Y'know... I can call-out some actual Putin lovers

[cthulu2016]

Sarah Palin's adoration of Putin should be an issue.

Really.

Like... like fucking really. And Giuliani, too.

Her comments today were an outright masturbation fantasy about Putin mixed with observations that Obama is "impotent" and wears "mom jeans."

I have never heard the like of it from a major figure in a major party.

Never.

Bear in mind that it is Palin herself who identifies Putin as an enemy of America, and a substansial threat to America.

Who the hell actually swoons over someone they consider a substansial threat to America?

I mean, I hate America as much as the next guy and I do remember Vietnam a little and I really despised Nixon... but I'm pretty sure that I wasn't going around saying that America needed a real man like Ho Chi Minh, or Mao, or Breshnev. Like, really... who the fuck talks like that?

It is impossible to even try to imagine a major figure in the Democratic party ever having talked about how Saddam Hussein is what a REAL LEADER looks like.

Im-possible.

[The Magistrate]

1. True, Sir: Republican Crushes On Mr. Putin Rather Give Their Whole Game Away

They want authoritarian rule; they actively desire it. They know they cannot prevail in a democratic polity.

They admire the man with the jack-boots on because they want to wear them themselves....

[OKNancy]

3. +1

[Ilsa]

9. As long as the ruler is their gop daddy, like

Cheney or Shrub.

[DeSwiss]

12. ....

[freshwest]

15. Nailed it. n/t

[bemildred]

16. Hands across the sea, Sir.

They recognize their own. It's a bit disorienting to have Palin praising Putin while McCain is trying to get a war going with Russia. And people say the Conservatives are not split.

[amandabeech]

25. Let's hope that they keep it up through 2016. n/t

[bemildred]

27. Oh, I do. nt

[fishwax]

101. Indeed nt

[RKP5637]

102. ^^^ This ^^^ I could not have said it better! Excellent! n/t

[MADem]

2. There are a few weirdos here who are "crushing" on Vlad the bare chested bear man, too.

Some of them purport to be liberals as well.

I wouldn't name names, but you'll know them by their slavish defense of that asshole! I just hope MIRT is on the hunt...!

[Cali_Democrat]

4. Unfortunately MIRT can't get the ones that have been here for a while....

Interesting how many of the folks crushing on Putin are vocal Obama haters who lurve them some Greenwald.

[MADem]

5. That's so true. There's the odd newbies who turned up for the Olympics and stayed for the invasion,

the MIRTers have done a great job shovelling them out the door, many of them.

I salute their efforts!

[riqster]

10. S'truth. +1

[Mojorabbit]

36. I am really getting tired of that meme. It is not true for the most part

and really insulting to people who care about our country and the fact that the more spying the government does the more our democracy erodes.

[CreekDog]

123. Send your concerns to MIRT

What MIRT knows can make a big difference.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

124. You around?Check out that gun thread in hosts

[ScreamingMeemie]

18. I saw someone accuse someone of adoring Putin because he used a metaphor...

There is a difference. I'm sorry, but this accusations against each other without solid proof is getting out of hand (by both sides) here on DU.

So put up links or it didn't happen. I've seen one 17 post newbie who expressed outright admiration for Putin. I have seen a boatload of accusations and the links provided did not match up to the "crime."

I have also seen someone issue a very RW-like, you should move to Russia because he/she opposed an OP. That's what I have personally seen.

[MADem]

37. This might be too nuanced for you.

Last edited Fri Mar 7, 2014, 02:17 AM - Edit history (2)

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10024617301

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10024617842

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024603240

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10024578413

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024585913

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024362938

You'll have to do the mining yourself (e.g. "...the Crimea belongs to Russia. Period.&quot , but I'm sure you can find a few nuggets in there. And there are many more threads with subthreads that follow similar themes.

You know, there are two points to made, here.

First, you can use the search feature too.

Second, just because you didn't see it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[go west young man]

60. You may have forgotten...

that all of Democratic Underground were called Saddam Lovers back in 2003 by Free Republic. Google it. Many on this board were accused of being Saddam Lovers by other members. Those who were labeled were vindicated in their thinking after the debacle of the war and the lies of WMD. Then there was the Chazez lover labeling and now you guys have your Putin lovers and your Rand Paul lovers. The problem for anyone bringing up this type of thing is it immediately makes your argument look childish and implies you have nothing else to go on debate wise. Why not refute the posters arguments through data, analysis and evidential links (as we used to do here at DU) rather than calling people names, acting nationalistic and throwing out a lot of simplistic emotion? This accused "Putinista" (it always gives me a chuckle when you guys write it welcomes the opportunity to actually debate people who represent the better side of DU. We can do better.

