April 2008 Archives
« Previous · Home · Next »
Obama in the Headlights
Filed under: US Elections
It seems that Real Clear Politics has nailed Barack Obama dead to rights on Jeremiah Wright. Though I despise Obama, I can't say I'm pleased about this. It could well bring calls for Obama to back out of the race, putting the more-dangerous Clinton candidacy back in play. He's bottomed out just a few weeks too soon, damn him (though perhaps leftist MSM coverage won't play broad enough and make the connection clearly enough during the primary cycle to finish him off that early)! Then again, this guy is such a dangerous freak that maybe it's better for the nation to take zero chance he will win office.
RCP points out that Wright told the New York Times in March 2007 that he had been "dis-invited" from Obama's announcement of candidacy the month before, and that Obama had told him: "You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we've decided is that it's best for you not to be out there in public."
So it's clear that Obama was fully aware of the outrageous, racist nature of Wright's sermons before he even announced his candidacy, and excluded Wright from the announcement proceedings for precisely that reason, in a coldly calculating manner. Boiling mad since then, Wright has now blown the whistle on the betrayal. Even if Obama denies making this statement to Wright, the fact that he was dis-invited does not change. Obviously, his lifelong pastor was not dis-invited (or simply not present) by accident, but because of a political calculation based on Wright's risk factor. And Obama never denied the New York Times quote, which should lay the whole issue to rest.
Hence, when Obama said that he didn't know the content of Wright's sermons, he simply lied. He attended them for twenty years. He's a well-educated, intelligent person. Of course he knew their content. And he traded on it for political gain. For all we know he believed it, applauded it, and still does. And then, he lied about his knowledge of it, and then he threw Wright under the bus when it became convenient to do so.
New kind of leadership? Audacity of hope?
I think not. This is a nasty enough situation that it may merit some spontaneous discussion, so I am opening the comments on this post for those who can responsibly do so and are so inclined.
del.icio.us | 
digg | 
technorati | 
stumble upon | 
furl | 
redditA Day of Reckoning for North Korea
Filed under: Asia
A perfect storm is brewing over North Korea.
The price of the nation's staple food source, rice, is soaring on world markets due to panicked speculation (there is no actual shortage of the crop).
As a result, the Peterson Institute for International Economics now says that North Korea is facing outright famine conditions. North Korea has stonewalled on the nuclear question, alienating South Korea, a traditional source of aid in hard economic times. Now, it's neighbor to the south is demanding progress in the negotiations as a prerequisite to aid. China, facing the worst inflation rates of the past decade, has imposed strict new controls on rice exports, in effect also shutting the door on North Korea.
Some in North Korea may have believed it was "safer" to sit silently rather than confront the regime, fearing its draconian punishments. But those attitudes didn't save millions in Russia from being pulverized by Stalin's meat grinder, and the people of North Korea must now see that they cannot find safety in silence. North Korea is hurtling down the same path to total destruction that laid waste to the USSR. It is time for the people of the nation to rise and speak in its defense.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditPutin the Girly Man, Afraid of his Own Shadow
Filed under: Russia
Meet Boris Nemtsov.
From March 1997 to August 1998, he was former Russian President Boris Yeltsin's deputy prime minister for energy. Nemtsov made a name for himself when he led a protest action in Soviet Russia in 1986, at the age of 27, to block the construction of a nuclear reactor in his home town of Sochi. He then tried to run for parliament, but was blocked by the Communist Party.
A few years later, as the Soviet regime began to collapse and Mikhail Gorbachev's liberalization policies took hold, Nemtsov tried again to enter parliament, and this time succeeded. When the USSR collapsed, he was appointed the first non-Communist governor of the Nizhny Novogorod region, and subsequently won the first-ever election to that post. This position also meant he entered the Federation Council, the upper house of Russia's parliament. He quickly won international praise for his effective policymaking in Nizhny Novgorod, and was soon brought in to the presidential administration.
Scapegoated by Yeltsin for Russia's economic collapse of the late 1990s, Nemtsov then formed his own political party, the "Union of Right Forces," and they won nearly six million votes in the December 1999 parliamentary elections. Soon, however, proud KGB spy Vladimir Putin was in power and Nemtsov, along with all the other liberal parties, were squeezed out of the parliament.
Nemtsov joined the "Other Russia" opposition protest movement, and on November 25, 2007 he was arrested for taking part in an unauthorized street protest. He declared himself a candidate for president in 2008, withdraw his candidacy in support of liberal former prime minister Mikhail Kasyanov, who was then forced off the ballot by the filing of criminal charges.
