Mother Russia: What do the liberals think now

[JakeStarkey]

Russia is becoming the country we were while we are becoming the country Russia was. It isn't Russia protecting terrorists in Syria, it's the US.

The fascist state of Russia is becoming the country of FDR, Kennedy, and Reagan?

Really?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Russia is right with their anti gay propaganda law too. Gay propaganda cannot be disseminated to minors. Simple, straightforward, correct and something the Russian people want.

Russians see what gay activism has done in the United States. They don't want it there. They are correct.

The irrelevance of your statement is another example the American people are done with the far right.

 

[JakeStarkey]

NEWSFLASH: Russia was never "admired" by liberals in this country. Quite the contrary, the Liberal Presidents of this country did the best they could to fight them without starting a hot war.

John F. Kennedy, a self avowed Liberal, was killed by Commie loving Lee Harvey Oswald.

Russia has always been a conservative nation...communism is conservative, not liberal. But don't try to spread fairy tales...Oswald had ties to the CIA.

that is the most idiotic post on this forum EVER

communism is the most left on the scale. Russia was never communist, it was and still is ( mentally) SOCIALIST which is a left political affiliation.

Both socialism and communism require totalitarian regime to be imposed - otherwise they can't exist - and that is what USSR and other socialist countries did.

Vox, do you even understand what is socialism? Your statement is very confused.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Russia is becoming the country we were while we are becoming the country Russia was. It isn't Russia protecting terrorists in Syria, it's the US.

please.

You really have no idea what Russia is, was and ever could be.

There is NO RESEMBLANCE with the US whatsoever.

Never WAS, never will be,

The fundamental difference is in the worldview.

Russia IS, WAS and will be a COLLECTIVIST country.

USA was founded and built on the INDIVIDUALIST priorities.

Nope. Franklin said it best: "We better hang together, or the British will hang us separately."

We are a union, a republic, a representative democracy, a group of Americans who work together for the betterment of the country.

We are not libertarian or anarchist, and we never will be.

 

[American_Jihad]

Russia under the czars was collectivist...ay caramba lol. The USSR WAS totalitarian communist. Both they and Hitler had socialism in their name for purely propaganda purposes. Socialism is highly regulated capitalism and always democratic..

FrancoDupa, shot down yet again...

Capitalism vs Socialism - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

https://www.google.com/search?sourc...T4GGLL_enUS324US325&q=Capitalism+vs+Socialism


...

 

[American_Jihad]

Gates: Obama strategy won’t stop Putin​

By Ben Wolfgang-The Washington Times
Sunday, March 9, 2014

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday the Obama administration’s attempts to deter Russia from further aggression in Ukraine and across the region are likely to fail.

Speaking on “Fox News Sunday,”Mr. Gates said Russian President Vladimir Putin has ambitions beyond just annexing the strategically important Crimean peninsula, which will vote next week on whether to split from Ukraine and join Russia.

Ultimately, Mr. Gates said, Russia wants to rebuild the old Soviet bloc, and Crimea is just the first step. The United States’ only effective option is to build stronger relationships in Europe and amass greater influence in the region to counter the heavy hand of Moscow, Mr. gates said.

The White House’s attempts to punish Russia for its excursion into Ukraine with travel restrictions, the revocation of visas, economic sanctions and other steps won’t stop Mr. Putin, according to the former defense secretary.

...

Read more: Gates: Obama strategy won't stop Putin - Washington Times
Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter

 

[bendog]

The liberals? They didn't move 300 K GIs to freaking Iraq! JFC.

 

[American_Jihad]

Crimea from across the Caspian​

Mar 11th 2014, 6:00 by D.T. | BISHKEK

CRIPPLING corruption, submissive courts, poverty lapping at the gates of ostentatious presidential palaces—the parallels between the regimes of Central Asia’s dictators and that of the fallen Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, are uncomfortably plain.

The events in Ukraine pose at least two worries for the ageing strongmen of Central Asia. The initial success of the anti-government protests in Kiev might serve as inspiration for further revolutions to the east. On the other hand, Vladimir Putin's response might come to look like a blueprint for a future Russian invasion. Both possibilities must be on the minds of the post-Soviet region’s autocrats. The crisis in Ukraine has exposed what look like neo-imperial appetites on the part of their former overlord.

