Chavez orders supporters to give up extra possessions

[shadowrider]

Source: cnn.com

CARACAS, Venezuela (Reuters) -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez told his supporters to give away possessions they do not need such as an extra refrigerator because he only wants true socialists to be members of a new single party he is forming.

"Whoever has a fridge they do not need, put it out in the village square. Whoever has a truck, a fan or a cooker they do not need, give something away. Let's not be selfish. I demand you do it," Chavez said at a milk producing cooperative, in remarks released on Monday.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/06/11/chavez.socialists.reut/index.html

[Taverner]

1. Here we go...single party state

And to think I used to like Chavez

[David__77]

15. What the hell does this say about "single-party state?"

Pluralism has always been respected in electorial politics in Venezuela. Didn't right-winger Manuel Rosales just get his ass kicked in the presidential race? Jeez...

[Taverner]

16. Read between the lines

"he only wants true socialists to be members of a new single party he is forming."

And I'm not saying Chavez doesn't have popular support - everything he did before whacking Fox Venezuela was good.

It just goes back to the old axiom - power corrupts.

[David__77]

20. I don't get your point...

He's building a socialist party, so he wants socialists to be members. He's not saying the capitalists can't have their own parties, just that they don't belong in a socialist one. Other countries don't have the same open membership policy as the two major parties in this country, and they have the right to maintain political criteria for membership.

[Taverner]

23. The Communist Parties in the USSR and Soviet States made people "prove" their socialism

and why doesn't he stick with the party he has?

Why the purge?

[David__77]

26. So Lieberman belongs in the Democratic Party?

You're saying, in essence, that if a party doesn't say "anything goes," they're just the same as the bureaucratic Soviet Communist Party.

You cannot compare the party Chavez is help building to the the Soviet party. One competes in fair, pluralistic elections; the other did not.

He's trying to lead a voluntary unification of leftist parties. Interestingly, the Venezuelan Communist Party is not joining the new party. He's not "sticking to" the situation of thirty leftist parties because having a smaller number will improves the long-term electoral prospects of the left movement in that country.

[Taverner]

30. Yes he does

Like it or not, his caucusing with the Dems is the thread that keeps Bill Frist from becoming majority leader.

And yes, I think no one should have to prove loyalty to the party.

[David__77]

33. Like I said, most democratic countries have more centralized parties than the US.

And there's nothing wrong with that in a democracy. Parties have the right to maintain whatever political form or membership criteria they wish.

[acmavm]

43. Bill Frist??

<snip>

Frist pledged to leave the Senate after two terms in 2006, and did not run in the 2006 Republican primary for his Senate seat. He campaigned heavily for Republican nominee Bob Corker, who won by a small margin over Congressman Harold Ford, Jr. in the general election.

Frist had been widely seen as a potential presidential candidate for the Republican party in 2008, much in the same tradition as Bob Dole, a previous holder of the Senate Majority Leader position. On November 28, 2006, however, he announced that he had decided not to run, and would return to the field of medicine.<7>

Frist's name has been mentioned as a possible candidate for Governor of Tennessee in 2010 when incumbent Governor Phil Bredesen will be barred from running again due to term limits. Though no official word has come from Frist on the subject, Tennessee Republican Party Chairman Bob Davis has said that "he'd have a lot of support" if he chose to run.<8>

<snip>

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

[Taverner]

49. Bill Frist, Trent Lott, John Boner - its all the same

[atreides1]

57. Not Really

Frist isn't in the Senate, Lott is from Mississippi, and Boner is in the House.;)

[Taverner]

59. You're completely missing my point

Quibbling about details.

OK, Lieberman is the only thread that keeps the Republicans from getting the Senate.

Do you feel better now?

[Ken Burch]

230. And Lieberman wouldn't BE in that position of your beloved party leaders

Hadn't stabbed Ned Lamont in the back after he won the primary.

There was NO excuse for Reid and Co. to sabotauge a LEGITIMATE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE.

[David__77]

64. Does David Duke belong in the Democratic Party?

Lyndon LaRouche? Is there no limit where one can be "purged?" Is there no limit to expediency or organizational democracy?

[windy252]

105. Hate to nickpick

but that's Mitch McConnell. Frist retired last year.

[MonkeyFunk]

221. There's much more than

lieberman standing in the way of Bill Frist becoming majority leader, most importantly that Frist isn't in the Senate anymore.

[John Q. Citizen]

24. Where does it say that in the story, or are you psychic? Do you always

believe everything Big Corporate Media says? Or do you sometimes question Big Corporate Media?

Did you read the story in the OP?

Where's the big story on the daily represion in Mexico, the muders of the journalists, etc?

Or isn't that really news?

[Taverner]

28. Clean up your non-sequitors and I might answer

[John Q. Citizen]

40. You already did answer.....and I see what you are saying. You like to

comment on what is essentially a non-story designed to continue the anti-Venezuelan drum beat in the media.

It looks like you fell for it, big time.

Bono, Chavez, and the Pope. Three peas in a pod.

[Taverner]

48. So the fact that he shut down a TV station is lost on you...

They were Fox Venezuela for all practical purposes, and as bad as Murdoch and Co are, I would never want them shut down.

[Tyler Durden]

75. On the contrary: they were US PROPAGANDISTS.

FUNDED and FULLY SUPPORTED BY THE US.

I agree with him completely. I assume from your statement, that if some catastrophically rich asshole much worse than Murdock decided to put on the ALL SLANDER NETWORK, you'd support THAT as free speech?

You shout "FIRE" in MY crowded theater, and someone is liable to beat the shit out of you.

[Taverner]

93. Yes, funded and fully supported by the US

But being a free speech absolutist, unless they were in fact yelling fire in a crowded theater - the government has NO RIGHT to shut down free speech. No matter who pays for it, or what they're saying.

[Tyler Durden]

95. Just enough Freedom of Speech gets you David Duke....

Freedom of Speech WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES for your actions gets you Hitler.

Bush his gang of criminals running a TV station in Venezuela is like Al Capone with his own news paper, radio station and political party in Chicago all legal. It isn't our country: we don't have the RIGHT of free speech to undermine them.

[Taverner]

98. Apples and Oranges

Totally different times, totally different media, totally different everything.

[Tyler Durden]

109. How nice of you to AGREE with me!

Exactly as I said: OUR freedom of speech ENDS at their border or in their airwaves. Simple. We have no right to spew our PROPAGANDA in their country.

Simple.

[montanaliberaldem]

101. You are absolutely right about the TV station (CATV) whose license Chavez refused to renew.

They purposefully mislead the public and refused to allow any pro-Chavez stories to be broadcast. Stations in Venezuela are licensed for 20 years at a time and that one went so far beyond opposing Chavez policies to treasonous behavior.

It alarms me that people here are so quick to believe all the garbage that comes out about Chavez without taking 5 minutes to do a little research on what Chavez is trying to accomplish in Venezuela. He is developing a social democracy and giving more voice to the poor than they have ever had. Anyone with a little knowledge of South American history knows that the wealthy live well and have worked to secure their wealth, power, and privilege through corruption of the government and exploitation of the poor. They do not like leaders like Chavez who try to give a voice in the government to the poor and who seek a greater sharing of the wealth of the country. Let's not forget that he won the last election by a margin of 2 to 1 in internationally monitored voting. I expect people to look at that CNN report and think it sounds a little too pat and one-sided.

[fishwax]

134. welcome to DU, montanaliberaldem! from where in montana do you hail?

I once lived in Billings, but I was pretty young at the time ...

[eridani]

188. The people who ran RSTV are perfectly free to start as many low power radio stations--

--as they want to. What is called "pirate" radio here is perfectly legal in Venezuela. That's hundreds of times more free speech than we have here.

[John Q. Citizen]

143. I had a friend who drove drunk. He lost his license, too. Boo hoo...

[EFerrari]

149. No. They were much worse than that.

Watch the video "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised."

They lied to their audience and they manipulated the news so that the electorate wouldn't know what was happening. The CIA and these guys blew it because two Irish film guys just happened to be there at the time. (Memo to CIA: when you instigate a coup, clear the building of independent journalists.)

RCTV is an organ of the oligarchy, not like Faux at all.

edit: Faux wishes they had that much influence. :shrug:

[ima_sinnic]

166. he didn't "shut them down"--they violated the terms of their license

so that license was not renewed. sheesh.

broadcast licenses are issued conditionally, same everywhere, including the U.S., where the FCC has declined to renew a license every now and then. why even have licenses if the terms are meaningless? the station did not act in the interest of the country or its citizens; it was advocating violent overthrow.

but you already knew that.

[krispos42]

222. the station was advocating the overthrow of Chavez

Chavez just let the station's broadcast licence expire.

Unlike our DEAR FRIEND President Musharref in Pakistan, who's actively shutting down radio and TV stations that support the recent resignation of a senior justice over Musharref's policies and actions.

Oh, wait. Pakistan has the bomb. That makes it okay, I guess.

[Ken Burch]

232. They aren't shut down. It's enough that they're on cable and online.

Are you going to back the Venezuelan Contras when Bush invents them and Hillary agrees to fund them?

Fat lot of good that approach did in Nicaragua. The place was a soulless, passionless, right-wing dead zone for 16 years. The poor and the workers lost everything. Fat lot of good free speech as an abstraction does for anyone who isn't rich.

[fazoolius_2006]

219. Is this any surprise?

The writing was on the wall for years.

[Barrett808]

2. Hugo, there's a little thing called Craig's List

He should give hundred-dollar laptops to every citizen...that could really shake things up.

[sojourner]

4. there's such a thing as a hundred dollar laptop?

[hang a left]

7. I think so

there was some kind of movement towards that a few years ago.

