage, for example, wanted something akin to palace guards posted on the steps of 'his' White House. Of course, given today's standards, Nixon would be some hippie left wing commie.

[treestar]

2. ODS run wild

and anti-Americanism run wild.

[bvar22]

189. I agree. This IS ODS run wild.

And until you or the OP can link to posts of any Liberal DUer praising or supporting Putin,
it is clear to most readers here exactly WHO at DU are the victims of ODS.
Most people, after the grow out of the Pre-Adolescent Stage of Development,
begin to see that there ARE other choices,
and BOTH sides can be WRONG in the War of Propaganda Rhetoric.

[font size=3]The Resurrection of The Master Baiters[/font]

I have to admit that reading the above screed made me nostalgic for the 50s.
The old childish binary rhetoric reminded me of my childhood!
"If you are not FOR us, you are against us."

Of Course, I reject this childish premise out of hand,
and challenge those deluded DUers who embrace this nonsense to show evidence where Putin has deluded "a tragically large number of left-wing Westerners".

This post was amusing only in that it simply reinforces the shallow thinking of the DUers who support this preposterous, warmongering, Right Wing NonSense.

[font size=5]
If you're not FOR the WAR in[/font]
Vietnam
Afghanistan
Iraq
Libya
Syria
[font size=5]The UKraine


you're WITH [/font]
The Communists
AlQaeda
The Terrorists
Saddam
Qaddafi
Assad
[font size=5]PUTIN!!!![/font]

Terror! Terror! Terror!
Evil Dictators!
Booga...Booga
Terror Drones and Freedom Bombs for Peace!!!
USA....USA...USA

They are killing their own people.
Don't they know that is OUR job?
[/font]

Note to Right Wing Warmongering DUers:
Just because Putin in BAD,
that doesn't make "The Other Guys" good.
Didn't you learn [ANYTHING from
Iraq
Afghanistan
Libya
or
Syria????

How easy it is to get you marching down the road to disaster.
This only proves that PT Barnum was wrong ONLY about the rate at which SUCKERS are born in America.

[arely staircase]

204. you're just phoning it in now

not even trying very hard.

[bvar22]

298. Where are the links to DUers cheering for or praising Putin?

Since you obviously believe that these subversiveness Putin Lovers are such a BIG DEAL at DU that you just had to put up an OP attacking them,.... lets see the evidence.

[arely staircase]

301. carrying his water is more accurate

well here is an example right here"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024672411#post189

[rhett o rick]

413. Saying that bvar22 is "carrying water" for Putin is a new low and extremely divisive. nm

[BeyondGeography]

3. K&R for a straightforward description of Edward Snowden's new boss

[blackspade]

167. Couldn't resist could you?

[BeyondGeography]

182. The irony apparently causes you pain

Last edited Sun Mar 16, 2014, 03:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Man lacking common sense flees Big Brother for Much Bigger Brother. Fans of man religiously ignore the latter.

[MADem]

289. That is precisely why so many people are resisting the obvious.

Because they'll have to let go of that whole Truth, Justice and the American Way vibe if they admit that ES has settled down with a dog and is now covered with fleas.

It's the ultimate in Cognitive Dissonance.

I also think there's another group that could give a shit about Putin; they're more of the Better Believe It Troll School. Impossible to tell who's who in the zoo, though--the approach is the same...the whole "I'm the best lefty here, the rest of you so-called Democrats are a bunch of ....errrrrr....right wingers!!!!! Yeah, that's the ticket!!!!"

[L0oniX]

286. Fuck that. I want to know what Brian Johnson is doing in the 2nd picture.

[arely staircase]

294. I actually thought that too. nt

[NuclearDem]

4. WARMONGER!

[arely staircase]

5. I know

the "US out of Ukraine" posts are so transparent.

[rhett o rick]

6. Can you spell S T R A W M A N ?

[arely staircase]

7. what did I get wrong?

which part of my post do you disagree with?

[rhett o rick]

9. Are you aware of what a strawman is? Here's one: "Those that want war with Russia should stop

calling themselves Democrats."

[arely staircase]

11. what Democrats want war with Russia?

the Putin apologists are all over DU. you can find them yourself, it isn't hard.

[rhett o rick]

34. There are most likely no Democrats in DU that want war with Russia, just as there are none on the

left that idolize Putin. Statements claiming such are strawmen arguments. I am asking you to see it from both sides with an open-mind.

If you favor a tough stand against Russia, then put forth that argument. Trying to paint those that dont agree with you, those that are leery of another devastating war as Putin lovers or apologists, is inflammatory and counter productive.

Being skeptical of those beating war drums is typical behavior of the left. Too bad some didnt listen better in 2003.

[arely staircase]

65. no the putin propogandists at DU are real

that is the difference.

[rhett o rick]

67. If they are real then you should have some links. How many do you suspect? Five, ten, a hundred?nm

[Igel]

290. Calling out by name is a DU no-no. n/t

[rhett o rick]

416. I agree, but of course you have to misrepresent what I said. If there are posts or OP's that

support Putin, it is not against the rule to provide a link.

If you guys disagree with an OP then provide your argument instead of the childish insinuations.

[arely staircase]

327. I have

and I am not going to do it over and over for each individual who is perfectly capable of locating them in this thread. I have posted two from this very conversation because since they were posted in this thread I am told it isn't a call out.

[rhett o rick]

427. I find your attempts to disparage the left as divisive. nm

[go west young man]

326. Juan Cole seems to disagree with you.

according to him..you must be siding with the Neocons. Can the Neoconservatives make a comeback via the Ukraine Crisis?

Excerpt:

Though I’m told the Ukraine crisis caught Obama and Putin by surprise, the neocon determination to drive a wedge between the two leaders has been apparent for months, especially after Putin brokered a deal to head off U.S. military strikes against Syria last summer and helped get Iran to negotiate concessions on its nuclear program, both moves upsetting the neocons who had favored heightened confrontations.

Putin also is reported to have verbally dressed down Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan over what Putin considered their provocative actions regarding the Syrian civil war. So, by disrupting neocon plans and offending Netanyahu and Bandar, the Russian president found himself squarely in the crosshairs of some very powerful people.
If not for Putin, the neocons – along with Israel and Saudi Arabia – had hoped that Obama would launch military strikes on Syria and Iran that could open the door to more “regime change” across the Middle East, a dream at the center of neocon geopolitical strategy since the 1990s. This neocon strategy took shape after the display of U.S. high-tech warfare against Iraq in 1991 and the collapse of the Soviet Union later that year. U.S. neocons began believing in a new paradigm of a uni-polar world where U.S. edicts were law.

[arely staircase]

328. well juan cole

I take back everything.

[Why Syzygy]

113. +

[Mojorabbit]

145. It is a weird concerted effort to demonize him

as if the members of this board don't know a thing about him. Black or white thinking instead of nuanced discussion of the issues at hand. Almost every discussion of the Ukraine has certain members making sure no one says anything that might be construed as support for Russia's position. I have no use for him myself but find myself irritated by the constant trashing of the person. It detracts from discussion of the situation.

[Rex]

178. I like how these kind of OPs backfire and show people for what they are.

Notice how the title and the context have nothing to do with each other? That was pretty slick.

[bvar22]

197. And it is always the same 25 who show up and Rec this childish NonSense.

It IS ODS,
but thankfully, most of the readers here at DU can recognize the 25 victims.

[Rex]

200. Yes thankfully critical thinking skills are still much in fashion on DU.

Let them keep trying...you are so correct ODS indeed. They suffer from an extreme case of it.

[Puglover]

329. Thank God DU is after all

Last edited Sun Mar 16, 2014, 05:13 PM - Edit history (1)

a relatively obscure website. I shudder at the thought of any one of those 25 speaking with Democratic voters.

[arely staircase]

333. you mean Obama supporters

by Democratic voters, right?

[L0oniX]

305. Standard military pysch. Demonize the enemy.

I'm all for equating Putin with Stalin but Putin is going to have to step up the mass interments and executions to catch up.

[arely staircase]

317. who equated him with Stalin?

he is wearing the Czar's uniform in my OP.

and you implying I am some sort of military psy op is fucking funny as all hell. because only the decadent western MIC could think Putin is a piece of shit.

try member of the LGBT community.

[L0oniX]

394. LOL ..no ...you are reading into this something I am not saying.

It is only a comment about what the military does ...not directed to you. Are you in the military? The other is only a comparison as to how bad Putin supposedly is and how bad history shows that Stalin was. I thought what I said was clear enough. Apparently it wasn't.

[dlwickham]

478. he has a way to go until he's on Stalin's level

but given time I think he could match Stalin's death count

[Adrahil]

320. I don't agree. Russian politics is all about Putin. That can't be avoided at this point. NT

[Mojorabbit]

354. He is part of it but not all of it

It is about geopolitical positioning,natural resources, eg. oil, gas, and much more. Making it about Putin minimizes the big picture as every thread seems to dissolve into Putin is a monster and accusations of members being Putin lovers. It is aggravating as all get out.

[MADem]

62. Some people--not very smart people, frankly--think that the only option with disapproval is war.

It reflects more on their lack of any ability to find creative solutions than anything resembling the truth. It's like, ya know, there's no such thing as the UN, no one's ever heard of sanctions, no one's ever heard of governmental disapprobation on a global scale! That, frankly, is a rather Bush-like way of thinking, ain't that odd!

Or, it could have to do with shit-stirring. And I guess we'd Better Believe It, too!!!

[Jesus Malverde]

187. Out of all the trolls on DU, why is BetterBelieveIt so famous?

Last edited Sun Mar 16, 2014, 04:56 PM - Edit history (1)

Up there with olive garden pittbull breastfeeding status....

Please explain what happened for those of us who missed out.

Thanks!

[arely staircase]

191. Maybe his/her relentlessness

and longevity?

don't know.

[MADem]

208. Because he was a famous troll who used a technique we still see here, lately.

He was given the boot by Skinner, personally. See here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=217293&sub=trans

Last, typically noxious thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002677848

Sometimes, playing the "I'm more liberal than thou, look at all these 'bad' liberals, how dare they (fill in the blank--be racist/sexist/discriminatory in some sort of way--when they're nothing of the sort)" in an Over-The-Top, faux aggrieved way just smells a lot like BBI's handiwork. He (or she, who knows, really) was quite good at playing the wide-eyed, "I'm just trying to figure it out" fool, while spreading some of the stinkiest FUD ever.

He/she was like a clump of cowshit stuck to a work boot--hard as hell to shift.

[Jesus Malverde]

215. Interesting thanks..

Sounds mostly like affinity trolling, which can always be a head scratcher.

[Bobbie Jo]

222. Had quite the following too....

Collected a number of fans along the way who often referred to him/her as "one of the most respected DU'ers."

Quite the clown car, there.

[zappaman]

228. Too true

Some of them can even be found in this very thread!
"I am sooo much more liberal than you and RT is a great news source!"

[Bobbie Jo]

246. Yup.

Go figure.....

Enough is enough, indeed.

[arely staircase]

253. a few in this thread

I believe

[MADem]

256. He had that infamous "I'm a better lefty than you" technique--he'd insinuate that others were

"bad lefties" who were insufficiently pure; then he'd post absolute SHIT from places like The Weekly Standard and affect a wide-eyed naivete when people would say "What the FUCK???"

Skinner said it eloquently: "Enough is enough!"

Any time I see that kind of argument cropping up, I think of him. Or her. Who knows, really?

I think BBI is still with us, unfortunately.

[Cha]

400. Just more subtle this time?

[MADem]

431. Or maybe less! The same thing...only different! nt

[Cha]

399. "One of the most respected DU'ers".. who just happned to get the "Enough is Enough" from

Skinner!

[FSogol]

443. Exactly. His fans are still here rec'ing up the most unbelievable crap. n/t

[joshcryer]

350. Seeing that thread shows me Putinists are anti-gay too.

I have seen it on two of the most noxious, vile, hateful posters on this forum (and when they get the boot when Hillary is nominated I will cheer). Pure hatred for gay rights but it's very very subtle. You can spot them in BBI's last thread.

[MADem]

357. I got a lot of "Don't spoil the fun" pushback when I voiced my disdain for the

asinine spectacle at Sochi. I could not have been more proud of Obama when he decided to send an openly gay delegation to represent him at the Games, and he had better things to do.

I must say, never was I so delighted when that last snowflake refused to come out of Putin's closet...! To me, it was the best part of the ceremonies.

[joshcryer]

347. They presented right wing shit as left wing.

And a lot of DUers, many of them posting in this very thread, bought it hook line and sinker. You can easily go find one of his threads and compare the recs to the outrage brigade about Putin.

I mean shit, this is ridiculous, over 300 replies debating whether Putin is a fascist and whether people defend him here, what the hell.

[Igel]

310. Some are just very risk averse.

Anything has a risk of WWIII attached to it. Some people are genuinely terrified of that kind of uncertainty and risk. They're full of bravado until something, anything, is on the line, then run for mommy or hide under the bed. Or they actually suffer some wrong, and scream as though there must be no risk to anything that they do. Ridiculous, really, always being on super-ultraviolet terror alert.

Others aren't pro-Putin. They just assume that anything the US or West is involved in must be Ultimate Evil. At some pointed they learned that not everything the West does is all rainbows and unicorns. Just as some true believers become atheists when they leave their church, so some assumed that if not everything is good, everything must be bad. By comparison Putin isn't all evil, so he's relatively good. Esp. when he counteracts the Great Satan. To bring up GLBT issues when discussing Putin and the Crimea is to distract from the overbearing evil that Putin is fighting in the Crimea--we have met the enemy and he is U.S. Heck, even if he sacrificed little babies and ate them with horseradish he'd still have redeeming features. And if the Real Truth website says it's all a lie about their vozhd' or fuehrer, eh--good enough for them.

