Hindsight 20/20?

Really? More examples of things I could've told you six months ago, a year ago, whenever. And yet everyone seems so surprised. It was obvious (to me, anyway) that after the US got kicked out of Uzbekistan they kissed Bakiev's ass in order to make sure they didn't lose their foothold in Kyrgyzstan. Meanwhile, these analysts seem a tad too late in their analyses. Also, I've seen numerous article (like this one) which try to make it out to be that the US presence at Manas was the reason for the ouster of Bakiev. Um, no. Certainly the fuel contract sending dollars directly into the Bakiev family coffers added to the anger and resentment of the Kyrgyz citizens against corruption in the government... but a key factor? No.

Talk of revolution... in the US??

The Diane Rehm Show is by far my favorite news program. For those of you who have never listened, on her Friday News Roundup she has a panel of experts and journalists (different each week) who discuss recent events in the US and in the world. After discussing said events, they then take calls and read emails, which are also then discussed by the panelists. Click here to download a very short MP3, and listen to Diane read a very, very creepy email. To those of you who are to the right of me politically... are people really talking about this? Seriously?

*IMMEDIATE* Benefits of Health Care Reform!

[via barackobama.com]

1. SMALL BUSINESS TAX CREDITS Offers tax credits to small businesses to make employee coverage more affordable. Tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums will be immediately available to firms that choose to offer coverage. Effective beginning for calendar year 2010. (Beginning in 2014, the small business tax credits will cover 50 percent of premiums.)

2. BEGINS TO CLOSE THE MEDICARE PART D DONUT HOLE Provides a $250 rebate to Medicare beneficiaries who hit the donut hole in 2010. Effective for calendar year 2010. (Beginning in 2011, institutes a 50% discount on brand‐name drugs in the donut hole; also completely closes the donut hole by 2020.)

3. FREE PREVENTIVE CARE UNDER MEDICARE Eliminates co‐payments for preventive services and exempts preventive services from deductibles under the Medicare program. Effective beginning January 1, 2011.

4. HELP FOR EARLY RETIREES Creates a temporary re‐insurance program (until the Exchanges are available) to help offset the costs of expensive premiums for employers and retirees for health benefits for retirees age 55‐64. Effective 90 days after enactment.

5. ENDS RESCISSIONS Bans insurance companies from dropping people from coverage when they get sick. Effective 6 months after enactment.

6. NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CHILDREN WITH PRE‐EXISTING CONDITIONS Prohibits new health plans in all markets plus grandfathered group health plans from denying coverage to children with pre‐existing conditions. Effective 6 months after enactment. (Beginning in 2014, this prohibition would apply to all persons.)

7. BANS LIFETIME LIMITS ON COVERAGE Prohibits health insurance companies from placing lifetime caps on coverage. Effective 6 months after enactment.

8. BANS RESTRICTIVE ANNUAL LIMITS ON COVERAGE Tightly restricts the use of annual limits to ensure access to needed care in all new plans and grandfathered group health plans. These tight restrictions will be defined by HHS. Effective 6 months after enactment. (Beginning in 2014, the use of any annual limits would be prohibited for all new plans and grandfathered group health plans.)

9. FREE PREVENTIVE CARE UNDER NEW PRIVATE PLANS Requires new private plans to cover preventive services with no co‐payments and with preventive services being exempt from deductibles. Effective 6 months after enactment.

10. NEW, INDEPENDENT APPEALS PROCESS Ensures consumers in new plans have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal decisions by their health insurance plan. Effective 6 months after enactment.

11. ENSURING VALUE FOR PREMIUM PAYMENTS Requires plans in the individual and small group market to spend 80 percent of premium dollars on medical services, and plans in the large group market to spend 85 percent. Insurers that do not meet these thresholds must provide rebates to policyholders. Effective on January 1, 2011.

12. IMMEDIATE HELP FOR THE UNINSURED UNTIL EXCHANGE IS AVAILABLE (INTERIM HIGH‐RISK POOL) Provides immediate access to affordable insurance for Americans who are uninsured because of a pre‐existing condition ‐ through a temporary subsidized high‐risk pool. Effective 90 days after enactment.

13. EXTENDS COVERAGE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE UP TO 26TH BIRTHDAY THROUGH PARENTS' INSURANCE Requires new health plans and certain grandfathered plans to allow young people up to their 26th birthday to remain on their parents' insurance policy, at the parents' choice. Effective 6 months after enactment.

14. COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS Increases funding for Community Health Centers to allow for nearly a doubling of the number of patients seen by the centers over the next 5 years. Effective beginning in fiscal year 2010.

15. INCREASING NUMBER OF PRIMARY CARE DOCTORS Provides new investment in training programs to increase the number of primary care doctors, nurses, and public health professionals. Effective beginning in fiscal year 2010.

16. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SALARY Prohibits group health plans from establishing any eligibility rules for health care coverage that have the effect of discriminating in favor of higher wage employees. Effective 6 months after enactment.

17. HEALTH INSURANCE CONSUMER INFORMATION Provides aid to states in establishing offices of health insurance consumer assistance in order to help individuals with the filing of complaints and appeals. Effective beginning in FY 2010.

18. CREATES NEW, VOLUNTARY, PUBLIC LONG‐TERM CARE INSURANCE PROGRAM Creates a long‐term care insurance program to be financed by voluntary payroll deductions to provide home and community-based services to adults who become functionally disabled. Effective on January 1, 2011.

Debates!

Occasionally the internet here in K-stan is fast enough to actually allow me to download things, and I was lucky enough to download the first Presidential debate and Thursday's VP debate. For starters let me just say that in both debates I was incredibly impressed by the fact that the Republicans came off sounding articulate and intelligent. I mean, of course the Dems did, but we're used to that. It's been ages since we had an articulate Republican on the national scene, and that was just due to Reagan's training as an actor. It was actually quite nice to listen to intelligent people discussing things instead of an intelligent person talking above a redneck Texan bumbler. (Although dammit if Palin doesn't pronounced nuclear the same way Bush does. It's NEW-clee-ar, not nu-cu-lur.)

While I may have been impressed by the performances of McCain and Palin (to be honest, I was hoping Obama and Biden would wipe the floor with them, and was a little bummed when it dodn't happen) nothing McCain or Palin said did anything to sway me to their side at all; I am firmly behind Obama/Biden when it comes to policy. Also, it was obvious to me that Palin had been super-prepped for the VP debate, and was simply repeating the points which she had drilled; meanwhile, Biden came off looking as though he had a much deeper grasp of the policies than Palin.

I found this exchange in the VP debate amusing, as it seemed that she didn't know what an Achilles heel might be:

Moderator: The conventional wisdom, Governor Palin with you, is that your Achilles heel is that you lack experience. Your conventional wisdom against you is that your Achilles heel is that you lack discipline, Senator Biden. What is it really for you, Governor Palin? What is it really for you, Senator Biden? Start with you, governor.

Palin: My experience as an executive will be put to good use as a mayor and business owner and oil and gas regulator and then as governor of a huge state, a huge energy producing state that is accounting for much progress towards getting our nation energy independence and that's extremely important.

US Politics: the scariest thing ever

I had actually wanted to remain in the US this year, so that I could follow (and blog about) the presidential campaign, but I'm rather glad I didn't. Aside from the fact that I've had a super-wonderful year here in Kyrgyzstan, just occasionally skimming the internet for headlines and downloading random podcasts is enough to make me boil and wonder what the hell "my part of the world" has come to. I've got a rather frightening link for you to read about Sarah Palin [click here], and a forward worth sharing that I received from Chad C (below). Please read both.

(Below is a forward; I don't know the author)

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....

* If you grow up in Hawaii , raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."

* Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.

* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

* Name your kids Willow , Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drivethat registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive and next in line behind a man in his seventies.

* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.

* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and then left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a true Christian.

* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

* If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

* If your wife is a Harvard graduate laywer who gave up a position in aprestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America 's.

* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

Seriously.

PseudoSolstice 2007 Part 2: YouTubeTastic

After Rob and his Very Normal Friend left and Alex went to bed, and the rest of us got out of our bizarre garb (see previous post), Chris entertained me, Melissa and Gwen by singing his various folk songs. Chris has been writing folk songs for years, and below are several. The first three are political and the last two are pagan solstice songs. Enjoy!

This one's on the politics of Bushomomics.

This one's on Iraq

This one's on immigration.

This is a pagan song; he's still working on it.

You might notice he has some horrific background singers in this one :-)

Islam and Politics in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan

It's fifteen minutes long, but you should definitely watch it - I found it absolutely fascinating.