Publicly, Central Asia’s ruling elite has said almost nothing about events in Ukraine, not even about the Russian government’s efforts to break Crimea away from the rest of Ukraine on the grounds that it must protect Russian speakers abroad. They have been frightened into a tricky balancing act. They must wish neither to alienate Russia, with its immense economic leverage on their economies, nor to support secessionism at home. In the words of Parviz Mullojanov, a political analyst in Tajikistan, “Russia is promoting separatism. For Central Asian countries, this is dangerous. They know they could be next.”

...

Ex-Soviet Central Asia: Crimea from across the Caspian | The Economist

 

[Bfgrn]

What do you want to bet that photographers in Russia won't be sued and forced to attend commitment ceremonies?

Whoever thought that Russia would be the country that protects religious freedom and the United States would be the country destroying it?

No, they won't. DEAD people don't attend ceremonies.

More than 300 journalists killed in Russia since 1993

 

[Wildman]

I wonder, what do they think...

Russia's Crackdown On 'Gay Propaganda' And Popular Illiberalism​

Mark Adomanis
6/29/13

Over at The Nation, Alec Luhn recently wrote a quite good summary of the recently-passed ban on “gay propaganda” and the generally perilous state of gay rights in Russia. I encourage everyone to read the full article, particularly because it does an excellent job of showing that Russian gay rights activists are themselves deeply conflicted and divided about what to do next. Some, particularly those that get the most attention in the West, want to focus on holding large public demonstrations of gay pride. Others think that Russian gays should adopt a more cautious stance that is based on coming out to family and close friends and then gradually broadening out from there.*

The point is that Russia’s gays are not united in lockstep behind a particular issue, strategy, or goal, but are people with all of the messiness, bickering, and spontaneity that that entails. That might sound rather obvious or banal, but in discussions about the ban on “gay propaganda” there is an unfortunate tendency to lump Russia’s gays together into some homogeneous and undifferentiated mass.

But what really struck me about Luhn’s article, what really got me thinking, was the widespread popularity of anti-gay sentiment. The Duma bill banning “gay propaganda” passed unanimously. Not a single member of the official opposition felt comfortable voting against it. Obviously the opposition doesn’t doesn’t control the Duma, United Russia does, but the Communists, the LDPR, and other groups have no problem voting against various sorts of economic and fiscal policies. Yes the Duma is hardly a paragon of democratic accountability, but unanimous bills are still quite rare and it seems worth noting how quickly its deputies fell in line behind the legislation.

...

Russia's Crackdown On 'Gay Propaganda' And Popular Illiberalism - Forbes

liberals.., think ? what do they think...?

if you rephrase the question to "what do liberals feeeeeel about Russia's qweer crack down?"

i believe they will get a grasp on the topic. ....

 

[kiwiman127]

What is even funnier are the Liberals who defend those that want to incorporate Sharia Law..... And gays get more upset and threatened when a beauty queen and fast food entrepreneur say that marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Sure they do!

 

[American_Jihad]

The liberals? They didn't move 300 K GIs to freaking Iraq! JFC.

They sure did, and this goofy "C"hicken ass voted for it...
​

 

[Bfgrn]

Conservative Russia

People simply do not realize that Russia is a deeply conservative country.

Fiscal policy is buttressed on a low, flat rate of income tax (13%), and there is virtually no social safety net, with spending on unemployment security, medical provision, disability aid, infrastructure, the environment, and urban regeneration far lower, in both absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, than its G8 contemporaries.

Similarly, military spending is high in comparison — and growing — medical care is available free in theory, but requires private insurance or additional cash payment in practice, and businesses are in reality pretty un-regulated.

If that doesn’t sound to you like a set of policies Newt Gingrich or William F Buckley would support, then you don’t know your dyed in the wool conservatives from your woolly jumper wearing liberals.

 

[American_Jihad]

Conservative Russia

People simply do not realize that Russia is a deeply conservative country.

Fiscal policy is buttressed on a low, flat rate of income tax (13%), and there is virtually no social safety net, with spending on unemployment security, medical provision, disability aid, infrastructure, the environment, and urban regeneration far lower, in both absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, than its G8 contemporaries.

Similarly, military spending is high in comparison — and growing — medical care is available free in theory, but requires private insurance or additional cash payment in practice, and businesses are in reality pretty un-regulated.

If that doesn’t sound to you like a set of policies Newt Gingrich or William F Buckley would support, then you don’t know your dyed in the wool conservatives from your woolly jumper wearing liberals.

He's an english investment banker in moscow thats gone rabid liberal, apples and oranges what a goofy ****. I'M sorry I went there, now he's got two hits on his website...

