The Pathetic Lives of Putin’s American Dupes

[n2doc]

By Jonathan Chait

A tragically large number of left-wing Westerners in the 20th century deluded themselves about the horrors of Soviet communism. As awful and unforgivable as it was, the process by which they made themselves into dupes was at least explicable: They loved socialism, and one country in the world was implementing socialism, so they persuaded themselves, and for a while, it was working.

Today’s Russia dupes are a smaller, more pathetic lot. Above all they are just plain weirder, because they lack a clear ideological motive for their stoogery. Soviet Russia not only commanded a vast propaganda network, but embodied a doctrine with international appeal (and which had originated outside of Russia). Vladimir Putin’s Russia follows no model except Russian nationalism. To the extent it employs a non-nationalist philosophy, its main idea is that gays have weakened Europe. And yet the dupes still come.

The most prominent intellectual apologist for Putin is Stephen F. Cohen, Princeton professor, Russologist for the left-wing Nation. Cohen is a septuagenarian, old-school leftist who has carried on the mental habits of decades of anti-anti-communism seamlessly into a new career of anti-anti-Putinism. The Cohen method is to pick away at every indictment of the Russian regime without directly associating himself with its various atrocities. Is Putin persecuting gays? Well, Cohen wants us to know that various Ukrainians nationalists dislike gays, too. And also Barack Obama’s claim to snub Sochi because of gay rights is probably not on the level. Is Putin bullying and killing journalists? Eh, says Cohen, “Every time a journalist breaks a leg, they say the Kremlin did it.” Accidents happen.

The primary hub of Russian propaganda in the West is Russia Today, an English-language Kremlin-funded propaganda outlet. Joe Pompeo reported last fall how RT has actually acquired a devoted following in the West, in part through relentless viral YouTube sharing of its reports. Cohen, of course, appears regularly on RT. (Is RT biased? Well, he says, so is CNN: “I’m highly suspicious about the narrative I’m getting on CNN. It seems to be the flip side of RT.”)

more

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/03/pathetic-lives-of-putins-american-dupes.html

[Are_grits_groceries]

1. When I saw that The Nation magazine had printed his views,

I was beyond disappointed.
I thought better of them. There was no recognition of the many factors and people involved.

[sabrina 1]

79. Yes, he does his job as a propagandist very well. I thought he was gone but I guess when propaganda

is needed, they drag out all the old propagandists. I remember him well, he never had much credibility back during the warmongering days of the Bush era, let's see how many on the 'left' will buy into his propaganda this time.

The Nation should know better, I frankly despise the guy and have zero interest in his opinions, nor did too many on the left back in the old days when the left was the anti-dote to all the right wing propaganda.

[Cha]

2. The Pathetic Lives of Putin’s American Dupes

"Today’s Russia dupes are a smaller, more pathetic lot. Above all they are just plain weirder, because they lack a clear ideological motive for their stoogery. Soviet Russia not only commanded a vast propaganda network, but embodied a doctrine with international appeal (and which had originated outside of Russia). Vladimir Putin’s Russia follows no model except Russian nationalism. To the extent it employs a non-nationalist philosophy, its main idea is that gays have weakened Europe. And yet the dupes still come."

thank you, n2doc

[Warpy]

107. Actually, RT does a few good news things

I won't bother with their stuff on their own country or any country they're at odds with, but some of their economic and social reporting has been quite good.

I won't watch Al Jazeera for any fluff pieces on how good Israel is, either.

Recognizing the agenda of any news source is the first thing anyone should do if they're going to put in time considering what they have to say.

Here in the US, that agenda is corporate. It's actually worse than RT because it's celebrity centered to boost ratings and contains little, if any, real news that affects ordinary people. Even the political campaigns are promoted as horse races, differing ideologies never making it on air.

[Whisp]

121. ++ whenever I do watch RT I take it with as many bags of salt as when I used to watch CNN

[jakeXT]

3. but the moment he calls me a Putin apologist, I’m going to say” something that cannot be said

“This is what I tell bookers,” Mr. Cohen said, referring to those who book him for television appearances. “I will go on with somebody who disagrees with me 100 percent, but the moment he calls me a Putin apologist, I’m going to say” something that cannot be said on the air.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/07/world/europe/american-experts-on-russia.html

[BeyondGeography]

4. Hey, dupes, Pat Buchanan loves him some culture warrin' Putin

http://buchanan.org/blog/putin-one-us-6071

[Cha]

5. Oh yes.. Putin and Buchanan.. two

peas in pod. Evil assholes who like to project.

[BeyondGeography]

12. It's a full-on conservative "values" crush

The “destruction of traditional values” in these countries, he said, comes “from the top” and is “inherently undemocratic because it is based on abstract ideas and runs counter to the will of the majority of people.”

Does he not have a point?

Unelected justices declared abortion and homosexual acts to be constitutionally protected rights. Judges have been the driving force behind the imposition of same-sex marriage. Attorney General Eric Holder refused to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act.

