Venezuela's Maduro blasts 'devil' Obama

[Freddie Stubbs]

Source: AFP

CARACAS — Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro took a swipe at Barack Obama on Saturday, calling him the "grand chief of devils" after the US president declined to recognize his contested re-election.

"Coming out of Central America, Obama let loose with a bunch of impertinent remarks, insolent stuff... He is giving an order, and his blessing, for the fascist rightwing to attack Venezuela's democracy," Maduro alleged in an address.

But "we are here defending our institutions, peace, democracy, the people of Venezuela... and we can sit down with anyone, even the grand chief of devils: Obama," Maduro said.

The socialist's harsh attack recalled diatribes from his predecessor the late Hugo Chavez aimed at former US president George W. Bush, whom he also called a devil, among other insults.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jX76DgPFU_f0mxp7sy8Me09kQVUw?docId=CNG.fa0d3a374515b5c1032c28a1d6b53c90.d81

[Archae]

1. And people wonder why I can't stand this jerk?

"Grand chief of devils?"

Don't forget Maduro still claims Saint Hugo was "poisoned."

[Benton D Struckcheon]

2. Yeah he's a jerk, but ...

Obama needs to recognize that he won the election. Everyone else has.
Maduro has a point with that, even if he doesn't exactly have a winning way with words. The US isn't the sole arbiter of whose elections are fair and whose aren't.

[Archae]

4. He won the election. Maybe.

There are charges out there of ballot-box stuffing for Maduro.
I don't know if the charges are true, and it wouldn't surprise me one way or the other.

I do know that Maduro is a nutcase.

If a right-winger in Venezuela said the stuff Maduro has, the Saint Hugo phanbois would be all over that man or woman.

But, Maduro is "leftist" or "left-wing" so he gets a pass.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

6. Look, I know all about the cultists we have on this site.

I find them as insufferable as you do.
That doesn't excuse Obama's behavior. That election was well-monitored, Maduro won it by more than Bush did in 2000, and we simply are not the sole arbiter of who wins and who doesn't win an election in another country.
Obama needs to recognize Maduro's election.

[Proletariatprincess]

9. excellant post.

Thank you!

[MADem]

12. It's not like Obama is going to send in the Marines--I mean, come on--let's not get overblown about

this.

There was shit going on during that election. It wasn't "well monitored" in many sectors. To claim it was is just not accurate.

That said, Maduro probably won, but if Obama wants to make a little noise about shenanigans, why not? It's not like Hugo and Bus Driver have been shy down the years about insulting Obama with rather heated rhetoric.

How long would America stand for it if Obama threw the same sort of invective that those two have done on a regular basis?

And bottom line, they have nowhere to go, at the end of the day. They can whine and use nasty words and phrases, and huff and puff, but we're their biggest trading partner and if we REALLY wanted to fuck with them, we could show them our ass, invite them to kiss it, and make them cry like babies. Who else wants their heavy, hard-to-refine oil? They've got lots of it, but it's cumbersome, and not every refinery can handle it. In fact, most can't, and most don't want to convert to be able to handle it.

The fact that we HAVEN'T 'sanctioned' them or lowered the trade boom on them is because this Fight The Power bullshit means way more to them than it does to us. They use this USA/Devil nonsense to incite the not-too-bright masses....and no one outside VZ takes that bullshit seriously--it's all for "internal consumption" and it makes them look like morons.

[Archae]

15. But since Maduro isn't a right-winger, he gets a pass.

As usual.

[MADem]

16. I just can't worry about 'em overmuch.

If people have to resort to pushing government propaganda--and it's horribly written, absurd shit, too--to try to "prove" a point, and attempt to discredit reputable human rights and other international agencies that "say bad things" about their heroes, well, it's at that point that you know there's not much point in continuing a conversation. It's not a "difference of opinion" at that point, you're dealing with a lockstep ideologue with an "All Hail" agenda.

All of the proselytizing in the world won't change that horrible economy, won't change that ghastly crime rate, or the (down to 2nd worst in the world now, is it?) murder rate, or make goods appear on the bare market shelves. It won't cure the corruption or stop the exodus of talent. There's never a credible answer to any of that, and there never will be either--it's like Neverland, with Maduro as the new Peter Pan...ya just gotta BELIEVE!!!!

All you can do is consider the source. You can lead a horse to water, and all that.

[Archae]

19. Those are the biggest problems.

Also don't forget all that oil money Chavez and his cronies controlled.

And still do.

[MADem]

21. Corruption is rampant. I think it'll get worse, too.

There is a real strain on earnings; so much money is going to placate the very poor and there is competition between that money to keep those in poverty "on the team," money for infrastructure improvements, money to put food on the market shelves, the massive tons of money and oil they hand over to Cuba (while Cuba gives them doctors who are sent out into the boondocks to provide medical care to those poor folks), money to keep the wheels of commerce greased...and all that corruption money that doesn't help anyone but the Boligarchs, the slice of which gets larger and larger as time goes by.

I think the model is unsustainable. VZ needs a guy like the dude running Uruguay--he lives on a crappy little farm, drives an old car, doesn't take all his salary, and is a model of frugality and temperance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Mujica#Personal_life Of course, all the dudes with their hands in the cookie jar would probably wax a guy like that...he'd be getting in the way of their earning potential.

[Archae]

22. And don't forget all the dope that funnels through there.

In many of the poorer towns, drug gangs are the real rulers.

Kidnapping is rampant in Venezuela also.

[MADem]

23. Drugs and kidnapping are a noticeable aspect of the GDP, indeed. nt

[Benton D Struckcheon]

33. Yeah I know, I could and have written many of the same things to the cultists.

Maduro still won. The time for Obama to give him a little of his own medicine has passed. We're now at the point where every day he continues not to recognize that election our credibility in the region sinks a little more. You have to know when to fold em too.

