Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Chavez Wins Reform Vote in Venezeula
CARACAS, Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez won a referendum to eliminate term limits Sunday and vowed to remain in power for at least another decade to complete his socialist revolution. Opponents accepted defeat but said Chavez is becoming a dictator.
Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez gestures as he leaves the polling station after voting on a constitutional amendment referendum in Caracas, Sunday Feb. 15, 2009. Chavez, already a decade in power, is trying for a second time to win the right to seek re-election far into the future with a referendum Sunday. (AP Photo/Howard Yanes) Fireworks exploded in the sky and caravans of supporters celebrated in the streets, waving red flags and honking horns. Thousands of people gathered outside Miraflores Palace, where the former paratroop commander appeared on a balcony to sing the national anthem and address the crowd.
"Those who voted 'yes' today voted for socialism, for revolution," Chavez said. He called the victory - which allows all public officials to run for re-election indefinitely - a mandate to speed his transformation of Venezuela into a socialist state.
"Today we opened wide the gates of the future," he said. "In 2012 there will be presidential elections, and unless God decides otherwise, unless the people decide otherwise, this soldier is already a candidate."
With 94 percent of the vote counted, 54 percent had voted for the constitutional amendment, National Electoral Council chief Tibisay Lucena said. Forty-six percent had voted against it, a trend she called irreversible. She said turnout was 67 percent.
At their campaign headquarters, Chavez opponents hugged one another, and some cried. Several opposition leaders said they wouldn't contest the vote.
"We're democrats. We accept the results," said opposition leader Omar Barboza.
But they said the results were skewed by Chavez's broad use of state resources to get out the vote, through a battery of state-run news media, pressure on 2 million public employees and frequent presidential speeches which all television stations are required to air.
Opponents say Chavez already has far too much power, with the courts, the legislature and the election council all under his influence. Removing the 12-year presidential term limit, they say, makes him unstoppable.
"Effectively this will become a dictatorship," Barboza told The Associated Press. "It's control of all the powers, lack of separation of powers, unscrupulous use of state resources, persecution of adversaries."
Voters on both sides said the referendum was crucial to the future of Venezuela, a deeply polarized country where Chavez has spent a tumultuous decade in power channeling tremendous oil wealth into combating gaping social inequality.
Chavez supporters say their president has given poor Venezuelans cheap food, free education and quality health care, and empowered them with a discourse of class struggle after decades of U.S.-backed governments that favored the rich.
"This victory saved the revolution," said Gonzalo Mosqueda, a 60-year-old shopkeeper, sipping rum from a plastic cup outside the palace. "Without it everything would be at risk - all the social programs, and everything he has done for the poor."
Chavez took office in 1999 and won support for a new constitution the same year that allowed the president to serve two six-year terms, barring him from the 2012 elections. Sunday's vote was his second attempt to change that; voters rejected a broader referendum in December 2007.
Venezuela's leftist allies in Latin America have followed the model. Ecuador pushed through a new constitution in September and Bolivia did so in January. Both loosened rules on presidential re-election. Nicaragua's ruling Sandinistas also plan to propose an amendment that would let Daniel Ortega run for another consecutive term.
Associated Press writers Fabiola Sanchez and Christopher Toothaker contributed to this report.
- Posted in
62 Comments so far
Show AllThis is SO sad for Venezuela and in fact for all on the left, like me.
Get that jerk out of there. Any socialist revolution worth its salt can work without the 'cult of personality' of its founder. Chavez is overdue for a retirement. I'm not totally against the right, but when someone like Chavez abuses the privileges granted to him by a downtrodden working class, it breaks my heart. That jerk should retire, if he believe in anything on the left.
Right - the truly democratic move would be to disregard the will of the people as demonstrated by their direct vote on this issue.
Until a candidate comes forth that will be able to successfully advance the goals of the revolution, he is willing to continue to serve and the people will be able to continue to vote for him. Don't forget the resources and tricks (including the NED, CIA, and the Republican party) that the opposition has available to them to take over and undo all the progress that has been made. A Hugo Chavez may only come once every couple hundred years -- it's no surprise they aren't ready to let him go.
This argument would be forceful if it weren't for one very inconvenient fact.
Chavez wrote the changes.
The only thing that legitimizes this is that the people did certainly vote for them.