Others are just trying to get rid of trivial distractions. They know what the good work is and all this stuff about Cymeans and Nukramians over there someplace is just in the way of what Really Matters, helping the particular oppressed folk they're in solidarity with at the moment right here in the US of A. They're focusing on their issues like a 1 um laser beam and really don't like having anybody else's interests get in the way of having us all focus on their interests. Human rights abroad is a weapon for political warfare over domestic issues. Everything fits into a domestic narrative because, well, they're just so danged important.

Etc.

[MADem]

316. Fair points, all.

But I'm not discounting "trolling from the left" and FUD-spreading, either.
After all, we've got elections coming up!

[karynnj]

112. Name even ONE elected Democrat who you think wants war

The REPUBLICAN complaint is that Obama and his administration took military options off the table from the beginning.

[progressoid]

15. Who, on DU, thinks he is a liberal?

[arely staircase]

18. why else would a liberal have his back?

unless they are just pretending to be liberals.

[progressoid]

29. Again, I'll ask. Who, on DU, thinks he's a liberal?

[arely staircase]

33. calling out individual DUrs is against the rules

nice try, though.

[progressoid]

52. Fine, then alert their posts for TOS violation.

Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

[arely staircase]

56. Clearly being a Putin stooge isn't against the rules.

Just idiotic.

[progressoid]

73. I beg to differ.

This part is pertinent:

including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

i.e. Putin.

Take it to a jury and the admins for removal.

[arely staircase]

75. thnks for the advice

[Rex]

306. Yeah but that would mean he could not do his hippie punching routine!

YEP. Obvious makes it obvious.

[arely staircase]

313. I love your Putin is a hippe meme

It doesn't make sense.

But it is funny as shit.

[progressoid]

330. yep.

sad.

[rhett o rick]

85. Linking to posts that you think support Putin is not against the rules. nm

[arely staircase]

93. others have already done that in this thread

so, knock yourself out.

[Cha]

404. Those yelling "Strawman" are trying to Deflect. "Poor Putin.."

"Leave him alone "



Travel Guide To Moscow

"First of all, Russia has become very corrupt throughout the last few years. Vladimir Putin has now been in office for twelve years and over those twelve years he has eliminated most elections, monopolized major media, and destroyed the democratic political system. Everyday people are brutally arrested for starting and participating in anti-Putin protests, while some are even detained simply for being nearby. Clearly, Putin’s actions are those of a dictator, and he plans to stay in power as long as possible."

http://sites.psu.edu/egorivanov/2014/01/31/travel-guide-to-moscow/

[functioning_cog]

22. Your claim this is a strawman is demonstrably false

Other long time posters came around to admitting DU has become overrun with people who are making excuses for Putin's actions and who somehow feel it is ok he is blatantly ignoring Ukraine's sovereignty. People are now dying in Ukraine because of what Putin is doing to foment violence with Russians he's sending into Eastern Ukraine.

Whatever you feel about Obama. Whatever you feel about right wingers in Ukraine. There is no excuse for what Putin is now doing.

Stating that position does not mean a person wants the US to go to war with Russia.

[rhett o rick]

88. It should be easily proven if his insinuations against the left are not a strawman argument. nm

[Drunken Irishman]

235. Speaking of STRAWMAN...

A great deal of DUers here have pretty much used it since the conflict broke out to suggest we're off to fight World War III.

[rhett o rick]

260. I dont disagree, what's your point. It's inflammatory and divisive as is this OP. nm

[TwilightGardener]

8. I've seen DUers recently describe, with a weird bloodlust, how Russia is going

to sink all of our aircraft carriers and how superior they are as a fighting force to the US. Just fucking BIZARRE, until you realize that some DU posters are probably Russian, or at the very least foreign, and can't wait for America to be defeated someday. The RW blogs (Free Republic, Hot Air, et al) have similar posters who try to convince the regular American Repubs that our military is full of gays and thus are going to show up to fight Russia in pink tutus (they actually say this).

And on both the left and the right, they try to convince everyone that you can't trust American government OR western media, and we can't say anything because IRAQ!!, and we should just mind our own business and not worry about Ukraine or Syria. Crazy how much they've infiltrated American internet sites, but when you think about it, it's a cheap/free way to sway public opinion and demoralize.

[arely staircase]

10. yeah, somehow Bush makes Putin OK

crazy

[LisaL]

12. But going to war with Russia is much better idea, I suppose.

Nobody has to show up in pink tutus.
We will just use nukes on each other.

[arely staircase]

14. who is calling for war with Russia?

fucking nobody

nukes

[LisaL]

17. Did you actually read the post you replied to?

He certainly talks about war with Russia. So I guess not.

[arely staircase]

21. yeah I just read it again

again, nobody is calling for war with Russia. but you waving Putin's nukes in people's faces is interesting to say the least.

[LisaL]

40. What exactly is your point?

Should we pretend Russia doesn't have nukes?

[arely staircase]

44. and they are relevant how?

are you suggesting he is going to nuke us?

[go west young man]

339. They currently have 26 subs and plans for 24 more.

16 of which will be nuclear powered. Regardless of missile shields in Europe if the subs are deployed it is still "mutually assured destruction" in a nuclear war, if it ever reached that point. In 2012, Putin announced a plan to build 51 modern ships and 24 submarines by 2020.

Is it relevant you ask? Of course it is. As one sub with one warhead can render our newest $30 billion dollar aircraft carrier completely useless. We built big as usual which was not necessarily smart. They built small, stealthily, with massive power. Very smart.

[arely staircase]

340. so I shouldn't disrespect him? nt

[go west young man]

388. You should take the time to understand the Russian perspective.

Instead of just performing a name calling ritual. It's childish at best.

[snooper2]

459. you are getting better at this but still not a pro yet

I give you Level 7 Power UP!

[go west young man]

463. Thanks. I'll take that as a compliment.

What I post is basic information, you know...easily available for anyone to look up. Try Janes Defense Weekly or the CIA fact book. They tend to hold more water than people simply posting... Putin is a baddie and if one doesn't agree with me ...their a poopie head!

[TwilightGardener]

19. Nobody wants to go to war, period. Certainly not with Russia.

That doesn't mean the US should condone or ignore what Russia is doing.

[rhett o rick]

13. Some may be Neo-Cons and support the American Bully mindset that hanged Hussein.

They easily overlook the horrible damage we do with a war.

[TwilightGardener]

27. You can oppose what Russia is doing and not be a neo-con, you know.

In fact, it's a more consistent position to say that NO country should be invading another country. Not making excuses for Putin like "Oh well, the Crimeans are all Russian anyway", or "They're just trying to protect Russians from the neonazis and civil unrest", and other laughable bullshit. If I thought Iraq was wrong, then this is at least equally wrong, and good people everywhere should take a stand against it.

[rhett o rick]

43. I dont approve of Russia taking over Crimea. And I dont equate all that want America

to take a "tough stance" with Neo-Cons. But Neo-Cons are real and out there pushing for strong American action. Some dont want a repeat of the past wars.

[joshcryer]

366. Saying Putin is a fascist is not calling for action, you know.

[rhett o rick]

410. I absolutely agree with the OP calling Putin a fascist. I dont like the insinuation that there are

those on the left that support Putin. I think it's absurd and divisive.

[joshcryer]

417. I agree no actual leftist is a Putinist.

[go west young man]

349. Plus they empower the neocons and have given them a chance for a comeback.

Last edited Sun Mar 16, 2014, 06:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Juan Cole recently wrote about the subject. http://www.juancole.com/2014/03/neoconservatives-comeback-ukraine.html

In 2004 we were unified at DU against the neocons and now because we point out Russia's interests and perspective we are considered Putin admirers or RT conspirators by people who are apparently fans of Neocon policy. Here's my new term for these Neocon agenda pushers "neocon-descenders"- my definition; people who defend war while descending and condescending on DU while holding water for the new neocon revival, all the while using outdated Cold War rhetoric as ammunition for their arguments. Demonization of Russia is a prerequisite to joining the neocon-descending movement.

[BeyondGeography]

16. There are people on the left who want the apocalypse as much as those on the right

Miserable people rooting for misery.

[TwilightGardener]

49. I'm not sure any of these folks are actually left/right in terms of American politics.

They're just using the arguments and concepts that appeal most to lefties and righties. Left: distrust in government intelligence agencies, reduce military spending, no armed intervention anywhere, the casual use of "warmonger" and "banksters" and "imperialism" in every conversation. (The Guardian's comments are the best example.)

Right: Weakened "gay" military, foreign aid is bad, Obama's a girlieman whereas Vlad is a real man just protecting his country, etc. etc. Both: can't trust the MSM. Different concepts, but the same possible results--cast doubt on your country's moral standing, truthfulness, intentions and capabilities.

[TwilightGardener]

109. Here's a right-wing example of the propagandists I'm talking about,

from American Interest:

we would be lucky if we can deter the bahamas with this defense budget. the a-10 warthog just got sent to the scrap yard and we just hired a bunch of fags into the army. are we going to butt f*ck the russians out of crimea?


http://www.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2014/03/15/putin-the-mask-comes-off-but-will-anybody-care/

It's really fascinating to me to see an attempt to convince America that we are weak militarily and can't even fight off small countries. Russia is big on promoting the view that homosexuality = weakness and moral degeneration, so it shows up on American RW websites in this way, as a means to cast doubt on our military capabilities.

[joshcryer]

367. The comment sections are always instructive.

Especially on RT.com. Russia was pushing an anti-gay anti-Jewish narrative for months before shit hit the fan.

[davidpdx]

441. Yep, the human rights angle by Russia is such joke

[treestar]

175. +1 we see it every day

[Adrahil]

169. OMG!!!! +1000!

[MADem]

190. Really? They barely have an outlet to the sea. That port they have in Syria ain't working out too

well for them, either.

Putin may want to get back to the old Hunt For Red October days, but he'll be an old man before he realizes that dream.

[Cha]

406. Yep, there's a so-called "liberal" on this site doing the very same thing. Not, swaying

too much opinion of anyone I respect, though. Way too savvy for that bullshit.

[hrmjustin]

20. Putin is evil! Tgere won't be a war but our relations will take a sour turn due to Putin's actions.

[arely staircase]

23. there won't be a war that we are in

but if Putin invades Ukraine that will be a war between Russia and Ukraine. Undoubtedly the Russians will initially take the country just like they did in Afghanistan.

[hrmjustin]

25. Well if he does that the international community should put sanctions on him.

[arely staircase]

28. I think it would be his downfall

the Russian oligarchy isn't going to let him lose all their money.

[hrmjustin]

32. Well I hope he listens to someone because he is going off the deep end. I am scared where this all

can lead to.

[go west young man]

390. The oligarchs whose names are on the sanction list

all say they will support him. And they actually believe it will make Russia stronger in the long run and more independent. Be careful what you wish for. Remember Russia has control of the oil spicket as well and obviously they aren't afraid to use it if one considers what happened in Ukraine in 2009. They are not as powerless as folks here seem to think.

[hrmjustin]

450. No they are not powerless as some may think but they will be hurt on this.

[davidpdx]

442. Then the same people on DU that defend him sit back and whine about the sanctions

The irony.

[hrmjustin]

451. Well we will have something to talk about.

[sabrina 1]

24. Putin is president of the US?

I thought only Russians could either support or not support him. Where do people find this incredible news that most of us never see?

[arely staircase]

26. what in God's Holy name

does what you just wrote actually mean?

[sabrina 1]

31. Jesus, Mary and Joseph, it means about as much as what you wrote to Americans many of whom probably

never heard of him. Shouldn't what you wrote be on a Russian blog or at least someone over there where it would actually mean something?

What in the name of the Holy Spirit do Putin's policies in Russia have to do with us here thousands of miles away across a continent and an ocean in the US?

[arely staircase]

35. that's weird. nt

[sabrina 1]

50. That's what I SAID, it's very weird, this OP, for a forum in the US.

Talk about irrelevant to what concerns the American people!

Or is this the 'You Love Saddam' talking point from way back during the Bush era?

No, can't be, this is a Dem forum where we don't use old Right Wing attacks on Democrats.

So I'll stick with your own word, it's just plain weird ...

[arely staircase]

51. well this is just getting better and better

[sabrina 1]

97. I've had lots of experience!

Here's a few pom pom 'girls' for you. Can't have Saddam/Putin 'cheerleaders without pom poms!







Liberals Cheerleading for Pootie!



Liberals are pretty thick skinned though, that alone used to drive Rush Ditto Heads insane. Rush had told them we would faint on the nearest couch when they delivered their 'brilliant' attacks on the 'Left'. It was the most fun watching them scratching their heads wondering why it wasn't working. They never learned not to listen to him though.

Memories, like the corners of your mind, misty water colored memories, of the way things were!

Any reason why you are using the same material to attack Democrats with? Were you around when they were doing it?

[arely staircase]

100. have you been up all night?

these are even better than usual.

[zappaman]

104. just curious...

by "better than usual", do you mean "more confused/crazier/nonsensical than usual"?
Gonna have to agree there.

[arely staircase]

107. well let's just say

they are like they always are, just more so.

[sabrina 1]

115. Are you talking about the OP? Or are you actually calling DUers who point out old Right Wing

material used against Democrats for years, stupid, crazy, confused'? Material, provided for them by Rush, every Monday, he gave them their talking points remember?

I can't tell whether you are approving of old Right Wing attacks on Democrats, or whether you are calling them crazy, which would make sense, being this is a Democratic forum.

You never know these days though, which is why I'm asking.

