PDA

View Full Version : Who'd ya think worse? Mr G Bush or Mr V Putin



MaF
12-03-2007, 04:42 AM
Interestin to know what other world thinks of our president - cause i heard todays west newspapers were headlined with somethin like "Evil putin and his party took over the Russia last sunday" :D
If be honest other our politiks suck worse... he's bein held by nation and party and got trapped.... oh, or maby.... u know that party only message of whoes is "Putin rulezzz" and it's very funny to see comunists in oposition to one-partied goverment.... that sunday we've got 63,5% of putin-party, 10-11% of comunists, 8% of mad liberals and 8% of another pro-president party and another got less than 7%.... that means that we've got monopolistik government yesterday. George Bush, come and save us! We need your super democracy :D

And i heard that in Westland (:D ) there's only 2 party... why it's so little number? Where's the others? Democracy's the rule of minorities i think. Where u must respect each one's voice (if even they r...ahem....or...ahem....)

the_GoDdEsS
12-03-2007, 04:55 AM
Western media will always write stupid things about Russia and demonise your country. It's entertaining to watch, you should make a collection of headlines. They're also scared of you. Personally I quite like Putin and your opposition makes me laugh. Good luck Russia.

Mota Boy
12-03-2007, 05:07 AM
Well, Putin's much more realpolitik than Bush - much more willing to use force and violence against those that oppose him, whether the opposition is internal or external, an individual or a nation. In that sense he's much more dangerous than Bush.

Bush is an idiot that believes he's on a mission from God, who just happened to put him in control of the most powerful army on the planet. In that sense he's more dangerous than Putin.

I'd say Putin's more "evil", though I don't like the word, though Bush's actions have lead to more deaths.

That said, I'd much, much, much rather live in the US under Bush than Russia under Putin. As far as domestic leadership goes, Bush every time.

As for American democracy, our system is not a parliamentary system like European democracies, where parties get a seats based upon the overall percentage of votes received. Rather, we have individual races for each seat - a "winner take all" system in which the winner gets a seat in Congress and the loser gets nothing. This is repeated in each individual race and in the race for President. Such a system results in only two parties. However, these parties are made up of broad coalitions of individuals, and thus represent more voters and issues than more narrowly-defined parties in Parliamentary systems.

Each system has its merits, and its drawbacks.

MaF
12-03-2007, 05:17 AM
Thx for such explicated reply...


Well, Putin's much more realpolitik than Bush - much more willing to use force and violence against those that oppose him...
that made me laugh - all he could is the phrase:"we'll wash 'em in closet" and few eye services... But maby u r right - everybody knows that he's ex-KGBer and that thing spoils his image. I started to think bad of him when he headed the party... imo - president must be true neutral.

interestin who'd be after Bush Jr...

wheelchairman
12-03-2007, 05:24 AM
Supposedly the west is helping the opposition (the communists) which is ironic because I don't think that the communists nor the west enjoy working together. Especially since in the Duma the communists vote almost always with the United Russia party.

I would prefer Bush, this is because I am not Russian and I do not live in Russia. I'm an American and live in the west. No surprise really.

MaF
12-03-2007, 05:39 AM
Supposedly the west is helping the opposition (the communists) which is ironic because I don't think that the communists nor the west enjoy working together. Especially since in the Duma the communists vote almost always with the United Russia party.

I would prefer Bush, this is because I am not Russian and I do not live in Russia. I'm an American and live in the west. No surprise really.

Eeerrr, i don't think that US helps comunists it would be ridiculous! Maby they re helpin to Union of Right Force, Democratic Party, Apple (:D).... but they looooose...

I'm not surprised :) I'm a russian and i live in... in... if be correct someplace between european west ans asian east... oh! :D but still like my city (even if i need to use sub-way everyday)...

the_GoDdEsS
12-04-2007, 01:50 AM
Eeerrr, i don't think that US helps comunists it would be ridiculous! Maby they re helpin to Union of Right Force, Democratic Party, Apple (:D).... but they looooose...


If they have a common 'enemy', who knows? Is it true that Putin may resign early and then run for the presidential election next year? Or is it just another media talk?