[MADem]

34. Oh, come on.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/obama-us-interfering-venezuelan-election-19110100

Obama: US Not Interfering in Venezuelan Election


President Barack Obama says the idea that an American filmmaker detained by Venezuela's government is a spy is, in his words, "ridiculous."

Thirty-five-year-old Timothy Tracy, of West Hollywood, California, was formally charged last week with crimes including conspiracy, association for criminal purposes and use of a false document.

Obama says Tracy's case will be handled like every other in which a U.S. citizen gets into a "legal tangle" while abroad.

The president also said the U.S. hasn't tried "in any way" to interfere with Venezuela's recent election of Nicolas Maduro as president. Maduro is the hand-picked successor to the late Hugo Chavez. Opposition leader Henrique Capriles narrowly lost to Maduro and claims the election was stolen....

Maduro is starting to sound like a batshit crazy boy-who-cried-wolf.

He may be his own undoing sooner than anyone anticipated, if he keeps this shit up. He makes Don Quixote sound like a reasoned, sober statesman.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

35. And? I'm not sure I understand what you're responding to. n/t

[MADem]

36. I'm responding to your gripe that Obama hasn't "recognized" Maduro's election.

Obama has said he's not interfering, and that's the best Maduro is gonna get.

I think Maduro, with his boogiemen here, evildoers there, and enemies under his bed, is the one with the credibility issues, frankly. The more he spouts off, the stupider and more paranoid he looks and sounds.

He needs to get to the business of governing, and quit with the bullshit, half-baked conspiracy theories. Chavez could play that card and be somewhat amusing in the role--he had the gift of gab and the ability to excite the crowd even when he was talking out his ass. Maduro does not have this skill, and so he sounds like a loonytune.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

40. It's a legit gripe

I have a low opinion of Maduro/Chavez also. But, our opinion doesn't count.
The only issue before us is: was the election conducted reasonably fairly enough that any reasonable person can conclude that Maduro won? Yes.
Everything else is irrelevant. Not our country. The cultists don't get this either of course, but I expect that from zombies who repost every word from these clowns like it came down from Mount Sinai.
What is relevant to the US is this: our standing in the rest of Latin America. That isn't helped when you're the only country in the world that won't recognize the result of the election.
Every action the US takes needs to be guided by the simple principle of whether it advances the country's interest. This move doesn't.

[MADem]

42. You don't know everything that Obama knows...so it just may NOT be a 'legit' gripe.

As others have pointed out in this very thread, there are unresolved irregularities.

You can't answer "yes" unless you were there--and you weren't.

And just because it's "not our country" doesn't mean that we--and that includes our leader--can't have an opinion about what transpired there. Sentient beings do have opinions--and they express them, often as not.

You do know that we are VZ's largest trading partner? They'd be FUCKED without us. We're the only ones with sufficient and specialized refining capacity who can handle the bulk of their heavy, sticky, cumbersome oil. Being their largest trading partner, I'd say we have every right to weigh in on which corrupt asshole is running that crime-ridden joint.

YMMV.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

43. We weren't there, so we have to take the word of the country's authorities,

and that word was believed by every other country on the planet. What gives the USG special knowledge, especially considering our reduced presence in that country? Nothing.
As for the oil, we need each other. That oil is good for refining into a lot of petroleum products (diesel, for instance); the light oil we get from all those new sources of shale oil won't do it for those other products.
Which is what makes this so dumb. No interest of ours is involved here. We aren't going to stop buying that oil, and they can't stop selling it to us. It's one thing for Maduro to be too stupid to understand this, but it's dismaying in the extreme to see Obama act just as dumb.

[MADem]

70. Well, the fact that the SA nations agreed to endorse the result "for stability of the region"

and not because they necessarily believed it was a clean election is probably a pretty strong clue that not everyone bought the results of the contest.

It's not that the results were "believed"--it's that the results were close enough that the bullshit wasn't worth it in their mind....kind of like the Supreme Court did in Bush v. Gore.

This, to my eye, does not constitute a "rousing endorsement"--it's closer to an "Awwww, fuck it, just not worth fighting over it" IMO:

http://news.yahoo.com/south-american-leaders-likely-back-venezuelas-maduro-emergency-200155271.html

[Benton D Struckcheon]

77. No, this is the key passage:

“It’s very difficult for [other states] to question the legitimacy” of a country’s own electoral authority, Bonilla says. And even if they did, it would be difficult for a recount to reverse a difference of almost 300,000 votes, he says.

I've never heard of an election recount turning 300,000 votes (actually 150,001, to be precise). Percentagewise the margin is close, but that's deceptive. No recount is going to change that result.

[Comrade Grumpy]

63. Funny, since Venezuela doesn't produce any cocaine.

I don't hear you going on about Colombia, its death squads, its massive internal displacement problem, or the fact that it is the major cocaine producer in the world.

Or Guatemala, or El Salvador, or Honduras, or Mexico.

I guess a leftist government in Caracas is more concerning.

[MADem]

64. Why would I "go on about Colombia" in a thread about VENEZUELA?

I'm not geographically challenged, and I do know the difference.

You want to talk about the Colombian coke trade? Fire up a thread and let's discuss it!

It's a problem, sure--but Colombia is not Venezuela, and this thread is about Venezuela, which acknowledges they have a serious drug problem, both in terms of use by their own citizens and the fact that VZ is a trafficking way-station where kingpins do business.

Don't derail this thread with the tired old "Well, waaaaah, OTHER COUNTRIES do it TOOOOO" argument. The answer to that is "Yep. We know."

[Comrade Grumpy]

55. Fortunately, nothing like that goes on in the rest of Latin America.

Like good old capitalist Honduras, with the world's highest murder rate.

Or Mexico, which just emerged from a dozen years of conservative rule, where the cartels are truly a force to be reckoned with.

Or Colombia, with its US-sponsored dirty war and the world's largest internal refugee population (take that, Syria!).

Sorry to interrupt your little wank-fest.