[sabrina 1]

106. Why thank you. I thought a trip down memory lane was appropiate! I earned my

liberal cyber warrior stripes taking on right wingers during the Bush years. Always recognize their old material when I see it. They used it often enough, probably being 'conservative' they didn't want to waste anything especially after paying so much for it.

[arely staircase]

108. fucking awesome nt

[yuiyoshida]

111. hahaha

Those are cute!


Can I adopt them?

[TwilightGardener]

59. We signed an agreement with Russia and Ukraine to allow Ukraine to give up

its nukes in exchange for a guarantee that their sovereignty and borders would be maintained. So just for that reason, we do have an interest.

[sabrina 1]

79. Crimea is what is in question. Not Ukraine. And we have no clue what the millions of voters in

Ukraine have to say about all this since they STILL have not held an election. Why is this our business? If the people vote for what they want, surely you're not saying it is OUR business to refuse to acknowledge their sovereign right to get what they want?

And what if the people of Ukraine vote against what we want them to vote for?? Will you recognize THEIR right to get what they want? So far, none of us has a clue what they want. I don't get why there has not been an election in Ukraine.

Have you seen what is going on there right now? I'd say we are better off staying out of it. We can't handle our own elections and protect them from being corrupted.

[TwilightGardener]

81. Crimea is a part of Ukraine, since the 50's. The agreement was signed in the 90's.

Crimea is within Ukraine's borders. They're currently holding a BOGUS referendum, under the watchful eye of Russian forces, that gives them little real choice and zero doubt as to the eventual outcome. The whole thing is absolutely unreal. Don't try to provoke isolationist "just mind our own business, America's worse, stay out of it" sentiment with me, it won't work.

[MADem]

312. Jesus--I can't believe you even have to respond to that load!

What craven spin! Rather like saying, "We signed that agreement with the USA, not with Alaska!!!"



After all, Alaska didn't get statehood until 1958...why "count" them as part of the USA?

[TwilightGardener]

332. It's the only argument they have, the neo-nazi threat just didn't loom large enough.

Now they're down to: It's what the Crimeans want
They're not really part of Ukraine anyway
Putin deserves warm water ports
Naval base already there
What invasion?
NEOCONS!
and Why do you care, it's far away.

[MADem]

361. It's astounding, truly.

And no shame, either.

As for the port business, Putin has a deal with the Ukrainian government for that port, a treaty, in fact. He has basing rights there until 2047. No need to "take" territory to get that port, he's got a signed piece of paper giving it to him for the next twenty some odd years.

Surely that's enough time to build up a new port, say, in some sultry winter haven like ... Sochi! Remember, it was in the fifties, sixties and seventies there during the Olympics--they had to go to the mountains to do the skiing, and all the ice sports like curling and skating took place indoors.

[davidpdx]

444. You are wasting your breath on that one

She's convinced that the US is the worst thing to happen since the beginning of time. She'll tell you we should "mind our own business" and then tell you we "don't care about blah blah blah". My favorite one is when she said we are endangering gays in Russia by speaking up for them during the Olympics.

All of this courtesy of Russian Thug TV

[MADem]

30. Bingo! There will be heads hung in shame for backing this assclown...

There will also be people who drift away and come back under new names, I'll wager.

Some things are just too egregious to overcome.

[arely staircase]

38. better believe it nt

[MADem]

57. +1,000 !!!!

It's just astounding, and it gets higher and deeper as time goes by....

[sabrina 1]

39. People here are voting for Putin? Well, there might be a few people from Russia here, who knows,

what in the name of all that's holy, to continue the style of the OP, does Putin or his policies have to do with US?

[MADem]

53. Aren't YOU obtuse!!! People can "support" someone without voting for them, you know...

You know, like this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024617157#top

Lotta Pootie love in that thread, fer shure!!! Talking points right outta the Kremlin!



I think your naive posture is growing a little stale. Anyone who backs that gay-hating, human rights oppressing, censoring invader has issues. But hey, get out those pompoms and keep on keeping on--you're only contributing to your own permanent record!

[sabrina 1]

69. Ah the old 'pompom' you love Saddam routine. Making its way to this Forum from across the years

from the old right wing attacks on Liberals.

Do you really think we are stupid enough to do anything but laugh at these old familiar attacks on Democrats?

It was stupid beyond belief when they were doing it, mostly we laughed at them, and it hasn't improved at all now that it has arrived here on DU.

I am far from naive, I thought that was obvious. But I am a veteran of cyber wars on behalf of Democrats with the Right Wingers, whose only recourse, being that they were not known for their high IQs was THIS 'you love Saddam/Bin Laden routine, they even used the exact same 'images'.

Liberal 'girls' with their pompoms, cheering for Saddam. How cute!

I just find it entertaining and am just having some with it. What else can you do with such nonsense, especially when, as a Democrat, you've seen it all before?

Btw, you need emoticons, little 'saddam' cheerleaders, or wait, little 'putin' cheerleaders. I know they had them, so they are available.

I never thought I'd see anyone from the left, imitating the most moronic attacks on Democrats from dittoheads. I thought we had too much pride and intelligence to use their old stuff. But, I've been wrong before ...

[arely staircase]

82. classic nt

[MADem]

159. Most of it was TL/DR, I must confess. nt

[SidDithers]

387. It's almost always tl:dr...nt

Sid

[Puglover]

409. OMG!!

Do you even know the definition of the word "irony"?

I really don't use this a lot but:

[MADem]

430. Ooooh, got a PM did you?

right back atcha, there, sport! You've done this before, and I didn't care then, either.

[Puglover]

447. Not a clue what you're talking about. Uh Sparkie.

PM wise that is. And honestly it doesn't matter whether you care or not.

I just can't help but notice the awesome wonderfulness of a poster with over 98k posts actually resorting to using the cheap and juvenile internet slur TL;DR referring to another poster. Simply precious.

[MADem]

448. Of course you don't!

I've kept the same account for the last ten years, you see. It's easy to have a low post count if one doesn't, "Precious."

[MADem]

156. You're a Democrat?

You might support at least one or two, on occasion.

And yes, you HAVE been wrong before.

[arely staircase]

161. no shit nt

[sabrina 1]

168. Yes, how about you? n/t

[MADem]

241. Since I vocally support the POTUS and not the PUTIN, I think it's pretty clear what I am.

Would that all were as unambiguously Democratic, here.

[sabrina 1]

314. I meant do you support the Democratic Party's ideals. There are Repubs who support the President

even voted for him, as happens in every election, and most Republicans hate that commie, KGB spying fascist, left winger, Putin.

That is not a definition by any means, of a Democrat.

Your attempt at a 'Purity Test' needs something more substantial than supporting one politician and opposing one foreign leader. Interesting though, that that is the standard for being a Democrat, at least in your opinion.

I am a Democrat because the Dem Party is the Party of the People, the Working Class, the Poor, that pushes for rights for minorities, fights bigotry and discrimination and supports equality for all Americans.

Politicians and world leaders come and go. And the lives of millions of people, present and future generations, seem a bit more important than which politician is your fave and which world leader is the enemy. Enemies to me are those who undermine OUR democracy which no foreign leader has the power to do. Only WE can do that.

Thanks for the response. I didn't know that, that to be a 'Pure' Dem, those were the only two requirements.

[MADem]

324. What "purity test?" I support the party platform and I vote for Democrats.

I also follow the TOS here, you know, that whole business about helping to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to public office.

You know, this thing, here? http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

Sounds to me like anyone who supports Putin, according to the DU definition, anyway, falls in the "wingnut" category. Aside from the odd cheerleading here on DU I've seen, the only people I see doing the rooty-tooty for Pooty are cretins of the Fauxsnooze set.

[sabrina 1]

338. Yes, yes, we've had this discussion before, we remember, we supported Saddam too according to wing

nuts. Faux btw, HATES Putin, they think he's a Leftie. And we know how they and, sadly more than there should be, some on the 'Left' cannot hide their hatred for the left.

Wing Nuts always use that tactic against Democrats.

The question is, why are you trying to use it?

They're upset with Obama for not blowing him to pieces.

Using Putin to attack Obama/The Left with should not be a surprise considering it's Faux we're talking about.

What is a surprise is you falling for their old games.

[MADem]

356. All I can say is this....I am not the one that thinks RT is an actual news source, and not

the honking, bullshit propaganda arm of Vladimir Putin, I am not the one who believes that shit-shovelling media outlet has an "agenda" of "practicing real news," and I am not the one who says, with a straight face, ignoring all international protocols, that the Crimea is not part of the Ukraine and they should be able to just leave if they've a mind (and Russian soldiers with weapons in the streets).

You, OTOH, have said those things on this board, recently, too. Let's review, since you want to go there:

RT is one of the best news sources on TV. Progressives like Thom Hartmann can now air their

views to a very large audience considering the popularity of RT around the world.

Using your logic 'do people who rely on the US Corporate Media heart Right Wing Predatory Capitalist Ideology and Warmongering?

Love RT and all the other news sources now available to the people who no longer have to rely on our own controlled media.

Crimea is an autonomous part of Ukraine, given to them by Kruschev without a referendum from the

people. If they people do not want to remain a part of Ukraine, that is their choice, is it not?

And that's not "falling into games." That's just me, quoting you. Unless someone hijacked your computer and your account, and wrote that stuff without your knowing..?

And Faux HATES PUTIN? Are you seriously saying THAT with a straight face? They ADORE him. They ADMIRE him! They love to use him as the "decisive opposite" -- a statesman, a strong man, a leader... they've got a crush on him, make no mistake.

I think you need to stop catapulting the propaganda while you're well behind-I am not falling for anyone's games, least of all yours...here's a little video for you.

This one really starts rolling around 2.20....

[sabrina 1]

362. RT is a news source. I'm not the one claiming the Koch Brothers funded Corporate MSM is a reliable

news source.

Thanks for quoting me. Crimea IS an autonomous part of the Ukraine.

That is what is called a FACT. Do you have some other FACT to dispute it with? I didn't see your refutation of that fact.

Your comment, sorry to say, is a classic example of what Democrats have been subjected to for years by Wing Nuts.

1) Call into question all their reading material, TV viewing choices, then call them 'not credible, leftie garbage'.

2) Quote recent comments of theirs, hoping they will go on the defensive and try to 'explain' them.

3) Pick a fact stated by the 'commie' then act as if there is something wrong with it, hoping to force them to 'try to explain' it.

4) Use Faux, which is definitely a 'credible source' to try to, yes, again, put them on the defensive.

When they don't play your game, try calling them 'politically naive', an extreme leftie, Lieberal, soft on defense etc, and if all that fails to get the desired result, call them 'a traitor' starting with accusing them of loving the 'enemy'. Saddam, Gadaffi, Assad, Putin et al. Kumbaya etc etc as every Democrat here remembers.

Same old game. There is not a single comment I have made here, unless I actually made a factual error, which those you chose do not contain, that I do not stand by.

Did you think using my comments was going to bother me or something? Lol!

I've told you this before, but you seem to have forgotten, I CANNOT be intimidated by Wing Nut tactics, no matter who is using them.

RT IS a news source, so is Al Jazeera which was the 'boogie man' of the day when Bush was occupying the WH. Same exact tactics. 'I am not the one claiming that Al Jazeera is a news source'. Omg, the familiarity of the tactics is simply stunning.

Save them for someone who is not yet familiar with them.

And again, thanks for quoting me, I am flattered. More than flattered actually. But I've been flattered that way before. So I'm kind of used to the compliments.

You have been going around here accusing Democrats of nefarious deeds and intentions. Without a shred of proof. I will have to check but I was under the impression that that is not permitted here. A whole lot of people are getting pretty sick and tired of it, some have already moved on because of it.

Now either prove your assertions, or have the courage to admit you are simply flailing around. . I'll take proof. So far all I've seen is you lashing out wildly at Democrats here on DU.

[MADem]

365. Well, I just did "prove my assertions" -- but thanks for coming right out and letting us know where

you sit.

And if you're "flattered," I'll just have to conclude that you're unclear on the meaning of the term! You're also unclear on what constitutes a compliment!

When it comes to "lashing out," I think you wrote the book.

[sabrina 1]

371. What?? 'Coming out'! Are you serious? I am CONSISTENT and you proved

that for which I thank you. Iow, what I said last year, yesterday, today, I will be saying tomorrow. What exactly was the point you are struggling to make?

Of course I'm flattered, I've always been both amazed and flattered when anyone goes to the trouble of digging up comments where I clearly state my position, have never changed it, and try to use that consistency as a weapon. What it says to me is 'they have NOTHING' But it's always nice to be quoted anyhow.

You tried all this slamming of Democrats before with me. It didn't work then and it hasn't now, and it never will.

You never told me what was incorrect about what you quoted me as saying re Crimea being autonomous.

Are you contradicting that fact or what?? You DID quote it as IF it was supposed to MEAN something. So, what was your point in using that factual quote? I expected some contradiction or something.

[MADem]

376. Uh, oh...you are getting into TLDR territory again...

But hey, by your very own words we know you. You love RT, you said so--you insist it is a news outlet and not a propaganda arm. And you think that Crimea is not part of Ukraine and they have a "right" to go their own way.

I could just see what a great advisor you'd have made to old Abe Lincoln in the days of the Civil War! Let those pesky southern states go their own way...they have a "right," after all!

You should demand a payday from the Pootster--you're certainly carrying his water for him!

[sabrina 1]

380. Is Crimea autonomous or not? The rest is more diatribe which has already been dealt with. You

quoted me saying 'Crimea is autonomous'. Now you're changing what I said to 'not a part of Ukraine' which in your quote of my quote proves you have changed it! lol! Why? Because your big 'gotcha' moment turned out to be a fact. Not very honest to try to change someone's words when you find out they were CORRECT.