But to imply that these changes were demanded by "the people" is untrue. They were demanded by Chavez and the people gave him that power.
This isn't like the Reichstag giving up it's law-making perogative to Hitler. It is more like our own House and Senate caving in to the Imperial Presidency.
I do not care whether that caving-in comes from the right or the left, I consider it a bad omen.
This was a referendum, NOT a vote by millionaire Senators bullied in secret and already terrified at the possibility of being defeated at the polls if they were deemed insufficiently eager to beat the enemy.
The US poses a far greater danger to Venezuela, to any country with oil, than any terrorist group poses to the US. So the comparison between the people of Venezuela with the plutocrats of the US is wholly invalid.
He may have written the changes, but he did not use "signing statements" nor executive orders like G.W.
"left, like me" "believe in anything on the left"
This commenter couldn't possibly be a right-wing troll, could he/she? I personally don't know any progressives/liberals/radicals/socialists who would phrase something like that.
It would be interesting to see what could happen in Venezuela if U.S. money, the CIA, the NED, provocateurs and jackals would butt out. Suggest visiting the country -- Global Exchange offers an excellent opportunity to hear both sides.
http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/americas/venezuela/
Here is a direct quote from an indigenous woman we met who was part of a Venezuelan project designed by a small group of people who applied for and received a grant from the government (i.e., with revenue from their country's oil) to build a health and education center: "We are finally part of the discussion, finally being heard. We feel full of life."
The Chavez supporters we met are not nearly as hung up on his personality as were his opponents. Most supporters said that he was an enabler, a tool for bringing about change. His opponents, however, focused like a laser on Chavez himself, most exhibiting a seething hatred for the man.
Wrap your mind around the notion that the resources of our country actually belong to and could benefit all of us instead of a few elites. Citgo, the oil company owned by Venezuela, was the ONLY company that responded to a plea from U.S. Senators for low-cost heating oil for the poor in the U.S. after oil prices rose in 2005. Exxon, with profits unprecedented in world history, couldn't be bothered.
http://vocuspr.vocus.com/VocusPR30/Newsroom/Query.aspx?SiteName=Citgo&Entity=PRAsset&SF_PRAsset_PRAssetID_EQ=111849&XSL=PressRelease&Cache=True&SubMenu=Releases
"The Chavez supporters we met are not nearly as hung up on his personality as were his opponents. "
It doesn't matter. This smacks of 'cult of personality'. Whatever left Chavez is 'birthing' in Venezuela should be smarter and more grown up than that, given the time he's had. Is it a movement or a man? For the good of his movement, he should give it up. Trying to retain control of it is, frankly, pretty corporatist.
I believe in corporations. There's a place for that kind of overwhelming control. That place is just not at the head of a government. That's a little TOO much control. Chavez is treading a very fine line here, one that leftists have wandered into with as much disregard as rightists, particularly in Latin America. He may be finding it impossible to remain out of power, and in that case, what's good for him will ultimately be tragic for the people he pretends to speak for.
EVERY politician requires a cult of personality. Say, like, Obama? Of course, they all do. That is HOW they get elected.
...and elected... and elected ...
"I believe in corporations. There's a place for that kind of overwhelming control."
Like with our self-styled 'first CEO President' (2001-2009, R.I.P.)?
Your colors are showing, "Lefty." :-)
"...on the left..."? Your mean, you're a Liberal, correct? Going only as far to the left as the Right allows.
Left like you? You've got to be kidding.
Great news, Venezuela has won this battle and US imperialism lost.
Deepa
The people who were marginalised for decades have realised (through their experience) that the external predators like the US, Spain... are just waiting for a chance to rule Venezuela through their client rulers, which will again force them back to their previous state of "non-people". So far Chavez has furthered their cause and stood strongly against the internal and external opposing forces. This must have been the reason why the people want Chavez to continue. It is good to see Chavez going to people instead of taking power into his own hands and changing the constitution.
I hope that people of Venezuela would continue to demand accountability from their rulers. It is failure of this responsibility on the part of people (i.e. demanding accountability from their government and leaders) that allowed to strengthen the nexus between political leaders and big companies, which enslaved common citizens to serve their selfish interests. This is what we find in most of the "democratic" countries (like the US) around the world.
