Maybe Russians Should Apologize for the 20th Century First

John Ransom

4/20/2014 12:01:00 AM

 

Jim Kress Wrote: There are so many grammatical mistakes in this leaflet [about Jews in Ukraine] that it could fool only non-Russian speaking people about its authenticity. I found few mistakes in one word in the very first sentence. It is unacceptable to ignore the fact of so many grammatical mistakes in the “official document” for a large multiple media publications.Before jumping to emotional conclusions, people have to cool down and realize that their ignorance of another nation’s culture, history, and language should not be used by our government and their lackey media as an excuse to justify the involvement of NATO or UN “peacekeeping” military in conflicts happening overseas, thousand miles away from our borders, and basically none of our business. - Why Not Arm the Jews In Ukraine?

Dear Comrade “Jim,”

Your familiarity with Russian, your awkward prepositional phrasing and your dropping of the indefinite article “a,” make me suspect that you are a non-native speaker of English.

You seem to be arguing that Vladimir Putin isn't responsible for the situation in Ukraine on the basis of a pamphlet that has grammar problems.

Getting past the fact that anti-Semites generally aren’t known for their perfect diction and their impeccable grammar, the point of the article was to remind everybody that regardless of who put out the pamphlet, Vladimir Putin is the guy who's responsible for the unrest in Ukraine.

I for one am not ignorant of Russia’s culture, history and language.

I have studied Russian literature, language and history since I was 19 years old.

That's 30 years of experience.

So let me say this-- if you’re Russian-- on the basis of my own observations about Russia's culture history and language: You owe the rest the world a big freaking apology.

And I'm not just talking about the tasteless joke that is Vladimir Putin, the guy who couldn't run the Olympic Games.

Do you know how many people died in the 20th century because of Russian idiocy? Seriously, name one Russian accomplishment that has helped the world since y'all killed the Czar and his family, who by the way, was one of the finest Russians your country ever produced.

Don't get me wrong: I love the Russian people. I hate the pimps and ignoramuses like you who've exploited them, starved them, beat them, killed them and manipulated them for 1000 years.

As R.J. Rummel wrote: "[T]he Soviet Union appears the greatest megamurderer of all, apparently killing near 61,000,000 people. Stalin himself is responsible for almost 43,000,000 of these."

That leaves another 18 million by Russians of other regimes. And you want to assign some moral equivalency to wars like Iraq and Afghanistan?

But guess what?

Your guy, Obama, won't be president forever.

And while the world is weary of war, that didn't stop the United States of America from standing up against Hitler, who as an anti-Semite, had his own grammar problems with the German language. And it didn't stop us from standing up against the Soviet Union for 45 years.

And by the way, as Robert Conquest has observed, Stalin, who was a non-native speaker of Russian, and also a Jew hater, had problems with the case endings of Russian words.

I hereby reserve the right of my country to kick the crap out of petty little tyrants like Vladimir Putin regardless of the state of America's ignorance about other countries.

I'm glad Americans are often ignorant about other countries.

Other countries suck.

Hoorah! for America!

And boo for ignorance wrapped in a Russian wrapper.

Maybe for Easter you guys can start off with apologizing to the rest of the world for the atrocities you've already committed.

Fabien Wrote: These neocons are almost funny (after it's not my life at stake, nor his). They just armed the fascist from Wester Ukraine (and they are the real deal) and now they want to arm the jews. And we, the cheeps, get all exited for a UFC fight! - Why Not Arm the Jews In Ukraine?

Dear Comrade Fabien,

What you call neocon used to be known as foreign policy and national security policy.

Under your definition of neocon, Franklin Roosevelt was a neocon, Harry Truman was a neocon, Dwight Eisenhower was a neocon, Jimmy Carter was a neocon, Ronald Reagan was a neocon.

Why don't libertarians like you concentrate on the real work of Libertaria by making pot legal everywhere first, because that seems to be working out very well for everybody.