America was de-Christianized in the second half of the 20th century by court orders, over the vehement objections of a huge majority of a country that was overwhelmingly Christian.

And same-sex marriage is indeed an “abstract” idea unrooted in the history or tradition of the West. Where did it come from?

Peoples all over the world, claims Putin, are supporting Russia’s “defense of traditional values” against a “so-called tolerance” that is “genderless and infertile.”

[Cha]

62. Peoples all over the world, claims Putin, are supporting Russia’s “defense of traditional values”

against a “so-called tolerance” that is “genderless and infertile.”

That's really all I need to know about stupid Putin.

thanks BG

[sheshe2]

85. Oh for the love of Gawd! That's their claim!

Sorry Cha, tired. That's the best I can spew!

[Cha]

87. That's Pat Buchanan and Putin and Franklin Graham all Whining about

the Gays, she~



Thank Goodness we have a President who Stands Proud with our Gay Brothers and Sisters~

President Obama Makes History by Calling for Gay Equality in Inaugural Address

If there is one thing President Obama’s address will be remembered for is that it likely marked the first time gay rights were mentioned in an inaugural. His sweeping rhetoric from four years ago may have been missing, but Obama didn’t mince words when it came to calling for equality for gay and lesbian Americans. Although Obama had already made it clear he was in favor of marriage equality, he suggested he would fight for it during his second term.

"Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law—for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well,” Obama said.

MOre..
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/21/obama_calls_for_gay_rights_marriage_in_inaugural_address.html

[sheshe2]

88. It is a beautiful flag Cha.

So strong and so proud.

Colors~

[Cha]

89. NICE! Thank you, she~ Which Reminds me..

The design for San Francisco’s rainbow sidewalks is similar to this crosswalk in Vancouver, BC.

San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood to get rainbow crosswalks

SAN FRANCISCO — San Francisco’s famed LGBT-friendly Castro district will be showing more of its gay pride when the city paints four crosswalks in the colors of the Rainbow Pride flag.

The multicolored crosswalks at the intersection of Castro and 18th streets will be added as part of a larger neighborhood improvement project for The Castro, according to the the Castro/Upper Market Community Benefits District.

“The Castro Streetscape project will make one of our most popular and celebrated neighborhoods more livable and welcoming for residents and visitors,” said San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee. “The new design also will improve pedestrian safety.”

The project is expected to be completed by October.

Similar crosswalks were installed in West Hollywood in 2012.

http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/03/san-franciscos-castro-neighborhood-to-get-rainbow-crosswalks/

[sheshe2]

90. Damn!

Love love love it!

Sweet~

[Cha]

96. :)

[Crunchy Frog]

49. Does that make Buchanan yet another Putin dupe

or does it make him an ideological fellow traveller?

[stevenleser]

109. Good point. Probably the latter. I had Pat on my radio show a few months ago and it's clear how much

he admires Putin.

[Starry Messenger]

6. Well if Jonathan Chait says so

What a red-baiting pile from an inveterate teacher-hater.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. How can you call it 'red baiting' when Russia is not Communist? That's one

of the points made in the article. Putin is not a 'red'. Russia has a freaking stock market, explain to me how it is a 'red' stock market. Or is it just a fun phrase you heard and like to repeat without regard to it's applicability?
I have known in my life dozens who suffered under the actual red baiting of the blacklisting era. So the term means something to me. I do not see how it applies to Russia of this day.

[stevenleser]

25. No, it's quite the opposite. I think we on DU have settled on a definition of Fascism as the merger

of corporation and state. Certainly Russia applies. The state is merged with the oligarchs and their corporate interests.

We can extend the definition/analogy with what has historically been known as Fascism by noting that discrimination against LGBT and to a lesser extent, Jews and foreigners is indisputably now part of the Russian state as well.

After we understand that, the questions remain for those defending Putin and Russia, why are you defending them? What is it about them that you think needs defending and is important for you to defend?

[Starry Messenger]

34. Because it is capitalist, but Chait is applying

any questioning of what is going on to people who once supported the Soviet Union, in his first two paragraphs.

I'm a Communist and red-baiting isn't a "fun phrase" for me either Blue.

[Bluenorthwest]

44. Then why do you offer it in defense of those who are oligarchs?

The anti gay fascists in Russia should be defended like one would defend Dalton Trumbo? I find it deeply insulting. I find it to be far too comfortable with open bigotry. I'm very sorry, but the writer is correct, those who are defending Russia by claiming they are somehow revolutionary are peddling false goods, and when they do so using the destroyed lives of people I know it bothers me.
Questioning what's going on is not what I see around here, which is open defense of anti gay billionaires by folks who claim the bigoted plutocrats are revolutionaries. They excuse hateful attacks on LGBT people. Why? Who would do that for stock markets and profit from energy, which is what this is about? The author is correct, if it really was about revolutionary government vs 'The West' there would be some reason for the defense, I could understand communists wanting to protect a communist vision, but communists wanting to protect today's Russia makes no sense to me at all, none, zero.

