CDI Russia Weekly #221 Contents

Russia's Putin an unrepentant domestic tyrant, his wife says

Russian President Vladimir Putin may openly profess his pride in his KGB past, but his wife Lyudmila recently disclosed a less-publicized aspect of his personality. According to the First Lady, her husband is a bona fide male chauvinist.

Regarding a woman's role in life, Putin's views are crystal-clear -- and not exactly progressive -- 45-year-old Lyudmila said in a biography of the Russian leader released Wednesday.

He has two basic rules: "a woman must do everything at home" and "you should not a praise a woman, otherwise, you will spoil her," she confided to journalist Oleg Blotski in "Vladimir Putin: The Road to Power."

Sent by fred camorra call | 11:02 AM ET | 12-19-2007

As I've told people before (warned them actually), Hillary is a "no holes barred, take no prisoner's, MY way or the highway, anything to be first!", type of candidate. Reminds me of Stalin!
She does not play nice! She doesn't want the office of V.P.!

In fact, I'm (somewhat) suprised that Chuck Schumer is still in office (being the senior senator from NY, he ranks higher). But, she is trying to "leap frog" him by going for the presidency.

To those that believe there is "a vast right-wing conspiracy", remember there is a vast left-wing conspiracy too! A most of it is paid for by "questionable" fundraising from people like Hu. (Wasn't there a fundraising scandal in Bill's administration too?)

All politics is dirty, it's about power (grabbing), influence (peddeling), and rewarding the people that got you there!
Why else spend billions (with a "B") to get a job that pays $200,000?

George Washington warned us about political parties subverting the needs of the nation!

Sent by Harold | 11:22 AM ET | 12-19-2007

AFSCME dropped $34,083 on postage to mail the fake flier. *** Nothing for production costs ... Nothing for research on Edwards so's to match his campaign's layout characteristics? nothing to pay for the images? Nothing to pay the author? *** Duh, oh! Looks like AFSCME got the flier free. Gratis. *** And from whom, if you please? And from whom... before the Iowa caucuses go down. Significantly before January 3rd. *** This is election fraud. It is as dishonest as anything done by Nixon's CREEP for the 1972 presidential election. *** Hillary Clinton, or "Hillary Nixon"

Sent by Amylicious | 7:44 PM ET | 12-24-2007

Some day Tennesse Williams is going to have to come up out of his grave to explain what went wrong between the Hillary camp with the Barack camp. Tell it in a way that will be interesting as a cat on a hot tin collection plate in a Democrat's back boiler room.

I've come to the conclusion that either the Democratic Party is throwing this election so bad that they're going to end up paying some homeless guy thirty thousand to be their candidate, that, or the Democratic party bosses went brain dead from too much Jack Daniels and Las Vegas party time.

Either way....corrupt or stupid as a bucket of water....the Democrats have come up a disgrace. This is what the fine people get for their efforts of taking back congress last midterm.

The White House has been settled, one way or the other. The GOP does not have any competition.

What should happen is that every Democrat be thrown out on their registered behinds. Show no mercy. If you can't start a third party, you should start a whole new Democratic Party. Because this one has done Et Tu Brute with a dull butter knife to the back multiple times.

Yeah, there's maybe a couple of Democrats who might be worth saving. You'd have to look at their records to determine saving maybe one or two of their pitiful souls.

Other than that, cleaning house with no mercy is about the only way I can think of that hints anything of party reform.

It is sad that we've come to a one party hydra headed system with two names.

Ya know, a garbage can that is empty doesn't stink as bad as a garbage can that is full.

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 6:28 PM ET | 12-26-2007

Fred is so entirely out of touch and off base. There is only one GOP candidate that stands a realistic chance of becoming president: Rudy Giuliani. And that's only if he can distance himself enough from our current president. McCain, Huckabee, Paul nor Romney will get the nomination. The GOP establishment doesn't want McCain or Paul. Interdenominational feuding will make Huckabee and Romney cancel each other out. Now, on that note, I'd like to point some things out about ol' RG. He's already named people he thinks he'll put on his foreign policy team. Mr. Giuliani???s team includes Norman Podhoretz, a prominent neoconservative who advocates bombing Iran ???as soon as it is logistically possible???; Daniel Pipes, the director of the Middle East Forum, who has called for profiling Muslims at airports and scrutinizing American Muslims in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps; and Michael Rubin, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who has written in favor of revoking the United States??? ban on assassination.

So, to put it simply because it actually will be a simple choice: If you want more of the same that we've had in the last eight years (though perhaps a bit smarter and more efficient) vote Republican. If you want change, vote Democrat. That is all.

Sent by John R. Otten | 3:13 PM ET | 12-30-2007

I forgot Fred Thompson. He's the wild card. I doubt he'll get the nomination but if he does, then whether or not he wins will depend on the Dem he faces. If Hillary, her experience (at running the country with Bill for eight years) will carry the day for her. If Obama, however, then the two are on a more even footing. He might stand a chance against Obama. Would Thompson represent a shift of course from the current regime. Well that is a good question, isn't it?

Sent by John R. Otten | 6:05 PM ET | 12-30-2007

Sent by John R. Otten: Michael Rubin, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who has written in favor of revoking the United States??? ban on assassination.

A Tomahawk missile into Khadafi Duck's backyard changed Libya's ideas about blowing up 747s.

Hey, maybe it would have been nice to send in a team and whack Saddam? Instead of doing all that messing hanging til their heads come off their shoulders routine?

So, what would be wrong with having whacked Saddam?

Or, do you prefer doing it the old fashioned way having the troops hunt Saddam down? But, of course you do. That way you can complain about troop losses in battle.

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 8:54 PM ET | 12-30-2007