[MADem]

97. That was a rude and silly comment. Wank fest? Really?

Look, do you want to talk about Honduras? Be a big boy, and start a thread on the subject. Invite others to discuss it with you. You know, like adults do.

You want to talk about Mexico? Again, you can type insults like "wank fest"--why can't you start a thread about that?

Columbia? Same deal--no one broke your fingers, I see, you were able to type "wank fest" without any difficulty, and snark with abandon, so how hard would it be for you to toss together a substantive thread and discuss your views on these other countries?

Why do you think that the "Other countries do this" and "Other countries do that" arguments matter? Or even work? We aren't TALKING about those "other countries" in this thread.

But throwing out those kinds of arguments, coupled with an insult, is one way to try to deflect from a lack of a substantive response.

That said, I noticed what you did--and I've pointed it out, here.

[joshcryer]

25. He's a right winger to me.

A homophobic bigot anti-semitic vile piece of shit.

[Ken Burch]

73. It goes without saying that Capriles is to Maduro's right, and that the poor would lose

if Capriles came in and did his "pro-business" policies. "Pro-business" is always code for "fuck the workers and the poor".

And I haven't seen any evidence that Maduro is an antisemite, or that he'd oppose LGBT legislation(the reason Venezuela doesn't have more of that was pressure from the Catholic hierarchy...but, for some reason, I don't hear you calling THEM out about that).

We tried it your way in Nicaragua in 1990. The results were a tragedy and the poor and the workers pretty much lost everything. Not only did the non-Sandinista governments have no social achievements, they had no achievements of any kind.

[tblue]

48. No, just the CIA.

Does nobody here know about out interference in Venezuela in support of Big Oil? Please, people. Read up on it. Greg Palast has been writing about it from the getgo.

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/12-bush-administration-behind-failed-military-coup-in-venezuela/

[Archae]

54. The CIA from 10 years ago.

The same CIA that lied us into invading Iraq, and led by a "president" and vice-president who are now long gone.

[MADem]

58. That's OLD NEWS. 11 years old, in fact.

News Flash--Bush is not the President. Obama is on his second term.

In other news, Teddy Roosevelt wants to build a canal in Panama...

[Ken Burch]

69. Remember Honduras. Obama is not above repeating THAT.

He probably thinks we were right to destabilize Chile and Guatemala.

[MADem]

71. Not gonna happen. nt

[Ken Burch]

74. Because...?

And, if the "Devil" thing didn't bother you, why did you reference it so much in that last post?

Shouldn't our response to the "Devil" thing be to push our country to stop BEING the devil in Latin America? To finally accept that we have no right to treat the hemisphere as our personal economic empire?

[MADem]

76. Look, I am not going to have two subthreads going on with the same person -- stick to the

other one, please, and shut this one down.

We aren't "the Devil" just because a paranoid guy who thinks US biker gangs are out to get him says so.

[Ken Burch]

72. Do you have any idea how imperialist that post sounded?

And our leaders got called "the Devil" because of our evil history in Latin America. Obama was supposed to break with that bullshit and let the Latin Americans run their countries on their own terms...not act just like Bush would down there. Christ, he hasn't even ended the war against the people of Cuba.

[MADem]

75. Why do you keep responding to the same post? Again--Not. Gonna. Happen.

Maduro called Obama the devil because Maduro is NUTS. He's paranoid. He's probably got some friends of Diosdado whispering in his ear, helping him along in his frightened fantasies. And he also thinks that's the sure-fire way to whip up the crowd.

Funny, though--when Hugo did it, it was dramatic and outrageous and Over-the-Top and loaded with elements of theatre. When Maduro does it, he sounds whiny, weird and scared.

I give him three years, tops, if he keeps this shit up, before the Army dislodges him and Cabello (not Capriles) ` takes over.

These are not the ramblings of a sane man: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/Latin-America-Monitor/2013/0411/Think-Chavez-was-paranoid-Venezuela-s-Maduro-warns-of-US-funded-biker-gangs

[arikara]

61. It can get kind of confusing...

Which are the cultists in this story? The crazy left or the filthy capitalists?

[Benton D Struckcheon]

62. Me, I'm talking about US and generally non-Venezuelan folks

...who fawn over everything Chavez ever did, and are now bent on justifying every fart Maduro makes. I don't regard such people as leftists, as handing over your critical faculties to a politician is a sure path to perdition for any poor person. A powerful person, whether they're politician or filthy capitalist, will throw you to the wolves if it suits their interests. I find it appalling that alleged leftists (as I'm sure they regard themselves as such) spend so much time trying to justify every single little last thing done by someone who couldn't care less about them.

[Ash_F]

7. The election was better monitored than any US election ever. /nt

Obama should stop caving to right wing pressure.

[joshcryer]

26. Preposterous. The Carter Center says "acompañante" is symbolic.

In 2007, under the argument of national sovereignty, the CNE replaced the practice of international observation with that of international accompaniment. International accompaniment is, by and large, a symbolic form of monitoring.

Source: http://www.cartercenter.org/resources/pdfs/news/peace_publications/election_reports/venezuela-2012-election-study-mission-final-rpt.pdf

Despite that UNASUR witnessed irregularities using fingerprint readers: http://www.democraticunderground.com/110814518

Who knows how much more would've been witnessed had the monitors had more ability to observe.

[MADem]

37. +1 nt

[Ash_F]

41. You are crying about voting machines that actually print out ballots?

Something US voting machines still don't have?

My contention that their elections are still better monitored than any US election is only strengthened by that report.

[joshcryer]

65. VVAT is the most common voting machine in the US.

ie, voting machines that actually print out ballots.

[Beacool]

57. That's what I heard too.

I have a friend who, although she's not from Venezuela but a neighboring country, was watching and reading everything about that election from Venezuelan and other Latin media. She too insists that Maduro committed fraud and that his followers stuffed the ballot boxes. Similar to Ahmadinejad and Putin.

Me, I'm blah on the whole subject. We have enough problems over here.