[Starry Messenger]

45. Huh?

I'm not. You are completely misreading what I'm writing.

Bye.

[Bluenorthwest]

52. Notice I told you directly 'I don't understand it'.

I asked you questions which if addressed would perhaps aid the understanding of what I see as defense of a government easily as immoral as any other government using ideas and images that do not apply to that government.
I have been told directly on DU that criticism of the anti gay laws in Russia is 'just red baiting, you hate the Russian people'. So that's the level of exchange I have gotten used to on DU. Stand up for equality among people, be called a 'red baiter' in spite of the absence of any 'reds' anywhere in the whole situation.
It's disgusting.

[Starry Messenger]

56. Well, I'm not one of those people.

And Stephen F. Cohen, one of the subjects of Chait's screed--isn't an oligarch, Russian or otherwise. The subject of this pile of crap are non-Russian leftists who are alarmed at the rise of fascism in Ukraine, and are being painted as the lunatic fringe (in Chait's mind) who might once have supported the USSR. That was the red-baiting I referred to.

I don't know how you got anything else from the article or my remarks, here or previously, which have never supported Putin or Russia or their anti-gay laws, or called any gay person here anything. I have spoken out against the people who have done so.

[intersectionality]

97. Yep. This is the assbeating response I was looking for.

While OP supports the invasion of the Ukraine by warmongering propagandists whose Ukrainian roots originally lied in the demands of fascists, those of us observing without an ideology as far up our bums as OP's ideology, watch in horror. The Ukraine will be destroyed by this, no matter who wins the day. I have met zero Putin apologists on the left (and that's my social circle here in NYC, a much larger place than most, where ideologies are better defined and identities are open for exploration), but it is something that is rampant on the right.

Referring to the lefties as 'Putin apologists' because we recognized the exploitation built into the natural resources trade agreement the EU had proposed, and we recognize the rise of fascism in response to turning down a trade agreement with the EU - a place that has all the countries where fascism was born, dismantled, and is yet again starting to rear its ugly head - would be like calling us unAmeriKKKan because we didn't support the US offering military support to a country whose citizens might revolt at the end of the TPP process and ask one of the old Red countries for a little support.

There are so many parallels between the shitty trade agreement we're trying to rope the Eastern world into right now and what is happening in the Ukraine that I'm absolutely stunned by the lack of support of Ukrainians generally, and then I get to see these posts that have a jingoist oath requirement where people demand taking the 'side' of either the Russians or the EU/west. As if there were only two perspectives. These types of articles and posts obliterate perspective (which, as Nietzsche says, annihilates truth), and are a large part of the 'outrage politics' being written about by Jeffrey Berry and Sarah Sobieraj. I would ask that OP read their book, "The Outrage Industry: Political Opinion Media and the New Incivility," and take some time to reflect on the rhetorical implications of arguments made in OP's article before invoking this type of discourse.

[Catherina]

17. Privatize everything! Attack everyone! Notice how these assholes all line up the same

when it comes to populist issues like education, safety nets for the people, corporate theft, wars? Their jig is up and they don't like it. They're in full propaganda, full attack mode now.

Chait is such a nasty asshole Dems using Kerry's bashing to defend Iraq War - Who is Jonathan Chait?

[Starry Messenger]

35. I don't know why Chait gets published in liberal journals.

He lines up with the right on several issues. He's downright nasty in this foam-flecked polemic.

[Catherina]

38. He carries water for the people who invest in both parties

to make sure their policy objectives get bipartisan support. Downright nasty but money talks and they get results in Congress and people like Chait appeal to the lowest common confused denominator. Reagan Democrats with no principles except their pocketbook, or who don't pay close enough attention that any passing wind that looks good for 5 minutes after a hard day at work, are a favorite of this bunch.

I don't understand it either but this is what happens when your party doesn't have a SOLID, principled platform, something stronger than "we oppose Republicans because they suck more".

[Starry Messenger]

40. Chait has had it out for teacher's unions forever.

That's usually the context I see him posted in, using a "liberal" here as a shield to bash unions from behind.

I have no use for anyone who attacks unions. Democrats who do it too are just lining up with Republicans, imo.

I guess he's branched out to a full-court press attack on the left, and anyone who doesn't support the fascists in Ukraine are all now "Putin-lovers". Yawn.

[joshcryer]

94. Chait has the issue of pretending to be superior to everyone.

On every issue. Generally he attacks the right though and the right hates him. I consider him a liberal / left wing Glen Greenwald in his tone and demeanor.

[reformist2]

7. I don't need RT to tell me the Crimea belongs to Russia. It just does.

[Cha]

8. K^R

[bemildred]

9. Vague and sentimental claptrap. Vacuuities, stereotypes, and projection all over the top.

Last edited Sat Mar 15, 2014, 10:29 AM - Edit history (1)

Like fudge.