A few months ago, Nemtsov also withdrew from the Other Russia group. He did so because he was about to publish a white paper reviewing the accomplishments of the Putin administration during its two terms in office, a document that would include strong criticism of Putin's record, and did not wish to bring the Kremlin's ire down upon the organization.
My blog La Russophobe has translated Nemtsov's paper from the original Russian and made it available in PDF and HTML format. Now, writing in the Moscow Times, author Richard Lourie (A Hatred For Tulips and Sakharov: A Biography) states that "all Russian bookstores have reportedly refused to carry [Nemtsov's work], whose title has been variously translated as 'Putin: The Results' and 'Putin: The Bottom Line.'"
In other words, it's classic Soviet-era censorship. Despite his pretensions of courage and power, Putin is afraid of Nemtsov just the way the Tsar feared Pushkin and the Politburo feared Solzhenitsyn. They're afraid mere words will bring them down. And the only response they can make is crude repression.
The parallels between Soviet Russia and Putin's Russia are indeed frightening. The Moscow Times also reports that a whole new class of dissidents is being created in Russia, and they are fleeing the country to find safe havens in places like Ukraine in order to avoid being jailed or murdered. One example is "Olga Kudrina, 24, [who] was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison for a May 2005 stunt in which she and another National Bolshevik [Party] member hung a banner from the now-demolished Rossiya Hotel reading 'Putin, Quit Your Job' and for participating in a 2004 break-in at the Health and Social Development Ministry. She failed to show up for her sentencing in May 2006, instead fleeing to Ukraine."
If you can get three and a half years in a barbaric Russian prison cell for telling Putin to quit, imagine what the sentence would be if you suggested he do something even more unpleasant.
How are these circumstances any different from what we saw occurring in the USSR? How is it possible that Russians can plunge headlong into exactly the same nightmare that has already destroyed them?
What we are seeing is a level of foolishness and outrage that is unprecedented in human history.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditThe China Toxin in Zimbabwe
Filed under:
The Times of London reports that "the boycott of a Chinese ship laden with weapons for Zimbabwe has cast new light on the connections between the African country's president, Robert Mugabe, and a secretive Chinese arms-trading firm with a controversial track record from the Congo to Darfur. Company documents show that Poly Technologies, the manufacturer of the weapons on board the ship, is ultimately controlled by a clique from China's preeminent military clans with close ties to the Communist party leadership and army."
Michelle Malkin has more.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditObamageddon
Filed under: US Elections
"Obamageddon" is when black New York Times columnist Bob Herbert writes: "A candidate who stands haplessly by as his former spiritual guide roams the country dropping one divisive bomb after another is in very little danger of being seen by most voters as the next J.F.K. or L.B.J. The apparent helplessness of the Obama campaign in the face of the Wright onslaught contributes to the growing perception of the candidate as weak, as someone who is unwilling or unable to fight aggressively on his own behalf. Mr. Obama seems more and more like someone buffeted by events, rather than in charge of them."
In other words, the Obama candidacy is not only terrifying because of the racism or stupidity that clearly lies in his past, but because of the craven weakness that clearly lies before us now. I've warned before that it's the worst thing in the world for America's black polity to put forth their first major candidate without demanding he have real credentials and a real vetting in the early primaries. Now, Obama is setting the cause of black politics back many years.
Obama's response to Wright's recent torrent of hatred? Quoth the Obama: "I may not know him as well as I thought." Can you imagine hearing that from him a few years after he inks a deal with North Korea, Russia or Iran, telling us to "trust him" as he exposes our national security? Gulp.
And let's be clear: The only reason we are hearing Obama back away from Wright now is that he's seeing political consequences from his allegiance. For twenty years he ignored this torrent of hatred -- indeed, he profited from it. It's quite possible that is more outrageous than actually agreeing with Wright's unconscionable racism.
I wrote in these pages just days ago that we would soon see Jeremiah Wright attacking anyone who criticizes him as a racist, and, lo and behold, now he is doing just that. Months ago, when other conservatives were saying Hillary Clinton was the most beatable candidate, I told you that in fact Obama was the prize target. I told you that when the Daily Kos embraces a national candidate, as it did with Howard Dean, it's a sure sign of doom for that candidate. We can only hope it isn't too late for Clinton to scratch and claw her way back into the nomination. Obama has bottomed out even earlier than I dared to imagine.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditBig Brotherski is Watching in Putin's Russia
Filed under: Russia
Two months ago, Human Rights Watch published a 75-page white paper reviewing the effect of a 2006 Russian enactment known as the "Law on Extremism." Just as civil rights activists warned at that time, the law has been used, as HRW documents chapter and verse, to support a wave of attacks by the government aimed not at terrorists but at politically oriented non-governmental organizations which dare to challenge the Kremlin on issues pertaining to civil society and democracy.