[zeemike]

3. What, you know him?

Or do you just know what some people say about him?
Could be I guess....we have lots of experts on South America here.

[Proletariatprincess]

10. I believe that Hugo was poisoned.....

and I am not a nut case. If you don't think that the USA is capable of such things, you are seriously naieve.
I know the US government lies. I just don't know about Maduro so I will give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Archae]

11. Do you also believe in the Tooth Fairy and Easter Bunny?

Because there is just as much ACTUAL evidence for them, as there is for the "Hugo was poisoned" conspiracy theory.

The guy got cancer.
And died.

My Dad did too.
Was my Dad "poisoned?"

[reorg]

18. speaking of evidence

can you point me to ACTUAL evidence or even specific claims that ballots have been stuffed in Venezuela?

The other guy lost. And cannot accept it.

What has Obama to gain by supporting the loser and denying reality?

[Archae]

20. Like I said...

I don't know if the charges of ballot-box stuffing are true or not.

Most of the accusations are from Maduro's opponent, who as you said, lost.

But is it so "impossible" for Maduro's cronies to have stuffed ballot boxes?

Here in the US George W. Bush got elected the first time due to a high-tech version of ballot box stuffing.

The right-wing has no monopoly on corruption and election cheating.

[reorg]

24. yes, it's pretty much impossible

Last edited Sun May 5, 2013, 02:31 PM - Edit history (3)

Your comparison with the 2000 presidential election shows that you don't know much about the Venezuelan system and probably not much more about the one in Florida either. There is nothing high-tech about hanging chads, or purging voter rolls of blacks, or closing polling stations early and so forth.

The electronic voting system in Venezuela has a paper trail, 54% of the ballot boxes, randomly chosen, are automatically audited. This prevents any attempt at cheating with the electronic tabulation.

The opposition claims their witnesses were thrown out of some polling stations. The numbers vary, first they said it happened to 286 witnesses, later they cited bigger numbers, up to 550 or so, I believe (the number of polling stations is 13,810). Odd that no such complaint was filed with the CNE, as observers have confirmed, and not a single such incident has been reported in the press.

They also claim that the voter rolls are not reliably purged of the names of deceased persons. This is most likely true, but there has no evidence been presented to show that ID cards of deceased persons have actually been used in attempts to cast fraudulent votes.

They also made some claims which were immediately shown to be false representations of facts. "In some districts, Maduro got more votes than Chávez in October, in one polling station 1,000% more, in another one the number of votes he got was higher than that of registered voters!!! Pictures of ballots being burned were printed in newspapers aligned with the opposition and posted by TV stations on their Twitter accounts -- a complete fraud because these pictures were taken from the CNE website and were several years old.


So, that's why I asked: Do you have any ACTUAL evidence or are you engaging in wild speculations based on vague comparisons with the vastly different and much more chaotic system in Florida, where Bush "won" by a few hundred votes whereas Maduro had a margin of almost 250,000?

(edited for more precision and some links)

[leveymg]

52. I notice that not one of the Hugo-Nots responded to your comment.

Personally, I have not had much time to track Venezuelan issues, but I'd like to see two things: more information and less opinion from the detractors, and citations and links from everyone.

That would really help the majority of us to make up our own minds.

Thanks.

[MADem]

67. Well, when the Christian Science Monitor, which reports VERY carefully, calls

the election "flawed" and "dubious," and "much - rigged," I have to say, it gets my attention. And the best they can manage to call Maduro is "alleged winner."

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2013/0502/In-postelection-Venezuela-why-nonviolence-must-win

Since its flawed April 14 presidential election, Venezuela has experienced violence over opposition demands for a vote recount. Pro-democracy forces must keep the moral high ground of nonviolence to avoid another Syria.

For years, political violence in Latin America has been rare – until this week. On Tuesday, a vicious brawl broke out in Venezuela’s National Assembly. A few opposition lawmakers were badly beaten by ruling party members after objecting to the dubious results of last month’s presidential election. The brawl follows the killing of street protesters and the use of intimidation tactics against the opposition over its demand for an audit of the much-rigged April 14 vote.

If such violence continues, Venezuela could be ripe for a larger popular revolt aimed at restoring its badly damaged democracy. Yet, as the example of strife-torn Syria shows, pro-democracy leaders must resist any tendency toward violence. The surest way to victory in a democratic revolution is to split the ruling elite and the military by appealing to their conscience – not their fears.

This is the lesson of many “velvet” revolutions in recent decades, from the Philippines to the breakup of the Soviet Union to Myanmar (Burma) to Egypt. When a political opposition keeps the moral high ground with nonviolence, whistle-blowers emerge, soldiers refuse to shoot, army officers defect, and cronies of a despot switch sides, either to save themselves or their values. Meanwhile, other nations with duly elected leaders offer moral support.

This may be why the alleged winner of the Venezuela election, Nicolás Maduro, has been playing rough with the opposition ever since the election. Violence may not only scare off the protesters but it can possibly be made to look as if Mr. Maduro’s opponents started it....

[reorg]

78. Wow, you read an opinion piece in the Christian Science Monitor

I used to occasionally read this paper in the late nineties and at that time they did some good reporting. I don't know what happened, but I'm not the only one who noted it went downhill since. Good reporting just doesn't make enough money these days, I guess.

Every single statement in this shabby hit piece is a disgusting lie. In fact, you can take for granted that the opposite of each claim is true. Yes, people were killed, but what the "editorial board" of the CSM fails to mention is that they were killed by "pro-democracy" protesters. And what the CSM labels "pro-democracy leaders" is the same bunch that was involved in the coup attempt 11 years ago. This is just a bad joke, sick and outrageous, as are the comparisons with the Philippines or Syria. In addition, this "editorial board" doesn't seem to have the first clue what they are talking about, lumping together all uprisings they can think of as "velvet revolutions".

The "duly elected leaders" of Latin America have acknowledged the results and congratulated Maduro. They don't support the opposition.

How come the 170 international observers didn't notice that the vote was "much-rigged" or any other "flaws"?

