Moonraven:

Whatever Hugo gives, it's not really free. I'll take that statement back....

Turk:

Please explain. What free cool stuff?

If only Chavez was president of our country, we would get the really cool stuff for free! I hate when anti-greed policies make me sound greedy....

I believe I corrected the misinformation about the number of proposed changes--but on the previous thread.

Chavez has more than six months left of the decree window, so certainly will pass the most important changes--the ones with the most social implications. He will not try to change term limits nor state of emergency provisions.

Daniel David,

As a resident here in Venezuela I can participate in local elections and find the process very secure unlike voting in the USA and the hanging chads. Plus with my gray hair I usually get ushered in to the front of the line.

One correction, Chavez proposed 33 reforms and the assembly the rest with the vote being divided in two blocks. We only need to look at his passed record, on housing, healthcare and food programs like Mercal to see the path he will continue to follow. When I walk to the local Mercal I get a kick out of seeing the expensive vehicles of the upper class parked outside.

I predict some of the reforms such as sexual discrimination, expanded social security and work week reduction from 44 to 36 hours, will be pased by decree allowed by the constitution.

moonraven,

Indeed you do have the right to demand what you will of politicians and speak anything here. That's the beauty of these opinion sites.

I do, in fact, need to keep working for the Democrats because we have the Supreme Court to think about here.
There are many many good reasons, really, but that one is enough alone for me.

Daniel:

Sorry, but for this bird one bad apple is all it takes. More to the point: It's my perfect right to demand that politicians behave themselves. Cutting them slack is what has allowed all the bad apples to take over the orchard.

I have seen nothing good from the Demos SINCE 1962--and considering we are talking 45 years of bad apples and wars in Vietnam and double-talkers a la Bill Clinton, I am not buying their b.s.

If you choose to do so, that's your funeral.

moonraven,

I do hope you have a better rationale for not liking Democrats than the fact you were disappointed (in 1962, no less) by one who was late to speak at a meeting, then dirty and hungover. Some of your writing shows a lot of depth, but if that event of less-than-important status is still shaping your opinions of a whole party and its platform, then the words "good grief" come to mind. As for your "sending the Demos packing with him", you should be aware that's all in your head. You didn't send anybody anywhere. The Demos are still around for about half the voters here.

1. funeocons: You lost me when you called Chavez the Kucinich of Venezuela. That's a very gringo-centric comment, and I find it both untrue and highly offensive. Chavez operates as a major player of great moral substance, not only in Venezuela and Latin America, but around the planet. He is a hero in the Middle East--ditto in China, Russia and India.

2. Eric Barth--the reason that electronic voting machines were designed and installed is the AMOUNT OF TIME it takes to count paper ballots manually. I see no reason to return to that system, when the machines in Venezuela print a paper receipt. The quality of the paper is absolutely irrelevant here, as they are not going to be used as business cards--only randomly audited.

The paper ballots used here in Mexico have a way of going up in smoke before they are even counted....Just saw that in local elections in Michoacan State, where the night of the election a group of masked men charged into the offices and held guns on folks while they burned the ballots.

I used to have an accounting service back in the States--and I always explained to folks why there was such a system as "double entry". I single entry system simply has zero controls.

3. Daniel David: I can't share your enthusiasm for the Democrats. I was a Young Demo for about 3 months in the fall of 1962, until I read the riot act to Washington's longtime senator Warren Magnuson--who showed up as the featured speaker for a breakfast an hour late, dirty and hungover. I sent him packing, and basically sent the Demos with him. I voted Democrat in 1972--against Nixon, and because I was living in Massachusetts, which was the only state to go for McGovern.

I believe that Gore Vidal is right: The US political system consists of one party, with two right wings.

4. Cassandra: You can't send me anything directly. This is an "anonymous" forum. But I can tell you one thing: Chavez is not the one behind food shortages in Venezuela. Five years ago, when the chain stores closed as part of the sabotage against the government, he sent the army in to "liberate" a couple of big distributors--and the stores re-opened.

I think he should do that again. Now.

5. Unionguy: Excellent points about the big copper companies in Chile. Nixon/Kissinger overthrew Allende at their request. The big companies always run the show in US politics. Right now it's petroleum companies and arms manufacturers/dealers (H Clinton has the backing of those arms folks--so is NOT EVER going to seriously consider withdrawal from Iraq and an end to making war around the planet--she is a war whore.)

There is nothing inherently wrong with re-election. Most European governments permit it, and take a look at how long some of our own senators have served. I disagree with the 7-year term Chavez was pursuing. I would support perpetual re-election for 4 year terms, but 7 years decreases accountability. Anyway, I despise presidential systems in general because they make policies more difficult to pass, especially the policies that help the poor. Venezuela is lucky because the left controls all branches of government. That situation won't last forever. The worst part of presidentialism, however, is that it poisons politics by turning campaigns into manly contests for power.

Eric Barth I must agree that all that are interested in this thread might want to get a copy of:

Pirates of the Caribbean (not captain jack)Tariq Ali

The monster will fall if we all push together!

Solidarity

unionguy,

Thanks for your posts, and not just because you've been kind to me. But THANKS for bringing specifically items about union perspective and union history. That is a very, very important part of "progressivism" and not enough people here are talking about it.

I was never a union member, but rather was a hired controller in a privately-held and non-union manufacturing company for a couple of decades. The owners there saw to it that I was sent the "Chamber of Commerce" view of everything---all the publications---and it was there that I developed respect for unions.
I ate lunch with the boss in a "staff meeting" every day and had to hide the fact I was a liberal at heart.
The owners there were a pretty fair and honest bunch, but staunchly anti-union. I wasn't, but it was an existence like "don't ask, don't tell."

Keep writing. You do it well.

Check out TheRealNews story on this vote:

http://www.therealnews.com/web/index.php?thisepisode=83

This is a two part video interview with the Editor of the website VenezuelaAnalysis.com, Gregory Wilpert.

Unionguy; Informative post. How many Dems say they will abolish 'Taft-Hartly'?
The only really pro-union (which means pro-worker, for you non-union folks) candidate is Dennis Kucinich. Most are disingenuous.

I remember reading about international war criminal Henry Kissinger and his buddy Pinochet. and what happened to the miners here and in Chile.

Reagan busted the Professional Air Traffic Controllers union, and in the next election, got plenty of votes from trade unionists. ??? You know the story.

Ignorance is not bliss, is it?
A fellow unionguy.

I think Chavez' intentionality is that the Bolivarian Revoloution should have no term limits i.e. that the reactionary elites in Venezuela wouldn't succeed in their counter-revoloution in the near future and reinstall the government that collaborates with the Washington consensus.
But I share DanielDavid's wariness about a highly charismatic leader who may become monomaniacal. I'm sure you're all familiar with Lord Acton's hackneyed warning, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Hackneyed, but a fundamentally true statement about human nature. The revoloution is for, by, and about the people. It was their intervention that saved Chavez from the 2002 Washington-sponsored coup attempt. Let's hope he never forgets that.

