Chávez to Propose Removing His Term Limits

[Burma Jones]

Source: NY Times

President Hugo Chávez will unveil a project to change the Constitution on Wednesday that is expected to allow him to be re-elected indefinitely, a move that would enhance his authority to accelerate a socialist-inspired transformation of Venezuelan society.

The removal of term limits for Mr. Chávez, which is at the heart of the proposal, is expected to be accompanied by measures circumscribing the authority of elected governors and mayors, who would be prevented from staying in power indefinitely, according to versions of the project leaked in recent weeks.

Willian Lara, the communications minister, said Mr. Chávez would announce the project before the National Assembly, where all 167 lawmakers support the president. Supporters of Mr. Chávez, who was re-elected last year with some 60 percent of the vote, also control the Supreme Court, the entire federal bureaucracy, public oil and infrastructure companies and every state government but two.

The aim of the overhaul is “to guarantee to the people the largest amount of happiness possible,” Mr. Lara said at a news conference on Tuesday.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/15/world/americas/15venez.html?hp

---

If it looks like a Dictator, Walks like a Dictator, smells like a Dictator.......

[alphafemale]

1. And this move will be defended by someone on DU in 3...2...

[1932]

7. I have no reluctance at all to defend this.

If the constitution in a country that is more deeply democratic than our own has a provision for amending itself to allow unlimited terms, and someone wants to follow that procedure to do that (which is something we did in the us for the first 170 years of our own existence and only ended because our best president ever was elected four times) then what exactly is undemocratic about following that amendment procedure?

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[redqueen]

18. Great post!

:thumbsup:

Isn't this the second or third article on this "breaking news" story?

They're really working hard...

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[1932]

35. You realize there is a constitutional process for amending the constitution

and you realize that they're following that process in Venezuela?

And a "command economy"? They're devolving economic power, not concentrating it.

[Mudoria]

50. The perfect reply imo..

[IsItJustMe]

66. You buy into the msm hook, line and sinker. Go for it. Oh, buy the way, there is WMD in Iraq.

[subsuelo]

31. Peace Patriot this was a brilliant post

Thanks !

[1932]

34. Another great post.

[complain jane]

41. Awesome post eom

[alphafemale]

44. I'm not anti-Chavez. I thought his "sulpher gag" at the UN was hilarious.

His donations of heating oil was tremendous.

For awhile I'd go out of my way to buy Citgo gas.

But, this looks really bad.

Other things have looked really bad.

I give no one blind allegiance.

[Ken Burch]

74. It;s just constitutional amendments. We've done 'em too.

And compared to some of ours(like, say Prohibition)this is no biggie.

[IsItJustMe]

65. Coould not have said it better myself. Thank you for your insight and your ability to articulate

a point very well.

[City67]

32. have to agree

It could easily be seen as a preliminary move just prior to a power grab on the part of Chavez and, like you, I knew people would jump to his defense.

[liberal N proud]

2. How long before bu$h propose the same thing?

[leftynyc]

25. He can propose all he wants

Other than declaring Marshall Law, his only choice is changing the constitution.

[Occulus]

42. MARTIAL

MARTIAL law

not Marshall

[FuJun]

3. ...Still not a dictator

President Chavez has been reelected by an overwhelming majority in an election process far more transparent and reliable than our own. Besides, beware the siren song of term limits, nothing more than a tool of the wealthy to protect their interests. Let the PEOPLE decide!

[wug37]

4. Could you expand on that?

What do you mean that term limits are a "tool of the wealthy". Wouldn't term limits help prevent that by forcing out the old politicians and bringing in new ones?

[ProudDad]

20. Term limits were passed in California

using the money from the most right-wing elements of the state...

You do the math...

[Ken Burch]

75. Presidential term limits were imposed here by the GOP to make sure there'd be "no more FDR's"

(as Steve Earle put it in his great song "Christmas in Washington").

The "Term Limits" movement we had here in the 80's and 90's was about Republicans trying to force strong Dems, often strong progressive Dems, to retire, so that Christian blow-dry boys with no instutional memory would sweep the board for the GOP and then pass the laws the lobbyists write for them. Term limits are NEVER progressive or pro-democracy.

[Socal31]

37. So you trust thier elections,

but not ours?

