Hugo Chavez issues a taunting obituary for the 'American empire'

[bigtree]

Venezuelan President promises fuel to the needy and proclaims 'final days of the North American empire' before visit to Britain today

Sunday May 14, 2006
The Observer

Venezuela's president Hugo Chavez arrives in London today with an extraordinary promise to offer cut-rate heating oil for needy families in Europe, modelled on a similar campaign in the US which has been seen partly as a bid to embarrass President George Bush.

Last night Chavez also issued a taunting obituary for the 'American empire' on the eve of a visit where he will be shunned by Downing Street but welcomed by London Mayor Ken Livingststone.

Chavez said in Vienna yesterday that the 'final hours of the North American empire have arrived ... Now we have to say to the empire: "We're not afraid of you. You're a paper tiger."

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1774649,00.html


my 2 cents -- Trampling American Empire (5-24-2006)

[bryant69]

1. I wonder if Democrats get back the white house

if there is anything in our relationship to Venezuela to be salvaged.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[bigtree]

12. they could start by taking down the ridiculous rhetoric that Rice

and Bolton have been spewing along with Bush

[mogster]

47. I think this is much posturing from Chavez' side

One part bolstering support at home, one part sending signals to allies abroad and one part regular pissed-offness at the rigid Bush government :D

I love this guy's attitude, but he need to branch out and build peace with the opposition at home, and also tie some knots abroad. I think that the moment Bush is gone, a whole range of things will happen that brings Venezuela into the social democrat range, with mixed economy a-la Scandinavia. I doubt he's the megalomaniac that many people would claim he is.

I bet he reads this forum too ;-)

[bigtree]

52. more 'posturing' today . . .

Venezuela's Chavez Fires Back at Bush

By VOA News
24 May 2006
http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-05-24-voa40.cfm




Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez says President Bush is a threat to world peace and stability.

Mr. Chavez's remarks on Tuesday came one day after the U.S. president expressed concerns about what he called "the erosion of democracy" in Venezuela and Bolivia.

The Venezuelan leader described the Bush administration as an "imperialist, war-mongering government." He said it is "eroding the possibility of peace and life" on Earth.

Mr. Chavez also accused the Bush administration of violating the civil rights of U.S. citizens. And he said Washington was trying to overthrow his government.

Mr. Chavez also has been a fierce critic of the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Relations between Venezuela and the United States have grown tense in recent months. The Bush administration has accused Mr. Chavez of being a destabilizing force in Latin America. It announced earlier this month that the U.S. would stop selling arms to Caracas, saying it has failed to cooperate in the fight against terrorism.

http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-05-24-voa40.cfm

[mogster]

57. I have no problems with any of those statements

They match my own sentiments exactly ;-)

[Judi Lynn]

56. He has without a doubt bent over backwards to accomodate the racist

vicious elite which has identified with and connected with Washington D.C.'s most corrupt politicians for years.

They will do everything possible to remove him any way they can. That's not an overstatement. The filthy things they broadcast about him via their electronic media, and carry in their print papers, tabloids, magazines would make a moral person blush.

The largest media owner, although tiny in stature, Cuban-Venezuelan Gustavo Cisneros is a personal friend of George H. W. _Bush, and he was one of the planners, plotters of the _Bush-backed coup in 2002, in which Hugo Chavez was kidnapped and taken away.

These pieces of fecal matter are not going to accept any kind of truce with a man they describe publically as an ape.

[mogster]

59. You mean he's 'been' bent over backwards?

He's not striking me as bending to anyone on his own accord, I mean? It doesn't look like Bush is gonna bend him any place soon either, when I think about it ;-)

I know about that campaign, that's why I don't trust any news about Chavez before they're double checked. Have you seen this film? I guess you've seen it.

http://www.biff.no/2004/index.php3?Eng=Ja&ID=FilmEng&counter=34

It was aired on the NrK TV here in 2004, and give a glimpse behind the scenes at what happened during the coup days.

[Judi Lynn]

67. It's not to be missed! It was good to see the faces of the two in charge

of the film on your link. I've heard about them for a long time.

Thanks! :hi:

[mogster]

74. Thanks for posting this guy, lol

We need to front the good faces once a while, no? :hi:

[K-W]

63. Chavez wants peace, it is the opposition that doesnt.

The opposition would rather see the democratic government overthrown than accept Chavez in power. Nothing he could do short of handing the government over to them would create peace.

Venezuala is already in the social democratic range. That is precisely what thier government is.

Chavez doesnt need to compromise with anti-democratic forces.

[mogster]

72. I agree to the last line and the first

I don't have enough insight into his government to judge on the second, because all reporting on this guy is slanted negatively - even here in Norway. Look, I'm not dissing Chavez, but he need to build powerful allies abroad, then build bridges between the people at home.

It is the sustainable course, and I think he should meet this man, the PM of Norway:



He's done everything right so far, by building bridges throughout South America. Now he should inspire Europe's left, because inspiration is sorely needed. In return he'd get support from a stable democracy based on a mixed economy.

But I agree he can't compromise with the opposition as long as Bush looms over him.

[Beelzebud]

2. I'll say it. Fuck Chavez.

He's no friend of ours at all. I get so sick of seeing people here kissing this guy's ass.

[Dufaeth]

4. Why?

?

[crikkett]

5. But you're not bitter. Nossir. n/t

[Beelzebud]

13. After 6 years of Bush, all I am is bitter.

You'll find no Happy Shiney Person here.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

83. Second that. n/t

MKJ

[CottonBear]

8. Venezuela sells the USA a huge amount of oil.

We really don't need to be pissing them off any more than we already have. Bush tired to overthrow a democratically elected government by sponsoring a coup. That really pissed off the Venezeuelans.

[bigtree]

14. ass-kissing? no. Respect for Venezuela's sovereignty? yes.

Like it or not, our president is the threat to world peace and stability now. His fascist assaults on our own historic democracy, and his colonialist assaults on Iraq and Afghanistan makes our country's complaining about what Hugo Chavez is doing in his own homeland laughable.

And, they are laughing at us . . .

[nxylas]

24. Complaints about Chavez...

...from an anti-Chavez website include his packing the supreme court with political appointees and allegations that the election which brought him to power was rigged. Lucky something like that could never happen in America, eh?

[newyawker99]

30. Hi nxylas!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[SammyWinstonJack]

46. And it never could happen twice in America, even .

:sarcasm:

include his packing the supreme court with political appointees and allegations that the election which brought him to power was rigged. Sounds hauntingly familiar.

[stepnw1f]

117. lol (nt)

[ObaMania]

25. Right on, Bigtree. n/t

[FyurFly]

18. I'll second it

Fuck you Chavez!

[arikara]

51. How articulate

not

:boring:

[SeveneightyWhoa]

115. Lol.

Tell me about it.

It's rather odd that all the Chavez threads have a disproportionately high number of very-low-post DU'ers, isn't it?

[arikara]

130. I've noticed that very same thing too...

If I had a bit of time to waste on checking, I wouldn't be shocked to find that those low post DUers only crawled out from under their rock to disrupt Chavez threads.

;-)

[rman]

39. Unfounded RW rhetoric

[Snivi Yllom]

44. I'll say it, cozying up to Hugo Chavez now is equivalent to the 1980's

When the US cozied up to Saddam Hussein.

It bit us in the ass then. We never learn.

[Beelzebud]

45. I share that feeling...

[Chulanowa]

50. Well, not exactly

We (or rather, Reagan) cozied up to Saddam for one reason - Reagan needed someone to kill lots of Iranians for him. That's it, really.

Currently, Hugo is not being cozied up to - except by individuals. Our government is calling hte guy Hitler, which considering the source, means he's probably doing something right. He's also certainly not the type to launch a campaign of genocide against, say, Brasil, especially not on American funding.

[Cha]

99. Yeah, not quite

the same..not even in the same ballpark.

[MrPrax]

53. Your concerns about

the US or 'progressives' or whatever looking hypocritical when they don't take tough principled stands is laudable.

But in fact it was US official GOVERNMENT policy that 'cozy'ed' up to Saddam, much to the objections of many 'grassroots' groups that are objecting to the official GOVERNMENT policy of attacking and subverting a duly elected government in Latin America.

There maybe indeed problems with Chavez--but you are not speaking to that.

"It bit us in the ass then. We never learn."

Who's the 'we', pal?

How exactly your mind could make an 'us' complicit in continued US foreign policy follies of the last century under the architecture of the SAME FUCKIN PEOPLE in power right now is truly astounding.

Now I won't call you a rightwing troller simply because you seem a little confused because it is probably just as fashionable in certain 'liberal' circles to make Chevaz the current 'pile-on' guy, so 'liberals' can prove their 'trustworthiness' to the power--but I would suggest that if you want to take a TOUGH stand to prove 'your not into dictatorship', there are many MANY current allies that the US is NOW supporting, equal to the crimes of your government's former buddy Saddam, that neither you or Beezlebub seem to care about...(I spy with my little eye...something called)...Egypt? Tunisia? Indonesia? Colombia?

Here is the just released Amnesty International report so you can get caught up on the 'moral hypocrisy' practised by your government (that other 'we') and so you don't look like a stupid rightwing troller...