[Barrett808]

31. Yes, now called "One Laptop Per Child"

http://laptop.org

Spearheaded by the "good" Negroponte brother at the MIT Media Lab.

I often wonder what he and his evil brother discuss at the Thanksgiving dinner table.

"I gave a million children laptops last year."

"I organized some death squads in Iraq last year."

[Lorien]

157. Actually, what he wants is more like Freecycle

I've Freecycled loads of stuff; furniture, electronics, books...most of us have far more stuff than we use, but even on Freecycle one never knows if it's going to the people who need it or if someone is just going to resell it. Maybe what he needs would be more like one massive state Goodwill!

[brendan120678]

3. Without actually reading the article...

I would like to ask, what is President Chavez going to give up?

Does he have an extra car or two or three or fifty that he would like to give for the "common good?"
I'm sure there are some extra televisions in his palace as well. I'll take a plasma HD!

[Igel]

44. Nothing, of course.

Because, well, he owns almost nothing.

Castro owns almost nothing, as well. Putin owns some stuff, but 99% of what he consumes and uses is state property. Think about *, where he lives: How much money does he actually need? (Answer: Very little.)

But they all live in extreme comfort because of what they use and consume, even though it's all state property. Give up extra tvs and cars, all of which are state property? Not bloody likely.

[Shallah Kali]

182. CNN says Chavez is giving $250,000.

nt

[melody]

5. This guy is a lunatic

Either that or he's a CIA plant to make the larger movement look bad.

He's the far-left example of extremism, just as Der Bush is quickly becoming
the far-right example. They're both nuts.

[NoPasaran]

8. I was going to go with "Christ-like"

But lunatic works too.

[silverlib]

12. Amen!

:hi: :hi: :hi:

[melody]

46. Christ suggested ... he didn't order

That's the difference.

[Beelzebud]

71. Chavez is Christ-like? LOL Give me a fucking break...

[NoPasaran]

97. I meant it ironically

Seemed nicer than "Power-hungry despotic lunatic"

[ContraBass Black]

175. The instruction is similar to one that christ made.

[eridani]

189. "Christ-like" works for me

"and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you." Matthew 5:40-43

Is anybody really stupid enough to believe that he has some sort of party bureaucracy checking on whether members FreeCycle or not? Jeebus! Sounds more like a request than an order to me.

[David__77]

18. Chavez and Hillary Clinton aren't in the same "movement."

One opposed the Iraq war, one didn't.
One opposes the war against Afghanistan, one doesn't.
There are plenty of differences. Perhaps it's others who are making Chavez look bad though. I see nothing wrong with encouraging people to support the poor through altruistic giving.

[John Q. Citizen]

25. Bono and Chavez are two peas in a pod, apparently.....

[melody]

45. What has Hillary to do with this?

I didn't comment on her at all. I commented on Chavez and Bush.

However, all the Democratic candidates are far more moderate in tone than Chavez is
rapidly beginning to be.

[David__77]

61. Because you said Chavez is making the "movement" look bad.

This is a Democratic website, and Clinton is a Democrat, and I assumed the "movement" to which you were referring included Democrats. It's no stretch to assume you'd think Chavez harms prospects for Democrats like Clinton. I was simply arguing that they're not in the same movement.

[melody]

100. It is a stretch to assume when I specifically tied the remark to Chavez

He's not even from the US, let alone a Democrat.

I meant his own movement ... the CIA has a history of doing that -- building up petty potentates to make
the movement which they are representing look bad.

No Hillarys included.

[NashVegas]

89. Actually,

I heard part of Hilary's health care chat on CNN. It might have been during the last debate, or a replay of it. But, when talking of health care reform, she spoke of vested interests, territorialism, etc., and specifically said, "some people are going to have some things taken away."

Not a wise choice of words, really.

[melody]

99. Again, she's suggesting within the framework of a given plan

She's not ordering people to cough it up.

Not a big Hillary fan at all, but that's the difference.

[SayWhatYo]

137. Maybe Hillary is just Bush in a wig and dress....

I better not joke because... well nevermind.

[jefferson_dem]

171. Agree completely. He's like the mirror image of Chimpy. Same method to their common madness.

n/t

[NeedleCast]

6. I demand you do it

See, I have no problem with people being cheritable. I'd encourage it. Charity is good...right up to the point that someone demands that I be charitable. Then it's not charity anymore, it's just complying with a demand.

[fishwax]

111. something tells me there's a bit lost in translation in that quote n/t

[NashVegas]

225. "Implore" Would Be My Guess

As to the correct verbage.

[nick303]

233. Exijo = exigir = demand

[Bonobo]

9. CNN writes a headline like THAT and you believe it so easily? Pffft! Whatever.

I'll believe it when a free media reports it.

[disndat]

10. Good thought

Sounds like CNN propaganda or out of context slant.

[Truthiness Inspector]

14. And what will you say if an "acceptable to you" media outlet

reports this?

[Bonobo]

21. Hypothetical. Won't take it.

[John Q. Citizen]

27. Bono and Chavez, two peas in a pod!

[rayofreason]

29. CNN got it from Reuters

But I believe it. The guy is heading down a well-trodden path in his "construction of socialism".

Some animals are more equal than others.

[David__77]

35. "How dare Chavez not admit capitalism is the best world possible!"

In essence, you're saying that any attempt to build a non-capitalist society within the context of political pluralism is inherently wrong and immoral. I disagree.

[rayofreason]

52. "Constructing a society"...

according to some ideological musings is the ultimate in hubris, but what would you expect from a 19th century intellectual construct? In those days it was thought that rationality had reached the pinnacle, and that all was understood - even in physics when it seemed that Newton and Maxwell had explained everything (except for nagging little bits like radioactivity) and that nothing fundamental was still to be learned. And so "scientific socialism" was born.

Not only is Marxism grounded in the intellectual hubris of the gilded era, it also shares much with other pseudo scientific nonsense like phrenology and homeopathy, only one of which persists today. And so when true believing practitioners of Europe's only major indigenous religion come up against reality, the majority response is to ignore the reality and shoot the messenger.

You claimed that I say that "any attempt to build a non-capitalist society within the context of political pluralism is inherently wrong and immoral." That is not what I said, but it is easy to address. I say look at the evidence. Is there a single example of "...a non-capitalist society within the context of political pluralism..."? Name it. And while you do that consider the following list:

DPRK (a.k.a. North Korea)
Democratic Kampuchea (Khmer Rouge Cambodia)
Vietnam
People's Republic of China
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
German Democratic Republic
Cuba
Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary - great supporters of the USSR, with the motto "Tanks a lot for your support"

Trying to pursuade others to freely embrace a philosophy is not inherently wrong and immoral. What is inherently wrong and immoral is the coercion extending up to mass murder of millions that all of these regimes have exerted on their people in pursuit of paradise here on Earth.

What wll Chavez do when his fantasies confront reality? What will he do if someone does not want to go along his path? What is he doing already?

Plus ca change, plus la meme chose.

[David__77]

62. You're describing imperialism actually.

"...coercion extending up to mass murder of millions that all of these regimes have exerted on their people in pursuit of paradise here on Earth."

Is this not what Bush is doing in Iraq and Afghanistan? Is not "global democratic revolution" the aim of the US administration?

I do not see this in the Chavez/socialist/Bolivarian current in Latin America. I see electors freely choosing anticapitalist candidates in competitive elections. Some faint while thinking "The horror!"

[rayofreason]

110. You forgot...

...to name a single example of "...a non-capitalist society within the context of political pluralism..."

You won't be able to find any that will hold water since, for some reason, it seems that every state constituted on a base of Marxist idealism ends up a despotism.

And as far as killing goes, for Iraq there is an unbiased organization keeping count.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

They have a figure of between 65116 and 71328 deaths because of the war. Pretty bad. But Shrub is a piker compared to Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot. There we are talking in the millions for each. And what is more, a large fraction, in fact most, of the dead Iraqis have been Shiites blown up by Sunni extremists who want a sectarian war, not people directly killed by us. So our body count is way below par. You would think that US soldiers could be more efficient in slaughtering civilians. Hell, inferior Soviet troops managed to kill more than one million Afghans during their war with a much smaller population around. Just one more example of the superiority of socialism, I guess.

So along comes Chavez and the pattern keeps on repeating. With the rise of every despot waving the flag of socialism we hear the refrain "This time it will be the one. Forgot about the previous ones. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

You use that asshole Marx as your avatar. If I were to use one, I'd use Jefferson and append his statement "The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion." The religion of Marxism has proved to be the source of the worst tyrannies in the modern world. You can be sure that Chavez will fear and loath anyone who says so, and as he drives the country deeper into the ground he will have even more reason to smash anyone who opposes him. Neither Jefferson nor I would do well in the "Bolivarian current" (a.k.a. "rip tide") he will create.

Plus ca change, plus la meme chose, or as the Who sang "meet the new boss...same as the old boss".

[eridani]

190. Kerala is a fine example

Communist land reform and literacy programs, but the two allied Communist parties are periodically turned out of office. The Nordic countries might serve as examples as well.

[hack89]

231. Except ...

Since its incorporation as a state, Kerala's economy largely operated under welfare based democratic socialist principles. Nevertheless, the state is increasingly liberalizing its economy, thus moving to a more mixed economy with a greater role played by the free market and foreign direct investment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala#Economy

Why the voluntary move towards a more free market economy?

[LoZoccolo]

32. "I demand you do it,"

Sounds pretty straightforward to me.

[David__77]

36. A demand for party members, not citizens in general. Don't like it, quit the party.

Sounds abundantly fair to me.

[LoZoccolo]

38. Hence the headline, "orders supporters".

Not an incorrect statement.