Oh, and I agree with those who pointed out the irony of your 'tldr' meme. That one made me laugh out loud!

[MADem]

383. It's OCCUPIED, is what it is. Hardly "autonomous." You did use that word, didn't you?

Vlad thanks you for your support, I should imagine.

Keep laughing--you're easily amused!

[sabrina 1]

386. Of course I'm amused. Crimea is autonomous, and how does stating a fact do anything other than state

a fact?? Wait, you want me to lie to prove I'm not a 'pootie lover' with pom poms and a cheer leader outfit, like this:



There you go, but that doesn't change the fact that Crimea is and always has been since it was given to Ukraine, autonomous.

Facts are just facts, no matter how someone doesn't like them.

[MADem]

432. No--it's OCCUPIED. And all the stupid cartoonish distractions won't distract from that.

Keep waving your pompoms for Putin, though. We know you adore the guy, by your own blatant cheerleading of his propaganda media arm.

So yeah, "facts are just facts" and you've laid yours out there for us all to see.

[sabrina 1]

436. 80% of the people of Crimea have spoken. Whether you espect their right to determine their future,

I doubt will have much effect on them. I expect our government will eventually respect their choice, and Europe too as that is the only option other than invading Crimea as we did Iraq, and trying to force them to remain part of Ukraine. That would most likely start WW111.

I suggest you start reading the news around the world. 20% of Crimeans did not vote, expressing their disagreement by their refusal to vote.

All signs are showing that the will of the Crimean people will eventually be respected and Europe and the US will negotiate on issues that are still unresolved, rather than start WW111. Fortunately Bush/Cheney are no longer in charge.

Why you think it is anyone's business other than the people there, and why you are in such denial of the FACTS, that a majority of Crimeans ARE Russian, and that the new unelected Government in Kiev are the real reason they lost Crimea, who feared they would invade Crimea, feared their rhetoric against Jews and Russians so much that they decided to take action before that could happen.

Iow, the new unelected Govt in Kiev drove Crimea out of Ukraine.

Even 'bomb-bomb-bomb-bomb-bomb Iran' McCain is backing off his Right Wing warmongering rhetoric now that there is no question of the will of the Crimean people.

This is none of our business. Why you think it is your business is beyond me.

Too bad the Ukrainian people have not had an election so we can see how THEY feel about the unelected government in Kiev.

Why are they afraid to have an election?

The Guardian is reporting that the people of Crimea are jubilant. the Guardian acknowledges that it's hard to question the majority supported the choice to leave Ukraine.

[MADem]

449. They're also calling it a "Soviet - style election" over at the Guardian, comrade....

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/16/white-house-not-recognise-crimea-referendum-us

Your favorite propaganda team, that "Russian State Media" is catapulting the same propaganda you are. Everyone's happy, no one disagrees, and your boy Pootie is a GOD! Pay no attention to those Russian assholes with guns on the street...and never mind that the Russians are counting the votes!

It's thick and deep up in here!

[sabrina 1]

455. 'Your boy Saddam'. There is not a single thing in your comments that has any credibility

whatsoever once you resort to those old wing nut personal attacks on DUers. And the little 'Bushism' is a nice touch also.

'Your boy' .... wow, I don't recall ever having to sink that low in order to make a point, anywhere.

Whatever point you are trying to make I can't really address as it got lost on all the old cold war, wing nut personal attacks on DUers.

[MADem]

457. I notice that whenever your argument falls apart, you change the subject.

Stick to the topic--no one, save YOU, is rambling on about Saddam or Bush. You do that every time you run out of air.

If you don't want to be labeled as a Putin apologist and propagandist, you shouldn't write posts that tell all of DU how much you LOVE RT and how you think it is a "real news" outlet, instead of the Putin Propaganda arm that everyone--save you--knows that it is.

If you want to be treated as someone with serious views, you need to hold serious views. All you have done is shill for Putin. Crimea is not "autonomous"--it is OCCUPIED by Russian soldiers. RT is not a "news channel"--it is a governmental propaganda agency, owned by and paid for by Putin's government. Everyone knows this, save you. You are operating in an alternate reality and supporting a rightwing, authoritarian despot with your posts. That is not opinion, that is fact. Your words and comments support that assessment.

[sabrina 1]

464. There is no arguing over facts, which is what you have realized you are unable

to do therefore resorting to more 'you love Saddam' attacks on DUers.

As for your obsession with the reading material and other sources of Democrats, that's your problem. It reminds me of the accusations of being a 'terrorist' against Democrats from Wing Nuts over using Al Jazeera as a news source. They were so afraid of anything other than the Corporate media propaganda being available, they were practically apoplectic over it.

In response to their attempts to censor the material Dems had access to, I donated to Al Jazeera in their name. May as well put their negative energy to some good use. And told them despite their obviously frustrated attempts to control Dems, an impossible thing to do.

I think I told you before, but in case you forgot, I have all the respect I want from people whose opinions I respect. It would scare me if those I do not respect ever publicly stated any respect for me. I would have to explain it away somehow.

Meantime I will continue to use RT as a source of news, and in memory of my old Wing Nut adversaries, Al Jazeera. And if this government ever censors, as Bush did, sources of information now available to the people, no doubt those sources will become even more popular. That's what happened to Al Jazeera after Bush's attempt to censor it. That's how censorship generally works.

But we are a free and open society now that we got rid of Bush, so I doubt RT will be taken off the air, in fact the availability of it, AND Al Jazeera has increased over the past few years.

I don't worry about your reading material, it's your choice and you should have it, to use only the Corporate Media as a source of information. I'm not sure why you worry so much about mine.

[MADem]

465. Yes-there is no "arguing over facts"--you haven't presented any. You are just spouting Putin's

propaganda.

Keep using Putin's propaganda arm as your source of news--I expect nothing better from you! But don't expect to be taken seriously if you do.

[sabrina 1]

466. Lol, you mean don't expect to be taken seriously by YOU. I don't,

as I said, that would seriously affect my credibility here.

And I will continue to watch and read whatever I choose, probably even more so the more there are attempts at censorship, which always need to be resisted as soon as they rear their ugly heads in any democracy.

I don't remember asking for your permission as to what 'library books' it is safe to check out, but thanks for the advice anyhow.

[MADem]

467. No, I meant by anyone who isn't part of the Putin-Praising RT Propaganda Brigade. nt

[sabrina 1]

468. Would you like me to create a poll, you v me to see who has the most

credibility? Lol, I think the Putin-Praising RT Propaganda Brigade Progressive Democratic majority here, that's who you are referring to, no? I think the results would be as expected on a Democratic Forum.

[MADem]

470. Would you "rally your minions?" You can't sway fact--RT is a piece of propagandizing shit, and

there's just no "debate" to be had about that.

[sabrina 1]

471. Why would I need to 'rally' anyone? If it's in GD, people will see it.

Oh wait, you're projecting right? Is that what you do, and how do you go about doing that? Is there a secret meeting place somewhere?

Anyhow, feel free to rally any minions you can, if you feel the need to do so.

And then I guess the poll would reveal who has the most 'minions'!

You're not afraid of such a poll, are you? Lol, I know I'm not.

[MADem]

472. It's what you do. And only you would imagine that a "DU poll" matters.

Nothing will change the fact that RT is a propaganda rag of of ruthless dictator.

It's not news, it's the perspective of a despot. You're the only one who hasn't figured it out.

[sabrina 1]

473. Never mind, it looks like someone already had the same idea and your opinions appear

to be in the minority.

Nothing can change the fact that one person's opinion on the internet, is just that, one person's opinion.

You should never feel threatened by information, IF you are on the right side of the issues. The only time people feel threatened by a free and open press, where all sides are presented and considered, as Wing Nuts did by Al Jazeera, is when they know they are not on solid ground regarding where they stand.

Thomas Jefferson, to whom the press was often pretty brutal, still defended it against any kind of censorship, because he knew how important it was to hear all voices IF democracy was to survive.

However, if you feel this threatened by RT, or Al Jazeera, or any other media outlets, stop complaining about it here, contact John McCain, Paul Ryan, Sarah Palin, Boehner et al and ask that they demand that the media corps remove RT from their lineups, I have no doubt they would be more than willing to oblige.

Clear Channel did it to the Dixie Chicks. We on the Left however, went out and bought their music, to counter the Right Wingers' attempt to destroy them simply because they did not agree with them.

No point in whining here about RT, do something about it. There is a whole Political Party who agree with you on this.

[MADem]

474. I don't "feel threatened" by a dictator's propaganda rag. nt

[sabrina 1]

475. I don't feel threatened by the Koch supported Corporate Propaganda Media either. Especially since

a majority of the people have no faith in them either. In fact the Corporate MSM has fallen to around #42 on the World Free Press list this year. It's shameful don't you think, that the US Media is so distrusted that we are so low on the Free Press list.

If you don't feel threatened by RT, then ignore it. I ignore the Corporate Media other than to compare their material against other sources of information.

[MADem]

479. I won't ignore RT because it's propaganda from a dictator.

And the fact that you slurp it up like the soup of the days tells us all we need to know about you.

Bon appetit!

[TomClash]

126. If "things get too egregious to overcome"

New names at DU will be the least of our worries.

[MADem]

148. Well, by "too egregious to overcome" I don't mean boots on the ground, even...

I'm not talking about any "interventions" by other nations.

I'm suggesting something local and internal-- beyond the self-inflicted wounds that Putin has already dealt out.

I mean something like public executions, something bigger and badder than incarceration and fining of people for being gay, or the complete censorship of "unfriendly" (as in "unfriendly to Putin&quot internet sites like is happening already, or the elimination of all "opposition" media outlets as happpened a month or so ago...

[TomClash]

172. Yes, I understand what you mean

I was using it as a play on words to point out that events that lead to reprisals that can spiral out of control, leading to . . . the unthinkable.

Interestingly, there was a large anti-Putin demonstration in Moscow and no one seemed to notice that there was little violence and no arrests, unlike the authoritative reaction to some similar events in the US.

[MADem]

192. The "government" denied the protest, and insisted that only three thousand people showed up.

The NYT printed the government's puny figure, even while opining that it seemed like tens of thousands.

But they wrote their piece with a view that Putin is going to bigfoot and win, as he always does these days--it is assumed, in a "why bother?" fashion, as a foregone conclusion.

All the power in Russia lies with the state and the state is Putin. Putin counts the votes, that's why his numbers are always favorable, no matter what. That's why he can change the law so he can stay in power for a quarter century and more.

There are a number of LARGE Ukrainian "enclaves" in Russia. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's a bit of internal terrorism on the agenda in the future. Of course, that'll be downplayed, too, because it doesn't fit the Happy Russia Led By Strongman Bear-Riding, Bear-Chested, Tiger-Tranquilizing, Fish-Kissing Fearless Leader propaganda that comes out of the Kremlin, these days.

[TomClash]

247. The Russian Government spews propaganda

No surprises there.

I didn't read the NYT article and I only believe about half of what I read there anyway.

There may be a low intensity terror war, but I doubt it for the same reasons we see little terror here: the populace is well-monitored. A limited invasion and asymmetrical defensive tactics with US noncombat assistance is also possible. We'll see.

[MADem]

266. If anything happens in Russia it'll be home grown, I think.

Like Chechnya. Ukrainians are a minority in Russia proper, maybe three percent on a good day, but three percent, covertly and determinedly, can do some damage.

[CJCRANE]

36. No one on DU supports Putin or thinks he's a liberal.

The DUers who don't fall into line demonizing the Putin regime 24/7 just have a more nuanced view about geopolitics.

This current crisis is playing directly into neocon hands. This is exactly what they wanted.

Saying that doesn't mean I'm anti-Obama, anti-Democratic or anti-American.

It just reminds me of the same neocon tactics used against Saddam Hussein, Colonel Gaddafi and Bashar Assad. None of them were or are nice guys but there are different geopolitical strategies that can be used and different opinions about them. And sometimes the neocon solutions cause much worse problems than the original issue.

[arely staircase]

42. nah, nobody here is peddling russian propaganda or apologizing for putin

or anything of the sort.

nosireebob

[CJCRANE]

47. The Laughing Man

is the new DU mascot!



In a few years time maybe our posts here will degenerate into posting endless threads of rofls.

[rhett o rick]

60. Instead of using that ridicule emoticon, why dont you prove them wrong?

Ridicule has no place in DU. You should be able to make your case without it.

[arely staircase]

91. I am not going to call out other members

and get a post hidden.

but thanks for trying

[sabrina 1]

377. You won't get a post hidden if you expose what you are claiming.

Why would you be afraid to post something that backs up your claims?

[Whisp]

194. ''Ridicule has no place in DU''........

ROFLMAO!

That is, ridicule can only go in one direction - toward Obama and democrats because, ya know, it's the Feet to the Fire duty of every raging malcontent but ridicule going toward their direction is not fair, mommy! Please make them stop, mommy.

[rhett o rick]

283. I am speaking of ridiculing other DU members. Like attempts with that emoticon. nm

[arely staircase]

288. if you don't like skinner's emoticon buffet, take it up with him nt

[Cha]

407. Exaclty.. Go to ATA and take it up it with Skinner.. that they

don't like the .. it offends their sensibilities.

[Whisp]

434. I think we need a new one of those

riding a kodiak bear bare chested with a thought bubble in Russian.

[Cha]

435. How thoughtful for them.. do you think Skinner would let

them have it? A little bare-chested bear-fighting dictator Oh, you said bear riding! Sorry!

[Whisp]

302. so now it's come down to: don't use that emoticon because it bothers me!

when you got nothing else, I guess it's something!

