The Mess in The Ukraine.

[Wonky]

A good read about This Mess.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/co...entry-more

An excerpt:

And here we are, chilly breezes blowing indeed. With Ukraine and Crimea suddenly looming as potential Sarajevos, the usual rhetoric of credibility and the horrors of appeasement comes blaring from the usual quarters. People who, a week ago, could not have told you if Crimea belonged to Ukraine—who maybe thought, based on a vague memory of reading Chekhov, that it was Russian all along—are now acting as though the integrity of a Ukrainian Crimea is an old and obvious American interest. What they find worse than our credibility actually being at stake is that we might not act as though it always is. The ins and outs, the explication of Ukrainian specificities—the expulsion of the Crimean Tatars, Khrushchev’s gift of Crimea to Ukraine in 1954—must be left to those who know them. But certain historical continuities appear at once to anyone with a memory of history’s grosser follies.

[Prospero]

If you want a sane view of things, the New Yorker is usually reliable (although that might not suit the needs of this forum).

Another excerpt from Adam Gopnik's article:

As I’ve written, the intellectuals of 1914 didn’t want the moral equivalent of war; they wanted war as a way of driving out moral equivalence, of ending relativism and decadence and materialism. They exulted in the moral clarity of the coming confrontation after the debasing decades of bourgeois pleasures, and they welcomed the end of their long holiday from history.

The intellectuals of that time would have been mostly European, and they hadn't had a real war for many years. The Americans, in 1914, were within living memory of the bloodiest war in history, and they made an effort to stay out until they could break the stalemate and put an end to it.

[Wonky]

If you want a sane view of things, the New Yorker is usually reliable (although that might not suit the needs of this forum).

Another excerpt from Adam Gopnik's article:

As I’ve written, the intellectuals of 1914 didn’t want the moral equivalent of war; they wanted war as a way of driving out moral equivalence, of ending relativism and decadence and materialism. They exulted in the moral clarity of the coming confrontation after the debasing decades of bourgeois pleasures, and they welcomed the end of their long holiday from history.

The intellectuals of that time would have been mostly European, and they hadn't had a real war for many years. The Americans, in 1914, were within living memory of the bloodiest war in history, and they made an effort to stay out until they could break the stalemate and put an end to it.

Yeah, but this is not "The Guns of August" and 1914 may not be a really good example of what is going on now.
I'm encouraged that our president and most of the leaders of the EU are keeping the rhetoric down and letting things unfold.
The bottom line is that The Ukraine is not vital to our national defense. It doesn't have a history of a hundred years of democratic practice that is being subverted. The recent political events there are muddled and complicated and "we" should be very careful about putting our national interests on the line.

[Prospero]

Yeah, but this is not "The Guns of August" and 1914 may not be a really good example of what is going on now.
I'm encouraged that our president and most of the leaders of the EU are keeping the rhetoric down and letting things unfold.
The bottom line is that The Ukraine is not vital to our national defense. It doesn't have a history of a hundred years of democratic practice that is being subverted. The recent political events there are muddled and complicated and "we" should be very careful about putting our national interests on the line.

When we did enter WW1, it was "to make the world safe for democracy," a noble aim, but somewhat nervy coming from a second-rate power (at that time) who had only recently renounced slavery and fought a bitter civil war, and whose female citizens were not yet allowed to vote.

It would be hard to find a piece of ground anywhere in the world that someone wouldn't regard as vital to our national defense (generally for reasons that are classified).

[tvguy]

Yeah, but this is not "The Guns of August" and 1914 may not be a really good example of what is going on now.
I'm encouraged that our president and most of the leaders of the EU are keeping the rhetoric down and letting things unfold.
The bottom line is that The Ukraine is not vital to our national defense. It doesn't have a history of a hundred years of democratic practice that is being subverted. The recent political events there are muddled and complicated and "we" should be very careful about putting our national interests on the line.

When we did enter WW1, it was "to make the world safe for democracy," a noble aim, but somewhat nervy coming from a second-rate power (at that time) who had only recently renounced slavery and fought a bitter civil war, and whose female citizens were not yet allowed to vote.

It would be hard to find a piece of ground anywhere in the world that someone wouldn't regard as vital to our national defense (generally for reasons that are classified).