[Snivi Yllom]

54. correction

I should have said US foreign policy in the 1980's was to suck up to Saddam against the Iranians.

Current US policy towards Venezuela and Chavez is hostile. However, there are groups of progressives who do suck up to Chavez as a saint, and he's no saint.

he's just as bad as the dictators in the countries you mentioned.

[Greyhound]

118. That is highly doubtful. Can you back that up?

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Catrina]

110. The only reason we hear Chavez's name in this country is because he

stands between George Bush and his oil buddies designs on Veneuzuela's oil ~ all that oil and those greedy oil barons can't their hands on it, because *GASP* Chavez thinks it should benefit the Venezuelan people. He nationalized the oil, and that is the ONLY sin he commit against the Bush oil Cartel. If he had been killing and torturing his people rather than feeding and eductating them, but sharing the oil with Bush's buddies, we would not hear a word about him. Here we go again!

[stepnw1f]

119. BINGO

and his assmunch brigade tries smear him.

[rman]

181. Except that the US installed Saddam as its puppet,

compared to Chavez being democratically elected by the people of Venezuela.

Also the current admin is hardly cozying up to Chavez, now is it?

[arikara]

49. And it starts already...

So predictable. So boring.

[Greyhound]

62. Why don't you folks that hate Chavez ever give a reason?

I'm pretty neutral on him as I don't have much first-hand knowledge of that whole region, but while I see plenty of action on his and his supporters part that lead me to think he's probably one of the good guys down there (as much as anybody can be a good guy in that environment), I never hear the other side do anything but name call and point out obvious propaganda hit pieces.

[Snivi Yllom]

73. 'propaganda' on Hugo Chavez from the NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/20/world/americas/20chavez.html?pagewanted=1&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fPeople%2fC%2fChavez%2c%20Hugo&_r=1

May 20, 2006
Seeking United Latin America, Venezuela's Chávez Is a Divider
By JUAN FORERO
BOGOTÁ, Colombia, May 19 — As Venezuela's president, Hugo Chávez, insinuates himself deeper in the politics of his region, something of a backlash is building among his neighbors.

Mr. Chávez — stridently anti-American, leftist and never short on words — has cast himself as spokesman for a united Latin America free of Washington's influence. He has backed Bolivia's recent gas nationalization, set up his own Socialist trade bloc and jumped into the middle of disputes between his neighbors, even when no one has asked.

Some nations are beginning to take umbrage. The mere association with Mr. Chávez has helped reverse the leads of presidential candidates in Mexico and Peru. Officials from Mexico to Nicaragua, Peru and Brazil have expressed rising impatience at what they see as Mr. Chávez's meddling and grandstanding, often at their expense.

Diplomatic sparring has broken into the open. Last month, after very public sniping between Mr. Chávez and Peru's president, Alejandro Toledo, the country withdrew its ambassador from Caracas, citing "flagrant interference" in its affairs.

"He goes around shooting from the hip and shooting his mouth off, and that has caused tensions," Jorge G. Castañeda, a former Mexican foreign minister, said by phone from New York, where he is teaching at New York University. "The difference now is that he's picking fights with his friends, not just his adversaries."

Some of Mr. Chávez's gestures, like his tendency to tweak the Bush administration, or the aid projects he has bankrolled with Venezuela's oil money, still leave him popular, particularly among the poor.

But increasingly, the very image of the Venezuelan leader has come to stand for a style of caustic nationalism that many in the region fear, as the divisions provoked by the man who professes to want to unify his region have widened.

"He is beginning to overreach, wanting to be involved in everything," said Riordan Roett, director of Latin American studies at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies. "It's a matter of egomania at work here."

Mr. Chávez, for instance, has taken the uncompromising stand that governments must choose either his vision of continental unity or free trade with Washington, which Mr. Chávez blames for impoverishing the region. "You either have one or the other," he said. "Either we're a united community or we're not."

In late April, he exasperated Colombia, Ecuador and Peru by declaring that Venezuela would drop out of their trade group, the Andean Community of Nations, because the other three members were seeking free trade agreements with the United States. He has instead formed a trade bloc with Cuba and Bolivia's new Socialist government.

While the move was filled with political symbolism, analysts say it offers few real prospects for trade and threatens badly needed integration among Andean countries, which still depend on United States markets.

"Chávez's idea of sovereignty seems pretty selective," said Michael Shifter, a senior policy analyst at the Inter-American Dialogue policy group in Washington. "Chávez has been saying, in effect, 'You're either with us or against us.' For most Latin Americans that hubristic message doesn't go over very well, whether it comes from Washington or Caracas."

[Judi Lynn]

78. Juan Forero is good at "propaganda." It's what he does.

He's been annoying people trying to get straight news about Venezuela for years.

Also last April, New York Times reporter Juan Forero reported that President Chávez had “resigned” when, in fact, Chávez had been kidnapped at gunpoint. Forero did not source his knowingly false claim. Forero, on Apr. 13, wrote a puff piece on dictator-for-a-day Pedro Carmona — installed by a military coup — as Carmona disbanded Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution and sent his shock troops house to house in a round-up of political leaders in which sixty supporters of Chávez were assassinated. Later that day, after the Venezuelan masses took back their country block by block, Carmona fled the national palace and Chávez, the elected president, was restored to office.

Forero — who allowed US Embassy officials to monitor his interviews with mercenary pilots in Colombia, without disclosing that fact in his article — was caught again last month in his unethical pro-coup activities in Venezuela. Narco News Associate Publisher Dan Feder revealed that Forero and LA Times reporter T. Christian Miller had written essentially the same story, interviewing the same two shopkeepers in a wealthy suburb of Caracas, and the same academic “expert” in a story meant to convince readers that a “general strike” was occurring in Venezuela. The LA Times Readers Representative later revealed that Forero and Miller interviewed the shopkeepers together. Neither disclosed that fact.
(snip)

http://www.agrnews.org/issues/210/mediawatch.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~snip~
In the New York Times, Juan Forero informs us (on December 3, 2004) that the CIA:

was aware that dissident military officers and opposition figures in Venezuela were planning a coup against President Hugo Chávez in 2002. But immediately after the overthrow, the Bush administration blamed Mr. Chávez, a left-leaning populist, for his own downfall and denied knowing about the threats.

Specifics were kept from the Venezuelan government, Forero states, but they were warned in "broad" terms.

The documents do not show that the United States backed the coup, as Mr. Chávez has charged. Instead, the documents show that American officials issued "repeated warnings that the United States will not support any extraconstitutional moves to oust Chávez."

No, the documents DON'T show that. One document has the quote Forero refers to (April 6, 2002, SEIB). There is no mention of US warnings in the March 5th SEIB of any warnings given by the U.S. Nor in the March 11th SEIB is there a mention. What about the April 1st or 8th SEIBs? Nada. Zilch. What about post-coup in the CIA's Spot Commentary, April 14th? Nothing about U.S. warnings. The seventh document, the April 17th SEIB, also mentions nothing on any warnings. One out of seven documents does not equal "documents."

Is this a comprehension error as someone rushes to meet a deadline? Ben e-mailed Friday (when this article ran) suggesting that Forero had "damaging documents, doesn't want to examine , just wants to grab the happy-face stamp, use it." Is that true? I don't know. But these are serious documents and Forero comes off strongest in areas that could lead Ben and others to suspect that he has a need to stamp a happy-face on the story.

More mistakes occur when Forero then contrasts the view of "a senior American diplomat" with the view of "Venezuelan ambassador to Washington, Bernardo Alvarez." "SAD" says that the administration's blaming of Chavez for the violence was a logical conclusion from the apparently limited information the administration had access to. Alvarez maintains that the documents show that the administration "was not operating in an information vacuum."

Which is it? The documents indicate Alvarez is correct. Read through them yourself. What's the point of access to the documents if you're still going to play he-said/she-said?

Forero can inflate a document to "documents" and quote the only sentence to back up a claim that the U.S. gave "repeated warnings;" yet he's unable to determine from the documents whether or not the U.S. was "operating in an information vacuum?" (Hint, no, the administration was not "operating in a vacuum.")
(snip)

http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/2004_11_28_thecommonills_archive.html

ETC.

[nick303]

104. The latest NYT article has some substance.

I wouldn't call it propaganda. I think its unfair that I've seen plenty of people link to the NYT when it suited their worldview-- and then turn around and call it a worthless propaganda rag whenever it didn't.

Like I said, the NYT article is true, and meaningful. As one example, a recent composite poll (of 5 polls) by Centro de Investigacion para el Desarrollo (CIDAC), has Obrador falling to 2nd place in Mexico's election race. This was after campaign ads linked him to Hugo Chavez (fairly or otherwise).

Spanish, see p.8 for graphs

[Warren Stupidity]

114. sourcing the Johns Hopkins SAIS

without identifying it as a rightwing neocon thinktank (former head one Paul Wolfowitz) is dishonest, to say the least. Secondly, while it may be true that Chavez doesn't help candidates at the polls, the fact that linking Chavez to a candidate preceded a decline in the polls is a data point that by itself proves nothing. This piece of work was another example of why that rag is better known as the Neocon Times.