HeadAroundU
12-04-2007, 01:46 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYxD0SdoBps&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFNF974izG0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO70NlcqlBQ

Putin is my idol. I'd like to meet him half naked.

the_GoDdEsS
12-04-2007, 02:05 PM
Dude, what's up with the "Takogo kak Putin" song? Hahaha.

Anyway, the answer to the whole topic lies here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSOOCos6Es4

HeadAroundU
12-04-2007, 02:32 PM
http://russmus.net/song.jsp?band=Poyushchie_Vmeste&album=0&song=0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlU3y5N1hSI

One like Putin
Translation by katya

My boyfriend is in trouble once again:
Got in a fight, got drunk on something nasty
I've had enough and I chased him away
And now I want a man like Putin

One like Putin, full of strength
One like Putin, who won't be a drunk
One like Putin, who wouldn't hurt me
One like Putin, who won't run away!

I've seen him on the news last night
He was telling us that the world has come to crossroads
With one like him, it's easy to be home and out
And now I want a man like Putin

One like Putin, full of strength
One like Putin, who won't be a drunk
One like Putin, who wouldn't hurt me
One like Putin, who won't run away!

the Alternate
12-27-2007, 02:42 PM
Being honest, I was looking forward to reading another comment from mr. Wheelchairman, full of sarcasm as usual, before writing my own.
But now I am disappointed. really, it's nothing to argue about. All too neutral.
The point is that I can't make a clear opinion what's going on in Russia. Lately it was easy to me being not involved in politics in case of parties, but I'm not quite sure that it will last further.
The second thing about this one is that too many people in my country voted for anyone but not for "United Russia" - the "party of president". As for me, the things happening look awful. And the opposition is not consistent.

As for topic - of course Mr. Bush is worse. I can't help wondering how can be a politician be such a laughing-stock. But maybe he is the reflection of american society. Putin is much stronger and adequate personality regardless of negative things connected with political climate in Russia.

HornyPope
12-28-2007, 12:20 AM
Putin is doing a greater job on a much tougher assignment.

the Alternate
01-07-2008, 08:54 AM
hmm I say, free Gasparov. everytime he leads opposition in the street he's collared, clubbed, and put back in prison. if putin gets short shrift here it's no less than he deserves.

Who is Gasparov? may be Kasparov, a former chess champion... Being honest his talks look much more like a barking of the dog and not like something constructive. He is always critisising in bad words but never suggests anything that would make the system better.


so what is russian political scene? a democratic farce? how many valid parties are there? if you don't vote for united russia, viz putin, you don't get much headway in life. talk about a smoothly run régime.

it is so "a la francais" to understand things. But arabs are still burning up cars in Paris...

wheelchairman
01-07-2008, 09:30 AM
but never suggests anything that would make the system better.




Should he? The criticized always say that the critic should put something positive forward. But I don't see why he should, he's in the OPPOSITION, it's basically his job description to criticize.

the_GoDdEsS
01-08-2008, 01:14 PM
who are you trusting on this alleged non-constructive criticism of kasparov's? the russian papers? they're all in hock to the régime.

Like you can trust any papers. The Western papers are full of anti-Russian propaganda. Blah blah Putin has no soul, blah blah regime, blah blah KGB. It's boring. And I have no idea what there is to like about their opposition anyway, especially 'Kasparov'? Apparently he was babbling in English when they arrested him. Not very hard to guess why.

the_GoDdEsS
01-08-2008, 01:30 PM
I trust a paper when it tells me that Russia is on a bullish economic trend - though mainly due to the oil bonanza. I trust a paper when it tells me Putin intends to stay in power through either tweaking of the constitution or nifty handpicking of obscure sidekicks. I don't trust a paper when it says "Putin is evil". I happen to have a brain, and to use it.

Point taken, I suppose.


To be quite, quite honest though, I just didn't come across the "Putin is a soulless bast" shtick.

Hillary and McCain:

"By definition he doesn't have a soul. I mean, this is a waste of time, right? This is nonsense, but this is the world we're living in right now."