[eridani]

191. You know it was a demand rather than a request--how exactly?

How would he even track whether party members actually did it or not? Sounds more like my legislative district Dem organization signing up for a highway cleanup spot. There's social pressure on members to help out, but no requirements.

[Socal31]

122. Anything you diagree with,

Is propoganda and horse-shit. Anything you agree with, no matter the source, cements and reinforces your opinion.

[MrPrax]

11. Good advice...

MrPrax has given away two old working computers last week. A working but older 20" inch colour TV with working VCR and both remotes! Gave a lamp away last month, video card, another refurbished computer, two plastic deck chairs, etc

I could have sold them, but the people who wanted them didn't have any money.

:shrug:

[David__77]

13. Excellent idea.

Though I prefer to move away from overemphasis of redistribution as a model of "socialism," I think it's a reasonable request for people wanting to join the new unified socialist party. He's trying to weed out opportunists who are just trying to gain a place in what will be the most popular party in Venezuelan history.

[UTUSN]

17. How can you dare post a source like CNN?!!1 It's CLEARLY a Rumsfeld voicebox!!1

Like the NYT, Associated Press, and ANYTHING that expresses the SLIGHTEST slur against El Bursting-out-of-the-flight-suit!!1 And it's obvious that anybody daring to practice FREE SPEECH and to have an OPINION spends hours every day memorizing TALKING POINTS e-mailed from KKKarl, Shrub, and RUMSFELD.


Ordinarily, these DAILY items about Uniform-boy would cause my Liberal heart to bleed, but after all, they VOTED for him, so I'll respect that and just LAUGH!!1 Quack, quack!!1

[SayWhatYo]

139. Where does this come from?

Where "El Bursting-out-of-the-flight-suit" and "uniform-boy" come from???

Has he done the flight suit thing too?

[bluestateguy]

19. Hugo could give up his extra trips to the buffet

He looks more than a little thick in the middle.

[David__77]

22. Are you saying obesity implies selfishness?

That's an interesting idea, to say the least. In this country, obesity is actually more common among the poor.

[Endangered Specie]

55. Don't tell that to Henry VIII

[Freddie Stubbs]

103. Since when is poverty and selfishness mutually exclusive?

:shrug:

[eridani]

192. In societies where there is enough to eat, it implies poverty

Being lean is a statement that you can take food from the peasants by force if you want, and therefore don't need to store surplus on your own body.

[treestar]

178. In modern times, it's the other way round

It's the rich who can afford better food and the poor who can only afford the more weight-gaining foods.

This isn't the 15th century.

[stimbox]

34. Hit piece

Total right wing hit piece designed to whip up that good old cold war anti-communism.
It's from CNN, it must be reliable. :sarcasm:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. So Hugo Chavez calls for charity...

and it's the sign of the apocalypse?

[David__77]

39. Yes, charity is apparently a hallmark of "totalitarianism."

And how dare he expect members of his political party to actually uphold the party's ideals!

[Beelzebud]

66. It's not charity when you're forced to give...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

69. LOL

It's not forcing when he's not forcing anybody.

[Vidar]

130. "Demand" was an unfortunate word, but if he doen't back it up with

force, which is extremely unlikely, he's not forcing anyone to do anything.

[Norquist Nemesis]

41. "I demand you do it" is not an order unless he starts enforcing it

Not a huge Chavez fan, but I don't trust our media. They spin things in such a way that makes him (and others) automatically the enemy, hyping up rhetoric for what seems to be nothing more than U.S. nationalism. The piece doesn't mention anything about his demand being a decree or becoming law.

[shadowrider]

42. I'm not a huge Chavez fan either

But making it law, along with outlawing any competing political parties would be the next logical steps (probably within the next 12 months), IMHO, but, I've been wrong before.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

119. Let me make a little bookmark-by-journal here and we'll talk in a year.

IF you're still here by then.

[Vidar]

128. Nice to see a voice of sanity. Thanks.

[ileus]

47. LOL...they've been duped.

along with many others....

[Bonobo]

50. Pathetic excuse for journalism. Lame. Transparent. And so many bites!!!

Wow. If you don't have the critical thinking skills to see how this is yellow journalism, you need to work on it.

Seriously, even the article can't justify using the word "ORDERS" in the headline. They could have used the word "urge" or "suggest" too, but they used "order", along with a healthy sprinkling of "socialism", "communism" and "Castro".

So pathetic. If this is how uncritical we are of our state-sponsored media, we are doomed.

[Megahurtz]

115. Yeah No Kidding! n/t

[MasonJar]

51. Sounds like Jesus. He asked his disciples to forgo their worldly goods and follow him.

[Vidar]

129. Unfortunately, half the responders in this thread would probably label

Jesus a power-hungry dictator as well, being as how he opposed the capitalism of his day.

[Bo]

53. As I said Before...Chavez has no intention of ever leaving power

Typical South American dictator with OIL money. At least here in America we can get rid of are mistakes.

[David__77]

65. He was just reelected in a landslide!

FDR was in power longer than Chavez. The right-wingers called him a dictator too!

[otherlander]

112. No... Typical South American dictators

are friends with America.

[Endangered Specie]

54. I don't suppose some of the Chavez supporters here,

will ship some of their goodies down there...

you know, to be truly faithful (Think of it as tithing to your saviour).

[NaturalHigh]

58. I'm waiting for that to happen.

Anybody?

(crickets...)

[Endangered Specie]

73. Maybe they sent their computers?

[NaturalHigh]

81. If they sent their computers...

how would they continue to fight for the great socialist revolution?

[rayofreason]

125. Computers are fine...

...As long you disable internet software and don't use the computer for "anti-socialist" activities. And definately don't do anything "capitalist".

[eridani]

194. Never mind--they're making their own open source computers

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2326

Venezuelan government of President Hugo Chavez announced the launch of their "Bolivarian Computers" last week, consisting of four different models produced in Venezuela with Chinese technology. The new computers will run the open-source Linux operating system and will first be used inside the government "missions" and state companies and institutions but eventually are expected to be sold across Venezuela and Latin America.

Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez presented the new machines to the public last week at an event in the state of Falcon as he donated them to a school there. The new computers are produced by the joint venture VIT (Venezuela de Industria Tecnológica), which is owned by the Chinese company Lang Chao and the Venezuelan Ministry of Light Industry and Commerce.

"The price of other similar brands is US$ 930, and the price of our computer is US$ 690, almost 40% less," explained President Chavez. "But, in addition, it has an added value, given that it comes with open-source software and a three year guarantee, while other brands only offer one year."

[Megahurtz]

116. Gee Ya Think

maybe some of us might be in need??? :think:

:dunce:

[Name removed]

148. Deleted message

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

[Saboburns]

173. I don't have to ship my old stuff to Venezuela

I give it to neighbors, friends and those who want it.

Asshole!

And replace the word 'order' with 'suggests' and you get closer to the truth.


Watching the vilification of Hugo Chavez tells me quite a bit about the history of my country.

Jesus, the memo that all socialists are dictators is hard conditioning to break, eh??

[eridani]

193. Someday there will probably be an online way to do this

Central American solidarity activists have been doing it for years.

http://quest.quixote.org/whatwedo/cyd

[NaturalHigh]

56. The purge begins...

How long before we see state programming on the TV stations he closed down extolling the virtues of "giving up your land for the greater good."

It amazes me that some people love this asshole and think we need someone like him in charge in the U.S.

[David__77]

63. What's wrong with giving land to poor farmers?

I honestly, truly do not understand the arguments being given here. According to the politics of the statements being given here, FDR was a communist revolutionary or something. This level of anti-socialist paranoia is absurd.

[shadowrider]

67. If you don't own the land being confiscated

It's always a good idea for someone else to give it up, isn't it.

[David__77]

76. Do you favor the flat tax?

You do of course realize that in principle, progressive income taxation is confiscatory, right? And yet Democrats have always supported it, as they should.

You think land reform is never justified? Landless peasants be damned, huh?

[anotherdrew]

86. and please tell me who this "owner" you speak of bought it from?

oh that's right, they came in and killed the people there before.

[harun]

90. Not all of it, just a portion of it. (n/t)

[hogwyld]

156. Democratic ideals demand that the less fortunate be helped

If the redistibution of a little land and material can uplift the general populace as a whole, I entirely support it. If some aristocrat inherited vast land holdings, and has no productive use for them, let the government hand them over to someone that will actually use them to survive.

[eridani]

195. Yes, it is--if the owners are ripping off the people who do the work

Taiwan had pretty good success with its Land to the Tillers program. Mainland China did as well, until it started the disastrous collectivization policy. Venezuela probably will as well.

http://www.caledonia.org.uk/land/fao.htm

On the island of Taiwan the successful land reform was imposed by the Nationalist Government which had just been exiled from the mainland. The new government therefore had no obligations toward the local indigenous landowners. Also important were accurate land tenure data and a non-indigenous bureaucracy. Land tenure ceiling of one hectare was imposed and the former land owners were paid in industrial bonds. Thus their future lay in the urban-industrial zone. (Yang, M. 1970, Socio-Economic Results of Land Reform in Taiwan. U. Hawaii Press.)

If Japan, Korea and Taiwan (Province of China) served as models for a role to be played for land reform in the development of industrial democracies, China provided an equally graphic model for socialist countries. In 1949 all the agricultural land was equally distributed. The immediate results were impressive. This was the largest national land reform in history. Food production went up by 15 kg per person (total population) each year until the collectivisation that started in 1956. This proved to be a policy disaster and the destruction of the family farm system created by the world's largest land reform resulted in one of the world's greatest famines (1959-1962). (Prosterman, R, and Tim Hanstad and Li Ping. 1996. Can China Feed Itself? Scientific American. November, 90-96)

[NeedleCast]

68. Just because we're paranoid

doesn't mean they're not out to get us.

