Down with the Kerensky Government . . .

[Strelnikov_]

Long Live the Tsar!!!!!!!!!!!!

~



++++++++



~

Yes, people really are that stupid.



(Comment: Norquist is representative of the Reichpublican status quo in effect until the '08 election).

[rockymountaindem]

1. Well, a lot of people who were against Kerensky were hardly for the restoration of the Tsar

... not to mention that Kerensky, who started out with a lot of popular support, screwed himself by remaining committed to the same idiocy of the war that doomed the Tsar. You'd have a better time arguing "there's no difference between Kerensky and the Tsar", in that case. I'm afraid your comparison doesn't do Obama any favors.

[Strelnikov_]

2. Not trying to imply a 1:1 relation.

As you stated, "Kerensky, who started out with a lot of popular support, screwed himself by remaining committed to the same idiocy of the war", kinda like Obama (in addition to the past economic policies, in Obama's case).

I understand why Obama/Democrats have done what they have done, and I understand why the Kerensky government pursued their policies. Both are/were victims of the 'Psychology of previous investment'.

If Russia would have given the Kerensky government time, they probably would have gotten their act together, and been better off for it.

If the American people give Obama and (some of) the Dems time, they will probably get their act together, and the country will be better for it.

Instead, it appears that the American people are going to throw out the 'reform' government for the government that got them in the mess in the first place, hoping they will 'reform'. That is, throw out Kerensky for the Tsar.

Just a simple (simplistic?) analogy. If you do not agree, so be it.

[rockymountaindem]

3. I think you make sense in this post

But the problem is that while Russia would have been better off under Kerensky, he did make a massive blunder, and relatively moderate policies take time to take effect. I guess that's the trap that non-radicals fall into.