[nick303]

137. A few points

1) It is neither a rule nor a common journalistic practice to label the political leanings of every source you cite. This was one side comment, not a central point of the article. Also commenting in the article was Jorge Castañeda, a left-leaning guy who is also the author of a Che Guevara biography.

2) So what was the central point of the article? You can find it in the title "Seeking United Latin America, Venezuela's Chávez Is a Divider". The following statements are the main support for the argument, all factual (as opposed to opinion). The rest is just commentary from experts, used to provide background.
a) After being tied to Chavez, the head of Mexico's ruling left-wing party has fallen to second place in the latest election race.
b) There has been disagreement between Chavez and Peruvian leader Alejandro Toledo, leading Peru to withdraw its ambassador from
Caracas.
c) Chavez has offended Colombia, Ecuador and Peru "by declaring that Venezuela would drop out of their trade group, the Andean Community of Nations, because the other three members were seeking free trade agreements with the United States."

3) You didn't need anyone to tell you that Chavez's quote boils down to "you're with us or against us." That sounds familiar, I think another head of state from somewhere said something similar... can't remember who it was...

PS If there is doubt that Chavez made that statement, there are many places where you can find him saying something similar. One example:

"O somos una comunidad unida o no lo somos. Es como la bigamia, si tu estás casado y te enamoraste de otra mujer, bueno, no te puedes pretender casar dos veces, tienes que divorciarte o separarte, al menos"

Translation: We are a united community, or we are not. It's like bigamy, if you are married and in love with another woman, then you can't get married twice, you need to divorce or separate.

[Greyhound]

116. Thank you so much for saving me the time.

it would be laughable if it weren't so sad. In the case of Chavez, he is the Ruling class' worst nightmare and therefore, I discount anything said about him by amerikan corporate media, whether "left" or "right".

[Judi Lynn]

153. There's no way to avoid the white wash they gave the coup against Chavez

No way at all. They have protected _Bush in every possible way from public responsibility.

People who have read enough to recognize the patterns aren't in the dark about this. No one can overturn the evidence of one's own eyes.

April 4, 2006

Provocative Humanitarianism?

Bashing Hugo Chavez at the New York Times

By DAVE LINDORFF

What do you call a nation that provides medical aid to desperately poor people in Mexico, heating assistance to low-income families in the U.S., crucial project financing to some of the poorest countries in Africa, and aid to impoverished Caribbean island nations?

If you're the New York Times, you call it "provocative," and you call the leader of that country "the next Fidel Castro."

Venezuela, under President Hugo Chavez, has been turning its increasingly valuable oil reserves into an engine for development, not just in Venezuela, where the revenues are being used to finance schools, housing and job creation for the nation's long-suffering and long-ignored poor, but also across Latin America, in the process creating a new model for Latin America-one which challenges the imperial domination of the United States.

In an April 4 page one article that reeks of Cold War rhetoric, Timesman Juan Forero warns that with Venezuela's oil revenues rising 32 percent last year, Venezuela's foreign aid spending "now surpasses the nearly $2 billion Washington allocates annually to pay for development programs and the drug war in western South America." (The drug war is foreign aid?)

Quoting only Chavez critics-both political opponents within Venezuela, and U.S. government and right-wing think tank members in the U.S.-Forero paints an ominous picture of a budding threat to U.S. influence in the Americas.

The most appalling quote comes from John Negroponte, the overall director of intelligence services in the U.S., and a man with a long history of meddling in the affairs of, and indeed subverting the governments of nations in Latin America. Mr. Chavez is "spending considerable sums involving himself in the political and economic life of other countries in Latin America and elsewhere, this despite the very real economic development and social needs of his own country," Negroponte is quoted as telling Forero.
(snip)

http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff04042006.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
He is a shill, carrying on his shill's work, and will always be a shill until someone in authority finally exerts his/her better judgement and removes him. As it is, he's a conspicuous Judy Miller propagandist.

[bigtree]

84. meddling? grandstanding?

don't these strike you as tame?

Maybe hardball politics, but where's the threat? It's in the second paragraph of the article:

"He has backed Bolivia's recent gas nationalization, set up his own Socialist trade bloc"

Most of the noise about Chavez is political, and a great deal is from outside the country, and from those who themselves want to lord over Venezuelans and their resources.

[me b zola]

207. yeah, the NYT would never use their paper to sell foreign policy lies

...like the war on Iraq. :eyes:







:sarcasm:

[devilgrrl]

79. Dood! He hate america and it big energy company's...

he bad person!

:silly:

[arikara]

94. No, they never give a reason

except to call him a fascist. LOL.

Ignore them, they are the disinfo bunch that creep out of the woodwork every time his name is mentioned.

[rman]

180. Gut-feeling mostly,

following the great example in the WH. And throwing in some RW spin for good measure.

[Greyhound]

64. I detect the distinct odor of a raygun "democrat".

Am I wrong?

[Beelzebud]

103. Totally wrong. So many assumptions in this thread.

Reagan destroyed the middle class, the unions, failed to care about the AIDS crisis, allowed the christian right to gain a stranglehold on American politics, and was generally just a right-wing freak.

Why is it that if someone doesn't care for Chavez they must be a raygun democrat, or a Bush lover?

[Greyhound]

120. Because you say things like "Fuck Chavez. He's no friend of ours at all...

I get so sick of seeing people here kissing this guy's ass."

without any explanation or reason given. It smacks of the knee-jerk jingoism that swept the majority of sheeple up in the 80's. :shrug:

As I said in my previous response, I'm not married to either side of this issue, but virulent non-responses always prejudice me against any position.

[rman]

182. yeah, assumptions based on feelings...

"I share that feeling..."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1273036&mesg_id=1273913

[DiverDave]

85. Huh, thats a strong statement

Whats to hate?
He helps the poor in his country, check.
He tells the oil giants to shove their globalization plan up their asses, check.
He tells the world the truth about the Oil corporations plans of taking every last drop of oil left to sell to the highest bidder...the United states, check.
AND he doesn't take shit from some rich little daddy's boy that don't know shit from shinola.

So, you still haven't told me why you are so against him.

[KaptBunnyPants]

100. So your an Imperial Democrat, I assume.

Seeing as how you take such great personal offense to his statement, you must be one of those "responsible" Democrats who supports the US taking up the white man's burden. Personally, I would rather allow people to choose their own governments, even if they foolishly think that their natural resources belong to them. But then again, I believe in freedom for all people, even those who make the mistake of not being white...

[Beelzebud]

109. You know what happens when you assume?

You make an ass out of u and me.

I'm all for Venesuala to elect whomever they wish. They ARE a soverign nation.

That said: I don't have to approve of their leader. He is dragging Venesuala down a militaristic path, and he's an enemy of free speech.

[KaptBunnyPants]

148. Free speech, not this again...

The privately owned media companies in Venezuela were complicit in the 2002 coup attempt against the government. You know, the one where the US backed Carmona dissolved their supreme court, congress, and constitution before being thrown out of office by the masses of Venezuela.

I’d highly recommend seeing “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised” if you would like to see first hand recordings of the kind material they were broadcasting. They deliberately cropped videos to make it look like pro-Chavez forces were attacking peaceful protestors, when in the expanded view it could be seen that the pro-Chavez people were trying to get cover from armed insurgents. The TV stations called on people to violently take to the streets, and openly gloated about their deceptions when they thought they had won.

Personally, if I was in power, I would have had the media owners and their lackey “journalists” shot for treason, or at the very least, I would have confiscated their stations. That they still continue to operate is a testament to the superhuman restraint of Chavez. All he has done is make it illegal to slander officials and incite violence, hardly a condemnable act.

And militarism is no vice when the ruling super-state of the world decides to go around starting wars left and right without cause. It’s wasteful to spend so much of their resources preparing for war, but since the American people went insane and elected (kind of) this blowhard it’s our fault more than anyone else. The global arms race was inevitable since Bush took over, it was a clarion call to all free men to arm themselves and prepare.

And sorry about making an ass out of you, but given that all Chavez said to elicit your response was that the American Empire was over, it seemed likely that you would support the concept of an American Empire. How was I to know that your hatred of Chavez stemmed from something completely unrelated to the parent article?

[Kostafarian]

176. great post

For a site called Democratic Underground the neo-con talking points and banner ads sure make one wonder whether this site isn't one big disinfo data mining project.

[Judi Lynn]

183. Welcome to DU! Don't forget to use your "ignore" feature from time 2 time

It should be the image on your page with a an "X" under it, on the right, right by your screen name.

[Kostafarian]

185. fantastic

Thank you.

[Judi Lynn]

177. I agree with Kostafarian. That's a great post, alright. Shows you've done

your homework, and have a good mind. That seems to make a difference when trying to discuss something. So many people enter conversations without one or both, and it's sad for everyone involved!

Welcome to D.U., KaptBunnyPants. Your voice and focus will surely work well in a place where intelligent people are IN THE MAJORITY!