How about citing some ACTUAL proof?

These are just unsubstantiated claims of the Venezuelan wannabe putschists. They are not meant to be substantiated, they are being used to make noise, like the pathetic stunt in parliament, to cause a ruckus and to provoke a violent response. Thus far their tactics have not succeeded. And I'm confident that, for the time being, the opposition's good friends in the US will be waiting in vain.

[MADem]

86. Others in this thread have spoken to the "observer" issue, so I won't repeat that.

Suffice it to say that the election was NOT "observed." Despite your insistence to the contrary.

Further, the very neighbors of VZ aren't cheerleading this result--they're tolerating it, for the purposes of "stability." They've made, in effect, a Bush v. Gore decision on this--saying it could have gone either way, but they'll go with the guy who's in the saddle already for the sake of "stability."

Hardly a ringing endorsement, no matter which way you try to slice it.

I think no one has to do a thing to Maduro, though--he's doing it all by himself. He may get a little "help" from the Army; time will tell on that score.

And that doesn't mean that the game will shift to Capriles, either. Keep your eye on good old Diosdado....I think that guy knew what he was doing all along when he stepped back with a smile and clapped for Hugo's "chosen" successor.

[reorg]

88. Your trust in this "other" one who has spoken is adorable

Suffice it to say that the Carter Center also said:

This change in norms effectively shifted monitoring responsibilities to national actors. Domestic observer organizations, first appearing in 2000, grew more experienced and professional; political parties negotiated ever-increasing participation in pre- and postelection audits of the automated voting system as well as providing party poll watchers on election day; NGOs played a particularly strong role in monitoring campaign conditions during the 2012 election; and citizens verified their voter registration and participated in election-night verification of the paper receipts to compare with the electronic vote tallies in individual precincts beginning in 2006.

National political parties helped validate the system’s reliability through consultations with the CNE rectors and staff during a scheduled program of 16 pre-electoral audits of the components of the entire automated voting system. They also verified the voter registry.

The Carter Center, Study Mission to the Presidential Election in Venezuela, p4

http://www.cartercenter.org/resources/pdfs/news/peace_publications/election_reports/venezuela-2012-election-study-mission-final-rpt.pdf

Still, although some of the former responsibilities of international monitors were shifted to domestic actors, the current form of international "accompaniment" means that the CNE invites international observers, including representatives from the Carter Center to monitor the activities during election day:

accompaniment involves a political presence of highprofile actors who witness election-day activities (ibid.)

“Debemos felicitar al pueblo venezolano por el comportamiento cívico y por protagonizar una elección muy ordenada y tranquila”, afirmó Penco, vicepresidente de la Corte Electoral de Uruguay, desde Caracas en declaraciones a Radio El Espectador de Montevideo.

Los venezolanos “votaron con responsabilidad”, agregó Penco y destacó que “pudo haber incidentes menores, como en todos los procesos electorales” pero en general “fue una jornada pacífica”, aseguró.

http://www.elnuevoherald.com/2013/04/15/1454520/observador-de-unasur-dice-que.html

La misión de Unasur estuvo integrada por unos 40 miembros, representantes de organismos electorales de Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Perú, Ecuador, Colombia, Guayana, Surinam y Brasil. Además se sumaron representantes diplomáticos de esos países acreditados en Venezuela. La misión estuvo presidida por un representante designado por unanimidad por los cancilleres de los países de Unasur, en este caso Carlos “Chacho” Álvarez, y con un coordinador general, también designado por unanimidad, que en este caso recayó en mi persona.

El representante de Unasur y el coordinador somos los responsables de la misión, y el comunicado está firmado por nosotros dos.

¿Otras misiones de observadores estuvieron presentes en las elecciones?

El Centro Carter, más que una misión, envió una delegación de invitados especiales que formaron parte del programa de acompañamiento del CNE, a diferencia de nosotros que firmamos un convenio especial de acompañamiento, como misión de Unasur. Ni el Centro Carter ni la OEA conformaron misiones sino que formaron parte del programa de acompañamiento invitados por el CNE.

http://diariolarepublica.net/resultado-debe-respetarse/

[MADem]

90. More than Venezuelan "Analysis" certainly.

That thing is a complete and total joke--makes Pravda and Izvestia look like Mother Jones.


Here's what I think is funny as hell--the neighboring nations have essentially said that they'll go along with the election results solely for reasons of "stability"--not because they think that Maduro really won. They have already made deals with Hugo's regime, and all Hugo's people are still in place--if there's a change, they'd have to do some negotiating, and that is not in their interest. Also, guess who gets the Unasur gavel this next time around (coming up in, what, June or so)? Don't wanna piss that guy off in the event he prevails, he could make life miserable for 'em.

Personally, I think Maduro may have won, by a vote or ten, but maybe he didn't -- it was a razor-thin result for someone that people here keep insisting has "overwhelming" support. Plainly, Maduro does NOT have "overwhelming" support--he got the votes he got because people were loyal to the memory of Saint Hugo...but only barely...IF at all. And I can promise you, that support will melt away like butter on hot toast in the coming months; the 'financials' of the country virtually guarantee it. Even if all the rampant corruption is halted, these guys are going to have some serious trouble paying their bills. They are in Stagflation Hell.

But here's the bottom line: When Gore challenged Bush's results in Florida, I think the people of the USA would have been mighty perturbed if countries started calling Georgie and congratulating him BEFORE the Supremes stole the election and handed it to him.

Yet, that's what some people here on DU want Obama to do--to ignore the internal process of election certification/challenge that is provided for under Venezuelan law, and capriciously pick one over the other--just because they happen to "like" that guy better.

It is within the right of Capriles to challenge the election, under Venezuelan law. It is within the right of Obama to stay the hell out of the matter, and NOT pipe up on his "opinion" regarding who won, until that challenge is acted upon. That law should take its course, and foreign leaders who interfere with comments and endorsements, even LAME ones--like that weak "stability" one from Unasur-- are the ones who are out of line.