[NaturalHigh]

70. Nothing. It's a great idea...

so long as you're not taking it away from someone else.

[David__77]

74. You must hate FDR's New Deal.

You think nothing was ever confiscated for the general welfare?

[Beelzebud]

77. When did FDR give poor farmers land?

[David__77]

88. It's called eminent domain.

The US government uses it all the time to further policy goals. Venezeula is doing the same thing.

[Beelzebud]

96. Again I ask. When did FDR give poor farmers land?

Eminent Domain applied to building of infrastructure.

Enough with the intellectually dishonest bullshit.

[David__77]

107. It's the exact same principle.

It's confiscatory. Smallholders' agriculture is indeed infrastructural, by the way. Quibbling is pure sophistry. But, indeed, if you must know, the feds did distribute Japanese-owned land during World War 2, though I am not upholding that policy case.

[1932]

198. Lincoln did that. 40 acres and a mule.

And doesn't almost every state in the US have an adverse possession statute...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

[NaturalHigh]

78. Yes, but FDR...

didn't confiscate land or shut down press media that disagreed with him.

[Justitia]

108. Well...he ordered the internment of Japanese Americans & tried to pack the Supreme Court

and I mention those things as a huge fan of FDR.

FDR revolutionized our system of gov't and the vast majority of us are in his debt for what he left us.

Just wanted to add a little historical perspective/context.

[eridani]

196. He had Father Coughlin shut up, no? n/t

[Megahurtz]

117. Better Hope Eminent Domain Never Happens To You.

:sarcasm:

[NaturalHigh]

145. I do, believe me.

[hogwyld]

155. I'm glad he's giving the poor farmers a patch of dirt

They'll be alot more productive citizens, than the rich bastards letting it just sit there. The capitalist land owners need to come to grips with the will of the people.

[pork medley]

60. CHAVEZ IS STALIN

IT'S ALL SO CLEAR TO ME NOW

[Beelzebud]

72. Chavez is a great, christ-like leader that only wants whats best for his people!

It's all so clear to me now!

[David__77]

82. I support Cindy Sheehan too.

"I admire him for his resolve against my government and its meddling. My government should not meddle anywhere."

-Cindy on Hugo Chavez

[NeedleCast]

84. Go Team!

I don't like Bush, and neither does Hugo. So we must be on the same team!

Go Team!

[David__77]

85. That's not what I said.

The poster indicated in their post that he or she supports Cindy Sheehan. My post seconded that notion. I don't like Chavez because he's anti-Bush, I like him because I support his political program.

[NaturalHigh]

87. One's ego is just about as big as the other.

[pork medley]

83. ANY LATIN AMERICAN LEADER THAT DOESNT TOE THE NEOLIBERAL LINE IS A FILTHY COMMIE

chavez just happens to get the most publicity

it's all so clear to me now

[Zorra]

172. Bingo. And the only people at DU that aren't filthy commies are me and you.

And I'm not so sure about you.
;-)

[Tyler Durden]

79. About fucking time someone decided to be a REAL Socialist.

If you have EXCESS, help your god damned neighbors. Fucking "A" right. BRAVO Chavez.

[originalpckelly]

80. I wonder how many extra refrigerators there are at Palacio de Miraflores...

How many extra of (insert anything) does Chavez have that he is asking his own people to give up?

[pork medley]

91. these chavez threads are a fucking embarrassment

why is mass media suddenly credible as long as people are gobbling up stories about hugo chavez's latest perpetrated "injustice" (land reform, redistribution of wealth, not renewing the license of a tv station whose personalities laughed and cheered when he was kidnapped)

but when the same media are discussing democrats - oh no, they're lying through their teeth, they're rotten corporatists, theyre turning viewers into willing participants in their own enslavement, etc

[Sapere aude]

94. Its got to do with the paradigm that we view things through.

Two or three people can see or read the same thing and get completely different interpretations based on the paradigm they have formed over the years. Our paradigms rarely change over time.

[Psephos]

167. You nailed that one perfectly

Says a lot about how we choose which version of reality to inhabit, and then believe it utterly.

[tritsofme]

92. Will the DU Hugoites heed Mr Chavez' call?

nt

[Dave From Canada]

102. You're being way too polite, they're not Hugoites, they're Hugobots.

[BushOut06]

118. He was elected by his own fucking people

Sometimes, it's hard to distinguish this place from Freeperville.

[Dave From Canada]

123. In a way you're right, they support fascist leaders, I didn't think members of DU would,

I'm suprised by the blindness of so many when it comes to this wannabe dictator(King Hugo).

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

124. We support democracy.

It always struck me as funny how the republicans love to talk about how they want to spread democracy around the world, and then hate democracy when it actually happens.

[Dave From Canada]

141. I also support democracy, however King Hugo's actions are anti-democracy.

[EFerrari]

150. That's ridiculous.

[hogwyld]

163. Senior Chavez was freely, and fairly elected

and not selected like our own idiot. I support what he is trying to do to help his people to better their lives. And like it or not, socialism is on the march in latin america.

[Dave From Canada]

164. Like it or not? Well, I guess I don't like it then, if socialism means the silencing of opposing

voices. They and He, can keep that "socialism", I'll stick to the nice mixture we have in Canada. Not the pseudo-socialism bordering on fascism that King Hugo is trying to implement.

Take your heads out of the sand Hugobots.

[BushOut06]

127. Once again - he was elected by his own people

He didn't hide who he was when he ran for president of Venezuela. He ran as a socialist, and that's exactly how he's governing. I'd probably be a little antsy also if there had been a coup attempt against me, and media stations had been involved in encouraging it.

Let me ask you - since you're so gung-ho against Chavez, do you support Bush's actions to undermine his government? Do you support coups to topple democratically elected governments?

[Dave From Canada]

142. No, I don't support King George's actions to undermine King Hugo's government.

However, I also don't support King Hugo's anti-freedom actions. His rule by decree was the tip of the iceberg. He seems to be going down a very dangerous path. Any non-partisan, non-Hugobot can clearly see that.

[Megahurtz]

121. As If We're ALL Rich!

ROFL!!! :rofl:

You're Fucking Hilarious! :7

[tritsofme]

132. As you sit there on the internet, rolling on the floor laughing,

I would venture to guess that you live considerably better than a Venezuelan peasant.

[Megahurtz]

181. I Don't Know About "Considerably" But

by the way you're talking you have lots of excessive belongings (and maybe some property)
and are certainly in the postition to give up a few possesions......

so as long as you made the suggestion, why not you? :shrug:

:sarcasm:

[tritsofme]

183. I'm not a socialist

I don't really care for Mr. Chavez.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

126. Way ahead of him.

I just took a whole bunch of stuff to Goodwill.

You?

[tritsofme]

131. Sounds like he's asking more than donating old clothes to AmVets.

But if that is really the only type of thing he is calling for, then I would support that 100%.

[Bacchus39]

138. if they are his supporters, they will obey his command

n/t

[truthisfreedom]

104. If his people enjoy this sort of thing, more power to him.

It's not the way I'd do things.

[Justitia]

106. The Quakers (Soc of Friends) in my city do this once a month

I think it's a great idea and lots of fun. It becomes a real social event (unintentional pun).

Everyone brings stuff they don't need and exchanges it with others - no $$$.

I believe it furthers their philosophy of simpler living and generosity within the community.

A serious question - how different is this than taking stuff to Goodwill?

I like the Quaker swap event for the community feeling.

[fishwax]

113. I've seen a lot of pretty dumb chavez coverage in the corporate media, but this one

is a particularly pathetic "story."

[bitchkitty]

114. B.S. - CNN = propaganda

I'm seeing more and more of it.

I can't believe how many people just hop on the Chavez is a Dictator bandwagon and accept this bit of crap as gospel. It's sad, and it's frightening.

No wonder they stole the elections so easily.

[EFerrari]

151. No kidding. n/t

[hogwyld]

158. What's even more worrying

Is that this Hugo is the devil disease has infected DU. Freeperville I can understand, since most of them are inbred idiots, but I always expected much better here. Go Hugo! Go Socialism!

[Flanker]

120. What a hit piece... Flawed translation and ignoring the tidbits

about leading by example (donating 250k he was awarded in Lybia)

[Andrushka]

133. Any original Spanish?

My Spanish sucks. I found this - not sure if it is mentioned in any detail: http://www.abn.info.ve/go_news5.php?articulo=94634&lee=4
("Empresa de Producción Socialista Elorza procesará 36 mil litros de leche diarios"

And there's a list of the full spectrum of Venezuelan news outlets here: http://www.abyznewslinks.com/venez.htm

One doesn't have the original, though, to see the CNN piece is just another trashy excuse for journalism. "Chavez, who rules by decree, ..."

Aww, f-off. :mad:

[silverweb]

186. That's what I want to know.

What were the exact words he actually said in Spanish -- and what is an accurate, in-context, colloquial translation?

I want to know what ordinary people in Venezuela heard, not what the opposition elites or CNN interpreted.

Anyone?

[Flanker]

199. It definitely was a hack job

"El que tenga una nevera que no necesite, póngala en la plaza Bolívar, el que tenga un camión que no necesite, un ventilador, una cocina, despréndanse de algo, no seamos egoístas. ¡Yo lo exijo! En el supuesto negado de que de esos 5 millones de aspirantes me queden 5, lo prefiero, pero quiero ser acompañado de verdaderos socialistas", agregó Chávez, en Aló Presidente, desde la población de Elorza (Apure). El programa no se transmitía desde el 22 de abril.