[MADem]

433. I think it comes down to "Leave Putin ALONE!!!!!"

Britney's in some grand company these days, it would seem!

[go west young man]

438. You guys are like children.

Just curious how old you are?

[MADem]

454. How old are you? You might want to check yourself, before you start accusing people of

behavior you're displaying.

I am retired; somehow, though, I'm pretty sure you aren't!

[go west young man]

456. Just looking at the posts directly above...

looks like something you might see in a 7th grade classroom.

[MADem]

460. Asinine arguments invite asinine retorts.

Do you think "Waaaah, don't use that emoticon?" aids a discussion of the topic?

Sometimes, a bit of brief mockery in response to what is an obvious distraction from the subject matter can get a topic back on track or beat back an attempt at derailment.

A 7th grade teacher--since we're in the classroom, now-- knows precisely how to do this sort of thing... "Young man, why don't you (tell the class what you're whispering to your neighbor/read to the the class what's in that note you just were passed/share that gum with everyone in the room), etc."

[sabrina 1]

45. Best to just have some fun with this nonsense, imo. Lol, seriously, you do not need nor every should

even try to take it seriously. Remember 'Liberals Love Saddam' from Right Wingers during the old Bush era, this is the same thing. Take it for what it is, pure entertainment.

Btw, I agree with you totally!

[jeff47]

48. Thread after thread quoting RT demonstrates there are plenty of supporters. (nt)

[Cha]

408. Prescisely, jeff. There's a very loud little "liberal" handful.

[Whisp]

37. but but he's Snowden's buddypal and saviour and king of humans rights. n/t

[Cha]

420. Putin's Snowden benefactor so Leave Putin Alone.. is

that it? 'Cause I'm not getting all this attempt at deflection from the veracity of the OP.

[redgreenandblue]

41. Someone suggested Putin is a Leftist on DU?

Must have missed it. The only people trying to tie Putin to the Left here are DUs resident "centrists".

[Bluenorthwest]

101. Absolutely. Some call criticism of him or even of the anti gay laws 'red baiting'

Criticism of the anti gay laws has gotten this sort of response:
"In actuality the LGBT loud approach at Russia during this Olympics has done more to help reignite the Cold War than Dick Cheney himself could have done. I bet the MIC is loving the LGBT community right now."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024490324

[arely staircase]

105. people pretending that this crap doesn't exist here

are being disingenuous.

[Bluenorthwest]

211. Also being very cowardly. Note the non response to the petulent demand?

Disingenuous is too kind a word.

[OKNancy]

46. I read we should show him respect

I think you know which thread.

[arely staircase]

54. haven't seen that one but

I have seen, cough, another one or dozen.

[rhett o rick]

66. I dont think it's appropriate to paint the left as pro-Putin based on one poster who may be

here only to disrupt. I dont understand the attempts here to alienate the left.

[OKNancy]

78. I didn't do that

I don't think the OP is either. There are some who praise him. In no way does that mean that all on the left do.
It also doesn't mean that when someone like the OP makes a rant about their disgust with Putin that it is any reflection on the left, or that the OP wants war, or that he hates Russians or anything else. He just wants to vent a little.

[rhett o rick]

84. "If you support this guy you need to stop calling yourself a liberal". What makes him

think that any liberals support Putin? I have seen one post that supported Putin and they have a low post count. No reason to assume they were liberal.

The OP could very easily been written to attempt to unify Democrats against the aggressiveness of Russia and not to insinuate that some liberals supported Putin. I find the attempts to paint liberals, even some liberals as Putin apologists as divisive.

[arely staircase]

123. I know you are all about unifying Democrats

with your awesome support of our Democratic president.

'stop dividing Democrats and let's get back to bashing Obama' is what you are saying.

and it is ridiculous.

[Cha]

392. Hear fucking

hear, arely

[Rex]

114. Part of an agenda.

So obvious it is sad to watch.

[arely staircase]

127. oh noes

an agenda!

[Rex]

128. Yeah your hippie punching act is sad put predictable.

Since you have no proof. Keep stirring!

[arely staircase]

129. putin is a hippie now? nt

[Rex]

131. So that would be no you have no proof.

Keep stirring!

[arely staircase]

134. what in my OP is incorrect? nt

[Rex]

135. That there are no liberals supporting Putin on DU.

Nice try.

[arely staircase]

137. never said there were

I said if you support Putin you are NOT a liberal.

Glad I could clear that up.

[Rex]

140. 'If you support this guy you need to stop calling yourself a liberal'

Wow, you are not even trying. That is sad. You should stop now.

[arely staircase]

142. exactly

because if you support Putin you are NOT a liberal.

[Rex]

144. Why not say progressive or democrat?

Yeah I know why. Again, point people out on DU that have done this...oh right you cannot, just stirring the pot.

[adirondacker]

331. "We have to fight the fascists over there, so we don't have to fight them over here"

Over here, we can settle on bipartisanship.

[arely staircase]

71. thanks for the link to the guardian pic

last time it was posted it was met with threats of death to thousands

Putin will teach you to love the motherland!

[treestar]

176. I saw that

It's because he's world leader (but that would apply to Obama too, poster didn't think of that )

[OKNancy]

180. as the mother of a gay child

I have nothing but contempt for what he represents.
He could leave Crimea, and wage peace in the Ukraine and I would still despise him.
There are just some issues that I can't overlook.

[arely staircase]

183. this

[Bluenorthwest]

230. Thanks Nancy, I notice how many are able to overlook the anti gay laws and in

fact some argue they are not actually anti gay, LGBT people have been accused of being more war like than Dick Cheney, these anti gay hate posters are still allowed here and it makes me sick.
If those laws were against an ethnic, racial or religious minority no one on DU would dare to defend, minimize or rationalize those laws. But anti LGBT laws? They defend, minimize, rationalize and even accuse the victims of those laws of being Nazis. Nazis, who treated LGBT people to oppressive laws, arrests and execution following patterns very similar to what goes on in Putin's Russia.

[Cha]

393. I haven't seen that one.. but, I would say.. I'll show Putin all the respect he shows Gay

People in Russia and Europe. I'll give Putin all the Respect he gives journalists who disagree with him in Russia.

Less than fucking Zero.

[arcane1]

55. I feel fortuunate that I have seen none of this on DU.

I hope it stays that way.

[africanadian]

70. Thank you

I was wondering what the OP was talking about. I've yet to see ANY pro-Putin threads here!

[Rex]

116. Same here.

This is more hippie punching by the exact same people that do it year after year no matter what the topic is...

[arcane1]

120. I see it in the NSA/Snowden threads too.

Which is why I haven't said much on that topic either. Hell, the mere asking of a question automatically labels one as an "NSA Authoritarian" or a "Snowden Fanboy" with absolutely zero degrees in between.

Applying that kind of black/white extremism used to be done only by rightwingers

[Rex]

121. That's why I quit talking about it and other topics.

GD is not a friendly place to have a discussion anymore. The perpetually outraged at everything have made sure of that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

58. He's just a politician playing "tough on Fascists" rather than tough on Terra' or Communism.

He'd be wearing cowboy boots if he were an American politician.

[arely staircase]

61. right on time nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

89. You're welcome.

[lostincalifornia]

63. He is a communist thug. Previous credentials KGB

[RedFury]

264. Does...

...Bush The First ring a bell? I mean, wasn't he head of the nefarious -- for other nations -- CIA for years prior to becoming Potus?

Weak sauce.

[lostincalifornia]

295. Bush could be characterized as a Fascist

[G_j]

64. going beyond ridiculous

Nobody can read every thread posted here, but I have seen a slew of comments accusing DUers of supporting Putin. Which is fairly remarkable, since I cannot recall seeing a single post singing Putin's praises. You folks have gone way over the edge. It's just insane.

[arely staircase]

68. so do you disagree with what I posted?

if so, which part?

[G_j]

74. No, not really

but it seems to be directed at an imaginary audience.

[arely staircase]

77. no, very real nt

[G_j]

80. well, right back to my original statement

I don't don't see it. However I do see multiple posts claiming it.

[arely staircase]

83. well I'm not going to call out any specific posters

so can't help you there.

[G_j]

102. whatever the case

it sure seems like much ado about nothing. But, go right ahead..

[arely staircase]

103. thank you

I will.

[ProSense]

76. Putin

apologists are transparent, even to those who once denied it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024610884#post1

No link:

"Vladimir Putin, the World's Last True Statesman"

[rhett o rick]

86. "You folks have gone way over the edge." Maybe not.

Looks like a distraction from the Pres Obama, CIA, NSA, vs. the Constitution debacle.

[NuclearDem]

90. Nope, try again.

[woo me with science]

224. Well, it *is* still at the top of the page....

so you have to give them that.

Yeah, the OP advertises for all of DU the dishonesty of the Third Way propaganda brigade, whose activities are already held in contempt and ridicule by most of DU.

That's all true....but frankly, I'm still ashamed at not having trashed this garbage before now.

[arely staircase]

98. yeah, no threads about any of that on DU

[arely staircase]

124. is this your 'unifying democrats' post of the day

[Rex]

117. Desperation will do that to people.

nt.

[G_j]

214. desperate for what?

To be upset about an imaginary group of people? I don't get it.
Maybe there are one or two who are real.. but it's not at all reflective of DU, and hardly worth the drama.

[2banon]

72. ?

[arendt]

87. How can a former KGB be a Fascist?

The blanket use of the term fascist to mean any old dictator is a rightwing meme to muddy the divide between extreme right and extreme left. As in, "Hitler was a socialist."

You can correctly point out that Putin was a communist and a KGB guy. But, unless you completely re-define (and thereby render meaningless) the term "fascist", Putin is not one.

Of course, as I said above, it is a rightwing meme to confuse people about the nature of fascism. The use of the word Fascist in the title trivializes the term as a generic insult when, in fact, there are REAL neo-nazis in positions of power in the Ukraine.

Its not the bashing of Putin that I object to, it is the flagrant dumbing down of historical awareness of what fascism really means.

You do acknowledge that one of the first acts of the new regime in Kiev [link:http://www.latimes.com/opinion/commentary/la-oe-english-ukraine-neofascists-20140313,0,7664312.story#ixzz2vquKXo4S
|was]:

(to) call to abolish the autonomy that protects Crimea's Russian heritage, and its push for a parliamentary vote that downgraded the status of the Russian language, (these acts are) flagrantly provocative to Ukraine's millions of ethnic Russians and incredibly stupid as the first steps of a new government in a divided country.

Drop the "fascist" and you might have a case.

[NuclearDem]

94. Being a former member of the KGB doesn't define one's politics.

Your underlying case is that because he was a member of the CCCP's intelligence service, he can only be a communist. That's not true.

His embrace of the plutocrats, the militarization and imperialism, and the homophobia are all fascist tendencies.

[arely staircase]

96. yep. see the former Yogoslavia if you think former Communist Party members can't become RWingers

That Putin isn't a fascist is a silly notion.

[arely staircase]

95. easily and joyfully it would seem. nt

[EmilyAnne]

99. Well, when you see neo-nazis walking down Nevsky prospect on Victory Day

holding giant banners depicting Stalin's face, you start to get the idea that your old, familiar, left/ right, cold war tropes don't necessarily apply in Russia these days.


Sorry, but its true and it certainly seems to complicate the issue for those who are detached from what is happening in Russia.

[Wounded Bear]

92. When the sytem goes authoritarian...

The difference between left and right tends to blur. It's kind of like WWII-Eastern front. Nazis, Commies...they were both fucked up.

One could argue that in the West, instead of democracy, a form of 'soft' fascism won out by destroying the Nazis, who were there real competitors. We're seeing that now, as the corporate interests continue to take over.

[Rex]

118. Stir harder!

[iandhr]

119. Ding Ding Ding

I couldn't have said it better.

[LittleBlue]

122. Yes. But he is a necessary counterbalance to the USA

In general, a multipolar world is desirable for the poorest nations. So I support having more than one major power, even if they are Putin and China.

[arely staircase]

132. I doubt that argument would get much traction in Kiev right now. nt

[LittleBlue]

171. Perhaps not

But they won't be any less poor if they accept the western austerity package. Their politicians are crooks and all the alternatives are crooks or amateurs.

[arely staircase]

173. that's up to them

or should be. we shall see if it works out that way.

[ProSense]

139. China

"In general, a multipolar world is desirable for the poorest nations. So I support having more than one major power, even if they are Putin and China. "

...didn't back Russia in the vote yesterday.

Russia isolated over Crimea after UN vote

Moscow only opponent to Security Council resolution condemning Crimean referendum, with China crucially abstaining.

Russia has been exposed as isolated over the crisis in Ukraine, with members of the UN Security Council overwhelmingly supporting a draft resolution condemning an upcoming referendum on the future of Crimea as illegal.

<...>

Russia vetoed the US-backed resolution when it was put to a vote before the council, but its ally China abstained, leaving it as the only nation to recognise the Crimean referendum.

<...>

Al Jazeera's diplomatic editor, James Bays, said the vote laid bare the international opposition to Russia's stance on Ukraine and Crimea.

"China is not supporting its ally Russia on this occasion. It is abstaining. That's the best the Western nations, who drafted this resolution, could hope for, but they think that this is important because it exposes that Russia is on its own."

- more -

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/03/crimea-prepares-vote-amid-deadly-showdown-201431512241274925.html

[Adrahil]

319. So the Cold War was good? NT

[SidDithers]

125. Huge K&R!!...

Sid

[TomClash]

130. Did I miss something?

Who is "supporting Putin" here?

[Rex]

133. You have to excuse a few here, whenever they get a chance to rag on liberals...

well you see the results it is this OP. Sad, but predictable by a handful of people here.

