Obama and Putin: Two Totalitarians, One Game

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


obama-and-putinWar is what Obama does best. The War on Women. War on Poverty. Class War. Race War.

Walk up to a union member snoozing on a bus, a Latino man crossing the street, a gay cowboy poet earning minimum wage, and community organize him along with a few hundred thousand others into the latest battle in the social justice war that never ends.

“Fight for card check, for birth control, for gay marriage and illegal alien amnesty.”

Every time a battle is won and an election ends, a new source of social conflict is dug up and deployed for war.

As a domestic radical, divisiveness is his natural weapon. Obama plays on fragmented identities, assembling coalitions to wage war against some phantom white heteronormative patriarchy consisting of a middle class barely able to pay its bills.

It’s governing by terrorism. The bombs are ideological. The objective is a constant state of war.

The war that never ends has been good to Obama. Its various clashes have given him two terms and very little media scrutiny. They have given him a post-American army of identity groups with few mutual interests except radical politics and government dependency.

While Obama profits from stirring up conflicts at home, making it easy for him to light some fuses and walk away, he loses from conflicts abroad.

A Reaganesque president could have turned the Syrian Civil War or Russia’s invasion of Ukraine into an approval rating bonanza. Foreign conflicts pay off politically for presidents even when they aren’t involved. But that’s not true of Obama who is congenitally incapable of showing strength and reacts to a foreign crisis by playing for time while struggling to resolve the ideological betrayal of using American power abroad.

Internationally, it’s the KGB agent, not the community organizer, who profits from conflict. Putin plays Obama’s role in the world community, dividing and conquering, doing to America internationally what Obama does to it domestically.

Obama uses a phantom patriarchy, a phantom white privilege, a phantom 1 percent, to mobilize a coalition for his own agenda. Putin uses the United States as a phantom enemy to organize a coalition of “oppressed” tyrants from Belarus to Venezuela to North Korea.

Administration officials scratch their heads wondering why Putin’s won’t cooperate with them. It’s the same reason they don’t cooperate with Republicans. Their coalition of black nationalists, gay rights activists, abortion-loving professors of feminism and fist-pumping La Raza nationalists, Muslim Brotherhood front men with trimmed beards and aging Stalinists urging single payer shares little in common internally except a furious resentment and a consuming sense of unfairness.

It needs an enemy to give it meaning. Without a common enemy it will tear itself apart and die.

The same is true of the anti-American coalition that Putin has cobbled together out of Marxist dictators in Latin America, Shiite fanatics in Iran, a North Korean prep school grad who starves his people to build nukes and radical American leftists convinced that every war is a CIA conspiracy. Like allying the NAACP, AFL-CIO and GLAAD; it’s an odd conclave, but as long as everyone focuses on a common foe, they can all be herded in the right direction.

Obama is an adequate national community organizer, but Putin is a global community organizer.

It’s not just that Obama is weak and inept, but he’s using a rulebook that Moscow is entirely familiar with because its men helped write it. The KGB vets running the show understand Obama intimately because they understood his mentors. The tactics that Obama and his people imagine are clever and innovative are minor examples of the tactics that the USSR was using abroad before he was even born.

Obama isn’t isolating Putin. Putin is isolating Obama. He’s doing it in the same way that Obama did it to Republicans.

Anti-Americanism has nothing to with America. Anti-Americanism creates a phantom enemy.

Osama bin Laden flew planes into the World Trade Center to increase the importance of Al Qaeda. Khrushchev’s bellicose posturing was intended to ensure that the USSR would be taken seriously as a world power by framing its presence on the world stage alone with America. For Putin, conflict with America wasn’t a reason not to invade Crimea, but an incentive to do it.

Putin is weakened, his popularity is shaky, the energy economy that he built up may collapse and the domestic opposition shows no fear of him despite all the beatings, arrests and suspicious suicides. Crimea polarizes his domestic debate on favorable terms, between nationalists and ‘traitors’, while increasing his stature as a world leader.

This should be familiar territory for Obama who has reacted to bad economic news by finding targets to attack. The War on Women had a lot in common with the invasion of Crimea. Both were sham wars stirred up by corrupt political figures to distract everyone from their own misdeeds.

Obama needs a Republican enemy to keep his people in line. Putin needs an American enemy to keep his people in line. If Obama understood this, he would also understand that Putin is as likely to work with him to defuse the conflict, as Obama would with John Boehner.

Putin and Obama are both deeply corrupt men whose former popularity has waned and are badly in need of distractions. The soft distractions of photo ops with celebrities, impromptu musical performances and hunting expeditions, won’t work. So they turn to the hard distractions of war.

The threat that both men face is the same. Their people are suffering and that suffering has been caused in no small part by the culture of corruption surrounding them. Obama and Putin’s friends have robbed both countries blind and the American and Russian peoples are waking up to their crimes.