Dijo que no pedirá como Cristo entregar toda la riqueza a los más necesitados, sólo aquella que no necesitan. "Yo quiero verlo. Lo pido y voy a comenzar a dar el ejemplo. No tengo riquezas, pero sí tengo una cuenta por allí ahorrada, de un premio que me dieron en Libia por 250 mil dólares. Doné una parte para un esfuerzo de intelectuales. No necesito ese dinero, lo voy a poner sobre la mesa porque yo aspiro a ser del PSUV, vamos a ver quién sigue", instó.

Advirtió que no basta con declararse socialista, "no, demuéstremelo, demuéstreselo al país". A quienes no tienen riqueza, pidió realizar trabajo voluntario "los sábados y domingos, sin cobrar nada, para ayudar a las comunidades. No hay revolución socialista sin trabajo voluntario. Hay gente que es cómoda, vamos por los campos, las calles, a buscar y darle la mano al que vive en la miseria"."

Google translation

The one that has a refrigerator that does not need, póngala in the seat Bolivar, the one that has a truck that does not need, a ventilator, a kitchen, are come off something, we are not egoistic. I demand it! In the assumption denied that of those 5 million aspirings I have left 5, I prefer it, but I want to be accompanied by true Socialists”, added Chávez, in Aló President, from the population of Elorza (It worries). The program was not transmitted from the 22 of April.

It said that it will not request like the most needed Christ to give all the wealth to, only that that does not need. “I want to see it. I request it and I am going to begin to give the example. I do not have wealth, but I have a saved account that way, of a prize that they gave me in Libya by 250 thousand dollars. I donated one starts off for a effort of intellectuals. I do not need that money, I am going it to put on the table because I aspire to being of the PSUV, we are going to see who follows”, insisted.

It warned that it is not enough with declaring itself socialist, “no, demuéstremelo, demuéstreselo to the country”. To those who do not have wealth, she requested to make voluntary work “Saturdays and Sundays, without receiving nothing, to help the communities. There is no socialist revolution without voluntary work. There is people who are comfortable, we go by the fields, the streets, to look for and to give the hand him at which she lives in the misery”.

http://www.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fbuscador.eluniversal.com%2F2007%2F06%2F11%2Fpol_art_chavez-exige-compart_316106A.shtml&langpair=es%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8

He said Exijo (demands) not ordeno (orders)

[Andrushka]

200. Thanks for that

So, the "demand" was the call to "let's not be egoistic (in the keeping of possessions we no longer need and to give what we do not need to those in need) and be true socialists".
It sounds to me like it was a challenge to all those who call themselves socialists or participants in the Bolivarian Revolution, not to each and every Venezuelan. "I want to be accompanied by true socialists," he said.

The way that CNN et al write it, it's as if he had a gun to everyone's heads asking for their fridges. Utter bullcrap once again from the MSM.

[nick303]

214. CNN reported exactly what was said

Reading the original and the CNN article, my personal take on it is that it is, if a bit over the top, a plea for increased charity, meaning that you are correct on the first part of your post. However it is not CNN's job to read into it for you. They report, you decide. In this case they have done what they are supposed to do.

[nick303]

213. So what exactly is your contention?

If you compare, the quotes match up exactly to what the original Spanish says. Are you trying to argue that orders and demands are not synonyms?

[Flanker]

218. Of course they are not synonyms

Two words with entirely different meanings, to demand somenthing is entirely differently than ordering it, one is passive the other is aggressive (not violently or legally but verbally).

For CNN to use the word "order" which has a painfully evident translation being "orden", leads me to question their credibility of whoever wrote that piece.

[nick303]

220. They used order for the title; the actual quote in the article said demand

I don't think anybody was scratching their head when they read that. One would have to be completely brainwashed to argue that "order" is a distortion of "demand". It is amusing watching people who refuse to give up no matter how painfully obvious it is that they are incorrect.

[silverweb]

224. Thank you!

That was exactly what I wanted to know. Context is everything.

Thanks for your efforts in finding/translating this! I tried looking for it (not very hard), buy my Spanish is so awful that I didn't really know what I was looking at in Spanish-language publications.

:hi:

[Peace Patriot]

135. The Anti-Chavistas have a lot of opinions about Chavez, but they never refer to

how things are really going for people in Venezuela, and also in its government activities and political culture. They only refer to fantasies, boogeymen, like Stalin, and things that they think WILL happen. But what is actually happening?

All indicators are up, with the greatest growth being in the private sector.

Illiteracy has been wiped out. The stories about people who can now read their own Constitution, and who have been given hope, and now have ambitions to higher education and higher skill levels--people who have been living in shantytowns and have nothing--are heartening. They went from 40% to 0% illiteracy in about five years.

A lot more people are going to school than ever before.

Everybody has health care.

A lot of enterprising small businesses and small worker coops have been started up, given a bit of help from the government (loans, grants).

Voter and citizen participation are very high--a lot of motivated, involved folks.

The government has been very active, policy-wise, to encourage widespread participation. The government doesn't dictate how the oil revenues are spent, and isn't involved in corrupt contracting. They ASK communities, formed into councils, to debate their needs and determine funding.

They run excellent elections--certified by the Carter Center, the OAS and EU election monitoring groups--elections that put our own to shame. They actually count the votes! And that is no small accomplishment for a poor third world country ravaged by decades of rightwing corruption. It is the foundation of democracy: honest elections.

And is free speech actually being harmed in Venezuela, by the government's refusal of a license renewal to RCTV? RCTV was very bad. They didn't just oppose Chavez. They directly participated in a violent military coup, by hosting meetings of the coupsters, broadcasting outright lies to help the coup (saying, for instance, that Chavez had resigned--he had not!), encouraging riots in which rightwing thugs killed people, and supporting the kidnapping of the president, and the suspension of the Constitution, the National Assembly and the courts.

If this coup had succeeded, what would have happened to free speech in Venezuela? Anyone who opened their mouths against the coup would have found themselves in mass graves, as they do in Colombia, and as rightwing fascist coups are notorious for doing. The Chavez government had a perfectly legal right to refuse a license to use the PUBLIC airwaves to this treasonous corporation. The station is now open to INDEPENDENT filmmakers, which means ONE broadcast frequency in Venezuela is now open to the poor, to racial minorities, to the indigenous, and to all previously suppressed voices, while the remainder of the PUBLIC airwaves are in rightwing corporate hands (very narrow, highly controlled opinion, biased news and corporate pablum entertainment). What is ACTUALLY happening is that free speech has been enhanced, not harmed.

On Chavez's economic edict powers (which previous presidents have exercised--these are normal powers), on ...well, what else is there? On Chavez's desire to run for a third term (FDR ran for and won four terms!), the anti-Chavistas are betting on a future in which their dire predictions that Chavez is a "dictator" will come true. But is it true now, and is there any evidence that it ever will be true? I don't see it.

They also rely on our stereotypes of Latin American "strongmen" leaders. Well, there certainly have been some. But is Chavez? He may demand that his supporters be generous and give away their extra refrigerators and cookstoves, but he is not about to take them away. His government has been scrupulous about the law, and has often repeated and enforced the laws protecting private property in the Constitution. Land for land reform (small plots of farm land for displaced peasants) has been carefully selected--property with unclear title, disused property, with absentee landlords. They have a food self-sufficiency crisis they are trying to solve. And, even so, there have been no wholesale confiscations, and confiscations without payment (if there is an owner). The rich remain rich, in Venezuela. They still have their big fancy houses and their jaguars. And the poor now have hope and some upward mobility.

I just don't see a "strongman." A strong man, yeah. A strong leader. But not a dictator.

Where are the re-education camps? Where are the gulags? Where are the police roundups of dissidents? Where is the torture? The firing squads? The 'disappeared'? Where is the MISUSE of power? If there were any such thing, it would be in the headlines of the Miama Herld, and broadcast 24/7 in our corporate media, you can be sure. But a leftist government acting with strength and assurance is not the same thing as a "dictatorship."

The government, which could rightfully have stormed RCTV after the coup attempt and shut them down, didn't. They carefully followed the law. I think that was their point. The law. Civil society. Constitutional government.

So where is there ANY evidence that Chavez has misused ANY government power--let alone sufficient evidence to establish that he is dictator?

Venezuelans are free. They argue policy all the time. They vote, freely. Their votes are counted. No one bullies them at the polling place, as happens here. No one does "voter caging" lists, as happens here. No one has control of the electronic voting source code, as Bushite corporations do here (--it's OPEN source, in Venezuela, and they handcheck 55% of it!) (--compared to our __%. If you don't know, you need to find out.) People protest freely, right and left. The government now helps the poor, instead of padding the pockets of the rich. And life goes on. There is no repression. There is nothing to fear from the government, as there is here.

When you ask anti-Chavista posters to produce evidence that Venezuelans are suffering a dictatorship, they keep bringing up the same things--these meager items of POSSIBLE abuse of power, that don't RESULT in abuse of power. Do Venezuelans feel dictated to? I would say, no more so than citizens of this country feel dictated to by the IRS. There are some things that you have to obey, that you may not like. The rightwingers and fascists in Venezuela feel that they have a natural born right to rule and to benefit inordinately from power. Is it oppression or dictatorship to deny them what THEY think is their right--when reason and fairness say otherwise? They think they have the right that all public airwaves are run by people who share their rightwing views--even including people who actively supported a violent military coup. Is it oppression or dictatorship to deny the rightwing, a minority, sole control of the public airwaves, even to the point of violent insurrection?