As HRW reports, the Kremlin has been systematically attacking all independent political action for some time now:
In 2007 Russian authorities cracked down on opposition political movements and on public protests expressing dissent. Police systematically harassed and detained activists planning and participating in a series of peaceful political protests called "Dissenters' Marches." The protests were organized by an opposition coalition called Other Russia and several other opposition groups seeking to protest setbacks in democracy in Russia.10Protest marches took place in Moscow, St. Petersburg, and half a dozen provincial capitals. Authorities refused to allow or severely restricted the demonstrations. On April 14 riot police and special forces used excessive force to break up the Dissenters' March in Moscow, beating numerous demonstrators and detaining hundreds. Authorities prevented observers and activists -- including Other Russia's leader, Garry Kasparov -- from traveling to Samara to participate in a Dissenters' March on May 18.11
In a case reminiscent of the Soviet era, Other Russia activist Artyom Baysarov was forcibly confined to a psychiatric hospital in Ioshkar-Ola on November 23, 2007, one day before the protest he had been planning in that city.12 He was released one month later.
Within the past few days there have been two more vivid examples of this neo-Sovietization of Russian society. On April 22nd, Other Russia reports, the "appeal of a Russian non-profit organization, shut down after failing to comply with strict new registration rules, was been thrown out by the country's highest court. The Judicial Division for Civil Cases of Russia's Supreme Court, led by Viktor Knyshev, upheld an earlier court order that the refugee assistance group be dissolved for failing to file the correct documents in time. A year and a half after the Law Against Extremism went into effect, there are some 227,000 registered NGOs. According to the state-run Rossiyskaya Gazeta, only a quarter of those groups had filed correctly by this year's April 15th deadline."
On the same day, ironically, Other Russia reports that "the website of a popular newspaper in Kirov, Russia suddenly stopped working. As it turned out, the Vyatsky Nablyudatel had been targeted by local law enforcement office for alleged extremism. The site's internet host, the 'Hosting Company,' decided to pull the plug after a formal request from the Kirov Oblast militsiya."
Some of the Kremlin's more base apologists claim that actions of this kind do not have the imprimator of the national government, much less the Kremlin, but rather are only the rogue antics of local czars. As if to specifically humiliate these cretins and remove any doubt as to whether these actions are approved by the Kremlin, three days later Russia's lower house of parliament voted to allow the government vast new powers to restrict and silence the mass media.
Some in today's younger generation may look back with contempt on the actions of their forefathers during World War II when faced with the rise of Adolph Hitler. They may ask how the world could have turned its back for so long on the threat it faced, how things could have been allowed to get so far out of hand. They may think that those times are passed, that a similar thing couldn't happen today, not with NATO and the United Nations in place. But reflecting on the impunity with which Russia's dictator, a proud KGB spy, is rapidly recreating the Soviet system in today's Russia, it's not hard to see how wrong such a conclusion would be.
Even now, just as Neville Chamberlain sought to blind the West in the 1930s to the threat posed by Hitler, the appeasers are desperately seeking to cast Vladimir Putin's successor as a closet liberal. Yet, Dimitri Medvedev has remained silent in the face of the new legislative initiative against the press, silent as a new wave of attacks on independent voices in Russia is launched, silent as Putin reaches out to grab more power in his new position as prime minister.
What we need now is a new Winston Churchill. Perhaps American presidential candidate John McCain, who has called for Russia's ouster from the G-8, will prove to be that leader.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditTales of Neo-Soviet Russia: The Khodorkovsky File
Filed under: Russia
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditAnd Now an Obama Burst, and Now a Dumbocrat World
Filed under: US Elections
BFFs
"How does one explain campaigning throughout 2007 on a platform of transcending racial divisions, while in that same year contributing $26,000 to a church whose pastor incites race hatred?"
That's the question Charles Krauthammer is asking presidential contender Barack Obama (shown above with his BFF Al Sharpton) in his latest column in the Washington Post.
The answer from Obama: "Real change has never been easy. The status quo in Washington will fight. They will fight harder than ever to divide us and distract us with ads and attacks from now until November."
So, anyone who dares to ask that question, or any other question not approved in advance by His Holiness the Obamacle, is "distracting" us from the truth. How long before such people are deemed racists? How long before "they really should be in prison"? How long before they are?
The nutroots are launching a frenzied attack on ABC for daring to ask Obama these questions during the most recent debate. Naturally, they want to sweep Tony Rezko and Jeremiah Wright and the Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers under the table, not only because of their toxic electoral effect but because Obama botched his responses to the questions so pathetically, bursting his bubble in a millisecond.