"Today’s Russia dupes are a smaller, more pathetic lot." Is one supposed to take statements like that seriously as reportage or analysis? It's no better than "running dogs of capitalism" and all that old commie rot. Actually, it's not as good. I suppose that's my point.

[Catherina]

19. Like his piece here: "Jonathan Chait: A McCain Presidency Wouldn't Be So Bad"

I'm not going to post his neolib drivel, that "A McCain Presidency Wouldn't Be So Bad" just a short critique of it.

Jonathan Chait: A McCain Presidency Wouldn't Be So Bad
By John Amato July 23, 2008 4:00 pm

And he's supposed to be a lefty pundit. Sometimes I think we need to clean out the whole crew. As for his substantive views, they do (now) closely re

And he's supposed to be a lefty pundit. Sometimes I think we need to clean out the whole crew.

As for his substantive views, they do (now) closely resemble Bush's. Yet the upside to a candidate who changes his philosophical orientation as often as McCain is that he could always switch back. While I certainly wouldn't recommend that anybody go so far as to vote for him on that basis, it still offers some grounds for hope. The Bush presidency is like being married to a sociopath. A McCain presidency would be more like being married to a drug addict -- however badly he behaves, he could always sober up.

Say, what?

Liberals tend to view the press's love affair with McCain as a wildly unfair act of bias. They have a point. On the other hand, they should take some heart in the fact that McCain obviously cherishes the approval of the mainstream (and even liberal) media. His accessibility to the press and public is something small-d democrats should cheer. McCain has conducted interviews with very liberal publications like Grist...read on

We should love him because he's nice to the MSM. Please make it stop. A flashback to an old Digby post reveals much more wankery.

http://crooksandliars.com/2008/07/24/jonathan-chait-a-mccain-presidency-wouldnt-be-so-bad

These neolibs, carrying water for their twin soul friends on the other side of the aisle, aren't fooling anyone.

[bemildred]

22. He reminds me of Jonah Goldberg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonah_Goldberg

[Catherina]

29. Excellent comparison.

On February 8, 2005, Goldberg offered Cole a wager of $1,000 "that Iraq won't have a civil war, that it will have a viable constitution, and that a majority of Iraqis and Americans will, in two years time, agree that the war was worth it."[15]

Goldberg and Peter Beinart of The New Republic for a time hosted a conservative vs. liberal webtv show, What's your Problem?, which originally could be found on National Review Online[19]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonah_Goldberg

It's always a pleasure to read your posts and your thoughts you know, even if this was just a wiki link for comparison. Yes indeed, Jonah Goldberg, another asshole who thinks Obama's not moving fast enough on starting the World War they've been working so hard for.

[bemildred]

32. Faith based politics. Like this guy is talking about here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4661684

[Catherina]

39. +1 n/t

[jsr]

11. Are You Now or Have You Ever Been a Russia Dupe?

[zeemike]

14. Or a Putin Apoligist?...Putin lover?

I suspect soon that will become a reason for some people on DU to hide a post or tombstone someone...and RT will be banned as a news source.

McCarthyism may be making a comeback.

[geek tragedy]

20. rt.com is already banned in Latest Breaking News, since it is not a legitimate news operation.

Just like presstv and North Korea's government aren't either

[Benton D Struckcheon]

28. Excellent.

Good to know. Doesn't stop the usual suspects from churning out cite after cite from that sewer, but still, one small victory is something.

[zeemike]

33. Is Fox News a legitimate news source?

Just so we know.
We really need a manual of the forbidden things that can be said, posted and thought of here so no one is offended...you should write one.

[geek tragedy]

63. Skinner and the hosts of LBN are the ones who made the correct decision

to ban Putin News as a source of LBN.

I certainly don't consider Fox a legitimate source, but it's more respectable than rt.com

[zeemike]

67. "it's more respectable than rt"

That tells me all I need to know...

[geek tragedy]

70. it should. there is nothing less credible than a propaganda site owned and operated

by an authoritarian government

rt.com is less like fox news and more like Americans For Prosperity.

[bvar22]

101. Conservatives and authoritarians are naturally attractd to the "approved" News...

...and Conservative (NeoLiberal) Doctrine repeated by the "approved" Media.

Makes them feel all warm and happy,
and FOX is better than RT!!!!

...All you need to know!

[stevenleser]

26. See BNW's #10 above nt

[Catherina]

30. They're pathetic. Their song never changes.

[KoKo]

50. The Senator Joe McCarthy ERA IS BACK! Loyalty Tests...Congressional Hearings

Answer the Question for The Record:

"ARE YOU NOW OR HAVE YOU EVER BEEN...A PUTIN SUPPORTER OR APOLOGIST"

[Catherina]

55. "I am not going to answer any questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs

MR. SEEGER: I am not going to answer any questions as to my association, my philosophical or religious beliefs or my political beliefs, or how I voted in any election, or any of these private affairs. I think these are very improper questions for any American to be asked, especially under such compulsion as this. I would be very glad to tell you my life if you want to hear of it.