And leave the defense and foreign policy arrangements to those of us who understand the constitutional duty of our federal government to protect us from all enemies foreign and domestic.

In any event, you hardly comprehended the article: My call to arm the Jews is a rhetorical call. I'm pointing out that Mr. Obama has no problem with an activist foreign and defense policy, as long as it acts upon those groups he favors.

Having said that, if there was some way for me to get arms in the hands of Jews in Ukraine, as president of the United States I would consider it a not bad option; certainly a better option than American soldiers fighting there.

LibertarianSoldier Wrote: First, if you ever say, "But alas...", consecutively, you're illiterate, as this writer begins a paragraph! That's like saying, "however, but..." How do you read past that? - The Recovery is Dead

Dear Comrade Libertarian,

So, it's kind of like calling yourself a libertarian soldier, right?

Why would libertarians need soldiers anyways? Isn't the whole idea of libertarianism that people should be free did make their own choices? Isn't the whole idea of soldiers that they should compel people to do things they would otherwise not do?

Philosophically wouldn't it be better if you called yourself “LibertarianKiosk”? Or “LibertarianPamphletDispenser”? Or LibertarianWebsiteThatNoOneShouldEverBeForcedToVisit”?

LibertarianSoldier I think is an admission that you're not really a libertarian.

I will admit that the phrase “But, alas…” has a certain antique or Victorian element to it.

That's because I'm not very fond of modern writers. Like William Manchester, my writers tend to come more from the Victorian school, the Golden age of great literature.

Your criticism indicates, however, but-- ha, ha!-- that you're not familiar with the actual definition of the word “alas”. It's an expression of weariness or unhappiness. Merriam Webster says it is “used to express sadness, sorrow, disappointment.”

So one could render the expression as “But sorrowfully, while more money is the Democrat recipe for success in everything….”

That would just sound silly though.

So real writers, like Shakespeare and and Lewis Carroll, use the phrase “But alas,” as in: ‘But, alas, Caesar must bleed for it” and “but, alas for poor Alice!”

I will let you, Comrade Kiosk, decide which author wrote which line.

johninohio Wrote: What's the unemployment rate in China? What's the national income growth rate in China? What is the growth rate of industrial automation? - The Recovery is Dead

Dear John,

Wait a second: What’s the price of tea in China?

You mean like that?

para_dimz Wrote: I don't get it. Ransom never explained what extra hiring would do. My assumption, which is what caused the I don't get it moment is that there is huge unmet demand. Is there? And why would any company forgo tapping into it? - The Recovery is Dead

Dear Comrade Para,

There isn't a huge unmet demand. But there are ways that companies could intrinsically grow revenues by hiring people.

These are being passed by because the risk of hiring people, and the expense of hiring people is far greater than it has been in the past.

If you were an employer and you knew that an employee that you hired today could cost 40% more in the near future, why would you hire somebody?

You wouldn't, unless business was so robust that economically it would be hard to lose on the proposition.

Clearly in this economy that's not the case.

So companies are doing things that make more sense and take less risk.

With the very inexpensive money being offered by Wall Street right now through the Fed, companies are taking the opportunity to refinance debt, to buy back stock, and other balance sheet gimmicks that help them at the margins.

Bost100 wrote: You obviously are one BIG MORON spewing lies and fox propaganda. Do, write something meaningful that truly has a positive influence on this country instead always whining and criticizing. Grow f****ing up!-- The War on Federal Bureaucrats Opens at Bundy Ranch

Dear Comrade Bost,

Oh my gosh!! Alas!! What a liar you are!! Alas, I've lost like 22 pounds.

So yeah, go ahead and call me a moron, but calling me big is where I draw the line.

Memo to the liberal: I don't speak for Fox News, and they don't speak for me.

I probably haven't watched FoxNews, or CNBC, or MSNBC in 10 years.

Not once.

Unlike you, who probably watches FoxNews every day. Otherwise, empirically, how do you know they are lying?