Krauthammer: "Take Ayers. Obama makes it sound as if the relationship consists of having run into each other at the DMV. In fact, Obama's political career was launched in a 1995 meeting at Ayers's home. Obama's defense is that he was 8 when Ayers and his Weather Underground comrades were planting bombs at the Pentagon, the U.S. Capitol and other buildings. True. But Obama was 40 when Ayers said publicly that he doesn't regret setting bombs. Indeed, he said, 'I feel we didn't do enough.'" Obama was also fully of age when he refused to put his hand on his heart during a patriotic salute and refused to wear and American flag on his lapel.
Perhaps has important to Obama's sordid role in all these scandalous affairs was his total inability to face the questions honestly. Though he claims to be about "change," he handled the questions in the same dissembling, evasive manner as all those ordinary politicians he loves to attack, and ended the debate with egg on his face.
People like Barack Obama are the reason the American system of limited government was devised. Like a wolf in sheep's clothing, they seek to insinuate themselves into office rather than to be genuinely elected on their core beliefs, and only unveil their actual plans once they have power. They know that their core beliefs would be repudiated by the voters if exposed, but they believe their core beliefs are the only way to save the people for their own good from their own inadequacies. In this way, all the dictators of the past have been born, and America has been spared them because even when they -- like LBJ and FDR -- come to power, they find that the power they've obtained is so limited that they can't effectively wreck the nation.
They say you know you are over the target when you start taking flak. So, listen to the Daily Kos wail and scream about Krauthammer, and you'll know with what precision he's lasered in on Obama.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditThe Holy Russian Empire
Filed under: Russia
Russia is not required to give freedoms to other religions because Russia is not the United States. People here differ from Americans. I'm not talking about right of a person to have freedom of belief. I mean, instead, the right of an organization to advertise its ideology. Not every country can have the same level of religious freedom as the United States.Most people around me are atheists. Atheism in this country is the most important religion, despite the fact that many atheists call themselves Orthodox. The majority of people, I am sure, are not interested in the struggles among churches for congregations and for what's in the pockets of believers. Never ask me about what the issue is, the issue is money.
If one talks about freedom of conscience in Russia, then: All faiths are equal. But some faiths are more equal than others.
What can I say? In principle, everything in the article is correct. Of course, it's different in different regions, but the general direction of movement is like this. In everything, including the issues dealing with faith, the Soviet dictatorship that is being resurrected wants to point the citizens in the direction it considers the right one. Descending, along with this, to brainwashing or more crude power pressure. All this is obvious and pointless to deny.
The New York Times has offered another installment in its series of long articles about Russia which are translated onto a Russian-language blog and commented upon by Russian readers. Above are four such comments on the new article, which exposes the horrific level of persecution by state-sponsored orthodox Christianity of all protestant religions in the nation. Reporting from the city of Stary Oskyol, the reporter begins:
It was not long after a Methodist church put down roots here that the troubles began. First came visits from agents of the FSB, the successor to the KGB, who evidently saw a threat in a few dozen searching souls who liked to huddle in cramped apartments to read the Bible and, perhaps, drink a little tea. Local officials then labeled the church a "sect." Finally, last month, they shut it down.
The result is that, as shown below, Russian protestants are forced underground into virtual bunkers, hiding from the authorities just as in Soviet times.
Welcome back to the USSR! Russians want to sit on the G-8 panel, but they don't want to extend any of the same democratic values that are the bedrock of that organization's value system in their country. This is fully-fledged neo-Soviet hypocrisy, childish in its ignorance, and it will surely bring Russia once again to catastrophe.
Watch a video report on the crackdown here.
To read more about how the Russian government is using its visa regime to exclude the "wrong" religions from reaching Russia, click here.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditRussian Oil is Drying Up Fast, No Hope Offshore
Filed under: Russia
We've previously reported on how Russian oil production is falling off fast. Those who hope that Russia can replenish its production by developing offshore fields may be barking up the wrong oil derrick. The energy industry trade publication Upstream Online reported on April 18th:
Russia needs 61 trillion rubles ($2.6 trillion) of investment to develop offshore oil and gas deposits, Rosneft boss Sergei Bogdanchikov has claimed. Exploration alone of offshore regions until 2050 will cost 16 trillion rubles and production 45 trillion rubles more, Bogdanchikov told reporters and government officials in Moscow today.UpstreamOnline also reports:
Russian gas giant Gazprom has booked a a worse than predicted 20% fall in second-quarter net profit, blaming lower sales in Europe and higher operating costs. Net profit fell to 113 billion roubles ($4.62 billion), to International Financial Reporting Standards, from 141 billion roubles in the same period last year and below the average of 129 billion roubles in a Reuters poll of 11 analysts. Revenue rose 5% to 532 billion roubles, in line with forecasts, but the bottom line was hurt by high operating expenses, which jumped 18% year-on-year to 390 billion roubles. Gazprom's total long-term borrowings, including affiliates, rose to 1.105 trillion roubles from 806 billion roubles at the end of 2006.