[MADem]

63. What do you think I've done? Read the thread before you start finger wagging.

I'm not "calling people names" so I can't understand why you're throwing that turd my way. Nice use of "you guys," too--doesn't sound like you want a debate, it sounds like you want to assign me to a team. Sorry, I'm playing on the Obama-Kerry one. And if you're a "Putinista" (your term), you're on the losing side of history in a big way.

[go west young man]

104. Did I miss something when you posted this upstream?

There are a few weirdos here who are "crushing" on Vlad the bare chested bear man, too.

Some of them purport to be liberals as well.

I wouldn't name names, but you'll know them by their slavish defense of that asshole! I just hope MIRT is on the hunt...!

[MADem]

105. Yes. Read the whole thread, or don't. I don't really care what you do. Putin is a despot,

plain and simple. He isn't someone people who purport to be liberals should be admiring or tolerating.

[muriel_volestrangler]

82. In 2003, Bush sent troops into Iraq; in 2014, Putin sent troops into Ukraine

(and in 2008, he sent them into Georgia). Are you sure you want to bring up Iraq to bolster the "it's OK to defend Russian troops in Ukraine" meme?

[ScreamingMeemie]

86. When a good many people don't see it

happening, it's probably not happening.

[MADem]

87. Yes, and the reverse is true. When people do see something happening, it likely is. nt

[ScreamingMeemie]

88. I think you're losing this battle of trying to frame something.

What I do see, is people who disagree on something taking it to a silly degree.

Have a good weekend.

[MADem]

89. What "battle?" I'm not doing any fighting, here, never mind rebutting long screeds

posted elsewhere in the thread.

I don't regard discussion as a fight, and it looks like there are plenty of differing views on this topic, not just on this thread but throughout the board. There are some people doing a swift walkback from cheerleading, while others are denying they did it at all. A few are doubling down and proud of it (the minority of racist Ukrainians "justifies" the invasion of a sovereign nation, is the thesis, near as I can tell).

I paid close attention, from before the Olympics, with the whole Putin-Russia-Homophobic thing, and it's not the Temptations singing Just My Imagination, either. MIRT has cleared out a lot of the more obvious ones, but there are others who are either woefully uninformed or "having a laugh" as Gervais might say.

Very "not-progressive" IMO.


You have a good weekend as well.

[sabrina 1]

19. Why wouldn't you name names? If I saw anyone pretending to be a liberal

'crushing on Vlad' I would have no problem naming names AND alerting on them. Just give me a link to those who are 'slavishly defending him' and I'll do it for you!

[ScreamingMeemie]

21. They don't exist...

This exists though... http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4620292

And it disturbs me greatly.

[sabrina 1]

26. You're not the only one, that is why I want them to come right out and name names. This insidious

McCarthyite attack on Liberals who deal in FACTS as they did throughout the Bush era and were proven to be correct, because they CARE about this country, is very, very familiar and has NO PLACE on this forum.

Let them have the guts to name names, at least the right wingers were direct about it which made it possible to wipe the floor with them when they used the same despicable tactic 'crushing on Saddam' nonsense.

This is being said about people here who have served their country, who have lost loved ones, friends in Bush's wars and it is absolutely reprehensible.

So either they have the guts to come right out and accuse someone, whoever in their wild imaginations that happens to be and risk the TERRIBLE consequences of having a post hidden on an internet forum. Now THAT would take courage!

[ScreamingMeemie]

30. Well said.

It's beyond bad behavior and on into reprehensible. The blacklisting of respected posters, whether I always agree with them or not. I can't believe what I'm seeing.

[sabrina 1]

32. Yes, despicable. Thankfully it is only a few, but one is too many on a Democratic forum.

[polly7]

85. Well ....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4613024

"The only thing I can see that justifies your completely different responses to the two military situations is that you like Russia and Putin and do not like the US and Obama."

But I'm not from the U.S., so I suppose she thought she had the right to say it, and I guess she does ........ but that I 'like' Putin over Obama and the U.S. is a big, fat lie. I like the Russian people as much as people anywhere in the world, but that's lost on some who believe in all or nothing.

[sabrina 1]

103. Scary, isn't it? Creepy actually because our hope that the country wasn't totally lost during the

awful Bush years, was that OUR side did not live in fear of a free press, or call people 'saddam lovers' for wanting the facts about what our government is up to.

That, as it turns, was wrong, so it's hard to have much faith anything will change for the better anymore.

But that was funny, how dare not swear a loyalty oath. It reminds me of people calling Assange a 'traitor' demonstrating that you don't have to KNOW anything to offer your totally ignorant opinion.

[MADem]

23. What, and offer up an alert opportunity for a callout?

No, no, no--there are much better ways of handling these matters.

MIRT is doing a great job, when they get to them soon enough.

[sabrina 1]

28. If what you are saying is true, there would be no risk of an alert.

[MADem]

38. It is true, but that doesn't remove the risk at all. The very people who object to Pootie

criticism would be the first to mash the button.