Moonraven and A Part... thanks for the links. Found a lot on counterpunch that is very interesting. The all-in-one referendum was a mistake - as was asking for no term limits, although that is the norm in many First World countries... while wanting term limits for governors, mayors, whatever. Too much to swallow in one bite.

Glad to see so much discussion about Latin American affairs - too many Americans know nothing abou the rest of the world. Also, I always expect to find US intervention behind 'student protests' - kids are easy to stir up since many are so idealistic. And we all know the US stirs up trouble in any country that wants social progress - that would set a bad example for the world!

Moonraven; Thank you very much for reporting 'from the field', rather than like the armchair speculators who have never been there. In spite of the obstacles from within and without confronting Chavez everyday, he has initiated many positive programs for uplifting his fellow citizens. We in the US should be so lucky to have a president as good as Hugo. But Americans have been taught to worship billionaires and multi-millionaires and not the common good for all citizens. Greed and selfishness is our national motto.

As far as voting, the United States is in no position to question any other nation's voting practices. And the majority of Americans could care less about political actions by their own government as they are more concerned about sports and entertainment.

Nobody is perfect, but Hugo Chavez, as well as Evo Morales are lighthouses of truth and justice on the dark sea of deception and corruption.

This has been a positive discussion, for the most part.

While I strongly support Chavez Bolivarian Revolution, as well aas the other forms the fight for economic and social liberation the working class and allies forces of that area at taking, it is clear that Chavez/has folks, made a tactical erro, that of overreaching, in pushing such a wide referendum at this time.

However, Chavez clearly is at the head of the forces of democracy, economic and social liberation in Venezuela. Their victories are also, whether we all realize or not, victories for progressive forces here. Their setbacks will also affect us negativeley, as well. One of the best examples I like to use (as a steelworker and long-time union leader/activist) is that of Chile. The Arizona copper mines are organized by the USW here (Steelworker Union, formerly the left Mine, Mill Smelter Union, before that merger). They are Anaconda & Kennecutt corporation mines.

During the 60's, our folks here struck, when the contract ran out, over the increasingly bad conditions at our mines here. In Chile, where the other major Anaconda and Kennecutt mines were, production was increased by the companies, and our union members in the southwest fought to a standstill, returning to work after 6 monthes with little changes.

After Allende, the Popular Unity (with Socialists, Communists, all Chilean Unions as part of that govt.), was overwhelmingly elected in Chile, the mines there were nationalized. Anaconda and Kennecutt lost their ability to shift production and isolation U.S. unions. Another USW strike was called, after the latest contract experied. It lasted only two days! Major gains were achieved both for U.S. unionists, as well as for the Chilean people.

However, a short time later, the CIA, with Pinochet and the corrupt Chilean generals, drowned theat govt. in blood. Anaconda & Kennecutt were quickly rewarded by having their mines returned to them. Soon after that, those companies launched an all-out union-busting campaign, shutting down the mills. The USW was broken in Arizona, and these historic mines (where the great labor film "Salt of the Earth" was made) are still being run as scab mines. Both U.S. and Chilean peoples have been horribly harmed.

However, when speaking of "overreaching," at this time. I think those spending their time attacking Mr Daniel, should study tactics a bit! Some have spoken about folks being "sell-oouts" for voting for the Dems, I would submit, with out any understanding of or program for, changing our nation. While it is certainly true that both parties are corporate based parties, they are hardly "exactly the same." Bush and the ultra-right clearly have shown their colors, and they are mean!
Truely outright anti-people, anti-labor, pro-war and anti-democratic. Bush's GOP rule has been marked by attacks on all people's gains, union-busting, wars without end and rolling back of all democratic liberties.

The political system in our nation is clearly a stacked deck, with the two corporate parties in total control. The next president will be from one of these parties, as will the entire congress/senate. I would very much like to see a real left, labor-led political party as part of that equestion, but it WILL NOT BE in the upcoming election. (& I do not define the 'Greens' as a left, certainly not a 'labor-based or Af Amer based, polititcal party). Without those main forces for change, not real new party can emerge that can have any real influence.

Meanwhile, the Dems, while, yes, also corporate-bassed, is hardly "exactly the same." First of all, there is a progressive wing, represented by Kucinich, Sherrod Brown, Conyers, Delumms, Wellstone, before his death, and many, many others. This wing, especially, is closely tied to labor and the Af American community, women amd the wider progressive and peace communities. Further, either the D's or the R's will win, period, and a massive well-organzed people's movement is growing, preparing for the '08 elections, fighting to elect the Dems. This movement is multi-layered, fighting for labor rights, pension rights, housing, democratic rights, for peace and for the monies spent on war be spent on health care, etc, at home, for universal health care. It is a multiclass movement, with a wide gerth, mainly center/left, but certainly with corporate elements of even the ruling class. At this time in history, this is the kind of movement, huge/wide, with wide, but mainly positive influences, that can break the hold of the ultra-right on our govt. This is the fight for the vazst majority of the American people. We arrogantly stand on the sidelines at our own peril.

Meanwhile, there are some here, that stand aside from the vast people's movement, yelling sell-out, as though that, or 'voting Green,' could in any way possibly affect our nation's political outcome next year. For any serious progressive, fighter for social justice, the electoral arena must be an arena that we use to win gains, isolate the worst, ultra-right, corpoate elements. A Democrat sweep next year, even with the many, many warts attached, will be a huge, a massive victory for our people, for the people of the world! for anyone that thinks that the election is in any way a end of struggles, then you have the worst of illusions. But that victory can give the people's movement an historic opportunity to fight and win peace, democracry, labor and pension rights, and prosperity. But only if we fight!

Just a final wrd on history. Both Lincoln & FDR were compromise candidates. They were at the beginning attacked by some in the abolishtionist movement, and the wide people's movement of the '30's respectively, as being "too conservative." Actually, they might have been that, had the wider movements not continued to fight for economic and social justice, forcing those governments to move in a positive direction. Theelections of Lincoln/FDR just made it possible for the people's movements to win!

Winnetou and Moonraven

Thanks for your comments. I wholly agree with someone else above that one of the most valuable aspects of CD is the participation we have here from folks like you who are not living in the USA and can bring in other important perspectives.