That’s why Putin isn’t going to play nice. Unlike Obama, his domestic political opposition isn’t in a position where it can be blamed for anything involving his regime. He can’t declare that his domestic political opposition is waging a War on Women.

Instead he has to seek his wars abroad.

Obama would like Putin to go away so that he can focus on demonizing the domestic political opposition. Putin would like his domestic political opposition to go away so that he can focus on demonizing America. It’s the same old game by two reds with law degrees on different political battlegrounds.

Obama thinks globally and acts locally. Putin thinks locally and acts globally.

Putin is determined to score points from the post-American transition. Reducing American power and influence worldwide was a move that the foreign policy left believed would defuse tensions. Instead it has turned into a gold rush for every petty tyrant and terrorist eager to count coup by humiliating the United States.

Obama wanted a peaceful post-American transition. Instead he’s getting worldwide chaos and war.

Putin seeks out a conflict with the United States for the same reason that Obama seeks one out with Republicans; he wants an easy target to beat up on to distract from the economy and political corruption. United Russia, like the Democratic Party, is a party of crooks and thieves, which survives by fighting phantom enemies for phantom causes while robbing everyone blind.

For Obama and Putin, it’s not really about Crimea or birth control; it’s about power.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Make sure to Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • guestwho2

    Absolutely cuts to the heart of the matter. They know what Obama is going to do before he does.

  • The Facts

    Sure, Obama bites, but the past six terms have been “governed by terrorism.” Perhaps we should elect leaders who don’t frame their administrations using the lexicon of crisis politics.

    • fiddler

      There are crises, real and imagined. In one there are splattered remains on a concrete parkway just before two buildings collapse, a plane-turned-missile smashing into the pentagon (I bet Bill Ayers cheered), and another would-be one thwarted by sacrificing patriots that ended in a PA field.

      Others, “less likely” amount to indigence over others questioning why they have a “right” expect just anybody to fund the eliminating of inevitable results of their indiscretions. The piles and piles of “inevitable results” are besides the point. The “demand” for funding the elimination MUST rest with the public. Otherwise, it’s war.

  • Bamaguje

    Russian anti-Americanism is largely caused by the West.
    Following the collapse of the defunct USSR, Russians mostly looked on America favorably, particularly as the West supported Yeltsin as he stood up to the Communists. But then NATO started expanding into Russia’s frontiers, despite initial promises not to.

    Bear in mind that the major reason NATO was established – Soviet communism – was gone. NATO nonetheless expanded into the former Soviet bloc – Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Estonia etc.
    In essence, although the Cold war was over, NATO still considered Russia the enemy. Any surprise Russians increasingly view NATO and the West with suspicion? Any surprise that a Putin would emerge in such an anti-American Russia?

    Jack Matlock (former U.S. Ambassador to Moscow) pointed out that – after the collapse of USSR, 80% of Russians viewed America favorably, but a decade later, 80% of Russians were anti-American.

    • darnellecheri

      No. Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Estonia, etc., consider Russia the enemy. If you want to issue blame, blame the post-Soviet bloc for pleading with NATO to stay alive and allow themselves to be members. NATO may or may not be relevant, but to these nations it is.

    • Johnnnyboy

      A second consideration is that following the fall of the USSR, we sent a number of our experts over to Russia to help set up a capitalist economy. It all turned out so badly that many Russians think that it was a deliberate effort to sabotage Russia.

      As for the expansion of NATO, I agree completely. It was a needless provocation. We should have watched Russia first and expanded NATO only if there was a problem to be solved.

      • Habbgun

        The expansion of NATO was not needless provocation. Poland actually served and served well in Iraq. The pro-Putin people consistently say he is upset with how we handle Islamic terrorism. Well guess what. We will need a united international military capability. Isolating a prior belligerent is not wrong. Ask the Japanese and Germans if Americans really want to be in their countries militarily or would rather have civilian trade.

      • Bamaguje

        “we sent a number of our experts over to Russia to help set up a
        capitalist economy. It all turned out so badly that many Russians think that it was a deliberate effort to sabotage Russia” – Johnnyboy.

        Indeed that’s another reason why NATO’s expansion was unnecessary and provocative.
        In the 1990s Russia’s economy was down. Her military was in tatters, and in no fighting shape. Military equipment were in shocking state of disrepair. Soldiers weren’t paid for months and resorted to selling military supplies.
        Clearly Russia was not a threat to anyone, but NATO provocatively kept expanding into Russia’s frontiers.
        You’ve got to admit, the West created the ripe conditions for emergence of a Russian strongman – Putin.

        • Drakken

          Very well stated.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Russian anti-Westernism predates the US. The US is no more responsible for it than it is for anti-Americanism in the Muslim world.

      NATO was never a threat to post-Cold War Russia. There’s no serious argument that NATO troops were headed toward Moscow.

      • Bamaguje

        “Russian anti-Westernism predates the US” – Dan Greenfield.

        You’ve got it backwards. Historically, Western powers conspired with Ottoman Jihadists against Russia.