Kitten has a home! :-)

Toma, whom I know from elementary school, and who lives with her family near Augusta, GA, has adopted kitten! We met today in Swainsboro, GA, which is about halfway between our homes, and she took kitten home. I'm very happy knowing that kitten will be raised in a good home. Thank you, Toma!

And for everyone else, here are some videos of the adorable kitten that you missed the opportunity to adopt:

On my drive back to Waycross, I stopped several times along the way to take photographs. Just south of Swainsboro on US1, I found my dream house. I would LOVE to move this house to my mom's land. It is perfect... a foursquare front with four rooms and a central hallway, with an L addition off the back for the kitchen and bathroom. It has a front porch and a back porch off the L addition. It's structurally sound with no signs (or scents) of water damage. And it's EMPTY and could totally be moved. Although it has a new roof, which makes me suspect someone might be planning to do something with it. Also, moving a house that big roughly 100 miles would be really damn expensive. But still, look at it.... PERFECT!

I thought this was a pretty scenic spot:

Old barn in a cotton field

COTTON!


Can you believe I'd never seen cotton au naturale before?


I also found a pretty neat old cemetery.


And lastly, I photographed this old church on DeVanderene Rd in Ware County.

(More photos at flickr.)

And on a brief and completely different note: I've been watching the CNN/YouTube Republican debate while resizing photos and blogging. I always have a hard time objectively ranking and discussing all-Republican events, simply because I disagree with so much of what they say. For that reason, I'm not going to bother discussing their content. Regarding performance, I thought Huckabee and McCain performed the best. Giuliani needs to stop making every sentence about New York. And I would love to watch Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich debate each other, because they're such weird little gnomes, and that would be entertaining. Tactically, I think that it would be fabulous for the Democratic party for Mitt Romney to be the GOP nominee simply because I am convinced he can't win the Bible belt.

Now this is some weird shit.

It's All Politics

I love NPR's It's All Politics in general, and they had a pretty good post-debate podcast that you should totally give a listen to by clicking here.

Tonight's Democratic Debate

Even though I don't own a TV, it occurred to me this evening to see if I could watch the Democratic debate in Nevada live online at CNN's website. While I'm not sure what clips CNN will post after the fact, I'm glad that I got the opportunity to watch it live. I hate having to pick through the things networks deem newsworthy to post on their sites - or worse, reading transcripts. That's one thing that has me a little bummed about the fact that I'll be out of the country and in a place with spotty internet next year - I won't be able to follow the 2008 election as closely as I would like. But, at least I can keep tabs on what's going on now.

As far as tonight's debate, I'm not sure that I can name a winner. I can, however give you some of my thoughts:

Dennis Kucinich is a weird little man. While I do agree with most of what he has to say, he's simply a weird little man. With pointy ears. And whom the moderators and other candidates tend to ignore. Like when moderator Wolf Blitzer asked all the candidates about Pakistan - except Kucinich. His response was to wave his arms and shout "Hellllooooooo?!" and yet he was still ignored. He was even ignored when he began chanting "Impeach him now! Impeach him now!"

Then we have Joe Biden and Chris Dodd. My problem with them is that they look SO MUCH ALIKE, I seriously cannot tell them apart. They're both older white dudes with white hair. I would type that they seem to have the same positions on most issues... but I'm just not sure. They haven't done anything to differentiate one from the other in my book.

Richardson came off well, and had strong answers. He's obviously a really smart, sensible fellow who would probably do a pretty decent job as president. But he seems more like a behind-the-scenes-get-things-done kind of guy to me, and I suspect that might make him seem un-presidential to many others. Also, he makes some fantastically amusing quizzical facial expressions, which I rather suspect mirrored the ones on my face the other night at that poetry reading.

Now, ya'll know I love Obama (I even have an Obama sign in my front window). He's such an incredible orator when he has a prepared speech (think his 2004 convention keynote speech, among numerous others. He had an incredible one that I heard on NPR the other day, but hell if I can remember where he was giving it...), but he's not *quite* as stellar when he goes unscripted. Nonetheless, I'm still rooting for him as my candidate of choice. His answer on the issue of alternative energy sources was very JFK-esque: I'm running for President because I think we can do it. Live, it was totally reminiscent of Kennedy's we choose to go to the moon speech. Also, watching Obama and Hillary go toe to toe on issues of health care, taxing the super-rich and fixing social security were certainly the high points of a debate that was, at times, dull.