"Putin is a somewhat popular topic with U.S. presidential candidates. Republican Sen. John McCain, in a newspaper interview last month, said: "I looked into his eyes and saw three letters: a K, a G and a B."

Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0633656720080107?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true)

In my view that was rather primitive even more so when it's part of the campaign.

Mota Boy
01-08-2008, 02:02 PM
Other than that, dragging anti-Putin sentiments into the campaign is a real low strategy.The President of the United States will have to deal with an increasingly assertive Russia in the next four years. It's an issue that's relevant to the Presidential campaign. The campaigning is months long, cameras are constantly trained onto the candidates and they are asked hundreds, if not thousands of questions dealing with all sorts of foreign policy issues. Quite frankly, I'm amazed that, in this environment, Reuters can only find two Putin references among the leading candidates. And, given Russia's backtracking on democracy and realpolitik wrangling in Eastern Europe, one of the places we've successfully mined for new allies, what on Earth do you expect - candidates to say "Oh yeah, Putin sounds like a great guy!"? How could you expect that they would do anything but talk tough, the same way that candidates and parties in other parts of the world gain ground by criticizing Bush and the US?

The "soul" issue could be attributed to Hillary (along with many candidates) increasingly incorporating subtle religious language in their speech in order to woo religious voters.

Also, with Russia without a free press, Western papers are the only place to hear criticism of the man. That makes 'em appear much more "propaganda"-ish than they otherwise would be. But that aside, what do you like about Putin, Sim? I understand that Russia's been revitalized while he's been in power, but at that same time, oil prices - which are heavily taxed, compose a fifth of the economy and nearly two thirds of export revenue, have quintupled. I think Russia's resurgence and Putin's leadership has largely been coincidental, and from my point of view, he's used that power largely to further his own interests. I fail to see anything particularly great about the dude.

the_GoDdEsS
01-08-2008, 02:09 PM
The President of the United States will have to deal with an increasingly assertive Russia in the next four years. It's an issue that's relevant to the Presidential campaign.

I wouldn't ever expect them to praise Putin. But is it so hard then to give more diplomatic replies rather than quite negative statements that will only contribute to worsening of the relations? Or is it what the voters want to hear?

I doubt it that Russia is completely without free papers. Maybe they're just less accessible. There's still enough "free" internet ones, I'm sure. I'll just let the Russians themselves tell us then.

HeadAroundU
01-08-2008, 02:46 PM
/\ Pffft, he was only breathless. ;)

Mota Boy
01-08-2008, 03:57 PM
I wouldn't ever expect them to praise Putin. But is it so hard then to give more diplomatic replies rather than quite negative statements that will only contribute to worsening of the relations? Or is it what the voters want to hear?Well, these comments were not made on the world stage. Hillary's was made in a small forum, in a small town; McCain's to a domestic paper. I'm guessing Hillary didn't know the press would seize on that quote and run with it (precisely because it's a fairly abrasive statement - if calling Putin soulless was the norm then it wouldn't be a headline). Presidential candidates are trying to appear "tough" because voters most concerned about "security" or "terrorism" make up a sizeable percentage of the population (something like a quarter), and it's an issue that can be open to both parties. And it's not like you're going to find too many voters that turn away from a candidate for being too hard on Putin, given the attitude toward him here, so the tougher you can sound, the better, especially since they're not making any promises - just talking shit.


Because of Putin our tramp-president Sarko got drunk at the G8...Good thing he's a happy drunk.

Mota Boy
01-10-2008, 04:50 PM
Came across this interesting tidbit (http://russophobe.blogspot.com/2008/01/annals-of-russian-education.html) about Russia's updated textbooks. I'm sure Russians can get information off the internet if they want, but you're putting the onus on them to actively question everything they're fed, both in school, on TV and from official sources, then decide that they trust foreign, or alternate sources. That is a very, very different thing from a free press, a hallmark of a liberal democracy.

Anyway Sim, again, why do you think Putin's been doing a good job?

the_GoDdEsS
01-11-2008, 05:42 AM
Well, these comments were not made on the world stage. Hillary's was made in a small forum, in a small town; McCain's to a domestic paper.

As long as it wasn't anything official but just part of the answers to questions being fired at them, I can understand. It makes sense that the voters would be asking that and then even seemingly small things are going to make it to the headlines. And well, politics is not neutral, I guess Putin's a too easy target for them even if I don't find it diplomatically nice inside a campaign. But like you already said, the Bush-bashing is similar (however I don't know if anybody did it in campaign?). It kinda evens out.

So why I think he's apparently good? He's a true Russian (unlike his opposition), in the first place. That is why I think people like him. Russian by ethnicity and by actually doing things for his country, re-nationalising companies and not being anybody's drunk puppet. He's the one pulling the strings now. That might be autocratic but I don't think Russia is going back to Soviet times. I'm not saying Russia has a good democracy but what country does? There are countries whose people tend to be more liberal and conservative countries that need strong rulers. Sure there is still a hell of a lot corruption probably but they're getting better and better. Like, you could say a couple of years ago Russia was still a messed up post-communist place but now they're making headlines. He took over when the country was not necessarily in a good condition and he's still improving it. In addition to that he's a strict diplomat. What's most appealing to me is his strict and persistant position on Kosovo and how he's asserted his and his country's power on the international stage. That's just the impression, I'd have to live in Russia to be able to get a real feel.

HeadAroundU
01-11-2008, 10:57 AM
A small forum or a big forum, it doesn't matter. The world is watching you! :D

It certainly wasn't very cool of her, just like her crying on TV. :cool:

...I wonder if she would sell her kidneys in order to be a president...

wheelchairman
01-11-2008, 11:31 AM
We just saw the Daily Show from the 8th (apparently we are 3 days behind here).

Maybe it's my tv that isn't high definition, but I didn't see any tears.

Dead Kennedy
01-11-2008, 02:39 PM
I hate both of them. In fact, I hate a lot of things
I hate a lot of people that are lame.
I like to hate stuff cause then I don't have to try and make a change. Yeah I hate everything I even hate you too, so fuck you

sKratch
01-12-2008, 10:33 AM
We just saw the Daily Show from the 8th (apparently we are 3 days behind here).

Maybe it's my tv that isn't high definition, but I didn't see any tears.

HFS!!! Daily Show is back?!! Best news I've heard in a long time.

In any case. Putin is Time's man of the year.

HornyPope
01-14-2008, 10:18 PM
As long as it wasn't anything official but just part of the answers to questions being fired at them, I can understand. It makes sense that the voters would be asking that and then even seemingly small things are going to make it to the headlines. And well, politics is not neutral, I guess Putin's a too easy target for them even if I don't find it diplomatically nice inside a campaign. But like you already said, the Bush-bashing is similar (however I don't know if anybody did it in campaign?). It kinda evens out.

So why I think he's apparently good? He's a true Russian (unlike his opposition), in the first place. That is why I think people like him. Russian by ethnicity and by actually doing things for his country, re-nationalising companies and not being anybody's drunk puppet. He's the one pulling the strings now. That might be autocratic but I don't think Russia is going back to Soviet times. I'm not saying Russia has a good democracy but what country does? There are countries whose people tend to be more liberal and conservative countries that need strong rulers. Sure there is still a hell of a lot corruption probably but they're getting better and better. Like, you could say a couple of years ago Russia was still a messed up post-communist place but now they're making headlines. He took over when the country was not necessarily in a good condition and he's still improving it. In addition to that he's a strict diplomat. What's most appealing to me is his strict and persistant position on Kosovo and how he's asserted his and his country's power on the international stage. That's just the impression, I'd have to live in Russia to be able to get a real feel.

I agree with that.

Also, Russia doesn't have strong democratic institutions like Western democracies so the top political echelon has to be accountable--at least in the form of standing before the public--for what goes in the country, and they have to apease people's nationalistic feelings in the process, and mediate among the many social devides. It's a job many governments failed at before. So when a lot of positive stories come out, you can't help but at least feel encouraged about it.