[Jim Sagle]

40. I do, and you should too. Theirs are honest, ours our rigged.

[Socal31]

43. Not saying ours arent...

but how do you KNOW theirs arent?

[Jim Sagle]

48. I don't KNOW, but OTOH, how do you PROVE a negatve?

[ronnie624]

49. Venezuela's elections

are among the most closely monitored in the world, by the EU, the OAS, and the Carter Center. The software they use in the recording and tabulation of votes is available for scrutiny by anyone who chooses to do so. More than 50% of the votes are hand counted.

These facts have been repeated thousands of times on DU. Have you never even once, encountered them?

If you want open, verifiable elections, Venezuela shows us exactly how to go about it. How can one not 'know' that Venezuela's elections are clean?

[Vidar]

5. If we didn't have term limits, Clinton could still be in office. Viva Chavez!

[ProudDad]

21. Naw, nancy ray-gun would be ruling us

via ray-gun's corpse --

just like she did when his corpse breathed...

[Judi Lynn]

6. This was discussed exhaustively last week when the same subject was posted on August 6th.

You can review the comments made at that time at this link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2943288

[stimbox]

8. Propaganda?

If it looks like Propaganda, Walks like Propaganda, smells like Propaganda.......

[Teaser]

9. Bad idea.

This is the problem. Chavez may or may not be a good chief executive, I don't know, I don't live there.
But it seems his "party" is weak if there isn't a clear successor who will continue the policies he champions. Which makes it seem like he's got a personality cult going here, and not a political movement.

[Peace Patriot]

14. Are we dealing in reality or are we dealing in corporate news monopoly illusions?

"...it seems like he's got a personality cult going here, and not a political movement."

The political movement is VAST, and includes millions and millions of people--in Venezuela, in Bolivia, in Ecuador, in Argentina, in Nicaragua, where Bolivarian governments have been elected; in big political movements in Paraguay, Peru, and also Mexico and Guatemala, where governments sympathetic to Bolivarian goals will likely be elected in the future; in Brazil, Uruguay and Chile, where leftist governments that are allies of Chavez and Venezuela, and share some Bolivarian goals, have been elected.

This political movement--a movement for democracy, peaceful change, social justice and Latin American self-determination--has swept South America, and is boiling beneath the surface in Central America.

The focus on Chavez as a personality in almost psychotic, on the part of the Bush State Dept. and its lapdog corporate press. SO WHAT if Venezuelans want to keep him in office for a third or even fourth term? They GET TO VOTE ON THAT CHANGE TO THE CONSTITUTION. Then they get to vote on whether or not to re-elect him. If somebody better comes along, fine. If not, they've got somebody they like and trust, and with whom the great majority of Venezuelans agree on policy. And if HE now announces his availability to serve longer, and proposes a change in the law to make that possible, SO WHAT?! Why is that major U.S. war profiteering corporate monopoly "news"?

Because Chavez is a TARGET. He might as well have a bulls' eye target painted on his shirt. They are prepping for another oil war. They have time and again tried to bump him off, and failed. They are trying every destabilization effort they can think of, in the Andes region, to defeat his leftist ideas and masses of supporters, and restore fascist dictatorships in South America.

The war profiteering corporate news monopolies--and Bushites--are PISSED OFF that they haven't been able to sway the Venezuelan people, that nothing they did to topple him worked--not a violent military coup, not a crippling oil professionals' strike, not a wasteful and stupid Recall election (which Chavez won hands down), not staged "protests" and "riots," not relentless anti-Chavez propaganda in all TV/radio media and some newspapers (and all newspapers here), not massive U.S. taxpayer funding of the rightwing opposition (against Venezuelan law!). Nothing worked. Nothing! Because Venezuelans and South Americans in general have done their homework on transparent vote counting and grass roots organization. They turned back a U.S.-backed coup--a momentous event. And Bolivarians are getting elected, and are greatly influencing policy, all over Latin America, including

--eviction of the World Bank/IMF (the loan sharks for global predator interests) from the region
--rejection of U.S.-dominated "free trade" (global corporate predation)
--rejection of the murderous U.S. "war on drugs" (war on union leaders, community organizers, peasant farmers and political leftists)
--promotion of social justice (anathema to Bushites)
--promotion of Latin American self-determination, through new institutions like the Bank of the South and new regional trade groups (aiming at a South American "Common Market" and common currency)
--opposition to U.S. military aggression and fascist policy such as torturing prisoners
--empowerment of the previously disempowered and disenfranchised poor, brown majority
--indigenous land rights
--good environmental policy
--expansion and protection of labor rights
--upward mobility for the poor (education, medical care, help to small businesses and worker coops, land reform)
--peaceful, democratic change

All of this "seems" like a "personality cult" because the Bush State Dept. and corporate news monopoly rat bastards are TRYING TO MAKE IT LOOK THAT WAY.

