To be fair, Putin is a tyrant & I reject him.

But we all know that libs & neocons would support & love Putin, if only he were their tyrant.

also we know that Zelensky Regime - which praises & boosts Azov literal Nazis, cancels elections outright, jails opposition & kills journalists - is really a bit more tyrannical than Putin, by now.

& finally that weapons companies, & their Uniparty politicians who drag out the war, are enemy #1.

Liberals love Communism. Russia dumped communism over 20 years ago.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahhahahahahahah! you

says Team Bloodthirsty.

PhD Professor of childish insults.

I'm PhD Professor of Factchecktology, you see. Anyway no one around here, is in least shape to say otherwise.

Don't blame me. Blame the program. I just highlighted what you had written and hit the quote button. Funny joke I guess the program didn't think it was a joke? I think maybe you don't really think it was either

No one embodies "Blind & Bloodthirsty Dumbass" like you @jaroonn

Now you're reduced to faking quotes.

I'm PhD Professor of Factchecktology, you see. Anyway no one around here, is in least shape to say otherwise.

Simply....wow.

My point about shit with Russia happens under Dems, is to refute certain 9-year-olds who try to claim it's you-know-who. El Naranja.

Just for fun, I feel to say it again.

Russia took Crimea 2014 under OBAMA-BIDEN (D).

Russia took Ukraine 2022 under BIDEN-HARRIS (D).

BUT - yes - USA Dems & RINOS together form a -Uniparty- that works for weapons companies, CIA & FBI, drug cartels both illegal & legal, CCP & WEF, & associated billionaires.

Because RINOs are in there: plenty of shit has happened due to Bushes, McCain, Lindsey Graham & other fake (R).

"Crimea...was part of RUSSIA" - Fact check: True.

To this day, 90% of Crimeans identify as Russian.

Libs are supposed to believe people's self-identifications.

"The war in Ukraine...started in 2014...Donbas..." - Fact check: Largely True.

I do think it's a centuries-old war. Latest phase started 2014, let's say.

"The US meets up with actual Hitler loving and Jew hating nazis..." - Fact check: True.

"Trump didn't include many of the key neocon and regime-change goons in his administration." - Fact check: Partly True.

There were too many for El Naranja to get rid of. But he did get rid of Nuland & some others.

Naranja was first USA Prez in 40 years to NOT start - or have - new wars.

And so on. Your facts are largely true.

I'm PhD Professor of Factchecktology, you see. Anyway no one around here, is in least shape to say otherwise.

Russia took BACK Crimea, which (along with the Donbas and and Eastern Ukraine) was part of RUSSIA until the Soviet Era (Lenin was concerned about Russian chauvinism, so Ukraine's administrative borders were expanded). Russia's only warm-water naval base is in Crimea, and the idea of Russia letting a US-allied Ukraine control Crimea is similar to the USA letting China take Hawaii or Guam.

The war in Ukraine didn't start a year and a half ago. It started in 2014, after Democratic and Republican senators, bipartisan neocon Victoria Nulan, and staff from the (CIA/State Dept cutout ) Natl Endowment for Democracy showed up to what had been a peaceful protest against a democratically elected president with less than a year left in his term. The US meets up with actual Hitler loving and Jew hating nazis and ultranationalist militants and gets them to do what fascists do, and create chaos and violence that concludes with a coup where the Nazis and ultranationalists have taken most of the positions of power. After they passed laws banning Russian-speaking children from being taught in their native language, outlaw many pro-Russian and socialist/communist political parties, and takes away Crimea's special autonomous status, people in Eastern Ukraine declare independence. So Kiev lets Azov
Bat (Nazi paramilitary group) shoot missles at Eastern Ukraine. Putin then sends arms to the separatists. Eastern Ukraine has been a war zone for ten years.

Now, if Trump had won re-election Putin might not have invaded Ukraine. But this isn't because Trump is a Putin puppet or because Republican foreign policy is superior to Democratic policy. I would be because Trump didn't include many of the key neocon and regime-change goons in his administration.

