The vocal crank minority needs to get its stories straight about Yushchenko

Since many of the major events in Ukraine have already taken place, and we're now waiting expectantly for the election rerun, I've had enough time to sit down and analyze some of the stories that have come out against the opposition in the past weeks and months. Of course this is a much easier task than analyzing pro-opposition press, since the vast majority of press has been positive.

What I found from the small minority of cranks was a collection of accusations against the opposition that not only clash with reality, they class with one another. The most obvious way they clash is in describing opposition presidential candidate Victor Yushchenko. I have posted before, and will probably do so again about how mild-mannered and, well, banker-like Yushchenko is. (He was National Banker for a while) Here are the accusations made against him in a few of the articles:

1) Yushchenko is dangerous because his campaign is tied to radical nationalists.
a. Guardian: Walsh - The Radicals with a vested interest in orange victory (Tymoshenko is the only person in the whole article who is described a a radical, perhaps the author meant the title ironically)
b. Guardian: Steele - Ukraine's postmodern coup d'etat: "The crowds in the street include a large contingent from western Ukraine, which has never felt comfortable with rule from Kiev, let alone from people associated with eastern Ukraine, the home-base of Viktor Yanukovich, the disputed president-elect. [paragraph break] Their traditions are not always pleasant. Some protesters have been chanting nationalistic and secessionist songs from the anti-Semitic years of the Second World War."
c. Guardian: Laughland -- The Revolution is Televised: The West is blind to the real character of the revolution: "The blindness extends even to the posters which the "pro-democracy" group, Pora, has plastered all over Ukraine, depicting a jackboot crushing a beetle, an allegory of what Pora wants to do to its opponents. [paragraph break] Such dehumanization of enemies has well-known antecedents - not least in Nazi-occupied Ukraine itself, when pre-emptive war was waged against the Red Plague emanating from Moscow - yet these posters have passed without comment."

2) Yushchenko is in hock to oligarchs, often used to say Yushchenko is no different than Yanukovych despite Yanukovych's ties to Donetsk oligarchs: as one commentator on this site put it, they are "two sides of the same medal"
a. Guardian: Walsh - The Radicals with a vested interest in orange victory (a discussion about how oligarchs are the ones funding Ukrainian protests)
b. Guardian: Steele - Where the Cold War Never Died "[Political observers] also wonder how much of a democrat Yushchenko is..." [another quote later on in the article]... Like his rival, Yanukovych, he has links to oligarchic clans and served as a prime minister under Kuchma..." (I respond to this article in full here)

3) Yushchenko is a Western Stooge
a. Guardian: Steele - Ukraine's postmodern coup d'etat: "In Ukraine, Yushchenko got the western nod, and floods of money poured in to groups which support him, ranging from the youth organisation, Pora, to various opposition websites. More provocatively, the US and other western embassies paid for exit polls, prompting Russia to do likewise, though apparently to a lesser extent."
b. Mark Almond with the British Helsinki Human Rights Organization (not International Helsinki Federation) : It's now or never for Washington, subheading of the work -- "America's real aim in Ukraine and other former Soviet republics is to seize control of vital resources before China and India can challenge US dominance."
c. Guardian: Steele -- Where the Cold War Never Died -- "But it is mainly because of the Nato factor that the US has become much more engaged in recent weeks in denouncing the dangers of fraud, funding the exit polls which will be done on Sunday and financing the groups of activists who may take to the streets." He seemsto have dropped this argument, seeing as how no one has mentioned NATO here in ages.
d. Times: Jenkins: When is a Mob not a Mob? Refers to Yushchenko as "our oligarch" as opposed to Russia's

last and least:

e. Former Presidential candidate and current crackpot Buchanan: (quotes both Steele and Laughland, rambles on on his own, read him here, if you want)

The problem with these three claims is that each of them assumes a different fundamental character for Yushchenko. If he is a radical populist nationalist, he would be highly unlikely to be simultaneously a Western stooge. If the UNA-UNSO guys were dictating strategy, like many of these people imply, Yushchenko would be virulently anti-western and there would be no possible reason for the US to help him.

If Yushchenko were just like the oligarchs, he would be a disinterested nationalist, because he would be busy pleasing oligarch interests, not those of his country. If he were an oligarch tool, he would also have no particular interest in the West over Russia, because his foreign policy would be pragmatically based on whatever helped the oligarchs the most.

He is none of these things. On the contrary, Ukraine is having a democratic election because he is so damn moderate he was willing to shake hands with the people he believes are behind the assassination attempt against him in September. He is probably the world's only moderate to the death.

Let the cranks keep cranking.