[arely staircase]

136. so by saying Putin is not a liberal I am 'ragging on liberals'?

that is rich

[Rex]

138. You can pretend you are not stirring up shit all you want to.

Have fun punching hippies over an issue they agree with you on. I guess hatred does that to a person.

[arely staircase]

141. you are the only person who has mentioned hippies

apropos to nothing. I said Putin is not a liberal or of the left and anyone making excuses for him isn't one either.

[Rex]

143. Why not say progressive or democrat?

Yeah right you are not fooling anyone with your wording.

[arely staircase]

153. you are making no sense whatsoever

I said Putin nor his supporters are liberal and somehow you have taken that as an attack on hippies.

truly bizarre

[Rex]

154. Of course not.

Again, enjoy your hatred of the Left.

[arely staircase]

158. strangest subthread so far nt

[Skidmore]

221. Aw, jeez...

did someone accuse you of being a lefty?

[ProSense]

147. Absurd

"Have fun punching hippies over an issue they agree with you on."

Pretending that there aren't Putin apologists doesn't mean they don't exists. Also, it's fairly absurd to claim that calling out Putin apologists is "punching hippies."

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Do you think that the Putin apologists are "hippies"?

"Hippies" for Putin?

Absurd.

[Rex]

151. Can you parse that word salad for me?

Can you point out a Putin apologist on DU...thanks I'll wait.

[ProSense]

157. No,

"Can you parse that word salad for me?"

...reading comprehension of a fairly simple comment doesn't require one to be a rocket scientist.

"Can you point out a Putin apologist on DU...thanks I'll wait. "

Putin apologists are transparent, even to those who once denied they exist.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024610884#post1

No link:

"Vladimir Putin, the World's Last True Statesman"

[Rex]

160. So no, you cannot prove it. Thought so.

Just more nonsense from you, typical.

[ProSense]

162. LOL!

Yeah, denial is best.

[Rex]

163. Well you are the king of denial so that fits you well.

Nice poll btw.

[woo me with science]

150. Hatred...

or a paycheck.

[Rex]

152. Really I don't care which one it is. Just sad to watch.

nt.

[woo me with science]

212. It is sad,

but good to see DU calling out the bullshit and the manipulation.

To be fair, this little Third Way group and its tactics are well-known at DU, and their posts are roundly considered an embarrassment to the site.

[Rex]

231. Yes the Third Way has made no progress on DU and it drives them nuts.

nt.

[arely staircase]

155. you think people have to get paid to think Putin is a gold plated dick? nt

[woo me with science]

195. False, manipulative accusations against community members is just part of the schtick,

but you know that.

It's not just the demonstrably false and manipulative attacks on others here. It's also the full-time, relentless defense of every single corporate outrage coming out of this purchased government, the inability to leave a single charge against TPTB unanswered no matter how true it is, and the constant dispensing of Third Way/corporate disinformation, manipulation, and diversion.

Always the same few, always the same tactics.

Obama taps "cognitive infiltrator" Cass Sunstein for Committee to create "trust" in NSA:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023512796

Salon: Obama confidant’s spine-chilling proposal: Cass Sunstein wants the government to "cognitively infiltrate" anti-government groups
http://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/

The US government's online campaigns of disinformation, manipulation, and smear.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024560097

The influx of corporate propaganda-spouting posters is blatant and unnatural.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News To Americans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023262111

The goal of the propaganda assaults across the internet is not to convince anyone of anything.*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801

The government figured out sockpuppet managment but not "persona management."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242

The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4159454

Seventeen techniques for truth suppression.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4249741

Just do some Googling on astroturfing - big organizations have some sophisticated tools.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1208351

The influx will continue
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4216987

[arely staircase]

199. all the adjectives are there

[TomClash]

146. Do you support the current Ukraine Government?

I don't support either side. But it is pretty stupid to escalate tensions with Russia because Putin is annexing Crimea and sucks on LGBT rights.

[arely staircase]

225. I will leave what government Ukraine has to the Ukrainians.

And I don't think I am powerful enough to escalate tensions with foreign nations.

[TomClash]

240. Will you also leave the Russian government to the Russians?

You seem to be advocating an escalation in tensions with Russia. How do you think we should handle the situation and why?

[arely staircase]

245. I think the Russian government should stop invading its neighbors

And I think Obama and the Europeans are handling it very well. I am glad the adults are in charge at a time like this.

[joshcryer]

363. If the OPs words bother you, then you identify.

And therefore the OP applies to you whether you like it or not.

That's why this thread riling so many people up is humorous. It's basically pulling the same strings that Obama detracting threads pull. But it's backfiring in the opposite direction. And most hilariously, it's people who probably do want Putin to succeed in his endeavors. Though only a few of them outright state their opinion on the issue (reformist2, rdharma, cosmicone). The rest hide behind rhetoric.

[2banon]

149. Your emotions on this matter is quite palpable

Clearly you are deeply upset about all of this.

Is your life in danger? Are you from Ukraine? Are you living there now or do you have relatives/friends there. are you afraid for their safety?

[arely staircase]

165. do you limit your opinions or concern to your personal safety or that of you friends and relatives?

or merely suggesting that I should?

[2banon]

184. No. Just trying to figure out why you're making sh*t up.. I figure you must be personally invested.

there are other possible, even likely explanations, but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt first.

[arely staircase]

186. what do you disagree with in my OP? nt

[Bluenorthwest]

236. That's the 'silly emotional gays' tactic.

Because you see, if you stand up for equality, you are very angry.

[arely staircase]

239. yeah. the borderline homophobia isn't lost on me nt

[2banon]

307. The reason why I asked if you were in personal danger for your life...

or the lives of others you were personally connected to, i.e. family, friends, relatives. would give me cause to sympathize with the reasons why you make outlandish claims you made here. When people are in fear of their lives, their perspective on matters can be easily skewed and does tend to manifest in irrational thought and behavior.

Probably because I grew up at the start of the Cold War, lived through the Cuban Missile Crises and all that followed, the current events concern me a great deal.

So I've paid a certain amount of attention to the events in the region these past two weeks, and taken time and effort to read and learn as much as time has allowed in this short period of time since Ukraine events broke out..

I've been reading everything from every point of view and every source that's surfaced on the subject, in effort to make sense of things, including a wide variety of posts on DU. And I can say without a shred of doubt, that your op is simply an irrational screed devoid of of any reality based evidence.

It would be forgivable if, as I stated earlier, you were in the region and were in fear of your life, livelihood and so forth. But since you're not, it would be prudent at the very least to avoid accusations and screeds that come straight from the pages of the Neo-Con play book.


eom/eod

[arely staircase]

428. let me clear it up for you

Got it?

[2banon]

429. Non-Sequitor

Nothing to do with the events unfolding in Ukraine and Crimea and the discussions of that topic on DU.

[blackspade]

164. He is defiantly a wing nut.

[ProSense]

166. Please respond to

this poll: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024673202

Thanks in advance.

[Rex]

170. BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

I love the transparency.

[morningfog]

174. Who "supports" him? How are you defining "support?"

[arely staircase]

177. oh I suppose posting links directly to his propaganda and pretending it is news is one way

agreed?

[morningfog]

242. I agree that RT is not a neutral or reliable source, and I wouldn't use it.

But, linking to it does not necessarily equate with support.

[cpwm17]

179. So Putin must be the new Ron Paul

Ron Paul has been too quiet in the news recently. So it's time for a new crusade, this time against all of the Putin supporters on DU. Because, as everyone knows, DU is full of Putin supporters.

[rdharma]

188. See rhett o rick's post #6. It exposes the purpose of the OP. nt

[arely staircase]

213. no Ron Paul is still Ron Paul nt

[cpwm17]

218. I shouldn't falsely accuse you of being part of that earlier crusade

A crudsade that was due to the fact that most people around here are anti-war, like Ron Paul. I don't see any such redeeming value in Putin.

[rdharma]

181. If you support the oligarch capitalist putschists and the neo-fascists who brought them to power,

....... can you call yourself a liberal?

Just wondering.

[arely staircase]

185. thanks for that post

some people here didn't believe me. said I was making shit up.

but you, my friend, have proved them all wrong.

[rdharma]

198. Proved what? That supporters of the capitalist putsch supported by the neo-fascists.......

....... can't call themselves liberals? Oh, I think that's pretty evident!

[arely staircase]

201. bravo

now all you need is a link to rt.

[rdharma]

203. Or ..... a link to Murdoch Jr's VICE NEWS!

[arely staircase]

205. what percentage of Vice News does Murdoch own? And what percentage of RT does the Kremlin own?

I'm curious.

[rdharma]

207. James Murdoch is the DIRECTOR of VICE NEWS...............

Arely, you should give it up. Everybody is on to your schtick and at this point they're just mocking you.

[arely staircase]

210. oh noes

they (everybody) is on to me. Mocking me even.

The horror.

[MADem]

237. No, he IS not. You really need to stop shopping untruths from a supposedly "left" perspective.

People will start wondering if your motives are impure.

Here's James Murdoch's CV--where's VICE in there, aside from the occasional reference to his being a "vice president" of this or that for his daddy? There's absolutely NOTHING about VICE Magazine or VICE Media Group.

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

[rdharma]

244. Keep diggin'!

James Murdoch Joins Board of Media Company Vice

By RAVI SOMAIYA

Published: November 21, 2013

James Murdoch, a 21st Century Fox executive and the son of the media mogul Rupert Murdoch, has joined Vice Media as a director, two people with knowledge of the appointment said on Thursday.

Over the summer Fox acquired a 5 percent stake in Vice, whose brand of video and print journalism has spread from scrappy start-up to establishment outlets like HBO. Fox paid $70 million for its investment.

James Murdoch joined as a director as part of that deal, said one person with knowledge of the arrangement, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential internal moves. Vice remains a privately owned company, with majority control of the board.


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/22/business/media/james-murdoch-joins-board-of-media-company-vice.html?_r=0

[MADem]

274. You falsely called him a "news director" when all he is, is a minority director on the board without

any "control" over the organization. He was put on the board to watch over Rupert's MONEY, not the editorial content of the organization.

But hey--keep insisting, lamely, pathetically....and don't bother reading your OWN links!!!!

Here, one word at a time, now--and pay close attention to the bolded bits:

James Murdoch joined as a director as part of that deal, said one person with knowledge of the arrangement, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential internal moves. Vice remains a privately owned company, with majority control of the board.

Where's your little rolling man...? It's actually pretty funny, how you keep shopping a pathetic "mis-statement" as fact, and then expect people to take you seriously...!

I've seen that technique before...wonder who it was that used to do that kind of thing...? It'll come to me eventually, I am sure...

[arely staircase]

248. 'a' director. not 'the' director. the murdoch's own about 5 percent of it. while the Kremlin owns

100 percent of rt: thought by fools to be a real news source.

[MADem]

279. He's a board director, not a "news" director...our little friend is shopping a "mis-statement"

and it is a DOOZY. James is on that board to look after his daddy's five percent, and the money came with James as part of the deal. James has no "say" over the board, the owners -- and it is a PRIVATE company, so it's not a "vote of the board" deal--retain complete control over the enterprise. And that lousy five percent is an INVESTMENT, it does not come with the perks of "ownership." Murdoch doesn't "own" any part of VICE. That's entirely clear from the article.

More to the point, James has nothing to do with the "news"--not as a director, not as an anything. Our little friend just made that up. And then he laughed about it, with a little roly poly laughing man.

He's playing a little game here, but veracity isn't a big part of his amusements.

He should be ashamed of himself.

[joshcryer]

364. Nevermind VICE reporters are independent.

They report what they want.

[MADem]

369. But..... but...... but......!!!

The Five Percenter looking for a job after the phone scandal in London, who "came with" the wee bit o'money, and who sits at the kid's table at the far end of the board room, is a "NEWS DIRECTOR" doncha know!! He OWNS!! He CONTROLS!!!

It must be true, I read it on Dee YEW!!!!!





They really aren't terribly subtle, I'm afraid!! Trying too hard...!

[joshcryer]

372. He pulled that crap on me before.

I just named the other stuff the reporter reported on.

BTW, Simon Ostrovsky's "North Korea Labor Camps" is an amazing watch.

[MADem]

374. I saw that, it was great!

The stuff coming out of VZ is first-rate as well. They are actually starting to produce a professional product....previously, they were a little "hipster-ish," not that this is a crime, it's just, well, annoying!

[MADem]

226. You should not shop untruths that are so easily shown as false.

It impacts your veracity and your narrative. See,

Suroosh Alvi, Shane Smith, and Gavin McInnes


don't sound AT ALL like any flavor of "Murdoch." But valiant effort at trying to imply a deep connection when there's scarcely an association involved!

Murdoch does NOT OWN VICE, he barely has an interest in it --a Canadian guy (with two partners) does. Fox invested in the venture, a total of FIVE percent of the total, and the original owners maintain control.


