Allied Parties Give Backing to Venezuela's Maduro

[Catherina]

Allied Parties Give Backing to Venezuela's Maduro

Following Chavez’s call in December for “unity, unity, and unity”, a multitude of leftist parties threw their weight behind the Presidential candidature of Nicolas Maduro this week.

Maduro will go into the April 14th elections with the formal backing of 14 political parties, two more than Chavez had in October 2012.

Maduro’s own party, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) was joined by its major allies, the Venezuelan Communist Party (PCV), as well as others such as REDES, Tupamaro, MEP, PPT, and Podemos in backing Chavez’s political successor this week.

These parties, which conform the alliance ‘the Gran Patriotic Pole’ (GPP), proved vital to the electoral success of Chavez in October, and are expected to play a significant role in both campaigning and votes for Maduro.

In October, the opposition alliance (MUD), which consists of over a dozen parties gained 6.6 million votes in total, beating Chavez’s party, the PSUV, which achieved 6.4 million votes. However the 1.8 million votes of the other allied revolutionary parties proved vital to push Chavez over the winning line and guarantee the future of his government.

Of these 1.8 million votes in October, the vast majority came from the Communist Party (490,000), followed by PPT (220,000), REDES (198,000), MEP (185,000), and Tupamaro (170,000).

The PCV Communist Party called a National Conference last week which voted unanimously to back Maduro as their candidate. “With the strength of our people and of the revolutionary and popular organizations, Nicolas Maduro will be elected as the constitutional President”, proclaimed the General Secretary of the PCV, Oscar Figuera.

Maduro, accepting their backing at their conference, paid lengthy tribute to the struggle of the PCV as a revolutionary party, and thanked the communists for the hard work they put in in on the streets and in the communities.

Similarly, the Vice President of Podemos, Baudillo Reinoso, restated his party’s commitment with Maduro: “With Nicolas Maduro we will continue to advance and to improve the quality of lives of Venezuelans. We don’t just support him in words, but also in deeds”.

Adrian Paez, speaking on behalf of MEP, stated that “we won’t allow the opposition to take political power, we will give continuity to the Plan of the Nation and the Revolutionary Socialist Project”.

The leader of REDES, Juan Barreto, speaking at his party’s conference, made a call to back Maduro: “We should continue the struggle, because this is the best homage that we can give to our leader Hugo Chavez”.

The PCV also recognized the importance of the continuing of a wider alliance with other revolutionary forces, which will “give continuity and deepen the democratic, participative and progressive nature of the process of changes started in 1998 in Venezuela, it is necessary that we maintain and develop the alliance of diverse political and social factors”.

Recent polls have given Maduro a commanding lead ahead of April 14th, from between 14 and 18 percent. The latest, by private Venezuelan firm International Consulting Services, suggested Maduro was 17.7% ahead of his conservative rival. In October, Chavez defeated Capriles by 11% of the vote.

http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/8322

This work is licensed under a Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives Creative Commons license

You are free:

to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/

[David__77]

1. Maduro will win.

And I imagine that the US media will attempt a vilification campaign, but not so successfully.

[joshcryer]

2. Yeah, he has unlimited coffers.

Capriles came out (ha, no pun intended) today bashing Maduro's use of public (ie, taxpayer) money to fund his campaign either directly or indirectly.

[idwiyo]

5. Maduro has unlimited public support. Here, fixed it for you.

P.S. Why do you keep posting straight RW propaganda on DU? Got any independent sources to confirm your statements?

[joshcryer]

7. The head of his campaign mobalization is the head of... PDVSA.

He also has complete control, as the President of Venezuela, over the Fonden fund.

PS why do you coddle homophobic bigots and slander those who criticize them as posting RW propaganda?

Oh, wait, you wanted sources, as if you give a damn about the bullshit cronyism in Venezuela.

Here you go: http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/155577/maduro-y-el-pueblo-aprueban-el-comando-de-campana-hugo-chavez-frias/

And: http://www.pdvsa.com/index.php?tpl=interface.en/design/junta2.tpl.html&newsid_obj_id=9216&newsid_temas=77

[idwiyo]

8. Thank you for providing even more RW propaganda. This time from Carlos Ardila Lulle owned media.

Last edited Sat Mar 23, 2013, 03:13 AM - Edit history (1)

Of course his sole owned NTN24 is like totally independent source and and upholds highest standard of non-biased reporting.

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

Now, lets talk about homophobia and who supports what.

Both candidates are guilty in this regard. Neither one of them is clean. The difference is which one is better for Venezuela?

Let's talk about Capriles, as he is the one who was accused of being closeted gay (this was used as a slur and is absolutely despicable).

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

Capriles said his faith had developed over the years, but that his time in prison in 2004 had "brought him much closer to God".[18] Capriles has stated that he is a "fervent Catholic",[19][20] and in an interview in the runup to the 2008 gubernatorial elections, he said that his greatest hero in history was Jesus Christ.[21]

I am sure "fervent Catholic" and Equal Human Rights for all without any exceptions go hand in hand. Oh, wait! LGBTQ and women don't need to apply. They are not exactly human, are they?

So, Capriles doesn't give a flying fuck about LGBTQ community, what he cares about is to prove that HE is not one of THEM. That is as despicable as the slur that was thrown at him.

I don't give a flying fuck who sleeps with whom and in which numbers/configurations/etc. no ones fucking business. That topic should NEVER be discussed unless of course only to prove hypocrisy. Even than it must be treated very carefully because there is absolutely nothing wrong with been gay, straight, by-, asexual, etc, etc.

His party:

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

And it's ideological roots:

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

Enough said, not that you would agree. But for some strange reasons I don't think its in the best intest of majority of people of Venezuela to implement these type of policies (just look how well it works in your own country!):

According to Boas and Gans-Morse nowadays the most common use of the term neoliberalism refers to economic reform policies such as “eliminating price controls, deregulating capital markets and lowering trade barriers”, and reducing state influence on the economy especially by privatization and fiscal austerity.[9] The term is used in several senses: as a development model it refers to the rejection of structuralist economics in favor of the Washington Consensus; as an ideology the term is used to denote a conception of freedom as an overarching social value associated with reducing state functions to those of a minimal state; and finally as an academic paradigm the term is closely related to neoclassical economic theory.[10]

Neoliberalism seeks to transfer control of the economy from public to the private sector,[71] under the belief that it will produce a more efficient government and improve the economic health of the nation

There is more, do read the entire article.

[joshcryer]

9. Haha! It's from AVN! Here's the original article on SiBCI:

http://www.avn.info.ve/contenido/comando-campaña-maduro-se-llama-hugo-chávez

Of course, I predicted that you'd quibble over the source so ignorantly. Just because it's posted on N24 doesn't mean that the source is invalid. They even cite AVN right there in the article.

So transparent.

[idwiyo]

11. Am not sure what is it are you laughing about? You provided a link to yet another RW website.

This time owned by Columbian billionaire.

It's very commendable of them to reprint an article from state owned media website.

It's shameful that you tried to pass it as an independent source of information.

[joshcryer]

17. I posted a Ven Gov article.

Which was quoted on a "RW website."

You ignorantly attributed the article, properly cited by the AVN, as a right wing source.

It is shameful that you'd try to pass off a Ven. news article as a right wing source.