I've seen people alert for "callouts" even when the comment is justified.

I know this because I've served on juries for such posts, so, sorry--your assertion isn't correct.

[sabrina 1]

40. Seems like a small price to pay, a hidden post, to clear the board of 'Putin lovers'.

[MADem]

41. Well, maybe for those who enjoy engaging in disruptive conduct.

You be sure to take your own advice, now.

[sabrina 1]

43. I always take my own advice, thanks for the suggestion. And if I find a Putin/Saddam lover

roaming around, I will definitely alert on him/her. But so far all I am finding are attacks on Democrats, good Democrats, using the old familiar 'commie lover' routine we are all so familiar with.

[MADem]

46. Who's using the "commie lover" routine? Name names, now!!!!

Who, seriously, on this board, is calling Putin a "commie"--I should think most would regard him as a dictator, a despot, a megalomaniac, a fascist, "unhinged" Angela Merckel, and "not quite the full quid."

But a commie? The only context I've seen that used is as snark.

[sabrina 1]

49. Well, you for one, and if you give me a minute I believe there is another in this thread. Calling

Democrats Putin Lovers has the same intention as the old 'commie' lover assault on Democrats. It was an example of the same old right wing attempt to smear Democrats.

Saddam lover, Commie lover, Putin lover all are intended to create the same impression, Dems are traitors, whoever the enemy may be.

Dems opposed the Iraq War, they were Saddam Lovers. Even war heroes were attacked for 'loving the enemy'. We know what it means. Dems LOVE the enemy. And on DU of all places.

[MADem]

54. I know that Putin isn't a commie, so your premise is a lame attempt and false.

But hey, do we want to talk about people who worship RT as the go-to, "anti-Fox" network that is so "liberal," "one of the BEST" and "worth watching," and worshiped "in fifty million households?"

Do we wanna go there? I know someone who said pretty much that, quite recently, too.

On DU of ALL places!!! Oh, the horror...

[sabrina 1]

57. Is he the enemy?

I see you all have your talking points ready same 'material' from multiple people = opposition research. Lol, I am not worthy of this much WORK and attention. But whatever rows your boat.


Wait, 'Worshipped'? You need to go back and check with your buddies, you got that wrong.

Keep going, though, this is getting us somewhere and I like to have things out in the open.

A little advice, you should have chosen a different comment though, I know, someone already did the work, but when you all settle on the same one, that's definitely not good strategy. It's evidence of 'collusion'! Do people really take this forum that seriously? Amazing.

Anyhow, I'm enjoying our little exchange and looking forward to what else you 'come up with' or whoever comes up with it in the smear campaign attempt.

And there you were trying to deny it! Shame on you! Lol!

[MADem]

61. No "work" involved at all. Not even a bit. Some posters have a lot to say about certain topics.

Stuff just jumps out, with absolutely no effort, and bites one on the toe.

And what's this "opposition research" accusation? You're the one who has been badgering me incessantly for some sort of "proof" up and down this thread. Now, you play the "oppo" whine when I do as you ask. How very rich.

You're also the one who falsely insisted I regarded Pootie Poot as a commie, when nothing could be further from the truth. I understand what the term means, you see.

And I'm not the one who "worships" (and yes, I will freely acknowledge the categorization is mine alone, but the damn shoe certainly fits, as anyone with a first grade reading ability can plainly read for themselves) RT and denied they were a propaganda outlet, even with evidence presented in compelling fashion. I'm not the one who INSISTED that "the Ukraine did not want to join the EU" either, but they were being "pressured" to so do.

Putin certainly is "the enemy" of the Ukrainian people, but I suppose you'd find a way to mitigate that based on your insistence that they don't care much for the EU. I've made my views unambiguously well known on how we should approach this imbroglio; use your search feature and you'll find it. Hint--I support the way Obama is handling this matter.

This isn't getting "us" anywhere. Least of all you. It does explain your hectoring behavior, though. By your words we shall know you!

[sabrina 1]

65. 'Commie' a reference to 'enemy' not to his politics, ideology. But carry on. I'm having fun.

As for 'opposition research' well, when people go back years and dig up comments they THINK will make someone look bad, and two or three dig up the same comment thinking for some unknown reason that there was something WRONG with that comment, it is reasonable to assume some collusion, or some amazing coincidence.

I can't imagine slogging through anyone's history to try desperately to find a comment to try to smear them with, but then I have better things to do.

Your 'putin lover' slur means the old Dems love the enemy nonsense, period, you want to keep doing, go ahead, but that is how people here will view it.

[MADem]

67. Annnnnd....there it is!

But carry on. I'm having fun.

You've revealed your true nature with that line. And you wonder why you get push-back on occasion?

I didn't have to "slog through anyone's history." People who shoot off their mouths about their admiration for Putin, RT, etc. and who insist that the Ukraine doesn't want to join the EU will sort of pop right to the top, if one executes a simple search properly.

