We are bombarded daily with news that even a few short years ago would have been unimaginable.
A recent article in Salon written by an abortion worker refers to an aborted baby as an “unwanted growth” and by removing it they “preserved the woman’s chosen course.” Seeing tiny arms and legs floating in a bowl made her even more pro-choice pro-abortion.
Planned Parenthood, the leading abortion provider in the country, tweeted that they thought telling girls to protect their character on prom night was “despicable.”
And the latest Gallup poll states:
Americans are more likely now than in the early 2000’s to find a variety of behaviors morally acceptable, including gay and lesbian relations, having a baby outside of marriage, and sex between an unmarried man and woman. Moral acceptability of many of these issues is now at a record-high level. source
One glaring observation of this poll is that while support for abortion has gone up by three points, support for the death penalty has gone down by the same three points.
To see these findings in action, I need go no further than my own very conservative area where the illegitimate birth rate among teenagers has skyrocketed. Marriage is no longer important, and multiple children by different fathers is common.
Marriage and family, the bedrock of a civilized nation, is all but destroyed. I have no doubt that when the Supreme Court issues it’s ruling on same-sex “marriage”, it will come down on the side of the homosexuals, thereby completely changing the definition of marriage.
Benjamin Franklin emphasized that without virtue, free societies could not properly function. He said, “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
When was the last time you even heard the word “virtue”? If people conformed to accepted virtues, none of what is going on would be possible.
There is much talk on many sites, usually the ones focused on the economy, about some big event coming along to collapse our country. Trust me on this, it won’t happen like that. In fact, it’s already happening and has been for decades. The slow drip of immorality and depravity has already transformed our country into something most of us don’t recognize anymore.
The elites don’t want a collapse, they want slaves who will be willing to do their bidding.
John Adams, in a letter dated October 11, 1798, to the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts said:
[…]we have no government, armed with power, capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
I have no intention of being anyone’s slave, and I hope you don’t either.
On Facebook I saw a liberal friend call the what-has-she-accomplished? attacks on Hillary Clinton “absurd.” Actually this is the best argument against HRC’s candidacy for president, although I can see why progressives are perplexed by this criticism. Libs’ minds are wired into whether people have the correct opinions and the right intentions. But of course no one cares if your trash collectors are Republicans or Democrats–you only care if that garbage is gone from your driveway once a week.
We’ve all worked with an office know-it-all, the person who can’t hack his own job but has plenty of ideas on how he can do a better job than his boss. All he–or she of course–needs is a promotion and the power to shine. On the rare occasion I’ve seen that complainer move up the ladder, the result was predictable, failure.
Because having great ideas and vision is only part of what is needed to be successful. You need to have skills to convince others that your course of action is the best–and to have patience to maintain alliances if initially confronted with failure. The concept of the philosopher-king is a myth.
Last week on MSNBC, Mark Halperin asked ten Iowa Democrats who are Hillary Clinton supporters to name one of her accomplishments while serving in the Obama administration. They couldn’t name any.
Seven years earlier on the same network, Chris Matthews asked a Texas state senator a similar question about Barack Obama–he was stumped too.
As for Obama’s record as president, we can look at a resurgent an anti-American Russia, the rise of ISIS, green energy failures, and a moribund economy. Obama’s biggest achievement is the still unpopular ObamaCare law–one that could be stripped down next month by the Supreme Court.
Americans: Do you really want four more years of an unaccomplished president? Can we afford it?
Duncan:It doesn’t have to be public as long as everybody knows
Yes Minister: Party Games 1984
This weekend everyone was all a twitter about the Saudi’s intention to arm themselves with Nuclear Weapons to answer the Obama enabled mullahs of Iran.
But unlike the Iranians who decided to develop their own program the Saudi’s being glutted with the wealth that comes from having only to poke a hole in the ground to find it are looking at a quicker route:
Saudi Arabia has invested in Pakistani nuclear weapons projects, and believes it could obtain atomic bombs at will, a variety of sources have told BBC Newsnight.
While the kingdom’s quest has often been set in the context of countering Iran’s atomic programme, it is now possible that the Saudis might be able to deploy such devices more quickly than the Islamic republic.