[KaptBunnyPants]

206. Thank you. Compliments are always well recieved! nm

[Catrina]

111. You mean he's no friend to George Bush's oil buddies, he has been a

great friend to the poor in this country, also victims of the Bush administration. I have no problem with him. He's made Venezuela's oil work for the people who own it. What they do there is none of our business, but poor Bush, can't stand it that he and his buddies can't profit as long Chavez is there ~

[natrat]

122. yea i'm starting to not like him

[PublicRadioVet]

164. Indeed. Fuck Chavez!

Chavez is a wannabe Fidel Castro. He is the latest Latin Strongman to emerge and beat the anti-American drum for his own political gain. Having read up on him, I see little that is noble in this man. Perhaps for some (the Che t-shirt set?) Hugo Chavez is a romantic hero, rising to fight for the Common Man. But when I look at Chavez I see a thug, plain and simple. Again, why are so many liberals in such a hurry to shake hands with this guy, just because he is a Bush basher and loves taking pot shots at America? Repugnant. I'm a liberal, and I love my country, and Chavez seems like nobody I would want to be friends with. No way in hell.

[bigtree]

165. I'm the poster. I'm not shaking hands with anyone.

Your problems with Chavez may be founded in fact. You produce none here though. The pot shots are in response to a U.S. assault on the sovereignty of Venezeula. That's far more repugnant to me, an American.

I don't need to 'be friends with' Chavez to speak out and appreciate the expressions about our nation's imperialism born out of a greed for oil and conquest, be damned sovereignty, be damned the rights, needs, and concerns of the countries we dictate to.

Hugo Chavez spoke the truth about 'American Empire'. It is failing under the weight of Bush's aggression. Countries are forming alliances outside of American hegemony, Latin America no exception. Venezuela supplies nearly as much oil to the U.S. as Saudi Arabia. Bush wants to bully Chavez and Venezuela into a compliant relationship, Chavez is looking to replace our business with China.

To ignore the expansionism of the Bush regime and their open threats to the elected government of Chavez and focus instead on Chavez and some political conflict he has in his own homeland is ridiculous for an American with so much left unaddressed with our own fascist regime.

It's amazing to hear such unbridled criticism, from citizens of the most threatening nation on the planet, against Chavez, considering the muckraking and illegal meddling our president is doing in Venezuela and elsewhere.

[PublicRadioVet]

189. I disagree, on a lot of things

Since U.S. troops are not on Venezuelan soil, there has been no U.S. assault on Venezuela's sovereignty. Merely applying political pressure is just that: applying political pressure. Happens all the time, to us, to everyone around the world, for different reasons, and can hardly be deemed an assault on sovereignty.

The U.S. is hardly a fascist state. Last I checked, even as much as Bush is an asswipe, he'll be out of office in 2 years. Whether he likes it or not. Fascist countries tend to have a President-for-life (aka: Cuba) so I think the the U.S. does not qualify. Again, I am not defending bush. I am defending the American democratic system, which is specifically not fascist in nature. Please change your rhetoric. Dumbing down the word 'fascism' is an insult to everyone who has to live under the iron heel of REAL fascists, in North Korea, Cuba, and elsewhere.

As for the whole bit about America being the most threatening nation on the planet.... I guess if you are a die-hard Islamist, Socialist, or Communist, sure.

Again, as an FDR/JFK liberal, I am not afraid to love my country, or how we do things here, and I say Chavez is a loudmouthed chump.

[1932]

192. You should read Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. The neoliberal

agenda is all about using DEBT as an assualt on sovereignty.

Also read Stieglitz's The Roaring Nineties and watch the documetary Life and Debt.

Furthermore, there were great Americans who disagreed with America's imperial agenda in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Read Stephen Kinzer's Overthrow if you want to learn about them.

And if you want to read about how JFK and FDR would probably disagree strongly with the things the US has done in Venezuela, read Richard Parker's biography of JK Galbraith.

If you want to learn what Chavez is really doing, read Aleida Guevara and Richard Gott's books about him.

Read all those books and you might have the courage to patriotically disagree with the things you just posted.

[AllieB]

197. There are no troops, but the Bush officials were involved in coup of 2002

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,688071,00.html

The failed coup in Venezuela was closely tied to senior officials in the US government, The Observer has established. They have long histories in the 'dirty wars' of the 1980s, and links to death squads working in Central America at that time.
Washington's involvement in the turbulent events that briefly removed left-wing leader Hugo Chavez from power last weekend resurrects fears about US ambitions in the hemisphere.

It also also deepens doubts about policy in the region being made by appointees to the Bush administration, all of whom owe their careers to serving in the dirty wars under President Reagan.

One of them, Elliot Abrams, who gave a nod to the attempted Venezuelan coup, has a conviction for misleading Congress over the infamous Iran-Contra affair.

The Bush administration has tried to distance itself from the coup. It immediately endorsed the new government under businessman Pedro Carmona. But the coup was sent dramatically into reverse after 48 hours.

[bigtree]

205. love for country doesn't have to include love of 'how we do things'

that's so . . . republican.

nice try with the Islamist, Socialist, or Communist labels. I'm an American and I support the Democratic Party. The rest have to find their own way around my beliefs, if they care to. I try to look at pov's with an open mind, albeit, with my own understanding of history and events.

I don't think the rhetoric that Chavez uses is any more pernicious than any other politician. His criticisms of the Bush regime, however, are right on target.

Btw, there's plenty of evidence of the Bush administration's muckraking in Venezuela. I don't have to debate that. It's a matter of reading and listening to Venezuelans who were/are directly affected by Bush's militarism and muckraking. I won't lead you there, just be aware that there is evidence of the Bush regime's interference in Venezuela's sovereign affairs.

Curious to assert that our nation is powerful, as conservatives often do, and still insist that Bush isn't using the threat of our arsenal and our forces to intimidate lesser equipped nations into compliance with U.S. ambitions. Just what does the president mean when he asserts something or other about nations and world leaders he disagrees with? Are his entreaties just polite queries? Or, does he intend to back his threats with force?

Fascism fits. The Bush regime is authoritarian and hierarchical, rendering Congress impotent save the exercise of their right to impeach. I don't think we have to wait until we're in a devastating state of arrest to declare their actions and attitudes fascist and un-democratic.

my latest 2 cents -- Cooking Up A New Cold War(5-26-2006)

[crikkett]

3. Where does the phrase 'paper tiger' come from?

Any etymologists out there?

[HamdenRice]

7. Originally a Chinese expression, I believe nt

[Dufaeth]

10. wiki

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

[bananas]

23. There was also a book and movie called "Paper Lion" by George Plimpton

This sounds like a decription of *:

"When finally inserted at quarterback for a series in a scrimmage conducted in Pontiac, Michigan, Plimpton managed to lose yardage on each play, convincing many in the crowd that he was a professional sports clown inserted for amusement purposes, not someone who was genuinely giving his best effort."

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

[marmar]

6. "We're not afraid of you. You're a paper tiger."

I think the rest of the world is fast figuring this out now. It's strange that the actions of an administration that operates on the guiding principle that America should terrify and dominate the rest of the world are having the exact opposite effect.

[rodeodance]

9. language like that will only make the BushCo gang dig in their heels.

[Beelzebud]

11. Exactly... Bush lives for shit like this.

Chaves knows what he's doing, and he'l playing right into Bush's bullshit.

[reichstag911]

26. Which is it?

Does he know what he's doing, or is he playing into Bush's bullshit?

Speaking for others, I'm sure, I have far greater respect for Chavez than I do for Bush. He was, after all, elected, and he's stood up to US attempts to overthrow him. Bush would wet his pants and cry for Poppy if he had to stand up to the forces that have arrayed themselves against Chavez.

[Beelzebud]

34. He knows he's playing into Bush's BS. That's the point...

[Warren Stupidity]

41. What's the point?

Obviously we are too dense and your are going to have to spell it out. If he is playing directly into Bush's bullshit and he knows what he is doing, then why is he playing directly into Bush's bullshit?

[Beelzebud]

105. The point is that he talks this type of stuff to lure Bush to challenge

him back.

It's what guys like this do. Both of them are piles of shit.

Chavez does not allow newspapers to print critical articles about him, and he jails political opponents. That is nothing I will support.

Bush and Chavez are cut from the same dictatorial cloth.

[1932]

131. What other guys have done this?

Can you give any examples of Chavez stopping the press from reporting on him?

Which opponents were jailed?

[redqueen]

48. I'd like to second Warren's question...

what would be the point of that?

[Warren Stupidity]

76. DId you actually expect a reply?

I didn't. Apparently the assertion was so profound that explanation would be useless. Meanwhile I'm just an idiot who wished we had leaders sticking up for regular working people and sticking it to the elites, just wishing that our own opposition party was 1/10 the populist progressive that Chavez is. Instead 'what's good for halliburton is good for the nation' seems to be the ideology driving both of our corrupt compromised political parties.

[redqueen]

82. Heh...

I'm sorry to say I did!

*sigh*

[SlavesandBulldozers]

95. exactly.

excellent post.

[Beelzebud]

107. Sorry I had to step out for a few........

[Beelzebud]

106. An attempt to lure Bush into making a retort perhaps?

This is like poking a guy in the chest at a bar saying, "C'mon buddy, what are you going to do about it?"

And when the guy you're poking is an ex-cokehead, dry drunk, the results can be disasterous.