So Russian gas and oil fields are running dry, trillions are needed to refurbish them, and Gazprom is deep in debt, unable to provide such funds. Blogger Tim Newman, who works in the Russian energy sector, adds:
The $2.6 trillion required by Gazprom and Rosneft is only that amount needed to develop Russia's offshore fields. The onshore developments will need separate funding, as in Upstream Online tells us: "Gazprom Neft, which expects Gazprom to hand over the right to develop all of Gazprom's 11 oilfields within the next two to three years, has said it plans to invest up to $4 billion per year to 2020, or around $50 billion, to boost output." $4bn per year is one hell of a lot of money for a single company to invest in oil and gas projects, if not much beside the $62bn per year that they say they are going to have to come up with to develop the offshore fields. Bear this in mind next time you hear about Gazprom investing in trans-saharan pipelines, Libya, and Nigeria. Despite the political rhetoric and talks of the massive potential and influence of Gazprom, it is Russia's most indebted company. In other words, Gazprom is unlikely to be in much of a position to be financing mega-projects any time soon, and if it is going to sink billions into places like Africa, having never run a major project on home soil let alone in a political minefield like Nigeria, Russians might be waiting a while for their offshore gas receipts.
Russia could, of course, solicit foreign investment to provide the needed sums, but then it would have to share the profits and the control, and it's currently in the process of enacting legislation to make this illegal out of pure neo-Soviet paranoia. The Kremlin imagines that it can simply bleed the nation white, just as was done in Soviet times, using the funds from oil and gas proceeds not to develop the nation or even the energy sector, but to wage a new cold war with the West. Meanwhile, just as in Soviet times, the energy sector and the people themselves get sicker and sicker until finally there is a massive collapse.
Russia replaced the USSR after the most recent collapse. What will replace Russia after the coming one?
Hat tip: Robert Amsterdam
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditDemocratic Doings in Pennsylvania
Filed under: US Elections
The top ten states according to population (in order California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Georgia and North Carolina) control 246 electoral votes for president or 91% of the 270 needed to win the Oval Office. Nine of these states have run their primary election contests so far this year, and Democrat Barack Obama has won only two of them -- Illinois and Georgia -- while Clinton has won all of the top three.
Despite spending truly obscene gobs of cash in Pennsylvania and leading in the overall delegate count, therefore having the wind at his back, Obama was dealt another devastating loss in a major state last night, losing Pennsylvania in woeful, double-digit fashion. Now Democrats are asking: Why can't he close the deal? What's wrong with him? And they are noticing that he isn't winning their core constituencies. If they don't win in Pennsylvania in the general election, they lose. It's as simple as that. Obama crazily referred to the people of central Pennsylvania as bitter hillbillies, and lost their counties by whopping 70% margins across the state.
Obama needs 320 more delegates to reach the nomination, but Clinton needs less than half that number to catch him in the delegate race. Clinton is much closer to catching Obama, in other words, than he is to reaching the nomination. Since the votes of Michigan and Florida aren't being counted but likely favor Clinton just like the other major states, Clinton supporters will reasonably claim they are being cheated if they are denied the nomination. Combined with Obama's wild-eyed and corrupt past, this dissatisfaction spells total disaster in the general election. The contrast between Obama's terrorist, America-hating cohorts and John McCain, a legitimate war hero, will be stark indeed.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditBill Clinton: Mendacious, Pathological Liar
Filed under: United Nations
Now that the country is in the throes of deciding whether to allow another Democrat to take over the Oval Office, perhaps it's useful to consider what the country got that last time it decided to do so.
Yesterday (April 28th), former President Bill Clinton, that last Democrat to hold the office, was interviewed by public radio in Philadelphia. You can listen to the interview on YouTube. At the beginning of the interview, Clinton states that he did not think it was a mistake to analogize between Barack Obama and Jesse Jackson, states that he would do it again, and states: "I think that they played the race card on me." At the end of the call, the former President, evidently unaware that he was still on the line, revealed his feelings about that line of questioning saying, "I don't think I should take any shit from anybody about that, do you?"
But when asked about it today by a reporter from MSNBC (watch the exchange here), Clinton denied ever making the statement. The exchange was as follows:NBC/NJ: "Sir, what did you mean yesterday when you said that the Obama campaign was playing the race card on you?"CLINTON: "When did I say that, and to whom did I say that?"
NBC/NJ: "On WHYY radio yesterday."