Edwards has a really cute smile. I'd never noticed before. He had really strong answers on issues of trade, Iran, the Patriot Act and torture... but I remembered that because I wrote it down as he was answering. Nothing he said really stuck with me. (Also, can someone seriously tell me what has happened to this country that torture is an issue on which people have opinions other than that it is heinous and should be illegal?)

I didn't see the previous debate, but I know that the news afterwards was that Hillary didn't perform as well as she should have. This was followed up by the debate over was she or was she not playing the gender card. Well, she's a politician, and she's smooth and she covered for that EXCELLENTLY with her answer to whether or not she was playing the gender card... It brought tears to my eyes. Literally. Even though I'm pretty certain she had that pre-scripted. She gave good answers, and came out looking like a strong leader - and like a strong politician. It's that strong politician part of her that makes me wary. That, and the fact that she doesn't seem to understand that people who make over $97k/yr ARE NOT MIDDLE CLASS. And she apparently voted to name Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group. Um, no. (Although Obama didn't even bother to show up for that vote, the punk.)

And who the hell thought it was a good idea to let the final question of the debate be some lame UNLV student asking Hillary if she prefered diamonds or pearls? Stupid, stupid question.

My continuing history of not having cancer

I was born with a whole bunch of moles and freckles all over my body. Two in particular, on my back, were rather large and irregular. While my pediatrician told my mother they were nothing to worry about, she did worry. And as I got older and learned about the signs of how to spot skin cancer, so did I. Additionally, throughout high school and my first couple of years of college, various people advised me that I should definitely have the two moles on my back - and possibly two on my left arm - looked at. When I was 20, I bit the bullet and went to a dermatologist in my hometown. He looked me over and thought that it was imperative that the two moles on my back, the two on my arm, and several others come off ASAP. Being young and naive enough to believe that my doctor was acting in my best interests (as opposed to the best interests of his wallet), I agreed. When the day for surgery came, he circled TWENTY-FOUR moles which he insisted needed to come off, including the two on my back and and the two on my arm.

Over two hours later, I was wheeled out of surgery with twenty-one sets of stitches, and one set of staples in my head. The two moles on my left arm were still there, still circled. As they were two of the four that I had originally been concerned about, I immediately asked. He said that he had decided they did not need to come off. (I was quite confused by this, as he had removed many smaller, less-irregular moles during the surgery, but again, he was the doctor, so I accepted this.) I would also like to just throw in here that my mom and I had been told that my surgery would last no more than half an hour; you can imagine how panicked my mother was when it took them over two hours. Also, one of the staples holding a bandage to my head went through my ear. Yeah. That was pleasant. And after all that, all of the 23 biopsies came back normal.

Anyway, over the course of the next year, the two moles on my back GREW BACK. That scared me back into the dermatologist's office. The doctor again insisted that they needed to be removed ASAP. Since there were only two, he did the surgery right there in his office under local anasthetic. A week later he called with terrifying news: some of the cells in one of the moles had come back as abnormal. Not that they were cancerous, simply abnormal. This could indicate cancer, or this could indicate nothing. He wanted to do another surgery to excise the margins. He explained that to me as the removal of a small area of skin surrounding the mole site. I didn't expect the surgery itself to be a big deal, although I was in a panic that I had skin cancer. Additionally, I was preparing to leave for a semester in Russia - and my plane left in two weeks. He wanted me to be in the surgery center under general anasthetic, although because of my departure date, this wasn't possible. Again, I was operated on in his office under local anasthetic. I was shocked, at the end of the surgery, to discover that the "small area of skin surrounding the mole site" was in fact a crooked, four-inch incision across my right shoulder blade. The result of this surgery was that I now look as though I have been stabbed in my back and stitched up by some ghetto quack. (You can see what the butcher did here and here, if you want.) The biopsy came back normal. I should mention that throughout all of the above I had health insurance, so all of those procedures cost me very little.

Despite all of the above, I have continued to fret over the two moles on my left arm that were not removed during the initial surgery. I knew all about the ABCs of skin cancer, and these two hit A, B, C and D. I was also pretty convinced that the bigger of the two ached, although that may very well have been in my head. I considered having them taken off and biopsied while I was in Korea (where not only did I have health insurance, but health care over there is reasonably priced even without it). However, I was worried that if the biopsies were to come back showing a malignancy... then what would I do? Stay in Korea for the entire length of my treatment, however long that might be? Or go to the US, and try and show an American doctor my Korean health records and try to convince them that I needed cancer treatment? I opted for having it done here in the US.

Now, the biggest problem with my life plan is that I don't have health insurance, and as we all know, the health care system in the US is seriously fucked up. See, the few times I went to the doctor in Korea, I just went. They checked me out, ran tests, gave me meds and sent me on my way at a very low price. Meanwhile, in order to get these moles off... first I had to "establish myself as a patient." This meant that for my first appointment they weighed me, checked my blood pressure, had me fill out some forms, and charged me $108. My next appointment was when they actually removed the moles. That cost $335 - but as I'd written before, had the moles turned out to be malignant, I would've been charged an extra $50! (There is no legitimate reason for that at all; they simply charge more for the removal of malignant tissue samples than they do for benign ones, even though they don't know the status of the sample in question at the time of removal!) Also, my doctor's office gives discounts (although not very big ones!) to those of us who don't have health insurance. Yes, that's right. If I'd had insurance, the insurance company would have been billed MORE for the exact same service that I was billed for. And people wonder why health insurance is so expensive. Additionally, the company which did the biopsy itself, has billed me $270 for the biopsy. Grrrr.

So, $713 later, and I still don't have skin cancer. Which is great, don't get me wrong, but that's an awful lot of money for nothing more than a new set of scars.

Huh?

I don't mind not having a television, but it would be nice to watch the presidential debates as they happen, instead of having to hunt up selected clips online or wade through boring transcripts. Now, watching two hours of political debate is one thing, but wading through the transcripts, reading the dry words without any of the political personalities bringing them to life is a bit much, even for me. Now, you can watch selected clips of the debate on MSNBC's website, here. But one has to wonder why certain clips were chosen. I mean, here's what I learned:

Dennis Kucinich admits to having seen a UFO, and Shirley Maclaine is the godmother of his daughter. I'm surprised they didn't manage to work his young, super hot and super tall wife into the debate as well. Since I can't link you directly to the clip in question (curse you, MSNBC), here's from the transcript:

Moderator: The godmother of your daughter, Shirley MacLaine, writes in her new book that you've cited a UFO over her home in Washington state -- that you found the encounter extremely moving, that it was a triangular craft silent and hovering, that you felt a connection to your heart and heard direction in your mind. Now, did you see a UFO?

Kucinich: I did. And the rest of the account -- I didn't -- I -- it was an unidentified flying object, okay. It's like -- it's unidentified. I saw something. Now, to answer your question, I'm moving my -- and I'm also going to move my campaign office to Roswell, New Mexico and another one, an extra, to New Hampshire, okay. And also, you have to keep in mind that more -- that Jimmy Carter saw a UFO, and also that more people in this country have seen UFOs than, I think, approve of George Bush's presidency.

The tasing of a handcuffed student

I just watched this. This happened at a University of Florida at a question and answer session with Senator John Kerry. Yeah, the student was rather obnoxious, but he had a right to ask his questions - it was a question and answer session, dammit. This kid shouldn't have been arrested, or even escorted out of the room. The other students in attendance were applauding his questions, so obviously having them answered would have been important. And then to tase this kid? After he was handcuffed? WTF?! And the fact that Kerry tried to continue on, ignoring the incident as though nothing were happening while cops tased a handcuffed student whose only crime was asking questions of a government official? Watch it for yourself and tell me what you think. (The direct link is here if you need it.)

Putin’s Russia: All of this has happened before; all of this will happen again

This is a post on Russia’s political history. It probably won’t be interesting to a lot of you, but I was inspired to write this up by some comments left the other day regarding Putin. My apologies to my readers who come here looking for info on Korea :-) Before I begin this post, I want to provide a little bit of my personal background in this area so you’ll know where I’m coming from. When I was in college, I double majored in Russian (language and culture) and international politics (with a focus on US-Russian relations). I earned my degree in 2001, and since then I’ve simply been a dilettante when it comes to studying these topics. I am by no means an expert. I am also not a sociologist. I’ve never taken any classes in sociology, so all of my ideas pertaining to group behavior which I’ll present here are simply based on my personal observations on the ways people behave.