 

[Bfgrn]

Conservative Russia

People simply do not realize that Russia is a deeply conservative country.

Fiscal policy is buttressed on a low, flat rate of income tax (13%), and there is virtually no social safety net, with spending on unemployment security, medical provision, disability aid, infrastructure, the environment, and urban regeneration far lower, in both absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, than its G8 contemporaries.

Similarly, military spending is high in comparison — and growing — medical care is available free in theory, but requires private insurance or additional cash payment in practice, and businesses are in reality pretty un-regulated.

If that doesn’t sound to you like a set of policies Newt Gingrich or William F Buckley would support, then you don’t know your dyed in the wool conservatives from your woolly jumper wearing liberals.

He's an english investment banker in moscow thats gone rabid liberal, apples and oranges what a goofy ****. I'M sorry I went there, now he's got two hits on his website...

Your ilk is identical to Russian communists. You share the same philosophy.


Socialism is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works. "Democracy," said Marx, "is the road to socialism." He was wrong about how economics and politics interact, but he did see their similar underpinnings.

Communism is conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works. The conservatives in the US are in the same position as the communists in the 30s, and for the same reason: Their revolutions failed spectacularly but they refuse to admit what went wrong.

A common mistake is to confuse Socialism, the economic system, with Communism, the political system. Communists are "socialist" in the same way that Republicans are "compassionate conservatives". That is, they give lip service to ideals they have no intention of practicing.

Communism, or "scientific socialism", has very little to do with Marx. Communism was originally envisioned by Marx and Engels as the last stages of their socialist revolution. "The meaning of the word communism shifted after 1917, when Vladimir Lenin and his Bolshevik Party seized power in Russia. The Bolsheviks changed their name to the Communist Party and installed a repressive, single-party regime devoted to the implementation of socialist policies." (quote from Encarta.). Those socialist policies were never implemented.

Whereas Marx saw industrialized workers rising up to take over control of their means of production, the exact opposite happened. Most countries that have gone Communist have been agrarian underdeveloped nations. The prime example is the Soviet Union. The best thing to be said about the October Revolution in 1917 is that the new government was better than the Tsars. The worst thing is that they trusted the wrong people, notably Lenin, to lead this upheaval. The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering. Later that year, he purged 259,000 from the party membership and therefore purged them from voting (shades of the US election of 2000!) and fewer and fewer people were involved in making decisions.

Marxism became Marxist-Leninism which became Stalinism. The Wikipedia entry for Stalinism: "The term Stalinism was used by anti-Soviet Marxists, particularly Trotskyists, to distinguish the policies of the Soviet Union from those they regard as more true to Marxism. Trotskyists argue that the Stalinist USSR was not socialist, but a bureaucratized degenerated workers state that is, a state in which exploitation is controlled by a ruling caste which, while it did not own the means of production and was not a social class in its own right, accrued benefits and privileges at the expense of the working class."

 

[American_Jihad]

Conservative Russia

People simply do not realize that Russia is a deeply conservative country.

Fiscal policy is buttressed on a low, flat rate of income tax (13%), and there is virtually no social safety net, with spending on unemployment security, medical provision, disability aid, infrastructure, the environment, and urban regeneration far lower, in both absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, than its G8 contemporaries.

Similarly, military spending is high in comparison — and growing — medical care is available free in theory, but requires private insurance or additional cash payment in practice, and businesses are in reality pretty un-regulated.

If that doesn’t sound to you like a set of policies Newt Gingrich or William F Buckley would support, then you don’t know your dyed in the wool conservatives from your woolly jumper wearing liberals.

He's an english investment banker in moscow thats gone rabid liberal, apples and oranges what a goofy ****. I'M sorry I went there, now he's got two hits on his website...

Your ilk is identical to Russian communists. You share the same philosophy.


Socialism is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works. "Democracy," said Marx, "is the road to socialism." He was wrong about how economics and politics interact, but he did see their similar underpinnings.

Communism is conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works. The conservatives in the US are in the same position as the communists in the 30s, and for the same reason: Their revolutions failed spectacularly but they refuse to admit what went wrong.

A common mistake is to confuse Socialism, the economic system, with Communism, the political system. Communists are "socialist" in the same way that Republicans are "compassionate conservatives". That is, they give lip service to ideals they have no intention of practicing.

