Eternal Russia
Today is Wednesday, 21 July 2010.
Perhaps the only moment of the W. Bush presidency (or usurpationary, to be precise) that I enjoyed, unfortunately didn’t happen.
It was when Bush and Vladimir Putin met in 2001 for the first time, and Bush was initially quoted as saying afterwards: “I looked into his eyes, and I liked what I saw”. I thought: “WTF? Is W. having a metrosexual guy crush moment?”
Turned out what George said was, "I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul. He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship.”
In other words, boilerplate.
John McCain, while running for president in 2007, said that he looked into Putin’s eyes, and saw three letters: “A “K”, and a “G”, and a “B””.
Well, duh. More boilerplate.
Contrary to popular belief, when the U.S.S.R. died and Boorish Yeltsin succeeded Mikhail Gorbachev at the head of the Russian state, democracy wasn’t born, but rather the same old autocracy under new management. (Communism died in 1924, with Lenin. Stalin and his successors were merely czars under a different title.) Not surprising, since Yeltsin was never a democrat.
People tend to forget that, when Yeltsin was expelled from the Politburo in 1987, it wasn’t for advocating democracy: it was for failing in an attempt to depose Yegor Ligachev, and replace him as number two in the regime. People also tend to forget that, in 1993, Yeltsin illegally dissolved Parliament, after a failed attempt to impeach him. The Parliament then removed him for overthrowing the Constitution, and Yeltsin responded by attacking Parliament with troops and tanks, and ruling by decree. It was then no surprise when, in 1999, Yeltsin handed over the presidency to Putin, a former K.G.B. officer turned opportunistic politician.
Putin has proved a far more efficient and ruthless ruler than Yeltsin, consolidating power once more in the Kremlin, and conducting a criminal war in Chechnya. Putin has also shown no little tolerance for political opposition to his regime, ordering the police to attack even the smallest public protests. Putin continues in power as Prime Minister, with a figurehead without a political base as token president.
It’s then no wonder Putin has now legally revived, through the State Duma (parliament), an old K.G.B. tactic used against dissidents. The security organs are now officially authorized to have a “preventive conversation” with “someone who is beginning to move toward committing a crime”. (The words of Vladimir Vasiliev, chair of the Duma’s Committee on Security.)
Bank robbers, wife beaters, and child molesters need not, of course, fear such conversations. As in Soviet days, the law will be directed toward intimidating members of the opposition.
_______________________________________
BTW. I once looked into McCain’s eyes. I saw his wife’s fortune.
Perhaps the only moment of the W. Bush presidency (or usurpationary, to be precise) that I enjoyed, unfortunately didn’t happen.
It was when Bush and Vladimir Putin met in 2001 for the first time, and Bush was initially quoted as saying afterwards: “I looked into his eyes, and I liked what I saw”. I thought: “WTF? Is W. having a metrosexual guy crush moment?”
Turned out what George said was, "I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul. He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship.”
In other words, boilerplate.
John McCain, while running for president in 2007, said that he looked into Putin’s eyes, and saw three letters: “A “K”, and a “G”, and a “B””.
Well, duh. More boilerplate.
Contrary to popular belief, when the U.S.S.R. died and Boorish Yeltsin succeeded Mikhail Gorbachev at the head of the Russian state, democracy wasn’t born, but rather the same old autocracy under new management. (Communism died in 1924, with Lenin. Stalin and his successors were merely czars under a different title.) Not surprising, since Yeltsin was never a democrat.
People tend to forget that, when Yeltsin was expelled from the Politburo in 1987, it wasn’t for advocating democracy: it was for failing in an attempt to depose Yegor Ligachev, and replace him as number two in the regime. People also tend to forget that, in 1993, Yeltsin illegally dissolved Parliament, after a failed attempt to impeach him. The Parliament then removed him for overthrowing the Constitution, and Yeltsin responded by attacking Parliament with troops and tanks, and ruling by decree. It was then no surprise when, in 1999, Yeltsin handed over the presidency to Putin, a former K.G.B. officer turned opportunistic politician.
Putin has proved a far more efficient and ruthless ruler than Yeltsin, consolidating power once more in the Kremlin, and conducting a criminal war in Chechnya. Putin has also shown no little tolerance for political opposition to his regime, ordering the police to attack even the smallest public protests. Putin continues in power as Prime Minister, with a figurehead without a political base as token president.
It’s then no wonder Putin has now legally revived, through the State Duma (parliament), an old K.G.B. tactic used against dissidents. The security organs are now officially authorized to have a “preventive conversation” with “someone who is beginning to move toward committing a crime”. (The words of Vladimir Vasiliev, chair of the Duma’s Committee on Security.)
Bank robbers, wife beaters, and child molesters need not, of course, fear such conversations. As in Soviet days, the law will be directed toward intimidating members of the opposition.
_______________________________________
BTW. I once looked into McCain’s eyes. I saw his wife’s fortune.
posted by HH at 2:05 PM
8 Comments:
HH -
You are writing at a grade level above my head.
What is the definiation of "usurpationary?"
What is the meaning/inferance of: “A “K”, and a “G”, and a “B””?
Thanks.
Palin says that word coinage "celebrates Shakespeare". Thus, "usurpationary", from "usurp", as I still consider the Supreme Court decision in the case of the 2000 election to have been intentionally and corruptly wrong. History will one day scorn it and its perpetrators as we now scorn Dred Scott.
KGB, comrade. The walls have ears.
If you are going to coin a word, give us warning. I thought I was just unfamiliar with the word. Also, if you are going to coin a word, give a clue as to what it means. If we don't know what it means, we won't get your point, and you won't get credit for coining it.
My bad.
I thought HH's "coined" word (which, by the way, obviously came from the base word "usurp") was an homage to our fine leaders, George W. "they misunderestimated me" Bush and his successor, the lovely and talented Sarah "just call me Shakespeare" Palin.
I don't think HH owes us an apology for failing to announce that he is about to make a little joke, and I'd like to see anyone refudiate that.
On the other hand, I do think HH often writes at a grade level above most of our heads--I doubt that too many people refer to the Dred Scott case in passing unless they are in a constitutional law class. But isn't that what makes this blog interesting?
To "Who needs a dictionary?":
No... I don't think that HH writes at a grade level above our heads - at least those who had the advantage of a public school education. I think the Dred Scott decision is familiar to any who graduated from an accredited high school.
The "coined" word "usurpationary" was obviously, clearly, manifestly and unmistakably from the base word "usurp." Cleverly done, and appropriately used, but hardly a head-scratcher. One can devine its meaning immediately. And it's not nearly so much fun as W's "misunderestimated." (Although, I grant you, that's VERY hard to top.) As for HH's joke in the coinage and use of the word "usurpationary", I think no one will repudiate his failure to announce it (repudiate means "to reject the validity or authority of").
As to what makes this blog interesting, I believe it is HH's re-defining of words currently in common usage in order to suit his own purposes and to conform to his logic.
And Sarah Palin is undoubtedly an incredible idiot. I can hardly believe that she knows the word "Shakespeare".
Dear fubarbeliever,
Not to be a stickler, but I asked if anyone could refudiate, not repudiate, my statement. You'll need your Sarah Palin dictionary for that one.
To: Who needs a dictionary? -
Sorry. My bad.
Post a Comment
<< Home