My point, again, is that Chavez is a strong leader, and a very popular one. But he is not a "strongman" leader. The evidence as to what is actually happening in Venezuela supports this. And the strength that Chavez is exhibiting is needed. Look at the crap that has been tried against this elected government! Look at the Bushties hungering for oil, to the point of war and massacre. And look at the problems the Chavistas are trying to solve--decades of neglect, corruption and looting by the rich, leaving a large segment of the population destitute. It's a wonder the poor in Venezuela DIDN'T haul out the guillotine! It's a credit to the Venezuelan poor majority that they chose democracy.

We ought to be applauding this democracy, and cheering on its efforts at social justice--instead of predicting, on the basis of no evidence, that it will go the way of Stalin and Pol Pot--utterly absurd comparisons, under the circumstances.

Democracy was tried in Greece a long time ago. It failed. A Republic with some elements of democracy was tried in Rome somewhat later. It failed. Democracy was tried in France, post-monarchy. It failed. Democracy was tried, or desired, in communist Vietnam. It was destroyed. It was tried in Iran. Again destroyed. It was tried in Germany, post WW I. It failed. There has been much trial and error, on democracy, throughout history--before it began to succeed rather spectacularly, in our modern era (only to fall on its face in the USA, recently). But its rather spectacular failures--Greece, Rome, post-revolutionary France, post-WW I Germany (and, God help us, not the USA)--do not mean that it should never have been tried, or should never be tried again.

But that is what some posters here are saying, with regard to socialism. Because socialism has failed, and descended into tyranny, in some rather dramatic and big cases, it will happen again in Venezuela. That is by no means true, and it is smug and baseless to predict it. Democracy has succeeded in Venezuela. Can that success be followed by successful socialism--or, to be more accurate, a successful mixed economy (on the European model)? By revolutionary change being sought democracy-first, the Venezuelans have gone about it the right way, according to the successful models (the European ones). They also are leading a general regional movement toward self-determination and independence, and have gained many allies in their endeavor (the strongest ones being Bolivia, Ecuador and Argentina). They are not oppressing anyone. They are not violent. It seems to me they have many elements of potential success--that were missing from previous socialist failures (such as the Soviet Union and China, which involved widespread oppression, mass murder and a failure of creativity). Why are posters here ignoring this evidence, and hammering home Bush's point, and the relentless point of Bush's corporate media echo chamber, that Chavez is a "dictator"? Have we any reason to believe Bush and his echo chamber, on any subject?

Luckily, in this case, we have some independent sources of information. The two I've found most useful are:
www.venezuela.com
and the documentary "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" (www.axisoflogic.com).

I ask people to get informed and ask good questions (like, is life better for Venezuelans today, than it was a decade ago? what better use for Venezuela's oil revenues than schools, medical centers, help to small business and the poor, and infrastructure development? are Venezuelans free to speak their minds and protest? has anyone been jailed for this? etc. Ask real questions, and beware fanciful riffs on the Bush State Department meme that "Chavez is a dictator.")

[Andrushka]

136. Great post!

:yourock:

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

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

[Peace Patriot]

154. I just caught up with your post that my post is "overkill." You want soundbites?

Stick with CNN!

What's the matter with trying to thoughtfully consider a wider scope of information on a genuine democracy that our corporate media--echo chamber for Bush's State Department--is constantly demonizing, by cherry-picking the news, and leaving reality out of it? Thoughtfulness and useful information, to help put CNN soundbites into perspective and to try to understand what they are doing, and why, seems a positive thing to me.

The topic was CNN's report that Chavez told his supporters he wants them to be generous with their material possessions, and not be acquisitive, and their framing of this as the statement of a dictator, in typical war profiteering corporate news monopoly style. It is important to understand the context of this brief news story, both as to what is really happening in Venezuela (the conditions there and what the Chavez government is trying to do), and as to the motives of our corporate-controlled news monopolies and the kind of coverage they give to this subject, which leaves so much out. You say that my attempt to do this "makes for some good laughs," but you don't say why. Why? What did I say that made you laugh? I presume you mean that you thought it was ludicrous. Is that what you mean? And if so, I would like to understand why.

Chavez sometimes makes me laugh, he is so blunt. But Bush, Rice, Negroponte and our corporate news monopolies never make me laugh on this subject, because, behind their lies about Chavez and Venezuela is the intent of murder--of him and his supporters, and of anyone who dares to raise their head and advocate for social justice, or who gains the political power to do something about it. They do not want democracy or social justice in Venezuela, but, more than this, they will commit mass slaughter in order to destroy it, if they can get away with it. They want unfettered access to the rich oil fields and other resources of Venezuela and the Andes region; they will destroy as many democracies, and kill as many people, as they need to, to obtain that power. Chavez, as the leader of the South American self-determination movement, is a big obstacle to their greedy and murderous desires. Another obstacle is us, the people whose government has such a bloody history in South America, and whose current lawless and illegitimate leaders--the Bushites such a Negroponte--are particularly responsible for some of the worst parts of that history.

And the "if they can get away with it" part is why I post at such length on this subject. I basically slept through the '80s, while Reaganite dictators in Guatemala slaughtered 200,000 Mayan villagers, and Negroponte was running death squads (the "contras") into Nicaragua through Honduras, and while U.S.-trained death squads were shooting a Catholic archbishop on his altar, in El Salvador, because he was an advocate of the poor, and raping and killing Catholic nuns who were working with the poor. I feel bad about my ignorance of some of these events, and my torpid attitude toward the ones I had some knowledge of. I feel that if more citizens of the U.S. had been alert to such things, and well-informed about the activities of our government, fewer people would have been killed, and the ravages of poverty that we see now throughout Latin America--as a direct consequence of Reagan's smashing of populist movements--could have been prevented.

Publicity is one of the few tools we have to prevent such things from happening in Latin America again. That is my motive.

It's interesting to contrast what Bush told us to do after 9/11--"go shopping"--and what Chavez is telling his supporters to do, in the midst of a crisis of vast poverty--be generous, give away unneeded possessions. In BushWorld, we are consumers. That is our only value to the greedy and murderous super-rich. Chavez, by contrast, asks people to take personal responsibility for other people and help them with basic needs, if possible. The details about refrigerators and cookers make the matter concrete. Don't just blather about socialism. Enact it! There is also a subtext that the Chavez government will not tolerate personal corruption (an endemic problem in Latin American countries, the legacy of decades and centuries of rightwing corruption).

What a stark contrast to Bush! The one urges overconsumption--about the worst thing a leader could encourage, in view of its impacts on our planetary environment, and totally irresponsible in view of the humongous costs that Bush was about the inflict on us--a $10 trillion deficit, for his heinous war and for tax cuts for the rich. Whereas Chavez urges sharing extra material possessions, and fostering values that counter greed and selfishness. The one says, "Acquire!" The other says, "Give!"

If CNN, or any of our corporate news monopolies, meant well by us, they would have pointed this contrast out: Bush encouraging people to be oblivious and uninvolved--"go shopping"; Chavez encouraging people to rise above personal greed and acquisition, and consider their common problem: poverty. But, of course, our corporate news monopolies will never do that. They want to kill any concept of the common good. They are right in line with Bush: be greedy, go buy some more cheap shit imported from China; shop 'til you drop--he-he-he!

This is "the topic at hand," which you wanted me to address. I see it in context. I see it as important--indeed, as a matter of life and death--how little understanding there is, in the U.S., about Venezuela and the South American left, and how stupid-making these corporate news items are. And I cannot to respond to it with a "hit and run" post, or a "soundbite."

[hogwyld]

161. As always PeacePatriot

An excellent post! You have always been one of my favorite posters.

[1932]

165. Another excellent post.

[nick303]

168. What makes me laugh

The following idea: that someone shows up to virtually every Chavez/Venezuela related thread and pounds out a lengthy ode to what a swell guy Chavez is. Every time it's a small variation on the same theme, gushing endlessly over a hyper-romanticized view of the situation, as if everyone in Venezuela were sitting around singing Kumbaya.

Actual propaganda is regarded as sources of "real information" while fairly non-descript stories from traditional, reputable news outlets are the "corporate war-profiteering fascist media". Anything supporting is reputable, anything not is propaganda and will be dodged or looked down upon.

In the Orwellian space we can see greater control by the central government is called "democracy" and that silencing RCTV, an opposing voice is actually contributing to greater free speech.

In the not-exactly-logical space we have, believe it or not, many news monopolies in the US. We have a Venezuelan TV station that was apparently playing a major role in overthrowing the government, yet was deemed safe to continue operating for another 5 years. We have the false dichotomy between George W. Bush and Chavez.

There seems to be a current of thought that if something is lengthy then it must be well-developed or (necessarily) complex, and that if you don't approve you must be a simpleton who depends on "soundbites". This simply isn't the case. Being clear and concise is an important skill that many people lack these days. Many people make up their inability to do this by droning on repetitively. Your posts are a great case study in this area.

In closing, I disagree with anyone who would refer to Chavez as a Pol Pot or a Stalin, or "just a dictator", the much more accurate analogy is Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Anyone who still sings Chavez's praises has not studied Mugabe's petro-state (however, they will run to Google/wikipedia and then come back claiming to be an expert on him, and how "this time, it's different".)

[Flanker]

169. I am sorry but your reliable sources supported the war in Iraq and WMD theories

I fail to see why you look up to them and see them infalible, you just use triangulation as a logical fallacy, if you have leftist media and Fox news then whatever is in the middle is the truth... Show me when has Venanalysis lie deliberately just to get ratings.

"an opposing voice is actually contributing to greater free speech."

You never saw that chanel, you might be repeating what others told you.

"We have a Venezuelan TV station that was apparently playing a major role in overthrowing the government, yet was deemed safe to continue operating for another 5 years. We have the false dichotomy between George W. Bush and Chavez."

