Hard to blame them, really: since that fateful day, Russia has spent twenty years trying to chart a course out of a past that didn’t bode too well for its future. It hasn’t helped, of course, that the country decided not to deal with its past at all, thereby allowing certain abuses and mistakes to repeat themselves in ever more absurd reincarnations. It has gone through several severe economic crises—the last of which hit about two weeks too late, on September 15, 2008. These have repeatedly wiped out the savings of millions, a phenomenon from which Russians have learned one lesson: spend, spend, spend. Living conditions deteriorated, birth rates plummeted, able-bodied men dropped like flies. Russia went through a period of the rapacious capitalism of pyramid schemes and robber-baron oligarchy, and it went through a wildly corrupt process of privatizing Soviet property. This cleaved society into a Bolshevik caricature of capitalism: extreme Porsches and extreme poverty.

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/08/russia-august-putsch.html#ixzz1VgdHRJQW

Another interesting article at the New Yorker. I plucked out this paragraph because it intrigued me.

You see, if you replace the word 'Russia' with the word 'America' it might run as a piece in the NYT.

Frankly I never would have stopped to even scan this article if Michele (my belle) Bachmann had not brought up the subject.

According to the liberal website Think Progress, Bachmann, whose grasp of history on the trail at times has been somewhat shaky, said during a radio interview Thursday that Americans today are mindful of the threat posed by a rising U.S.S.R., which, like Elvis, left the building a long, long time ago. (Listen below.)

“What people recognize is that there’s a fear that the United States is in an unstoppable decline. They see the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the Soviet Union and our loss militarily going forward,” Bachmann said on conservative activist Jay Sekulow’s show. “And especially with this very bad debt ceiling bill, what we have done is given a favor to President Obama, and the first thing he’ll whack is 500 billion out of the military defense at a time when we’re fighting three wars. People recognize that.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-bachmann-soviet-20110819,0,7989785.story

I might get into 'cruelty' shortly but ignorance is an astounding quality.

You see Bachmann's latest misstatements, much like her previous misstatements, are not necessarily cruel on their face.

Inspector Clouseau comes to mind when I read portions of Bachmann's speeches—I confess I do not hear them because when her face turns up on the telly I hit the mute button.

I suspect no one, I suspect everyone.

A meaningless statement of course but there is a purpose, an aim in those words.

Clouseau needs to be respected and so he feigns an intellect he does not possess!

Bachmann, for a while would go around calling herself Doctor Bachmann!

She had evidently done some post graduate work following her graduation from Jesus U Law School.

And of course, when once we graduated from law school with an LL.B, that changed to a J.D. Degree.

Doctor of Jurisprudence you see!

Lawyers never really had the balls to call themselves Dr. however and most kept the tag of 'Esquire'; an old hats off to the English caste system.

So whether Michele's excuse for the moniker of Dr. related to the D in the J.D. Degree or to some post graduate work in Tax Law is meaningless.

The fact is that she was straight out masking her true identity when she called herself Dr. and her aim was to pretend to be something she was not in order to further her ambitions.

I have discussed her psychological failings in the past (or rather my opinion of what I perceive as psychological failings).  

http://dagblog.com/reader-blogs/ms-bachmann-nuts-11130

But Michele at times is so very bad at pretending she is something that she is not, she comes across as comical to those who have at least a scintilla of historical interest.

Clouseau might decide that it is necessary to go 'undercover' in order to gather evidence relating to some criminal activity.

The French forensic expert might therefore dress up as a pirate with an inflatable parrot on his shoulder in order to work the wharfs.

Or he might dress up as Henri Toulouse-Lautrec in order to look unsuspecting on a specific corner for a proper stakeout. (When he starts singing Thank Heavens for Little Girls, I cannot even sip on a cup of coffee for an hour or so because the drink will go down the wrong pipe)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9KGjK9aluk&NR=1

His purpose again is to mislead the public so that folks wont discover his true purpose—which is to gather evidence relating to crimes.

Michele, somewhere along the way, got the idea that she was some sort of expert in American & World History; that she was a professor of sorts; and that she should lecture folks on historical matters.