Communism, or "scientific socialism", has very little to do with Marx. Communism was originally envisioned by Marx and Engels as the last stages of their socialist revolution. "The meaning of the word communism shifted after 1917, when Vladimir Lenin and his Bolshevik Party seized power in Russia. The Bolsheviks changed their name to the Communist Party and installed a repressive, single-party regime devoted to the implementation of socialist policies." (quote from Encarta.). Those socialist policies were never implemented.

Whereas Marx saw industrialized workers rising up to take over control of their means of production, the exact opposite happened. Most countries that have gone Communist have been agrarian underdeveloped nations. The prime example is the Soviet Union. The best thing to be said about the October Revolution in 1917 is that the new government was better than the Tsars. The worst thing is that they trusted the wrong people, notably Lenin, to lead this upheaval. The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering. Later that year, he purged 259,000 from the party membership and therefore purged them from voting (shades of the US election of 2000!) and fewer and fewer people were involved in making decisions.

Marxism became Marxist-Leninism which became Stalinism. The Wikipedia entry for Stalinism: "The term Stalinism was used by anti-Soviet Marxists, particularly Trotskyists, to distinguish the policies of the Soviet Union from those they regard as more true to Marxism. Trotskyists argue that the Stalinist USSR was not socialist, but a bureaucratized degenerated workers state that is, a state in which exploitation is controlled by a ruling caste which, while it did not own the means of production and was not a social class in its own right, accrued benefits and privileges at the expense of the working class."

...

 

[KNB]

What is the Conservative demand for action against Russia over the Crimea incident?

Besides "man up", whatever that means.

 

[American_Jihad]

What is the Conservative demand for action against Russia over the Crimea incident?

Besides "man up", whatever that means.

kOOk, you don't know what it means, you must be a girl or a girlyman. Hey don't cha have school tomorrow...

 

[Bfgrn]

He's an english investment banker in moscow thats gone rabid liberal, apples and oranges what a goofy ****. I'M sorry I went there, now he's got two hits on his website...

Your ilk is identical to Russian communists. You share the same philosophy.


Socialism is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works. "Democracy," said Marx, "is the road to socialism." He was wrong about how economics and politics interact, but he did see their similar underpinnings.

Communism is conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works. The conservatives in the US are in the same position as the communists in the 30s, and for the same reason: Their revolutions failed spectacularly but they refuse to admit what went wrong.

A common mistake is to confuse Socialism, the economic system, with Communism, the political system. Communists are "socialist" in the same way that Republicans are "compassionate conservatives". That is, they give lip service to ideals they have no intention of practicing.

Communism, or "scientific socialism", has very little to do with Marx. Communism was originally envisioned by Marx and Engels as the last stages of their socialist revolution. "The meaning of the word communism shifted after 1917, when Vladimir Lenin and his Bolshevik Party seized power in Russia. The Bolsheviks changed their name to the Communist Party and installed a repressive, single-party regime devoted to the implementation of socialist policies." (quote from Encarta.). Those socialist policies were never implemented.

Whereas Marx saw industrialized workers rising up to take over control of their means of production, the exact opposite happened. Most countries that have gone Communist have been agrarian underdeveloped nations. The prime example is the Soviet Union. The best thing to be said about the October Revolution in 1917 is that the new government was better than the Tsars. The worst thing is that they trusted the wrong people, notably Lenin, to lead this upheaval. The Soviet Union officially abandoned socialism in 1921 when Lenin instituted the New Economic Policy allowing for taxation, local trade, some state capitalism... and extreme profiteering. Later that year, he purged 259,000 from the party membership and therefore purged them from voting (shades of the US election of 2000!) and fewer and fewer people were involved in making decisions.

Marxism became Marxist-Leninism which became Stalinism. The Wikipedia entry for Stalinism: "The term Stalinism was used by anti-Soviet Marxists, particularly Trotskyists, to distinguish the policies of the Soviet Union from those they regard as more true to Marxism. Trotskyists argue that the Stalinist USSR was not socialist, but a bureaucratized degenerated workers state that is, a state in which exploitation is controlled by a ruling caste which, while it did not own the means of production and was not a social class in its own right, accrued benefits and privileges at the expense of the working class."

...

Hey pea brain, in 2016 will you vote for Hillary Clinton for President, or the GOP candidate?

 

[auditor0007]

Russia is living the conservative dream right now!

You do mean authoritarian dream, do you not? Calling Russia the conservative dream should scare the crap out of any freedom loving American.