        • A Z

          France & Britain fought the Crimean War not because they hated Russia, but because the were afraid it would become too big and unstoppable with or without its’ corruption.

          The whole conflict was not predicated on whether Russia had done something wrong to France, Britain or anyone else. Russia had not done anything wrong. Russia had good reason to war with the Turks.

          They might have been right about the whole balance of power thing, but they should never had assisted the turks directly or indirectly.

          • Bamaguje

            “France & Britain fought the Crimean War not because they hated Russia, but because the were afraid it would become too big” – A Z

            Western conspiracy against Russia predated the Crimean war. But for such anti-Russian scheming by Western powers, Russia’s Catherine the Great could have smashed the Ottoman empire as far back as the 1770s.

            Britain had a global empire much bigger than Russia, yet Russia was becoming “too big”? Even France with her later colonies in Africa and Indochina could also be described as “too big.”

          • A Z

            Russia had the advantage it was contiguous.

            Which was not much of an advantage until the trans-Siberian Railroad was built.

            Russians were probably more more loyal to Russia than say someone from India or Africa were loyal to Britain.

            I don;t think France had all of Indochina back in 1856. Certainly not the Red River valley.

          • pfbonney

            “I don’t think France had all of Indochina back in 1856.”

            France had Vietnam, Cambodia and, I believe, Laos.

            Britain had Burma. No Western power has ever colonized Thailand.

          • A Z

            France obtained control over >>>northern<<< Vietnam following its victory over China in the Sino-French War (1884–85)

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Indochina

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-French_War

            I am reading a book about China now that covers that period. France did not gobble Vietnam up all at once.

            China actually beat France in northern Vietnam

          • pfbonney

            “France & Britain fought the Crimean War….”

            I have always intended to read “The Charge of the Light Brigade”, which occurred there, but instead, it remains on my “Must Read” list.

  • lyndaaquarius

    nobody sees the big picture as well as Daniel Greenfield.This is one of his best articles among so many. Thank you,Daniel!

    • Daniel Greenfield

      thank you

    • Joe The Gentile

      Yeah, this is a pretty excellent article.

      • endofliberty

        no it is not, reps and dems are criminals together!

  • justquitnow

    Watching you cult douches fawn over Putin and his power and comparing it to our elected President is just disgusting. Reagan didn’t have to contend with seditious liars at home that were so partisan, regressive and just ideologically sick.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      The article is about how repugnant Putin and Obama both are.

      Reagan had to contend with the likes of Kerry who lobbied for the Sandinista Marxist thugs.

      • Gerry

        Thanks for reminding people about Kerry and the rest of the cohort.Obama,Kerry,Clinton etc etc

      • justquitnow

        Oh yeah I forgot that in bizarro world Iran-Contra never happened.

        “The War on Women had a lot in common with the invasion of Crimea.”

        You’re a class act Greenfield.

        • nomoretraitors

          Soros’ check cleared again, huh

          • justquitnow

            (rubes eyes)…sure yeah. Anything that rubs you the wrong way in life is part of a conspiracy.

        • nomoretraitors

          Hey, can we blame Iran Contra on an internet video???

          Guess you didn’t read the next sentence: “Both were sham wars stirred up by corrupt political figures to distract everyone from their own misdeeds”

          Or was it written beyond your reading level?

          • justquitnow

            huh?

          • nomoretraitors

            Right. I figured it went over your head

          • justquitnow

            The “War on Women” was a label the Democrats starting using as an overall catchphrase for the regressive, anti-women statements and policy positions of Republicans…you know “legitimate rape” and so forth….the whole “barefoot and pregnant” crowd that cannot stop passing legislation to control women’s bodies. OK…so not only is it a bizarre comparison…you first have to be completely ass-backwards on what “war on women” (which is stupid political shorthand to begin with) even “means”…then you have to consciously compare it to invading and annexing territory by a tyrant on the other side of the world. Saying they are similar is already a twisted pretzel of equal parts anti-concept and stupid. Now, Fox news and FPM and other cult mouthpieces realizing how offensive their candidates were to women, simply began saying that Obama was waging a war on women…um through economic policy, because women’s wages were down….or something like that…idk, it was lame.

            Then there’s you….who’s first thought about Iran-Contra is “Benghazi!”. Sigh.

            OK…let’s say that to spite all the hearings and investigations and exhaustive evidence to the contrary, Obama deliberately let people die or gave a stand down order….to idk save Hillary the embarrassment of having sold missiles to muslims or whatever…OK, let’s say that actually happened….how does that excuse the crimes of the Reagan Administration?

            Of course, there is no reason to believe the above, accept that FPM and like minded outlets keep making up nonsense conspiracies about every aspect of anything Obama does. And it’s always with the most extreme rhetoric available. That’s right….made up. Greenfield gets paid to write this cult schlock.