They tried to make Chavez's de-licensing of a corporate news monopoly TV station (which had actively supported the violent military coup) seem like "suppression of free speech," when it was perfectly lawful (as it is here) to de-license them, and when that action, in truth, ENHANCED free speech in Venezuela. In Venezuela, as here, the media was completely dominated by the rabid right. Now ONE PUBLIC AIRWAVE is open to independent broadcasters, including access to previously excluded voices. They tried to make what was a pro-free speech action into its opposite, to support their lie that Chavez is a "dictator." Peru, which supports rapacious U.S. "free trade," recently denied licenses to four TV stations. Why is this not mentioned? Every government has this right; many governments do it, for various violations of the rules of the PUBLIC airwaves. Why is this context entirely absent from corporate news?

And WHAT do you suppose the coupsters that RCTV Corp. actively supported--who kidnapped Chavez, and suspended the Constitution, the National Assembly and the court system--would have done to anti-coup dissenters, if they had succeeded, hm? They would have shot them, that's what. Tossed them out of airplanes. Slit their throats. Tortured and raped them. Chainsawed them and tossed their body parts into mass graves. That's how much RCTV, the Bushites and the corporate media revere "free speech"!

They make it "about Chavez." When it's not about Chavez--it's about DEMOCRACY!

What difference does it make if he wants a third term in office, and the voters want him to have it? Why make such a dither over this notion of no term limits in ONE South American country? Why is this even news--except of a minor nature?

Because they want you to believe that Chavez is a "dictator"--so you won't make a fuss if they succeed in bumping him off.

This disinformation campaign is as much for OUR benefit as for anyone else. In fact, Latin Americans all know that Chavez is not a "dictator," and that Venezuela has a strong democracy. The disinformation is MOSTLY for us. We need to mightily resist it. We need to understand that Chavez's great popularity is based on good ideas and good policies, and NOT on a "personality cult." His power is based IN THE PEOPLE, in democratic elections, not in "authoritarianism."

I think I understand your comment--from a perspective of theoretical democracy. It is the ideal to have many potential national executives. It is the ideal to have a strong and well-intended opposition. But the lack of OTHER candidates to rival Chavez (at least currently), and the lack of a strong and well-intended opposition are NOT Chavez's fault or doing. And THAT is where the smear campaign is most deceptive. The rightwing has done ITSELF in, in Venezuela--through their stupid, greedy alliance with the Bush Junta. And the lack of rivals to Chavez is just an historical situation, partly due to Chavez' good qualities--strong leadership, visionary ideas, genuineness. Chavez doesn't stop anyone from running for office. He doesn't smear people. He doesn't do "dirty tricks." He doesn't fiddle elections. He is just himself. And that happens to be what the people want and need. He has something like a 70% approval rating. Is that his FAULT?!? What an absurd contention. On the contrary, his 70% approval rating is the result of his VIRTUE--his genuine attendance to the needs of the people, and his answering TO them. This is what the Bushites and the corporate rulers hate. A real leader, with real public support.

[Teaser]

15. Are you arguing with some other Teaser?

I don't dispute anything you say. And nothing you say isn't consonant with Chavez also heading up a personality cult.

There isn't too much that's wrong with a personality cult, when the personality in question is a very good person and there isn't an atmosphere of coersion involved in propagating it.

My problem is that so much of what Chavez is doing seems to begin and end with him. Who are the other leaders in his movement? When he dies, who takes his place? Who are his allies?

Chavez may be a real leader, with real public support, and he may be the regional expression of beliefs about policies, politics, and such that cohere and hang together as they would in a movement. But the maneuvers he is using to maintain his policies are not healthy if one wishes to establish the movement as a political force for more than his lifetime.