As for me, I generate a lot of "heat" advocating for Democrats, but occasionally some "light" too by drawing others, such as you, to jump in with added depth for the discussions rather than just a bashing session. I am probably naive to a fault, still believing in the conventional "left", and it is because I believe we can come nearer pushing real progress past Democrats than past Republicans, or past a mixed bag of gridlock. I am a progressive at heart, just skeptical of the America I know being able to get people like Ralph Nader into power. I'm going to keep asking for Democrats, then ask for citizens to scream the progressive agenda into their ears once they're there.
In other words, I believe the Democrats may be maleable, but I know the Republicans are not.

As for Hugo Chavez, kivals (above) may be right that losing the "reforms" will keep him alive and perhaps working hard for his people without losing his head literally or figuratively because of "absolute" power.

Without commenting on how Chavez would act had he won the referendum—because no one knows that—I can understand why some of the posters are advocates of term limit. With vote rigging and election stealing that has recently been done in the US, can you imagine more hanky panky and Bush as lifetime president? Wow! I bet if that happened, most of us would probably commit suicide. The moral of the story: term limit is damn good FOR THE USA.

I find it amusing that even the Canadian press accuses Chavez of wanting to be a dictator because he wants the right to run for office as long as people elect him. In parliamentary democracies this is the norm.I have not read this in any article written on Chavez.How many years was Blair in charge of England without the majority of votes,Howard in Australia or Canada's current Prime Minister,all won with less than half the cast votes and could continue to run indefinately and win with well under half the cast votes.George Bush won twice by losing.

I am a US leftist who was very happy to see Chavez lose this last vote and submit to the will of the electorate. No other outcome could have been more helpful in preventing an assassination attempt by covert operatives of the US government. Sometimes Chavez shows more courage than he should, as he must have known that winning the vote would most likely lead to martyrdom. Is that what he wants?

I think it is obvious that Venezuela's voting system trumps ours in its reliability. They should have 100% paper ballots, however, and get rid of all the electronic machines. That should be our goal in the U.S. A good way to cut through all the garbage put out by corporate media about Hugo Chavez is to read Tariq Ali's PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN.

Daniel David,

Most of the time I don't agree with your postings, but I applaud your insistence and 'stubbornness' in the face of a sometimes 'hostile' blogging environment. That is exactly what any democracy needs.

I live here in South Africa and here it is not the right-wing that is known to move like a 'mob' politically with whole masses uncritically following where ever the 'leader' tells them to go, but it is the left that behaves in this way. In my opinion, what is the value of being left-wing if that is not your own choice, but you got there just by following and uncritical thinking ?

I do think your posts are intelligent and well-articulated and I sincerely hope that the Democrats win the next election and that the Republicans will be decimated (preferably with only a few senators and congressmen left).
But I also hope that the Democrats will feel the heat from a strong left-wing party like the Greens and that they will start to 'feel' that they are being watched by an angry and impatient electorate. In a democracy, the politicians should fear the electorate, not the other way around.

That is why I mostly do not agree with your 'campaigning' for the democrats. Building a progressive movement has a much higher priority in my view and that is what the majority of Commondreamers are actively doing by supporting Third parties and building a real democracy in the U.S. 'Winning the elections for the Democrats' is just a bit lower on the list of 'must-do's'.

Hugo Chavez is no dictator, but he is a huge force in the struggle against the Washington Consensus. He has taken on the system without edges, the one so ubiquitus that they say this is just the way life is -- there is no changing it, we've hit the pinnacle - the end of history. Chavez brings the message to his people that No! We do not accept this - we have struggled for 500 years and try as they might to exterminate us, we are still here. And now, we are organized, we are educated, and we are empowered and they will never rule us again. We do not accept that we are to be the perpetual slaves and subjects of the north.

He turns the American mythology on its head. His speeches last forever because he tells the story of the struggle for the last 500 years (no notes, quoting everyone under the sun) in just about every one of them. He shows the world that there are alternatives to the neo-liberal model that only returns wealth to wealth. He constantly reminds the people that he works for THEM, that this is their government, and that it is not about him.

So when people say things like "power grab" and "cult of personality" I just don't get it. He has an incredibly powerful presence and he inspires a whole nation - or rather nations who have felt like there was no hope for centuries. He is adored - and rightly so, but he is also very down to earth. He has literally risked his life for the cause, been arrested and jailed for it, been kidnapped and nearly assassinated on numerous occasions. Sounds like fun, huh? Wouldn't you just love to do this for life? No, he is so committed to the vision of a strong, thriving, united planet that he will give all of himself for as long as the people want him. He is the Kucinich of Venezuela.

The si or no/up or down vote was a tactical error - especially if social transformation is the real goal.

I say si to a 6 hour work day!

I say si to the natural resources being controlled by the people!

I say si to pensions for home makers and street vendors!

etc, etc, etc!

Like many others, I'm wary of the cult of personality and founders syndrome.

The Left the world over must learn how to build, cultivate and turnover leadership.

In spite of having to put up with trolls and appeasers, I agree with dip67. This site is a wealth of information and critical thinking. It is a relief and pleasure to read so much intelligent, thoughtful discussion and know it still exists in our country. I also appreciate the input from people in other countries. We really need viewpoints "from the outside". Information wise, for Americans dependent upon corporate media for news we are living within an iron curtain. It helps to hear what people on the ground are observing.

Moonraven, your input is especially informative.

PUBLIC SERVICE announcement: Theres been a masacre in Omaha, Nebraska....like Columbine and the recent massacre in Finland, the killer was a teen on antidepressants:

'Breaking story:

'A friend of Hawkins told KETV that Hawkins had been on antidepressants, staying with friends and bouncing from job to job.'

http://www.cbs46.com/news/14783006/detail.html

Will this aspect of story receive more coverage?

Story:
'OMAHA, Neb. -- A teenage gunman who some descibed as troubled and others say was funny opened fire in a busy mall near Omaha Wednesday, killing eight people before turning the weapon on himself.

Five others were said to be wounded, two critically.

The shooter at Westroads Mall was identified by the Sarpy County Sheriff's Office as Robert Hawkins, of Bellevue, Neb., TV station KETV reported.

Hawkins had been arrested on at least two misdemeanors in November and was due in court this month.

Sarpy deputies said they were getting a warrant to search Hawkins' home.

Shortly after the shooting, Hawkins' mother walked into its office with a note that "could be interpreted as suicidal," the sheriff's office said.

KETV reported that the note left with the Sarpy sheriff's office said Hawkins wanted to "go out in style."

It also reportedly said Hawkins was "going to go out and be famous."

Yost said Sarpy County is working with Omaha police.

A friend of Hawkins told KETV that Hawkins had been on antidepressants, staying with friends and bouncing from job to job.

Staying With Friend

KETV reported that it had talked with a woman named Debra, at whose home Hawkins was staying. He was apparently friends with Debra's sons, and she offered her home to give him stability.

She was quoted as calling Hawkins, who she called Robbie, a troubled kid who had recently been fired from a job at McDonald's.