Well at the time we may have "recently renounced slavery", recently being what? 50 years? But the point is that we did renounce slavery.And that we did step up to the plate to make this world a safer place and we did and still do put our people in harms way so others can be free like we are.

But later especially after Vietnam out actions are rightfully questioned by many of us. Sometimes to the extreme that we never do ANYTHING that is REALLY for freedom for others.
I think it's sad that so many feel this way.It's an extreme view.

[Prospero]

Yeah, but this is not "The Guns of August" and 1914 may not be a really good example of what is going on now.
I'm encouraged that our president and most of the leaders of the EU are keeping the rhetoric down and letting things unfold.
The bottom line is that The Ukraine is not vital to our national defense. It doesn't have a history of a hundred years of democratic practice that is being subverted. The recent political events there are muddled and complicated and "we" should be very careful about putting our national interests on the line.

When we did enter WW1, it was "to make the world safe for democracy," a noble aim, but somewhat nervy coming from a second-rate power (at that time) who had only recently renounced slavery and fought a bitter civil war, and whose female citizens were not yet allowed to vote.

It would be hard to find a piece of ground anywhere in the world that someone wouldn't regard as vital to our national defense (generally for reasons that are classified).

Well at the time we may have "recently renounced slavery", recently being what? 50 years? But the point is that we did renounce slavery.And that we did step up to the plate to make this world a safer place and we did and still do put our people in harms way so others can be free like we are.

But later especially after Vietnam out actions are rightfully questioned by many of us. Sometimes to the extreme that we never do ANYTHING that is REALLY for freedom for others.
I think it's sad that so many feel this way.It's an extreme view.

The cynicism I expressed here was a superficial overlay on my basic idealism about the US, stemming from the fact that I was at an impressionable age (12) during one of the most idealistic times in history, when the UN and the country of Israel were founded, the fascistic Axis had been defeated, and the USSR was still our "gallant ally." This idealism has been strained from time to time, but it's still my default attitude.

Those who were at that age during the late 60s and early 70s (i.e. a lot of the baby boomers) tend, I think, to have the opposite point of view, that our country and its government can do no right. It's hard for anyone who grew up on Vietnam and Watergate to trust the government at all. I knew a lot of people during that period who believed that a revolution was the answer, and I think that it's quite understandable that many of these people now find themselves on the Republican right, trying to make the government go away.

[Wonky]

Yeah, but this is not "The Guns of August" and 1914 may not be a really good example of what is going on now.
I'm encouraged that our president and most of the leaders of the EU are keeping the rhetoric down and letting things unfold.
The bottom line is that The Ukraine is not vital to our national defense. It doesn't have a history of a hundred years of democratic practice that is being subverted. The recent political events there are muddled and complicated and "we" should be very careful about putting our national interests on the line.

When we did enter WW1, it was "to make the world safe for democracy," a noble aim, but somewhat nervy coming from a second-rate power (at that time) who had only recently renounced slavery and fought a bitter civil war, and whose female citizens were not yet allowed to vote.

It would be hard to find a piece of ground anywhere in the world that someone wouldn't regard as vital to our national defense (generally for reasons that are classified).

Well at the time we may have "recently renounced slavery", recently being what? 50 years? But the point is that we did renounce slavery.And that we did step up to the plate to make this world a safer place and we did and still do put our people in harms way so others can be free like we are.

But later especially after Vietnam out actions are rightfully questioned by many of us. Sometimes to the extreme that we never do ANYTHING that is REALLY for freedom for others.
I think it's sad that so many feel this way.It's an extreme view.

The cynicism I expressed here was a superficial overlay on my basic idealism about the US, stemming from the fact that I was at an impressionable age (12) during one of the most idealistic times in history, when the UN and the country of Israel were founded, the fascistic Axis had been defeated, and the USSR was still our "gallant ally." This idealism has been strained from time to time, but it's still my default attitude.

Those who were at that age during the late 60s and early 70s (i.e. a lot of the baby boomers) tend, I think, to have the opposite point of view, that our country and its government can do no right. It's hard for anyone who grew up on Vietnam and Watergate to trust the government at all. I knew a lot of people during that period who believed that a revolution was the answer, and I think that it's quite understandable that many of these people now find themselves on the Republican right, trying to make the government go away.