Until I see another leader in his party ride the same populist sentiment to victory that Chavez has, I can't regard him as anything more than a (possibly) well intentioned politician elected by personality driven politics.

He isn't a dictator, I'm not one who argues that at all. But he isn't what I'd want in a real leader either.

[ProudDad]

24. The problem when comtemplating these events

is trying to fit them into the authoritarian box that is forced upon our minds by the way things are done in the Caucasian "West".

The model of government we suffer under here in the U.S., the authoritarian, top-down, "pissed on", LEADERPRINZIP blinds us to what the Bolivarian Revolution is really trying to do -- empower a bottom-up approach to self-government...to create local leaders instead of enforcing edicts with the barrel of a gun.


Who are his allies? The majority of the People of Venezuela and a large part of Latin America are...


Who will take his place? The thousands of local governing entities, the Missions and Community Councils will take his place... The new "leaders" created locally in thousands of communities will take his place.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6946013.stm
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2954359&mesg_id=2954359

That's the design...decentralize power and governance instead of it being in the hands of the corporate capitalist masters...

Socialismo!

[Judi Lynn]

47. Wonderful comments. Absolutely the best. I have something to add I just found, regarding this

movement, which is as serious as a heart attack, although completely ignored by the right-wing controlled corporate media. As soon as I saw this, I was determined to add it to your comments:

Democracy Rising
Grassroots movements change the face of power.
by Nadia Martinez
August 15, 2007

Yes! Magazine

As the people of Latin America build democracies from the bottom up, the symbols of power are changing. What used to be emblems of poverty and oppression—indigenous clothing and speech, the labels “campesino” and “landless worker”—are increasingly the symbols of new power. As people-powered movements drive the region toward social justice and equality, these symbols speak, not of elite authority limited to a few, but of power broadly shared.

The symbolism was especially rich last year in Cochabamba, Bolivia, when the new minister of justice made her entrance at an international activists’ summit. Casimira Rodríguez, a former domestic worker, wore the thick, black braids and pollera, a long, multilayered skirt, of an Aymara indigenous woman. As she made her way through the throng, Rodríguez further distinguished herself from a typical law-enforcement chief by passing out handfuls of coca leaves.

Throughout the region, marginalized people are rising up, challenging the system that has kept them poor, and pursuing a new course. In country after country, people are selecting leaders who strongly reject the Washington-led “neoliberal” policies of restricted government spending on social programs, privatization of public services such as education and water, and opening up borders to foreign corporations.

Of course, there are exceptions, most notably Mexico, where conservative Felipe Calderón claimed power after a bruising battle over disputed election results. But the growing backlash has driven old-guard presidents out of power in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Bolivia. And, while there are sharp differences among the new leaders, there is no question that what put all of them in power was a growing outcry against economic injustice. Over 40 percent of the region still lives in poverty, and the gap between rich and poor is the widest in the world.
(snip/...)

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=20&ItemID=13534

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The movement is real, it's been going on far longer than Hugo Chavez has been the elected President of Venezuela. The people of Venezuela have asserted the movement came before and will continue after Hugo Chavez. Anyone who takes the time to become conscious would have known this long ago.

The knowledge is there for the taking for anyone ambitious enough to stop turning to Fox News for his/her picture of what is happening in the world they are going to find they must share with others.

Thanks so much for the time and care you pour into your comments. It's always helpful to read every one. ALWAYS.

[ProudDad]

26. The point you're missing

is that Chavez and the People of Venezuela and the region are trying to develop a new model to replace the oligarchic rule, the stooges and puppets of the great Satan of the north, that they've suffered under for over a hundred years.

They're trying to build a "party". It's very strong now, they want it to last...

This takes time, maybe more than two terms...

The point is not to keep "Chavez in power" but to allow the process towards a better model for the future to take root...

[David__77]

11. FDR didn't have term limits either.

The right-wing called him "president-for-life" and other such things. It's a good thing there weren't term limits too. Shouldn't the people be allowed to vote for and elect whomever they choose?

[arcos]

12. Term limits are a MUST in Latin America...

I don't think Chávez is "becoming a dictator" like the propaganda would like us to believe, but it is a need for a healthy democracy, especially in Latin America, to have people alternating power.