            No one “blamed” the attack on the compound in Benghazi on a video. You are aware that Obama didn’t personally attack the compound right? Do you know how many embassies and foreign installations were attacked and how many Americans killed during the Bush Administration? Not in war, but in little attacks here and there? Before Obama and the cult of Freedumb, I don’t think it crossed anyone’s minds to just make up a bunch of crap about an attack, especially a CIA compound in a country we were actively helping, and just keep piling on bs until just the smell made it seem like the President did something wrong. It works though…people like you will be saying “Benghazi” until the end of time no matter what information comes to light. It’s unAmerican…but whatever…

            Just look what it takes to unspool even your lame joke/comment. FREEDUMB!!!

        • Daniel Greenfield

          And let’s not forget Pelosi and Kerry cozying up to Assad which Americans were being murdered by terrorists moving through Syria.

    • Gerry

      Seditious liars at home,like the ones responsible for Benghazi for instance.

    • nomoretraitors

      “Reagan didn’t have to contend with seditious liars at home that were so partisan, regressive and just ideologically sick”
      Yes he did. They were called the “Democrats”

    • Erudite Mavin

      As far back as when Reagan was my Governor, Reagan dealt with the Radical Left demonstrators of the day especially in the Universities

      and the Democrats on his back for 8 years.

      Reagan when President had more of the radical left and Democrats attacking him all the way to the end.

      Can put you down as a disgruntled
      American who is still bitter Reagan took on the Soviets and their Berlin Wall along with the Soviet’s dictatorship of Eastern Europe

  • Chiron_Venizelos

    It’s all a show folks.
    0bama will ultimately give in because giving in to our enemies is the basis of his agenda.
    If the US is to survive, the TRUE AMERICANS had better start waking up!

    • Daniel Greenfield

      He’s already given in

      • Chiron_Venizelos

        I qualified my remark with “give in again.”
        Thanks for your articles and your remarks.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Thank you

    • pfbonney

      The Democrats are always looking for someone to surrender the US to.

      In the Vietnam War, it was the Democrats who refused to fund the defense of South Vietnam to protect it from the invading north. Now Obama is surrendering Iraq and Afghanistan to al Qaeda.

  • http://www.clarespark.com/ Clare Spark

    Should we be using the world “totalitarian” so promiscuously? Obama may have social justice on his mind, but we still have dissenting publications like this one. See http://clarespark.com/2012/11/13/orwell-superpatriots-and-the-election/: Orwell, super-patriots, and the election.” If we can’t use language more precisely, what can we do that makes a difference in an already polarized political discourse?

  • Sharps Rifle

    Excellent article, as always!

    • Daniel Greenfield

      thanks

  • Johnnnyboy

    Allowing that the analysis presented here is correct, and it would seem to be, we should expect that Putin will drag out the crises. That would explain why the Russians are not moving more energetically with their military despite getting almost no real opposition to the Crimean land grab.

    Allowing that Putin also wants to incorporate parts of the Ukraine into Russia, he will likely want to finish up any military moves in the next two years or so, the period in which Obama remains our president.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      I doubt he’s all that worried about Hillary.

  • DAnte

    Russian anti-Americanism is largely caused by the West.

    voiture thermique pas cher

    • Guess

      Yes, you’re right on with that.

    • Hass

      Piss Off!!….

  • Josh Randall

    The main reason Obama “won” the two elections and the media gives him a free pass is because he is “black”. He would have never got past Hillary in 2008 if not for this.
    Until people get over the idiotic phobia of being called a racist if they stand up to him this will never end. Putin just outsmarted this clown that is all.

    • Gerry

      Oustside the US,nobody believes that Obama won the elections.Everybody knows that in the US the elections aqre rigged,no ID for instance.We know how the like of Al mFranken for instance was elected,even JFK.

      • Josh Randall

        No doubt my friend. Team Obama stole both elections.

        • Guess

          yeah, as if you Republitards are innocent of that. Ha!

          • Josh Randall

            Crawl back under your rock liberal toad.

          • Guess

            Ahahaha!

          • nomoretraitors

            I think the rock evicted him/her/it

          • nomoretraitors

            The toads of the world take great exception to your remark

          • nomoretraitors

            Did we insult your messiah again? We’re sorry

          • American1969

            Don’t apologize to the troll.

          • Sharon Morgan

            Yet, it is the D’s doing their best to BLOCK voter ID.

      • NJK

        I agree, he at least stole the last one, but the GOP are losers in every sense of the word. Heck, they knew their own voters were being disenfranchised by the IRS, and never said a word. Real warriors in that bunch.

    • fiddler

      And the sad thing is that people are left with thinking that he’s “everyman’s black person”. He’s black, therefore he is Marxist. To be the opposite is an oxymoron.

    • NJK

      He’s not “black.” He’s mixed race, and people need to start pointing that out. It drives me crazy when Rush uses the term, “First African American president.” He’s mixed race, and a criminal posing as president.