And I haven't "colluded" with a soul--but how interesting that this is your "go-to" argument. I guess that's your routine, that you're ascribing to me? And now you abandon "commie" accusations for "Putin lover" ones. FWIW, I am not the author of this thread, and that's where that term was introduced. Don't let facts get in your way, now.

Again, you reveal your true nature with your very own words.

[msanthrope]

91. You Better Believe It! nt

[MADem]

108. OK that wins the thread!!!

[winter is coming]

34. Covering GD in a fine shit spray of unsubstantiated generic accusations isn't "a better way

of handling these matters". Link or slink.

[MADem]

39. You have a search feature, as I said elsewhere in this thread. Why aren't you getting busy yourself

and satisfying your curiosity?

[sabrina 1]

42. I have been paying attention, and have not found this mob of Putin Lovers, or even one frankly.

I have seen a lot of anti-Democratic accusations though and have confronted those, as I always did when I saw Democrats being attacked with vile, McCarthyite insinuations. I can certainly point some out to you and don't mind doing so, even at the risk of a hidden post. Because I will never allow good Democrats to be smeared with vile Right Wing insinuations regardless of the 'risk' involved.

I will keep looking for the Putin/Saddam (I assume they probably loved Saddam too) lovers and will let you know if I find one, and then we can both alert on them.

[MADem]

51. But you found the "commie" accusers--so you say--and I don't see you naming those names, now!

Talk about "McCarthyite insinuations!"

And this is the second time I've said just that.

I have found many in "the mob of Putin lovers," I've alerted on a few. Their names are Name Removed, Name Removed and Name Removed. And there might have been another, also called Name Removed. I'm sure there are more as well, some beyond the reach of our friends at MIRT.

But go back and do some reading. Use the search feature. You might surprise yourself.

[winter is coming]

44. You tossed the smear out there. If you don't want to back it up, you shouldn't make it. n/t

[MADem]

48. It's not a smear, it's an observation. nt

[sabrina 1]

50. No, it's a smear. If it were something you actually observed, you would provide a link

to it.

[MADem]

52. Well, I've provided a number of links.

You're going to have to do the data mining yourself, though--I won't help you there.

[sabrina 1]

53. No, you intended to smear good Democratic DUers imo, and with nothing to back up your claims

I have deduced it is because you cannot. Insinuations are so much better, stimulating imaginations, causing people to see things that are not there etc. Been targeted by the masters with these tactics, they taught me all I needed to know about how it works. Most of us here have. We're Democrats and that's all that is needed.

Like I said, I did my own 'data mining', have been unable to detect any enemy lovers here, but have detected the small group using the 'putin lover' insinuation, which translated means 'Democrats love the enemy, they are unpatriotic'.

Good luck hunting down those enemy lovers, I think you're going to have a hard time finding them here though.

[MADem]

55. You are not a good source for these assertions, I'm afraid, given your own history.

I provided some links, now start digging through them. You'll figure it out.

Or maybe you won't, if you opt to rely on the "best" "anti-Fox" international news resource, RT, which is "VERY US liberal" and "left leaning."

But then, anyone who would take that view about the propaganda arm of Vladimir Putin might be a bit confused about other things as well, wouldn't you agree?

[sabrina 1]

59. 'What books do you read, what are your sources of information, do you

or have you ever been a viewer of RT'? Lol!

Pssst, if you want to smear someone, don't use what another not-very credible individual already tried. It didn't work for him.

Here's what I learned about smear campaigns from HB Gary when they were bidding on a contract to smear Glenn Greenwald, which someone got it seems.

You cannot smear someone with 'dirt' the person freely talks about THEMSELVES. You have to look for something they might be hiding, in his case, they wondered 'does he have children, what schools do they go to' no doubt because they had skimmed his blog and saw nothing about his children there and thought he might be hiding something. Then, they wondered, 'is he married, what church does he go to, what about his wife', creepy no? What were they planning to do if he had children?

They didn't try to smear him with stuff he talked freely about. That doesn't work.

Let me explain something to you, I will watch RT until the US Government censors it, I will watch Al Jazeera and did even when Bush TRIED to censor it. I will read and watch anything I want to watch and read.

If other people's reading material and sources of information is a concern for you, I can't help you.

But your ridiculous, and actually very disturbing attempt to use someone's sources of information to attack them with, only makes YOU look like you're desperately trying to smear good DUers as enemy lovers.

Which is what I said in the first place.

So thanks for proving me right.

Thank the gods I don't have a copy of the Communist Manifesto on my bookshelf, because I'm the type who would tell you about it!

And lord knows what could be done with THAT information! Lol!

[MADem]

69. Sorry, your attempt at constructing a "straw man interrogation" won't work.

I've no desire to know your habits.