Deborah said that she believed Hawkins stole the gun from his step-father.

Debra said Hawkins was coming out of his room Wednesday morning when she last saw him.

"He said he'd gotten fired and was pretty upset and said, 'This is the only way,' and we tried to talk to him," Debra said. "He was just a very troubled -- I had no idea that he was this troubled."

Debra said she saw Hawkins with a gun Tuesday night and thought he and her sons were going hunting, which they did quite often.

'Anything But A Terrorist'

Another friend, Andrew Bigler, said that Hawkins was "an awesome kid" and that he loved him like a brother.

"Robbie was anything but a terrorist," he said, and said he didn't think Hawkins was filled with anger, just that he was an average teenager with average problems.

Other friends told KETV that Hawkins was a funny person who liked to make others laugh.'
etc

'If Hugo Chavez was Jesus Christ, it wouldn't matter.

The local oligarchs and their plutocratic masters in the US would still dis him.'

remember what DID happen to Jesus Christ!

On a side point. voting technology. The machines described here--touchscreens with paper trails--actually are inferior to other voting technologies.

Optical scan machines are much better. They are used along with traditional paper ballots, which are generally made of harder paper stock and thus are much easier to maintain and to count (either in audits or in recounts) than most of the paper used to accompany touchscreen machines. Touchscreens usually are retro-fitted with printers that produce grocery store receipt type things, which do not "wear" well and are very difficult to handle in recounts/audits.

But the 54% audit is fantastic! Wow, with that kind of serious auditing, you can really have some faith in your results.

Sigh. Accurate vote counts are almost as "quaint" as the Geneva conventions, aren't they?

Do check out today's article by James Petras, a sociologist, professor emeritus from Binghamton U, who has researched, in depth, Venezuela. Here is the link: http://www.counterpunch.org/petras12052007.html.
He writes exactly why there are shortages of foodstuffs in Venezuela, why Chavez lost, why many things are occurring as they are in that country.

If I could, I would trade our Harper, free of cost, to Venezuelans who would rather have authoritarian corporate government, for Chavez. I rather like the idea of being able to directly vote for issues that will affect my future.

By the way, our leaders can stay in power forever if their party does not lose,they do not retire, they do not die of old age, or if they do not lose a non-confidence vote from either their own party, or on a parliamentary bill that does not generate enough support such as the budget (usually a major cause for non-confidence, though the prolonging of troops in Afghanistan may do it sooner).

Why not have a referendum on impeaching Bush/Cheney?

Moonraven:

I can't remember where to send you to read things directly, but I have read pretty reputable reporting on food shortages and believe they exist.

I have also read interviews with oppositionists who claim, if you carefully parse their statements, that shortages are deliberately being created by opposition elements. They blame the government for "creating a climate" in which producers, not consumers, are hoarding and cutting back food production.

The US mainstream media is for the fools. I have long put it in the can and flushed them down the toilet.

The absurdity of equating abolishing term limits and declaring someone president for life can be simply illustrated.

If the U.S. abolished presidential term limits next week, would Bush be president for life?

Only if someone assassinated him before 2009.

Here's the problem. With U.S. newspapers saying reforming the infant (less than 20 years old) constitution would make Chavez president for life, can we doubt that the opposition-owned press and TV were doing likewise?

If the reform package was defeated because the voters thought they were defeating something other than what was actually part of it, how much respect should be paid to the result?

If people want some over-arching background on how the US behaves with respect to our neighbors to the south, read Howard Zinn's "People's History of the United States." It is an eye opener and I guarntee you'll never believe again our govt's opinion of any leftist leader in South or Central America.

I just assume if our Media is bad mouthing anyone, they are more than likely doing a great deal to help their people at the expense of the ruling oligarchy and multinationals.

The two things I liked best about this article were: touch screen voting with a paper receipt and a 54% random sample to verify that the count is statistically accurate.

American polling surveys use a much smaller sample, even the census uses a much smaller sample to statistically correlate results. Viva Chavez, viva Venezuela, viva Bolivarian Socialism!

I had a woman this summer that wanted me to make her a trellis and some furniture . She correctly told me that ipe (a SA hardwood) was pronounced e pay not i pay, for she was from Columbia .I laughed and admitted she would know better than I in that case.
Then I said Columbia huh ? There are some good thing going down in SA. She then went on about bashing Chavez.

You know I never did the estimate on that work...

workreno: Right on!!!!

This is 1 gringo in favor of "The Bolivarian Revolution".From all I've read and studied of it and other peoples movements they will remain with us unless the fascists kill every free thinking man ,woman and child on the planet.(and don't think they haven't given that several attempts.)

"You really haven't been a virgin for so long it's ludicrous to keep up the pretext...
You've slept with all the big powers in military uniforms
and you've taken the sweet life of all the little brown fellows...
Being one of the world's big vampires. Why don't you come out and say so like Japan, and England, and France and all the other nymphomaniacs of power.

Langston Hughes addressing his country from "A Power" Zinn

Seems as though the bourgeoisie are always calling foal.This time because they may have to limit there shopping sprees to Miami.

Viva Chavez Viva Morales

Thanks to all this and yesterdays Chavez thread have been very informative (for the most part)

Rebel:

I used to be a journalist in the US--quit that when I left for Mexico 15 years ago.

In that 15 years I have seen journalism in the US sink to simply licking the boots of those in power.

And anyone who does try to speak the truth is drummed out of the corps. Dan Rather is a good case in point--more years as a credible MAINSTREAM jornalist than most folks in the US have lived--and bounced out on his ear.

He is suing the bastards, of course--but even if he wins the money will only buy him a nice coffin--not his reputation back.

Moonraven: Thank you SO much for your input. It is all so informative and seemed relatively unbiaesed. Bravo!

Another observation: Just like in American politics we expect every candidate to be perfect in every way. Yet we do not vote for the candidates that truely represent us. Chavez may not be perfect, but at least he seems to be representing his people instead of the corporations and the rich. Can we give the criticism a rest and give him a chance? How about we do the same thing here in the primaries? How about rewarding those that that stand up for the people?

Lets give democracy a chance.

rumiluv,

What mechanisms do you have to stop them?

They have always done it.

I am finishing a thorough account of that, a new book by Luis Suarez Salazar--unfortunately in Spanish only--Un siglo de terror en America Latina--cronica de crimenes contra la humanidad de Estados Unidos.

It only goes from the turn of the twentieth century forward....

However, in the 1820s, Simon Bolivar wrote: The United States appears destined to plague America with misery in the name of freedom....

That was right about when the Monroe Doctrine was unilaterally promulgated.

Wow. what a fantastic discussion. The critical thinking, the information, and the speaking truth to power -- no wonder I keep coming back here to escape from our corporate media's mind-numbing, one-note approach to most important issues.