Now Clouseau's fellow workers were 'on' to him. Herbert Lom's character is so frustrated at his inability to get this French forensic expert canned that in the last few Panther films he attempts to just murder the idiot.

Michele's staff, over the last couple decades just seem to jump ship so to speak. At first members of her staff on the State and Federal levels kind of bought her persona and then discovered that they were working with Representative Clouseau.

Getting back to her statement concerning the USSR, Ms. Bachmann's purpose is clear if you read the statement in context.

She realizes that instilling fear in the electorate is a good tool for repubs to use in the course of their search for office.

The Russians are Coming, The Russians are Coming, The Russians are Coming has worked as a rallying cry for politicians for almost a century.

So Michele's purpose is clear. She wishes to instill fear in the electorate in order to get elected.

It is true of course that the Minnesota Congresswoman (now there is a moniker that pisses me off) is after money and fame (in order to make more money) just as Palin seeks more money and more fame (in order to make more money).

I do have a question though.

I believe that Clouseau actually thinks that his cover as a pirate will aid him in his pursuit of truth, justice and the Franken Way.

The question seems to be:

Does Michele Bachmann believe her own comic book history?

Does she really believe that our slave owning founders fought tirelessly to end slavery?

Or is she attempting to take away an argument by the Left that our nation is guilty of terrible historical sins just like any other country?

Does she really believe that the USSR is about to invade the United States of America?

Or is she attempting to instill a Red Scare into the electorate in order to grab power?

Does she really believe that the Theory of Evolution is really evilution?

Or is she attempting to get the most ignorant of the Protestant Right to vote for her?

Does she really believe that global warming is a falsehood perpetrated by the Left—for what purpose I am not sure?

Or is she attempting to procure more corporate contributions—from those corporations who would have to pay a lot of money in order to further pollute the earth?

Does she really believe that the EPA should be dismantled in order to help energy companies better pollute the environment?

Or is she attempting to fill her campaign coffers?

Does she really believe that our banking system is overly regulated; that the larger corporations should not pay taxes; that money earned without labor should not be taxed...

Well that is enough of that!

Now Ed Rollins, I think, saw an opportunity to make a lot of money by jumping on her bus.

Michele is a real popular person right now and will end up with some say at the repub convention.

So ole Ed can receive a nice fee for his services and maintain prestige in the National Republican Party which will give him future opportunities to make good monies in future elections.

So Ed is just participating on some of America's biggest lies for money and prestige.

And that is par for the course for most politicians I should think; and it is the Tao for the Republican Party.

Representative Bachmann has some old ties with some people and some organizations that have views

of history, views of politics and views of humanity that are somewhat at odds with my views:

Eidsmoe has stirred controversy. In 2005, he spoke at the national convention of the Council of Conservative Citizens, a defiantly pro-white, and anti-black, organization. (Eidsmoe says that he deeply despises racism, but that he will speak “to anyone.”) In Alabama last year, he addressed an event commemorating Secession Day and told an interviewer that it was the state’s “constitutional right to secede,” and that “Jefferson Davis and John C. Calhoun understood the Constitution better than did Abraham Lincoln and Daniel Webster.” In April, 2010, he was disinvited from a Tea Party rally in Wausau, Wisconsin, because of these statements and appearances.

Bachmann has not, however, distanced herself, and she has long described her work for Eidsmoe as an important part of her résumé. This spring, she told a church audience in Iowa, “I went down to Oral Roberts University, and one of the professors that had a great influence on me was an Iowan named John Eidsmoe. He’s from Iowa, and he’s a wonderful man. He has theology degrees, he has law degrees, he’s absolutely brilliant. He taught me about so many aspects of our godly heritage.

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_lizza#ixzz1VgFghAqG

Now in my humble opinion Michele Bachmann has a lot of evil in her heart and many of her aims and purposes are clear.

But unlike Perry and others, Michele Bachmann resembles Chief Inspector Clouseau more than Dick Cheney!

And I really do not know who is more dangerous!