HornyPope
01-14-2008, 10:27 PM
Came across this interesting tidbit (http://russophobe.blogspot.com/2008/01/annals-of-russian-education.html) about Russia's updated textbooks. I'm sure Russians can get information off the internet if they want, but you're putting the onus on them to actively question everything they're fed, both in school, on TV and from official sources, then decide that they trust foreign, or alternate sources. That is a very, very different thing from a free press, a hallmark of a liberal democracy.

Anyway Sim, again, why do you think Putin's been doing a good job?

Russians don't learn politics from books. Only nerds read them and they forget them when they leave school--when they have to do entrance exams and actually bust their asses in university.

the Alternate
01-16-2008, 08:36 AM
Being honest, living in Russia, i think that it is a bad bullshit about "absense of free newspapers" and "being fed at schools".
As far as I remember, when studying at school I didn't hear anything about politics, maybe somewhere it isn't so, but I have never faced it. In University - we only discussed the international politics that has its effect on financial conditions.

About free newspapers: you should properly understand what is a "free newspaper". I don't know why, but people in western hemisphere always feel like pointing on closing some of them but always the most radical. My view is that they are worth being closed because they contain lots of abusing things not only to the actinons of govenment, but for racist discrimination, Appeals to violent overthrow of authority and so on.

as for opposition: I told many times before and I would tell more and more: the opposition for that Putin is blamed is not even a little constructive. All their speeches are available on the internet and everything they do is just saying that this government should be replaced. But they never offer anything that will help the country live better. (I'm about Kasparov & stuff) Everything they do is just provocative action and trying to underline how badly they are pursuit. But did they ever think about the nation? I know nothing about it cause they never tell us about their plans.
As once was said: There are people, who do, and there are who critisize.

as for international politics: the opinion that isn't similar to US's is not meant to be incorrect. As far as I notice, Russia is always persistant and consecutive.

Jesus
01-20-2008, 07:50 AM
Presidential candidates are trying to appear "tough" because voters most concerned about "security" or "terrorism" make up a sizeable percentage of the population (something like a quarter), and it's an issue that can be open to both parties. And it's not like you're going to find too many voters that turn away from a candidate for being too hard on Putin, given the attitude toward him here, so the tougher you can sound, the better, especially since they're not making any promises - just talking shit.


Which can be exploited again by Russian elites for internal purposes (good old irrational idiotic nationalist sentiment).

I think the whole neo-liberal 'western' (I dislike the word western, like it's some kind of homogeneous block) elites disliking the Putin regime is overblown. They are for the most part happy with him. They have had their worries a few times, but the Russian elites quickly reassured them.

1) Nationalization, fears that the neo-libs would lose their investments. Solved by the Russians for the most part focusing on the oligarchs. In response FDI has skyrocketed, with a new record high in 2007. Ow how they loathe the Russian regime. Not.
2) Stopping gas supplies to former soviet states (they received it almost free or under market prices, in exchange for pipeline usage). Fear that the instability would lead to higher prices. This was quickly solved by negotiating new contracts (with the necessary internal corruption), higher prices for those eastern European states meant more gas for Western Europe (cause we can actually afford it). Gazprom fulfilled its contract during this whole non-crisis.
3) Litvinenko, this was only relevant for the British. Given that 2 of the most important news outlets are based there (FT and The Economist) it was overblown. It had mostly to do with 'sovereignty', the same reaction these City papers have regarding the EU (or Brussels as they call it). Probably the result of an old Britannia rules the waves mindset. The result? Britain was the largest foreign investor in Russia in 2007. Shows how much they actually care.
4) The only thing that isn't really settled is the concern about the lack of investment from Gazprom in extraction. It mostly invest or wastes money in distribution. And probably aims to get a foot in the direct consumer market too (it became the shirt sponsor of Schalke 04 for instance).

So we got a quasi like totalitarian government that can suppress any sign of social justice and therefor supply plenty of cheap labor (the Dutch Disease has been avoided for the most part). When local governments protested about the exploitation in their region they got their political autonomy withdrawn, they got replaced by central appointees who couldn't care less. Finally, it is quite a stable supplier of natural gas compared to the other energy rich region.
It's quite a sweet deal.

wheelchairman
01-21-2008, 04:22 PM
You should post more in this form Ken, you're rather insightful so it's nice reading.