  • darnellecheri

    “Putin seeks out a conflict with the United States for the same reason that Obama seeks one out with Republicans; he wants an easy target to beat up on to distract from the economy and political corruption. United Russia, like the Democratic Party, is a party of crooks and thieves, which survives by fighting phantom enemies for phantom causes while robbing everyone blind.”

    These insights are “spot on.”
    As an OSCE election observer at the 2012 Russian Federation Presidential elections, I saw and heard the vitriolic anti-Americanism in high gear. I felt like I was transported to the 1970s USSR. Of course, some of this was to deter the protests happening in Moscow, but some of the diatribe bordered on ridiculous. On television and in media print, 90% of what you saw and heard was: “America is corrupting our elections,” “America is ready to enter our military installations,” “America wants to starve us,” anything bad you can think of, America was behind it. I am not joking. I asked my interpreter why does her government act like we are living back in the 1960s? Well, she had her own reasons of why we are double-standards idiots. It is a shame, but it truly is all about power and keeping your population under your thumb.

    • Hass

      Wow, thanks for the insight.

    • http://www.themadjewess.com/ The Mad Jewess

      Putin didnt ‘seek out’ any conflict.
      McCain and more than a few senators are the ones instigating in HIS backyard just as they did in Egypt, Libya and Syria.

      • darnellecheri

        By its very nature, Russian propaganda and disinformation seek conflict.

      • Daniel Greenfield

        Right. The KGB never seeks out conflict. It just defends the mother land.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Russian rhetoric was always vitriolic, but it generally gets worse when there are things basically wrong with the country, particularly economic factors that require distractions.

      Russia is still run by many of the people who ran the USSR.

      • pfbonney

        So they were blaming Bush, too. ;-)

  • Hass

    A very well thought out article there Daniel.

    And just look at the embarrassing end of this recent European Speech.

    How fitting you may say…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVFrdWIs2LI

  • Rosasolis

    It is interesting to show some comparison to these two leaders. But the differences
    will always out-weigh any comparisons.
    1. Putin was born and raised in St.Petersburg, Russia. His background was entirely Russian. Obama has had various backgrounds before he became
    an American.
    2. Putin has always supported Russia, especially during the recent terrible Islam
    terrorist attacks in the theatre in Moscow and the school in Chechnia.
    3. Putin is a Christian who will never sell out his country to allow illegal immigrants
    (Islamists!) to take over.
    4. The new Russia under the leadership of Putin and his government,
    is progressing in every field. We in Netherlands still have excellent relations
    with Russia…in spite of Obama trying to tell us and the EU that we must now
    start to boycott the Russians! Our former Queen Beatrix founded together
    with Putin the Hermitage Museum in Amsterdam, which shows many treasures
    of the centuries-long relationship between Netherlands and Russia, which began
    with Tzaar Peter. Now why would Obama want to destroy our renewed, excellent relationship with Russia?
    5. We are looking forward to continuing all our programs in working together with Russia in so many fields: music and dance, science, medicine, space, etc.
    Years before Obama finally decided to visit Netherlands and Europe ….
    for the 1st time !!! — we have been building up a good strong relation
    with Putin and Russia!
    6. Europe does not need Obama and Kerry to tell us what to do!
    Since when have they ever been interested in Europe!!! They supported
    Kosovo to become independant of Servia. Now Kosovo has become
    Europe’s 1st Islamic country, which is “governed” by the Sharia Law!
    Many Christians and non-Islam people are still fleeing this country!
    7. Putin is a stong leader who does not need any publicity from the Media
    in order to gain support. He loves his country, knows what they have gone
    through the 20th C. up until now. Kruschev sold out the Crimea, which has
    now a population of nearly 100% Russians, who have been discriminated
    by the Ukrainian government. The PEOPLE chose to return to Russia, and
    not Putin….as Obama and Kerry would have us believe!
    8. How did Obama ever get chosen for a 2nd. term as president!!!!
    9. While Putin is doing everything possible to keep the threat of the Islam
    growth and terrorism under control in Russia, we in Europe are very worried
    about the enormous growth of Islamic populations everywhere in our cities
    and now even in small villages!
    10. It seems as if Obama is now at last waking up to the fact that he is a weak
    man who has neglected relations with his former European Ally countries, and
    now suddenly realizes his weak position. While Russia is steadily progessing,
    in every field, Obama has been forcing America to becoma a 3rd. world
    Communist country!….Russia and Europe got rid of Communism throughout
    the 1990′s, and now Obama is planning to let this corrupt form of government
    take over America!

    • darnellecheri

      5. Obama has visited Europe many times since 2009. He was hailed as a “Messiah” in Berlin.
      6. Kosovo was enduring massacres of its citizens by Serbia.
      7. There is no escaping the fact that Crimea was legally part of Ukraine, and its referendum to separate should have gone to a vote for all of Ukraine, not pushed by another country. Should Kaliningrad institute a referendum to return to Germany, as it was stolen by Stalin?
      9. That problem is ushered into the Netherlands by your own government’s immigration policies.
      That is wonderful your country has a fantastic relationship with Russia. Remember, that the Netherlands was a founding member of NATO.