CLINTON: "No, no, no. That's not what I said. You always follow me around and play these little games, and I'm not going to play your games today. This is a day about election day. Go back and see what the question was, and what my answer was. You have mischaracterized it to get another cheap story to divert the American people from the real urgent issues before us, and I choose not to play your game today. Have a nice day."
NBC/NJ: "Respectfully sir, though, you did say . . . "
CLINTON: "Have a nice day." [continues shaking hands with supporters]. I said what I said, you can go and look at the interview. And if you'll be real honest, you'll also report what the question was and what the answer was."
This man is pathologically unable to tell the truth, even when the subject is something he himself said in a recorded interview the day before. And Clinton, at least, was a duly elected governor of a state, hence having clear executive credentials. Now, we face the prospect of a President Obama, mired in real estate and racism scandals and totally unqualified to hold the office.
They follow him around! Remember Gary Hart? Other great hope for America's "Democratic" future!
Is the Democratic Party trying to destroy America?
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditNice Job, Mr. Gore! (Happy "Earth Day" Everybody!)
Filed under: US Elections
Though Al Gore was recently awarded a Nobel Prize, as the Gallup Poll data shown above clearly indicates, American attitudes on the need for action to address global warming are almost exactly the same now as they were thirteen years ago. In other words, Mr. Gore's hysterics have accomplished exactly nothing. In fact, support for dramatic action is actually slightly down from 1995. Some of his key "green" ideas, like "food to fuel," have actually been proven quite harmful to all concerned.
Al Gore stands in a long line of Dumbocrats who have been given their party's nomination for president since World War II without ever holding the office. Others include Adlai Stevenson, George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey, Michael Dukakis, Walter Mondale and John Kerry. How many Republicans have been in that position? Just two: Barry Goldwater and Bob Dole. That just about says it all, doesn't it?
Oh by the way: Happy "Earth Day," everyone!
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditNemtsov on Putin in PDF
Filed under: Russia
La Russophobe's professional translation of Boris Nemtsov's white paper reviewing the accomplishments, or lack thereof, of the Putin administration is available as a PDF document hosted by DocStoc. The window is also embedded below, click rotate and magnify to view it within the window.
nemtsov bookform
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditRussia: Land of Bestial Hypocrisy
Filed under: Georgia ~ Russia
Once again, Russia has launched a barbaric and unprovoked military assault on Georgian territory, shooting down an unarmed surveillance drone in Georgian airspace. Like the cowards they are, Russians have brazenly denied the action even though Georgia has it recorded on video.
It's genuinely difficult to capture in words the full scope of Russia's hypocrisy where NATO expansion into Georgia is concerned. It operates on three entirely independent levels.
First, there's Russia's actions towards Georgia. Russians tried to claim they won some sort of victory when NATO didn't grant MAP status to Georgia at its recent summit in Romania. As Edward Lucas points out, Russians had claimed that if Georgia made any real progress towards membership, this would be "provocation" and Russia would respond in kind -- yet, although they claimed this didn't occur, Russians still moved aggressively to split off Georgia's breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Vladimir Putin announced new ties with those regions which were to include trade, agriculture, education, diplomacy and social support. Military assistance was on the table as well. "Support for the Abkhaz military in the form of logistics or ammunition, this is possible," said Putin. Both the former and current prime ministers of Estonia denounced the action. So which is it, Russians? Did you win in Romania, in which case your actions in Ossetia are an outrage, or did you lose and lie about it to everybody? Either way, it's manifest that Russia simply can't be trusted. Either way, its barbarism.
And then there's Russia's attitude towards Chechnya. By setting a precedent for intervention in Ossetia, how can Russia possibly complain if NATO decides to start supporting rebels in Russia's breakaway provinces in the same way? It's not a moot question. Reuters reports that Chechen rebel leader "Sulim Yamadayev, in an interview with Echo Moskvy radio station, said on Saturday amnestied rebels recruited by Chechnya's pro-Kremlin leader Ramzan Kadyrov were engaged in violence and stood ready for another war with Russia." Yamadayev declared: "You think there is order here? This amnestied army goes around with weapons. They do not have to hide and run... They have everything. They are just waiting!" Defense analyst Pavel Felgengauer said of the interview: "This is a very embarrassing statement and a very embarrassing situation for the Kremlin."
And third, there's Russia's proclaimed attitude towards unilateralism and the use of force. How often have we heard Putin screeching about the impropriety of America resorting to force and acting without consultation, only to turn around and do exactly the same thing whenever he chooses? As Streetwise Professor points out: "Putin and Lavrov, so sensitive to Russian territorial integrity, have more than once made irredentist threats against Ukraine, most notably making aggressive noises about eastern Ukraine and the Crimea. Important Duma members have mooted the possibility of renouncing the 1997 Russia-Ukraine interstate treaty guaranteeing the inviolability of Ukraine's borders. On cue, Chief of the General Staff of Russian Armed Forces, General Yuriy Baluyevsky, threatened military actions. With respect to Georgia, Putin and Russia have made it very clear of their intention to exacerbate tensions in Abkhazia and South Ossetia."