I find it quite amusing that what's good for the Gore/Bush goose isn't good for the Capriles/Maduro gander. The situational bullshit I see on this board when it comes to VZ used to astound me, but I've grown used to it, almost. Now, all I can do is laugh.

Democracy is important, except when an autocratic Dear Leader--or his surrogate--wants to ignore it.

Whatever!

[reorg]

91. the "devils" Maduro mentioned

the CIA, the Pentagon and the State Department, want their dupes to believe that there is some similarity to the 2000 presidential election.

What you call "razor-thin" is 12 times the margin Kennedy had in the presidential election 1960:

112,000, in a country with six times (at the time) the population of Venezuela (compared with Maduro's 225,000).

It's about 280 times the margin Bush had in Florida (537 in a state with roughly 2/3 the population of Venezuela).

1.5 percent is not "razor-thin". The countries which accepted the result simply accept reality. The lone outlier appears to be the US.

Whether Obama HAS the right to do whatever he pleases is not the issue here, the question is if he IS right to follow the advice of the above mentioned devils and continue with interfering in Venezuela's internal affairs.

[MADem]

92. It's anywhere from a half a percent to a percent and a half, depending

on what source you use.

It's not a landslide.

I'm not comparing it to other elections. I'm taking it on its own merits, or lack thereof.

There are documented irregularities. The opposition candidate HAS asked for a recount. The law allows for this.

The countries that accepted the result flat out said they did so "for the sake of stability." NOT because they believed the count was accurate.

By not weighing in on a decision BEFORE the court has decided it, I'd say Obama is staying OUT of VZ affairs. You're just mad because he's not cheerleading that poor fellow you are supporting.

What if the margin was a half percentage the other way, and Maduro was challenging the results? You're SERIOUSLY telling me that you would DEMAND that Obama "endorse" the outcome while Maduro had a case before the court? Of course you wouldn't. This pique you are expressing is ALL about YOUR bias--not rule of law.

Obama, by not chiming in while the court still has a hand in the process, is doing the right thing and staying OUT of this mess while the courts still have a finger in the pie. You just don't like it because it doesn't help the floundering successor of the Dear Comandante.

[reorg]

95. it depends on whether you use actual sources

or, like you apparently, "others who have spoken". Whatever, these were the official results (later slightly adjusted to account for the extraterritorial vote):

Nicolás Maduro 7.563.747 (50.75%)
Henrique Capriles 7.298.491 (48.97%)
José Eusebio Méndez 19.462 (0.13%)
María Josefina Bolívar 13.274 (0.08%)
Reina Sequera 4.225 (0.02%)
Julio Mora 1925 (0.01%)

http://www.cne.gov.ve/web/sala_prensa/noticia_detallada.php?id=3171

And here you can find the results for every single ballot box (mesa):

http://actas14a.psuv.org.ve/

[MADem]

96. We know what Uncle Joe said about "official sources."

It doesn't matter who voted for whom.

It's all down to who counted the votes.

That's why this thing is headed to court.

Again, as I have said elsewhere on this board, I believe, cheating or not, that Maduro will prevail because his team owns all the branches of government, including the judiciary (it might end up being a Pyrrhic victory for him, but that will play out in the out-months or years).

That said, the wheels of justice, tainted or not, must grind on. A complaint has been made, and it must be seen through.

Until then, it's not appropriate for any other nation to stick their beak in--even if VZ is going to take the gavel of their regional club. I can understand why they made that 'stability' comment, but it didn't cover them with glory to do that. They may one day rue their eagerness, but that, too, will be a story for another day and time.

[reorg]

98. your misinformed ramblings are quite depressing

what the hell do you get out of this?

Your argument from ignorance is not convincing.

[MADem]

99. Way to have a substantive issue-based discussion--toss a few lame insults.

It's obvious, though, that you want to propagandize, not discuss.

Knock yourself out; your petty little insults speak volumes, and they don't do you any credit.

[bitchkitty]

27. No, he can't, because THERE IS NO EVIDENCE.

None of the things the anti-socialist guys post are true.

[joshcryer]

29. Wouldn't broken fingerprint machines be cause for concern?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110814518

If the machines didn't work then the claim that ballot stuffing would be impossible is objectively false.

[reorg]

49. You said yourself they are not needed at all

You defended the student protesters that went on hungerstrike because they didn't like being fingerprinted:

They don't like mandatory fingerprinting before voting.

and added: "Next thing I'm sure you'll be supporting elections with all electronic voting machines that fingerprint you when you vote."

Personally, I can do without the fingerprinting. It's not done in where I live, in Germany. We don't even register to vote. We get a postcard notifying us of an upcoming election and that's the only identification you need to present in the polling station or if you request an absentee ballot. If you misplace this postcard, like I do most of the time, you can present your ID card.

In Venezuela, you have to present your ID card. Verification through fingerprints is only an additonal measure. With this new biometric data stuff the US demands us to have on passports, databases with fingerprints already exist. So why not use them for other purposes like voting. If the fingerprint readers don't work very well in some instances, well, then they're back to where we are, I guess.

[joshcryer]

66. No, it's not an "additional measure."

Fingerprinting activates the machine. This is a fundamental breakdown of the system.

It's simple, if a poll worker is standing around and someone comes in with an ID that doesn't match they'll simply trust the fingerprinting machine to verify the identity of the person voting.

Basically it presents a situation where you don't have to present your ID card. The trust is in the machinery.

[reorg]

80. BS, of course it is

Got any links for your claim?

The fingerprint readers don't substitute the need for identification, your wild fantasies about careless election workers notwithstanding.

Surely the opposition would have included such irregularities, if they had actually happened, in their list of complaints?

Still, if something was wrong with some of those fingerprint readers, the CNE should definitely find out what exactly it was and fix it. Or they could abandon them altogether which would make the student hungerstrikers and yourself more than happy, I'm sure.

