Maggie's Farm

I doubt you have the slightest idea why Russia invaded Ukraine. Here's a hint: it wasn't because of anything the US did.

What Russian president was impeached because of the CIA? Do you mean Ukrainian president? Is it possible that the revolt against him has political legitimacy? Might the Ukrainians have been nationalist enough by 2014 that they wouldn't stand for their president kowtowing to Russia?

"...including directly into republican..." Heh. The left's environmentalism, including the ACGW hysteria are a direct product of the most successful Soviet misinformation campaign ever undertaken. One that was specifically intended to harm the west economically, socially and politically, and was continued by Putin and the Russian intelligence agency after the fall of the Soviet Union right up until today. Pot, meet the kettle.

Oh, BTW, both the Soviet Union and Russia also targeted American ethnic and racial minorities with propaganda that progressive whites adopted. Maybe start looking in the mirror occasionally.

And get this, LW American's also parrot Russian rhetoric about economics.

Your comment is really too rich to leave alone. The bureaucracy that insisted that Trump was a Russian agent or compromised by Russia and said that the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation, both thoroughly discreated claims, now says that a witness who implicates Joe Biden in crimes is a Russian agent. The same progressive clowns like yourself insist that this time it's true.

If you can't muster a modicum of skepticism about the claim and be hesitant to repeat it, you really don't deserve to be treated as even marginally reasonable. You're the mirror image of the must unreasonable RWish commentors here that you take, except you're wrong on the meta issues while they're mostly correct on the meta.

I will agree that the 96% vote is obvious nonsense. The "30% Russian" is nominally accurate but misleading. A nontrivial % of the Moldavians and Ukrainians living there speak Russian as their first language and are highly Russified. Combine this with the fact that much of the population who oppose the rogue government have fled, the majority of the current population is almost certainly pro Russian. Which in no way indicates that the Russian occupation should be allowed to stand.

I've got a compromise that will satisfy several moral sensibilities simultaneously. Lety's move as many as we possibly can to your neighborhood. Or, alternatively, we could just move you to Gaza. which would be a much better outcome for the US, you dunderheaded antisemite.

Yes, as a RWer, I know I should rely on a fundamentalist progressive to define what conservatism is and what the modern American right is.
So they came impose their simpleminded, over-simplified politically convenient (for themselves) definition on the conversation.
If perchance, I wanted to think for myself, I might point out that the right has, and did at the time it was proposed, point out that social security was not demographically viable in the long run. Since the country was already experiencing a declining fertility rate and an increasing life expectancy. Or, they might point it out now. As some do. Which would in fact be considering the value of the fence before building it. or, today, considering the negative value of the fence and advocating for tearing it down because of its negative value.
As for progressives being advocates for "reform,' that is complete nonsense. It was primarily naked vote buying with other people's money. Any concern about the welfare of the poor was tertiary. The secondary concern for many of its advocates was giving the government leverage over citizens.

I'll add, any attempt to characterize contemporary American politics that neglects the fact that a plurality to a majority of the right is liberal, and that very few progressives are liberal, is one that doesn't merit being treated seriously.