Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Putin on the Ritz
Share:
by YankeeJim | March 6, 2012 at 03:50 am
237 views | 1 Recommendation | 5 comments
Photos
Putin on the Ritz
He’s on a roll, like tanks against the Germans on the eastern front.
Putin and the gang have steamed rolled Russian voters and plowed their way back into office.
See the video.
http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2012/03/04/putin-on-the-ritz/
Via the Poke at Putin
Advertisement
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
YankeeJim
Arlington, Virginia, United States
Most Recommended Stories in World
Recommendations (1)
Anonymous user
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (5)
- Sign In or Join to post comments
"thirty-aught-six" (not verified)at 05:49 on March 6th, 2012
Putin is a progressive. He represents the elite and knows what's best for Russia and it's people. If he was American the Democrats would give him the White House with out question. The Republicans would too but, they'd never get to him first.
at 07:18 on March 6th, 2012
Super Tuesday has arrived. Let's see if your party produces a winner.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
"thirty-aught-six" (not verified)at 08:01 on March 6th, 2012
I'm an independent non-partisan voter. I vote em out as much as I vote to elect em. If you don't they start talking about their social legacies and passing into law policies that they never have to worry about being re-elected on. Four years of Obama was enough. Time to change the Washington diaper.
at 08:27 on March 6th, 2012
When electing presidents, it should be for the maximum number of terms because that way voters can maximize their return on elections providing that 1) the candidate is performing acceptably, 2) there are no candidates with clearly superior qualifications and plans for improving government performance and economic performance.
When the scope and scale of needs and problems are great in magnitude and duration, it makes more sense to elect incumbents for the longest haul allowed by law.
I don't think the case has been made that Obama is a badly performing President. The case is apparent that 1) Congress is performing poorly, 2) Republicans don't have their act together, and 3) Republican candidates are not offering a better alternative.
Change for change sake is a bad idea.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
"thirty-aught-six" (not verified)at 09:32 on March 6th, 2012
LOL. For all the reasons you ranted against GW Bush you now support in Obama. Change for the sake of change? Hardly! Change is as important as it was in 2008. Obama has been more GW Bush than the actual GW Bush was. We don't need 4 more years to be sure. Like so many partisans you just can't let go of the "blame the other guy" rhetoric, or acknowledge the situation is entirely on Obama and the Democratic party after 4 years in office. More on the Democratic Party itself for remaining quiet on the issues they could never defend under GW Bush yet have silently rubber stamped under Obama. That hypocrisy is on you guys. Congress isn't there to rubber stamp the Obama agenda. Their key job is to act as a buffer. Debate every issue that comes before them and take it back to THEIR electorate to get the PEOPLES opinion, and then cast their vote representing their constituents. Congress isn't there for the pleasure of Obama. It's there to represent the people district by district, State by State. You should know and understand the importance of that political demarcation between the White House Administration and both Houses of Congress. Time to get someone in there who does understand and isn't working to undermine the system so they can dictate policy. The Democratic Party has been very lazy since the election of Obama. If politicians don't get things right in the first four years.. turf em and move on to the next. That goes for every level of government. Sooner or later some politician from either Party will click to the notion that they are there to serve the PEOPLES INTERESTS -not to create servants to their political or social ideology. That is not the role of government.