[joshcryer]

81. They don't have actas in polling stations representing 700k votes.

Meaning there were no observers or observers weren't allowed. This was part of their complaint. It is alleged that they were forcefully removed during the audit or were otherwise not allowed in. There are eyewitness accounts of chavistas taking over the audit process.

The CNE should definitely fix it, and they would do themselves a favor by doing a full audit of the entire system including the electoral rolls since the machines did not operate as expected.

[reorg]

82. different issue

same bullshit. The actas are currently being digitalized and are published here:

http://actas14a.psuv.org.ve/

[joshcryer]

83. Regardless to check for ballot stuffing requires an audit.

Which Capriles has requested and which was denied.

So not sure what this discussion is about really.

[reorg]

84. how about producing some evidence

ACTUAL evidence as the poster said before I jumped in. The poster appears to have left the house, and you, despite your best efforts and lots of fanciful speculation, haven't produced any evidence for "ballot stuffing" either.

[joshcryer]

85. One needn't provide evidence to make the request.

There are pictures of a guy with a handful of cedulas and in the video the crowd is really pissed off with him accusing him of fraud, but I don't know the credibility of the video.

Anyway, I suppose the CNE can refuse to check the veracity of their systems if they want.

This is all circular arguing with you at this point.

I suspect you'd say the same of disenfranchised minority voters where Republicans refuse to do audits.

[cstanleytech]

14. Belief isnt proof though.

Sure its possible it could have happened just like its possible I could have won the megamillions jackpot last night but I didnt.

[Skidmore]

32. And you have facts to support this claim or are

you just catapulting your own version of propaganda, princess?

[Akoto]

45. I believe he had pancreatic cancer, a condition which kills many.

The prognosis is very poor, and it's a bad way to go. I had my reservations about the man, but I do not envy him, the way he went.

As for Maduro, all I can say for now is that he seems to be quite the firebrand and poet. Grand chief of the devils? Creative.

[tblue]

50. Maybe you don't know the history

of our gov't trying to help Big Oil get a foothold in Venezuela when Chavez refused to play ball with them. There's a reason this new president said what he said, and it's not petty and based on ignorance. Please read up on it before dismissing it.

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/12-bush-administration-behind-failed-military-coup-in-venezuela/

[Gore1FL]

5. I have to wonder who the Tea Party will side with.

The Black Guy or the Brown Guy?

[bitchkitty]

28. Neither - most of them don't know what or where Venezuela is. n/t

[Gore1FL]

38. Isn't near Benghazi?!?!?!?

[bitchkitty]

79. Nah, it's a town in Cuba. ;) n/t

[hrmjustin]

8. Sounds like a fool to me!

[John2]

13. President Obama

never had good relations or recognized the last President even though Chavez won by a large margin. I'm noticing a trend here. Is it just by accident, that he shows favoritism to right wing leaning rulers and bad relations with more leftist leaders? I've also noticed these leftist rulers seem to care about the interests of the poorer people in their countries while being accused of oppressing their wealthy elites. Is that the problem President Obama has with him? His Foreign Policies are too far right and dominated by neocons. There is a good bet, if he showed any good relations with a Leftist Government, that he will hear it from our rightwing Congress.

[cstanleytech]

17. If Obamas policies were truly to far right we would have long ago invaded Venezuela.

No the truth is Venezuela just doesnt really matter as its not a large player in the grand scheme of things much like Iran isnt nor Syria.

[John2]

51. and how did you

come to this conclusion Venezuela, Iran or Syria doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things? If that were the case, then why are U.S. politicians worrying about what happens in any of those countries? If you are an American, it just depends on which American you are talking to. So this is one American to another one if you are one, I do not agree with you. His Policies are too far to the Right in Foreign affairs. It is not that easy to carry out rightwing foreign aggression in International Affairs without the opinion of Public support in your own country. Even Bush had to demonize the opposition before he could take action. We do not have a Dictator or a King. So if neither of those countries matter, I guess you shouldn't worry about their internal affairs and trying to influence which government they have. You have the freedom of speech just like I have.

[Akoto]

46. I always find it odd how people joke about the President playing "ten-dimensional chess" ...

... as if he were a fool, yet left and right, he's perfectly capable of enacting so many evil plots and schemes against the poor and liberal (both of which I am, to be clear).

[John2]

59. Oh my comments

have nothing to do with games or chess, but what one believes. I do not agree with him on his opinions about Bush, Reagan, Romney or even Thatcher. I do not agree with him putting the Left in the same category as the Right in this country. I support the Left on social programs and finding Wars they don't like. I don't demonize every country the Right in this country believe we should demonize. When you can cite a country, Obama disagrees with the Rightwing Republicans in Congress on, then let me know. And I definately don't agree we should compromise with the Rightwing Republicans on Social issues. I would rather go to War with them if need be. I think it is a good idea to anihilate them politically. If it was up to me, Reid would have been replaced and we would have eliminated filibuster. A person have to do what a person have to do, in order to get things done. He needs to see Lincoln again.

[DFW]

30. I doubt Obama will lose any sleep over that

The President of Venezuela calling the President of the United States "the Devil" looks like it's starting to become a routine occurrence.

Besides, after all the crap hurled at him from Fox Noise and National Hate Radio for five years, this is amateur night at the insult factory. If Maduro wants to get nasty, he should make sure his inglés is up to snuff and then watch Hannity, Malkin and Coulter for a day, and learn how the experts do it.

[47of74]

31. Yep

Compared to all the things the reich wing in this country has called the President, the devil is pretty mild.

[davidthegnome]

39. I didn't follow the election in Venezuela

At least, not very closely. I knew it was going on, heard the rumors and wild speculations about Hugo perhaps having been poisoned, or somehow "given" cancer by the US... for the most part, it does not effect me, so I didn't pay much attention. I did have some measure of respect for Chavez though, it was hard not to, for a man so adored by the poor in his own Nation - a politician, greatly admired by the poor... it was hard to countenance.