      • Drakken

        In Germany Obummer is looked at with utter distain and disgust.
        Kosovo was a propaganda war by muslims to get empathy and sympathy from the west and it worked, just like Bosnia.
        The chances of me getting the families estates and lands in East Prussia has about zero chance of happening.

        • darnellecheri

          Not in Obama’s first term. Germany and most of the Western side of Europe loved him then.

          • Drakken

            Look at Europe now, they absolutely despise Obummer with a passion.

          • Rosasolis

            The only Europeans I can think of who might want to
            support Obama may be the everygrowing Islamic
            populations in the large cities, who are aware of his relationship and support with terrorist groups such as
            The Brotherhood and others in the Middle-East. And the few existing, but quickly
            diminishing socialist/communist groups Even in France
            the popularity of the socialist Hollande is now at its
            lowest point. However, the TV Media cannot get enough
            of Obama and Kerry…I have often wondered how much
            these TV senders are being paid to spread Obama’s
            corrupt world vision?!!!
            We in Europe do not need this hysterical man to tell
            us what to do! Perhaps mischievous young teeners have
            to be “grounded” now and then, but Obama is not Europe’s
            grrrreat leader who thinks he has the right to tell us which
            countries are OK and which we have to boycott!
            Many of us still miss the excellent friendly and diplomatic relationship we had for several years
            with Pres. Reagan.

        • Lanna

          Egyptians sure told Obummer to take his policies and his Muslim Brotherhood and get the heck out of their country!

  • Dan Mesa/AZ

    What a gem.
    Pope Emeritus Benedict, the greatest mind in the 20th/21st century…has his replacement ready in the prolific Daniel Greenfield.
    Dan Mesa/AZ

  • James Keir Baughman

    Wow! You really got it all right this time, Daniel. Write on, brother! Write on.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      thanks

  • Ray Burke

    Obama is a DISorganizer, NOT an organizer !!! That lame brain couldn’t organize a game of marbles !!! Putin, on the other hand, is obviously a master organizer, for better or worse.

    • RMthoughts

      He was certainly successful and deconstructing the USA in five short years, and it didn’t happen by accident.

      • fiddler

        Just ask Chris Matthews.

  • Realist

    “War”, at least war packaged and sold as a political commodity, is merely the exigent crisis needed by the power-hungry to foist their control over society at large. This is true for both sides of the current political spectrum. The libcultists, however, have honed their skills at creating and exploiting the concept of “war” as a useful and rather ubiquitous meme of deception and, when circumstances deprive them of any other tools of political warfare, libcultists instinctively return to their roots and manufacture some ad hoc “war” that they believe will both frighten and inspire enough people to keep them in power. The wars of the Right are usually founded in external threats while the wars of the Left are (generally) founded in internal threats, or more specifically, threats to their own power. That being said, the Left can also be quite adept at using external threats to shift focus, deflect and obfuscate their own malfeasance.

  • RMthoughts

    The difference is Putin is a Russian nationalist, Obama is a post-marxist communist.

    • nomoretraitors

      and a traitor

    • Daniel Greenfield

      I’m not sure a genuine Russian nationalist would be that committed to a Eurasian Union.

      • RMthoughts

        Good point, Putin is more looking a multi-national federation of States lead by Russia on the old Empire model where Russia was a federation of enthnicities and nations.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          It’s always about feudalism over nationalism in the end.

          • RMthoughts

            after the bitter taste of nationalism(S) of the 19th and 20th centiries, how we will long for the local, mutual, responsibilities and interdependency of feudalism.

  • Little_Cossack

    Acorn community organization was forced to shut down, reopened under other name while at the same time going global along with other Alinsky ideology aligned community organizations & Barack Obama is embroiled in their activities on a global scale.

  • Attila_the_hun

    Congratulation Mr.Greenfield you have nailed it. But You missed one thing and that is the IQ level of both man. Putin for all his motives he is a very intelligent chase player who earned his stripes by studying the game. On the other hand Hussein O is an empty suit without any discernible achievement. Who is where he is because of skin tone.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      It’s not so much straight IQ as practical skills. Putin got his hands dirty, while Obama went from academia to non-profit to politics without ever staying long enough to do much of anything except talk a lot.

  • http://www.themadjewess.com/ The Mad Jewess

    Putin never would have went into Ukraine if McCain/Murphy and Nuland were not there instigating ‘protesters.’

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Why did Russia invade other countries over the last few centuries? Can’t all be McCain’s fault.

  • nomoretraitors

    If I had the insight of Daniel Greenfield……

  • Jerry G

    Putin despite all his faults is a nationalist and I’m sure gains a lot of support from the Russian people for that. Putin’s message to the Russians is that he will restore the glory of the Russian Empire.Obama’s message is that he will do all he can to diminish or destroy the American Empire.

  • BocaLady

    What a superb comparison! Well stated!