Latin America has a long and sad history of caudillos, people who not necessarily are dictators, but that monopolize power and are worshipped almost like gods... I'm afraid Chávez is going this way. I am absolutely sure that there are plenty of capable and intelligent men and women among Chávez's allies that could take his legacy and expand it further with new ideas and new blood.

Venezuela and the bolivarian project are NOT dependent on Chávez in order to continue, and would probably be better off if Chávez retired like a statesman and passed on the torch to someone else who can continue leading, the way he has... this project is much bigger than himself, and by doing this he only makes himself indispensable. I think it is in his best interest, and the best interest of the bolivarian revolution, to leave the way open for someone else to run.

[Teaser]

16. Exactly what I was trying to say

Thank you for being so articulate.

[arcos]

23. Thank you!

Sometimes it's hard for me to be articulate in English, so I really appreciate it :)

[Peace Patriot]

19. It may be true that it is "best" to have term limits, and "best" for Chavez to retire,

although I wouldn't say "must"--"term limits are a MUST in Latin America" (--it's up to the Venezuelan people)--but we can't always have what's "best." Often we have to settle for what's workable, for what's possible in reality, for utilizing whatever (or whoever) is at hand, keeping our eyes on the ideals of democracy, but understanding that politics, like life, is often messy, irrational, and ad hoc.

We have our "cowboy" and "good sheriff" and "knight in shining armor" and "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" and "rock star" myths as well. The phenomenon of personal charisma is not confined to Latin America. And if the myth adequately fits reality, and satisfies a hunger for heroes--rather than being a distorted, ugly, harmful thing like "Bush, Cowboy"--then I don't see it as necessarily harmful. It COULD be harmful. It could turn into something harmful.

Also, I think the Bush Junta and its corporate media copy writers are PLAYING on this "caudillo" thing--and on other stereotypes (prior REAL Latin dictators, of the fascist variety, and gun-toting leftist revolutionaries who want to confiscate your jaguar and your plantations). Judging from Chavez's ACTIONS--and policies--he doesn't fit the "caudillo" model at all. His government has scrupulously adhered to the rule of law and the Constitution. He may "shoot from the hip" as a speaker--and love getting laughs and applause--but he does not do so on policy. His policy could even be described as centrist--in comparison, say, to some European countries. On RCTV, for instance, he waited them out. He waited until their 20 year license expired, and then took the perfectly legal (and reasonable) action of not renewing their license. He DIDN'T go in, with guns blazing, and shut them down. (--what a "caudillo" would do--a populist cowboy crowd-pleaser).

Still, I understand your caution. ANYONE can BECOME a "dictator"--or get too enamored of his own power. But it's not as if we haven't had hero worship in THIS country, both good and bad. It's a reality of human life, and one of the hazards of any representative democracy (as opposed to pure direct democracy, and even then...).

One final thought: Chavez's presidency is not happening in a vacuum. He is TRULY the target of a massive disinformation campaign--as well as an actual real target of the Bush Junta (assassination target). This most certainly influences how he behaves (imagine the stress and the pressure), how he and others view Venezuelan democracy (I've read articles in which he admits to chafing under the necessary security), and how he is perceived, there and here. I find myself feeling desperately protective of him, and wanting desperately to counter the disinformation campaign that I think is preliminary to other nefarious Bushite actions. I've lived through three assassinations of my own political heroes--JFK, RFK and MLK--and they were DEVASTATING to U.S. democracy, not to mention personally devastating. I also have familiarized myself with the history of horrendous U.S. policy in Latin America, and don't want to see those horrors repeated. So may I go too far in defending Chavez, and ignore the flaws and the pitfalls. But, as I said, his presidency of Venezuela, and leadership of the Bolivarian movement, are not happening in a vacuum. They are happening amidst all these dangers, and precedents and fears. Ideals of democracy--the perfect democracy--don't seem so important next to keeping a good democratic president ALIVE, and keeping his supporters alive and well, and working to further their democratic and social justice goals. I DO agree that the Bolivarian Revolution is bigger, much bigger, than one man, and WOULD survive his violent removal, or could possibly benefit from his retirement. Whatever occurs, I want it to be the will of the Venezuelan people, democratically achieved.