Pete Seeger, House Unamerican Activities Committee, August 18, 1955

http://www.peteseeger.net/HUAC.htm

THEY NEVER CHANGE

[KoKo]

58. Great Snip....Honor of Seeger!

To see the resurgence of McCarthyite 'loyalty tests' and J. Edgar Hoover 'secret lists' (NSA Spying on the People) makes me realize that this malignancy in our Democracy never went away and won't until the stables are cleaned out. However, the best chance for the "clean out" came and went as Parry's article documents.

The threats to world stability perpetrated by the NeoCon's Philosophy plus the Global Banking and Military/Media/ Industrial Complex are growing more serious as each year passes and accountablity dims into the rear view mirror.

We have to hope that the NeoCon's hubris and over reach will cause such a backlash from other nations going forward that they will eventually implode on their own or an unexpected intervention from somewhere within saves the USA from itself.

[functioning_cog]

51. He's not a "red commie". He's a right wing fascist thug

Supported by the wealthy. You know, the thing you supposedly hate. We're not calling you unAmerican. We're calling you daft hypocrites.

[Bluenorthwest]

53. That's pretty direct, but it is spot on.

nt

[Cha]

64. Stand up Proud for Putin .. don't be shy. He has "traditional values".

"Peoples all over the world, claims Putin, are supporting Russia’s “defense of traditional values”

against a “so-called tolerance” that is “genderless and infertile.”

http://buchanan.org/blog/putin-one-us-6071
.

[G_j]

74. intellectual dishonesty

wikipedia:
"Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position which the advocate knows or believes to be false or clearly misleading, or is the advocacy of a position which the advocate does not know to be true, and has not performed rigorous due diligence to insure the truthfulness of the position."

[Cha]

77. Yes, Putin is dishonest.

[africanadian]

13. The USSR wasn't Socialist!

Or Communist! It was a dictatorship wearing a mask!

[William769]

15. Kick & highly recommended!

[Catherina]

16. Jonathan Chait lol. The Neoliberal asshole supreme spreading School of Chicago neocon bullshit

On his savaging of Naomi Klein

The one review in particular that's got my blood going is Jon Chait's in the 'New Republic'. I read that review when it first ran nearly three years ago. Back then, I was interested in maintaining a standard of Intellectual Seriousness that, after reading Chait's piece, caused me to regard Klein's work with suspicion. I knew then what I know now, that the New Republic is about as intellectually dishonest and pro-establishment a magazine as you're going to find (outside, perhaps, the Weekly Standard under a Republican President); but I liked Chait's work, thought he was one of the few good'uns, and I trusted him.

So that's the reason I became quite angry when, turning back towards the review for the first time in nearly three years, I found Klein's response, which does a rather thorough job dismantling Chait's piece and leaving one to see him as either unforgivably lazy or, more likely, knowingly misleading. Go ahead and read both pieces. I didn't start the Klein piece necessarily as a fan or sympathizer, but I sure was by its end.

...

And how else could you respond to this New York Times review of 'The Shock Doctrine', with its uninterrupted condescension and rather absurdly blatant misinformation. Just take the opening paragraph as an example:

When Milton Friedman died last year, the acclaim for his work was nearly universal. Even his ideological opponents, like Paul Krugman and Lawrence Summers, treated this Nobel Prize-winning economist — who taught for decades at the University of Chicago — with respect.

There's absolutely no way that a reporter who focuses on economics, and who has reached the professional heights of the New York Times, is unaware that there's an ideological realm further to the left than Lawrence Summers' neoliberalism, with its fulsome embrace of Wall Street deregulation. Similarly, while Paul Krugman has for quite some time been on the left of the American political debate--in rhetoric more than anything else--he spent much of his career also advocating neoliberal policies. To call them "ideological opponents" is almost stunningly dishonest.

But the real masterstroke of the review comes near the bottom, where the author does a quick pivot and suddenly unleashes a torrent of free-market propaganda so unsubtle and so trite and unthinking that, for a moment, I thought I was in some bizarr0-world wherein the New York Times played the role of a capitalist version of Pravda:

What she is most blind to is the necessary role of entrepreneurial capitalism in overcoming the inherent tendency of any established social system to lapse into stagnation, as all too many socialist countries — and some nonsocialist ones, too — have shown. Like it or not, without strong economic growth and its inevitable disruptions , there is little hope for creating the healthy middle classes necessary to sustain democracies, much less an improvement in the lot of the poor and dispossessed Ms. Klein seeks to represent. And yes, that means some people will become rich and powerful.

...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/27/969409/-Naomi-Klein-s-Shock-Doctrine-and-Our-Liberal-Media

It goes on. Dean supporters will remember how viciously this neoliberal asshole, a self-described foreign policy hawk, savaged Howard Dean. Fuck him and the horse he rode on. He was so eager to carry water for PNAC that he was even attacking Kerry because he wanted the Democratic Party to run John PNAC McCain for President.