  • zombietimeshare

    Nature abhors a vacuum. So does politics and weakness is a vacuum to be filled by power. A lesson the Messiah never learned—unless the current turn of events is his hoped for outcome. I guess it depends on whether Barry is viewed as incompetent or evil—or both.

  • http://geoffreybritain.wordpress.com/ Geoffrey_Britain

    [Democrats] “coalition of black nationalists, gay rights activists, abortion-loving professors of feminism and fist-pumping La Raza nationalists, Muslim Brotherhood front men with trimmed beards and aging Stalinists urging single payer shares little in common internally except a furious resentment and a consuming sense of unfairness.”

    All ‘isms’ of the left, to one degree or another, reject critical aspects of reality. At base, liberals rejection of reality is rooted in the juvenile protest, “that’s not fair!”, which fails to comprehend that life’s essential ‘unfairness’ is not only absolutely necessary but overall, a great good.

    For without life’s essential ‘unfairness’ and inequality, neither civilization, material progress nor evolution itself are possible.

    The cognitive dissonance that characterizes the left prevents them from appreciating the irony of, in principle, protesting the foundation and primary characteristic of the very evolution they worship.

  • WeroInNM

    Are 9 Dead Bankers A Sign Of Pending Economic Collapse and War? (Part 5)
    http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/are-9-dead-bankers-a-sign-of-pending-economic-collapse-and-war-1
    “Food For Thought”
    Hello-When Are Americans Going To Wake Up-God Bless America.
    Semper Fi!
    Jake

  • nimbii

    Never thought of it like that before Daniel. Thanks,

  • American1969

    Excellent piece. Well thought out and spot on.

  • Bob

    During the 2008 election I warned everyone I could that Obama is a dictator wannabe, but people simply would not believe it.

  • Erudite Mavin

    This commentary should be required reading for all Americans except a large per cent of Americans are afraid of the truth and facts.
    Putin is not ending this with Crimea especially with Obama enabling Russia.

  • fiddler

    Wow, what comparison! BRAVO!

  • Erudite Mavin

    US intel: More indications than ever Russia could invade Ukraine
    Published March 27, 2014
    FoxNews.com
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/27/alarm-on-hill-over-russian-troop-buildup-as-nato-general-briefs-lawmakers/

  • CosmotKat

    Daniel, you nailed it again. The compare and contrast is spot on. Thanks for your talent.

  • Sherill Weber

    This was an excellent article. Everything you said in it you can see. Your last sentence “it’s about power”. I have said that so many times. Thank you for writing this.

  • johnnie the jew

    Great analysis Daniel. What interests me about all this is the ever stronger strategic alliance being forged between Russia and China. The energy deals alone and geo-political interests intrigue. Both countries share similar approaches to controlling and maintaining their heritages and cultures. Aggregate that power and will and you can forget some of our cherished “western”(at times totally misguided) views of fair play and human rights by way of acquiescing passively to equality driven social agendas and ridiculous religious appeasements in the face of an intolerant enemy, etc. These boys have an entirely different take on this type of problem solving. Alors, the west better factor in some very large fingers stuck in the air in our direction from the the east and get ready for the ride. Its already happening. Obumma thought he could tell the Burmese off for persecuting muslims stating that they also have “human rights”. To which the Burmese responded, “they are not Burmese (Buddhists),they don’t have the same rights as Burmese people”. Or, thereabouts. And can you blame them ? Keep up the great work

  • nicky

    Excellent article. Id like mr greenfield to write a piece on how it may be possible to change the voting process to make it unlikely that another obama is never elected. What I mean is that the current democratic process is flawed and the evidence for this is very clear. Ultimately my fellow citizens have the power to vote me into slavery. What is the answer?

  • nicky

    How did the democratic party get from JFK to this human garbage? Worse still – how did the american public get to the point where they would support such pond life like this? 2 terms? The brain dead masses will pay the ultimate price. When I watch the walking the walkers remind me of obama supporters trying to make their way to the voting station.

  • DontMessWithAmerica

    Putin is light years ahead of Obama on his domestic front, too. He has brought some order to a chaotic country while Obama brought chaos to America. Putin figured out a way around their laws to continue his control through the Medved puppet. This must find Obama green with envy scratching his head furiously to find a way to do likewise in 2016. Laughably it will be Obamacare, like Al Capone’s tax evasion, that will bring him down while he has committed far greater crimes.

    America is the last of the industrialist world to get socialized healthcare. What he doubtlessly wanted was to put the insurance companies out of business and run it as a single payer plan as Canada has and other countries. Sadly, to be democratic and provide all citizens with health care coverage, overall costs have to rise because the coverage doubles. Quality has to go down because no country can afford to cover quality care for everybody with only half the recipients paying. A real totalitarian approach, as in some Canadian provinces, forces all doctors to be part of the system and forbids any type of private insurance or private practice. In such a case only the very rich can get quality care by leaving the country for their care – as some Canadian politicians have done and as they will no longer be able to do without leaving the continent because U.S. healthcare will be in the toilet.