See, I don't give a shit what you read. I don't care what you watch. I don't care what you have on your little bookshelf.

But if you are suggesting that we should ignore what you say here, because it might be inconvenient to your current argument, you'd best think again. I'm not the ardent, angry, persistent RT cheerleader on this board--you are. I'm not the person who insisted that the Ukraine was being "pressured" to join the EU--YOU are. You wrote that stuff. You OWN it.

If you think your very biased statements don't have an impact on how people regard you, you're living in a curious fantasy. You aren't proved "right"--you're shown to be what you are, by your very own words.

I do know that Skinner, the administrator of this site, has said that RT, that propaganda station you tout from the rooftops, is not a valid source for LBN.

So, "LOL" all you'd like. You're easily amused.

[sabrina 1]

71. Sure you have no 'desire' to know my reading habits. Lol, you just proved otherwise and are still

doing so. Skinner is entitled to his opinion. Why do you think Skinner's or anyone else's opinion should cause me to alter my sources of information? I don't know Skinner, he's more than entitled to his opinion, as am I, equally so. I certainly wouldn't be telling him, or anyone else, what they should read. Nor, I think would he, at least I hope not.

If he wants to ban people, (was that your threat, and did you really think I would even WANT to be on a forum where people are banned for their reading habits, you've GOT to be kidding) for which sources of information they use, then there will be an exodus of DU like you won't believe.

But I have no fear of that, because DU is a Democratic Forum. I see nothing in the rules telling people they will be banned for what they choose as sources of information.

I live in a Democracy where I am free to access any source of reading material, we don't BAN BOOKS IN AMERICA. I will continue to watch RT and if that ever becomes a banning offense here, I wouldn't NEED to be banned. I, and many others, lots of others, would be gone so fast there wouldn't be time for anyone to tell me to go.

'Show me your reading material'.

Wow!! Scary. I think maybe I need to ask Skinner if what you just implied is true, we do need to know if this forum would ban people for what they read or watch.

Because I sure won't be influenced as far as what sources I use by ANYONE.

But it's interesting, your appeal to 'authority' as if I need the approval of any man for what I read! Are you serious?

I'm a Liberal Woman,we didn't fight so hard to have some man tell us what we can read. You're not very informed about Liberals, women especially, are you? Here's a hint, they don't succumb to threats from men about their reading material.

[MADem]

72. What did I just say? I Do Not CARE what you read. As for the rest, Sabrina, TL-DR.

You're just gonna have to go try to fuck with someone else--your strawmen are poorly built, rambling, off the page, and tiresome.

[sabrina 1]

73. Sorry, you chose to try to intimidate me by using an old comment of mine, coincidentally the same

comment used by a couple of others, how odd, regarding a source of information I use, RT in case anyone is interested, and when you failed to intimidate me with that, someone should have told you I am not that easily intimidated, you tried to use Skinner to tell me HE doesn't like RT. As if that should affect me in the slightest.

I got what you were trying to do, so STOP pretending you were not trying to intimidate me about my choices of reading material.

It is here for everyone to see and it is DISGUSTING. Your friends tried it using the exact same comment. It is CREEPY to me, as a private person, that people here are digging up my comments, thinking I will try to defend my choices. I never defend my reading choices, nor should any American EVER have to do that. Right Wingers tried it with me when I let them know I watched Al Jazeera. Yes, I was a 'traitor' blah, blah, right wingers, NOT Intimated by them either.

Now you think you can run away because women like me know all too well this kind of intimidation from men who throughout HISTORY have attempted to 'control' what we read or watch or learn.

And then you dragged Skinner into it, when YOU could not control me, to try to use HIM, implying that the 'powerful man who runs this forum' might BAN ME for what I read. How ridiculous, but quote revealing.

You started this attempted smear campaign using an old comment about RT, as a couple of friends of yours already tried, with the exact same comment and also failed, and now you want to run away from what you tried to do.

I read and watch whatever I want regardless of men like you trying to control or use, (an old trick used by men against we 'little women') what we are reading, and then you dragged Skinner into this to try to further intimidate me, who YOU are speaking for, and as I said, I need to know IF you are really speaking for him, which I doubt.

I am writing this for those reading so they can see how far some people will go to try to silence women here on DU or anyone who dares to use reading material NOT approved by them.

I hope no one else here tries to do this using that comment. In case they are thinking about it, I watch RT and Al Jazeera, which I was equally attacked for by Right Wingers and just as unwilling to allow THEM to try to intimidate me for watching Al Jazeera.

I've been down this road before so it's very familiar.

Now I'm off to watch the news on RT, after which I will try to catch it on Al Jazeera, and if anyone has a problem with that, let's talk about it.

I'm ready.