[idwiyo]

19. You provided a link to RW media website that republished an article from Ven Gov media website.

By doing so you tried to pass a RW website as a legitimate source of information. Someone less aware of your trend to provide links to RW propaganda websites would have an impression this is a legit link, specifically because of reprinted article feom AVN.

That's no better than providing a link to FOX reprinted article from an independent or leftwingers source. You just confirmed your dishonesty AND confirmed that you are very fond at publishing RW propaganda on DU.

[joshcryer]

21. Wrong. I baited ignorant posters into bashing Ven. sources.

You were a perfect candidate, since it was clear you wouldn't actually look at the quoted text and see it was merely a republished article. Really, I searched for it, I saw that it was from the Ven. goverment, and wondered if you'd actually take the bait. You did. Rather than verifying the article, and indeed, ingnoring the orginating source, you decided to bash it, ignorant of the fact (verfied by the source) that it came straight from the Ven. government. It is hilarious to be sure.

I'll occasionally quote an AP source from FOX News just to see the hilarious knee jerk reaction from ignorant posters. (Generally it's only if FOX News is the only website currently displaying the AP link, of course; then again, AP is frowned upon here as well, so it's a wash, still, hilarious.)

I'm fond of posting the newswire on DU because people are ignorant, foolish, sad people who can't read the citation of the fucking articles, and it brings me much amusement when they lose their shit because they're programmed to follow certain sites, and can't think for themselves.

(I do usually use a disclaimer when I post a FOX News AP article, though, but on Latin America, I have no desire to say, "Hey, ignorant people, this is actually from sources within the government." For the simple reason that ignorant people like you will completely deflect from the source and show their hypocrisy.)

[idwiyo]

24. Bullshit. You tried to present yet another RW source as a legit source of info.

You were betting that some of the DUers will NOT check who owns this latest RW propaganda website because of the re-printed article. Unfortunately for you it failed.

So, why are you so fond of spreading RW propaganda, specifically against South America? You do remember this is DU and NOT FR? Or do you give a shit?

[joshcryer]

28. Wrong. I saw AVN in the date of the article.

Are you serious? You couldn't see who the source was! And you're going to pretend you know my actions?

Are you going to continue dishonestly saying I posted a "RW propaganda" when I posted an AVN SiBCI linked source? Seriously?

I did not post a right wing article. Perpetuating that bullshit is just hateful nasty typical behavior from people who can't take one iota of criticism for their Latin American masters.

[idwiyo]

29. You posted a link to RW propaganda website. It doesn't matter that they reprinted an article from

Government of Venezuela source. The only reason someone would do it is to present RW media website as "fair & balanced". Look, they reprint stuff from legit websites! You can trust them! They are OK!

Also, from your previous post:

I'll occasionally quote an AP source from FOX News just to see the hilarious knee jerk reaction from ignorant posters. (Generally it's only if FOX News is the only website currently displaying the AP link, of course; then again, AP is frowned upon here as well, so it's a wash, still, hilarious.)

I'm fond of posting the newswire on DU because people are ignorant, foolish, sad people who can't read the citation of the fucking articles, and it brings me much amusement when they lose their shit because they're programmed to follow certain sites, and can't think for themselves.

Are you sure you are on the right website? Amount of disdain toward DUers in that one quote is astonishing. Instead of educating people how to check if the source is legit or not you call your fellow DUers "ignorant, foolish, sad people" and brag how "it brings you much amusement"? This is trolling. Intentionally baiting others and enjoying it is NOT the way for responsible person to behave.

Seriously, WTF are you really doing here?

[joshcryer]

34. "Generally it's the only website."

Sometimes AP articles aren't on any other site than FOX News. So what? It's not a FOX News article it's an Associated Press article, when I post it.

It brings me amusement on any forum I go to when ignorant posters knee-jerk over trivialities and fail to have any substantiative input whatsoever.

Regardless, the fact that Rafael Ramírez is the head of Maduro's mobilization efforts is a known fact to anyone who actually follows Venezuelan politics. That you needed sources at all shows me that you aren't as well informed as you'd pretend to be.

[idwiyo]

37. You posted a link to RW media website. The only reason to do that is to present it as "fair &

balanced" and to trick others into trusting them.

BTW, I repeat my question from previous post. You show so much disdain to fellow DUers, are you sure this is a right website for you? What exactly are you doing here if not shit steering and using DU for your own amusement (as you yourself admit)?

[joshcryer]

39. I don't care about people trusting websites.

I really don't. It just comes up so often on these forums that it's hilarious.

I don't see how my being entertained by ignorant DUers shows disdain at all.

If anything I enjoy it.

This wouldn't be an issue if you hadn't ignorantly, falsely, attributed my source to the right wing and then insulted me as well as insulting the Venezuelan government for its own article!

[idwiyo]

42. Your source IS the RW media website that reprinted the article from Gov of Venezuela website.

And yet again you call your fellow DUers ignorant and brag how hilarious it is and how much you enjoy it.

So, what exactly are you doing here if not trolling? Are you sure you are in the right place? And I don't mean for trolling.

[joshcryer]

44. When some nasty person starts insulting me...

...I have no desire to try to connect with them. So why waste my time copying the AVN link when the other link is already in my clipboard? To pander to someone who's insulting me? Nah, better I just let themselves dig their own hole and make a fool of themselves. Which I think you did pretty well.

And that's where I get my enjoyment. If I let insulting, nasty people get to me, I wouldn't even post here. Far too many people can't be respectful of others and have a nice discussion about things.

I'll note this whole subthread deflects entirely from the fact that Maduro has a lot of ability to campaign, to the point that it makes the Koch bothers look like novices at spending money to buy an election.

[naaman fletcher]

33. Dude..

You got busted not even reading the article, but just looking at the source. That's a fact. Stop trying to weasel out of it.

[idwiyo]

40. Dude, I don't care about the actual article. What I care about is someone posting links to RW media

websites trying to present them as fair & balanced.

This is not the first time I asked this particular poster to post a link to independent source. It's yet to materialise.

[naaman fletcher]

50. ???

It was just a reprint from an independent source.

[idwiyo]

52. Did you actually bother to have a look who owns the website that reprinted that article?

[naaman fletcher]

54. Yes

And so what?

It's a reprint.

[idwiyo]

55. That's like saying its OK to post links to FOX News, if not worse. Since when did it became OK

to post links to RW propaganda websites regardless of what they reprint? The only reason to do it is to pretend they are fair & balanced and its OK to trust them because they reprint some legit articles too. Never mind that broken clock is right twice a day.

[naaman fletcher]

56. Fox News

Is a terrible and awful website, but a huge chunk of their stuff is reprinting AP stories. What is wrong with a Fox News AP story?

[idwiyo]

58. FOX News. That's what wrong but it looks like you either don't get it or deliberately pretend

there is no problem to present something like FOX or similar media website as a OK sourse of legitimate articles. After all, they just reprint them, nothing else.

[naaman fletcher]

72. I guess

you simply don't understand what a wire service is and their role in the media

[idwiyo]

99. Well, go ahead and explain why it's OK to post links to FOx and similar RW media sites on DU.

Am all ears.

[naaman fletcher]

100. BecauSe

It's ok when they are reprinting wire articles. Again, I think you simply don't know what a wire service is.