There were times when exciting changes were afoot in this country. It seems like you have to go SA these days to get a whiff of not only vibrant media but actual democracy.

Viva Chavez!

In a memo dated Nov. 20, Michael Steele reportedly working in the US embassy as a "regional affairs officer" lays out a plot to CIA Director General Michael Hayden. The plot, "Operation Pliers", which included an $8 million US-funded in country propaganda campaign. Aside from the merits or demerits of the referendum, do we want our government interfering like this in sovereign nations (don't forget the coups in Venezuela and Haiti), and spending our tax $ in the process while our debt flies through the roof, and health care, education, public housing, transportation, etc. degenerate?
The memo is discussed at length in counterpunch articles by James Petras and Dave Lindorff

machi,

I am not living in Chile nor am I a chilena but I remember very well the order given to the CIA by Nixon when Allende was ELECTED:

"Make the Chilean economy SCREAM!"

They do the same shenanagins over and over--not so much for lack of imagination, but because folks are gullible and buy into it.

I just wiggle and giggle, reading all this.

If Chavez decided to send some oil money, just because, to the Trans-Nationals' bankers in New York and Dubhai would he get a better image from the MSM?

Pregunta un Gringo inocente.

Daniel David:

I know a fair amount about Latin America in general because I live in it and also give presentatations about it--with emphasis on Venezuela, Mexico and the history of agrarian reform projects--here, in the US and in the Middle East.

Most of the information that I posted about the second Señora de Chávez is available if one does a careful search in Internet and is relatively fluent in Spanish.

But the point I want to make is that I am ALWAYS skeptical when it comes to politicians. When Chavez was elected I was very skeptical--partly because I am pretty well-versed on the results of governments headed by military men--and by ex-military men in the part of the world. I was also writing about the phenomenon of CAUDILLISMO here, and I thought that perhaps Chavez would make a good, current chapter.

When I am skeptical it is not my habit to jump into INternet and start shooting off my keyboard. I have the habit of investigating--and doing so on the ground. So I have made several trips to Venezuela, and have had several useful conversations with Chavez, among other folks.

I suggest that you might want to consider doing something similar to clear up your doubts.

Hugo Chavez has been a good leader for the people of his country. He is also human and capable of both good and bad ideas. His people felt this was a bad idea - case closed. If you believe in democratic rule you must applaud the fact that an informed public has made it's will known and the leader respects that (if somewhat grudgingly). Bu$h the inferior could never do that.

"Powerbook" wrote: Or the fact that it's getting harder and harder to get certain foods, like milk and eggs, for instance.
It would be a surprise if this was not happening; in Chile, my country, this was a very effective tactic used by CIA in order to upset people's mood. I guess they are using big distribution and retail chains, just like here.
By the way, it's interesting to see that the anti-Chavez coalition has the same composition of the anti-Allende's one: Oligarchy, Cristian Democrats and US Government.

Lots of funny comments, hay gringos muy divertidos :-)

armybrat: the site venezuelanalysis.com has extended information on the 69 proposed changes to the Constitution--and in English.

OK I get it. This discussion is about how Americans perceive Chavez, not about what he's actually doing here and now. Sorry, I promise I won't say another word.

Uribe, along with Saca in El Sal, are just Bush's narco buddies as Noriega is/was his dad's
impeach and hang in public
you USA people are just so ignorant

revolution coming 'sheeples'

12 million hispanics with guns
wake up time

Hello. Does anyone know what else was on the ballot? Did all the changes get defeated? Or doesn't anything else matter besides term limits? I've googled several terms and can find nothing so far on my own - anyone have any information? I thought there were some 60-plus items on the referendum, but didn't hear about anything except term limits! Is this the limit of our attention?

Gosh, what a spittin' contest. Onto the subject (I think).
I don't know a lot about Chavez or Venezuela. A lot of what I've read sounds good on the surface. But I liked his efforts to help American's in need of heating oil a couple of years ago. So I tried to send him an e-mail thanking him since my president was not being so gracious. I sent it to the Venezuelan embasey e-mail address listed on their web-page. I got a message that there was no such address. I don't think the Venezuelan Embasey changes their e-mail address a lot. Around the same time there was a lot of talk about Venezuala being a terrorist state. I haven't heard anything about the Venezuelan Embasey being closed but it wouldn't surprise me.
Now about this Danial David guy or whatever his name isn't. How DARE he advocate for the Democratic Party. The nerve of some people!

powerbook, bligh and daniel

Don't you guys get it.

If Hugo Chavez was Jesus Christ, it wouldn't matter.

The local oligarchs and their plutocratic masters in the US would still dis him.

Last, in 1989, when a supposed social democrat was in power, Perez, he laid done a harsh IMF-dictated austerity program on Venezuela's poor majority.

The sizable number of Venezuelans protested these vicious austerity measures; many were shot down by the "democratically" elected government. The number killed has been est. up to 2,000. Many times that number were wounded and left to cure themselves on the streets.

How did the Venezuelan oligarchs respond to both the harsh attack on the standard of living of millions and the execution and wounding of thousands? Did they evoke a continous anti-government campaign, did elite students protest, did the mostly oligarchy-owned MSM complain?

How did the US MSM, political elite, pundits, etc. respond? Was there a concerted campaign of outrage? Did the CIA, US Embassy, NED, etc. get involved in a concerted effort to make these murderers answer for their "dictatorial" methods?

Forget about it! Nobody gave a damn among the Venezuelan elite, middle classes and the US plutocrats. It was a job well done.

Today, Perez lives in comfortable retirement in Miami. Guess who pays his bills?

Hugo Chavez and his supporters in the military emerged and gained power in RESPONSE to the callous and historical indifference of the local oligarchy (and middle class's) to the plight of the impoverished majority.

DAB, please don't be too sure that I'm not skeptical of a British Prime Minister running too many times. At least there, though, they have that Parliamentary "no confidence" vote thing to maintain a check on power.
I don't think that was part of the Hugo Chavez plan.

As for hoping Mr. Chavez will succeed, with success defined as progressive progress for Venezuelans, not just a power grip, yes, I hope for that.

But posts like the one from "powerbook" just above should give us some reason to be skeptical.

Moonraven, you evidently know more about Hugo Chavez's former wife than I do. But, evidently, the voters there (barely) agreed with her warnings about him.

Powerbook:

You have slightly changed your posting name but you are the same person who cried wolf on this site when I was posting to it from CARACAS in June.

I have lived for 15 years in Latin America (Mexico), am bilingual English/Spanish and spend quite a bit of time in Venezuela. So I KNOW what life is like there--at least in the working class barrios of the city. I do not frequent Chacao.