[MADem]

74. Again....TL/DR. Go bother someone else. You're ranting/rambling. nt

[sabrina 1]

75. Not for you, for those reading. Don't attack me for what I choose to read and you won't have to

worry about anything. But IF anyone does, and they have tried, with the same exact comment they dug up, as if they thought I would try to defend it, WRONG, they should not expect to be allowed to get away with it. Because I will respond to ANY attempts to smear my reputation.

Stop acting like you are the victim, you are not. I will never allow anyone to victimize me as you tried to do. You started this by implying there were anti American Putin Lovers here, then refused to back up your insinuations, despicable insinuations and then launched what you thought was an attack on my reading/resource material that would intimidate me. It didn't. Stop attacking Democrats here, and I won't be compelled to defend them.

[MADem]

77. Now you're just goading/baiting and writing dramatic subject lines. Again, TL/DR. nt

[sabrina 1]

78. I'm responding to an attempt to accuse democrats of being 'enemy lovers'. And when I

asked who these people were, I was attacked, using a comment of mine, reusing I should say, as that exact same comment has been dug up and 'used' already by a few of your supporters, to try to intimidate me. If that's all you guys can dig up out of over 40 thousand comments, well, what can I say, especially since people are at a loss as to why you all thought it was so significant. Yes, I have received a lot of feedback on this, not complimentary to the diggers btw.

Stop playing the victim, people can read. YOU used an old Bushbot attack on Liberals implying they 'love (insert enemy here). Saddam, Bin Ladin, The Taliban, Putin.

I did not start this. You did. Then you tried to use my reading/media habits, openly stated by ME, to smear me. It failed, after which you tried to intimidate me by claiming to speak for Skinner who, you warned me, 'doesn't like Rt'. Why you thought that was important information for me I can't imagine.

Don't attack Democrats and I will not feel compelled to defend them.

[MADem]

79. How many more paragraphs are you going to write? I'm not reading your diatribes, sorry. nt

[sabrina 1]

80. The news was interesing, I checked out RT, Al Jazeera and CCTV, also the BBC.

Things are not looking good for the people of Ukraine according to all sources. Seems they are being sold off to the IMF and the The World Bank, and without a chance for the people to even vote.

All sources reporting the handover of Ukraine to the IMF and the World Bank.

Remember when Liberals fought the strangulating policies of the IMF on third world countries? How could this happen without a referendum by the people? Unelected people selling the country off to the IMF?

Just stop attacking Democrats with right wing talking points, Democrats are not traitors, and I won't need to defend them.

[MADem]

84. Why are you hyperposting? I don't read past your subject lines, and I don't care what you're up to.

[joshcryer]

94. The reason is obvious.

[sabrina 1]

115. I believe I have repeatedly asked you to refrain from any contact with me, including the now well

known 'let me attack via a third party' trick which I also asked you to refrain from.

What IS obvious is your inability to honor requests from DUers to stop lying about them through this method, believing they cannot defend themselves if you think you can claim to have 'honored their requests'.

The reasons for my comments ARE obvious, I intended them to be. From all the feedback I have received, I am satisfied that DUers completely understood them.

I am once again asking you to use your ignore feature regarding me since you apparently cannot ignore my comments as I do yours unless they are aimed at me.

[joshcryer]

117. Leave me alone.

[sabrina 1]

118. I am asking you again, stop following me around DU. And don't even try to twist what you are doing.

You have been doing this for years now, And it is creepy, so just stop!

[joshcryer]

119. I wasn't talking to or about you.

I spoke generally. This is a whole new level of paranoia. Now I can't post anywhere without this crap.

[msanthrope]

98. You've discovered my method of dealing with this poster....read nothing after

the first sentence.

I once accused that famous troll, Hannah Bell, of using a Marxist Random Quote Generator after some particularly stupid rant about child support. Our comrade took umbrage, but I found that replying with the Lebowski one was not only funny, but effective.

Phone's ringin' Dude.

[MADem]

107. I think the term "word salad" is apt in this particular situation.

On, and on, and on!

Makes DU suck, that kind of thing...

I think I remember Hannah Bell--wasn't she the one who went on and on about how wonderful life was in North Korea?

[msanthrope]

110. Yes--Hannah Bell/HiPointDem/*** is a staunch NK apologist.

"Word salad" is pretty apt---you make me think of those 1950's Jello/veggie 'salads' though....



***She's back.

[MADem]

111. Ewww!!! ASPIC!!

How to ruin good vegetables, if you ask me!!

[msanthrope]

112. That is just nasty. What the hell are the white chunks? nt

[MADem]

114. I think that might be boiled white potato or maybe diced swedes....

[sabrina 1]

120. Not very nice of you to speak that way about MADem. As you can see, I don't get along too well

with him on issues, but for all you know, in person, he could be a very nice guy!

[sabrina 1]

121. Good, then you won't be worrying about what sources DUers use to inform themselves anymore.

At least we got that is settled. That kind of thing really is disturbing.