    For most of us Obama arrived bright and smiling, civilized and intellectual after four years of a pleasant dummy in the White House. He convinced enough of us to get him in and convinced himself that he was bright enough to work his unworkable concepts to turn America into a socialist and perhaps Muslim state. His irrationality grows by the week and he begins to look more and more like the image of an African in an Arab’s mind.

    My concern is the degree of damage he has brought to the country and how long it will take to repair it if ever. He has set race relations back by 50 years. He has unconscionably ballooned America’s debt. The list seems endless. Even if the GOP gains the Senate this year and Obama gets impeached and convicted of treason, the damage will be with us for a long time.

    • ursine

      Well said, thank you.
      It feels even worse when I think that along with the heavy tangible damage that can be probably measured in trillions of dollars, Obama brought us something even worse – human corruption. The very notions of responsibility and openness were buried, honesty and integrity disappeared, the land of equal opportunity mutated into ugly “fairness” of equal outcome, socialism is no longer a despised word, but rather something to feel cocky about. I lived under the socialist government for many year and never thought I’d see the ghosts of the past again. Now it feels like we dropped a flight or two on the evolution ladder.

  • lapin.grove

    The EU, USSR-West and the American Left-wingers hate Russia AND Putin because they are no longer commies but BUSINESS COMPETITION.

  • pfbonney

    You know what I love about Frontpagemag? Outstanding articles such as this, explaining WHY the left does as it does.

    While other websites, such as WND and CNS, alert me to what is going on – and that is very important, considering how the left censors the news – Frontpagemag explains what is REALLY going on, and WHY.

    And while Frontpagemag is the best at what it does, Daniel Greenfield is among the top at Frontpagmag at articulating these insights. (Don’t make me have to pick only one “Best”!)

    I’ve finally read all three “Inside every Liberal is a Totalitarian Screaming to Get Out” articles, and was not disappointed. Except for the fact that there was only one comment posted among the three, and that was by a leftist kook. Maybe it’s just my (electronics) technician background, but I find it fascinating on how things work/why things are. But I need to re-read and digest them all before I make any comments there.

    I’m not sure even the members of the left consciously understands exactly why they do as they do. Giving me an opportunity to mess with their minds!

    Kudos on this article, Daniel Greenfield.

  • Teri O’Brien

    This is a BRILLIANTLY. Insightful list, which is why I posted an excerpt at my site here. Keep up the great work, Daniel. We need to get you. Back on The Teri OBrien Show again.

  • Lanna

    Right on…very accurate article…Obama does need a Republican enemy to keep his people in line. Putin and Obama have the same goals, the One World Government! Both dictators own their poor economies that feed their destructive goals which are not for mankind!

  • Nabukuduriuzhur

    Something that seems to be getting missed by every media personality is Putin’s sudden change of behavior.

    When Bundeskanzler Merkel called him two weeks ago, Putin was not his usual sharp self. He was completely out of it.

    Something has happened to Putin. Drugs? Stroke? Concussion? B12 deficiency? Deposed? Nuts? A disease affecting the brain?

    That question of “what happened” needs to be answered before any policy can rationally be made. When a person suddenly changes how they’ve operated for more than a decade, the “why” needs to be found out.

  • Marshall Goodman

    Great column. Why is the truth so hard for people to believe?!

  • Robert177

    Pretend for a second that Obama’s mother was still alive.
    How do you think SHE would feel every time she heard her son referring to himself as black or African-American? She’d feel insulted, or negated, or left out.

    Obama is no more black than he is white. He’s precisely half and half. The fact that his father was black doesn’t magically negate that his mother was white. For Obama and his supporters to refer to him as African-American(modern “PC” synonym for “black”) is an insult to Obama’s late mother, and her skin color.

    Obama is mixed race. He is not black. He is NOT African-American. He is NOT black.

  • nwoisbad

    Fisrt of all Obama did not isolate republicans, THEY WORK TOGETER. This article says a lot of good stuf but ALSO it mixes the truth with desinformation such as; Al Qaeda blew the towers…NO MISTER! CIA, MOSSAD DID IT! Same republicans(GLOBALISTS) started this and so called democrats (globalists) contunied the agenda of the NEW WORLD ORDER! Also the article blamed some American people for knowing that EVERY war starts with CIA, yes Sir it is the fact. The evidence that the only Antiamerican element here is not Putin or “conspiracy cook americans” IS THE LEADERSHIP OF U.S. GOVENMENT.They are Antiamerican!!! They work for private Central banks, for international interest, for Globalist organisations such as Bilderberg group, CFR, TRIALATERAL COMISSION, CLUB OF ROME, COMITEE OF 300, ext…ext…Putin did not occupied the Crimea get that in your head. He prevented another globalist takeover…call me a conspirasy nut, name calling doesn’t change the FACTS.Shame on the author of this Double speak article.