The first thing you need to know about my little theory is that I’m a believer in cyclical history. As they say in Battlestar Galactica’ religious philosophy, all of this has happened before, all of this will happen again. From examining my own life and the patterns (both good and bad) which continue repeating themselves, to examining historical patterns – in which humanity doesn’t seem to learn from it’s mistakes – it appears obvious to me that there are patterns of behavior visible throughout history. It would also seem to make sense that people from one culture would follow patterns of behavior different from people of another culture. (In other words, just because the USA follows one set of political behavioral patterns, it doesn’t follow that all other countries in the world should easily adhere to the same patterns. This would be one reason why Bush’s ideas for turning Iraq into a Middle Eastern bastion of democracy didn’t fly quite like the administration thought it would.)

In 2000, while studying Russian politics and history (in Russia, actually), I began to notice patterns which really stuck in my mind – to the point that I decided to write my senior honors thesis on it the following year. Don’t worry, I won’t subject you to the entire thing; it makes for quite dull reading. Instead, let me give you an interesting timeline to muse on:

• Approximately 1040AD – The Medieval monarch Iaroslav the Wise of Kievan Rus (the early Russian state) implements a written code of laws dealing with retribution for murder, accidental death or injury, reimbursement and repayment of debts, recovery of stolen property, etc, in an unbiased legal fashion. This code of laws applied only to free males (although free males did exist in all strata of society) but nonetheless it was remarkably advanced for its time.
• The Boyar Duma and veche traditions begin. The Boyar Duma was a council of nobles, which was created to advise the prince in all matters. The veche was a public gathering of free citizens from all strata of society which gathered regularly to voice their opinions. While the princes weren’t required to consult with the veche like they were the Duma, they often did nontheless.

At this point in time, Kievan Rus was the most liberal state in Medieval Europe. Then something happened in 1223AD to totally squash liberal democratic political movements: the Mongols invaded. Dictatorship of princes who kowtowed to the Mongols began, and these dictators (erm, Tsars) retained their power after the Mongols had finally been kicked to the curb. (I should point out that the Kievan province of Novgorod was able to maintain independence from the Mongol rule by negotiating a tribute system. This enabled even greater political advances in Novgorod than had happened in Kievan Rus: the Duma and veche dismissed the prince and elected their own leaders. This lasted until the late 15th century when Ivan III sent troops from Moscow to utterly crush Novgorod and bring the province under the mantle of Moscow.)

Until the 19th century, there was nothing remotely democratic to be found within Russia. The 19th century saw the following:
• The Decembrist Revolt of 1825 – Russian Army officers refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the new Tsar and tried to bring about a revolt to topple the Tsardom and replace it with a constitution. It failed miserably. The top leaders were publicly hanged and the others were exiled to Siberia.
• 1855 – Tsar Alexander II takes the throne. He allowed a relaxation in restrictions enabling various interest groups to form throughout Russia. These groups enabled people of all strata to organize around various political/social issues.
• 1861- Tsar Alexander II emancipates the serfs
• 1864 – Tsar Alexander II passes the Zemstvo Statute. This created a system of local councils, or zemstva, the members of which were elected directly by nobles and middle class townsmen, and indirectly by the peasantry (former serfs). This was the first time that all classes of Russian society had any say in Imperial Russian government. In 1864, the Tsar also established an independent court system modeled on western styles of jurisprudence.
• Near the end of his reign, Alexander II was seriously considering implementing an elected body akin to a parliament, whose role would be to advise the Tsar. This was still under consideration at the time of his death.
• 1881 – Alexander II was assassinated.

The new Tsar, Alexander III was wholly uninterested in reforms, the development of representative government, or in anything else which might erode his power. While he didn’t dismantle any of the reforms put in place by his father, he prevented further reforms and strengthened the autocracy.

In 1894, Alexander III died and Nicholas II assumed the throne. He held the same autocratic views as his father, although he didn’t have the same strength necessary to quell reformers.