Now given the effect of Obama’s retreat in Iraq, and the results of the Ukrainian surrender of their nukes the Saudi move is a prudent one but there is an obvious question worth asking.
Since 1947 the arab nations of the area have insisted the Israel is the greatest danger to peace, an aggressor out to enslave arabs and until 1973 fought multiple wars in an attempt to destroy them.
While Israel did not publicly admit it, the entire Arab world suspected that Israel had the bomb , and the first unofficial confirmation came out in 1986 meaning that they have known Israel had nukes for at least 30 years.
Yet the knowledge that the scourge of humanity, the country that the UN condemns more than any other. The state that Arabs the world over consider the ultimate aggressor at knowledge did not compel the Saudi’s to either develop or buy the bomb.
There is lot of talk that comes from our friends on the left, about the threat of Israel but the only crisis that Israel nukes brought to the middle east was arresting of the potential of Arabs to slaughter Jews en masse. And Arab nations for all their talk acted accordingly
Compare this to how Arab nations are reacting to a potential nuclear bomb.
Glenn Reynolds often says this Global Warming: “I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people who keep telling me it’s a crisis start acting like it’s a crisis.”
The Saudis/Arabs never acted like Israel with a bomb for 30+ years was a crisis because for all their talk they knew it was not.
Now with the Iranians about to get the bomb the Saudi’s are acting like it’s a crisis.
Now in fairness to Mr. Beutler, you can make a case that Mr. Paul has been more flexible in his positions and to some degree his article makes that case
Paul went on to suggest his old view—that we should not provide foreign aid to Israel—isn’t in contradiction with his new view: that foreign aid should be phased out, starting with antagonistic countries and working back to Israel, because “ultimately all nations should be free of foreign aid because we shouldn’t borrow money to do it.”
However attacking the Senator for the difference between his ideal (the elimination of foreign aid) and the steps that are politically possible to move in that direction (elimination of foreign aid to our enemies) is a weak argument as selling what is currently possible while making the case to the people for the next step is the way an intelligent pol creates change.
But in terms of sheer nonsense that pales before the argument that not being friendly to reporters is going to ruin him.
When he shushes a reporter or scolds her for talking over him, his loyalists don’t see an otherwise talented politician unable to hide his annoyance. They eat it up. In their minds Paul is the rare politician who’ll bite back at reporters when they supposedly expose their biases. But asking questions that other conservatives continue to raise reveals no bias. What it reveals is that, for all his natural talent, Paul can’t reconcile his beliefs with his ambitions. That’s a huge problem for a national politician. It will define his candidacy.
This is nonsense for two significant reasons.
The first is the most obvious, no matter how many times as a Republican you go along with a reporters meme or make concessions to their opinions, the reality is the goal of the Mainstream media is your defeat and if you are a strong conservative not just your defeat you but discredit you.
Making accommodations with people who want to destroy you is analogous to the Iran deal a denial of reality that will in the end only make things worse.
Will this affect Americans’ trust in the media? It could, but it’s important to keep in mind that such trust is already as low as it has been since Gallup began measuring it.
Each September we track a measure of trust in “…the mass media, such as newspapers, TV and radio — when it comes to reporting the news fully, accurately and fairly…” The accompanying graph shows the trend since 1997, with the “great deal”/”fair amount” of trust category dropping from as high as 55% in 1999 to a low of 40% both in 2012 and in 2014.
In other words six in ten Americans don’t trust the MSM in fact according to Gallup’s chart less than one in five Americans trust Television or Internet news quite a lot or more and Newspapers only manage to produce that level of trust from 22% of Americans.
In fact not only are media trusted less than Banks but only 38% of independents and 54% of Democrats have even a fair amount of trust of the media.
That being the case when Rand Paul expresses public distrust in the media the most likely reaction from the majority of the voting public is going to be agreement
Will it be enough to win Senator Paul the nomination? Of course not, but disdain for the media can only help Rand Paul with voters and only someone from the media could fail to understand this.
In an age when everybody is turning to surgery, pills & fad diets Ms. hudson has a method of maintaining a competitive physical shape that openly reinforces uncomfortable truth.