Here, let's break it down for you:

Vice is an international magazine focused on arts, culture, and news topics. Founded in 1994 in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, in later years the company expanded into Vice Media, with divisions including the magazine, a website, a film production company, a record label, and a publishing imprint. As of March 2013, the magazine's editor-in-chief is Rocco Castoro[2] and its global editor is documentary filmmaker Andy Capper.[3]

Established by Suroosh Alvi, Shane Smith, and Gavin McInnes, the magazine was launched in 1994 as the Voice of Montreal with government funding, and the intention of the founders was to provide work and a community service.[4]
When the editors later sought to dissolve their commitments with the original publisher Alix Laurent, they bought him out and changed the name to Vice in 1996. Apparently unhappy in Canada, and in search of more streetwear advertising income, the magazine's personnel relocated to New York City in 1999.[5] Andy Capper co-founded the UK division of Vice with Andrew Creighton.
Numerous media sources reported in mid-August 2013 that Rupert Murdoch's corporation 21st Century Fox had invested US$70 million in Vice Media, resulting in a 5 percent stake. Following the announcement, Smith explained, "We have set ourselves up to build a global platform but we have maintained control."[6][7]

Here's the political stance of the effort:

Politics[edit]
In a March 2008 interview with The Guardian, Smith was asked about the magazine's political allegiances and he stated, "We're not trying to say anything politically in a paradigmatic left/right way ... We don't do that because we don't believe in either side. Are my politics Democrat or Republican? I think both are horrific. And it doesn't matter anyway. Money runs America; money runs everywhere."[4]
Founder Smith has stated: "I grew up being a socialist and I have problems with it because I grew up in Canada [and] I've spent a lot of time in Scandinavia, where I believe countries legislate out creativity. They cut off the tall trees. Everyone's a C-minus. I came to America from Canada because Canada is stultifyingly boring and incredibly hypocritical. Thanks, Canada."[5]

I think maybe your little rolling-on-the-floor-laughing guy might want to get up, dust himself off, and slink away.

[rdharma]

238. Falsehoods, eh? Nope! Read and weap, oh, denying one!

James Murdoch Joins Board of Media Company Vice

By RAVI SOMAIYA

Published: November 21, 2013

James Murdoch, a 21st Century Fox executive and the son of the media mogul Rupert Murdoch, has joined Vice Media as a director, two people with knowledge of the appointment said on Thursday.

Over the summer Fox acquired a 5 percent stake in Vice, whose brand of video and print journalism has spread from scrappy start-up to establishment outlets like HBO. Fox paid $70 million for its investment.

James Murdoch joined as a director as part of that deal, said one person with knowledge of the arrangement, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential internal moves. Vice remains a privately owned company, with majority control of the board.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/22/business/media/james-murdoch-joins-board-of-media-company-vice.html?_r=0

[MADem]

250. I think you need to do the sobbing, here.

From YOUR link:

....joined as a director as part of that deal

From mine:

"We have set ourselves up to build a global platform but we have maintained control."[6][7]

And from yours:

Vice remains a privately owned company, with majority control of the board.

Stop trying to pretend that VICE is a "Murdoch" enterprise. His job as a "director" is to make sure that his daddy doesn't lose money on the investment, not to direct the slant of the news.

You are so transparent, you know.

[rdharma]

252. You need to go to Oz and see who's behind the curtain!

Oh, and while you're there, ask about the "strawman".

[MADem]

263. You need to stop making up tales, and calling "board" directors who don't control the direction of

a corporation "news" directors.

It's not nice to make things up. Particularly when your OWN SOURCES out you as a "mis-stater of facts."

How humiliating for you.

[Cha]

402. Yep, that's one of 'em.

[Puzzledtraveller]

446. that sizzled!

[LiberalLovinLug]

193. WATER IS GOOD FOR HUMANS TO DRINK!!!!

And anybody who thinks drinking water is unhealthy should STOP CALLING THEMSELVES A LIBERAL!
You look like an ass for claiming such a thing.


- I haven't seen anyone doing that on here could you prove it?

I'M NOT ALLOWED TO BECAUSE OF THE DU RULES!!
BUT THEY ARE OUT THERE...AND IF ANYONE SAYS OTHERWISE I'LL GIVE THEM ONE OF THESE...

[arely staircase]

196. anyone posting to rt and pretending it is news

how's that?

[LiberalLovinLug]

220. Sorry that's a little thin

And I thought you were talking about DU not RT.

[arely staircase]

223. what? nt

[LiberalLovinLug]

234. huh?

[rdharma]

202. See rhett o rick's post #6. It exposes the purpose of the OP. nt

[2banon]

206. ^This^ 1000+

[L0oniX]

395. Fishes and humans can co-exist too.

[Cha]

414. "You look like an ass for claiming such a thing." Look who the

fuck is talking.

[awoke_in_2003]

209. Haven't been around a lot lately...

but I don't think there are any true liberals supporting Putin. He is a dictatorial thug, but short of, what would quickly become, a huge war, what the hell can we do about it?

[msanthrope]

216. I found this thread interesting...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024626592

[arely staircase]

217. no no. those posts don't exist

it is all a strawman I made up.

[msanthrope]

219. Here's something else......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024617842

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10024658478

[LiberalLovinLug]

232. You admit it thanks

Unfortunately you seem to equate criticism of the American corporate media reaction, and the hypocrisy of Kerry's statement about invading other countries on a false pretext, as somehow "supporting" Putin.

I realize its easier to view the world in black and white positions, but that isn't reality.

[arely staircase]

258. I admit that was a link to exactly the kind of pro-Putin propaganda

I was talking about. The kind that supposedly doesn't exist.

rt is the Kremlin.

[Cha]

403. Mustn't "hate Putin".. he's so loveable.. So much to fucking offer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4675361

[Cha]

415. Some people don't get it.. they can't get sarcasm when it's written.. you have

to spell it out for them

[joshcryer]

370. LEAVE PUTIN ALONE!!!

[msanthrope]

378. Poor vlady....smeared by the awful Internets....nt

[L0oniX]

396. You'd think he was Stalin or something.

[Cha]

418. Poor Big Vladdy.. "Stewart Rips Fox for Buying Putin’s ‘Bullsh*t’:.."..

‘What the Hell Is Wrong with These People?’

Hilarious Video Ensues @ Link..
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stewart-rips-fox-for-buying-putins-bullsht-what-the-hell-is-wrong-with-these-people/

[libodem]

227. Czar, Czar, now

He is no bigger Fascist than the Koch bros. I used to laugh at the wild Global, One World Government, conspiracy nuts, with their Buildaberger, Masonic, Rapture, bullshit, oh heck, I still laugh, it can't be the Plutocrats, from 5 countries, calling the shots, on oil production.

It could never happen.

[arely staircase]

229. Koch brothers love 'em some Putin nt

[libodem]

267. No doubt

[Scootaloo]

233. "Anybody who thinks this guy is some kind of liberal or in anyway of the Left..."

I can't help but wonder what kind of fantasy land you inhabit, to convince you that there's anyone anywhere who thinks this.

Maybe you're seeing "He's not Satan or Hitler" and re-imagining it as "ERMAGERD HE'S SO LIBERAL AND I LOVES HIM SOOO MUCH!" Seems to be the most common problem behind people making posts like yours.

[arely staircase]

243. people are repeating his propaganda in this very thread

you really aren't trying very hard if you can't find it.

[Scootaloo]

249. No, I see you trying to defend a stupid claim with more stupid claims

Circular arguments seem to be the case of the day.

This entire thread looks like this.

Arely staircase: "Oh my god will people stop claiming Putin is left / Liberal?"
Sane people: "Who is saying that?"
Arely Staircase: "All the liberals who support him!"
Sane people: "What liberals are those?"
Arely staircase: "The ones claiming he's a liberal and on the left!"

You're making shit up, and you look like a damned fool for doing it. I'd suggest you leave this mess as a hit-and-run thread, rather than trying to double down on what has been thorough;y exposed as dumbassed bullshit on your part.

[arely staircase]

251. uh, I said Putin is NOT a liberal. nor are his apologists - some right in this thread

dumbass bullshit, indeed.

[Scootaloo]

254. There you go again

[arely staircase]

255. lol

[Scootaloo]

257. Pretty much what I thought

I'm sure Skinner appreciate the ad revenue you generate with your troll thread

Anyway, I'll just repeat myself one last time, then go back to prepping lunch.

Arely staircase: "Oh my god will people stop claiming Putin is left / Liberal?"
Sane people: "Who is saying that?"
Arely Staircase: "All the liberals who support him!"
Sane people: "What liberals are those?"
Arely staircase: "The ones claiming he's a liberal and on the left!"

[arely staircase]

262. yeah totally

'if you support him you aren't a liberal' totally means "all the liberals support him"

in some fucking bizarro universe.

sorry that calling Putin a fascist has pissed you off so much.

[Scootaloo]

265. No, not at all. he is a fascist.

I just think your claim that someone out there thinks he's a liberal is fucking dumb, and that you base this claim off nonexistant people only adds to the stupid.

Name some names. Who are the posters who support Putin and think he's a liberal? You say they're in this thread, so the DU callout rules don't apply - you're allowed to reference and name people within the thread. In fact reference would certainly bolster your point

So who are these faux liberals supporting Putin and claiming he's liberal himself, or part of the left?

[arely staircase]

269. so the people posting to rt aren't liberals, only pretending to be so?

no argument here

[Scootaloo]

272. Still no names, arely?

C'mon, you're already looking foolish with your circular logic. Don't add intellectual cowardice to the list as well. Yo uwant to makea thread calling people out, call them the fuck out.

[arely staircase]

275. here

there are some here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024672411

[Scootaloo]

282. So you've got nothing except ANOTHER circular argument.

If you're going to make a claim like "People think Putin is a liberal!" you ought to have something to back that claim up with. Especially if you're also claiming "DU'ers support putin!"

Prove that shit. As in, actual references and examples and names. Bolster your point.

All you've got now is essentially "it's true because I say it's true and if you disagree you're one of them, which just proves my point!" It's a pretty egregious failure of logic on your part and is doing your argument absolutely no favors.

[arely staircase]

284. Prove fucking what?

that people post links to Kremlin propaganda (rt) and pretend it is news?

if you can't find any of that you are just being lazy.

[Scootaloo]

291. You have made two claims.

1) That someone out there thinks Putin is a leftist or Liberal

2) That DU'ers support Putin.

These two claims are found in your OP and are in fact the thesis of the thing. You are attempting to call out DU'ers who - according to you - support Putin and believe him to be a liberal.

Russia Today is mentioned nowhere in your OP, and your attempt to involve it is nothing more than a deflection

I want you to actually provide citation for the two claims in your OP - that someone on DU thinks Putin is a liberal, and that DUers support Putin.

[Rex]

271. Golden ticket...can't call out people on DU.

Don't worry, a few of them are desperately looking through the archives for examples as we speak.

[Scootaloo]

273. As I said, you can if they're on the same thread

The premise is based on the notion that if they're active on the thread they can rrefute the call-out - or that the example for the callout is on the thread itself and thus irrefutable.

Established rule, else you wouldn't be able to say, oh, "arley staircase is posting nonsensical circular arguments to defend a false claim that someone on DU thinks Putin is a liberal."

[arely staircase]

281. here's one.

now do your own homework

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4673285

[Scootaloo]

285. Except it's not

rdharma is attacking the government of Ukraine. This does not translate into saying Putin is a liberal, nor a defense of Putin. It's not binary.

As for homework, you're the one making the claim. It's up to you to prove the claim to your audience. If you expect me to research your claim for you, then I can only conclude that you're making shit up as you go.

[arely staircase]

292. I just gave you an example of someone spouting the Kremlin line word for word

you are on your own now.

[Scootaloo]

296. No, you gave me an example of someone attacking the Ukrainian government

Again, this is a different thing from "supporting Putin" or "thinking Putin is a liberal." As i said, it's not binary; this is not a situation where opposition to one translates into support for the other. Now if you've got something where rdharma voices support for Putin, or asserts that Putin is a liberal, then we're getting somewhere.

[arely staircase]

299. just like

http://americablog.com/2014/03/meet-vladimir-putin-favorite-neo-nazis-russia-crimea.html

[Scootaloo]

303. Are you accusing rdharma of supportung Russian nazis, now?

Remember the topic at hand, arely - you're insisting DU'ers support Putin and think he's a liberal, or otherwise on hte left. I keep waiting for you to back it up but all you do is snivel and deflect.

Is it just that you're completely and utterly full of it, or what?

[arely staircase]

308. ah exactly as I figured (fucking priceless)

give me an example

give me an example

give me an example

example given

how dare you call out another DUr!

and no, I am pointing out that he, like the Kremlin call the Ukrainians Nazis.

[Scootaloo]

323. Not at all, arely

I asked you to provide an example of a Du'er supporting Putin or thinking Putin is a liberal. You chose as your example rdharma. The logic behind your choice is that he compared the Ukrainian government to Nazis, and since so does Russia, that must mean rdharma supports Putin and thinks Putin is a liberal.

That's just fallacious logic on your part. First it's reliant on binary thought - that opposing one means support for the other. This is the sort of logic that leads to opposition to the Iraq war being seen as being "pro-Saddam" which is why a lot of us are laughing at the bog trolls who keep trying this logic.

Second it's a genetic fallacy where a shared position is taken to mean sharing all positions; "You like dogs? Well, so did Hitler!"

You gave an example, sure, but it happens that it's a really bad example that happens to not actually make your point. You might as well have showed me a .gif of a dancing banana, told me it's peanut butter jelly time, and claimed that your argument was made.

There are Nazis in the Ukrainian government, and they hold some pretty key positions currently. Pointing that out, and regarding the government as a whole tainted by their presence, does not translate into supporting Putin, or thinking Putin is a leftist which is what you are claiming.

[arely staircase]

325. yeah because calling the Ukrainians a bunch of Nazis, like some DUrs have is just like digging dogs

hells yeah - for the win

[Scootaloo]

335. Utilizing those statements to claim they "support Putin" is indeed just like that, arely

It's a logical fallacy, as I said. Sharing a position does not mean sharing all positions, or overall support. Were you against the Iraq war? You're with saddam! But wait, you think Saddam was a bad guy? You're a Bushbot neocon!