[MADem]

122. I'll still call a source BS when that's what it is, but you have a nice day, now! nt

[Puglover]

113. Why does this conversation remind me of Janet Parshall.

"La la la I can't hear you."

As to the accusation of "long screeds" leveled against (I assume) you upthread.......ROFL...oh the irony. Someone needs to take a look in the mirror.

Oh that "Better Believe It" they throw out just never gets old does it?

[sabrina 1]

116. Lol, I remember that interview, Randi wiped the floor with that poor woman.

I remember wishing she would do more TV she was so good. The poor woman didn't seem to get how ridiculous she looked, just kept to the talking points. It was wonderful to watch.

As for long screeds, lol, I know, the irony is spectacular!

Somethings don't need explaining and when that happens, I prefer to just watch ...

Thanks for that link, I had forgotten it. Good analogy though ... lol!

[amandabeech]

20. You'd think that the treatment of Pussy Riot would be enough

to turn anyone to the left of Attila the Hun against Putin.

Before and during WWII there were some on the left who adored Stalin.

I don't think that even the incontrovertible evidence of Stalin's crimes later on dissuaded some of them.

My guess is that the Putin lovers will be around for awhile.

[MADem]

24. I think you're right. nt

[sabrina 1]

29. Palin is on the Left?

[amandabeech]

31. I think that she is to the left of Attila the Hun, yes.

She hasn't slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people. At least not yet.

But I do think that she is a leading member of the crazy, tea party wing of the Pubbie party.

[sabrina 1]

35. Can't disagree with that. I misunderstood your comment then, thought you were joining the

small group of people here who have been running around the board accusing DUers of being unpatriotic commies.

Makes me wonder when I see stuff like that on this forum, brings back memories of the Bush era when they would listen to Rush to get their talking points for the day, 'Saddam lover' etc. They were so ridiculous but thought they were so 'intelligent', all repeating the same garbage, never realizing how stupid they were.

My apologies, sometimes I have flashbacks to those days lately!

[amandabeech]

62. No problem! n/t

[joshcryer]

93. I'll name names.

People who respond, nearly immediately, to any Putin criticism.

Some of the responses are fucking canned, literally, from some PR mouthpiece. Then they respond. Then disengage. It's classic PR firm manipulation.

Ask me. I'll tell you. I am not afraid.

[MADem]

106. There was a huge cadre of people with five or six letter nonsense names in lower case letters...

They came in for the Olympics, and MIRT took them out, one at a time. I'll bet there are a few more about, but they have the sense to lay low! For the time being, anyway!

[Behind the Aegis]

6. Some revealed themselves long ago with their incessant braying.

Of course, then it was in regards to the odious anti-gay laws. See, things here were much worse than Russia.

[MADem]

45. If you go back to the OLYMPICS threads, early on and even before the games started, there was a

great deal of "Nothing to see here, move along" type posts. There were also posts that suggested that people should just deal with it, put up with it, on a "don't ruin the fun" type theme.

Frankly, when that Olympic Ring Snowflake stayed in the closet, that, to me, was the highlight of the evening.

Before that, there were a massive crew of RT enthusiasts--even when it was pointed out that RT is Putin News (and the resignation of that anchor who has been on the job for two years makes that pretty clear...in case anyone missed the memo) who excoriated anyone for having the NERVE to point out that anyone working for that outfit--no matter how "adorable" they might seem to be--was working for a despotic dictator with delusions of grandeur.

Now the new theme, I guess, is "Naaaah....no one said that! No one feels that way! NAME NAMES to the Subcommittee On Anti-Putin Activities...or be put on the BLACKLIST!"

It's incredible.

[go west young man]

58. You guys must be referring to me.

Here's my newest schtick. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024616147 Call me what you like you can't stop the flow of information with a little 7th grade bullying in the age of the internet. Love ya. Peace

[MADem]

70. Nope, sorry. Not talking about you. Don't know you. Maybe you can get some attention elsewhere. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

92. That is the fact.

Aggressive defense of the anti gay laws. Personal attacking of LGBT DUers in order to conduct that defense.
Of course, to be fair some of them also celebrate the Pope for his anti gay bullshit, so for some of them it is more about being anti gay...

[joshcryer]

97. I thought for sure that was only me.

Recognizing the pro-Pope fuckers for being anti-gay jerks. I'm glad I'm not the only one. I don't keep lists or anything but I automatically recognize the arguments and the inclinations and postings of some. It just felt like "well shit these people don't support the Pope for X," "these people support the Pope despite his anti-gay BS."

Got into a decent argument with a Catholic here over the newest Pope's anti-poverty shit, I couldn't believe the depths they took it. And I learned more about Catholicism than I ever wanted to.

PS the virgin Mary isn't just a virgin, she is perfection. She literally had perpetual virginity.