Hugo Chavez is a Socialist revolutionary....he is not a dictator. His model is Democratic Socialism. The Disaster Capitalists tried very hard to get him out. They lost! Chavez needs more time to turn around the status quo in South America. With him as an example, the rest of Socialist South America will be able to prove that Capitalism IS NOT the only game in town. Perhaps we will be following Chavez' example soon.
Let us pray that power does not corrupt yet another warrior for freedom of the people!
"Socialist South America will be able to prove that Capitalism IS NOT the only game in town."
Well, as a first principle, capitalism IS the only game in town. The question is whether you want your 'invisible hand' operating OUTSIDE the government or IN IT! In the latter, there's no visibility, and so more corruption, and such is the fate in both communist and fascist economies.
As a second principle, government can play a huge role in softening the often rough edges of raw capitalism primarily through taxing of the rich (capitalisms winners), but also selective (and hopefully temporary) tariffs and outright government support of certain industrial sectors, again in support of local or homegrown capitalist ventures.
This whole movement is disturbing. I understand that Venezuela has one overarching industry (oil) that needed to be shared more equitably with the people of Venezuela. The traditional way to do that was to let businesses operate there, then tax the cr*p out of them. I don't know why that wasn't good enough. Too much control is being given to this movement, and I worry about its long term affect.
"Well, as a first principle, capitalism IS the only game in town"
Really? The gambling house just came crashing down, or did you miss that story in the papers? Right now they're trying to glue the pieces of the shell back together, and things are still functioning; but there is no game, except the one which is keeping people from grabbing the nearest bunch of suits & putting them up against the wall.
Hugo's Bolivarian revolution will look like Calvin Coolidge's America once what's coming, just over the horizon. Now THAT will be revolution . . .
socialism is government mediation of the worst excesses of capitalism. Failure of government to do its job leads to the kind of mess we're in.
Capitalism is as simple as the Sunday Market. The Sunday Market functions peacefully and efficiently, however, because government enacts laws and enforces them. The stock market is a sunday market that also runs amok when gov't doesn't do its job.
In the sunday market, as in the economy at large, there's also a tendency for success to breed more success even through it provides less and less real value. It can do this because the market is finite. So, if it can dominate this finite resource, it can stifle competition and gain monopoly control of the resource. It owns all the stalls, say. This may involve graft, but needn't. In either case, even if its unfair, its proper for government to act to rebalance the books (to some extent), to keep the competition going. Progressive taxation is the simplest way to do this, and all gov'ts practice it, but anti-trust action is also necessary in critical industries. Its competition, not private enterprise, that makes capitalism great.
And its competition thats lacking when the same socialist leader gets elected to office again and again and again. What exactly is so fragile about Chavez's movement that it cannot function without him?
Yes, I went through my Tooth-fairy Capitalism stage as a teen. Then I had to go to work.
"This may involve graft, but needn't."
Of course owning ALL, or even MANY, 'stalls' involves graft & criminal activity. The desire to compete is the desire to win -- to eliminate or subjugate competitors. But this is an extremely anti-social motivation; and its effects are always destructive of society, not just of the children's primer "Sunday market". To be successful in business requires the entrepreneur to put money into any & all governing or limiting mechanisms that impede him.
There is no such thing as benign competition or altruistic capitalism, any more than there are good cancers.
You are totally delusional.
-----------------------------------------
What Is Marxism? - a short primer on a subject the working class needs to know.
http://www.marxist.com/Theory/what_is_marxism.html
I am now changing my mind about Chavez. I was a strong supporter of the man. I am now only a mild supporter and am taking a more wait-and-see attitude.
We see in the USA how term after term of people in the Senate and people in the House tends to corrupt them. After the first couple of re-elections they decide they are entitled to their jobs and forget they are public SERVANTS.
My personal opinion is that it is Chavez's own weakness that he was unable to prime a cadre of dynamic people to carry on his fight. It is a weakness which will now become ingrained. Was he unable to find such people? Or is he unable to let go of power himself?
Either way it does not bode well.
"Chavez's... was unable to prime a cadre of dynamic people to carry on his fight. Was he unable to find such people? Or is he unable to let go of power himself?"
Oh come on! Can Venezuela be so bereft of talent?