[1932]

132. What kind of retort do you think Chavez is trying to provoke?

[redqueen]

142. It makes perfect sense to me...

I don't think Chavez backing down and trying to make nice-nice with the guy who tried to force his ouster is really a logical expectation.

Also, I think he *knows* it's gonna happen again, one way or another, no matter what Chavez does (unless he goes back to the old 'fuck the poor' tradition)... so WTF? Why mince words? When you know someone's out to get you, you call them on it.

[bigtree]

15. yeah

truth hurts

[Beelzebud]

16. Paper tiger means fake threat. I disagree with our fascist regime,

but they are not a paper tiger.

And this type of sabre rattling bullshit only gets them fired up and ready to kill more people...

[Dufaeth]

17. We should all stop protesting too

cuz that just makes Bush mad

[Beelzebud]

20. We aren't world leaders. We're civilians. Chavez is the president of

a country.

Do you honestly think it's ok for a world leader to spew such rhetoric? If it was Bush giving a "taunting obituary" of another soverign nation, would that be ok with you?

[Dufaeth]

21. No because I'd be afraid it would be Bush doing the "killing"

However a leftist leader mocking a rightwing imperial nation? I'm right there with him. I'd rather the Bush regime crumble and the US be saved, but if we're going to keep invading other countries preemptively, then maybe we should lose our power.

[reichstag911]

28. His taunt was justifiably aimed...

...at the "empire," not the nation. Or are you a PNAC ideologue that believes in a militarily enforced American global hegemony?

[Beelzebud]

35. Am I a PNAC idologue? WTF.

Because I think Bush AND Chavez are pieces of shit, I'm a PNAC ideologue?

I'm not a fascist, and I'm not a communist. I'm a Liberal.

I don't have to buy Chavez's bullshit, and I don't have to buy GWB's bullshit.

[reichstag911]

38. Then why'd you buy...

...the anti-Chavez bullshit? Clearly, you are in the minority here on your virulent dislike of Chavez, and I wonder at the source of that. Is it just because he presumed to criticize "our" empire?

And asking if you're a PNAC ideologue had a purpose: as a rhetorical device, hyperbole, implicitly questioning your "Fuck (the democratically elected and anti-American-imperialism) Chavez" comment. Do you disagree with Chavez' disdain for the American imperium?

[Beelzebud]

108. Chavez is not a good leader.

Do good leaders not allow their press to print negative stories about them?

Do good leaders jail political opponents?

Do good leaders pick a fight with the most psychotic government on the planet (ours)?

Do good leaders go down a militaristic path and sabre rattle with other countries?

This guy sounds more like a Bush republican than any sort of socialist or progressive...

[Catrina]

112. The people of Venezuela disagree with you ~ he's very popular with

his own people and that's all that counts.

As for the rest of what you said, that's just propaganda from the former ruling class that kept 80% of Venezuelans in poverty ~ And the ruling class OWNS the media in Venezuela. What Chavez is doing to counter the all FOX/RUSH version of Venezuelan news it to provide some other media that's not all propaganda all the time.

Chavez did NOT pick a fight with Bush. The Bush administration backed a failed coup d'etat against a duly elected president of a sovereign nation. And for the same reason they invaded Iraq, OIL! The people of Venezuela foiled them. That's what I call 'picking a fight' ~ Chavez says he forgives Bush because he's a REAL Christian, but he hasn't forgotten nor should he.

[1932]

133. Could you give examples of those first two claims?

The rest of your claims are your interpretations of his actions, and we can address those later. But your first two are allegations of facts, and I'm not sure those facts exist.

[bigtree]

31. taunting rhetoric: okay for Bush to question Venezuela's government?

But Chavez can't speak of the decline of American empire? What does American Empire represent to you? To the rest of the world it mostly looks like conquest and domination.

Bush says democracy eroding in Venezuela, Bolivia
http://www.wavy.com/Global/story.asp?S=4934196


Chavez dismisses US concerns on democracy

Wed May 24 ETCARACAS, Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez dismissed U.S. concerns over democracy in Venezuela, saying President Bush is "demolishing" his own country's democracy by spying on fellow Americans and violating the rights of immigrants in the war on terror.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060524/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_us_1



"Sooner or later the US is to invade Venezuela"


It is "funny" that US President George W. Bush has expressed concern about Venezuela and alleged meddling in foreign countries' affairs, Venezuelan Foreign Affairs Vice-Minister for North American Affairs Maripili Hernández said, and considered it a self-criticism.

"Sooner or later" the United States is to invade Venezuela with the aim of grabbing the "most important proven oil reserve in the world," Hernández added.

"We are not talking about now, or today or next month. But sooner or later, the US will require what Venezuela has -its oil- in order to keep its standard of living with such a high consuming level. Willingly or forcefully, they will come for our oil, they will come for us. We must have that clear," she admonished.

When Bush said that intervening in other countries elections is not good, he was probably reflecting on his own country practices, as "US intelligence services have done so in Latin America since last century," the official insisted.

http://www.eluniversal.com/2006/05/23/en_pol_art_23A711117.shtml

[Beelzebud]

33. No it's not ok for Bush to do that. For the record I think both men are

jackasses.

I'm a liberal.

Not a fascist.

Not a communist.

[bigtree]

37. well, the rub here is that Bush is the threat, not Chavez's defenses

against the weight of the U.S.

It's not like they don't have anything to point to which would demonstrate the threat Bush poses to sovereign nations, all in the name of his own regime's definition of democracy. What a farce.

I challenge you to come up with a darker picture of Chavez and his government than I can produce of Bush and his regime.

[Walt Disney]

145. And there is nothing liberal about Hugo Chavez.

But he must be laughing his:rofl: off at some of these so-called Democrats. What was it that Lenin said? Something about useful idiots, I believe.

[AllieB]

150. Was Lenin a Communist or a Fascist?

And what is your ole buddy Hugo today? A Nazi or a Commie?

[PublicRadioVet]

190. WORD!

Too many American democrats and liberals, climbing into bed with fascists and wannabe fascists simply because they share common cause: hating Bush. Sad.

[1932]

196. What has Chavez done that makes you think that?

[AllieB]

198. Please define fascism and how Hugo Chavez is a fascist

it's amazing how the foes of Chavez on DU alternately call Chavez a commie and a fascist, and don't seem to have a grasp of history or any knowledge of Latin American politics.

Many of the people who understand that Chavez was democratically elected are real Democrats, since they have respect for sovereign nations and their democratic institutions. It is not simply because they 'hate Bush'. as you say.

[Warren Stupidity]

43. Actually yes I do think Chavez should speak out.

And Bush routinely uses such rhetoric against other nations.

More world leaders need to stand up and call out this administration. Part of the reason that the Bush regime gets away with its bullshit on an international level, just like they do on a domestic level, is that leaders both international and domestic who know better refuse to speak up and speak out.

[Cha]

101. bush and his posse..

[leesa]

58. Not only OK, but admirable that he speaks up.

I think you like Bush a little more than you're admitting to us.

[Beelzebud]

61. So if I don't slobber all over Chavez, I love Bush?

Get real...

Chavez is no saint.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

97. since you don't slobber over him he's a piece of shit?

?

[bigtree]

22. The alternative is to sit silently by and be dominated

There is a world organization, the UN, which is completely led by the nose by the U.S., for purely self-serving interests, the rest of the world be damned as far as they are concerned.

But, from Venezuela, a sovereign nation, no threat to anyone save their control over THEIR resource (oil) that we so desperately crave here in the U.S.

The Bush regime assumes that Venezuela's resources are their god given gift. Chavez, properly, asserts that they are Venezuela's to use and benefit from as they see fit. Chavez has said he wants to cut off the 60% of their oil business that goes to the U.S. and replace that market with China, by the end of the year.

This is about intimidating the Chavez government into some sort of collapse so we can continue our exploitation there without any respect for the Venezuelans and their support of Chavez.

Here in the U.S. it's always all about us, our needs. Understandably so. But the world's resources are not there for us to pluck out and use at our pleasure. That's irritating to Bush. He needs to hear it daily and often, from those brave enough to stand for their own liberty from the corrupting influence of an increasingly corporatist American government which uses its military as its calling-card.

We should support Venezuela in this without fear of Bush's militarism.

[Judi Lynn]

29. Thanks for making those points. It seems it's hard for the layer of

Infantile, _Bush-like Americans to grasp these vital elements of this situation.

Venezuela, with the people's elected leader, neglected to bow to the child occupying the pResidency, so he feels determined to destroy everyone there who doesn't put _Bush's interests first, before their own, which are wildly important, and long neglected by the former ruling, European descended oligarchy.

What a shame some Americans identify with the Republican idiot pResident, and take offense when world leaders dislike his filthy , dishonest conduct of U.S. foreign policy. My god.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

27. I will now exercise telepathy. Behold.

*Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmm*

You don't actually believe that "our fascist regime" bit. You wrote it to try to lace your post with credibility.

(Cue the theremin)

[Beelzebud]

32. Go back to reality. Telepathy pseudoscience that gives zero results.

Had you read anything I've ever read here at DU, you'd know I call our current fedgov fascist at every opportunity.

Just because I'm not going to kiss the ass of Chavez, should not cause people to question my views on our current crop of idiots we have running our country.