Your inflation gripe shows a real lack of historical knowledge about the region you supposedly live in--where in some countries such as Peru, inflation hit the MILLIONS during the first term (1985-90, I believe) of the current president, Alan Garcia. Inflation has been well into the THOUSANDS in many other Latin American countries. And it happened when their economy was NOT booming from a dynamic private sector and high petroleum prices!

The inflationary figure shows TWO things:

1. Venezuela's having a boom, and

2. Venezuelans, historically VERY dedicated SHOPPERS, are shopping again like mad.

In short, the inflationary figure for the highest performing economy in the region is absolutely NOTHING to worry about.

As for the much-trumpeted food shortages, you may want to consider that:

1. many folks have been hoarding because of the recent violence provoked by the opposition since they remember December 5 years ago, and

2. the folks who own the grocery stores and chains are not chavistas, but opposition members trying to provoke social unrest.

Also, I heard all over this site and others in June when I was THERE about shortages--and I saw ZERO shortages. I had no problem whatsoever buying ANYTHING in the Candelaria--which is not a high-roller barrio. There is a lot of disinformation circulated in Internet, and frankly, YOU have been part of that.

I HAVE heard that there have been some soldiers involved in selling food across the border in Colombia--but have not seen proof. Four years ago at this time I was told in Santa Elena--a few kilometers from the Brazilian border, that soldiers were doing a brisk business selling cheap gasoline on the other side. I didn't see it happen, but Santa Elena has a sort of frontier-town lawless ambience and it could have been happening.

I think there is a real lack of maturity in Venezuela. When I can't buy basic items in our mercado in the village where I live in Mexico (where a president was IMPOSED rather than elected last year) I do not immediately run out and complain that the president--spurious though he is--is at the bottom of my inconvenience.

Yet, every time I have been in Venezuela I have heard middle aged women in corner tiendas complain because coca cola (!!!???) had gone up slightly in price because of Chavez.

Was this vote a single up-or-down vote with all the proposed changes lumped together? I didn't find a site that spelled out exactly what was on the ballot, other than those 'term limits' - of which I am also very leery. Anybody have a good reference for me (preferably in English)?

What were some of the other major changes, and why were they rejected?

You Chavez fundamentalists are living in a fantasy world. You see, for you, Chavez is just a symbol
that represents an ideal, so whatever he says or does, doesn't actually affect you directly,
unless it has to do with oil prices. For us Venezuelans, he is a daily reality that affects us directly
big time. So, you can talk all you want about the apple, but we are the ones actually tasting it. Big difference.

If you want to know the real Chavez and the real Venezuela, why don't you stop talking and come spend some
time here with us? You would then know the other side of the story, so to speak, like the fact that Chavez said on
national television today that the opposition had won a shitty victory, his words, not mine. And maybe you will wonder
why we have the highest inflation rate in Latin America: 18,5% so far, expecting to reach 21% by the end of the year.
Or the fact that it's getting harder and harder to get certain foods, like milk and eggs, for instance.
Or maybe you will wonder why the vicepresident and other high government officials drive brand new Hummers and Audis.

But you don't have to believe me. Just come here and start thinking for yourself, for once.

Apparently Daniel David would be an opponent of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He was basically "president for life' once elected.

One little detail, I don't think I've ever heard Chavez say he wanted to stay in office without further elections.
Instead, what I've heard was that he wanted the term limits removed. In other words, he wanted to do about what
FDR did, keep getting re-elected to the Presidency for as long as he wanted the job.

Mr. Daniel David:
Are you skeptical of a British Prime Minister seeking to run for prime minister indefinitely? I am sure you are not.

Had Tony Blair not followed the bush-follies, he would still be in office today. President Chavez simply wanted to have a similar system.

The American media has brainwashed Americans so much that the average American sees President Chavez as a pariah, which he is not.

Thanks to the absence of balance and credibility on the part of the American press, people now rely on Al Jazeera, The Guardian, Asia Times, etc to get a true balance on matters of international import.

We need a leader like Chavez to straighten out the mess we got going here. Universal health care, nationalizing energy resourses. Rigged election, false flag domestic terror [9/11]. The same creeps who did 9/11 have got their fingers into almost every country and institution you can imagine. We have to clean it up not just for ourselves but for the rest of the world too. Our country is so screwed up by now it's hard to tell where to begin.
We definitely need a third party and a way to keep it from becoming corrupted.

Contact your local Board of Elections and ask them to buy this voting equipment. This is what the
U.S. needs.

What is the name of the company that created this system? Please post if you know.

We don't have to reinvent the wheel, we just need to locate it and insist it
be put in place here.

This thread has way too much name-calling and foolishness, in my opinion.

Probably the most bogus example of argumentation so far is the reference by Daniel David to Chavez' exwife, Marisabel Rodríguez's comment that Chavez should not be given too much power.

How many of the folks on this site who are divorced came to that legal status amicably?

I did. But I suspect not many others.

Marisabel Rodriguez may be a perfectly nice person--but from what this poster has seen of her she is unstable and she was really disappointed that the guy she married didn't start right off feeding at the public trough and cutting deals with the oligarchy.

When her then-husband refused to accept the presidential salary, and created a foundation to receive it--for the purpose of university scholarships for poor young folks--she had a rude awakening.

She apparently wanted a burocrat who took weekends off and flew her off to exotic spots on vacations on the taxpayer's Bolivar.

She was conflictive as hell, and at the point of the divorce became actively involved in a religious sect and ran around speaking in tongues (sounds like the religious right is also making inroads in Venezuela--and not just the Catholic religious right).

Be that as it may, I fail to see why her comment should have the slightest weight when discussing geopolitics.

Hell hath no fury, etc....

If DD chooses to be "skeptical", that's his perfect right. But show us a substantial argument for skepticism if you want us to
take you seriously, DD.

I for one have had enough personal experience of Chavez to see him as a real breath of fresh air--a nd not just here in Latin America, either--but around the planet!

Daniel David,

"As for Democrats, they're sometimes dumb, but the best hopes we have. Your 'real change' stuff with long shot candidates sounds good, but never happens in real life America."

Hey, I can agree with you now! Our real change stuff never happens in real life America because we believe Democrats are the best hopes we have. Well put!

You're funny, Tijuana. Hugo Chavez is doing in Latin America what we've been doing all over the world, without the military and CIA invasions and assassinations. He's spending money in his region to promote independence from US, world Bank and IMF policies that bankrupt these countries. He's attempting to develop a regional alliance that is independent of US hegemony. Horrors!

Tijuana,

Here's a little proof. You don't even have to believe Chavez, take it written and direct from the CIA... er, I mean, the "US Embassy".

http://www.counterpunch.org/petras11272007.html

Can I have a link from you now that shows "...proven meddling of Chavez in internal politics of Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Peru, and probably Mexico..."?