Look, Chavez's ascendency has brought huge hope to all of Latin America and, indeed, the world. All of that is lost if he turns it into a power grab. This plays into all of the worst prognostications of socialisms critics. Its not like Stalin never happened, or Mao, or Castro. Indeed, given that history, how predictable of Chavez!
Chavez's situation isn't remotely comparable to that of our ruling oligarchy, which enjoys privileges & protections & immunities that were once granted only to the highest nobility. He has elected to be the second enemy, after Cuba, of the neo-liberal financial cabal; he has survived a coup, constant campaigns of defamation, and now they've even started the old standby "anti-Semite" attack in order to dislodge him.
His insistence on continuing to rely on referendums, taking the risk of being repudiated each time, is remarkable considering how much he's angered our governing elite.
That elite is very effective in using the natural tendency of self-criticism to persuade people on the left to disown themselves & their best representatives, as the slow drip of continual propaganda induces them to disown this one, to make another accommadation, until one day they find themselves among the Blairs, Jospins, and Clintons. The best antidote to this is the work of Slavoj Zizek.
I fully accept your brief historical account above.
But this would not be the first time a basically good man was corrupted by the temptations of power.
Furthermore, a law which gives Chavez the ability to be 'forever President' also gives the opposition such power too. If I were in charge of a country which is repeatedly the target of CIA-induced conflicts and threats against my life I wouldn't be wanting to pass such laws.
Can you imagine how the Repugs would be feeling today if they HAD actually managed to push through the 'nuclear option' in the Senate? When the majority takes power and abuses it they often forget that one day they will be the minority.
I don't care if Chavez did get the people's approval. He begged them for it and they will give him anything right now. This is NOT the hallmark of a functioning Republic.
Again, comparing the oligarchic politics which rule America's middle class (to which I belonged in the first half of life) with the true integration of formerly socially-disfranchised people into actually governing bodies is an error. The middle class is fundamentally a fearful & fickle class, easily manipulated, now voting for a Nixon, now for a Carter, now for a Bush, now for a Clinton. The bourgeois myth is that the classes beneath them are dangerous & unstable, and so one has to continue the polite parlor game of procedures in order not to upset the doilies. Even in the US, this is changing, as millions are losing the illusion that they belonged to a prosperous middle class.
You've missed the main lesson, though, of the Democratic response to the threat of nuclear option: instead of caving in & appointing two reactionaries to the Supreme Court (which is reactionary by design), they should have said "Fine: we can do without the filibuster. We'll win the next time." Had they done so, they would be able to pass radical legislation. Of course, they aren't a radical party, which is what made it impossible for them to take the bet in the first place.
Jeevee
YES! Why so much overwhelming negativity, which is a reflection of their senders' minds?
Look at all Chavez has done for Venezuela's poor—and even for this country's poor? Why so much insistence that he will be corrupted? Thoughts have power! Let's all join in striving to be more positive thinkers!!
All that matters is that democracy is maintained and the masses position is improved (unlike the USA). Absolutely nothing else matters.
The approved amendment allows Venezuelan presidents to now run for election to continuous successive terms without limit. But it in no way installs a president for life. The amendment specifies that presidents still have to get elected each time, for a new term, by the people.
There's nothing inherently wrong with this idea in itself. Even the 3 authors of the US Federalist papers concurred in their opposition to term limits RE the US Constitution.
The potential problem in this context is with Chavez himself.
If it's true that he's clearly broken laws by, for example, expropriating government money to run the pro-amendment campaign itself (as his opponents allege), then he's already out of control in terms of democratic procedures, and the people of Venezuela would be stupid to trust him any further.
While many of Chavez's policy goals seem to have merit, he'd be the wrong person to pursue a democratic socialist revolution in Venezuela if he supplants the law with illegal presidential acts. At this point, for me, it's hard to know which news accounts to believe.
The authentic American Democratic tradition
Two continents and cultures geographically connected but unfortunately worlds apart as always.
As ameriKa implodes on war debt, corruption, poilitical graft and socialism for the upper crust my money is on the peoples of the south and the new Bolivar who leads the revolution.
"The United States seems destined by Providence to plague the American continent with misery in the name of liberty." (1829)
"Nations will march towards the apex of their greatness at the same pace as their education. Nations will soar if their education soars; they will regress if it regresses. Nations will fall and sink in darkness if education is corrupted or completely abandoned."