[Phx_Dem]

68. Your opinion of Chavez

is correct imo. There are many others on DU who are not enamored with Chavez, but getting attacked by stating an opinion gets old fast.

[Warren Stupidity]

75. Kiss ass? How about leap at every opportunity to post

missives like 'Fuck Chavez'? That ain't kissing Chavez's ass for sure. Yes it most certainly is reasonable to question the people here who feel compelled to condemn Chavez at every opportunity.

Wait, I haven't seen 'corporate_mike' here yet. What's up with that?

[Judi Lynn]

86. A fine DU'er indicated Corporate_Mike has involuntarily taken a hike!

DU is missing one of it's greatest non-luminaries!

[tkmorris]

170. Mike took a dirt nap?

I was kinda wondering why he wasn't on this thread, echoing the anti-Chavez rhetoric.

[AllieB]

90. There are many more in that peanut gallery too

none of whom ever post anything that makes sense to a rational human being. :crazy:

[redqueen]

143. hahahahaha... i was wondering the same thing...

:hi:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. Well, he is speaking to people who know about crumbling empires.

The once mighty British Empire is now a 2nd rate power with a leader who doesn't yet realize that he's aligned it with another crumbling empire.

[pocket]

36. Go Hugo!

and fuck off to his detractors

[Virginia Dare]

40. Hugo Chavez gives Bush, PNAC and the corporate overlords...

a big middle finger, and I really have to applaud the guy for that. Who else in the world right now has the conjones to do that?

[cliss]

42. Some reasons for Chavez' surliness:

Venezuela has proven oil reserves of 65 billion barrels. It has an additional 1.2 trillion barrels of extra-heavy oil. (more like Play-Doh or tar, but it can be turned into oil).

Venezuela is the 5th largest oil producer in the world.

Venezuela is flush with cash: in 2005, the country made $55.5 billion off of its oil imports. #1 customer: the U.S. The total oil production was 3.2 million barrels per day. We purchased 65 % of that, which makes it US purchases $36 billion.

That's a pretty big check, Bush. I'm sure it has them bouncing off the walls in Washington, too.

Unlike the US which is the world's largest debtor nation, Venezuela is flush with cash. They have a very large trade surplus. (they're not spendind all their dough) which explains why Chavez can do these very specific 'charity' cases, the former Empire Britain and Future Former Empire: the US.

[natrat]

127. fuck him-laughing at us going down-fuck him

and yea all you liberals wont think it's so nice when there's no fucking food in the supermarkets

[cliss]

129. How is that Chavez' fault?

He's SUPPLYING us with the stuff, for God's sake. Without his oil, we'd be in a world of hurt, tonight.

We WOULD be looking at $5.00/gallon.

[DiverDave]

139. Whoa there!

where did that crap come from?
No food in the supermarkets??? huh???
There will always be food in the markets, but most of us wont be able to afford it.
Get your head straight, it aint the president of an oil rich country that will cause the calamity you describe.
It's the president OF OUR COUNTRY that will cause it.
Now, go wash your mouth out with soap...

[bigtree]

141. He's mocking the decline of American EMPIRE, imperialism

colonialism, expansionism, not the decline of the country. He's mocking the decline of the U.S. ability to dominate lesser equipped nations through the force of our nation's military. He's also mocking our efforts to control Venezuela, economically and politically.

If our nation continues to exploit other countries of the world for our mindless consumption without regard to their needs and concerns, then we deserve to fall flat on our faces. What most in America expect is that these countries should be so grateful for American dollars that they should kow-tow to our every wish and desire. But these countries have needs that are not served by our government's arrogant insistence that Chavez and Venezuela hand over their resources according to OUR terms and conditions.

Venezuela's resources are theirs to distribute and use as they see fit. That's what irks folks here in the U.S.; that Venezuela has the free will to turn their backs on the Bush regime and their imperious meddling.

[tavalon]

60. I think he speaks the truth

taunting or not. I still hold onto the idea that through fair elections and rule of law, we can wrest our country back from the brink, the flip-flop I occasionally feel in my stomach reminds me of that first steep drop on a rollercoaster - in other words, those first few seconds when you are beyond the point of no return.

[SpiralHawk]

66. My dear olde Pappy always used to tell me...

"Son, if you go out looking for trouble, the chances are excellent that you will find it."

Thanks for the insight, Pappy. You was right. I knows it now.

[bigtree]

71. Politics is the art of looking for trouble,

finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

Groucho Marx

[dailykoff]

69. Let's see, Hugo's got oil, cash, and growing popularity.

We've got debt, war, and growing hatred.

I think he's right.

[Judi Lynn]

70. It's always worth considering when right-wingers accuse DU'ers of

slavishly adoring leftist leaders the right-wing doesn't like, as they stand up for their own people, rather than allowing American right-wingers to exploit them.

They attack the DU'ers who expect U.S. leaders to act like dignified men and women, and not utter assholes, flinging terms at them like "enablers," and "useful idiots" and "slobbering."

Makes you wonder how it is they arrive at harboring such seething hatred for Democrats. Abnormal, to say the least.

[LittleClarkie]

77. Not exactly what you'd call a diplomat, is he.

Dude has a rather large ego, methinks.

[Judi Lynn]

80. Are you speaking of Chavez or of the man who's sticking his nose into

Venezuelan government, and trying to destroy Chavez, who has been on a constant attack against this democratically elected man since the day _Bush stole the American Presidency?

[leftchick]

81. would that be bush you are talking about?

:shrug:

[LittleClarkie]

87. No, his twin on the left

They can blowhard themselves to death for all I care.

[1932]

134. I bet you wouldn't say that if you read two books:

Aleida Guevar's book which is an interview with Chavez and Richard Gott's book (the revised edition) on Chavez.

[MadHound]

88. How refreshing it is to hear the truth being spoken

Sad that it has to come from a foreign leader. Even worse still is the fact that our leader is aiding and abetting the collapse.

[Balbus]

89. In 3 years, when there's a Democratic president,

and most likely a Democratically controlled house and senate, and Hugo is still spouting with this same rhetoric (which he most assuredly will - he needs the U.S. as an enemy to maintain his power) I wonder what the views on this board will be....

[AllieB]

91. If we keep exercising the same foreign policy in Latin America

I guarantee most people's opinions will remain the same. I doubt that we would bother to stage a coup like we did in 2002 under a Democrat:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,688071,00.html

[Judi Lynn]

92. That didn't happen when Bill Clinton was the President, so we already

know how things could be with a Democrat in the White House.

[bigtree]

93. If our government is still posturing and acting against Venezuela

he, or they, will be correct in what they are saying about U.S. imperialism directed against them.

If speaking the truth about the U.S. maintains him in power, so be it. But, I don't expect a Democratic administration to treat Venezuela and their leaders like criminals to suit some corporatist agenda. If they do they will get the response they deserve. Venezuela shouldn't have to kow-tow to any foreign influence, especially the U.S.

I'd be surprised to find the same hostility between our nations with Bush and the republicans out of the range of influence.

[Minstrel Boy]

121. Please Note: in 2004 Chavez was praising Kerry, and it was Kerry

who was spouting the same tired rhetoric as Bush about Venezuela.

CARACAS, Venezuela (Reuters) - U.S. Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has attacked Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez as a dubious democrat hostile to U.S. interests, delivering a slap in the face to the leftist leader who had portrayed Kerry as a potential friend.

The Kerry statement on his Web site made front-page news in Venezuela on Monday, nearly two weeks after Chavez had publicly praised the Democrat contender, hailing his health care plans and likening him to assassinated U.S. President John Kennedy.

http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/americas/venezuela/1683.html

[bigtree]

124. ". . . his statement also chided the Bush administration

for sending "mixed signals by supporting undemocratic processes in our own hemisphere," saying it had "acquiesced" to a brief 2002 coup against Chavez."

[Minstrel Boy]

125. point isn't Kerry's having it both ways, it's Chavez's praise for Kerry,

in response to the prejudiced conjecture that Chavez would treat a Democratic President with identical contempt.

[Judi Lynn]

152. A right-wing scum who created a right-wing Tampa-based group

of expatriot Venezuelans takes credit for having turned John Kerry on the subject. Here's an open letter he wrote:

Published: Tuesday, March 23, 2004
Bylined to: Curtis Reed


Tampa-based Free Venezuela, Inc: Our goal is regime change in Venezuela

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:39:42 GMT
From: Curtis Reed [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Error: It was Venezuelans in TAMPA

In David Coleman's article "Venezuela's relations with USA to improve if Bush 2 loses election this fall" you stated that Senator Kerry's statement regarding the Chavez regime amounted to "Parroting anti-Venezuelan Miami Herald propaganda."

In fact, the Kerry position statement was the result of the effort of Venezuelan-Americans from the Tampa area who contacted his camp and conducted an education campaign to be sure that Kerry understood what a threat the Chavez regime represents to US interests, regional stability, and how it endangers democracy across the hemisphere.

We have been working constantly over several years to establish good contacts with our representatives, and it was through those contacts that we made direct contact with John Kerry and delivered to him the message you will find below.