“You [have to] work your ass off, that’s the only way. [And] you have to eat right,”
Furthermore it’s a question of consistency:
“I wouldn’t say [I work out] a lot, just consistently…People think for some reason you have to work out for two and a half hours…but, it can be little. It can be 20 minutes, it could be 40 minutes, but you have to [get it in],” she said. “You can’t do like two weeks and go like do two days and then take a week off and then do three days and then go, ‘Why aren’t I [seeing results?] I don’t get it.’ You know, you just got to do it — sad, like anything else in life!”
Obviously as a person who doesn’t work out & eats wrong (but better than I once did) my opinion on health is not worth much so why am I bringing this up?
Because this applies to almost every single endeavor in life, from writing, to any kind of business to politics. People keep looking for a quick score or an angle it reminds me of what Max Hastings wrote about 3rd world armies who simply can’t get it through their heads the reality of relentless training as the secret to the success of British & American forces from his book The Battle for the Falklands
They all secretly believe that there is some pill you can take if you will tell them what it is.
But like those third world armies such as the arabs who routinely lost wars to Israel and to the mill if you are looking to get into Kate Hudson shape there is a simple answer
Hudson told Us. “Everybody wants some sort of secret and there just isn’t, it’s just you have to work out.”
It’s like the 10 commandments, easy rules are always the hardest to follow.
This is an important life lesson that’s worth learning
Third-Quarter 2014 Primetime Averages
FNC: 1,797,000 viewers, up 12 percent (313,000 adults 25-54, up 12 percent)
CNN: 555,000 viewers, up 2 percent (186,000 adults 25-54, up 4 percent)
MSNBC: 557,000 viewers, down 2 percent (150 adults 25-54, down 21 percent)
HLN: 352,000 viewers, down 4 percent (120 adults 25-54, down 12 percent)
Yes FNC is outdrawing them all combined and yes we can joke about Shark Tank re-runs beating MSNBC but let me throw a dose of reality at you. Those FOX numbers mean nothing as long as these broadcast news numbers remain true:
You will note that Fox total views barely beats the 3rd place CBS number for 18/54 year olds. Furthermore If we combine the totals of these 25,821,000 & 6,089,000 in the 18-54 demo for the seven networks in question here is what we get for numbers by comparison
NBC 31.6% 29.7%
ABC 31.1% 32.9%
CBS 24.5% / 24.7%
FOX 7.0% /5.1%
CNN 2.1% / 3.0%
MSNBC 2.1% / 2.5%
HLN 1.3% / 1.9%
So for all their power in cable Fox news reaches a whopping 7% of news viewers and not even Megan Kelly beauty has gotten them above 5.1% among 18/54 year olds.
Furthermore when you remember that the 25.8 million number represents only 10.7% of the voting age population and and 18.4% of the number of people who actually voted the impact of Fox (and to some degree the networks) is really understood.
Now to the left, being totalitarian in nature, even this modest bit of the electorate getting an opinion differing from their message is dangerous which is why FOX remains a target, but lets not kid ourselves. As long as we are crowing about FOX News vs CNN/MSNBC/HLN we are like the toughest player on the JV football team talking smack.
Until we break into those newsrooms thing swill not change and frankly until we break into the greater culture where the 89.3% of voting age people who don’t watch news go even that move will be wasted.
Conservatives pride themselves on seeing things as they are as opposed to the utopian left. Let’s start acting like it.
If you think this site and the writers who write here are worth your support please consider kicking in so we can reach our final goal for the year
Update: Hotair gloats over Media Matters failure but as long as Fox is only reaching 7% of news consumers and under 1% of the electorate they are winning.
…Then perhaps someone in the country would give a damn that she didn’t even make it to Michael Brown’s age:
How many people got shot to death in Chicago this past weekend? I don’t know, but I’m going to guess it’s probably more people than the Ferguson, Missouri, police have shot to death in the past five years. (OK, I just Googled it: 7 dead, 29 wounded in Chicago last weekend, including 16-year-old Shaquise Buckner. For killing black kids, the Ferguson police can’t ever hope to rival Chicago.)
When a story like Michael Brown’s death makes national news, it’s because the media decided there’s some kind of Social Justice angle. Matthew Shepard was a story like that, and it took years for people to admit it wasn’t really about “homophobia.”