Simon Bolivar
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way, the social and political equality of the white and black races... I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
Abraham Lincoln
(Ironic then to say the least that an “educated” man like
Mr O bama aka Al Jolson took the oath to uphold the ameriKan “constituion“ on old curmudgeon Lincoln’s bible, or is it?)
Onward thru the hubris to our titanic destiny with Cap’n O Bama!
Let it also be noted that Chavez has repeatedly resorted to plebiscite referendum to determine the popular will on various issues. This is a directly democratic method that the people in the United States, with their delegated democracy, can only dream about. Can you imagine the results if we had "yes or no" referendums on the following questions: 1) Should the U.S. withdraw its military from Iraq and Afghanistan; 2) Should the current government investigate and, if necessary, prosecute the Bush administration for stealing two elections, going to war on false pretenses, and authorizing torture, etc.; 3) Should the current government re-open the investigation into 9/11; 4) Should the excesses and illegal activities in the financial world that led to the current economic crisis be investigated and the guilty parties punished; 5) Should the U.S. cease giving economic aid to Israel so long as the latter continues its policies of violence, ethnic cleansing, and illegal settlement of Palestinian lands? I think the answer, even among our mind-numbed populace, would be "yes" to all of the above, and we would thus have a truly democratic solution to the above questions. But it ain't gonna happen, because our system will not tolerate such direct democracy and never has! Gripe all you want about Chavez, he at least has the guts to see if the majority of the people will support his policies and live with the results. And when the results have gone against him, as in the last legislative elections, he has lawfully respected them.
Until America abolishes the CIA, we'll continue to be stuck with sellouts and compromisers of national security. While I feel uneasy about Chavez going unlimited, hey, the people voted for it and strongly so. In sharp contrast, here in America, all it would take is a corrupt Congress to give the same kind of power to the White House. The anti-Chavez folks should thank their stars that neither Nixon, Raygun nor Dubya even bothered trying that option to procure a 3rd term because they would have easily gotten it, at least Raygun and Dubya if not Nixon.
P.S.: I'll take Chavez over Haley Barbour for governor any day !
t_g
Why do we have our collective knickers in a knot about this referendum? I live in a country (Australia), where there is no limit on terms in office. Our previous far right government had 4 or five terms, there is no time limit when to call an election, it can be within a year and a bit, two years, three years... Big deal with these terms! If the people like the government, I say, let them have it! (correct me if I'm wrong, but Great Britain has a similar regime. Remind me: how long the present [New] Labour has been in power?)
And what if the people choose instead of Chavez a US puppet? Has there never been such a precedent south of the Rio Grande? If I'm not mistaken, some governments are still pulled on strings from Washington (Colombia, Mexico, Peru comes to mind).
The changes Chavez has brought on are significant: literacy programs, food and fuel at decent prices, among others and don't forget the quasi-nationalisation programs. Yes, he can be a bit long-winded and tedious in his rants, but he has a big heart. And it is in the right place.
Good luck, Sr Chavez!
Excellent comments.
USAns should remember that the term limits on the US presidency (the 22nd amendment) has it's origins in pure dirty politics - it was a big-business Republican reaction to FDR's four terms. Can anyone argue that FDR's continued re-election was not a good thing in those times or economic crisis then war?
And those who call for term limits for other legislators seem to be terribly ignorant of the skills, acquired through experience, that are required required to be a good legislator. For example, my objection to my Republican congressman isn't that he stays in office term after term. My objection is with his conservative pro-big business, pro-war, anti-healthcare politics. If I was in Dennis Kucinich's district I'd be very happy that he gets re-elected with no opponents again and again.
If a bad politician gets re-elected again and again, it is the fault of the opposing parties, not lack of term limits.
---USAn---
Congratulations to Hugo Chavez and to Venezuela. Hugo Chavez is a friend.
Dear Patriots:
Viva Chavez!!
The "Out of Control" wealthy classes, both, in my country and Venezuela are foaming at the mouth with hatred, like rabid dogs, over Democratic Venezuela's WIN! The people have won....and they don't like it!
Change is coming. WE, THE PEOPLE, will force positive change even in the United States!
Peter Montana
He lost a referendum on this issue, only a few months ago. Now, with reference to the district-by-district returns on the last time, plus lists of who voted, plus, exit polls, he managed to pull a 54% of 67% of the registered voters victory. (That means: not a majority of registered voters.)