[joshcryer]

95. +1

The fucking incessant justification for Russia's anti-gay laws. It made me distrust a number of DUers I'd respected until that point.

[lillypaddle]

7. Spot on

We are living in some weird fucking times.

[davidpdx]

8. Weird indeed

[reformist2]

11. Putin is kind of awesome. He rides bears!

[riqster]

13. That's because there was no real difference between Uncle Ho and Tricky Dick.

It's all an illusion, the parties were just two sides of the same corporate sell-out coin...

(Snark OFF)

[DeSwiss]

14. K&R

[center]
''Mr. President, I believe I speak for military men and the Republicans of Alaska when I say:
We cannot afford a Manliness Gap!! No sir!!!''[/center]

- Of course, you realize that many are missing the primary point here. This is Sarah. Sarah the Grifter© we're talking about here, okay? The half-Guv who only has half-assed talking points for thoughts. And who now (with the on-going swan-dive into concrete of Chris Christie's career), represents the leading Republican in her party.

That's the point.

[amandabeech]

22. I think that Sarah wants some of Putin's precious, bodily fluids.

So do half of the idiots over on Free Republic if they could only admit it to themselves.

[DeSwiss]

56. Yeah, she's admitted that she watches him from her front porch!

- And obviously he's been looking back!


[center]
''Come to me Sarah. You know you want me, my babushka!''[/center]

[amandabeech]

64. She probably likes it best when he has his shirt off.

Maybe he's part of the tea party drool club.

[sabrina 1]

66. Well, she can see him from her house.

[DeSwiss]

68. Yeah well......

...all the best leaders like to do it with their shirts off:



- It helps them alleviate their stress and aggressions when they can flex......

[ScreamingMeemie]

33. Now THOSE are deserved callouts.

[spanone]

47. they are irrational

[merrily]

76. Sarah's not a major figure in any political party.

She sure gets a lot of attention here, though, for some reason.

[muriel_volestrangler]

81. Daily Caller poll: "Who would make a better US president - Putin or Obama?"

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/06/urgent-news-poll-who-would-make-a-better-president-obama-or-putin/

I don't know if that's self-parody, a criticism of what they think is other RWers going weak-kneed at the thought of Putin, or a question they genuinely think needs answering. That it's impossible to tell is an indication they are not a serious website, no matter what they'd like to think.

[bemildred]

96. Whoa. The comments. nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

100. A lot of Freeper-style BS there

though they do allow normal people in as well, to point and laugh.

[Turbineguy]

83. Here's a nice song

for the Putin Lovers to listen to:

[MADem]

90. I remember that--it came out a while ago, I think when Porgie was still Pretzeldunce.

I think back then the popular media were calling it "I Want A Man Like Putin!" Same tune, though!

[freshwest]

126. Love the music! Alex Jones loved on Putin years ago, saying 'Putin's patriot who loves his country.'

Some people were really Jonesin' for Putin to elected POTUS. And AJ is JBS.

Putin's an intelligent man and is no more responsible for all the fuckwittery that happens in Russia anymore than Obama is responsible for the insane clown posse @ CPAC or Z. I'd rather argue specific policies, and how to win against them, than go into a mode of hating him or Russians.

We have too many Obama haters who can't see daylight from their arse, and can't think straight anymore. Let Obama, Kerry, the EU, UN or NATO countries confront the Russian bear. The worst thing about Putin to me is the RWNJs in this country who support his nation's oppressive policies.

Each nation has its own crowd inhabiting asshole central and Russia, Ukraine and the USA itself, has our own homegrown disgraces. I'm for letting our POTUS take care of this in a measured way.

It's worked before with Libya, Syria and Iran and just keeps on working. It doesn't satiate the blood lust a lot of people have, though. And I say, once again, that is why Obama and those are his level at the seat of power, as we don't have the maturity to handle it.

We see it every day on the net that people act like a pack of rabid wolves, accomplishing nothing. I'm not one to claim I don't get down and dirty with those I think are hurting me and mine or others who can be hurt by these policies, but I wish we could have a decent discussion about the WHY of all this shit, what drives it, and not go for the low blow, or going after each other.

BTW, Commie is from the word Communist, and it is an economic system, not a personal attack. Just want to get that one out of the way. Fascist can be both.

And this is a general rant, most definitely not about you, as you are one of the best posters IMO, will to explain positions and give excellent reasoning and good information.

[Bluenorthwest]

99. Palin's comments were vile even by Palin standards. Rudy as well.

I see many people tying in this thread, few address the subject of the OP.

[gulliver]

109. "You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska..."

"...but you need really good binoculars if you want to see President Putin astride his steed. Does anyone have a set? Mine have this weird wheel on the top that I can't figure out."

[AnnieBW]

125. Well, Putin is no Gorbachev

The last time people in America swooned over a Russian leader, it was Mikhail Gorbachev.