They ALL participated in the coup, just that both Venevision and Televen promised the government they would not back rightwing extremism again, that is all that was needed, RCTV could have remained a healthy critic and still be alive today instead they chose to continue their extremism.

Lastly Mugabe's election victories are not as thoroughly open as Chavez's victories.

[Peace Patriot]

174. Nick303, can you point to ANY fact regarding life in Venezuela that even remotely

supports their suffering under a "dictatorship"? That was the point of my post which you characterize as "a lengthy ode to what a swell guy Chavez is." ("Someone shows up..." --uh-huh.) I did not say that Chavez is "a swell guy." I said that his policies are lawful, democratic and, across all policy areas that I have reviewed, beneficial. That is the reality, on the ground, in Venezuela. There IS no dictatorship in Venezuela. There are no facts that point it. None. Strong, decisive, democratic government--in which citizen participation has dramatically increased, not decreased, and which is benefiting the country in real, countable, visible ways--is not dictatorship. Not even close.

There MIGHT have been a dictatorship, had RCTV, Bush, Negroponte and Venezuelan fascists succeeded in their coup. But, thanks to the courage and tenacity of the Venezuelan people, they failed. Democracy succeeded. And democracy is now at work, with widespread participation in government and politics--and, now, even on the public airwaves.

It takes STRENGTH to do these things--strength in the citizenry, strength in the leadership. Democracy in Latin American--with its stark and deliberately created great divide between rich and poor--is not an easy task. It is made even more difficult by the hostility and nefarious plots of our own supposedly democratic government (--in truth, a Corporate Ruler junta), trying to undermine this peaceful revolution at every turn, and relentlessly lying about it and reviling it. You want wimps trying to create democracy? Easy pushovers? People who wouldn't dare touch a treasonous rightwing "news" station because it's too powerful and has too many friends (and co-conspirators) in high world finance places? People who are afraid to assert their own laws? People who buckle at coup attempts, at oil professionals' strikes, at U.S.-funded recall elections, or USAID/NED-sponsored protests?

It's interesting what happened with the student protests against the denial of a license to RCTV. The National Assembly (Congress) invited the anti-Chavista students to debate the matter before the National Assembly. (Imagine our Congress, say, inviting Cindy Sheehan and antiwar protesters to debate the Iraq War before Congress.) Two student groups showed up, one pro-RCTV, one anti-RCTV. But the pro-RCTV students walked out. Why? Because they didn't like what the anti-RCTV students had to say. This is the attitude of the rightwing minority in Venezuela. They don't really want a debate. They hunger for illegitimate power with which to shut other people up, forever if necessary. They similarly boycotted the by-elections about 18 months ago--on ridiculous grounds--a very foolish move. The result is that they have even fewer voices in the National Assembly, which is dominated by Chavistas. But it was just an excuse anyway. They knew they were going to lose big. So they refused to participate and tried to raise the cry, once again, that the elections are rigged (which they clearly are not), in order to foment trouble and stir up another coup. That is their M.O. And if you study the tactics of the Bush USAID/NED, you know where it comes from. Bushistas (among then, James Carville!, and also the corporate-run Albert Einstein Institute), have been down there advising this undemocratic faction in Venezuela how to bring about a "soft coup" in lieu of the violent coup that failed.

So, how goes freedom of speech in Venezuela? The anti-Chavistas were invited to speak for the RCTV cause. Given the floor. Given a voice, right there in the halls of government. Something WE never get here. It's THEIR PROBLEM that they didn't take advantage of it. It was the intent of the GOVERNMENT to let them speak--to a wide, nationally broadcast audience. And they also have the freedom of the streets to mount peaceful protests. And the only thing they lack now--with the de-licensing of RCTV--is ONE among MANY rightwing corporate TV/radio monopolies as a 24/7 trumpet of their minority cause.

Democracy is difficult, especially with a big rich/poor divide, and a hostile U.S.. And proper BALANCE in government is also difficult. WHO gets to use the PUBLIC airwaves? The rightwing all day, on all channels? That is not balanced. WHOSE interests should government serve? The corporations, the banks, the rich? Or the vast poor majority? What is the proper balance? WE have been struggling with this question since our founding. Right now, we are incredibly UN-balanced in every way. The Venezuelans are trying to achieve balance, after decades and centuries of the kind of unbalance that we now have, where the corporations, the banks and the rich run everything, and squash alternative views. And the practical, on-the-ground reality in Venezuela is that a re-balancing toward the majority and the vast poor population is occurring WITHOUT bloodshed, WITHOUT injustice to the rich and formerly powerful, and WITHOUT dictatorship.

That is a remarkable achievement. And it is the achievement of a People, not of one leader.

You and other anti-Chavez posters focus on Chavez as "a swell guy" or "not a swell guy." But what is happening in South America totally transcends individual leaders. It is a bottom-up movement of huge magnitude and importance. And that is why it is so scary to our powers-that-be. It is THEY who are personalizing this matter, just as they tried to personalize the invasion of Iraq and the slaughter of half a million innocent people and the destruction of their country, to get their oil. They tried to make it all about Saddam. Easy soundbites. Brainless "talking points." Lies! Picking up on any little bit of spinnable news that makes Chavez look bad, and utterly ignoring the context in which he is speaking--a peaceful, democratic revolution--and ignoring the achievements of the Venezuelan people, in turning back a violent military coup, in holding honest elections, in wiping out illiteracy, in writing, understanding and voting on their Constitution, and in seeking social justice and balance, PEACEFULLY, in dire circumstances of poverty.

Look at the reality in Venezuela, and this talk of "dictatorship" and "authoritarianism" vanishes. It is a phantom. Are politicians and individual leaders in need of being watched and held accountable? Always! COULD Chavez become a "dictator"? Yes. Anybody with power can be tempted. Is there ANY evidence of that so far? No. Is it likely? Not in my opinion. He is very popular. He is a strong-willed and powerful politician. He has REFRAINED FROM using his popularity or power for ill purposes, for eight years now. I can't find a shred of evidence to the contrary. I don't see corruption. I don't see repression. It is NOT happening. And, quite frankly, it's a wonder to me that anti-Chavistas think that the Venezuelan people, who have fought so hard for Constitutional government, would put up with a dictator, if Chavez were to become one. It's an insult to the people who put Chavez in office, and who keep him there, by their democratic will.

[northzax]

176. you don't see corruption?

you mean his brother really is the best person to run the oil export agency? how convenient. how is it corruption when the Bushes appoint family members to plum jobs (it is) but not when Chavez does it?

how many members of his family have high ranking government jobs?

[Judi Lynn]

179. How about more information on Hugo Chavez' brother, and his corrupt

appointment to some oil export agency? I've been searching for something and I'm not coming up with anything at all.

I know it's gotta be there, you took the time to make the assertion.

By the way, I'm not certain having a brother in government is an idication you're looking at a villain. Very few people saw John Kennedy as corrupt.

Also, for the obvious right-wingers who attend and read Venezuela threads, there are all kinds of examples of right-wing American politicians and their brothers in government.

Really need to know more about this Hugo Chavez and his brother act you are trumpeting.

[Judi Lynn]

180. Found the appropriate title for Adán Chavez, after searching.

What appeared to hold me up was the use of "oil export" in my search!



One of these men is the brother of Hugo Chavez, Adán Chavez. The
other one is Alan Woods, of Hands Off Venezuela, in London, I believe.

Chavez’s brother, Adán Chavez, is moving from the Ministry of the Presidency to the Ministry of Education, replacing one of Chavez’s longest serving ministers, Aristóbulo Isturiz.
(snip)

http://www.venezuelasolidarity.org/?q=node/32

[Andrushka]

187. Looking for a laugh?

Look no further than your screed!

"I disagree with anyone who would refer to Chavez as a Pol Pot or a Stalin, or "just a dictator", the much more accurate analogy is Mugabe in Zimbabwe."

:spray: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :crazy:

[nick303]

215. Not surprisingly,

you did not include an explanation as to why you think that.

[eridani]

197. The accurate analogy is FDR, actually

--who was no saint, BTW, what with the WW II concentration camps for people of Japanese (but not German or Italian) ancestry. Has Chavez done anything like that lately?

Does anybody really think that FDR's knocking Father Coughlin off the air was a major offense?

[Ken Burch]

235. It wouldn't have been...

But it was actually the Vatican who silenced Coughlin, IIRC.

By the way, did you know that, years later, Coughlin was Tom Hayden's parish priest when Hayden was growing up?

[silverweb]

226. Thanks, Peace Patriot.

Terrific posts, as always.

:hi:

[1932]

144. five star post

[Judi Lynn]

146. The loudest, most emotionally loaded opinions are the ones which are light on facts.

You can't begin to know how much good it does to put the information right in front of peoples' eyes so they can start seeing there's far MORE to these stories than they have been told in the sound-bite cable tv stories, or the corporate media stories from the papers most of them don't read.

Maybe at some point they'll be inspired to start doing their own research and their own reading in order to be able to speak from a foundation based on reality. You can't make them pay attention, but I'm sure you have prompted some of the more thoughtful ones to start learning more about Venezuela themselves, so they can grasp what's happening there.

Thanks for your posts, every one of them.

[silverweb]

227. Amen.

Speaking of research, my daughter decided that the paper she was doing on "U.S. Misperceptions about Venezuela" actually needed to be a dissertation, which was impossible/inappropriate for this assignment.

Thus, she went to the professor and explained her dilemma, and got his okay to changed the subject to "Why Chavez is so popular despite U.S. opposition."

She's editing and polishing right now. I expect to see the final draft pretty soon.

:)

[Judi Lynn]

228. So good to hear she kept thinking about it and got her new angle!

Hope it works out very well.