I do agree that there is a large hardcore Dem base, that has totally embraced Bill Kristol, George Bush, the CIA, FBI, and pretty much anyone or anything that is anti-Trump. And the Dem Party is more hawkish now than the Republican Party. Even Senator Barbara Lee voted to send weapons to Ukraine. In California's all party primary, Adam Schiff (financed by US weapons makers) received more votes than (rhetorically) populist Katie Porter and (previously) anti-war Barbara Lee combined.
If you are against arming Ukraine or meddling in their affairs, your views are represented by a handful of Republicans in Washington.
But if you are against arming and giving aid to Israel, you certainly won't find any Republicans who agree with you. And that is because a large minority of the base believe the Bible should determine our Middle Eastern foreign policy.

And on both Ukraine and Israel/Palestine, the US and Europe are isolated from the rest of the world. Brazil, most of South and Central America, Africa, China, India, most of Asia, Russia, Mexico--most of the world--have formal diplomatic relations with Palestine, believe Israel is illegally occupying the
West Bank and Gaza (if not all of Israel-Palestine), and abstained or voted "no" to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine in a UN General Assembly vote.

I think both "libs" and conservatives should stop worrying about the other party, and take a step back and look at their own party bullshit. Both parties serve overlapping corporate interests, and party loyalty is much more about self-dealing and personal power than any ideological belief. Both parties use race, gender, and sociocultural issues in their rhetoric to fire up their bases, while doing very little policy wise. And if you thought Republicans were successful with their long game with the Supreme Court and abortion, then you missed the bipartisan long game to pack the court with pro-corporate, pro-war, pro-banks, anti-worker judges without anyone noticing because confirmation hearings are now culture-war theater (distraction, spectacle, scandal).

When it comes to policy (legislation, administrative rules, foreign policy) is see very little difference between Dems and Republicans--at least on most the major issues affecting people's material lives. The only differences are how many bombs to drop on poor countries, how big should the tax cuts for the wealthy be, how big should we let monopolies grow, how big should the big banks get,how many democratically elected governments should we undermine.

I didn't realize that "English professor" was the name given to "expert in everything"

It doesn't. That is why I try not to argue about things I do not know or care about. Unlike your buddy blabla who needs to learn that it is better to remain silent and appear stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Ok. So I am an English professor

I didn't realize that "English professor" was the name given to "expert in everything".

Switching definitions - since you blew it so badly, with first

I didn't change the definition. I just chose one that I thought, given your linguistic limitations, would be easier for you to understand.

Let me try this: if one insults another, and he/she has the same fault, that is the pot calling the kettle black because they are both black. If one insults another and they are not both "black," that is just an insult. And there is no need for an idiom.

Capisce?

Switching definitions - since you blew it so badly, with first. Covered yourself in disgrace.

AND, still same problem there - "People criticize" & "you say" - ie. subjectivity - one of literature's most basic ideas - RIGHT. THERE.

If you do have an English degree, you need $$ back

RETARD.

& meanwhile you still support

1. Azov Nazis

2. weapons companies

while failing to show up yourself, for what you preach

Since you unable to understand English grammar, let's go with Cambridge.

the pot calling the kettle black
idiom
something you say that means people should not criticize someone else for a fault that they have themselves.

You are an idiot. Truly. I've failed students smarter than you.

Or concept of subjectivity (person's view not need to be true - separate question)?

It's right there.

It's RIGHT. THERE.

OMG @jaroonn you are so so retarded!!!

That you think u have English degree, ADDS. TO. HILARITY.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahahhahahahah

From the Oxford Dictionary:

"the pot calling the kettle black"

used to convey that the criticisms a person is aiming at someone else could equally well apply to themselves.
"the Council is complaining that the post office is slow at communication—talk about pot calling the kettle black!"

Enjoy that clown mask. It suits you to a tee.

Point of pot - kettle - black, is never that kettle is black -for real-, but only that desperate retarded pot - ie. you - needs self-awareness before making shit up.

"Glass houses" is another - whether the stone-throwing is deserved or not, is always different question.

HAHAHAHAHahahahahaha

only you are dumb enough to need basic shit explained

he's Soooooooo far beyond pot - kettle - black

You do realize that is an admission of guilt, right? lol

he's Soooooooo far beyond pot - kettle - black