A good and accurate observation.
In some sense we are all a product of our our times.
That said, The Ukraine is a another one of those (these) hot beds of historical confusion and at some point we must accept the events of the past and add it to our understanding of what's going on now.
A mess!
It' really hard to do justice to the conversation here. It requires pages and pages of space to lay out any decent argument.
But we have a clear window onto history and this could be something remembered for a very long time.
Lets hope for the best.

[SFLiberal]

Barack really showed Putin he meant it when Kerry stated that if Russia didn't withdraw form the Ukraine by today there would be "serious consequences". What a joke. Putin is shaking in his boots....

Russian Deputy PM Laughs at Obama’s Sanctions

By Kirit Radia

Mar 17, 2014 3:09pm

MOSCOW – Russia’s deputy prime minister laughed off President Obama’s sanction against him today asking “Comrade @BarackObama” if “some prankster” came up with the list.

The Obama administration hit 11 Russian and Ukrainian officials with sanctions today as punishment for Russia’s support of Crimea’s referendum. Among them: aides to President Vladimir Putin, a top government official, senior lawmakers, Crimean officials, the ousted president of Ukraine, and a Ukrainian politician and businessman allegedly tied to violence against protesters in Kiev.

It remains to be seen whether the sanctions will dissuade Russia from annexing Crimea, but one an early clue that they will not be effective came just hours later when President Putin signed a decree recognizing Crimea as an independent state, perhaps an early step towards annexation.

U.S. official have warned of additional sanctions for Russian action, hoping it will deter Russia from any further aggression towards Ukraine, but it didn’t appear to upset the often outspoke Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin.

Rogozin, a friend of actor Steven Seagal, took to Twitter to tweak Obama, tweeting he thinks “some prankster” came up with the sanctions list

In a later tweet addressed to “Comrade @BarackObama,” he asked, “what should do those who have neither accounts nor property abroad? Or U didn’t think about it?”

Another Russian on the sanctions list, Vladislav Surkov, also seemed unconcerned.

Surkov, a top Putin ideologue often called the Kremlin’s grey cardinal, reportedly told a Russian newspaper, “It’s a big honor for me. I don’t have accounts abroad. The only things that interest me in the U.S. are Tupac Shakur, Allen Ginsberg, and Jackson Pollock. I don’t need a visa to access their work. I lose nothing.”

Here’s who gets hit with the sanctions:

U.S. officials said that, among the sanctioned individuals were the “key ideologists and architects” of Russia’s Ukraine policy, while adding that some of the Russian officials were included in the list for their role in curbing “human rights and liberties” in Russia.

The sanctions freeze any assets under American jurisdiction and prevent American banks from doing business with the named individual, essentially freezing them out of the international banking system. The sanctions also impose a ban on their travel to the United States. Separately, but in coordination with the White House, the European Union announced sanctions today on 21 individuals that it plans to name later. U.S. officials told reporters that the American and European lists “overlapped” in some area, but declined to say how.

While some of the sanctioned officials are bold faced names, the White House move is unlikely to affect Russia’s decision making with regard to Crimea’s bid to join the Russian Federation. Russia’s stock market actually improved on the news that so few officials were included on the list. U.S. officials warned that, if Russia does go ahead with annexation of Crimea, additional penalties will follow, with more, harsher measures to come if Russia attempts to enter eastern Ukraine.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/20...sanctions/

[Wonky]

Barack really showed Putin he meant it when Kerry stated that if Russia didn't withdraw form the Ukraine by today there would be "serious consequences". What a joke. Putin is shaking in his boots....

Russian Deputy PM Laughs at Obama’s Sanctions

By Kirit Radia

Mar 17, 2014 3:09pm

MOSCOW – Russia’s deputy prime minister laughed off President Obama’s sanction against him today asking “Comrade @BarackObama” if “some prankster” came up with the list.

The Obama administration hit 11 Russian and Ukrainian officials with sanctions today as punishment for Russia’s support of Crimea’s referendum. Among them: aides to President Vladimir Putin, a top government official, senior lawmakers, Crimean officials, the ousted president of Ukraine, and a Ukrainian politician and businessman allegedly tied to violence against protesters in Kiev.