BTW, speaking of our buddy Uribe in Columbia, I don't think anyone here has mentioned yet that he too has very similar proposals in the pipeline to remove his term limits. How many US MSM articles can you find that accuse HIM of wanting to be "dictator for life"? Hmmm, wonder what's the difference?

Amy Goodman on all "opinions" having equal weight excerpted from CD website:

"The Dubious Mr. Dobbs"

by Amy Goodman

"Truth matters. History and context count. 'You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts,' the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously observed. CNN's Lou Dobbs has migrated to a pre-eminent position in the debate on immigration in the U.S. Since he identifies himself as a journalist, he has a special responsibility to rely on facts and to correct misstatements of fact. CNN, which purports to be a news organization, touting itself as the 'Most Trusted Name in News,' has an equally strong obligation to its audience to tell the truth."

Nuff said.

the limit on the term of u.s. presidents was the oligarchy's response to FDR's overwhelming popularity and his enmity towards the oligarchy. application to current dicussion is left to the reader.

In Canada and Great Britain the Prime Minister continues as Prime Minister as long as his party retains power. No term limits and so far so good. Am I missing something?

"President of Columbia didn't help his cause"

You mean the guy who has well known ties to drug cartels and death squads? Who's former campaign manager was busted in the US with pounds of drug making materials, who had his cronies in government (and not a national vote like Venezuela) change the law to let HIM run indefinitely, who's cousin is under arrest for connections to drug cartels (along with 15 members of his party), who has presided over hundreds of murders of unions activists (one of his death squad buddies, days before he met with him, captured on camera, released a "communiqué" that said the squads would be targeting union leaders) and only prosecuted a handful, I could go on forever. Yeah, he wouldn't help his cause getting into it with THAT guy.

Honestly, the US presidents might articulate things in kind ways but the underlying logic of their polices are usually much more scandalous than people in the US realize. Maybe Chavez should work on how he articulates his points, I just don't think polite articulations make discussions about issues as vital as economics or social relations polite or proper. I can tell you, in an indirect way, that I am going to bomb you and steal your oil (maybe I'll call it self defense, "US interests" and say I regret the decision to go to war) and you can call me the devil. Which, in the end, is worse?

Friends, I take strong objection to the use of perjuritive, nasty terms when debating. I, also, do not agree with Mr Daniel's formulation. However, what entitles the first one answering him to refer to Daniel as "Mr. sellout Democrat?" I've found many of Daniel's comments quite positive, well thought out. For the life of me, I can't see what your nasty and negative, argumentative tone adds to our discussion.

Please knock it off!

Meanwhile, I do strongly agree with those that have taken issue with the idea of term limits being somehow democratic. The 'term limits' movement in our nation was the brainchild of corporate think tanks, trying to unseat long-held pro-labor, Democratic seats. Someone mentioned FDR. To my way of thinking, at least, FDR represented the best we are able to do in this system. His New Deal reforms aided working and poor folks here, and he was consistantly re-elected, by wide majorities.

Chavez, and his Bolivarian movement, clearly overreached in this referendum. I'll wait and see what the workers, comrades and friends involved, on the ground in that fight say, before I draw any hard and fast conclusions.

However, some things we do know now.

First; Chavez has been elected, re-elected and won elections, by increasingly wide majorities, since coming on the electoral scene in Venezuela.

The reason for his wide popularity is that he, his movment, have represented, in both word and (especially) deed, the poorest of Venezuela, the workers and indigenous peoples, long held in servitude there. Chavez govt. has nationalized the oil of Venezuela, (the source of the conflict with Bush and his corporate cronies), and has used that wealth, for the first time in the history of that nation, for the people of Venezuela. People have been fed, unions given rights to organize freely, health care was brought into poor folks' communities, children fed, clothed and taken care of, etc.

It is actually this, certainly any lack of "democracy," that has brought down the wraith of our nation's corporate media.

Far from playing any positive or "democratic" role, U.S. military, political and media forces all joined together to support the ill-fated and illegal military coup against Chavez elected government. The people of Venezuela, however, had the last word, raising up en masse to support their democracy and their elected government.

This is far from unusally, as corporate U.S. forces have invaded many Latin American nations, organized facist military coups in others, all in support of corporate wealthy elites and multinational U.S. corporations. This was true, for example, in Guatemala, where U.S. forces overthrew the elected govt. of Jacoba Arbenz. They overthrew the elected socialist govt of Allende in Chile. Nicaragua, Uruaguay, Brazil, Greneda, Jamaca, Domincan Republic snf Argentina suffered similiar circumstances, not to mention Cuba. Tese illegal, immoral invasions had absolutely nothing to do with democracy, and everything to do with keeping corporate profits high by murdering, torturing and supressing movements of poor and working people for justice in those nations.

Meanwhile, I believe that we need to look at the so-called "news" in our own nation very closely, reading between the lines. As the Iraq debacle, as well as this week's announcement that Bush/Cheney have been lying about Iran for over three years, eloquently shows, our's truely is the CORPORATE media. It is here not to inform, but to mis-inform! When they call Chavez a dictator, we really, as progressives, need to look much closer. It is a responsibility of ours. The corporate media uses these code-words, or attack words, to build a base for war on democracy in other nations. Those wars don't help us any more than they do folks in those nations our forces invade. We will both ultimately lose if we don't pay attention.

Finally, in reference to the brother that stated that the "far-left" would never win elections if it weren't for the right-wingers here. While I understand where you're going, you should really read your history.

First, I take exception to the term "far-left." The corporate media called civil rights workers 'far-left,' and anyone left of Eisenhower was termed 'far-left' during the McCarthy peeriod (and actually for some time after). Workers organizing unions were called 'far-left.'

In other nations, every progressive movement for social justice, against corporate rule, is termed 'far-left' by our corporate media.

In terms of the ability of the real left, and progressive formations, to win elections overseas, it has been pretty darn resilent, even while faced murderous attacks from armies of the rich, supported by the U.S. government.

Jacoba Arbenz won in Guatemala in '52, but was drowned in blood after US invasion. The progressive Mossadeyeh won eelction in Iran, only to be overtrown by US & British secret services. Allende won in Chile, but was murdered by the CIA. Jedi Jagan was elected in Jamica, but pushed out by the US, as were progressive elected governments in Greneda and Domenican Republic. A mild social democratic, elected govt in Brazil was drowned in the US-supported "Coronels Revolt." Greece, France, Spain and Italy have all elected popular unity governments, only to have them smashed by outside, corporate interests.

No, I really do not agree that the left can't win. In fact, the exact opposite has been should time and again to be true. The left, the progressive and people's movements, are extremely popular in all corners of the earth. If left to hold truely honest elections and set up governments of their own choosing, most nations would have progressive, left governments now.