[Flatulo]

84. This is really silly. A link, by definition, is simply a pointer to other data. You

can pass a link through 5,000 RW websites, and the original data remains completely and utterly unadulterated.

You should really give up on this tactic. Joshcryer has made a valid point, which is that Maduro has the power of the state behind his candidacy. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence and impartiality can see this. Trying to discredit Josh doesn't change this one bit.

And by the way, it's insulting to continually question another poster's motives or accuse them of being a RW-er just because you disagree with them. This is a discussion board, not a cheerleading camp.

[Judi Lynn]

85. Doubt the poster ever has attempted to claim this democratic message board

was designed for cheerleaders. Perhaps you inappropriately exaggerate.

The poster, like other DU'ers is clearly well aware this message board was created for liberals, progressives, like himself.

As already stated here:

Democratic Underground is an online community where politically liberal people can do their part to effect political and social change by:

• Interacting with friendly, like-minded people;
• Sharing news and information, free from the corporate media filter;
• Participating in lively, thought-provoking discussions;
• Helping elect more Democrats to political office at all levels of American government; and
• Having fun!

[idwiyo]

91. Total BS. Pointing people to RW websites is the same as saying its OK to trust them because they are

Fair and balanced and print legit articles too.

Why not to point to originating website? After all, it's not that difficult in most cases to trace it down.
And if no one else printed the same article, it should at least tell you that just maybe it shouldn't be trusted just yet. But I am sure you know all that.

The other poster is choking on his/her own words. I am only questioning them because of what they said. And what they said is not exactly nice. They are trying to avoid the question like a plague because there is no excuse for it, is there?

What exactly does it have to do with cheerleading?

[Flatulo]

104. I think your your beliefs about Josh's motivations are clouding your thinking on this issue.

When I search for a link, I usually select the first source that Google finds. If its Fox or Drudge, I don't really care. I expect people to examine the raw data, not the path it takes to their monitor. In general, links do not filter the content that they point to.

I think Josh caught you here, and now you're flailing about trying to chip away at his point without really making any progress. You haven't even attempted to critique the actual data his link pointed to, so it seems safe to assume that you don't take issue with it.

On edit: you would have as much luck attacking the validity of a link because the network path that brought it to your screen via forty or fifty hops passed once through a host owned by a corporate RW entity. It's pretty much the same argument.

[joshcryer]

106. That's exactly what I did.

The first thing I did was search for Rafel Ramrez, and that was the first hit, I saw that it was AVN, searched for the first bit of quoted text, saw the AVN link (this is to verify the article is AVN, like one might do for AP if the website isn't one we like here). The N24 link was already posted in my post as a source. Why would I copy the other link if it's legit?

[idwiyo]

111. BS. Takes few minutes to post a link to originating website or at least find something that doesn't

stink as much as FOX and its ilk do.

In Josh's case he admitted himself he does it because it amuses him:

I'll occasionally quote an AP source from FOX News just to see the hilarious knee jerk reaction from ignorant posters. (Generally it's only if FOX News is the only website currently displaying the AP link, of course; then again, AP is frowned upon here as well, so it's a wash, still, hilarious.)

I'm fond of posting the newswire on DU because people are ignorant, foolish, sad people who can't read the citation of the fucking articles, and it brings me much amusement when they lose their shit because they're programmed to follow certain sites, and can't think for themselves.

That's a shitty attitude, doesn't matter how much you try to excuse it. Never mind showing so much disdain for DUers.

But do keep on coming up with excuses.

[Flatulo]

112. Any time you're prepared to refute the data, I'm happy to follow along.

The 'dismissing the source' game is a bit lazy, but I see it a lot in this group. It meshes well with the overall authoritarian tone of many posts.

[idwiyo]

113. I am not going to bother with links to FOX and its ilk. Why should I spend my time verifying

that what FOX or other RW website reprinted is actually the same article that was printed on originating website? It's not a big secret that FOX does shit like mislabeling R and D when it makes Republicans look better.

You want to be taken seriously, do spend few extra minutes and post a link to originating source.
If you can't find it elsewhere may be its not worth posting. It's that simple.

[Flatulo]

114. Thank you for your time. nt

[joshcryer]

10. Capriles came out bashing the homophobia, actually.

He said LGBT should be treated equally.

He wants the Missones enshrined into law (a right for all Venezuelans).

Capriles is a pencil pusher more than anything, he wants to shut down the cronyism.

He's not the evil neoliberal that you make him out to be.

[idwiyo]

12. Sorry. "Fervent Catholic" and defender of Equal Human Rights for all just don't go together.

It's either one or the other. As soon as Capriles publicly denounces RCC stance on equality for all, I'll look at his claims differently. Never mind his political affiliations.

[joshcryer]

13. Eh, you're the one defending the poor LGBT performance of Maduro.

I don't use that sort of justification because I think Capriles, if he ever held power, would do more than just posture to a homophobic base.

[idwiyo]

14. Can you please point out where exactly I defend "poor LGBTQ performance by Maduro"?

Here is my statement from previous post:

Both candidates are guilty in this regard. Neither one of them is clean. The difference is which one is better for Venezuela?

Let's talk about Capriles, as he is the one who was accused of being closeted gay (this was used as a slur and is absolutely despicable).

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

Capriles said his faith had developed over the years, but that his time in prison in 2004 had "brought him much closer to God". Capriles has stated that he is a "fervent Catholic", and in an interview in the runup to the 2008 gubernatorial elections, he said that his greatest hero in history was Jesus Christ.


I am sure "fervent Catholic" and Equal Human Rights for all without any exceptions go hand in hand. Oh, wait! LGBTQ and women don't need to apply. They are not exactly human, are they?

So, Capriles doesn't give a flying fuck about LGBTQ community, what he cares about is to prove that HE is not one of THEM. That is as despicable as the slur that was thrown at him.

I don't give a flying fuck who sleeps with whom and in which numbers/configurations/etc. no ones fucking business. That topic should NEVER be discussed unless of course only to prove hypocrisy. Even than it must be treated very carefully because there is absolutely nothing wrong with been gay, straight, by-, asexual, etc, etc.

[joshcryer]

15. "Both candidates are guilty in this regard."

Which is false because Capriles has never used homophobic slurs. He's on only come out in defense of LBGT. Simple.

You justify it on the basis that "all Latin American politicians" are bad on LGBT issues. But Capriles has already defended them, so he's already, 100%, ahead of the cause.

[idwiyo]

16. Capriles is "fervent Catholic" by his own words. THAT doesn't go together with Defender of LGBTQ

Rights. Either he publicly denounces RCC stance on LGBTQ (and woman) rights or he is full of shit.
Campaign promises notwithstanding.

[joshcryer]

18. That's a white wash. He's come out against LGBTQ discrimination.

Which is a far sight better than the homophobic bigot Maduro.

This isn't a "campaign promise." He literally responded to the homophobic bigot Maduro condemning him on his homophobic statements. So few Latin American politicians would go so far as to condemn homophobia. He's done it. It's a fact.

[idwiyo]

20. So, what stoping him with condemning RCC and dropping his "fervent Catholic" claim?

Did he forget about it? Or is it a clever tactic to try to attract LGBTQ vote only to drop them as soon as election is over?

Wouldn't be the first politician to do just that, would he? So pardon me if I am sceptical.

As it stands, both are bigots. Maduro is better for Venezuela simply because his party doesn't bloody believe in privatisation. THAT alone makes him a better candidate, BUT it doesn't absolve him from being a bigot in any way shape or form. I can only hope he will "evolve" just like Obama did.

As of now he has my partial support only because he is a lesser of two evils when it comes to who is better overall for Venezuela as a country whe majority of people are poor.

[joshcryer]

22. Can you name one Latin American Presidential candidate or politician who has done that?

No? OK. You got your answer. It remains a fact that Capriles is the only Venezuelan candidate who has called out LGBTQ discrimination. Period. Full stop. Do not pass go. Do not collect $100. The only candidate.

Maduro is your "lesser of two evils" because you attribute his policies to Chavez. Maduro is no Chavez. At least Chavez didn't make homophobic statements and was neutral on the issue. He was someone to be respected in the Latin American environment. Maduro? Fuck that piece of shit homophobic bigot who panders to the lowest common denominator. Chavez never did that bullshit. Even as he stood in the last election with homophobic posters hanging in the background, he never acknowledged that bullshit.

[idwiyo]

23. Don't try to wiggle out of it. We are talking about Capriles and his campaign promises.

All he needs to do is publicly denounce RCC and his "fervent Catholic" claim. He does it' he is legit.
Otherwise he is full of shit and bigot, same as Maduro. Same as Chavez, as much as it pains me to say so and to place all 3 of the, into the same category.

BTW, he doesn't have to wait till election is over, he can do better - how about propose a new law right now? One that prohibits discrimination against LGBTQ community. What exactly stops him from doing it now?

[sabrina 1]

25. Capriles is a liar. He said whatever he thought he had to say, to win. And liars always end up

tripping over themselves...

[idwiyo]

26. He can propose the law against discrimination of LGBTQ right now. No need to wait until after

the election. Telling that he didn't do it yet.

Guess he didn't evolve enough...

[Marksman_91]

31. He's won't put up laws to defend the LGBT community because right now it's the smart move

Venezuela is dominated by a machismo culture, where most of the population still looks down upon homosexuality. I'm not saying it's the right thing that gays are discriminated, but if you blatantly show support for homosexuals like Obama did, your popularity would plummet quite rapidly. Don't know if you know this, but I'm Venezuelan myself, and was born and raised in Caracas. Granted, at the moment I'm studying in Miami for a little over 2 years now, but most of my family is still there, and I travel often to the Capital, so I'm still keeping touch with the situation in the country. I suggest you take great care in what you say, especially since you do not know the reality of the country like I do.

[idwiyo]

35. He already said he will do so when he is elected. I am guessing THAT would damage him enough

right away, no? So, why wait, prove you mean what you say and prove it now, not after the election.

BTW, this is the same person who cares so much about Venezuela, he wants to privitise everything? I guess his much beloved country wasn't raped enough by international corporations, lets do the round two. And fuck those poor people and shit like Health and Poverty reduction. Everyone for themselves and if you can't pull yourself by bootstraps you deserve to be poor. Let's build some skyscrapers, Dubai style!

Just read what his party stands for, check the damn Wiki for the ideological roots of his party.

Sorry, but I have a really hard time believing he gives a flying fuck about LGBTQ community, or anyone for that matter. Unless of course they can help him to get elected or can donate preferably large amounts of money to his campaign.

And somehow I doubt that an average Venezuelan person can afford to study in Miami. How did you manage it? Scholarship from government? Private wealth? care to share?

[joshcryer]

45. "he wants to privitise everything"

Nope.

[Marksman_91]

53. I'm studying in Miami because my family and I decided to leave the country.

Lemme tell you a story: my grandparents were immigrants from Italy who literally came to Venezuela with nothing. They had to start from scratch there, and they worked their asses off to be able to afford their family of five a proper home and education. My grandfather, in particular, because he WORKED hard, managed to establish a successful business which sold construction material (during that time in Venezuela, between the 60s and 70s, probably the largest construction boom occurred in Venezuela, as the country was going through its most prosperous years, unlike today). My father helped out my grandpa in this business, and thanks to his and my grandfather's effort, was able to afford to go to study economics in Miami. My mother met him there as well, and then, after my dad graduated, they both came back to Venezuela, as things were actually going well there back then.

My mother then had my brother while she did her studies in Architecture at the Central University of Venezuela (UCV, which, by the way, was always public and not at all "privatized", meaning that anybody, as long as they had the grades and dedication, could enroll in it, no matter what kind of socio-economic class they came from). She graduated after I turned 2. Later on, my grandpa had to retire and my dad took over the business, but since he also knew the potential of real-estate investment, he decided to buy properties which he would resell or rent, offering another profitable source of income. When he could afford it, my dad decided to invest in properties here in the US as well, particularly in the Miami area. And his business is still alive and kicking back home, giving people plenty of jobs and paying them their fair share for their work.

Unfortunately, ever since Chávez took over, construction has only gone down the drain in the country. You take a good luck at the infrastructure, and you'd see torn-up streets everywhere, whole buildings which have been left unfinished for years (of which many have been invaded by street dwellers, OBVIOUSLY because there's no poverty AT ALL in the country, right?), and the only substantial things that have been constructed are shanty towns by the masses.

But, the REAL reason why we decided to move here to Miami was because of the high crime rate. A friend of mine from highschool was actually murdered about 3 years ago because some asshole malandros wanted to rob her. They didn't even offer her the choice of giving it up, they just hit her on the head without warning and left her on the pavement while she simply went out to the bakery. She passed away a few days later due to blunt force trauma. I also know many people personally, some even family members, who have been kidnapped and held for ransom. One of them was a cousin of mine who was pregnant with her second child. Thankfully, nothing bad happened to her, but hey, obviously her husband had to pay the ransom, or she could've probably been murdered.

The numbers themselves say it, Venezuela has one of the highest homicide rates in the world, and that number has only been increasing ever since Chávez took over. Go look 'em up, even Venezuelan government entities are those who release these amounts. People are basically vulnerable wherever they are, even in their homes, because criminals have only grown by the numbers and actually have acquired more and more sophisticated weapons and equipment throughout the years. A pretty good example of this are the mutinies that have occurred in the last few years in Venezuelan prisons. They've actually found military-grade weaponry held by criminals in the jails, and the wardens themselves allow this to happen. And this was not long ago, they've happened within the last 2 or 3 years. But obviously, Iris Valera, who's in charge of the ministry that handles prisoner affairs, says that the previous governments (as in, before Chávez) are the ones at fault for this. The point is, the government is willing to blame EVERYBODY but themselves for anything wrong that happens in the country. Hell, Maduro's claiming that Chávez's cancer was inoculated by the US. That screams bat-shit crazy to me.

So in the end, my family and I decided to move to Miami because my parents couldn't bear the stress of us, especially my brother and I, going out and being exposed in the streets of Caracas, one of the cities with the highest crime rates in the world. Go ahead, accuse me of being a right-wing anti-socialist (I'm not, by the way. I'm actually in favor of socialism, and support Obama's policies in trying to put the US a little more along that path. But I actually support more the social democracy that is implemented in the Scandinavian states, not the pseudo-socialism that Chávez implemented here, where the highest government officials have made themselves multimillionaires out of what is rightfully the people's oil money).

I don't really expect you to understand since you don't know Venezuela like I do. So maybe your ignorance is understandable due to that. But please, don't be so close-minded and think that anybody who is wealthy or claim to be of a certain belief automatically makes them something else. Chávez himself was the one who seeded the idea that being rich is bad to the humble population of Venezuela, but yet, his family and his lackeys' are the ones that possess the most wealth now in the nation, and each day they become more and more exclusive of anybody who does not share their ideology. I can understand if they resent all those political parties that they claim to be responsible for everything wrong with the country (they're not anymore, by the way. Chávez's regime has existed for 14 years now, so everything today is now their responsibility after so many years in power), but now it has gotten beyond the point of politics, it's become an ideological issue, and over 44% of Venezuelans (which I doubt consists mostly of rich people and middle-class) have stated they don't support this government, which is willing to exclude or resent everyone in that percentage simply because they think differently. Tell me, how does that sound like a civilized country or the socialist utopia that you and so many other chavistas in this site seem to think there is in Venezuela?

[idwiyo]

57. It was always an ideological issue. Rich vs dirt poor. People who have no problem selling their

country resources to the highest foreign bidder, people who don't give a flying fuck about healthcare, public education, investing in people instead of building skyscrapers aka Dubai style, etc, etc, etc.

Sorry, I have hard time taking anything you say seriously enough to even bother with longer reply.

Have a great day.

[Marksman_91]

60. That's the kind of reply you give?

Really? One that refuses to counter any point that I made (points which you can look up yourself, by the way) and simply says "can't take you seriously"? You're not really coming off as the rational one in the argument. When you refuse to dispute any point that someone has made, and simply decide to evade them based on the fact that you can't take them seriously, even though they haven't made some kind of personal attack against you, you're only giving the impression that you simply have no good arguments to give. I thought you'd be a little more mature than that, but I suppose I was wrong.

[idwiyo]

62. Sick and tired refuting the same old arguments over and over and over again.

Have a good day. Don't forget to have a last word.

[Marksman_91]

66. Fair enough. I'd like a link or something I could use to see where you refute them

If you manage to provide something authentic, I'll drop the subject. I'm asking you as an opponent in an argument who has thus far not disrespected you in any manner whatsoever who kindly expects the same treatment.

[Mika]

101. I'd like to see a link from you where some here claim Ven is a "socialist utopia".

Your inclusion of that ridiculous comment reveals a lot about your perspective on this discussion.

[joshcryer]

63. "selling their country resources to the highest foreign bidder"

US is their biggest importer of oil.

They sided with the US at Rio+20.

They're dependent on the US to refine their gasoline.

[idwiyo]

65. They sell oil to US. Nationalised resource. But you know that, don't you? They don't let someone

else into the country so THEY can rip all the profits and leave absolutely nothing behind, but I a sure you understand the difference.

At least I hope you do.

[joshcryer]

67. China got oil at $5 a barrel.

And resold it at market rates.

Venezuela buys gasoline at $200 a barrel from the Unites States and sells it at $5 to the rich Venezuelans who own cars.

The foreign entities are making profit even if their contractors are not on the ground. They don't need to be with the boligarchs running the show.

[idwiyo]

87. 2010 report, some accusations as usual. Nothing specific. Not even sure what is it that Chavez

Should have been doing in her opinion. Never work with capitalists? Kick all of them out of the country? Invite everyone in? What?

Interviews a politician that disagree with Chavez, some accusations with no way to prove or disprove what is said.

So, what is your point?

Also, what are you trying to say pointing that China resold Venezuelan oil for profit? Chavez's fault somehow? Your second acusation of selling gasoline to rich Venezuelans for below the market price (link would be nice to verify the claim) - WTF was that about? Don't sell gasoline to rich people?
What exactly?



Some info for other DUers about the reporter, Monica Vilamizar

American born journalist working for various media companies:

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

Worked for:

Noticias Caracol

Noticias Caracol (until 9 October 2007 Caracol Noticias) is the name for all the national newscast from the news division of Caracol Televisión which carries the same name. It is broadcast four times on weekdays and twice on weekends.
Before becoming a network, Caracol Televisión produced the morning newscast 7:30 Caracol in the mid-1990s. Several well-known Colombian journalists, such as Claudia Palacios, Érika Fontalvo, and María Cristina Uribe were also news presenters of Caracol Noticias. Yamid Amat was its director until March 2002.
The newsroom and studio was built in nine months before Caracol Noticias’ first airing, on 10 July 1998. Canadian company Imageneering acted as a consultant.
All Noticias Caracol newscasts are also aired live on Caracol TV Internacional, the international general entertainment channel from Caracol TV and on Caracol TV’s WGEN-TV in Miami, which is affilitated to the MundoFox teleivision network, which is half-owned by Caracol TV’s competing television network, RCN Televisión from Colombia.

Caracol TV

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

Caracol Televisión is a Colombian private national television network, owned by the Santo Domingo Group.

Julio Mario Santo Domingo

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

Julio Mario Santo Domingo Pumarejo (October 16, 1923 – October 7, 2011)[2] was a Colombian businessman and patriarch of the wealthy Santo Domingo family. He was the son of (Julio) Mario Santo Domingo and Beatriz Pumarejo. He controlled more than 100 companies in the diversified portfolio of the "Santo Domingo Group." He was listed by Forbes magazine as one of the wealthiest men in the world, and the second wealthiest in Colombia, with a fortune of $6 billion US dollars.[3] He is an alumnus of the University of Virginia.[4] He was the founder of a philanthropic foundation, named to honor his father, that benefits Colombia's social development.

BUT she was working for Al Jaseera too!!! Woo Hoo! Must be trusted without questions asked! Or not.

BTW, that award she received is on one of the safest topics one can pick.

[naaman fletcher]

88. China oil

That china resells the oil for a big profit means that they are paying too little for it in Venezuela. That means that Venezuela is giving away money to China that could otherwise be used on behalf of Venezuelans. It's pretty straight forward, really.

[idwiyo]

90. And it's Chavez fault? He should have known it would happen in advance? What? Is it still going?

Links, please.

[naaman fletcher]

92. Well,

If you don't think Chavez is the one striking deals with foreign countries that gives them oil at cut rate prices then it is not his fault.

I can't get links today as I have an 18 hour series of flights I'm embarking on now but hopefully someone else can post the links.

[naaman fletcher]

93. Have a few minutes on internet, here you go:

http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/americas/china-resold-5-a-barrel-venezuelan-oil-at-a-profit

[joshcryer]

119. I actually posted that link up thread.

The poster doesn't actually read the links as was established earlier. They just spout off nonsense about how people are right wingers when the facts are unsettling.

[joshcryer]

107. She reported the facts, as Al Jazeera is known to do.

What, you think she should've opined about what should've been done about the boligarchs?

Do you have an issue with the facts she presented? Chavez himself came out against the boligarchs. If you actually took the time to research the person she interviewed it's rather simple to see that everything she said is factual: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilmer_Ruperti

In the video he denies being a "boligarch" (wouldn't all boligarchs?). If you look at how big of a contractor he is, that is flat out wrong. Monica simply reported the facts, and the boligarch in question wound up revealing himself in a classic Al Jazeera style of reporting. It is brilliant really.