It remains to be seen whether the sanctions will dissuade Russia from annexing Crimea, but one an early clue that they will not be effective came just hours later when President Putin signed a decree recognizing Crimea as an independent state, perhaps an early step towards annexation.

U.S. official have warned of additional sanctions for Russian action, hoping it will deter Russia from any further aggression towards Ukraine, but it didn’t appear to upset the often outspoke Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin.

Rogozin, a friend of actor Steven Seagal, took to Twitter to tweak Obama, tweeting he thinks “some prankster” came up with the sanctions list

In a later tweet addressed to “Comrade @BarackObama,” he asked, “what should do those who have neither accounts nor property abroad? Or U didn’t think about it?”

Another Russian on the sanctions list, Vladislav Surkov, also seemed unconcerned.

Surkov, a top Putin ideologue often called the Kremlin’s grey cardinal, reportedly told a Russian newspaper, “It’s a big honor for me. I don’t have accounts abroad. The only things that interest me in the U.S. are Tupac Shakur, Allen Ginsberg, and Jackson Pollock. I don’t need a visa to access their work. I lose nothing.”

Here’s who gets hit with the sanctions:

U.S. officials said that, among the sanctioned individuals were the “key ideologists and architects” of Russia’s Ukraine policy, while adding that some of the Russian officials were included in the list for their role in curbing “human rights and liberties” in Russia.

The sanctions freeze any assets under American jurisdiction and prevent American banks from doing business with the named individual, essentially freezing them out of the international banking system. The sanctions also impose a ban on their travel to the United States. Separately, but in coordination with the White House, the European Union announced sanctions today on 21 individuals that it plans to name later. U.S. officials told reporters that the American and European lists “overlapped” in some area, but declined to say how.

While some of the sanctioned officials are bold faced names, the White House move is unlikely to affect Russia’s decision making with regard to Crimea’s bid to join the Russian Federation. Russia’s stock market actually improved on the news that so few officials were included on the list. U.S. officials warned that, if Russia does go ahead with annexation of Crimea, additional penalties will follow, with more, harsher measures to come if Russia attempts to enter eastern Ukraine.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/20...sanctions/

It's early in the game.
The Russian economy is in the tank.
Sanctions can bring that economy to it's knees very quickly.
Putin is a ego driven throw back to the KGB. He wants a "win" in some part of the Ukraine and may very well get a limited victory.
His army is large
NATO and the US has a HUGE military by comparison.

Putin won't be laughing all that long. Sadly, he could cause lots of pain and suffering until he is slapped down and put back in his place.

[SFLiberal]

Barack really showed Putin he meant it when Kerry stated that if Russia didn't withdraw form the Ukraine by today there would be "serious consequences". What a joke. Putin is shaking in his boots....

Russian Deputy PM Laughs at Obama’s Sanctions

By Kirit Radia

Mar 17, 2014 3:09pm

MOSCOW – Russia’s deputy prime minister laughed off President Obama’s sanction against him today asking “Comrade @BarackObama” if “some prankster” came up with the list.

The Obama administration hit 11 Russian and Ukrainian officials with sanctions today as punishment for Russia’s support of Crimea’s referendum. Among them: aides to President Vladimir Putin, a top government official, senior lawmakers, Crimean officials, the ousted president of Ukraine, and a Ukrainian politician and businessman allegedly tied to violence against protesters in Kiev.

It remains to be seen whether the sanctions will dissuade Russia from annexing Crimea, but one an early clue that they will not be effective came just hours later when President Putin signed a decree recognizing Crimea as an independent state, perhaps an early step towards annexation.

U.S. official have warned of additional sanctions for Russian action, hoping it will deter Russia from any further aggression towards Ukraine, but it didn’t appear to upset the often outspoke Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin.

Rogozin, a friend of actor Steven Seagal, took to Twitter to tweak Obama, tweeting he thinks “some prankster” came up with the sanctions list

In a later tweet addressed to “Comrade @BarackObama,” he asked, “what should do those who have neither accounts nor property abroad? Or U didn’t think about it?”

Another Russian on the sanctions list, Vladislav Surkov, also seemed unconcerned.

Surkov, a top Putin ideologue often called the Kremlin’s grey cardinal, reportedly told a Russian newspaper, “It’s a big honor for me. I don’t have accounts abroad. The only things that interest me in the U.S. are Tupac Shakur, Allen Ginsberg, and Jackson Pollock. I don’t need a visa to access their work. I lose nothing.”