[arcos]

22. I mostly agree, but caudillos come in all sorts of forms, shapes and ideologies...

They have always been enamored with power though. In my country we had two big caudillos in the 20th century, and despite their shortcomings and sometimes lack of respect for democracy, their legacy is mostly positive... they were the architects that allowed Costa Rica to have a solid middle class and to a extent avoid the extreme unequality problems most other countries in the region have experienced. Thanks to them the army was abolished, we have universal healthcare and workers' rights, etc. But both of them ruled their parties (and the country when they had their chance) with an iron fist, and their legacy was so strong that even after their death people were either "Figuerista" or "Calderonista" (even now a few people define themselves that way, 60 years later!). They always insisted on running for President even if their parties had plenty of people not only capable and willing but that could enrich and further expand the reformist steps they took. New blood is ALWAYS important in politics, because politicians of all stripes eventually lose touch with their constituents.

In fact, we now in Costa Rica have a President that wants to play the caudillo too. He wasn't allowed to run for reelection, yet he lobbied the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court which struck down term limits as unconstitucional... basically he wanted to be crowned as President once again, and sadly the people voted him in again, although by the tightest of margins much to his surprise. He ran as "the Nobel Peace Prize winner"... "the only one who can take Costa Rica out of poverty"... "the captain that the ship needs". Not a dictator, but an authoritarian figure.

I think myths are always harmful... whether it be the cowboy, the rockstar, the caudillo, or whatever, especially if people adopt them because they have a need for them, like what happened in the case of Arias. Myths blind people, and especially when we are talking about leaders, we all need to be aware and criticize even our own if needed (not eat our own, though) when they deserve it. And it certainly cuts both ways, because there is also the slander that becomes a negative myth among a part of the population, like "Chávez the dictator", "Kerry the coward", "Gore the stiff", etc.

I totally agree that Chávez has had his way against all odds, against big money, against the media and against the US, and that's thanks to his progressive policies and the support he has among the Venezuelan people. And I not only support that, but think it is an amazing example for all nations and progressive leaders and movements everywhere. However, I have always considered him a caudillo... Chávez is far from a dictator, but he is indeed authoritarian, and the Venezuelan people not only recognize that but actually LIKE it. I respect it, but that's a big turn off for me, and personally I think Latin America DOES NOT need more authoritarian leaders. Yes, that's up to the Venezuelans (and up to each country's people) to determine, and I know I'm biased because I'm Costa Rican and we mostly dislike authoritarian attitudes, but I certainly think the healthy thing would be for him to retire after this term and become an elder statesman that will continue to work for the cause he championed, it's not like he's going away.

I definitely agree that the Bush administration and the media love to play on stereotypes and call him dictator and stuff, when we all know that they are both guilty of much, much worse and dictator-like things than Chávez. We still have to see exactly what he proposes, I'm not willing to believe 100% what the media is reporting... but for now, I certainly don't like this at all.

[ProudDad]

27. But you're ignoring the DIFFERENT MODEL

that the Bolivarian Revolution represents.

What we're witnessing in Latin America is the creation of a new, better form of government -- a bottom-up, decentralized power approach.

They're trying to destroy the top-down dictator of the capitalist oligarchy ruling from the barrel of a gun approach that indeed should be severely limited.

"Venezuela and the bolivarian project are NOT dependent on Chávez in order to continue, and would probably be better off if Chávez retired like a statesman and passed on the torch to someone else who can continue leading"

I too hope he can do this, better sooner than later, but given the extreme forces arrayed against the Bolivarian effort, primarily from the great Satan of the North, he may need another term. I hope it's only one...

[ohio2007]

13. this is old news, just spun in a new way. nt

[TankLV]

17. Define "dictator" and how this applies to the ELECTED leader of Venezuala.

You hacks are all too transparent and easily refuted...

[ConservativeDemocrat]

30. Adolf Hitler was elected, Tank. So was Bush.

Would you have a problem if Bush decided to just declare himself President For Life?

Or, if you think that it's unlikely he'd be reelected, imagine a scenario in which
Bush was just as evil, but also frighteningly competent. Suddenly after we invade
Iraq, a massive anthrax plague hit the Iraqis, effectively depopulating the country
(this all blamed on Saddam's biological WMD programs, naturally). Now, with the
contractors and U.S. oil companies in charge, gas is 50 cents a gallon in the U.S.
and Bush has a 70% popularity. So he wants to change the Constitution to be elected,
forever, for life. Are you in favor of the idea?

