I voted against George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004, and I spent most of his presidency actively working against his administration with every tool at my disposal, but I never said or wrote that I would prefer that the country be led by a foreigner or a foreign leader. Not so, for many pundits on the right. Ann Coulter wants Benjamin Netanyahu to be our president, Erick Erickson wants David Cameron to be our president, and Fox News host Kimberly Guilfoyle would be okay with either Netanyahu or Vladimir Putin being our president.
Someone needs to explain the right’s adoration for Vladimir Putin because it’s creeping me out.
There is a simple answer about Vladi-boy and his attraction to the right – he is a Strong Man, and the attraction to the adherents of the Daddy Party is for a Strong Man, a Man’s Man. Vladi-boy can rassle a bar with one hand tied behind his muscled torso, his muscles rippling with the effort … but I digress.
They love Vladi-Boy because he is the Daddy of all Daddies.
Yeah, it really does seem like there’s a homoerotic component to the Putin attraction. Nothing at all wrong with homoerotic attraction as such, of course, but I think the self-repression does twisty things to their politics.
And George, remember him, the Man’s Man?
Someone needs to explain the left’s adoration for Vladimir Putin, because that’s creeping me out.
OK, I understand the enemy of your enemy is your friend, and all that, but seriously….
They aren’t leftists, they’re Paultards who think they’re leftists because they smoke dope or think gay people are human (but don’t criticize Putin for not thinking so because he’s combating fascist Obama hegemonism or something).
They’re leftists. Stephen Cohen of The Nation may be many things, but he’s not a Paulista…
I suppose it comes down to how we want to define “leftists” then. My guess is that there are a lot of anticapitalist leftists who have little to no use for Putin (I’m thinking those identifying with various Marxist tendencies and some flavors of anarchism), and probably very few among those camps singing his praises.
I’ve said lots of things like that lately. For example:
I never thought I’d see a “news” station be nothing but a propaganda outlet that puts party before country to deliberately sabotage anything the other party does regardless of merit.
I never thought I’d see politicians put party before country and pretend that it is reasonable to equate corporations with actual people and then claim that corporations have a religion.
I never thought I’d see politicians put party before country and deliberately sabotage the economy.
I never thought I’d see politicians put party before country and deliberately sabotage the Post Office.
I never thought I’d see politicians put party before country and favor the President of Russia over our own President.
I never thought I’d see politicians put party before country and cheerlead companies moving staff and resources to foreign countries.
I never thought I’d see politicians put party before country and deliberately try to sabotage the SALT Agreement that was negotiated by the Pentagon.
Simple.
Right wing authoritarianism.
You see this being deliberately used and manipulated by the right wing elites here in the US, with the over the top “Great Leader” type PR that they spammed out about Bush (“George W Bush: Our Leader/Commander in Chief” stuff) and the unceasing work to delegitimize Democratic presidents since the obedience to authority here is contingent on said authority being viewed by them as legitimate.
Replace that last part with destroy the hide bound old ways that are ruining us and our planet and I admit I’d give it a listen. Left wing authoritarianism.
Bingo.
This is the correct, definitive answer.
Right-wing authoritarians love authority.
And ol’ Putin is certainly that.
Within an historical context it’s rational and like most fandom on the right is also creepy.
It was Reagan/BushI that began the process of not demonizing the leader/President of the USSR/Russia. Gorbachev was praised. Then BushI/Clinton praised the drunk/corrupt Yeltsin. Hell, team Clinton and the IMF facilitated Yeltsin’s 1996 re-election. Then BushII told his flock that Putin was a good guy.
The renewed public demonization of Russia and by extension Putin rode in an the Obama bandwagon. The old Cold War warriors folks such as McCain, the stink tank folks, and Nuland, etc. used proxies such as Georgia and Ukraine to attack Russia/Putin during that period of time. And they are really pissed that Putin interfered with their design for regime change in Syria. However, the dimmer right-wing bulbs not being raised on unrelenting USSR demonization, didn’t notice the continuation of Cold War warrior machinations and formed a positive impression of Putin from GWB. Regardless of what they now say, they viewed GWB as manly and Putin conforms to that same model in their view. Whereas, Obama is black and therefore, more exotic than the white Putin.
Actually remembering that President Putin isn’t just not a good guy, but is in fact a bad guy has been something actual leftists have been saying for more than a decade. That the G.W. Bush admin tried to cover up and rehabilitate Putin’s image does not make people who never bought the lie, but supported President Obama “suddenly anti-Russia” or even anti-Russia at all.
Remembering and acknowledging that Putin is a bad guy, and a habitual liar, should not be controversial since it’s you know, true.