We are now in the process of publishing more Op-Ed articles, organizing round table discussions about the Chavez regime, and speaking out on nationally syndicated radio shows. Let there be no confusion: the "Miami Mafia" had nothing to do with this. It was the result of hard work by US citizens and Venezuelan expatriate organizations like FREE VENEZUELA that we influenced Kerry, and we will continue to push US policy until we achieve our goal.

Our goal: regime change in Venezuela.

Finally, let your communist friends know that their propaganda machines are failing, and the tide has turned against the Chavez dictatorship. We have convinced Democrats and Republicans alike that Chavez and his criminal henchmen are the antithesis to Democratic principles.

Have a nice day.

Curtis Reed
(snip)

http://vheadline.org/readnews.asp?id=16656

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I believe either the slime or one of the few members of his group have hounded D.U. consistantly. I believe Windandsea was one of them.

[Walt Disney]

146. Many on this board are not real Democrats,

so their views will surely remain the same.

[AllieB]

151. Speak for yourself

:rofl:

Many of the people who understand that Chavez was democratically elected are the real Democrats, since they have respect for sovereign nations and their democratic institutions.

[tkmorris]

171. Well THAT is certainly true Walt

They are easy to spot though, so fear not.

[Judi Lynn]

184. You bet! They are so easy to spot,contrary to what they seem to believe.nt

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

186. Easier to spot than a forty year old frozen corpse! -nt

[rman]

179. If the US continues foreign policy as it has for the past decades -

pretty much regardless of who was president, then Chavez has as much reason to say then what he is saying now.
But maybe, just maybe, we will see some real change...

[Blue_Tires]

96. ttt !!

[Joanne98]

98. I love this guy.

[Jed Dilligan]

102. Obituary?

Would that it weren't so premature.

[dailykoff]

113. It took 500 years but they're finally getting the beast

off their backs. Maybe Hugo will help Ireland kick Britain out of Ulster.

[Pavulon]

123. about 6 hours

that is the time it would take the CIA to cause his death. Airplane, sniper, knife from his own military. He talks a lot but rules a 3rd world nation.

He is a useful idiot. All his yapping keeps oil up by speculation. He gains his money from selling oil to us. His power comes from dead dinosaurs, they have zero other than cheap labor and nice trees for furniture.

Venezuela is on the list of nations that would collapse with any shift in oil prices. Like if Iraqi crude was to be dumped on the market.

[bigtree]

126. poor yes, but . . .

you just can't keep those Venezuelans down . . .

the fact that the country has a struggling economy doesn't reflect their character at all except in the proud way they maintain their independence. That should be respected, not judged merely by the standards of our own country's relative prosperity.

[Pavulon]

128. I have been there

and loved the people. I am not knocking the population at large.. It is a wonderful, beautiful place. However it is very poor.

I do not talk politics on business so don't have much first hand info.

Their economy is very petro dependant. As is their leader.

[1932]

136. Do you think Venezuela isn't trying to diversify its economy?

You think they're not trying to build up steel and aluminum industries and to add a second level of value-added industries to convert their raw materials into products made in Venezuela? You're not aware that they're also building up agriculture too?

You need to read Gott's book on Venezuela if you didn't know these things.

[dailykoff]

135. About 6 hours, five months, and forty-seven years.

That's the time it's taken the CIA to assassinate Castro since he took power.

Oh wait....

[rman]

174. Chavez want oil at $50 a barrel

If all he wants is to get as rich as possible from selling Venezuelan oil, then why would he provide cheap oil/fuel to the poor in the US and elsewhere?

[Dunvegan]

138. Aside from any of Chavez's rhetoric, the US HAS tried to kill him.

And is probably still (in all probability) trying to "Allende" him to a long dirt nap because of our major dependence on Venezuelan oil.

I believe the Cheney cabal is salivating to "liberate" the people of Venezuela (e.g., like Iraq) and install a puppet government as we have so often in Central and South America.

Guy's at least got a reason to be paranoid and pissed with people like Pat Roberts still calling publicly for his death.

The US has a long history of violent interference in Central and South America on behalf of American business and plantations. We've done the assist and training of death squad that supress resistance to our dictators for many decades.

Chavez is no saint, don't get me wrong.

But neither are any of our many puppet governments we've install hither and thither for a century, on behalf of our wealthiest citizens and corporations in the name of their windfall profits, that have introduced cruel and deadly regimes in to this hemisphere.

There's a good deal of grey here.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

140. Senor Peligro ("Mr. Danger") is Chavez's nick for Bush and . . .

it's the title of a song by Ministry on its new album, and IT ROCKS:

Seńor Peligro
Bush’s alter ego
A family of danger
And that’s his middle name
Invasion is imminent
Keeping down the dissidents
Killing is his business
And business is game

CHORUS
Justification
To Cross the Border
Justification
For Law and Order
Justification
To Cross the Rio
Seńor Peligro

Seńor Peligro
Lost all his amigos
From Chile to Panama
And all points in between
Exploitation
To feed the Corporations
The driving force of any war
Is always based in Greed

Venezuela
Watch your Back
Seńor Peligro is on the attack

Voice Over (Isa Martinez – signed release)
El Presidente el es un Asesino
The President is an assassin
No cambieremos sarge por asete
Tente moriendo por el amor del dinero
We will not exchange blood for oil
People dying for the love of money
Seporladolo es mas gas para el fugeo
Supporting him is fuel to the fire
Prepuese por el Seńor Peligro
Prepare for Mr. Danger

CHORUS

[Walt Disney]

144. Nikita Khrushchev said the same thing.

And we all know how that story ended. It will be no different with this tyrant.

[bigtree]

147. so,

long live the American 'Empire'?

I don't mind rooting for country, it's ours, it's a beautiful place with beautiful and wonderful people. But notions of 'Empire' are nothing but blatent expressions of colonialism. What Chavez is denouncing is Bush's aggression against Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, and covertly, Venezuela.

Nothing there to cheer, defend, or legitimize.

I challenge you to present a factual characterization of Chavez and his regime which in any way rivals one that I can produce of Bush and his regime.

[Walt Disney]

154. I’m not here to cheer or defend boy george; rather,

I am here to criticize the fat-fidel-wanna-be from Caracas. I know, his friends fidel and mugabe say that he is not a dictator.

The say you can learn quite a bit about a man by observing the company he keeps.

[bigtree]

156. Yet, these are still not enough to justify the muckraking and criminal

meddling in Venezuela's affairs.

The Bush regime makes these you mention amatuers in their subversion of the electoral processes, the rape of sovereign lands and resources, and in their murder of innocents in the course of their manufactured war.

Despite how we may feel about Chavez, Bush's (our nation's) aggression against Venezuela is the real threat to the people and their liberty. All in the name of oil. I don't know how folks here in the West can be so strident about the foibles and shortcomings of other countries and their leaders. Most in the world are scrambling to adjust to the U.S. induced race for dominance and economic influence through conquest across sovereign borders.

Very few, if any, of Chavez's faults rival the threat from Bush's reckless militarism - a good deal of that militarism, in fact, directed at Latin America and Venezuela.

[AllieB]

163. "fat-fidel-wanna-be from Caracas"

You haven't given any hard evidence that Chavez aspires to be like Fidel.

What is your background that gives you such expertise on both Venzuela and Cuba?

[Warren Stupidity]

149. You mean there is hope the Bush Cabal will fall?

Great news!

[Walt Disney]

155. On January 20, 2009, America will have a new president.

There is no doubt about that, my friend. However, Comrade Chavez has revealed his intentions to appropriate a 25 year term for himself.

No matter, for he is just another in the long line of populist demagogues that we have seen before. And he will be dealt with as before.

[Judi Lynn]

157. Why don't you provide proof he intends to grab 25 years for himself?

It would be better if you explained what "And he will be dealt with as before" means. We're not mind readers here. As it stands, that statement makes no sense at all.

Are you saying _Bush will concoct another coup?

What makes you think Democrats would find this interesting? Democrats didn't approve of the first coup.

On edit:

You won't be able to confuse many DU'ers with your Venezuela comments. Right-wing US presidents have ALL pursued a vicious path in their policy toward Latin America for decades, and it has cost hundreds of thousands of lives.

You're never going to be able to convince anyone sensible that the people of Latin America deserve to live under the boot of idiot American right-wing monsters who see them as inferior beings who can easily be slaughtered with no sense of responsibility whatsoever.

We KNOW so much better than that, and Democrats DO so much better than that.

[Warren Stupidity]

158. By getting re-elected in fair and open elections that are

closely monitored by international agencies? Elections that, unlike our own, actually meet international standards? More power to him. Appropriate would be the wrong term, comrade disney, but I think you knew that. Yes indeed, Chavez seems to fit the FDR mold, and we all know what happened to comrade franklin. Keep catapulting the bullshit though, and welcome to DU.

[nick303]

159. It's not accurate to say he wants a 25-year term

He has said everything short of that on this matter.

[Minstrel Boy]

160. Please read, and please learn:

Associated Press Falsely Portrays Chavez as Seeking 25-Year Term

Monday, May 08, 2006

By: Justin Delacour - Latin America News Review

A little scrutiny of a recent Associated Press report about Venezuela provides a lesson in how the English-language press often gets the story wrong. Take the first sentence: "President Hugo Chavez said Saturday that Venezuelan voters should have the chance to decide whether he should govern the country for the next 25 years."