Russia refuses to respect the rights of Ukraine and Georgia, yet it expects NATO to respect Russia's rights in Chechnya. Russia claims it desperately wants Georgia to stay out of NATO, yet again and again it launches military attacks that leave Georgia with no other choice and belie Russian claims of benign intentions. This is hypocrisy and duplicity that is truly Soviet in scale and quality. If Russia is not careful, its disappearance from the globe may be just as Soviet.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditThe Blind Leading the Blind
Filed under: US Elections
So, let me ask you a question. Suppose you were quite sick, and went to see a doctor. Suppose you were sitting in his waiting room, and you overheard a conversation between the doctor and his secretary. The doctor said: "Last night I had 43 messages, all of them five minutes in length. That would be 215 minutes worth of material -- over three hours." You gathered that the doctor was blind, and each of his nurses would call a special telephone number at the end of each day to give him reports on all the things he needed to know for the following day. The doctor then said: "I stayed up that night from 11 p.m. to 1 a.m. listening to the recordings. But that was only enough time to get through half of them."
Would you consent to be treated?
If not, then you'd probably have considerable stress living in New York State today, because that's a real conversation between New York State's new governor David Paterson and a reporter for the New York Times. That's right: He admitted freely, just as he did his extramarital affairs, that he can't fully prepare for a day's work because he's legally blind. He doesn't even read Braille. All he does is listen to taped messages, and try to remember what he can of those he can manage to get to before nodding off at beddy bye time.
It was never for one single second part of the most recent campaign for governor that the state might have a blind governor -- and one reason it wasn't was that the MSM, most especially the New York Times, didn't make it so. They betrayed New York's voters just as surely as the Democrats themselves, who nominated a lying, cheating scoundrel named Elliot Spitzer as their candidate, only to see him resign in disgrace. Thanks to the failure of MSM institutions like the Times, which utterly failed to challenge and question his candidacy, Spitzer won a Soviet-like 70% of the vote and the public remained totally oblivious.
Thanks a lot, Dumbocrats! Your role in leading one of the nation's most significant states really fills us with confidence as to your ability to do the job on a national scale.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditArt History
Filed under: Asia
Did you ever wonder how China came up with the graphic emblem for its 2008 Summer Olympic Games, which it wanted to reflect the open and welcoming spirit it has adopted towards the world in honor of the occasion? Click the jump and have your curiosity satisfied!
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditPutin, the Lady's Man
Filed under: Russia
The Daily Mail has reported that Russian dictator Vladimir Putin has a mistress. According to the paper, she's Alina Kabaeva, a nubile, 24-year-old rhythmic gymnast with a penchant for posing semi-naked (shown at left). Putin has been photographed with her at least three times, see photos after the jump.
The story originated with a Russian newspaper called Moskovsky Korrespondent on Thursday. The New York Times relates that "Interfax reported Friday evening that publication of Moskovsky Korrespondent had been suspended 'for financial reasons,' according to its parent company, National Media Company." Putin had been asked about the rumors on his visit to Italy shortly after publication.
So one day a newspaper prints a scandalous report about the "president," the next day it is summarily shut down. Coincidence? You be the judge!
Putin says there's "not a word of truth" to the allegations. But sir, if you were having an affair, are you seriously implying you would admit it?
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditPop Quiz
Filed under: Russia
On any given randomly selected day, what percentage of Russians will access the Internet?
( b ) 68%
( c ) 36%
( d ) 12%
Answer after the jump.
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditChina Rolls out its Welcome Mat
Filed under: Asia
In a magnificent display of hospitality and welcome to the world in the buildup to the China Olympiad, the civilized, friendly, reasonable people of China have eaten one of their own. It's a pretty strong indication of how very wrong the world is to even consider boycotting the China games.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditLetters
Filed under: Letters
RE: Vladimir Putin, A National Catastrophe
Dear Publius Pundit,
There is no rule of law or free enterprise in the West, there is the rule of money and state-sponsored big corporations, with high government employment. Western countries are paper democracies, when they are in fact run by powerful bureaucrats like in Russia. Russians don't need the West, but the West needs Russia, the Middle East, Venezuela, Nigeria...etc.Time to wake up my friend, Russian politics and business are not so different from the West, it just has a Russian flavor.