What's the diiference between a neocon and a neolib? Answer, NONE, just a few cosmetic differences here on there. What pathetic lives these hawks lead. They hated the Left then and they hate it now. That's good because to be admired by the likes of them is like being admired by Dick Cheney.

[jsr]

18. ^ This should be an OP.

[Catherina]

24. Exposing Chait or how the neolib water carriers are finally showing their true colors?

I don't think the first would generate much interest and the second would need more work exposing them all like that dreadful Stephen Zunes and Luke Harding. Thought jsr? Because I'll most certainly work on it.

[ProSense]

23. "he was even attacking Kerry"

Like some people currently are?

[Catherina]

27. "John McCain for President"!

It just shows how low he is, and how hypocritical those with changing principles are.. Like you don't know any political opportunists whose principles change with every wind lol. Sorry for exposing a neolib who's carrying water for those opportunists and PNAC chameleons now.

[ProSense]

31. You mean,

"Like you don't know any political opportunists whose principles change with every wind lol."

...like those who were claiming that there allegedly was no support for Putin here and the U.S. was hypocritical for being against the Russian invasion because of Iraq? Now those same opponents of Bush's illegal Iraq invasion are trying to justify Putin's illegal invasion.

Or do you mean like pushing Paul Craig Roberts' drivel?

[Catherina]

36. I mean what I said my dear professional friend and none of your attempts

to distract, deflect hijack will change that.

Don't you have anything better to do like kick up one of your own threads?

I'm sorry your threads don't generate much interest and now you rudely try to hijack other people's. I won't be playing your silly games.

The times they are a changing, yes indeed, yes they are.

[ProSense]

41. LOL!

I mean what I said my dear professional friend and none of your attempts

to distract, deflect hijack will change that.

Don't you have anything better to do like kick up one of your own threads?

What was that about "attempts to distract, deflect"?

"The times they are a changing, yes indeed, yes they are."

Yes, they are. Best evidence is the lengths some people will go to attack Obama and Kerry while hyping Putin's illegal invasion.

[Catherina]

42. ^ Pro can have the last word ^

Otherwise this exchange will never end and the blue links of death will make an appearance soon.

[bvar22]

102. Woo said it best.

The goal is not to convince anyone of anything.

It is to thoroughly hijack, pollute and therefore eliminate public spaces where real discussion and organization can occur. Occupy is disbanded with clubs and pepper spray. Dissent and organization online are disrupted with surveillance and propaganda.

It is no accident that propaganda brigades post new threads on discussion boards far out of proportion to their presence in the community, and that they nearly *always* demand the last word in any interchange.

The goal is to disrupt the important public space for liberal thought, discussion, and organization that these boards offer, and to keep the participants busy instead batting off the corporate lies and talking points.

woo me with science Sun Jul 28, 2013
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801

[geek tragedy]

84. Funny that someone who pimps Russian state propaganda and carries water for a foreign tyrant

has the gall to criticize you for being pro-Democrat here.

[Number23]

91. Holy shit I was sitting here thinking the EXACT same thing

What the f*ck is going on this web site? Being Pro-Obama is somehow WORSE than being Pro-Putin by some people here? Chait nailed them to the walls and they are hollering.

[msanthrope]

98. Indeed...being pro-Obama is somehow shameful, but being pro-Putin is on the purity meter.

I'm feeling nostalgic......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023467863

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023385470

[Number23]

111. Oh my God... the Mayor of Face Palm Springs

I'd forgotten about the Catalano one. Dear Lord. After posting that, you would have thought anyone with a shred of dignity would have fled into the night, including the ones high fiving that foolishness. But considering that one of the main ones doing so just had an OP in GD last week saying that there was not and had never been any Putin support on DU, I don't think words like dignity or honesty really resonate.

And don't forget this one http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242

So much paranoid idiocy that even Skinner felt the need to smack it down http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3383622

[msanthrope]

112. Had quinoa been the end of it, we never would have had this gem.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3467863

[reddread]

114. or pro-Fox "News"

hard to imagine anyone could be both.

[geek tragedy]

115. Rt.com fans same as foxnation.com crowd

Just more pretentious.

[reddread]

116. seems like a lot of beliefs are built around name calling and derision

I guess divide and conquer doesnt require much else.
certainly context and perspective have no place in life and death decisions that impact
the prospects of democracy and personal safety anywhere in the world from the average
American political hacktivist point of view.
Just call em some names and call it a day.
History has no useful place in the dis cussin.

[functioning_cog]

48. Hahahaha! You crack me up

Uber liberals are So Very Serious TM.

[sibelian]

21. Telling lies about nasty people is easy.

Establishing the idea that both the nasty people and the people telling lies about them are nasty and both telling lies is slightly more difficult.

[FSogol]

37. K&R The dupes aren't going to like this!

[Bobbie Jo]

43. Obviously not...

By the looks of this thread.

Good.