But nobody is rioting in Chicago because Shaquise Buckner never made it to 17, Al Sharpton & Jessie Jackson will not be meeting with his mother, no nationally known lawyers will be holding news conferences about his death, the Black Panthers will not be holding vigils and his murder will be of less consequence to the left’s activists in the city than the potential opening of a Chick Fil A.
After all, there are no potential to change the course of the 2014 midterm elections from his death, is there?
Exit question: If Stacy McCain hadn’t mentioned Shaquise Buckner’s name how many people in the country would know it?
The 4th Doctor :“You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don’t alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering.”
Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Episode Four
Stan:I want you all to call me “Loretta”
Monty Python’s Life of Brian 1979
In the course of my reading yesterday I came across this piece at The Other McCain concerning the ongoing war between Radical feminists and Transgender activists.
I wish Brennan and her radical feminist allies could be strategic enough to realize that there is a huge majority of people who would be willing to support them on this one point — that “woman” is a biological category, not a “gender identity” — if only they realized how important this issue is. The fact that the people being targeted now are my ideological antagonists is not irrelevant to my concern. If hardcore feminists can be targeted this way, what do you think is going to happen when the Tranny Totalitarians target conservatives?
While I find the fight between this em “interesting” groups of people quite amusing there was a rather clarifying moment within this post. This was a tweet from a “transgender” person by the name of Sophia Banks and a response by a person who goes under “SugarPuss” that neatly encapsulates the actual reality here:
Now before we comment on this tweet there is one thing that needs to be clarified. There is, in fact, a tiny amount of people who are born with the sexual organs of both sexes and or an abnormal production of hormones. If a person is in such a situation one should respect whatever decision said person makes at the age of decision in terms of choosing to define oneself as either (or no) sex. None of what follows applies to a person with said medical condition.
Now back to that tweets, The bottom line is with the exception I just noted above there is a simple fact that can not be disputed:
Women do not have penises.
Or as Nursie once explained in Black Adder Series 2
Women do not have penises, Women have never had penises and baring an incredible advance in genetic modification and manipulation or transplant surgery women never will have penises any more than men will have wombs.
Now there are a statistically insignificant amount of men and women who have for whatever reason chosen to have their bodies physically altered, via surgery and or hormone treatments to resemble the opposite sex and who have chosen to live as such. The recognized term used for such a person is “Transgender”. In some countries such alteration is recognized by law, however this doesn’t change the actual reality any more than laws claiming a woman’s testimony is worth half of a man’s under sharia describes an actual mathematical ratio of eyewitness validity.
Now if that tweet said “Transgender woman” rather than simply “woman” I would have no problem with it as it acknowledges the objective reality of a person choosing to physically or chemically altering themselves in a way recognized by law. Nor do I have a problem with a person such as Sophia Banks choosing to live as a woman, function as a woman etc etc etc. Whatever my opinion of the wisdom or sanity of such a decision it’s not my life and therefore not my business. Nor would I have a problem is a person meeting “Sophia” chooses to use female pronouns in discussion, particularly if they had no acquaintance with Sophia before the alternation. Two of the three “transgender” people I know I only met after their “transformation” therefore I find it convenient to use feminine pronouns particularly if they do not wish their previous status disclosed.
However a line is crossed from amused disinterest line to outright defiance if any attempt is made to compel me to acknowledge this delusion as “fact” or if one wishes to force such an acknowledgement by law. At that point this goes from a delusion that only harms the deluded to an attempt to impose a blatant falsehood as truth which is wrong. A great parallel to this would be the group of “catholic” women who ordain themselves & others as catholic “priests”. It’s one thing for them to live this delusion, it’s quite another if they demand the actual Catholic Church to recognize the validity of their make-believe orders.
Or think of the character of Teddy Brewster in the Movie Arsenic & Old Lace. As long as Teddy is simply blowing his bugle and just talking to neighbors his delusion is not a problem or at most a minor annoyance, but the moment he demands secret service protection as an Ex President and insists on attending international conferences being acknowledged as Theodore Roosevelt and takes legal action to secure and compel it, then one would be compelled to remind him of objective reality.
And that brings us to this tweet I put out in response to Stacy’s post that caused so much fuss yesterday.
