Something trully chilling to free speech

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
everything Putin does is defensible on the surface. Sure, the elected governors had issues with corruption, and plenty of democracies dont have elected governors.

Case closed.

OTOH all the democracies that are comparable to Russia in size and extent DO have elected governors,

1) Give me your list of democracies comparable to Russia in size, that have elected governors.
2) Our governors ARE elected. The people who elected them do not vote for exact candidate directly. They vote for political parties at local parliament elections. The party who won the election, then offers its candidate for approvement to the president of Russia, whom the people of Russia, aside "the beacon of democracy and the last hope of humankind - US of A", ELECT DIRECTLY, not through electoral college like you do.
The fact that you don't elect your president directly, like the most democracies worldwide, makes USA a dictatorship?

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Boris Yeltsin, the Friedrich Ebert of Russia.

Boris Yeltsin the disgrace of Russia has fully deserved a firing squad.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Serb

Case closed.


1) Give me your list of democracies comparable to Russia in size, that have elected governors.
2) Our governors ARE elected. The people who elected them do not vote for exact candidate directly. They vote for political parties at local parliament elections. The party who won the election, then offers its candidate for approvement to the president of Russia, whom the people of Russia, aside "the beacon of democracy and the last hope of humankind - US of A", ELECT DIRECTLY, not through electoral college like you do.
The fact that you don't elect your president directly, like the most democracies worldwide, makes USA a dictatorship?

When it was instituted, in 1789, it along with several other provisions WERE intended to make the US less than a full democracy. Indeed, at that point most states had property requirements to vote. Not only at that time was the president chosen by electors, but the electors were usually chosen by state legislatures. However since 1789 numerous reforms have been made which have made the US system democratic. Now IF the US, under a strong charismatic leader were making changes going in the other direction - then yes, that would be a sign of concern.

You will note that I havent said that Russia today is a dictatorship. I am concerned that Russia is headed in that direction though.

as for continental scale democracies, IM thinking the US, Canada, Australia, Brazil. As far as I know none of them require central govt approval of state/province governors. India has on occasions had the central govt take over a state govt, IIUC, but thats always been a sign of the weakness of Indian democracy, I thought.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Serb


Boris Yeltsin the disgrace of Russia has fully deserved a firing squad.

Boris Yeltsin wont get a parking ticket. That was the deal your lovely Putin made to get into power. If you dont like the deal, you should vote against Putin. And speak up against him. While you can

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Very interesting. Thanks for the explanation
The way it was presented here, I thought governors were nominated from Moscow.

The head of state approval in most western parliamentary democracies is pretty nominal - the head of state not having much real power. How would there be danger from the Pres. of Germany approving the Chancellor, when the Presidency of Germany (today, not Weimar) has so much less power than the Chancellorship? In Russia the approving office is the President who dominates the executive - Spiff, can you even name the PM of Russia without looking it up? And from all Ive gathered the CHANGE was motivated by the actions of particular governors. the justification is that the governors were corrupt, were obstructing progress,etc. But it was certainly a real change.

[lord of the mark]

heres an article on Russia by Putins own former PM.

http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=700710

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Boris Yeltsin wont get a parking ticket. That was the deal your lovely Putin made to get into power. If you dont like the deal, you should vote against Putin. And speak up against him. While you can

Damn, how many times should I say that I didn't vote for Putin (both times).

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

When it was instituted, in 1789, it along with several other provisions WERE intended to make the US less than a full democracy. Indeed, at that point most states had property requirements to vote. Not only at that time was the president chosen by electors, but the electors were usually chosen by state legislatures. However since 1789 numerous reforms have been made which have made the US system democratic. Now IF the US, under a strong charismatic leader were making changes going in the other direction - then yes, that would be a sign of concern.

You will note that I havent said that Russia today is a dictatorship. I am concerned that Russia is headed in that direction though.

As long as in USA presidents are not elected direclty (like in the rest of the world), we can't call US of A a true democracy.
So, stop whining about the wrong direction the countries where governors are not elected directly, are heading. Because a president has much more power than any governor and direct elections of president is a standard for worldwide democracies.
So, please, stop bullsh!ting us. You are much less a democracy than Russia or any country which has a direct presidential elections.

as for continental scale democracies, IM thinking the US, Canada, Australia, Brazil.

Blah...blah...blah...

About US see above.

As for Canada and Australia, you must be sh!tting us again! They have a British Queen as their head of state. Since they don't elect their HoS they can't be called a true democracy (sorta like Russian governors are "not elected").

Brazil?
I don't know what to say. I know too little about Brazil, despite the fact that their football sucked pretty much at last WC.

[Serb]

ACHTUNG: Sarcasm again (mostly).