I know liberal brains lack the processing power to compute irony, but I find it ironic that you would simultaneously call someone names and use a dirty word while demanding that they grow up.

NRMLUNIT Wrote: Bundy doesn't own the land and, never has. The USA has held this land in trust for "we the people" since Nevada became a state in 1864. The land in question was overused for grazing to the point that it was being destroyed. To put a stop to the destruction The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 became law. The privilege (not right) was controlled. The BLM was created in 1948 and took over the management of grazing. The vast majority pay their fee's, including Bundy until 1993.That is when he stopped paying and became a freeloader. He went to court twice and, lost. He should have been in jail a long time ago. The BLM has handled this poorly. !-- The War on Federal Bureaucrats Opens at Bundy Ranch

Dear Comrade Limpet

I actually don't know the ins and outs, the rights and wrongs, of the Bundy case.

But for those people who condemn the Bundys as lawbreakers, let me say this: That guy with the fruit stand in the Middle East, he didn't have the proper license to be operating a fruit stand.

And so they shook him down every day.

Until one day he had had enough. And so he doused himself in gasoline and lit himself on fire.

There’s probably something illegal about setting yourself on fire too.

And the legalists who would split hairs on these issues, obviously didn't read the article.

I wasn't taking a side. I was merely observing that at a certain point citizens get tired of being shaken down by their own government.

And sometimes citizens get so tired that they light themselves on fire, or they form themselves into a posse to stop the federal government, or they dress up like Indians and throw tea into Boston Harbor.

Illegal? Yeah. All of it.

But rebellion, by its very definition, is illegal.

And don't ever confuse illegal with immoral.

Terry1350 Wrote: Russia, a gas station masquerading as a country! They can be outmanuvoured, but it takes something Obama doesn't have. Imagination and Guts.-- Obama's Peace is Hell, Baby

Dear Terry,

Best ever! "Russia: A gas station masquerading as a country."

It was almost the headline.

David4 Wrote: In fairness, at the beginning of the article, 'The Gilded Age' was written by Mark Twain AND Charles Dudley Warner. Again, it was Warner who said "Everybody complains about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." Twain quoted it and many people mis-attribute it to Twain. --Dirty Harry Got Richer in 2008...and You Didn't

Dear David,

Name one other thing Charles Dudley Warner ever did. I mean besides ruining Mark Twain's book. The part I quoted from the book, The Gilded Age, that was all Twain.

Moc5 wrote: If you have not already seen it, you will find this story interesting: http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/May-2014/Chicago-crime-rates/

Dear Moc5,

Thanks for the link. I've been following the story in the Chicago Tribune, but I forwarded the link to our associate editor Michael Schaus, and he wrote it up. Thanks again for sending it.

Robertb wrote: Oh comeon . This screed does noteven rise to the levelof B.S. I don't know where to beginin showing howludicrous it is . Sarah Palin is a complete and utter imbecile ! She's incapable of saying anything true or intelligent,yetmillions ofgullible right-wing Americans still take her seriously .Unbelievable ! She's Moose-olini ! The awfulthing is that Ted Cruz ,Michel Bachmaann, Rick Perry , Louie Gohmert andother GOP morons areeven worse, if this could be imagined .This country is doomed ofthe GOP elects a president in 2016 .l Forget about Muslims . Who needs them to destroy America when we have the Christian Taliban in our own back yard? --Sarah Palin is Right: Obamacare Death Panel Real; Disguised as the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee

Dear RobertB,

Oh, but, Alas poor Yorick!

I knew him, Horatio: a fellow

of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy:

Where be your gibes now? your gambols? your songs? your flashes of merriment,

that were wont to set the table on a roar? Not one

now, to mock your own grinning? quite chap-fallen.

Now get you to my lady's chamber, and tell her, let

her paint an inch thick, to this favour she must

come; make her laugh at that. Prithee, Horatio, tell

me one thing.

HORATIO: What's that, my lord?

HAMLET: Where the hell did you learn to spell?

That’s it for this week,

V/r,

JR