Unless you think his anti-Semitism, anti-Gay, misogynist, and Christian Dominionist actions, are somehow acceptable, while not tolerable in other people. I would like to think you don’t actually believe that, but you have this really bad tendency to always give anyone who is not related to the US the benefit of extreme doubt with regards to that sides bad intentions, but the US always seems to be wrong, period no discussion required.
It just boggles my mind how you can accuse the US of backing Gorbachev as bad, but Putin isn’t just as bad for backing Gorbachev. He resigned from the KGB to support Gorbachev against the KGB’s coup. You try and shit all over Bill Clinton for backing Yeltsin for being corrupt and drunk, but Putin was the literal number two man in Yeltsin’s administration, was Yeltsin’s hand picked successor, and came to power directly because Yeltsin retired and made him kin- err “Acting President!”
Somehow, it appears from over here that some wire got crossed in your brain where US leaders supporting those Russian Leaders is bad because “US Imperialism!”, but if Putin also supported and benefited from those same Russian Leaders, and arguably was more responsible for their being and staying in power than the US, that’s okay because “US Imperialism!”
And I just don’t get this. I don’t understand the warped logic that says “These guys can do bad things and it’s okay, but these guys can’t do bad things because it’s not okay.” Either Gorbachev and Yeltsin were bad guys and so was everyone who supported them, or there is another option. And it could very well be that your characterization of Gorbachev and Yeltsin is 100% accurate and they were men doing their best devil impersonations and the US was wrong to support either one. But I don’t see how Putin, or anyone else for that matter is supposed to get a pass if the US doesn’t get a pass? Especially since in the US’s own internal politics, you made your name for yourself by not giving people passes for doing things you considered bad.
I don’t see a rational mind in your statements as presented. From the perspective over here it looks like you are a troll who starts from the premise “The US is always wrong.” and reverse engineers your understanding of events from there. It’s why I think you’re a troll in a lot of the comments you make on this site.
Pure bs and derogatory propaganda:
Cut the crap and stop troll rating bloggers on this site. It really pisses me off. You have been repeatedly warned by a slew of bloggers who have contributed for years here at the pond.
I don’t agree with Marie2’s comment, but she gets a “4” because of your bs and troll rating. Anti-semitism, racism and anti-gay violence can be found all across the US, Africa, eastern European states and our Arab allies.
Thanks. Nice to know that someone else has noticed the ratings abuse from this person. Probably not a big deal as long as she/he remains alone in stalking me.
Not sure what you disagreed with in my comment, but stand by my take that overt anti-Russian rhetoric from the US administration has for the first time since Reagan increased under Obama.
○ Svoboda party and gay rights in Ukraine
○ 3 Deputies Svoboda registered a draft bill banning abortions in Ukraine – 2013
It was legalized in Czechoslovakia in 1957 but required approval until the initial results of Henry David’s longitudinal study were released.
First of all, this is not your blog and therefore, for comment rating purposes, you don’t get to define what a troll is. So, knock it off wrt my comments.
Second, my comment addressed why some on the right are enamored with Putin and as I said that it was “creepy,” you’ve gone off a deep end in your accusations of who I am and how I think. You will never find me excusing, much less praising, Putin’s provincialism and social backwardness. As I’m not Russian, I’m not in a good position to know how much or how often he lies. Probably like most world leaders it’s frequent, but as a citizen of the US, it is the lies of my government that take primacy for me.
Putin has moderated some of the western supported economic policies of Yeltsin that devastated the population. Has he done enough? Of course not. Just as the income and wealth inequality in the US has continued to increase under every US President since Reagan including Obama.
I had respect for Gorbachev, but Russians didn’t. Yeltsin presided over “disaster capitalism” (ref. Naomi Klein). Putin sips religion instead of vodka which is only a slight improvement over being a lush.
Ukraine’s Jewish community is split along similar lines as the Eastern Orthodox Church of Kiev and Moscow patriarchate.
False flag operation with fake letter posted to Jews of Donetsk, ask the CIA man in Kiev, Ambassador Pyatt. He tweeted the bs across the globe.
○ Jews Commemorate WWII Massacre in Russian-Annexed Crimea – July 14, 2014
Israel and Netahyahu abstained in the U.N. vote on the Ukraine, clearly not wanting to take sides where Jewish oligarchs are domestically divided between east and west.
I’m not really getting how western UKR Jewish oligarchs are able to rationalize their alliance with Svoboda and employing neo-Nazia in the militias. Guess they “forgot.”
It’s rational enough, provide you advance from certain premises.