[Number23]

92. It's amazing, isn't it? We have to sit here day after day and listen to these idiots shit all over

Kerry and Obama and Pelosi and Reid and anyone else that dares to represent this country, no matter how imperfectly. And we all have our issues with the things get done but we still support these folks much to the ever lasting wailing and chagrin of a large group of people here.

But somehow, we are supposed to ignore that these same folks all line up to praise Putin who actually IS the living embodiment of the authoritarian nightmare they keep trying to say that this country is. And when called on it as they should be EVERY FUCKING DAY they wail even louder.

[Cha]

65. Dupe Group in Full On Deflective Mode..

[Jesus Malverde]

46. The generation brainwashed with duck and cover drills...

Feeling comfortable with their childhood memes.

You too can be Burt the turtle....

[functioning_cog]

47. Looks like this is upsetting all the right people

[SidDithers]

61. +1...nt

Sid

[MADem]

54. Unfortunately, some of the loudest and dumbest dupes are hanging around here.

A smaller and more pathetic lot indeed.

That NATION article was the biggest, honking, steaming piece of horseshit I've seen in a while. It doesn't reflect the views of sane Dems. Stephen Cohen is also a professor EMERITUS, which means that he's not -- thank our lucky stars -- shaping young minds anymore.

And if CNN is the "flip side of RT" where's the 24-7 praise of All Things Barack? After all, RT is Pootie's A Cutie, All The Time. On CNN, brother Barack can't get a kind word out of many of those anchors.

And THIS looks like a worthwhile read, too:

Rosie Gray has a deeply reported piece on the cadre of young American journalists. Their motives appear to be a mix of careerism, naïveté, and utter incuriousity. The modal career arc of an American RT reporter appears to be an ambitious but not terribly bright 20-something aspiring journalist who, faced with the alternative of grim local-news reportage, leaps at the chance to make two or three times the pay while covering world affairs, sort of. It’s the sort of reward that dims one’s incentive to perform due diligence into just who is signing your paycheck, and why. “I saw a job posting,” a former RT America reporter tells Gray, “and figured why not,” in one of the more hilarious uses of “why not” you will ever see. (I’ll launch my journalism career by being a mouthpiece for an authoritarian regime. What could go wrong?)

[ProSense]

57. Developing, the funniest meme ever:

The neo-cons are responsible and are driving Obama's policy, even though Obama is figthing back as much as he can, even regretting to go along with their decisions ("the surge in Afghanistan, which he campaigned on) and batting down Kerry at every turn (sheer lunacy). The fact that the warmongering neo-cons are to blame is the reason that the pro-Putin progressives must justify his illegal invasion of Ukraine. Putin's illegal invasion is better than the neo-con supported illegal invasion of Iraq.

I seriously just read someone claim that "neo-con" McCain helped install Kerry as SOS. These are the same people attacking Susan Rice, the other name pushed as SOS, and other members of Obama's foreign policy team.

They can't make up their mind if Obama is a willing participant in his own administration or a puppet being misled by warmongers.

[Cha]

66. Who's keeping them in the dark and feeding them

this shite?

[MADem]

71. Well, that's because he's blaaaaaahhhhhhh....to quote Rick Santorum!!!

He's gotta be demonized, infantalized, marginalized or cut-down-to-sized...

It drives them NUTS that there's a "blaaaaaahhhhhh" man in the White House.

Yes, they are still crazy after all these years.

[Cha]

69. Yeah, I saw the way Stephen Cohen was rationalizing RT..

cnn? He needs to keep up. Some of us aren't dupable.

“I saw a job posting,” a former RT America reporter tells Gray, “and figured why not,” in one of the more hilarious uses of “why not” you will ever see. (I’ll launch my journalism career by being a mouthpiece for an authoritarian regime. What could go wrong?)" Brilliant.

[bvar22]

59. ...and The Master Baiters RISE again!!!

I have to admit that reading the above screed made me nostalgic for the 50s.
The old childish binary rhetoric reminded me of my childhood!

Of Course, I reject Jonathan Chait's childish premise out of hand,
and challenge him, and those deluded DUers who embrace this nonsense to show evidence where Putin has deluded "a tragically large number of left-wing Westerners".

This post was amusing only in that it simply reinforces the shallow thinking of the DUers who support this preposterous, warmongering, Right Wing NonSense.

[font size=5]
If you're not FOR the WAR in[/font]
Vietnam
Afghanistan
Iraq
Libya
Syria
[font size=5]The UKraine


you're WITH [/font]
The Communists
AlQaeda
The Terrorists
Saddam
Qaddafi
Assad
[font size=5]PUTIN!!!![/font]

Terror! Terror! Terror!
Evil Dictators!
Booga...Booga
Terror Drones and Freedom Bombs for Peace!!!
USA....USA...USA

They are killing their own people.
Don't they know that is OUR job?
[/font]

Note to Right Wing Warmongering DUers:
Just because Putin in BAD,
that doesn't make "The Other Guys" good.
Didn't you learn [ANYTHING from
Iraq
Afghanistan
Libya
or
Syria????