The devil comment is pretty ridiculous - if Maduro wants to be taken seriously he should come up with some more original rhetoric - or at least more realistic rhetoric. I would not recommend turning to Hannity, Coulter, or Limbaugh for advice... rather, I would suggest Maduro take some lessons in recent US history.

He would discover that, in 2000, we had an "election" that was an absolute farce. He would discover that, again, in 2004, there was far too much shit going on under the surface to really have faith in Bush's second "victory". He might learn some things about smear campaigns - swift boat anyone?

The idea that a seated US President (in this case, Obama) can criticize another Nation for not holding "fair elections" is a funny joke. No one ever prosecuted Bush or his business allies for what happened in 2000. No one was ever held accountable for the fact that, even though Al Gore won... Bush was somehow chosen to sit his dumb ass in the oval office.

It's sad. Over the years we have had many opportunities to ally ourselves with South America, we have had many opportunities to make friends. Instead, our government and government agencies have branded them as evil backwards socialists, fooled around within their internal affairs and generally made an absolute mess and mockery of anything resembling diplomacy or good foreign relations.

Should Obama recognize Maduro? I don't know. I don't know enough about the details of the election, but I do know that for us to be overly critical or high and mighty about it is much like the raven calling the crow black.

[Ash_F]

44. On the devil comment

Chávez spoke like that sometimes. Maduro is just trying the emulate that.

One thing to consider about both of them is that neither were career politicians. They didn't grow up coddled in prep-schools and go straight into law school like most US politicians. They came from poverty. Chávez's career prior to politics was a soldier. Maduro was a bus driver.


Unlike our politicians, they did not go through the years of formal and iterated training that has been established over two centuries in order to pick their words carefully. No one taught them to stay away from firey rhetoric to maintain broad appeal and temper outrage. No such infrastructure existed in Venezuela for the poor.


They can get away with that language in Venezuela because the country has been through so many struggles, and the people are hardened to such language. Words don't outrage them compared to what they have been through. Not as much they would to relatively pampered first world citizens. But international media will jump on any opportunity to highlight any controversial comment and blast it in headlines, because that turns heads. However, their democracy is under attack from the outside and they need the support of international citizens right now. So they must learn to stay away from that kind of language.


But you know what? Even though, in America, we don't hear comments like that too often, the real barbarity is displayed when our politicians enact policies that do real physical harm to our citizens.

[davidthegnome]

47. I had no idea.

So what you're saying is that Chavez and Maduro were, essentially, REAL people? Another thing I simply can't countenance. Politicians who weren't born with silver spoons up their butts, who didn't have overwhelming advantages in comparison to their people. I find it admirable. I find it odd. I find it astonishing.

You're absolutely right in regards to barbarity. It's funny how we mock South American Nations as backwards socialists, as corrupt, often as criminals or as, somehow, lesser evolved beings. It's hysterical (no, not really) that we do this as we're de-funding meals on wheels, as heating assistance has been cut to the quick. It's so damnably ironic that Chavez actually worked to create a program that helped deliver heating oil to many of the impoverished people in America.

Yet, these guys are somehow the bad guys.... so much spinning our politicians and media do, it is terribly difficult to discern anything resembling real truth.

[Ter]

53. The far-left is just as nasty as the far-right

Screw him, I stand with Obama on this 100%.

[John2]

56. Just what are

you standing with him 100% on? The guy stole the Election or he is oppressing his people? Did you stand with him 100 % on his attitude towards Chavez too? Did he think Chavez was oppressing his people also and was illegitimate?

[davidthegnome]

60. The far-left is not even close...

Last edited Sun May 5, 2013, 01:47 PM - Edit history (2)

to being as nasty as the far-right. How can I say this? How can I have the audacity to make such a claim? Well, because I work in radio - or, rather, I work for a radio station. It is a very conservative station in a very conservative part of Maine (though we're trying to get some more moderate, even progressive programming, perhaps by replacing Glen Beck for an hour...) where there are hundreds, even thousands of eager, ignorant listeners. I am tasked with making sure we stay on the air, producing ads, that sort of thing.

As a consequence, I frequently have to listen to the rants of people like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, and Howie Carr. I have heard what they believe, I have listened to the words of their radio followers... and let me tell you, I'm not sure I can even imagine a more despicable bunch. While I'll grant that some republicans are actually decent people, most of them don't listen to Rush Limbaugh or take his word as gospel truth. The word of a white, fat rich man who's only real selling point seems to be that he's pissed off all the time.

I have also, on occasion, heard the words and speeches of those on the "far-left". I have yet to find a socialist that is nearly as angry, as crude, as ignorant and as petty as the vast majority of far-right individuals. On the contrary, generally I find that socialists are well spoken, thoughtful, compassionate - and even generous. It is about as different as night and day.

There really isn't anything here to stand with Obama on, unless it's the stubborn refusal (hands over one's ears... "I'm not listening... lalala...&quot to recognize an elected leader of a sovereign Nation. Don't get me wrong, generally I approve of Obama, generally I like what he has to say. I think a big part of the problem is that it would be politically unpopular to recognize Maduro, whether Obama wants to or not. It would drive the conservatives into a frenzy if Obama dared to be seen to recognize, like, or (God forbid) work with South American liberals.

In reality, it's a bunch of crap, as is Maduro referring to Obama as a devil.

[Ken Burch]

68. Well, Maduro does have his reasons. The U.S. is trying to destabilize Venezuela

and put the pro-corporate, anti-people candidate into office despite the fact that he clearly and indisputably lost.

If Capriles comes to power, it will be Honduras all over again-and no, what we did in Honduras was NOT a happy ending, folks.

[Arkana]

87. Taking a page out of the Chavez playbook, I see.

[Pterodactyl]

89. That is so racist.

[Enrique]

93. Venezuelan presidents have a way with words

and a preoccupation with devils.

[Sunlei]

94. President Nicolas Maduro acts like hes afraid to have his election checked for fraud.