I think you're onto something. And sadly, it means that they're letting him tell them what to do.

Seems to me that's the dynamic here. Bowing to his wishes either through flat-out intimidation or strategic manipulation to avoid trouble.

But either way you slice it, it's STILL bowing to HIS wishes. Letting HIM tell them what to do. Letting HIM be the boss. Who died and made him king? Uh- YOU GUYS DID! YOU goys in Nato who don't want to provoke Putin and his nukes and will thus bow to his wishes. Let HIM do the behavior modification on you guys, when it really should be the other way around: that WE tell HIM what to do after he's gotten out of line and invaded a sovereign independent state on a premise of total lies and fabrications.

One way is rewarding bad behavior, and the other is discouraging bad behavior - by not giving in to it. But then again, I'm a weirdo who tends to see pretty much everything through a parenting lens.

Seems to me we need to start thinking like the enemy does.

I know, I know. Don't call 'em the enemy. I know, I know! I hate the idea - in one way. But in another way, I'm deeply in love with it.

I think (or at least I hope) there are enough really smart, shrewd, and intimately-informed people on our side to be able to outwit the usual Republi-CONJOBS. Is it because Democrats are usually not wired that way? Maybe we really ARE just "too nice"? How do we break out of that? If nothing else, the opposition is probably hard-wired to think being nice means we're chumps. So if we change our behavior, maybe it'll take the other guys some time to realize as much. And we should be ready to take FULL advantage of that while we can!

Could it still happen for Ukraine?

President Zelenskyy is still recognized as the leader of the sovereign nation of Ukraine, and Ukraine is still almost globally recognized (except for Putin & Co.) as a sovereign nation with a president very much in command.

Couldn't we and/or another NATO country, or several together, start the proceedings for Ukraine to join NATO? Is that an option if hostilities have already broken out? Is that an option - at all? How does that work? And how could it be speeded up - as it appears is being done for Sweden and Finland? If them, then why not Ukraine too? They're expressing more vocal interest in doing it as a preventive measure, because they're seeing what's happening IN Ukraine. Why couldn't we go straight to the heart of the matter and fold them into NATO, too?

And then again - we've certainly seen certain high-profile individuals with a certain level of clout and fan-base just up 'n' DO IT. Whatever "IT" happens to be. Usually, in the case of those individuals, there's maybe a little verbal push-back but few or no consequences. It should of course be noted that in the case of those individuals, the result is against the law, wrong, unethical, deceitful, self-aggrandizing, corner-cutting, misleading and deliberately distorted and/or falsified. But if it happens in EXPOSING or blowing the whistle on such individuals and make them stop and face consequences for it, then is it not a good thing that benefits and protects the interests of the greater good?

Asking because I genuinely don't know. Not familiar with this particular turf, and my reasoning here may be simplistic as well as not completely informed. Thank you in advance!

Certainly works for me!

And since they expect no shrewdness from us,

I bet that gives us an advantage! They won’t be expecting ruthlessness from us, and aren’t set up to defend against it (at least not yet)!

They’ll be taken by surprise. They’re used to Democrats being easy marks. When we’re not, we won’t fit their templates or bags o’ tricks, they won’t know how to respond effectively.

Hopefully others who understand this better will weigh in for you (and for me, too!)

but what I understand is that it's because his hands are tied by the fact of NATO membership.

As I understand it (and I'm NO expert), the biggest prevailing priority of the NATO charter is that "an attack on one is an attack on all." Unfortunately, Ukraine is not a NATO member.

I find myself wondering - why does it have to take so long? Does it have to take years to jump through all the hoops for a nation to earn membership in NATO? If it'd help Ukraine prevail over Russia, what's the harm? All the members' ambassadors vote to let 'em in, and they're in. Same with Sweden and Finland! I've heard that checking all the boxes for membership takes years. Is this really true? Or could we cut through the red tape here? Seems to me what Ukraine's dealing with right now is undeniably a life-or-death situation.

I'm just trying to think of possible solutions - using the "well, what CAN we do?" approach. And I hope for input (and thank you in advance)!

I do, too.

I was hoping for better when he moved into the White House. I have yet to be disappointed. The more I watch, read, and year, the better I like him.

They're the big black "beads" on your necklace.

They were everywhere when I went to Hawaii with my parents. Still love 'em!

Welcome to DU, thomski64!

I see what you did there!

He was her mentor.

I may be mistaken but I think he brought her onboard, or encouraged her toward a higher profile at MSNBC.

I, for one, FUCKING LOVED Keith Olbermann! I loved his biting wit, his “angry man thing”, his willingness to make waves on principle. His was a Never-Miss show for me. He was as far away from a dispassionate news reader as one could find. LOVED his show!

I still miss him. Still don’t understand what his problem is as to why he keeps getting himself fired. But I don’t exactly have a source for good gossip at that network anymore. Everybody I knew or worked with is either retired, dead, or selling real estate.

I’m tempted to wonder why Maddow said no to bringing him back aboard after he was instrumental in her initial success. (Loyalty much?)

My immediate reaction is that Rachel loses points for this, but then again, I have no idea what or how things were playing out behind the scenes. And I’ve not heard any stories about Maddow holding grudges of some kind, either. So I can’t figure out who’s the heavy, here.

I just wish he was back on the air every night. We NEED somebody who doesn’t keep trying to keep it “tidy” and “remain objective” by not yelling the truth about the GOP. The Republicans have long ago forfeited the right to have people cling to some misbegotten “objectivity” and just start calling it like it is.