![]() ![]() If any of you travel with labelmaking devices equipped with Russian spell-check, please do let me know. “So the *Opechatka* is being fixed, the gift will correctly read ‘Perezagruzka’ by the time of the joint press conference. “Since we're all learning a little Russian today, ‘opechatka’ is Russian for ‘typo,'” he wrote. ![]() We mean it and we look forward to it."Įver the diplomat, Lavrov says he’ll put the “reset” button on his desk.Ī few minutes later, Clinton senior adviser Philippe Reines sent an e-mail message to reporters covering the Secretary of State. “It should be “perezagruzka” ," said Lavrov."This says ‘peregruzka,’ which means ‘overcharged.’”Ī quick comeback – and recovery – from Clinton: "We won't let you do that to us, I promise. “You got it wrong," said Lavrov, as both diplomats laughed. Do you think we got it?" she asked Lavrov, laughing. "We worked hard to get the right Russian word. "I would like to present you with a little gift that represents what President Obama and Vice President Biden and I have been saying and that is: 'We want to reset our relationship, and so we will do it together.'. Lavrov opened it and, inside, there was a red button with the Russian word “peregruzka” printed on it. So when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton greeted Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva Friday before sitting down to their working dinner, she was all smiles when she presented him a small green box with a ribbon. (CNN) - When it comes to Russia, the Obama administration has been talking about “pressing the reset button.” It’s meant to symbolize a possible new start in U.S./Russian relations, which “crashed” after Russia invaded Georgia last August. Somehow I had avoided watching more than a few minutes of any of the presidential debates of either party prior to last night (presumably I’ll live longer for it), but I tuned in to the chatfest from Milwaukee somewhat dutifully.Caption="A little misunderstanding over a big red button."] My main interests were how would Bernie Sanders come across (reasonable or no) and how desperate would Hillary Clinton be after the shellacking New Hampshire voters gave her on Tuesday. Clinton is plenty desperate to be president, but for the most part last night she did not betray that, other than nakedly obvious pandering to African American voters in continually praising President Barack Obama. Instead, for now Hillary’s main argument to the voters comes down to “I got this, I can manage things” on whatever issues come up. As Bernie said however (to repeated presumptive off-key “when I’m in the White House” statements by Hillary), she’s not in the White House, yet, and I suspect odds are about even she won’t be come next January. I could go into her high negatives with voters, her hawkishness and militaristic bent (more on that soon, but it’s not a big stretch to say her 2002 vote to support the Bush/Cheney invasion of Iraq may cost her the presidency once again, as it did in 2008), her Wall Street patrons and other problems, but my main sense is her “I got this” mantra is weak tea compared to Bernie’s call for a political revolution. ![]() One need not necessarily believe our country, the world, humanity and our very Earth are in mortal danger (from MLK’s “triple evils” of racism, militarism and extreme materialism), as I do, to get on board Bernie’s “A future you can believe in” train, though it’s easy to see why young voters, even young women, are doing so in droves. Americans, at least the ones voting in Democratic primaries (to limit the scope of this for now) broadly agree on the problems we face, so the question is not just who has better solutions, but whose campaign wants to empower people to “be the change we seek in the world,” to quote Mohandas Gandhi. One could also just compare, on every issue, that Bernie’s proposals, far from being radical, would actually solve the problems they are intended to address (or at least go a long way toward doing so), while Hillary tut-tuts condescendingly that Bernie is unrealistic, but they share the same goals (a victory for Sanders), and then offers more tepid proposals. On both scores, concrete solutions and empowerment, Bernie is the far more genuine candidate. Uranium investors gave millions to the Clinton Foundation while Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s office was involved in approving a Russian bid for mining assets in Kazakhstan and the. Lastly, recent “I got this” presidential candidates, broadly defined as those who were complacent, overconfident or felt entitled to the White House, usually lose (Jimmy Carter 1980, George Herbert Walker Bush 1992, Bob Dole 1996, Al Gore 2000, John Kerry 2004, John McCain 2008, Mitt Romney 2012). Perhaps Barack Obama was an “I got this” candidate in 20, but he benefited from the country’s revulsion with the Bush/Cheney train wreck and extremely weak general election opponents in McCain (with running mate Sarah Palin!) and then Romney. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |