Putin Takes a Pen and a Seat - Instablogs
Putin Takes a Pen and a Seat
Kim , New York: May 14 2008
Made Popular May 14 2008
Russia :

Putin Takes a Pen and a Seat
It’s necessary now to put both the word “former” and the word “president” in quotation marks when referring to Vladimir Putin. He stands accused of rigging his elections (both by purging the ballot form and stuffing the ballot box) and therefore can’t be considered a properly chosen “president,” and rather than leaving government after his term as “president” ended he chose to assume the position of prime minister, vastly expanding the powers of that office. Thus, he’s still ruling Russia, and by no means as a freely chosen president but rather as a conspiratorial dictator.

The New York Times reports that in announcing the appointment of the members of his new government, Putin “sat at the same place at a table that he used as president for these performances. Dmitri Medvedev, officially the president, sat in a chair that viewers have come to regard as for subordinates.” The ministers were all Putin’s former flunkies; Medvedev will not be allowed to bring in any new faces. As the Times states: “The announcements reinforced the image that Mr. Putin will retain a grip on power and the direction of policy in Russia.”

The Associated Press reports: “When Boris Yeltsin left the Kremlin eight years ago, he gave Vladimir Putin the pen he had used to sign important documents and decrees, a gesture symbolizing the transfer of power to Russia’s new president. When Putin left the Kremlin, he took the pen with him.”

The Wall Street Journal reports: “If, as is widely expected here, article 32 of the law on government is amended to transfer authority over the military and security services and the foreign ministry to the prime minister, Mr. Putin will have the authority to continue to rule Russia regardless of the president. Postcommunist Russia can thus be ruled in reality (as opposed to appearance) by someone not elected as president, even in flawed elections.”

Since being sworn in a week ago, Medvedev has spoken in public for a total of less than 20 minutes. Putin surrounded himself with cabinet ministers who are hard-line former KGB spies, taking them away from the presidential administration and leaving Medvedev “adrift” and powerless. The Telegraph reports that Dmitry Oreshkin, a Russian political analyst said: “The centre of power has been unquestionably transferred to the White House.”

Blogger Robert Amsterdam reports that even funnyman David Letterman understands the apocalyptic outrage taking place in Russia:

On the May 12th Late Show with David Letterman, they did a short funny bit replaying clips of all these different news anchors (and of course Hillary Clinton) caught mispronouncing Medvedev’s name. Then, right when the bit ended, Letterman looked into the camera and ad-libbed — “You know it doesn’t even matter because he’s just one of Putin’s cronies..., “while shaking his head in cynical disapproval. The surprising comment was greeted with silence from the crowd, while his hype man in the band Paul Shaffer quipped, “Is that you speaking here? Because you usually don’t go political...” And from there the show continued on without further comment.

Ouch. Way to go, Dave, that’s telling it like it is! We are getting more leadership on Russia from a stand-up comic than we are from our president, it seems.

Anyone who uses the term “former” or “president” in regard to Putin is betraying not only democracy but the meaning and purpose of human language itself.

Add Images and Videos
Close X
Recommended Tags or Keywords
Search by Tags or Keywords
Selected Media ( You can Upload only Six media )
Sorry no picture found for this combination of tags. Try to search minimum number of tags at once
1 Stars
Michael
La, United States
yea world really not doubtful but knows that the epicenter of power will remain with putin no matter what slot he occupies. the very act of carrying the pen with him that his predecessor, Yeltsin, has given to him is the symbolic of power that putin is taking with him being the Prime minister of Russia. So hopefully nothing will change in Russia world is apprehensive of more russian aggression.
1 Stars
Michael Kerjman
The Earth, Australia
Let’s be serious: presidents cannot be blamed for pursuing their national interests instead of accommodating the close/far neighbours.

Other story, how to cooperate with a world pragmatically:
http://seattle.indymedia.org/en/2005/10/248352.shtml
1 Stars
Balbhadra Rana
Rajkot, India
Putin is very popular in Russia. That is a fact. Putin had to step down as president only because of some technical clause in the constitution that forbids more than two terms for the presidency.

What is wrong if Putin holds much power in Russia even after Medvedev’s presidency? It must be noted that Medvedev won easily only because of Putin’s backing.

The other scenario was that Russia sink into chaos after a bitterly fought presidential election. The present situation is definitely preferable.

One can discuss about the ill-effects of an all-powerful Putin rule later, when Russia has matured into a stable country.

Remember the utter chaos of the Yeltsin era?
1 Stars
Kim publiuspundit.com/
New York, United States
MICHAEL: Why are you trying to change the subject? This article isn’t about Russian foreign policy, it’s about domestic democracy.

BALBHADRA: You’re simply wrong. Putin has destroyed the independent media so the people of Russia know little about his policy failures, and crushed all opposition politicians, so they have no choice in the matter. We have no idea how an educated population truly feels about Putin. What’s more, Hitler was also ”very popular.” Does that mean opposition to him outside Germany was improper? You’re admitting that Putin is flouting the constitution in a country only just separated from a totalitarian nightmare. To me, that’s very disturbing appeasement and not in the best interests of the Russian people or our own.
1 Stars
Michael Kerjman
The Earth, Australia
Kim,



Thank you for clarifying an issue because, an outer observer, I am really much more concerned of implications Russians foreign affairs present while reflecting domestic relations such as, for instance, an increasing HIV pressure and tensions in Siberia over an in-fluxing-Chinese’s land-use.
1 Stars
Kim publiuspundit.com/
New York, United States
MICHAEL:

So in other words, you couldn’t care less how much the people of Russia might suffer under dictatorship, as long as it works out well for you?
1 Stars
Balbhadra Rana
Rajkot, India
The mistake we all make is to try to fit in the US or British model of democracy on every country of the world. It is because we have been systematically brainwashed by the western media.

Russia under the present circumstances is doing the best it can. I repeat. The Putin era is definitely better than the hotch-potch of the Yeltsin years. It only gave rise to big billionaires (who manipulated the system) and the Russian mafia.
1 Stars
Michael Kerjman
The Earth, Australia
Kim,

I did not say that, but how do you know that Russians were worse under Putin, than the ordinary Brits under their factually-no-way-out crown recently?

And there are many newcomers of India round the globe this time either…
1 Stars
Balbhadra Rana
Rajkot, India
The people have voted for Putin’s nominee for the presidency. The presidential polls have been largely fair without large-scale organised rigging. Even the western media agrees with that.

As for the bad old days of Yeltsin, if the Russian people were happy during his reign, how did Putin get elected as President?
Add your Comment