Still more democratic than anything we've seen come out of the USA.
-----------------------------------------
What Is Marxism? - a short primer on a subject the working class needs to know.
http://www.marxist.com/Theory/what_is_marxism.html
I have started reading the link in your footer. I know it is supposed to be an elementary primer, and by British education standards it probably is. But can you imagine a member of the US working class actually reading through it these days?
I have always viewed the arm-waving ramblings of western philosophers, idealist or materialist, as eye-glazing, incomprehensible, and often flat-out wrong.
A better primer should cut out all the philosophical stuff and stick strictly to Marx's ideas on human affairs.
---USAn---
So what? In 1980, Ronald Reagan's "mandate," which was to change the country in ways from which we are still suffering, consisted of only 24% of all potential votes. Makes Chavez look like a true democratic hero. Viva Chavez!
Actually the previous referendum in November 2007 was not on this issue alone, though you would never know it from US propaganda ... uh, I mean news. (If I had a dollar for every time I heard "dictator for life," even on NPR, I could retire.) Our Global Exchange trip took place just days before the 2007 referendum, so we got an earful about it from both sides. The reason it lost was because many of Chavez's supporters were concerned about some of the other issues that were bundled in by legislators, which supporters felt had not been given full consideration.
Certainly those of us in the US have no right to comment on whether another country's elections are won by a majority. To quote Christian Dominionist and Heritage Foundation founder Paul Weyrich, "I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of the people. They never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
At least in recent times Venezuela's supreme court has not appointed a President.
In ten years the next Head Chimp of Venezuela will discover that Chavez was a CIA plant all along.
Oh, really? Please give evidence.
Unlike you, chimps are magnificent sentient creatures.
The global "Billionaire's Club" must be foaming at the mouth.
Viva Chavez!
"Contrary to what is being advocated by some reformist elements in Venezuela, the international crisis of Capitalism will have an effect on Venezuela. In fact, the impact is already being felt. In just half a year, the price per barrel of oil has gone from $147 to less than $40. This has completely undermined the country's economy. Prices of other raw materials, such as aluminum and steel, which Venezuela produces en masse, have also dropped dramatically.
"This cannot but undermine the conquests of the revolution. PDVSA (the national oil company), which finances various social projects, has already announced a 40% cut-back in this year's budget. Inflation has also soared. It is currently at nearly 30%, but food prices in Caracas have risen by 50% in a single year.
"This creates severe problems for thousands of working class families who cannot make ends meet. If they are not solved, it will put the the social support of the revolution in grave danger. The main problem is that the Venezuelan economy still is capitalist, and must therefore obey the basic laws of the market. To break this pattern it is necessary to introduce a Socialist plan to re-activate the country's productive capacity and ensure the economy runs smoothly. But to do this, a break with the economic power of the oligarchy, which still holds the main levers of the economy in its hands, is necessary."
http://www.marxist.com/venezuela-big-victory-for-revolution-time-to-build-socialism.htm
patgarrett -
I'm aware that Chavez's major opponents in VZ are fascist oligarchs who've run the country as their personal fifedom for generations, creating and perpetuating misery for millions. I'm also aware that their alleged 'concern' about possible 'democracy violations' by Chavez is the sheerest hypocrisy.
But none of this AUTOMATICALLY means that Chavez isn't in fact exceeding his lawful democratic powers in some instances.
I'm not saying he has --so I still support him.
But I'm wary because not all of Chavez's VZ critics, who're raising these questions, are aligned with Vz's filthy oligarchs: a fair number are VZ'ers who strongly support a democratic socialist transformation, but who claim that Chavez is not keeping ALL of his methods within the accountable democratic proceedures.
Questions about Chavez's extra-legal machinations have even been raised by the usually trustable, pro-socialist UK Guardian.
My wariness aside, he's still innocent until proven guilty.
That doens't mean, though, that we're obliged to automatically dismiss any credible questions raised against his methods, just because we believe in his ideas.
OMG, Venezuela now has the same 'no term limits' as Italy and Iceland.
And we know what a disaster *those* two countries are...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_term_limits
By the way, why is 'no term limits' OK for Senators and Congressman in the U.S. ? Do we really want 80 year olds making our laws ?