How easy it is to get you marching down the road to disaster.
This only proves that PT Barnum was wrong ONLY about the rate at which SUCKERS are born in America.
(You STILL have time to go erase your Rec.)

[ProSense]

68. "If you're not FOR the WAR"

Putin is the one who illegally invaded the Ukraine. If you're not against Putin illegal invasion, you're supporting war.

There is no friggin way to spin that.

[NuclearDem]

72. He can try.

Like how I was somehow okay with the half a million dead in Iraq from sanctions because I suggested freezing Russia's assets in the west.

[MADem]

75. Well, Putin's war, apparently, is GOOD. Anyone objecting to Putin's war...not so much? nt

[MADem]

73. Bifurcated arguments are easily made, because there's no complexity associated with them.

And sorry--you just made one.

You can be opposed to an insane despot and not be a champion for war.

Were you asleep at the switch when the UN left Pootie out there, all by himself?

Even his good buddy China abstained.

Now run along and think harder.

[Number23]

93. "Now run along and think harder."

[sadoldgirl]

80. Bravo!!!!!nt

[functioning_cog]

81. You mad, bro?

[geek tragedy]

83. Still waiting for you to criticize Putin with 1/100th the vehemence with which you

denounce his critics.

Solidarity is usually admirable. Not here.

[arely staircase]

100. putin's war, to be specific nt

[SidDithers]

60. Huge K&R!!...

Sid

[RandySF]

76. I've yet to find any "good guys" in this dispute.

In one corner is the right-wing, gay hating Putin who just sent his forces into another country (sound like a past American president we know?). In the other corner is a right win government back, in large part, by right wing, Jew-hating neo-Nazis. I guess I if some were to put a gun to my head and make a judgement call, I would say Putin was clearly wrong by invading and trying to annex another country.

[sabrina 1]

78. Jonathan Chait, I wondered what had happened to that right wing former supporter of everything Bush.

Very familiar with his 'views' from way back when we were trying to stop a war in Iraq among other things.

[stevenleser]

104. You understand that what you wrote doesn't refute anything he just said, right?

It's pure argumentum ad hominem logical fallacy.

[sabrina 1]

106. No, I understand that most of what he says is, as always, not credible. He's a tool and always was.

And certainly never considered credible, well that was back in the Bush days, by any self respecting Democrat.

Same old Chait ...

[stevenleser]

108. You still haven't refuted anything he just said. nt

[sabrina 1]

110. You haven't explained why the man who hates the 'left' who never has had anything relevant to say,

should be refuted or even read, considering his long history of 'left hatred', anymore than the average freeper?

Here's the thing, after spending a few years giving time and energy to refuting garbage from haters of the Left, it became obvious that even reading their stuff was a waste of time. Chait is one of those on my list of Left Haters to ignore. Can't remember ever reading ANYTHING from him that wasn't always the same. And I did give him a chance.

Give me one reason why anything he has to say should not be taken, as always, with huge grains of salt. I prefer to spend the time reading credible journalists, who report news. To read Chait means WORK, you then have to go check his opinions, which is mostly what he offers, against reliable sources. Too much effort for nothing I discovered long ago.

[Rex]

118. The GOP got caught LOVING on some Putin.

And now their operatives are furious at getting caught being total hypocrites. Their standard SOP of Blaming the Left is in full effect as can be seen here.

Same shit, different topic.

[sabrina 1]

120. Well, they loved him the way they loved Saddam. They thought Saddam was 'more of a leader' than

'wimpy Democrats' who didn't support Bush's invasion. Otoh, they couldn't contain themselves at the thought of killing him and every other 'raghead' they could find.

They USE that tactic to attack the 'left'. It's amazing to see people fall for it.

Well, maybe not so amazing. Attacking the left is what gives them away, no?

[jtuck004]

82. Should offer a kit on the Internet. He's warning not against all apologists, just Putin's?

If the writer offered a test we could check, else we might end up ignoring ALL apologists, (most are highly annoying anyway) and then where would we be?

Might make a few bucks.

[sheshe2]

86. Kicked and Recommending!

[joshcryer]

95. Leftists supporting a fascist sort of belies reason.

I don't need Chait to tell me Putinists are pathetic.

[stevenleser]

105. And I can completely appreciate that. Chait is not a favorite of mine. But he is right here. nt

[arely staircase]

99. k&r nt

[Union Scribe]

103. Coming soon, Left People Got No Reason to Live

by Jonathan Chait. Coming after that, Randy Newman's cease and desist letter.

[Cha]

113. Kick

[Rex]

117. Funny, all the love I see going toward Putin is from the GOP.

Think their lurkers are furious at DU? I do.

[brentspeak]

119. The same Iraq War-loving Jonathan Chait?

Same pro-slave labor/globalization Jonathan Chait?

Thought so.

[Cha]

122. ..

[Cha]

123. Time to Kick this Again.

[uhnope]

124. K & R. Still true 10 months later