Under Nicholas II, the following happened:
• 1904 – the National Congress of Zemstva was held. They gave Nicholas II a document demanding individual rights, civil equality, freedom of the press and of assembly, and the development of a legislative system. The Tsar essentially told them to take a hike.
• December 1904-January 1905 – A peaceful strike led by leaders of a newly created union was fired upon by Imperial troops. Reports ranged from 96 dead to several thousand dead, depending on the source. No one really knows for sure.
• October 1905 - St. Petersburg Council (Soviet) of Workers was formed as a representative of the working classes, in an attempt to increase their rights. The Soviet gained so much support, that Nicholas II realized he had to concede somewhat to their demands in order to retain his throne. He signed the October Manifesto, which granted various individual freedoms and created a Duma (parliament).
• 1906 – The first Duma elections were held. The make-up of the first parliament was so liberal that Nicholas II dissolved it and called for new elections. The second Duma was elected… and was even more liberal than the first. Nicholas II dissolved it as well.
• 1907 – Nicholas II changed the property qualifications for voting – meaning that only the nobles could vote for Duma representatives – leading to the election of a very conservative and weak third Duma.
• March 1917 – fed up with Nicholas II and his lack of willingness to allow reforms, the masses finally rise up and revolt. A provisional government was formed, which intended to create a democratic state.

This seemed pretty promising… but a democratic government can’t pop into place over night. Given the needs of the masses and the weaknesses in the infrastructure the provisional government inherited, the masses were not content, despite the regime change. The inability to placate the masses led to continued revolution…

• October 1917 – the Bolsheviks (under Lenin) led a revolt against the provisional government, leading to three years of civil war, culminating in the establishment of the Soviet Union.
• 1927 – Stalin takes control. Political participation was forcibly limited to state-sponsored activities.

Certainly there were acts of opposition to the Soviet government during the decades of its regime, but they were not organized democratic participatory acts. At least not until Gorbachev arrived.

• 1985 – Gorbachev becomes General Secretary of the Soviet Union. Policies of glastnost and perestroika were implemented. Glastnost was the making known to the masses of everything that had been kept from public knowledge throughout the existence of the Soviet Union. Perestroika was as a restructuring of the Soviet system, in order to establish a democratic and self-governing system. Censorship was relaxed, organizations were allowed to form, and people began discussing their political situation.
• In the late 1980s, elections which seemed quite democratic were held… the Soviet Union seemed to be slowly turning into a democracy. But, things were moving slowly and the masses didn’t want to wait.
• 1991 – Boris Yeltsin leads a coup, effectively ending the Soviet Union. Yeltsin becomes president of the Russian Federation.

At this point in time, everyone in the west hailed this as a great victory for democracy and capitalism, and seemed to believe that from here on out Russia would be a booming capitalist democracy much like the US. People seem so damn surprised that it’s not. Well, seriously. Look at Russia’s history. Look at how Russia’s people will be content for decades – even centuries – under a repressive regime, only rising up and revolting when things finally become intolerable. Most of the time the masses are apathetic. Take a look at how nearly ALL of the democratic reforms that have occurred over there through the ages were implemented AT THE TOP, when an enlightened leader (Iaroslav, Alexander II, Gorbachev) felt that the country needed more political participation/reforms. Notice how when government leaders try to slowly implement reforms in a nice, logical manner, this leads to either revolt from below of quashing from above. Russia is the most stable under strong, authoritarian leaders. Why is the current situation in Russia a surprise to anyone?

Here’s a bit of an anecdotal story about the apathy of the Russian masses, and how they differ in political behavior from your average American citizen. Under the Soviet Union, a centralized system was created to provide hot water to the masses. Most Russians still get their hot water from central hot water sources. This means that for most of the year, your average Russian has unlimited hot water. Unfortunately, for a few weeks to a month or so every summer, the hot water is shut off for routine maintenance. That’s a few weeks to a month or so of no hot water. (And let me tell you, cold tap water in Russia – even in the summer – is REALLY cold.) Now, obviously in the US the government doesn’t supply us with hot water… but just imagine for a moment that it did. Imagine for a moment how the populace would react if every summer there was a month or so of no hot water. People would be writing/calling/emailing/visiting everyone from their local city council to their state and national representatives, lobbying to get this situation remedied ASAP. You know what the Russians do when the hot water goes out? They simply deal with it.

But I *do* have a crush on Obama!

Attention American Citizens!

Please listen to this.
You'll probably learn something.

Terrifying.

You need to listen to this. Now.
Especially if you're an American.
Do you find that as terrifying as I do?

My mom is hot.

And I am *so* very jealous of this sweater she's sporting.

What's NOT hot is Ann Coulter calling John Edwards a faggot.
Nick has the story.

McCain: Not Moderate Like You Were Led To Believe

(If you're having trouble viewing the video, click here.)

Additionally, check out Nick's post on Obama, Edwards, Hillary and McCain.