China's deal with Venezuela at $5 a barrel oil was that they couldn't resell it. They resold it. Making massive profits. That was theft outright from the Venezuelan people (if Venezuela sold it at market rates to China, then they would've got the profit, not China). This is neoliberalism in action. Making really crony deals with capitalists and screwing over the people under the auspices of "free enterprise." If that shit happened here in the US we'd be having an uproar of epic proportions.

As far as selling gasoline at $5 a barrel that they pay the US $200 a barrel? Most poor Venezuelans do not have cars. It only helps out the richer Venezuelans who do have cars. Simple logic here. According to Wikipedia Venezuela has 147 cars per 1000 people. 85% of Venezuelans don't have a car. Gas that is cheaper to buy than water, then, only benefits that 15% of Venezuelans who do have a car.

[idwiyo]

108. Starting with its 2 year old report. Next would be facts vs hearsay. You know how to tell them apart

Chavez sold oil to China. And what? Deal was they shouldn't resell. They did. That's Chavez's fault according to you. He should have foreseen it somehow. Bad Chavez. Is this all you can come up with?

Someone is a boligarch. He denies it. Accusations of favouritism without proof. Nothing new there.

Some other politician makes some more accusations. Again nothing verifiable, just someone said something.

Next according to you Chavez should sell gasoline to rich people for higher price then he sells it to poor? Because it benefits rich people? This is just plain nuts.

Just because its Al Jaseera doesn't mean I have to trust anything they say. In this case I would like some proof of accusations. Something. There was nothing offered besides hearsay. But you consider it a brilliant journalism...

Got something better?

[joshcryer]

117. He should've never sold it so cheap.

That's the point. We all get upset, rightly, when foreign entities take resources and the people don't get a fair shake of it, but in this situation, it's not Chavez' fault, it's China for renigging. Of course, they wouldn't have had the opportunity to do so without Venezuela selling it to them so cheaply!

As far as selling gasoline, Venezuela already has in place quotas to states that border Colombia, because Venezuelans, poor Venezuelans, would carry big bottles and jugs of gasoline over the border and sell it to Colombians. It's cheaper than water, they spend $1 in Venezuela to get tens of gallons, go to Colombia and sell it at a little bit below market rates, and return with hundreds of dollars.



In the last elections, ironically, the chavistas were talking about implementing the quota system nation wide (basically the first few tanks are super cheap, after that they are priced at higher market rates). And guess who was against doing that? Why, none other than Capriles! (Who I criticized for this, btw, because he was the one supporting the chavista regressive policy.)

I posted you proof of that guys boligarchical past, if you refused to read the link, it's not my fault. Monica's report was accurate. I await your criticism of her report that is more substantiative than she worked for a bad news agency in the past.

[Judi Lynn]

69. You are laboring under a misperception people might find your family history

more interesting than anyone could be.

My eyes started glazing over before I had ended your first paragrah. I dropped back to check how long it was, skipped through it picking up phrases, and realized you simply have no idea how to make a point, and seem to be drowning in yourself.

Pick up the pace. You are not obligated to keep hurling yourself at this board to support the other right-wingers who come to troll at D.U. They've been here forever, it's their job. The lives of their little right-wing children depend upon it.

Don't tie yourself down. Surely a fashionable, rich young lord like yourself should be off enjoying the "good life" you enjoy in the U.S. of A., bucking down, devoting your efforts to your ambition, getting in there, working hard to make yourself fabulous, just like your right-wing parents did before you.

The world is your oyster, as long as the right-wing controls things in this country. Go get'em.

[joshcryer]

71. How kind of you.

[Marksman_91]

73. Still waiting for someone to actually address the points I made instead of attacking me

And not only that, but you're being a prime example of disrespect towards an opponent by making a personal false accusation based on nothing but your intolerance towards anybody who criticizes a government that you support, even if the critic is someone who knows that government better than you.

Tell me, and please try to keep the personal attacks aside, how criticizing Chávez or anything that his government is responsible for automatically make me a right-winger.

[idwiyo]

89. Maybe you should start with providing some links to independent sources so one can at a least

attempt to verify what you said about Chavez, what is going on in Venezuela, accusations of corruption, whatever else points you raised. You made those accusations, you should at least attempt to supply some verifiable info to prove them.

[Marksman_91]

95. Alright, here's one concerning the crime rate

http://www.insightcrime.org/news-briefs/venezuelan-government-recognizes-record-murder-rate

Hope that was insightful

[idwiyo]

96. Crime rate is not a secret and was never in dispute. Who and why is responsible is different matter.

Can you provide some links to your claim below? Please, not RW websites, try to find something independent.

But I actually support more the social democracy that is implemented in the Scandinavian states, not the pseudo-socialism that Chávez implemented here, where the highest government officials have made themselves multimillionaires out of what is rightfully the people's oil money).

[Zorro]

75. I found his family history interesting

as did many others, I'm certain.

When are you planning to relocate to Caracas and experience the Bolivarian revolution firsthand?

Let me guess. Never. Because it might just shatter your illusions.

[naaman fletcher]

76. How is Lawrence, KS?

You wouldn't survive two days on your own in Latin America, where of course you have never been.

How so very liberal of you to ignore a poster from your comfortable coffee shop in Lawrence, KS.

[Zorro]

79. Hell she's never even been to Miami

Yet she's a self-anointed expert on the expatriate communities there.

[naaman fletcher]

82. For what its worth

This post encapsulates EVERYTHING we have already known about you.

[naaman fletcher]

74. lol.

1. As an italian immigrant you are clearly a racist.
2. You are also a fascist.
3. If you had been here longer you would know that crime is a fault of the right-wing in venezuela
4. ALSO, the media neglects to report everything Chavez was doing about crime.
5. The fact that you live in Miami just seals the deal.

[Marksman_91]

77. It's a good thing I know you're being sarcastic, or else I would've just given up in this thread :P

What's sad is that you're really not that far from how the chavistas here actually behave

[naaman fletcher]

78. Of course

It's a religion. You can't use rationality against it.

They simply believe that Latin America is a world of black and white, with no grey in between. It is quite racist really. They don't believe Latin American's are human and suffer from the same faults, desires, and ambiguities as the rest of us. One is either good or bad. There is no inbetween, there is no grey. Just good and bad. It is a comic-book view. They are the racists. They are the ones who de-humanize Latin Americans into either hero revolutionaries who have no fault, or evil rich fascists.

Of course, if Judi were on her own in Caracas she wouldn't last two days, but I am sure she can tell you what a great revolutionary she is if you meet up with her for a coffee in Lawrence, KS.

[Marksman_91]

80. Not even Reagan has such fanatism from the most hardcore right-wingers

The idolatry that people give to Chávez is something bordering on religion, it's unhealthy for the mind. I'd go as far as compare it to the idolatry that Nazis gave Hitler. Guess that's why they take such offense when someone criticizes him: you're pretty much criticizing their god. And then they refute your claims with personal attacks rather than with a civil argument. It's sad, really. I understand that this is DemocraticUnderground, so obviously I'd expect most people to be Democrats (the side I agree almost always with in US politics, by the way) and therefore maybe be a bit more left leaning than right, but never to such extremes that their ideology overpowers their rationality.

[ocpagu]

97. Reductio ad Hitlerum?

It's getting better all the time...

[Benton D Struckcheon]

83. Said it better than I could.

The condescending attitude towards Latin America these "experts" display is extraordinary.
Also, the consistent attitude taken - on display yet again here - is a version of ad hominem known as "poisoning the well".
Simple point of order for all of you doing this (you know who you are): this isn't an actual legitimate debating tactic. The idea is to refute the point the person is making, not dismiss the point out of hand based on what site the person linked to, or in this case what site you think they linked to.
The bad part of this is that the OP does good work in real life, from what I can figure out. But the online persona presented when the subject is Chavez is not exactly conducive to making a pro-Chavez case to anyone not already convinced that he ascended to Heaven three days after he died.
My position remains the same, and is merely confirmed by this thread: Chavez was out to make his party - and its allies - into a Venezuelan version of the Mexican PRI in its salad days. From what I can see, he's succeeded, right down to reproducing "el dedazo", the old PRI practice of the outgoing Prez naming his successor and thereby guaranteeing that person's election to President. That's what the OP's article is actually, perversely, celebrating. It's not at all something that should be celebrated, not if you know Latin American history at all.
It will end the same way: massively corrupt and stagnant. The corruption is already there, the stagnation awaits. It's a fairly typical supply region (a place that exports a single commodity and depends on the earnings from that to stay afloat) political model, but that's no excuse for Chavez's behavior anymore than it is for Putin or the Saudi royal family. It's just an explanation.
Someone around here posted a critique of him which characterized his regime as "Bonapartist". This is actually a stunningly accurate description both because Chavez came from the military and - far more importantly - Napoleon wasn't French: he was Corsican, and he followed the Corsican custom of trusting only his family when it came to apportioning power in his briefly glorious European empire. Chavez almost exactly followed that model.

[ocpagu]

102. That's why I disagree with you.

1 - Religion is based in faith, approval for Chávez and PSUV is based in concrete, visible changes. Say whatever you want, but not that voting for people who are improving your living standards is not being rational. It makes no sense.

2 - About the "comic-book view"... have you taken a time to consider the possibility that you are projecting a black-and-white view of "chavismo" yourself? And, when people say, even in a non inflammatory way, that Chávez voters (the majority of Venezuelan voters, the majority of Venezuelan people) must be uneducated, irrational, members of cult or something as bigoted to justify their choice, aren't they using de-humanization?

3 - You know, if evil rich fascists were only characters of DUer's "comic-book views", I could understand your point about seeing the world in black-and-white. But they are not. They are quite real. They've plagued this continent with mass killing, mass torture, coups, juntas, censorship. They've turned this place the most unequal region of the planet. Being aware of this and expressing disagreement of such a corrupted system and supporting change is what's expected from progressives and this, of course, does not mean they can't see the whole figure.

4 - Judi would be ok in Caracas, as I was ok in Caracas.

[naaman fletcher]

103. I wasnt' commenting on voting for Chavez

1. I was commenting on the attitude on DU that EVERYTHING Chavez does is correct, and every one of his opponents is a fascist.

2. Yes, I have considered that, but I have also spent years here watching certain people believe that everything Chavez has ever done is right no matter what, and every one of his opponents is wrong no matter what. I would agree about your second sentence.

3. I agree, but that doesn't mean that every middle class person fleeing venzuela is an evil rich fascist, and that every person who votes against Chavez is an evil rich fascist.

4. I don't think she has ever been out of the country, but you might be right.

[ocpagu]

86. Oh, I knew it was coming...

... the myth of superiority of the self-made (rich) man.

Justifying social exclusion and inequality for ages in Latin America.

[Marksman_91]

94. In what moment did I claim to be "superior"?

I'm just trying to explain my socio-economic background in hopes that the false accusers would be a bit more considerate about my views and why I'm critical of the current Venezuelan government and stop with the personal attacks. But apparently to no avail, as seen by your and others' posts.

[joshcryer]

27. The point is that Capriles went one further than Maduro.

Already making him better on LGBTQ issues than Maduro. That's all.

If you want to move the goalposts that's your prerogative, I have no desire to run circles around you.

Say he did do those things, you'd still pull something out saying he wasn't doing enough.

Much like Obama on gay rights. Not doing enough, etc.

If he wants to get elected in homophobic Catholic dominated Latin America he can't be fully for gay rights before being elected, and you know it. So you propose an impossible situation. And of course, you know that it's an impossible situation. If he was President? (Which won't happen.) I think he would make moves to equalize.

[Marksman_91]

30. So claiming to be Catholic automatically makes you a homophobe... That makes PERFECT sense

Don't be so close-minded.

[idwiyo]

32. Claiming to be "fervent Catholic" does. Also, if he is so pro-LGBTQ rights, why not to introduce

the new bill now? Why wait until after the election? Great way to attract LGBTQ vote and to humiliate existing government even further.

Questions, questions...

Hmmm, or may be all it is just empty campaign promises? I'll bet my money on it. On the other hand, if you trust this weasel, I have a bridge over River Thames to sell to you. interested?

[joshcryer]

36. Oh lordy he's not going to get elected.

He's not going to have any power whatsoever.

You'll never be able to prove that he's dishonest on this matter.

All we got is that he's defended LGBTQ in the past.

While Maduro stands on the bully pulpit insulting them.

Simple.

[idwiyo]

38. Defend them by doing something about it instead of paying lip service. Words are damn cheap.

[joshcryer]

41. Why not Maduro?

Why does it fall on Capriles, a governor, to make up legislation, when Madruo, who has had to apologize on numerous occasions for his homophobic bigotry, could decree it?

Oh, I guess that means that the homophobic bigot Maduro is, in actuality, not really apologizing, since he's simply "paying lip service."

[idwiyo]

43. We are talking about Capriles, The Defender of LGBTQ Rights, no? If Maduro wants to prove that he

Not a bigot, he sure as hell SHOULD introduce that law and introduce it now. I am positive he could swing it too. After all, Opposition is all for it, no?

Unfortunately I don't trust either one of them when it comes to LGBTQ rights because neither one gives a shit and both are bigots.

[joshcryer]

46. Capriles has never said a bigoted statement.

So I guess you just can read his mind or something and know that he's a bigot like Maduro openly is.

[idwiyo]

47. "Fervent Catholic" by his own words. Enough said.

[joshcryer]

48. Nice.

Saying you're a "fervent Catholic" is a bigoted statement.

[idwiyo]

51. Makes it that much harder to believe in Capriles The Defender Of LGBTQ Rights.

BTW, care to answer what are you doing on DU with all the disdain towards DUers you exhibit in your posts? Your claims how hilarious it is for you to shitsteer? How much it amuses you?

Are you sure you are on the right website, and I don't mean for trolling?

[joshcryer]

59. I've been here since 2002.

Please move along and stop harassing me. Your initial objection to my source is totally bizarre and wrong. Until you apologize for harassing me, insulting me, lying about me, and overall being nasty to me, I have no desire to respond to you.

[idwiyo]

61. You have been here since 2002 proves exactly what? See quote below from your own post

I'll occasionally quote an AP source from FOX News just to see the hilarious knee jerk reaction from ignorant posters. (Generally it's only if FOX News is the only website currently displaying the AP link, of course; then again, AP is frowned upon here as well, so it's a wash, still, hilarious.)

I'm fond of posting the newswire on DU because people are ignorant, foolish, sad people who can't read the citation of the fucking articles, and it brings me much amusement when they lose their shit because they're programmed to follow certain sites, and can't think for themselves.