Here’s who gets hit with the sanctions:

U.S. officials said that, among the sanctioned individuals were the “key ideologists and architects” of Russia’s Ukraine policy, while adding that some of the Russian officials were included in the list for their role in curbing “human rights and liberties” in Russia.

The sanctions freeze any assets under American jurisdiction and prevent American banks from doing business with the named individual, essentially freezing them out of the international banking system. The sanctions also impose a ban on their travel to the United States. Separately, but in coordination with the White House, the European Union announced sanctions today on 21 individuals that it plans to name later. U.S. officials told reporters that the American and European lists “overlapped” in some area, but declined to say how.

While some of the sanctioned officials are bold faced names, the White House move is unlikely to affect Russia’s decision making with regard to Crimea’s bid to join the Russian Federation. Russia’s stock market actually improved on the news that so few officials were included on the list. U.S. officials warned that, if Russia does go ahead with annexation of Crimea, additional penalties will follow, with more, harsher measures to come if Russia attempts to enter eastern Ukraine.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/20...sanctions/

It's early in the game.
The Russian economy is in the tank.
Sanctions can bring that economy to it's knees very quickly.
Putin is a ego driven throw back to the KGB. He wants a "win" in some part of the Ukraine and may very well get a limited victory.
His army is large
NATO and the US has a HUGE military by comparison.

Putin won't be laughing all that long. Sadly, he could cause lots of pain and suffering until he is slapped down and put back in his place.

That's the point. What sanctions? The sanctions Obama just announced will do nothing. In fact they will do less than nothing. Putin knows Obama is all hyperbole. All he has to do is look at Syria.

[cletus1]

Well SFLiberal, I don't want to dampen your Love Fest with Putin, but you might want to pay attention to what is going on in Russia post US led sanctions.


CORRECTED-UPDATE 1-Russian economy grinding to a halt as Ukraine crisis takes heavy toll
Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:09pm EDT


(Corrects growth figure for January in paragraph 2 to read 0.1 pct, not 0.7 percent)

By Darya Korsunskaya

(Reuters) - Russia's economy is barely growing, inflation is rising fast, and capital is pouring out of the country, the Economy Ministry said on Monday, a sign that international tensions around Ukraine are already inflicting severe economic costs.

In February Russia's gross domestic product eked out growth of just 0.3 percent year-on-year, up from a revised 0.1 percent in January, Russia's Deputy Economy Minister Andrei Klepach said.

Last year the economy grew by just 1.3 percent, far below initial forecasts, but there had been hopes that growth would rebound this year. Instead Russia's economic performance is deteriorating further as the international tensions around Ukraine lead capital to flee Russia.

Klepach said that when seasonal and calendar factors are taken into account, February's 0.3 percent was "not bad" and "better than expected."

But he added that "it's too soon to talk about a turn-around in economic trends, about a recovery from stagnation."

He said that the ministry anticipates GDP growth of "around zero" for the first quarter as a whole. That would make its 2.5 percent growth forecast for 2014 challenging.

"There won't be a recession, but there is a problem of stagnation: it's length and depth. Unfortunately the investment slump is continuing. I'm not ready to say how long it will continue," Klepach said.

INFLATION SPIKE

While Russia's economic growth slows, inflation is shooting up. The Economy Ministry expects inflation to reach 6.9-7.0 percent in March, up from 6.2 percent in February.

The sharp rise illustrates how a slumping rouble is feeding into higher import prices, as both Russians and foreigners scramble to get out of rouble investments.

Klepach said that the Economy Ministry forecasts the net capital outflow during the first quarter at $65-70 billion - and "closer to $70 billion".

That compares with an outflow of $62.7 billion during the whole of 2013.

He said that Russia's economic indicators have been deteriorating, even though western sanctions against Russia have so far had only a minor economic impact, because cool relations between Russia and the West damage investor confidence.

"We considered in the forecast how the general deterioration of our relations with developed countries and world markets is having an influence," he said.