I found it all quite amusing and returned tweets for a bit until actual “life” trumped my amusement but as of this writing angry responses continue to enter my timeline. I’m not inclined to block them because I’m a first amendment guy & I generally don’t block an account unless it’s a phony troll one. Contrary to their totalitarian impulses crazy uncles/aunts have the right to their opinion just as I have and I further am confident in the wisdom of my followers.
While flogging this reaction might be good for traffic & DaTipJar there is a more interesting phenom to note in term of both psychology & the net that I’d like to discuss.
Five years ago (have I really been doing this that long?) I wrote a piece called “The Empowerment of Crazy Uncles” where I talked about how the internet empowers the 1% of people who are, shall we say reality challenged.
The problem is with the internet and social networking and the like that crazy 1% or 1/10 of one percent is suddenly empowered. Instead of the crazy uncle at the family gathering that you can ignore, suddenly he has 1000 friends that he can text to rebut and counter rebut all night. He is affirmed and empowered and boy is he motivated, because now there are thousands of people telling him he’s been right all along and is MUCH smarter than everyone thought.
300,000-3,000,000 crazy uncles as individuals isn’t a big deal, but get them all writing e-mails or making phone calls and most importantly AFFIRMING themselves and suddenly you have a potent economic and or political force. Suddenly there is a huge market for a book or 10,000 people willing to pay $20 for a DVD. That’s a fair amount of change and a person can make a good living off of it.
While the net empowers these crazy uncles there is one limiting effect upon them. While they make up a considerable niche market and an excellent activist base in reality they are a rounding error when compared to the actual population. That means if you have constructed your psychological identity based entirely on an illusion and have spent thousands of dollars and years of your time reinforcing said illusion via surgical & chemical alteration the one thing you dread above all else is the person who, without fear, is willing to deny your illusion , to pull back the curtain of the Wizard, or point to the procession and say “but the Emperor has nothing on!”
And if such a person is in any way a public person that might encourage others to do the same the carefully built lie that is one’s life becomes as fragile as a block of flats put up by hypnosis: You want to talk phobia THAT’s phobia.
But it’s not just those deluded and fearful of reality who are endangered, it’s the people who make their living supporting and enabling such delusions. The expensive treatments, the bestselling books, the political machines who can count on shock troops, the ability to exploit these people financially & politically for their own gain is never more in danger than when people are willing to stand up and bluntly say the truth. And the truth is this:
When your identity & belief system in your life can be summed up neatly in a 3 minute gag from a Monty Python movie Then it’s likely a wise move to re-examine that system closely.
It’s one thing to lose a cherished delusion, it’s quite another to lose the gravy train that those people illusions finance. That demands a loud, immediate and even a totalitarian response. That’s the real fear on display for the world to see here, if they did not have this fear they would have ignored me as just some guy on twitter to block.
Two things in closing: None of this nonsense removes the inherent dignity owed a person by virtue of humanity. Furthermore said person remains a child of God and thus the proper subject for prayer as required. Those are the rules.
If one’s goal is to intimidate and silence that last thing you want to see is this:
The amusing & irrational tweets from those outraged by my homage to reality will be the subject of my lead post tomorow. @rsmccain#tcot#p2 — Peter Ingemi (@DaTechGuyblog) July 24, 2014
retweted by Instapunit
As a wise man once said: ” Heh, indeed.” ***************************************
With 8 days to go we need $1100 to make this month’s goal.
If just twenty of you can hit DaTipJar for $50 or more July will end as a success.
If you think the coverage and commentary we provide here is worth your support please consider hitting DaTipJar below and help keep the bills paid.
Clive: April 1912. This is a photo of the Daniels family of Southampton, and friend. This was taken the day before they were due to sail off for the New World on the Titanic, and for some unknown reason, they cancelled the trip and survived
Doctor Who Rose 2005
Yesterday the administration and their media allies was dancing on air. They were able to announce that they had their seven million Obamacare folks (the methodology wasn’t quite made clear) .
Jay Carney was delighted and the President and Vice President went before the American public yesterday afternoon and declared just how wonderful Obamacare was and how the GOP would have to look people with coverage in the eye and kick them off. The networks ate it up (even CNN found the time to break away from Flight 370 coverage long enough to join the Presidential victory lap).