You call DUers "ignorant, foolish, sad people" not even some DUers, all of us.

You brag how posting links to FOX and watching people get upset "brings me much amusement" and is "hilarious"l. Your words, not mine.

This is trolling, pure and simple.

Again, why exactly are you here?

[joshcryer]

64. Why are you here?

You lied about me, you posted a falsehood about my source, and then when I laughed about your ignorance, and took pleasure in your ignorance, you act as if I've done some woefully horrible thing that doesn't merit my presence here.

No, you're the one who one should question why they're here. You've only been here a year. You are highly insulting to posters here, long time posters, and you can't even apologize when you've been proven wrong.

[idwiyo]

68. Your source was RW media website. I made sure that anyone who reads our exchange knows

They are not to be trusted, even though they do reprint articles from elsewhere. Why? Because I care that people here understand how easy it is to present RW media website as fair & balanced,

You on the other hand post links to FOX and website in question for your own amusement (your words, not mine).

What does length of stay have to do with anything? Which one of us called DUers "ignorant, foolish, sad people"? Which one of us brag how much "amusement" it gives them to shitsteer?

One more thing, who are other posters here I am highly insulting to? So far I am questioning our behaviour only. And I question it based ow hat YOU yourself wrote in your previous post:

I'll occasionally quote an AP source from FOX News just to see the hilarious knee jerk reaction from ignorant posters. (Generally it's only if FOX News is the only website currently displaying the AP link, of course; then again, AP is frowned upon here as well, so it's a wash, still, hilarious.)

I'm fond of posting the newswire on DU because people are ignorant, foolish, sad people who can't read the citation of the fucking articles, and it brings me much amusement when they lose their shit because they're programmed to follow certain sites, and can't think for themselves.

[joshcryer]

70. You're wrong, N24 is not RW.

The RW hates it as I established.

Repeatedly posting falsehoods does not make it true.

You started off by calling me a RW propagandist. I post facts. You then say my facts are on RW sites. I already said that I don't care about web sites, it's just a link as far as I'm concerned. It turns out the web site in question was not the same one you accused me of even posting. So the entire exchange was based on a false premise with a knee jerk reaction to anything you don't like. I suspect you just searched for N24, got the wrong N24, confirmed your deep rooted head in the sand bias, and decided to lose it and just start doubling down on the nasty insults. It really illustrates your character to behave this way.

I didn't even post a RW website. I won't expect an apology for the false accusations because your behavior reveals a lot about your character. Done with you. Your bullying, insults, and hateful attitude toward me doesn't change that I posted facts and you posted untruths, misinformation, and outright nasty insults.

[idwiyo]

110. You admitted yourself posting links to RW websites because it amuses you. Your words, not mine.

You damn well know that posting links to FOX and its like EVEN when that link is to legit article reprinted from somewhere else is presenting FOX as "fair & balanced". Keep denying it as much as you want, it doesn't change the fact.

BTW, if someone should apologise, it's you. For this post:

I'll occasionally quote an AP source from FOX News just to see the hilarious knee jerk reaction from ignorant posters. (Generally it's only if FOX News is the only website currently displaying the AP link, of course; then again, AP is frowned upon here as well, so it's a wash, still, hilarious.)

I'm fond of posting the newswire on DU because people are ignorant, foolish, sad people who can't read the citation of the fucking articles, and it brings me much amusement when they lose their shit because they're programmed to follow certain sites, and can't think for themselves.

But of course you wouldn't. At the very least, thank you for letting everyone know what you really think about about DUers. Question remains, with attitude like that toward DUers, what are you doing here?

[joshcryer]

115. Why would I apologize for posting news wire articles?

The people who should apologize are those who bash me for posting news wire articles.

[idwiyo]

116. Ha ha ha ha ha. Of course they should, you poor innocent you!

From my previous post:

You damn well know that posting links to FOX and its like EVEN when that link is to legit article reprinted from somewhere else is presenting FOX as "fair & balanced". Keep denying it as much as you want, it doesn't change the fact.

BTW, if someone should apologise, it's you. For this post:

I'll occasionally quote an AP source from FOX News just to see the hilarious knee jerk reaction from ignorant posters. (Generally it's only if FOX News is the only website currently displaying the AP link, of course; then again, AP is frowned upon here as well, so it's a wash, still, hilarious.)

I'm fond of posting the newswire on DU because people are ignorant, foolish, sad people who can't read the citation of the fucking articles, and it brings me much amusement when they lose their shit because they're programmed to follow certain sites, and can't think for themselves.

But of course you wouldn't. At the very least, thank you for letting everyone know what you really think about about DUers. Question remains, with attitude like that toward DUers, what are you doing here?

[joshcryer]

118. You're repeating yourself.

And you didn't answer the question.

Your bullying tactics are amusing, at least.

[idwiyo]

120. See my previous post. :)

[naaman fletcher]

81. NEWSFLASH: TED KENNEDY IS A HOMOPHOBE nt

[joshcryer]

49. Wait. I didn't post NTN24. I posted N24.

They are not the same site. N24 is a news aggregator which the right wing hates.

So, an entire thread insulting me, and it's based on the falsehood that I posted a right wing site.

Fucking priceless.

[idwiyo]

98. Yes, priceless. You are so used posting RW crap it took YOU several hours to figure out that this

Last edited Sun Mar 24, 2013, 05:52 PM - Edit history (1)

one maybe isn't. What is really funny, you ASSUMED I was right and you have a nerve to call DUers
"ignorant, foolish, sad people"?

BTW, I do apologise for the wrong attribution in this one case.

Everything else I said about you stands.

[joshcryer]

105. No, I was more concerned that it was cited as AVN.

And I found your petulant hatred to be so amusing that I didn't bother to even read your long rambling, false, screed. If I see a wall of text written by someone being hateful to me, I tend to ignore it.

[idwiyo]

109. Of course you were.

[sabrina 1]

121. I did read all of your 'screeds' (note that word, it appears to be a favorite of certain

people who for the most part do not like liberals, leading me to believe it is a 'talking point' intended to 'insult' but mostly has the opposite effect) and found them to be excellent.

I give you credit for your patience.

[idwiyo]

122. Thank you, it means a lot coming from you. You are an inspiration for me, as are few other posters

who keep fighting to keep this place as progressive as possible.

Solidarity!

[sabrina 1]

123. That is a very sweet thing for you to say. And I return the compliment, sincerely!

[idwiyo]

3. K&R thank you for posting this

[sabrina 1]

4. Good, I believe he will win. The Venezuelan people appear to know what is good for their country.

I am sure the Western Global Corps will finance, as usual, more of the same old jaded propaganda that has failed so badly to influence those who matter, the people of Venezuela, and most of the world also. They should save their money for something worthwhile. The Western right wing's obsession with Venezuela is so transparent. If they are worried about a country that needs their attention, they should spend their money and time on one that is ruled by a genocidal dictator. But oddly, that dictator is supported by most of them. I think the world has moved ahead from the old days when Latin America was an easy target for Western Backed dictators. Chavez did the most important thing he could do to protect Venezuela from the predators he knew would always be waiting in the wings to steal that country's resources, he provided education. The best weapon against the Right Wingers.

[idwiyo]

6. +1