Signed, Mr. GAF
RE: Getting to Know the Real Barack Obama
Dear Publius Pundit,
Good, no great, post on the Obama Drama. Is the graphic yours??? I would like to put it on a t-shirt.... or buy one with it.... keep it up!!!!!
Signed, CW Ivy
Publius Pundit responds: No, the graphic was made by one of Michell Malkin's readers.
Dear Publius Pundit:
I honestly believe you're doing your absolute best to either twist the words that Barack said, or you're choosing to hear the Fox News rhetoric over any context of the sentence. Barack was not against Religion, and his stance on gun ownership(while I disagree with it), is in line with people from all over.
But, as he used bad wording for this(as he said himself, the word 'cling' has too many negative connotations), he stood by what his intended message was: That those are not the important issues in America right now. Right now, it is more important for us to worry about Washington Lobbyists, the Iraq War, and curbing executive power, than issues that have honestly been twisted to become the important parts of the modern republican party(this coming from a republican).
As he has said outside of what you posted, he wants us to come together for the more important issues, and that in the end, while those issues are things that are important to people, that it is better for the country to come together and deal with our biggest problems now, before we move on to working out the things we disagree on- also together.
Signed, Jake
RE: Comments on Publius Pundit
Dear Publius Pundit:
In reading the comments of the various apologists for Russia that have appeared in comments on your blog in the past, an idea struck me from one of the comments that had been posted by "Misha." I've run this idea by others, and they agree. Totalitarianism, it was rationalized, is a "necessary" step towards - democracy. And here is the key - "otherwise, we might have more Chechnya's."
Russia is not a country - it is a federation. And there are many areas that are simply not Russian. They are more Asian, and other than Russian. So indeed, if these other areas start getting ideas in their heads about trying to break away, like Chechnya, then Russia shrinks down to -- nothing. It follows in line with Stalin's comment that if Russia "loses Ukraine, then everything is lost." And with Putin's recent outburst at the NATO summit in a private meeting with President Bush, that "Ukraine is not a state." It falls in line with Russia's history of totalitarian governments.
The justification, among others is - the "greatness of Russia." It's all built on FORCING people to be part of Russia and Moscow. Because without the subjugation of non-Russian people into a greater sort of artificial Russian federation, Russia, in reality, is a tiny little -- nothing.
Signed, Elmer
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditAnnals of Dmitri Medvedev, Pathological Liar
Filed under: Russia
One can't praise highly enough the Russia reporting that is being done by the International Herald Tribune, the Associated Press and the Washington Post. A few weeks ago, the Tribune carried an AP story which came right out and called Vladimir Putin's hand-picked, jury-rigged successor Dimitri Medvedev what he is: A mendacious liar out to recreate a neo-Soviet state. As the AP put it:
Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's president-elect, has preached freedom and the rule of law, and raised hopes for an end to government pressure on opposition leaders, rights advocates and businesses whose assets the Kremlin wants to control. But events of past weeks are adding to mounting suspicions that Medvedev's presidency may not be all that different from that of his steely-eyed predecessor -- Vladimir Putin.
The AP then goes on to provide a litany of evidence to prove their point.
Maxim Reznik.
Mikhail Kasyanov.
If you don't know these names, and what the Kremlin has been doing to persecute each of them in recent weeks, that's because so many other Western institutions of journalism have been falling down on the job reporting about them, even as the Kremlin unleashes a furious, and ludicrous, propaganda offensive trying to dupe us into believing Medvedev is benign, or even liberal. Andrei Illarionov asks: "We've seen in this last two months what the freedom [Medvedev] talks about really means. Are there any examples of real actions, not just words, that someone can use as proof that Medvedev is a liberal person, economically, politically or over civil rights?"
Can anyone answer his question in the affirmative, and give such examples?
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del.icio.us | digg | technorati | stumble upon | furl | redditThe Dumbocrats, Imploding
Filed under: US Elections
Ouch!
These are not good times to be a Democrat, though they should be if George Bush is unpopular as people say.
Let's leave aside the amazing spectacle being generated as the Dumbocrats prove unable to select a nominee and hurtle towards a bloody brokered convention. Let's pass over Hillary kicking Obamabooty all over last night's debate, and the nutroots going pathetically, predictably ape. Understandable, of course. If Barack Obama can't even beat Hillary Clinton, what will happen to him in a general election -- much less a conflict with a rival of the United States?
Let's just focus instead on this:
First the Dumbocrats lose the governor of New York State to a massive corruption scandal.
Then, the the Mayor of Detroit is on his way out as well.
And now, it's the former Mayor of Newark's turn.
How many other corrupt Dumbocrat whales are yet to be discovered? Only time will tell.
NOTE: To comment on this post for publication, write to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com
del