If not, explain your hypocrisy.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[1932]

61. Venezuela clearly has a highly functioning democracy. 80% of the people have very little power

and they've elected a guy who is representing their interests.

[struggle4progress]

69. Do you have a link to support your claim Chavez has declared himself President-for-life?

[EFerrari]

28. Skewed hit piece of the week AND not new. n/t

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.0
==================



This week is our third quarter 2007 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend on donations
from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for your support.

[Socal31]

36. Chavez = Dictator.

Period. Either confess that you like that, because he is socialst, or you lose all credibilty.

[Socal31]

38. Why are social progressives being destroyed by

economic socialists more and more on DU? It seems like its a war between your average progressive (Equal rights, better education, rich paying their fair share, get b*sh the FUCK OUT OF OFFICE, etc) and your Guevara/Castro/Chavez apologists....I see a rift forming.....

[EFerrari]

39. No, it's just the same people buying into BushCo propaganda

re Chavez.

It always amazes me how quick people are to buy in.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[EFerrari]

46. The media campaign against Mr. Chavez is unrelenting.

And people of conscience step up. That's what we have to do. :toast:

[Burma Jones]

51. I'm a Subscriber, I pay Monthly, therefore I don't get the red text next to my name....

I do have a star however, and certainly am no troll.......

I read that the National Assembly is 100% Chavez supporters, yet, in the last Presidential Election, he received 60% of the vote. This Assembly has also granted him the ability to "rule by decree" in certain areas. There also appears to be a Personality Cult growing around him. He engineered a failed coup, and survived another. All I meant is that he has many of the outward signs of a Socialist Dictator. The replies I've read in defense of Chavez are compelling enough to make me appreciate that at least he's doing a very good job of using Venezuela's Oil Money and has done much to improve his country. Plus, anybody that feels the way he does about the Bush Junta is fine by me. I am curious as to why there are no other People that can serve as President and maintain the Bolivarian Revolution.

I've never posted anything about Chavez before. I saw the article, thought the guy was starting to look like your basic Communist Era Dictator and threw out a post to see what would happen.

Many of the comments here are reminiscent of the Naive idealists that defended Stalin.

[EFerrari]

52. The thing is, he "starts" to look that way every time one of these

hit pieces come out.

I don't think this guy is the Second Coming and it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

One thing I can say, I was impressed that his Cabinet is staffed with leaders, not yes wo/men. You can watch them in action in the documentary made during the attempted coup. He was more or less kidnapped and they had to carry on without him. They were amazing.

It's hard to believe that an authoritarian would put a crew like that together. :)

[Burma Jones]

53. Thank You. I hope Blackwater doesn't find it necessary to declare war....

Venezuela is buying about 5,000 Russian Sniper Rifles, I would hope our shadow government takes some time to mull that over.

[EFerrari]

54. John Perkins said if we weren't in Iraq, we'd be in Venezuela

because the economic hitmen and the jackals have failed so far. I don't know why Chavez is still alive except that BushCo is so obsessed with the Middle East. :shrug:

[Burma Jones]

55. Chavez has more allies than Saddam had

lots more.

[EFerrari]

56. That's because Saddam was our guy and Chavez never was.

What a great scam. Put Saddam in, isolate him, and take him out when the Oil Cabal is good and ready.

[Burma Jones]

57. Aren't you proud of our clever leaders?

When you stop producing things, exhaust your natural resources and denigrate Labor, all you have left is sneak.

[EFerrari]

58. Mark Crispin Miller has called them suicidal. Imho, he's right. n/t

[ronnie624]

59. So, Chavez supporters are like Stalin supporters....

except for the the fact that Chavez has never conducted political purges, or murdered political opponents. Nor is he responsible for the deaths of millions of people and the imprisonment of millions more. In fact, it is not possible to honestly attribute any sort of purges, deaths or wrongful imprisonments to Hugo Chavez. And Stalin was certainly never elected by huge majorities, in elections that were closely monitored by numerous international organizations.

In other words, Chavez and Stalin are not even remotely similar, and no one could possibly prove that they are. So, why do you and others make such comparisons?