No, such a referendum would not be about "whether he should govern the country for the next 25 years." A referendum would be about whether Chavez would be permitted to run every six years and --in the event that he were to continue winning elections-- serve multiple presidential terms. The AP report's opening sentence makes it sound as if such a referendum would do away with elections in Venezuela, as if its intent would be to grant Chavez a new 25-year term in office! The website of The Calgary Sun even titles the wire report "Chavez seeking 25-year term"!!

This is obviously an extremely poor piece of reporting. Chavez made it clear that, if the opposition committed to participating in the upcoming presidential election, he would not convoke a referendum to end presidential term limits. He explained that the intent of his threat to convoke such a referendum was not to perpetuate himself in power but rather to defend the Bolivarian Revolution. Fortunately, Agence France Press (AFP) got the story right. The opening sentence of AFP's Spanish-language report reads, "Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez claimed Saturday that, if the opposition decides not to run candidates in the December presidential election, he could decree a referendum to permit his reelection for multiple terms until 2031."

...

When Venezuela's opposition knows it's going to lose an election, it has a tendency to try to delegitimize the electoral process. Instead of facing up to the fact that it is unpopular, the business-led opposition tries to shift the blame for its electoral misfortunes to the National Electoral Council (CNE). The opposition claims that the CNE could commit "fraud" and that the vote might not be secret. Opposition conspiracy theories of this nature are legion. Never mind that there have been international observers on hand that have testified to the fairness of Venezuela's elections. Never mind that even the opposition's own polls show that Chavez is much more popular than they are.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1723

[Judi Lynn]

161. Some posters apparently can't get it no matter how many DU'ers

EXPLAIN the news to them. Unbelievable.

Thanks for posting that helpful information. Maybe some of the slower ones will finally "get it."

[AllieB]

162. Some people just can't think critically

they've been indoctrinated by the mainstream media and are victims of our crappy educational system.

[rman]

178. you're either misinformed or you're lying

Chavez proposes a referendum to extent term limits if and when the opposition boycots the elections.
If the people don't like it, it won't come to pass. If the opposition does not boycot the elections, it won't come to pass.

Leave it to the "liberal media" to spin it to suit the agenda of their corporate owners.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

166. Tyrant? Perhaps to the oligarchs who have been in power.

[PublicRadioVet]

167. A few reasons why I dislike Chavez

“I hereby accuse the North American empire of being the biggest menace to our planet.” -- Hugo Chavez

“If they don't comply with the contract ... we can do whatever we want with these aircraft, whatever the hell we want. Maybe we'll give 10 planes to Cuba or to China so they can study the technology,” -- Hugo Chavez

"Socialism builds and capitalism destroys.” -- Hugo Chavez

So, Chavez skips right over North Korea and China and the Islamists, and goes right for the American throat, eh? Yeah, the "American Empire". I am an FDR/JFK style liberal, and thus I grow nauseous about the misuse of the word "empire" where the United States is concerned. Do we meddle too much in world affairs? Yes. But which country is always there with the most aid and the most financial and military and humanitarian assistance during a crisis? When the tsunami hit Indonesia, a nominally Muslim set of islands, was it the Islamosphere, or evil Empire America, that sent the mercy fleets loaded with supplies and clothes and rescue choppers and desalinization technology?

Hugo, please pull your head out, bro. You better pray a natural disaster does not hit Venezuela any time during your little thug revolution. You will feel mighty dumb coming to the U.S. with hat in hand, asking for assistance when it becomes clear that you cannot manage the crisis by yourself with your Latin neighbors.

Also, I take issue with any world leader who makes threats of intentionally sharing U.S. technology with communist states, out of pure spite. No, I don't expect Cuba to suddenly become a big threat, technology or no, but it's the principle that counts. Fidel Castro's Cuba is a sworn enemy of the U.S. and vice versa, and China is still a nominally communist state with dreams of matching or beating the U.S. in the world power game. That Chavez would gladly assist them, strikes me as a threat. And I don't like people who threaten my country.

As for the black/white analysis on socialism and capitalism, I am probably risking a flame war by stating that I am not a socialist, nor am I infatuated with the socialist model. Controlled capitalism, warty and problematic as it can be, is still the superior model in my opinion. Mainly because Socialism (capital S) becomes a project of diminishing returns, and perhaps Hugo needs to go see how France and Germany are doing these days before declaring the socialist path to be a tip-toe through the tulips.

[bigtree]

168. His first complaint about American Empire is correct

He's not talking about country, he's referring to Bush's imperialist military expansionism which threatens Venezuela and others.

The rest is Venezuelan politics. Venezuela is no threat to the U.S. or its neighbors. Yet the Bush regime threatens Venezuelan democracy with their attempts to oust Chavez. Why don't they butt out?

With all of the criticism against him, Chavez is much less of a threat to Venezuela than Bush and his mindless hunger for conquest.

As for natural disasters, those affect Venezuelans, and the U.S. will always be there for them, despite the political spite some may have for the government there.

The rest is politics. I don't see how Americans can be so critical of the governments in other countries when our own is the world's greatest danger under the leadership of Bush.

[rman]

175. Well, he's right isn't he

Who would disagree these days that "North American empire is the biggest menace to our planet"?

Breach of contract is breach of contract, even if the US does it.


What's with your hypocrisy regarding China? US corporations love doing (and in fact do) all kinds of business with communist China, yet you think Venezuela shouldn't? wtf

Socialism in Venezuela is a mix of socialist policies and free market policies - it's not that Chavez is creating a state-controlled everything economy.
And certainly his socialist revolution is improving conditions for the majority of Venezuelans; those who became poor under the capitalist era that went before.

[1932]

194. FDR and JFK wouldn;t agree with you

check out post 190.

[jerry611]

169. Chavez has diarrea of the mouth

I wonder what Chavez's true intentions are. Sounds as if he is trying to instill some kind of fear, hate, or paranoia in his population.

The way he keeps spewing this anti-American nonsense just smells like something is fishy.

If Chevez doesn't start watching his step and what he says, the CIA is going to knock him off. He's insulting a lot of very, very powerful people.

[tkmorris]

172. "He's insulting a lot of very, very powerful people."

About time someone did, don't ya think?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

187. By that reasoning, DU shouldn't exist. -nt

[rman]

173. Looking at the history of US foreign policy in Latin America,

Chavez has every reason to be paranoid.

[AllieB]

188. So you think it's OK that the CIA knock him off?

They already tried:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,688071,00.html

Do you think it's OK for us to interfere with the government of a democratically-elected President who poses no threat to the US?

[PublicRadioVet]

191. When Chavez is still "President" in 10 or 20 years...

...having long since dispensed with that pesky thing we call Democracy (something the evil American Fascist Empire still functionally practices, I might add) will you all still be defending Chavez as a brave hero of The People?

[Minstrel Boy]

193. oh yeah?

"Democracy (something the evil American Fascist Empire still functionally practices, I might add)"

Chavez, unlike Bush, honours his nation's constitution.

[1932]

195. What about Ven democracy do you think is less functional than US's?

[PublicRadioVet]

199. When Chavez is still president in twenty years...

Then we'll know. Chavez strikes me as the kind of populist who loves touting democracy, until it's time for his term to end, and then suddenly he'll be changing the law and finding ways to install himself permanently, For The Good Of The People.

Bush is going to get thrown out of office, either via impeachment or, probably, via the 8-year limit.

Does Chavez even have a term limit on him right now?

[1932]

200. You know that's what right wingers said about FDR?

What's informing your feeling about Chavez?

"Striking you" isn't what I'm looking for. I'm looking for facts that inform your opinion.

(By the way, Venezuelan presidents are term-limited by the constitution (and the consitution has a process for amending that rule, just like the US) -- I'm surprised that you didn't know that; or I should say it's always interesting when people talk about how things "strike" them about Chavez without really knowing very much about Venezuela or Chavez.)

[Judi Lynn]

201. Having things "strike you" is a variation on the claim by a couple

of previous posters that they didn't know what it was (hence no useable LINKS to information which supported their views) but they just had a "gut feeling" about Hugo Chavez. The "gut feeling" probably came from embarrassment about not having any information whatsoever to uphold their preposterous, idiotic, propaganda-derived, uninformed points of view.

[AllieB]

204. it's the equivalent of 'Some People Say'

All perception with no facts.

[Minstrel Boy]

202. Chavez: "The U.S. people are our brothers"

"One day the decay inside U.S. imperialism will end up toppling it, and the great people of Martin Luther King will be set free. The great people of the United States are our brothers, my salute to them.

"We must start talking again about equality. The U.S. government talks about freedom and liberty, but never about equality. They are not interested in equality. This is a distorted concept of liberty. The U.S. people, with whom we share dreams and ideals, must free themselves… A country of heroes, dreamers, and fighters, the people of Martin Luther King, and Cesar Chavez."

link

All here who prefer empire to republic, please, bring it on.

[bigtree]

203. nice piece

clearly Chavez distinguishes between our fascist government and their militarism, and his respect for the American people. His critics would like to blur those distinctions.

Obligatory plug:


Cooking Up A New Cold War

by Ron Fullwood

http://www.opednews.com