Good points, Rebel Farmer. I think what sunk Chavez was not the term limits part, but all the other bells and whistles. He was trying to clean house, but it placed a huge amount of power in the executive branch, and who knows what someone else down the road might do with that. You know, like we have here now, except that ours wasn't given, it was taken.

There's a lot of anger between progressives and Democratic party apologists. They blame us and Nader for Gore and Kerry. But Gore and Kerry did that to themselves, they ran lousy campaigns, and refused to challenge the outcome. Gore tried to be selective about the recount and actually prevented an investigation into voter suppression, and Kerry folded like a wet rag even before the count was complete. It made me wonder what was going on; no Republican would have given up so fast. Remember the Washington state race for governor? But the fact is, most of the Nader voters wouldn't have voted for a Democrat in any case. As far as I'm concerned, they're both scumbag parties.

So, we have to put up with the likes of Daniel David trying to convince us to vote for Democrats where they will use us and betray us. He makes me think of a siren trying to seduce us into sacrificing ourselves to a capitalistic feeding frenzy.

Well, I never said Venuzala was a dictatorship. In fact, I'd like to add that there is no real Left in America, just a fake "Left" whereas in Venuzala, at least there's some attempt at putting the progressive ideology to work ! Instead of merely throwing stones at rightwing thinktanks and institutions, the Left should SHUT THE FUCK UP and BUILD THEIR OWN THINKTANKS AND INSTITUTIONS AND PUT THE PEOPLE'S PROGRESSIVE IDEOLOGY FIRST !

Well, back to Venezuela. I think that Mr.Chavez may have been his own worst enemy. With his statements of "I want to be President until 2050" and "Until I am nothing but bones" I think he scared even some of his most loyal supporters. This along with his ridiculous spat with the King of Spain " I'll nationalize the Spanish banks unless he apologizes" and with the President of Columbia didn't help his cause.

"Chavez and other leftists would never win an election anywhere if it wasn't for the US government's extreme right wing politics. The further right the US gov. moves, the more fearful third world voters are of the US. The extreme left is seen as the only way for them to survive in a world dominated by right wing US politics."

This is so ignorant I don't know where to begin. US liberals, in power, are no different on foreign policy and economic issues than conservatives. Could it be that Venezuela was one of the poorest countries in Latin America (despite it having endless natural resources), with access to education, healthcare, food and housing horrible and their election of Chavez and support (overall) of his policies be a reflection of THAT? No, couldn't be. Listen, capitalism works well for certain countries, it works horribly for everyone else. In a world with finite resources, when you have the developed countries consuming as much as they do (and consuming the resources of the countries that are poor) you leave little for the rest. The means to that end is the financial markets and people have been rejecting the IMF, World Bank and capitalism as a result of this. This is why you see a leftward shift not only in Latin America but here as well. Chavez could go away tomorrow and if the economic system stayed in place you'd have the same support for the same type of change that you see today. If you want someone to blame for this situation look in the mirror. You supported candidates who back this economic system and you have a lifestyle that negatively effects people in the developing world. Until that changes there will be many more Chavez's and I think that's a good thing.

So, would you say that your views are in keeping with the spirit and views of CommonDreams?

Why are you here? I don't find that your generally "centrist" views--fairly in line with mainstream illusions from Israel to Latin America are enlightening or diverse. It is the same old shit that unquestioningly buys into the manufactured consensus that finds us in messes like Iraq. And we took alot of shit from the likes of you, questioning our patriotism, accusing us of not "supporting the troops", or being purists for not supporting politicians who capitulated time after time after time while blaming Nader, chastising Cindy Sheehan, championing the Clintons, marginalizing progressives.. Let me tell you, we were Right--Nader was right--and we continually are proven as Right--so you should be lining up with us--and not demanding we follow your disasterous course.

I don't know Vern, is "kneejerk pablum" whatever you disagree with? One mans truth is anothers "KP"!.

Bligh ~ I wish that all would appreciate diversity of opinion! Some would rather you march in lockstep with the crowd and do not have your openness to discussion and debate. I'm more in the independant mode and see the wisdom resident in all political directions rather than hate the right and love the left, or visa versa. In my opinion; Idiots reside in both directions!

youbetterwork,

Sorry they subjected you to "incoming". It's not unusual here. Mentioning my name, except in a scathing criticism of something I've written, is considered politically incorrect at Common Dreams, because I usually do plug for the Democrats. Some imagine I'm addicted, or paid off, or just a meanie of some sort. My apologies, really.

Okay folks, it's time to stop banging heads here and get back on topic. Let's stick to the facts, shall we?

As I see it:

1. Chavez asked his people to vote to eliminate term limits just like in many democratic European nations. He was asking his people if they wanted the opportunity to vote for him in the future if he was doing a good job for them. He was not asking them if they wanted a dictator for life. He was asking them if they wanted to lift term limits, period.

2. From the article it appears that Venezuela has a much more transparent and better voting system than the US. I wish the US could emulate the good things about the Venezuela system. Looks like it is better representative of the people.

3. The US government and its representatives of both parties seem to prefer dictators or leaders in other countries that they "own". Hence all the interference.

4. The MSM is not telling the truth or the facts about what is happening in Venezuela or about Chavez.

Why is the US hell bent on getting Chavez ousted? IMHO, "its all about the OIL stupid"! And what do you think our government will do if they can't control the government in Venezuela? Does Iraq and Iran come to mind?

Diversity of opinion? Or parroting the deliberately spun conventional wisdom?
Many of us are here because we are sick of spinning our wheels with what could be considered equivilant to those who vote against their own economic interests.

What is so diverse about the same old uncritical, kneejerk pablum?

Youbetterwork

Hang in there. Some of us like a diversity of opinion.

youbetterwork, you wandered into the crossfire of a longstanding difference of opinion. Daniel David is well known on this site for cling to the Democratic party - "my party, right or wrong". You know, sort of like the loyalty alcoholic family systems maintain.

Well, yobetterwork, if you are going to fire a shot over the bow...better be prepared for incoming.

It amazing to me--all this whining about chavez when he actally took it to the vote despite the oppsitional media and CIA meddling, yet our own Congress whines their hands are tied when it comes to our own president's abuses of power and war crimes.

And you sanctimonous so called reasonable (reasonable to whom?) Centrists (the center of what?) wonder why we don't bow to your scare tactics and proven losing DLC framing of the NeoCon illusions.

Give me break--you are way off course other than clinging to the mouthpiece.

???

What?

That doesn't even make sense. I don't watch Fox news. I do have a job. My login name refers to the song by Ru Paul, something of a gay anthem. And I still don't understand the vitrol... I suppose I'm just in the middle of some long standing comment war carried over from some other story... I'll just move along.

youbetterwork--or whydonyougetajob--must view everything within the realm of electorial politics as presented by Fox news.