After seeing your post, I recalled hearing how well he was received last year in London, and decided to see if I could locate anything that mentioned it. Before I got far, I saw this statement about Hugo Chavez issued by Ken Livingston, Mayor of London, which may be interesting to you and to her:

Not a difficult choice at all


Chávez and Venezuela deserve the support of all who believe in social justice and democracy

Ken Livingstone
Monday May 15, 2006
The Guardian


President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela will today become the second head of state - after the Queen - to be welcomed to London's City Hall. When it comes to the social transformation taking place in Venezuela, the political qualifications often necessary in our imperfect world can be set aside. It is crystal clear on which side right and justice lies. For many years people have demanded that social progress and democracy go hand in hand, and that is exactly what is now taking place in Venezuela.

It therefore deserves the unequivocal support of not only every supporter of social progress but every genuine believer in democracy in the world.

Venezuela is a state of huge oil wealth that was hitherto scarcely used to benefit the population. Now, for the first time in a country of over 25 million people, a functioning health service is being built. Seventeen million people have been given access to free healthcare for the first time in their lives. Illiteracy has been eliminated. Fifteen million people have been given access to food, medicines and other essential products at affordable prices. A quarter of a million eye operations have been financed to rescue people from blindness. These are extraordinary practical achievements.

Little wonder, then, that Chávez and his supporters have won 10 elections in eight years. These victories were achieved despite a private media largely controlled by opponents of the government. Yet Chávez's visit has been met with absurd claims from rightwing activists that he is some kind of dictator.

The opponents of democracy are those who orchestrated a coup against Chávez, captured on film in the extraordinary documentary The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. It is a film that literally changes lives. By chance, a TV crew was in the presidential palace when the military coup of April 2002 against Chávez took place. It captured minute by minute the events that unfolded.

Anti-Chávez gunmen, in league with the coup organisers, opened fire on a pro-Chávez demonstration. As guns are commonplace in Venezuela, some in the crowd returned fire. US television stations manipulated these images by editing out the gunfire aimed at the pro- Chávez crowd to claim that anti-Chavez demonstrators had been attacked.
(snip/...)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1774918,00.html

[silverweb]

229. Excellent article, thanks.

And thank you for all your previous help and information!

:hi:

[hogwyld]

160. Your posts are the best

Don't listen to the Chavez haters, as they seem to really eat up the propaganda. I'm glad that the Venezuelans have the government that they have CHOSEN freely and fairly. A small fact that some here conveniently overlook. Oh yeah, one more thing....:applause: :headbang: :yourock: :toast:

[EFerrari]

147. What utter crap. Is this the best the BFEE can do?

Hilarious.

[EFerrari]

152. Doesn't anyone notice that there are all these non stories

being put out all the time? Anyone?

[David__77]

153. The important story is that McCarthyism resonates on the left.

So many self-described left-of-center people in the US have no problem with the McCarthyite smear campaign, and eagerly repeat its talking points. Progressives have a lot of work to do.

[EFerrari]

162. The BFEE has really stepped up the propaganda lately.

I'm afraid they aim to desensitize people so when Chavez is killed, most people won't care very much.

[John Q. Citizen]

170. That story and many like it certainly are propaganda. Without knowing

a whole lot about the Bolivarian Movement, my concern is that if they murder Chavez that the whole movement may collapse, similar to what happened with Dr. King in this country.

The danger of pinning a movements viability to the energy, vision and charisma of one person is pretty obvious. When the person ceases to to exist the movement often dissipates.

It hard from here to tell if that is the case or not in S.A., especially when most of the news stories published focus entirely on Chavez and almost never on the movement he is associated with in the pubic consciousness.

[goodhue]

159. ridiculous headline and spin on unremarkable request for charity

[Thickasabrick]

185. I was just thinking that and saw your post. I agree completely n/t

[killbotfactory]

223. yep.

[treestar]

177. Edwards would be in trouble there!

In essence, Chavez is saying to do what sometimes on DU people demand Edwards, etc., do.

[ohio2007]

184. Venezuela's Chavez to finalise Russian submarines deal

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is expected to finalise a deal on buying up to nine Russian submarines during a visit here later this month, a Russian newspaper reported on Thursday.

snip

Venezuela wants the submarines in order to overcome a possible US naval blockade, the paper said.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070614062644.0d1z4l69&show_article=1


Nine subs to break a US naval blockade ?

Why would the US blockade its own oil supply ?

[Judi Lynn]

201. A recent public speech:

Venezuela: US fears spread of Chavez example

by Federico Fuentes

Global Research, June 15, 2007
Green Left Weekly, issue No 713 - 2007-06-13

~snip~
Chavez reiterated the points he made after his landslide re-election last December, stating that the victory was not “a point of arrival, but rather a point of departure” for the revolution, and that this mandate had given the government the ability to drive forward its revolutionary project.

“Only 140 days have passed” since the new government’s inauguration, Chavez explained, yet a “new period has started up, accelerating the process of revolutionary transformation”. He pointed to the recuperation of state control over the oil fields in the Orinoco Belt, the re-nationalisation of the telecommunications company CANTV and six electricity companies, as well as the mammoth turnout to register interest in the new united socialist party, the PSUV (by that day, 4.7 million people had registered, reaching more than 5 million by the end of the following day when registrations closed).
(snip)

Drawing on the “great Italian revolutionary thinker Antonio Gramsci”, Chavez outlined why this process has encountered the reaction of imperialism. Referring to Gramsci’s thesis — “a truly historic crisis occurs when there is something that is dying, but has not finished dying, and at the same time there is something that is being born but which also hasn’t finished being born” — Chavez explained that already by the 1980s, “Venezuela had entered into a historic crisis … {today} we are in the epicentre of the crisis”.
(snip)

For Chavez, the Fourth Republic represented the rule of the “US empire and its lackeys here in Venezuela, the oligarchy, the bourgeoisie, the class that dominated Venezuela for 200 years”. This is the same class, he stressed, “that betrayed {Simon} Bolivar, that killed {Jose Antonio de} Sucre, that murdered {Ezequiel} Zamora”, all prominent leaders of Venezuela’s 200 years of struggle for independence.
(snip/...)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5975

[Zavulon]

202. "I demand it?"

I don't know enough Spanish to read and understand the original, and I don't trust electronic translations.

If he's leading by example and encouraging people to volunteer to do the same, more power to him. If he's going to force the issue and confiscate property, he'll lose any support he'll ever have from me.

[Judi Lynn]

203. Take a few deep breaths, and read the previous posts, and the o.p.

You have to develope your own grasp of things. Have you not realized yet you have been fed completely bogus crap for ages? Half-truths, misinformation?

Get more informed by reading in order to understand, just like the rest of us must. We can't do it for you. Start to realize you have to THINK while reading. You can't go wrong there.

[Zavulon]

212. Gee, thanks.

I haven't been condescended to like that in quite a while. It sure was entertaining and fun.

My post indicated that I wasn't sure what was meant, and you'll have to pardon me if I don't take your post or previous posts as gospel. Furter, there was nothing hyperactive in my post, so maybe it's you who should take a few deep breaths.

Now I see why everyone in the Lounge tells each other to stay out of GD and LBN. If one writes anything even remotely disagreeable to someone else in these forums, even if you make it clear you're reserving judgement, one gets snide and condescending tripe like I got from you. At least the others were adult about it, but I still shouldn't be surprised that I got a steaming pile like the one you wrote.

[nick303]

217. He says exactly that

From the earlier post #199 by Flanker:
"¡Yo lo exijo!"

You can verify that this means precisely that, "I demand it".

http://www.wordreference.com/es/en/translation.asp?spen=exijo

[AngryAmish]

204. He should announce a new calender

He should declare that a new day has arrived for Venezuela and there is a need for a break from the past. 2007 could be year zero and the anniversary of his rule be the beginning of the calender.


edited because I'm too stupid to tell between Columbia and Venezuela.

[Judi Lynn]

207. What does this mean?

He should declare that a new day has arrived for Columbia and there is a need for a break from the past.

I've never heard he intends to run for office in Colombia. What do you know we haven't heard yet?

[AngryAmish]

209. You are right my friend

It is Venezuela - I'll try to change the original.

[slackmaster]

205. No word on what Hugo himself is giving up

Surely he has an extra pair of Gucci shoes lying around.

[Judi Lynn]

206. Did you not read the original article posted in the original post?

He is giving $250,000.00 to get the ball rolling.

[slackmaster]

208. That's cash, not possessions

n/t

[Judi Lynn]

211. Sorry, doesn't compute. He just gave the speech, announced he would get the ball rolling,

contributed 250,000.00.

What else were you expecting from anyone in that position at this point? You need to get a clearer idea of the speech itself, of what he was discussing.

Are you saying his deep wish is anal, and he hopes to secretly accumulate as much material wealth as he can, or that he would tell Venezuelans to share what excess possessions they have with others less fortunate, while hording and piling up trinkets and gizmos for himself?

Where is your evidence? You're the first one to make that leap of speculation here. Chavez: the secret horder, the beeg peeg. I doubt this is the case.

[barb162]

210. Watch the middle class start applying for citizenship elsewhere.

[gorbal]

216. Well, you know what, I demand all of you give up anything you don't need!

Or you have to be a Republican!!!!

(And Chavez will probably punish people as much as I do you if you do not. )

And what's wrong with creating a single party, like Democrats are a single party? Jeesh!

I don't think he is painting himself as Jesus, I think our coorperate owned media is painting him as the devil, and it seems by some of your responses they have some of us convinced.

[Ken Burch]

234. Btw...Jesus did the same...

Or are you saying HE wanted a one party state as well.