But while the White House was all smiles and President Obama, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi took their bows there were a few people not in view of the cameras.
If you watch the live coverage you saw plenty of people standing behind the president, you saw even more sitting in the crowd in front of him, but you know who was not either behind the president or in front of him?
Any Democrat running in a district that isn’t safe. There were as hard to find as Leland Yee on CNN
James Carvelle’s column not withstanding , it doesn’t matter how much the White House crows or how much the media spins this or how many seats on the good ship Obamacare between two ferns managed to sell, Democrats who actually have something to lose in November know a boat is full of holes will still sink when it goes out to sea and they’re determined not to be on it..
American voters oppose the Affordable Care Act 55 – 41 percent and 40 percent are less likely to vote for a candidate who supports Obamacare, while 27 percent are more likely and 31 percent say this will not affect their vote.
As I said to Maxine Baptiste this morning as she was crowing about Obamacare’s success
NATO allies will hold emergency talks on the crisis in Ukraine on Tuesday, for the second time in three days, following a request from Poland, the alliance said on Monday.
In calling the meeting, Poland, a neighbor of Ukraine, invoked a NATO rule allowing any ally to consult with the others if it feels its security, territorial integrity or independence are under threat, the so-called Article 4.
“The developments in and around Ukraine are seen to constitute a threat to neighboring Allied countries and having direct and serious implications for the security and stability of the Euro-Atlantic area,” the alliance said in a statement.
Emphasis mine; Poland knows Russia well.
There’s the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, under which Hitler’s Nazi Germany and Stalin’s USSR agreed to split up Poland.[i]
There’s the Katyn Massacre. Originally attributed to the Nazis, it was actually perpetrated by the NKVD (Soviet Secret Police); the USSR admitted to the massacre in 1990.
And there’s the Warsaw Pact. Allegedly it was formed counter as counter to NATO and as a “Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance” between the USSR and eight other eastern European countries, including Poland. But, as is well-known, it was de facto enslavement of those countries by Soviet masters.
But Poland doesn’t even have to look to the previous century find reasons to be suspicious of Russia and its goals.
Recall the scrapped agreement for the missile shield technology for Poland and the Czech Republic. It had been promised by George W. Bush, opposed by Vladimir Putin, and, in the end, was reneged on by Barack H. Obama. And recall that the turnabout was announced on September 18, 2009—the seventieth anniversary of the day on which Hitler and Stalin carried out their designs on Poland.
Polish President Lech Kaczynski and some of the country’s highest military and civilian leaders died on Saturday when the presidential plane crashed as it came in for a landing in thick fog in western Russia, killing 96, officials said.
Russian and Polish officials said there were no survivors on the 26-year-old Tupolev, which was taking the president, his wife and staff to events marking the 70th anniversary of the [Katyn] massacre of thousands of Polish officers by Soviet secret police.
Our leadership and many other observers may not be taking into account—or even be familiar with—the history of this abusive relationship, but it would be safe to bet that the Poles had it in mind when they decided to make their appeal to NATO.
This is not to say that the United States should intervene on behalf of Ukraine. Even if our mandate to do so were morally and politically clear-cut, in the wake of the hollowing out of this nation–militarily, economically, socially, and, most importantly, in the leadership sphere–we are simply not able to help Ukraine or any other nation.
But while the President of the United States continually provides negative examples of an observation made by King Solomon in Proverbs, Poland looks at Ukraine, scrutinizes its own history and soberly ponders reality. Please, God, let there be a few more sober realists in the USA!
[i] In his actions concerning Georgia and Ukraine, Russian president Vladimir Putin has borrowed a strategy from both Stalin and Hitler: both claimed that their attack on Poland was to protect ethnic Ukrainians, Belarusians and Germans in the country—a pretext, to be sure.
Putin used a similar justification, with respect to ethnic Russians living in the Republic of Georgia, for the Russo-Georgian War of 2008, which resulted in the “independence” of formerly Georgian provinces Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Both provinces “had been functioning for 15 years outside Georgian control, their de facto independence guaranteed by Russian peacekeeping troops.” Putin is using this same strategy at present as justification for Russia’s incursion into Ukraine–an old form of ethnic cleansing.