Right Wing Wrong
Alright first Jesse . . . you always astound me with never ever looking anything up or researching jack shit, Yeltsin was not elected, he assumed power. After the coup that failed he took over simple as that. Also if you actually look at the Soviet Union they were damned long before Reagan took office. If you want to give credit where it is due, you should credit either Ike or the Pope because both of them did much more than Reagan. Also democracy has never flourished in Russia especially if you look at the Oligarchs that are now running the country in Russia and the incredible corruption in Russian politics. If you look at the recent election where Putin was elected by huge margins and where was the contender, "Um yeah I took a vacation for awhile and didn't let anyone know" in other words he defintely had an encounter with Putin's officials. Also with the propoganda thing . . . wow! As I said before Yeltsin initially took over(and Yeltsin looks a lot better in a tank than does Duhkakis), and then won the election by a land slide, why? Because the corruption in the system and not something from the USA. I don't know where you got your facts, but I would advise kicking your sources ass, cause they are just plain liars. And besides driving this country into horrible debt, ignoring aids, and his wonderful activities down south I guess you could say that Reagan wasn't the wourst president of all times.
Paul - I have had this discussion with you before. Here is the arguement that I am going to make, and I already have an image of your reaction to it (it is quite funny actually), but Michael Moore is a breath of fresh air. He is asking questions that that horridly "liberal" media does not ask and that no one else does in a public manner. Sure there are inaccessible pieces of literature and so forth that say the same thing as Michael Moore but the reason that he is so liked is because people can view his ideas at widely accessible venues. Also you are going to have to give reasoning behind Micheal Moore not being a man of the people. And him being rich doesn't cut it. The reason that I am saying this is because he is defintely considered to be a man of the people so in order for you to discredit that popularly held belief we need some shred of evidence, because your word over the masses . . . well lets just say neither are very credible.
Left Win . . . Always!
Paul - I have had this discussion with you before. Here is the arguement that I am going to make, and I already have an image of your reaction to it (it is quite funny actually), but Michael Moore is a breath of fresh air. He is asking questions that that horridly "liberal" media does not ask and that no one else does in a public manner. Sure there are inaccessible pieces of literature and so forth that say the same thing as Michael Moore but the reason that he is so liked is because people can view his ideas at widely accessible venues. Also you are going to have to give reasoning behind Micheal Moore not being a man of the people. And him being rich doesn't cut it. The reason that I am saying this is because he is defintely considered to be a man of the people so in order for you to discredit that popularly held belief we need some shred of evidence, because your word over the masses . . . well lets just say neither are very credible.
Left Win . . . Always!