Originally posted by lord of the mark
The head of state approval in most western parliamentary democracies is pretty nominal - the head of state not having much real power. How would there be danger from the Pres. of Germany approving the Chancellor, when the Presidency of Germany (today, not Weimar) has so much less power than the Chancellorship?

If the power of the German president is so nominal, what's the point to let him approve or not approve the candidacy of new Chancellor elected by parliament?
Do you belive there is something in the German constitution which prevents him to say NO, that he always have to say YEA?
Sure, when the Chancellor is approved, he gets much more power than president, but before that...

In Russia the approving office is the President who dominates the executive

Really? Please tell me more about that. I'm actaully shoked, 'cause the Russian constitution (Article 110: Executive branch) doesn't have a single word about President domination over the executive. The Russian PM is elected by the Russian parliament.

- Spiff, can you even name the PM of Russia without looking it up?

I can, as well as 99.99% of Russians, so?
Spiff or you aren't Russians. Why should you know the name (Fradkov) of our PM?
I can't name the PM of United States of America, no matter how hard I'm trying to look it up. So what?
You blame Russia: “Russian president dominating the Russian PM”, while your own president (once again, the president “elected” in disregard to modern standarnds of true democracies ( I mean direct presidential elections) even doesn't have a PM to dominate upon.

Does it mean that USA is not a democracy and actually heading towards dictatorship?
Sure it doesn't, because US was a dictatorship from the beggining.
In US the President and the executive are the same junta:

[Serb]

And from all Ive gathered the CHANGE was motivated by the actions of particular governors. the justification is that the governors were corrupt, were obstructing progress,etc. But it was certainly a real change.

Is it so hard to realize that Putin for Russia is like a both Teddy and Franklin Roosvelt combined for US of A?
When Putin was elected, Eltsin left him a country with pathtic economy and ridiculous state budget. The country with lackey foreign policy and even worse, the country with a henocide policy towards its own people, internal policy. The country where the robber barons had more power than the legal authority.
Putin cleans that mess pretty well. He successfully eliminated or neglected the power of robber barons, Russia has now a world’s 9th largest GDP, the Yeltsin’s practice of being an American whore is abandoned and the most important thing – Putin made a life of average Russian much better.
These are the reasons why he is so popular. I’m pretty sure that absolute majority of Russians would LOVE to see him nominating for the third term. But I know that he won’t do that, becasue aside Eltsin, who violated the constitution in 1993 and ordered a tank bombardment of the Russian parliament (and thus responsible for a death of over a hundred of civilians), Putin is the true democrat who will never cross the line and will never broke the constitution.

I doubt you guys can understand that. So, keep living in your fantasy world of western propaganda brainwashing machines.

Have a nice day.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
heres an article on Russia by Putins own former PM.

http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=700710

Ah.... what a crap

And you claim we don't have a free media?

[Arrian]

It's "what crap" Serb. No "a" in that.

I take it you think the man just has an axe to grind with Putin?

-Arrian

[DinoDoc]

It's rather telling that Serb has to resort to the rather tired UR line of "but the US..." in his rather weak defense of the state of Russian democracy.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Serb
ACHTUNG: Sarcasm again (mostly).


If the power of the German president is so nominal, what's the point to let him approve or not approve the candidacy of new Chancellor elected by parliament?
Do you belive there is something in the German constitution which prevents him to say NO, that he always have to say YEA?
Sure, when the Chancellor is approved, he gets much more power than president, but before that...


Really? Please tell me more about that. I'm actaully shoked, 'cause the Russian constitution (Article 110: Executive branch) doesn't have a single word about President domination over the executive. The Russian PM is elected by the Russian parliament.


I can, as well as 99.99% of Russians, so?
Spiff or you aren't Russians. Why you should know the name (Fradkov) of our PM?
I can't name the PM of United States of America, no matter how hard I'm trying to look it up. So what?
You blaim Russia for the “Russian president dominating the Russian PM”, while your own president (once again, the president “elected” in disregard to modern standarnds of true democracies ( I mean direct presidential elections) even doesn't have a PM to dominate upon.

Does it mean that USA is not a democracy and actually heading towards dictatorship?
Sure it doesn't, because US was a dictatorship from the beggining.
In US the President and the executive are the same junta:

Yes, the President in the US runs the executive, which is why if the Pres of the US had the power to approve the selection of state governors it would be important, much important than the Pres of Germany approving the Chancellor.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Arrian
It's "what crap" Serb. No "a" in that.

I take it you think the man just has an axe to grind with Putin?

-Arrian

I mean that even such moron here has a tribune for spreading his so fascinating, so lying and so funny BS stories.

p.s. Thanks for correction. There are no articles in Russian language and all those "a" and "the" are real pain in the ass for me. Can you educate me about proper use of "a" and "the" in PM?