Sorry the TPGOPers do not have any Patriotism(devoted love, support, and defense of one’s country; national loyalty.) Anyone that has watched what these people are doing can safely say that they are practicing “Domestic Terrorism”, why they are not being arrested is beyond reasonable thought. They will continue acting in this manner until the full weight of the law is applied to each and everyone of their actions against the USA.
One question for you all.
If these TPGOPers were of say Muslim ancestry would they be allowed to do the same things you have seen TPGOPers do and say?
Why are not these people arrested?
How many of our CIA “assets” were killed or imprisoned as a result of the Valarie Plame affair? Besides “Scooter” who was brought to account???
NOW, can we accuse conservatives of being unpatriotic? Not waving the flag enough? Not wearing their flag pins on the proper side?
Can we start putting American flags in our rear windows to rub it in?
Isn’t it time to call out all the crazy uncles on the crap we’ve been taking politely the past 16 years?
And insist on our elected officials doing the same?
The right’s view of Putin is easy to understand, though: he’s a rightist in every respect, in his mystical nationalism, his hostility to the working class, his hatred of artistic and sexual freedom, his racism as expressed against Chechens, his attraction to the explicitly Russian-Fascist thinking of Aleksandr Dugin, and his occasional outbursts of good old anti-Soviet anti-Semitism.
OK. I’ll admit that doesn’t sound very promising.
But is he as bad as IMF/NED/ECB/EU/NATO/US hegemony?
And Victoria Nuland. Let’s not forget Victoria Nuland.
I mean, let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the good, here….
Oh I think I’m in love. David will you gay internet marry me? I just love a man with such grace and talent in snark and who Poe’s so well!
Damn look what you’ve done, now I’ll have to start forgetting Victoria Nuland all over again!
I floated this idea last winter:
The State Department is an entity unto itself. It guides US foreign policy. Sometimes the President agrees with it, sometimes he doesn’t. It’s irrelevant. Neither the President nor Congress control foreign policy.
First, chaos is not necessarily bad if the chaos is visited on US enemies. Enemies are defined as what stands in the way of profits, and international profits for the US have to do with control of energy.
The US wanted to put a pipeline (the TAPI) across Afghanistan in order to drink the gigantic milkshake that is Central Asia. After almost fifteen years it’s obvious that that’s not going to happen anytime soon. But then no one else is going to build a pipeline there. A north-south pipeline for Iran is off-track because of sanctions. Also, a pipeline from Iran, through Iraq and Syria, the so-called Shia pipeline proposed back in 2011 is pretty much dead thanks to ISIS.
Controlling energy means, if you can’t possess it and sell it, then denying your competitor revenue is almost as good. I think Chomsky (who I am generally loathe to quote) called it “keeping your hand on the spigot.”
Russia and China’s deal? If nothing else, I bet the Uyghars are getting some minimal support from our intelligence agencies, just like in the 90s the CIA was supporting the Chechen rebels.
Thus, the US’s interest in Ukraine is to cork Russia’s gas to Europe. Ultimately, controlling central Asian oil is the goal, owning and profiting from it, but shutting it down and cutting it off from Europe is fine for now.
How does this fit with Obama? Obama, like all Presidents before him since 1963, does not control foreign policy. This would not be the first time that the Republican wing of the permanent government, and State is in the conservative camp, has tried to sabotage a Democratic administration. One of the things that the conservative mind reacts to is fear, and presenting the President as weak and not in control of world events helps politically in election years. During Clinton and Carter both were accused of being “weak” in foreign policy by Republicans. Republicans, the deep military and intelligence services sabotaged Carter. Sabotage works.
Presenting Obama as a weak leader will help in the midterms. Thus, the comparison to Putin. Of course, Putin is dealing with a completely different set of circumstances and by supporting Russian economic interests comes in direct confrontation with State interests (which are actually corporate interests). I’ve already seen suggestions on op-ed pages about assassinating Putin, so the love for Vlad doesn’t really go that far.
If only the Repubs could find Obama’s dead gay cocaine-snorting lover then maybe lives could be saved around the world.
These men are nihilists, Donnie.
And yet they are all for constraining our own leader.
Ask the Turks! In an interview before the recent presidential election, one of Erdogan’s admirers summed it up as follows: “Recep Tayyip Erdogan is like Vladimir Putin for the Russians, he is a strong leader for Turkish interests.”
You realize, of course, that the more clearly and correctly it’s explained, the creepier it’s going to get.
Your answer courtesy of the other Vladimir.
could it just be a simple straight up cash proposition? Russia hired some American PR firm and the PR firm bought off the pundits?
Of course they right prefers those three: they’re all white men.