Media freedom in Russia is doing about as well as it is in China and Iran - in other words, quite badly, according to the ranking of the US Freedom House organisation, which monitors freedom of the press in different countries. The organisation rates countries as free, partly free, and not free. Russia ranks in the third group.
» Breaking News
Gemma Atkinson Promotes Command & Conquer Red Alert
Uganda Cops Warn About Knock-Out Breasts
CNBC Forced To Cut Costs
Sumner Redstone Sells Midway Games To Ease Cash Crunch
Murdered Anchorwoman Anne Pressly Was Sexually Assaulted, Parents Say
Never. Coz he is not dictator. Bush is dictator.
How about the same time we admit Bush is a dictator (or at least a puppet of the dictator Cheney)?
Soon I expect, he’s becoming a liability to the MIC.
Wow. Three really intelligent responses.
To answer your question. There is no definitive beginning and ending point for defining a dictator. By comparison with past Soviet rulers, Saddam and Assad, Chinese rulers, the likes of Castro and Chavez, Putin is not a dictator. To lump him in with those yahoos is to deprive the word of true context. He’s not a dictator.
He’s got a similar cult of personality. And there’s a good chance that his elections have been hookey - the first one especially. The second one he mostly kept on the level as far as the paper was concerned, contenting himself with manipulating the media into his personal 24-hour Party Election Broadcast.
So yeah, the appropriateness of the specific word “dictator” is arguable, but semantics never got anyone anywhere.
Hugo Chavez, by the way, was elected, just like Putin, only his elections were considered to be solid.
Well, when Bush orders this site as well as other liberal blogs to shut down because they’re politically opposed to him, then we’ll compare him to Chavez and Putin.
He may be a bad president. But a dictator?
You probably need to see your tailor to get fitted for a straight jacket.
He’d like to be, but fortunately you guys have that constitution thing which the administration’s been having a hard time getting through.
Frankly it’s amazing that you admitted he’s a bad president.
“This would be a whole lot easier if this was a dictatorship…just as long as I’m the dictator!” - George W. Bush, 2000
Not that he is, mind you. Not that he’d even like to be declared one. But his actions since 2000 tend to make me think this was more than just an offhand joke.
Throughout his business and political career he’s been fixated on cheap and easy solutions to difficult problems, so it wouldn’t surprise me that the best solution in his mind to dealing with the complicated nuances required of a world leader would be if everybody would just Shut Up and Do What He Says.
You mean Bush saw the “soul” of a Dictator?
“he’s been fixated on cheap and easy solutions to difficult problems’
Hmmm. Bush is a big spender on just about everything and Iraq is ‘cheap and easy’. Yeap. Good analysis Spidy.
Again. Perspective you yahoos! Stalin was a dictator. Hitler was a dictator. Castro is a dictator. Sort it out. Is it any wonder Democrats are disatrous at foreign policy. Maybe Patty Murray needs to send you all to some of those daycare schools AQ has been building. OR maybe you can go to Murtha’s Iraq support base - in Indo-frappin-nesia for Gods sake.
Maybe if you could read and/or actually respond rationally to what people actually said to you you’d get more respect. Just a thought.
No, Iraq is not cheap and easy, but Bush went into Iraq with an undermanned, under-equipped, underplanned strategy to Kick Ass and Install Freedom because he wanted it to be.
And of course he’s a big spender. That’s not his money he’s spending. It’s yours and mine.
Duggsy spouted like this last year … right up to the day of the midterm elections. We didn’t hear from him for weeks afterwards. The silence spoke volumes.
“And of course he’s a big spender.”
Oh, I agree. Was just trying to reconcile that with your claim about his cheapness.
And actually Bush spends nothing not authorized by the former Repub and now Democratic Congress. And as bad as Bush is with spending. Take a Democratic Congres with a Democratic presdients with all sorts of notions baout penalizing achievers and rolling back the tax cuts, well then you’ll see real spending.
Nimmer
If it was a real ‘thought’, who told it to you?
Conservative humour, ladies and gentlemen.
Maybe not “cheap,” then. You have a point. He is nonetheless fiscally irresponsible and emotionally immature, entertaining constant fantasies about his glorious heroism and assigning himself nicknames left and right. He’s Tom Sawyer, only half as clever, and he runs the most powerful country in the world.
But never mind. I’m sure this is just what you call “Bush Hate.” And yes, Stalin and Saddam were worse.
that’s humour with a U, thank very much.
Of course we are going to see a rollback of tax cuts when the Dems take the WH. we’ve had 6+ years of fiscal fistfucking going on that now we have to clean up after.
Danke schon. I vill be here all veek.
Dugger
And I betcha with the economy rolling, there will be no roll back of the Bush tax cuts. Not a single viable Dem candidate will, in the final shakedown, sign up to that. Like iraq, progressives are doomed for disappointment on this.
But please doubt me and encourage your candidate to run on the “We politicians want to take home more of your hard earned wages” platform.
Shorter Dugger: “The government should run for free.”
Spider, don’t let Dugger bamboozle you by conflating “cheap” and “cost.” Bush and his cronies have been extraordinarily cheap and have gone out of their way to screw the middle class and the poor. The Iraq war was fought on the cheap, it just didn’t pan out that we could occupy the country for an extended period and have a prayer of containing the cost. The only time Bush isn’t cheap is when he’s throwing billions in subsidies or no-bid contracts at GOP contributors.
Notice the not-so-subtle attempt to paint taxes as a penalty on “achievers.” What a load. Wingers are so freaking dishonest about everything. We live in a society crumbling under the weight of a minuscule percentage of the population who have accrued such extraordinary wealth that they are able to bend and even break the system to their own ends. That’s capitalism run amok for you, thanks to the “no limits (read:taxes) on achievers” crowd. By that definition, Paris Hilton is an “achiever.”
And clearly Bushco is not yet a dictatorship, but that’s only thanks to 230 years of precedent, not some deep moral commitment to the rule of law and the Constitution. Bush doesn’t get credit because his predecessors had the foresight to put constraints on the government, controls this administration has worked tirelessly to shred within the fictitious WOT framework.
The people will get behind higher taxes if they know it’s going for a worthy purpose. FDR proved that.
Get it through your skull–Bush has lost the confidence of the people on this war and on his ability to even broker a reasonable end to it. If he comes up with a strategy that isn’t simply “more troops to Iraq equals Victory!” then maybe he can win that confidence back.
FDR used higher taxes to fight the Nazis and japan, and pull us out of the depression. We are no where near those conditions right now. No where near and the economy is starting to look very strong. Raising taxes will ruin a strong economy.
Funny, I keep hearing comparisons with World War II.
Also I seem to remember that “Raising taxes will ruin the economy” was your excuse in the middle of Bush’s horrible deficit recession which may or may not be gone for good.
Nimmer
You don’t remember sh*t.
Ooooh, good one, dugs.
But its Nimmer! And he don’t remember poo poo. Them there limeys don’t get vitamin C and it messes up their teeth and brains. I try to cut Nimmer some slack because of that.