Again. if you can show me rdharma - or whoever - saying Putin is a liberal, or saying they support Putin... ? These are - again - your own claims, the thesis of your OP, and it's expected you give examples ot bolster them - good examples, not piss-poor logic and a bunch of kicking and screaming.

[arely staircase]

337. you are just saying the same shit over and over now

I will get back to you when you have new material.

[Scootaloo]

344. Well, yeah, because you keep doing the same shit over and over

If you insist on repeating bad arguments and logical fallacies, I'm going to keep pointing out why they're bad arguments and logical fallacies. But, alright.

You claimed Du'ers support Putin and think he's a liberal. This claim is something you have been challenged to substantiate throughout not just this rather long subthread, but throughout the entire thread overall. Each time you have been told to back up your own claim, you have demurred and deflected, and relied on piss-poor logic and reasoning.

The only conclusion that can be reached is that you are making things up and are completely full of BS.

[Rex]

397. Well his cheer leading squad showed up to cheer him on.

They love stirring the shit here. As you can see, they had to go look for some...which means this OP was meant to piss off the Left. If you look at prior posts by the OP, you will see it is SOP. Along with the 4 or 5 people that love to hate on the Left.

Same group, different day, different topic.

[progressoid]

334. "calling out individual DUrs is against the rules"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4672616

[arely staircase]

348. part of the same thread

so it is ok, or so I am told. there are actually three or four steaming piles of Kremlin propaganda in this thread now. I will let you find them.

[Cha]

411. There It goes again.. I'm not even going to address he/she's

bullshit directly. Talk about trying to Deflect from the OP and the subject at hand. Makes me wonder what investment it has in pumping up Putin?

[Scootaloo]

423. Would you like to play too, Cha?

I'm not even going to address he/she's bullshit directly.

Let's discuss your pronoun usage. First off, "It" is not an acceptable pronoun for use with a person. Second, neither "he" nor "she" fits into the sentence you used there; you want "his" or "her." I would have thought these basic lessons would have sunk into your head back when Chelsea Manning was the major topic of discussion. Ah well, sometimes people need a refresher in basic English, I suppose

It's "he," by the way.

Talk about trying to Deflect from the OP and the subject at hand.

Quite the opposite, I'm trying to keep focus on exactly that. Arely accuses people of claiming Putin is a liberal, and of supporting hte guy. I want Arely to back it up. Give some decent examples. This whole subthread is basically a showcase of their inability to do so, sadly.

Makes me wonder what investment it has in pumping up Putin?

Oh dear. Again with the "It." And while I'm sure you do wonder exactly that, I'm afraid such questions are based on the same nonsense assumptions that have already been exposed in the case of Arely.

If you would like to play again, please insert 25 cents and press "START"

[Cha]

424. No, you keep playing with yourself.

[Scootaloo]

426. That'll cost you substantially more than $0.25

[Puglover]

419. Thanks.

This subthread has been like a yummie hot fudge sundae!

I have rarely seen such spectacular slicing and dicing.

You should be a surgeon.

Not to mention having the patience of a saint.

[Scootaloo]

425. My pleasure n/t

[fascisthunter]

462. No... the motive is to shut down any argument against the Mainstream Media's Narrative

It's childish black and white thinking by the usual thought police who always use these types of tactics to shut down any and all unpopular/non-mainstream thinking.

"If you say anything against what the mainstream media is saying, I'll call you a Putin lover, so YOU better watch out!"

It's goofey.

[Kurska]

259. "If you support this guy you need to stop calling yourself a liberal"

[rdharma]

268. Nobody is supporting "this guy".

So you bought into this strawman, eh? Oops!

[Kurska]

270. Nope, just being useful idiots for his propaganda mouth pieces.

Parroting his lies.

Fuck him and fuck anyone who repeats this bigot's hateful spiel.

Putin is a delusional monster.

[arely staircase]

276. yep. spouting the Kremlin line as given by rt. nt

[rdharma]

277. What Putin lies are being "parroted"?

I'm curious..........

[arely staircase]

280. these

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4673285

[Kurska]

287. +1 n/t

[rdharma]

293. That was a question..... so what do you think... can you call youself a "liberal"......

If you support the oligarch capitalist putschists and the neo-fascists who brought the interim government to power?

Did Putin ask that question too? Why would he care if somebody wanted to falsely claim themselves to be a "liberal"?

[arely staircase]

297. the company you keep

The Russian government is now claiming that it had to invade Crimea, Ukraine in order to stop “Nazis” from taking over the country.

Russian UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin has been especially vocal about the Ukrainian Nazi threat, repeatedly lashing out at western governments for supporting what he calls “fascist thugs” in the country.

http://americablog.com/2014/03/meet-vladimir-putin-favorite-neo-nazis-russia-crimea.html

some day you will probably be very embarrassed by all of this.

[rdharma]

309. So.... does that justify the support some are expressing for those fascist thugs?

Like the Right Sector, Svoboda, etc.?

Just wondering where you stand.

[arely staircase]

311. your turn

example?

[rdharma]

315. Do you mean you need another example of a "strawman argument"?

Like I said before...... folks here are wise to your schtick.

All that remains ....... is you being mocked for your original strawman OP.

Quit digging whenever you like!

[arely staircase]

322. yeah yeah I heard you

"they" are on to me. I am being mocked

yadda yadda yadda

again, I do appreciate you posting the Kremiln propaganda when nobody believed me.

your very post disproved the strawman theory.

let's look at it again shall we?

because this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4673285

now let's give it some context:

From Moscow to London to New York, the Ukrainian revolution has been seen through a haze of propaganda. Russian leaders and the Russian press have insisted that Ukrainian protesters were right-wing extremists and then that their victory was a coup. Ukraine’s president, Viktor Yanukovych, used the same clichés after a visit with the Russian president at Sochi. After his regime was overturned, he maintained he had been ousted by “right-wing thugs,” a claim echoed by the armed men who seized control of airports and government buildings in the southern Ukrainian district of Crimea on Friday.

Interestingly, the message from authoritarian regimes in Moscow and Kiev was not so different from some of what was written during the uprising in the English-speaking world, especially in publications of the far left and the far right. From Lyndon LaRouche’s Executive Intelligence Review through Ron Paul’s newsletter through The Nation and The Guardian, the story was essentially the same: little of the factual history of the protests, but instead a play on the idea of a nationalist, fascist, or even Nazi coup d’état.

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/mar/01/ukraine-haze-propaganda/

nice bunch of people you agree with there/

[joshcryer]

352. That's a Putin lie, you parrot, continually.

The interim government was not brought into power by "capitalist putschists and the neo-fascists." It was brought into power by Ukrainians of every stripe. The anti-protest law was polarizing and quite literally written by Moscow-connected members of parliament.

[rdharma]

353. "Flower Power" won the day in Kiev, eh?

[joshcryer]

355. The dead came from all walks of life.

Who was killed? Dozens of people, in all about a hundred, most of them young men. Bohdan Solchanyk was a young lecturer at the Ukrainian Catholic University, a Ukrainian speaker from western Ukraine. He was shot and killed. Yevhen Kotlyov was an environmentalist from Kharkiv, a Russian speaker from eastern Ukraine. He was shot and killed. One of the people killed was a Russian citizen; a number of Russians had come to fight—most of them anarchists who had come to aid their Ukrainian anarchist comrades. At least two of those killed by the regime, and perhaps more, were Jews. One of those “Afghans,” Ukrainian veterans of the Red Army’s war in Afghanistan, was Jewish: Alexander Scherbatyuk. He was shot and killed by a sniper. Another of those killed was a Pole, a member of Ukraine’s Polish minority.

Has it ever before happened that people associated with Ukrainian, Russian, Belarusian, Armenian, Polish, and Jewish culture have died in a revolution that was started by a Muslim? Can we who pride ourselves in our diversity and tolerance think of anything remotely similar in our own histories?

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/mar/01/ukraine-haze-propaganda/

Laugh it up rdharma. The Russian empire is doomed, Eurasia will never see the light of day.

[rdharma]

358. "Die Sturmtruppen" of Maidan were the violent RW thugs......

But, by all means,....... keep denying that fact if it makes you feel good!

[joshcryer]

359. I could feel good if I believed it was fascists being killed.

But it wasn't.

Seems you believe that lie as it makes things better for you.

[rdharma]

360. Were the peaceful protestors up front with the molotovs and baseball bats?

[joshcryer]

368. Against live ammunition.

I think that's pretty under equipped.

[rdharma]

373. That didn't answer my question.....

....Were the peaceful protestors up front with the molotovs and baseball bats?

Why won't you directly answer that question?

[joshcryer]

375. That would not be peaceful.

It was obviously a rhetorical question. "Would peaceful protesters not be peaceful?"

It's silly on the face of it.

What you neglect to mention are the thousands of protesters behind the protesters up front with bats and shields and homemade riot gear. The medics. The food preparers. The musicians.

Once the anti-protest law, drafted in Moscow, was passed, the protesters felt they had no choice but to make a stand. And that's what they did. I'm sorry this bothers you.

[rdharma]

379. Exactly my point! It would not be ......and was not peaceful protest ..........

...with molotovs and bats.

So, that didn't happen?

[joshcryer]

381. Are anti-protest laws peaceful?

Or are they authoritarian?

[rdharma]

382. Show me the text of these laws.

Let's see what they say.

[joshcryer]

384. Here you go:

You can read the text of the laws at the bottom of this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-protest_laws_in_Ukraine

[Cha]

412. Yes.. One such username comes to mind. nt

[LittleBlue]

300. He won big in Crimea. 93%. Ouch

So much for an indecisive result.

[arely staircase]

304. damn, those are almost N. Korean numbers

too bad the rest of Ukraine didn't get to vote on having their country carved up, just the occupied part.

[bvar22]

318. Thankfully, there are only 28 DUers who are buying the BS you are selling.

Your OP would do a lot better at a Conservative Web Site.
Those Conservatives just LOVE "YeeHaw" Foreign Policy,
and never hesitate to gather information before charging off to Swing their D**ks
in parts of the World where we may not belong.

Good Luck drumming up support for more Interventionism.
How is Afghanistan,
Iraq,
and Libya working out for you.

Admittedly,
it has been a while since we have killed off a bunch of people,
so I can understand the withdrawal and nervousness.
If we keep drumming hard enough,
keep catapulting the Yee Haw Propaganda,
and keep demonizing those who have learned from our History and prefer a more calculated approach,
you may must get some of those Freedom Bombs a-Droppin!

Good Luck,
but you would have a better time whupping up a WAR frenzy somewhere else where there are more Conservatives and NeoCons.


You will know them by their WORKS.

[arely staircase]

336. none of what you wrote makes any sense

something about penises and hee haw?

[bvar22]

341. I'm not surprised it doesn't make sense to you,

...or the other 25 or so that thought your OP deserved a Rec.
Fortunately, I understand YOU all too well.

[arely staircase]

342. yeah I heard "everyone" is "on to" me

you must be one of the everyone

[NuclearDem]

343. I think it was something about how condemning an illegal act of war is being pro-war

And something about how condemning a right wing homophobic imperialist asshole who came to power in a stolen election would play well on a conservative website. Freeperville during the Bush years though..

[arely staircase]

346. thanks for interpreting it

I just saw "swinging dicks" and yeehaw. And a bunch of other random words.

[grahamhgreen]

440. +1

[PowerToThePeople]

321. Please

[joshcryer]

345. No, fucking, shit. Why this has so many replies...

...this is just fucking nuts. Look at all the replies. It's nuts.

[Cha]

421. Lame Attempts at Deflection from the OP will do that to a thread.

[Oilwellian]

385. Mirror, Mirror on the Wall

Which country is the most fascist of all? Russia or America?

[SidDithers]

389. Stop punching hippies!!!..

Stop red-baiting!!



Sid

[arely staircase]

422. oh yeah

Disrespecting super hetero macho man defender of tradituonal values Putin =hippie punching has got to be my fave.

[WatermelonRat]

391. It's not so much "Putin is awesome!"

as "Putin's not so bad" or "Forget about Putin, let me tell you about how this is all America's fault!"

Practically, it serves the same general purpose, though: to take heat off Russia for this invasion.

[Cha]

398. What makes you say that, arely?.. "How Vladimir Putin and his Homophobic Henchmen..

are Brainwashing the Russian People"..

•All gay people are paedophiles regardless of age, even 13 years old. They present a threat to all children.
•HIV/AIDS is spread by the LGBT population.
•Gays are responsible for the depopulation of Russia and low birth rates, not the wide spread social problems such as alcoholism/drugs/poverty/unemployment.
•One can become gay by observing gay behavior.

These are the four key tenets of the homophobic creed being propagated across Russia by Vladimir Putin and his cronies. To the rest of the world, or at least the vast majority, these precepts are ludicrous, even scandalous. But in Russia, as demonstrated by recent opinion polls, millions of people believe they are true, so pervasive and insidious is the influence of Putin's propaganda machine.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/russia-homophobia-lgbt-gay-rights-nazis-vladimir-514311

[Shankapotomus]

401. Couldn't have said it better nt

[Turbineguy]

405. That would explain

why so many American wingnuts seem to like him.

[grahamhgreen]

439. It's not about Putin. It's about another war for oil (& gas), and austerity.

[Puzzledtraveller]

445. and if a repub was in office

we wouldnt care, of course.

[RKP5637]

452. Those that love Putin must must not have lived under the old Russian regimes. n/t

[Orsino]

458. You can tell by the right-wing fascist thugs who praise him on TV. n/t

[fascisthunter]

461. Nobody Here Thinks Putin is a Liberal

grow up.

[William769]

469. Kick & highly recommended!

[Deep13]

476. yup. nt

[dlwickham]

477. very well put

[Tom of Temecula]

480. kick