"Sanctions so far don't have a significant economic character, but in itself a worsening of relations is a significantly negative factor for economic growth and correspondingly influences the capital outflow."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/2...J120140324

[MarkM]

This will not end well for Putin. He may claim some short term victories, but his overall strategy is an epic fail. Sadly, he has too much pride to back down so it will be the Russian people who suffer. Brace yourself for another wave of Russian immigrants.

Again I ask progressives, Do you seen any differences between Republican and Democratic presidents? The last Rep prez we had didn't care if no other country allied with him -- he was going to war! Would McCain, Palin, or Romney be any different? I shudder to think how many active fronts we'd have now under that bunch. I'll stick with Mr. Cool, thank you very much. Mr. Spock knows how to deal with Romulans.

[SFLiberal]

I see today the Florida Rep. Al Grayson (D) said today are a Foreign Affairs Committee meeting that the United States should be please that Russia annexed the Crimea. He said that the Crimea residents vote was a entirely legitimate vote by a group of people who were upset that their chosen leader and that the Russian troops were just acting in a peacekeeping role. Not kidding. What an idiot.


Al Grayson , Al Zawahri, Al Gore , Al Jazeera, Al Qaeda, Al Franken, Al Awlaki, Al Sharpton ……………….hey………there’s a pattern here

[MarkM]

Wow. MarkM agrees with John McCain. What time is it?

"I have no illusions or worry about the long-term future of Russia. Russia is now a gas station masquerading as a country." -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

I wonder why he is so afraid of a gas station?

[chuck white]

Wow. MarkM agrees with John McCain. What time is it?

"I have no illusions or worry about the long-term future of Russia. Russia is now a gas station masquerading as a country." -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

I wonder why he is so afraid of a gas station?

Because, gas stations can cause a big explosion?

[MarkM]

Fareed Zakaria explains why we're on precisely the right track here. Thanks Obama!

This is not an academic debate. The best way to deal with Russia’s aggression in Crimea is not to present it as routine and national interest-based foreign policy that will be countered by Washington in a contest between two great powers. It is to point out, as Obama did eloquently this week in Brussels, that Russia is grossly endangering a global order that has benefited the entire world.

Compare what the Obama administration has managed to organize in the wake of this latest Russian aggression to the Bush administration’s response to Putin’s actions in Georgia in 2008. That was a blatant invasion. Moscow sent in tanks and heavy artillery; hundreds were killed, nearly 200,000 displaced. Yet the response was essentially nothing. This time, it has been much more serious. Some of this difference is in the nature of the stakes, but it might also have to do with the fact that the Obama administration has taken pains to present Russia’s actions in a broader context and get other countries to see them as such.

You can see a similar pattern with Iran. The Bush administration largely pressured that country bilaterally. The Obama administration was able to get much more effective pressure because it presented Iran’s nuclear program as a threat to global norms of nonproliferation, persuaded the other major powers to support sanctions, enacted them through the United Nations and thus ensured that they were comprehensive and tight. This is what leadership looks like in the 21st century.

There is an evolving international order with new global norms making war and conquest increasingly rare. We should strengthen, not ridicule, it. Yes, some places stand in opposition to this trend — North Korea, Syria, Russia. The people running these countries believe that they are charting a path to greatness and glory. But they are the ones living in a fantasy world.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/f...rc=nl_wonk

Bottom line: The world is becoming a more and more peaceful place every day. If you want a war nowadays, you have to go looking for it, just like McCain, Graham, and all the right wing pundits have implored. Thank goodness they have no power to pursue their delusions.

Here's a link to Pinker's very fine essay.

http://stevenpinker.com/files/pinker/fil...review.pdf

His book "The Better Angels of Our Nature" is not to be missed.

[orygunluvr]

The smartest guy in the room proved once again why a community antagonizer has no place in politics, especially at the international level. If Sarah Palin had made the blunders Obama has on foreign policy the libby media would blow it's collective wad for ever. Rachel would have had the orgasm that never ended, the tingle Matthews gets would have turned to quakes, it would be a libbies media circle jerk with all you minions as pivot men.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Londo...urope-Trip

[Scrapper]

Breitbart, Breitbart, Breitbart...

[MarkM]

Zakaria or Breitbart?

Hmmmm. I'm gonna go with Fareed on this one.

[SFLiberal]

Breitbart, Breitbart, Breitbart...

Now that was a very intellectual response. Par for the course.