This is exactly the sort of hyperbole that is found to be so revolting by those who observe Venezuelan politics.

Attacking in this fashion, Chavez and those who believe he is a good president and a decent human being, when the evidence strongly suggests that he is, is dishonest and insulting, and worthy of little more than contempt and scorn.

[struggle4progress]

70. Your comparison of Chavez to Stalin seems inept: do you have any evidence

that Chavez is setting up a vast prison network, having political enemies whacked at home and abroad, or engaging in other such crimes?

[Ken Burch]

76. In Latin America "democracy" is just a code word for "the rich must always rule"

And that's what the anti-Chavistas who run our country want when they say they want "democracy in Venezuela".

[1932]

60. "Equal rights, better education, rich paying fair share." You just described Venezuela.

[IndianaGreen]

62. Colombia's Uribe got rid of term limits. I don't hear the GOP & DLC Democrats complaining about it.

This is the same NY Times that told us that Iraq had WMDs, that Iran is trying to get the atomic bomb, and that the anti-WTO demonstrators in Seattle were terrorists. Why do we give them any credence?

Many Americans opinions on Hugo Chavez's Bolivarian Revolution are based on the limited, incomplete, and distorted information they are being fed by the same corporate media that tells them that Democrats want Al-Qaeda to win in Iraq, Saddam was involved in 9-11, and Iran is a threat to America.

Bush rules by decree, and he ignores the Constitution, yet he is not called a tyrant by the corporate media.

Chavez is going through a constitutional amendment process to remove term limits from the Presidency. For Chavez proposal to become law, it has to be approved by the General Assembly, and then it has to be ratified by the voters in a national referendum. Since when it is considered dictatorship to follow the Constitution, including the amendment process?

There is a thread in LBN that has a lot of information on this topic which, if one bothers to read it, it will change one's point of view about Chavez and Venezuela.

Our pal President Uribe of Colombia just changed the law and removed term limits from the Presidency in order to run for reelection. I don't see anyone accusing Uribe of being a tyrant since he followed the law in changing the law. Why the double-standard with Chavez?

It is disgusting how DLC/conservative Democrats parrot the Republican rightwing siding with the Venezuelan elites against the people of Venezuela. Consider that these are the same "Democrats" that are most opposed to impeaching Bush and Cheney. Their love for "freedom and democracy" is as genuine as Bush and Cheney's "liberation" of Iraq.

Just as their like-minded corporatists in the GOP, DLC/conservative Democrats demonize any government that helps the poor, the workers, and the indigenous people at the expense of the wealthy. They love Pinochet, and they hate Allende!

Colombia re-election ban lifted

10/20/2005 - Le Monde, Edicom, AP, BBC Mundo, BBC News

Colombia's Constitutional Court has ruled that President Alvaro Uribe can stand for re-election next year, overturning a single-term limit.

Opinion polls currently make the right-wing Mr Uribe a clear favourite.

Mr Uribe had argued for a change in the law, saying he needs four more years to implement his tough policies against Colombia's left-wing guerrilla groups.

Opponents of the move said allowing re-election in Colombia would give presidents too much power.

Mr Uribe is one of Washington's strongest allies in South America, where many governments have recently shifted to the left.

Judges took almost a month to reach the decision, after examining 18 challenges to the amendment.

"The court decided to declare as reasonable within the Constitution the legislative act allowing the re-election of the president of the republic," Constitutional Court President Manuel Jose Cepeda said.

http://www.educweb.org/webnews/ColNews-Oct05/English/Articles/Reelectionautoriseepourle.html

[Judi Lynn]

63. They completely ignored it, although it was discussed here repeatedly. Since Uribe was the one,

and he's so far to the right, it could only be good, apparently.

That should tell us a lot about the politics of these "Democrats" at D.U.. Who among them would have a word of criticism for their little death-squad massacre loving Alvaro Uribe?

http://cryptome.org.nyud.net:8090/brp/pict20.jpg

He knows enough to walk BEHIND his master.

Every other action which has been targeted by the corporate media to be bellowed about for at least a week or two, in every case, has been accomplished by other Latin America leaders with absolutely NO BACKLASH.

If you'd never heard of Chavez, and made up your mind based on what these imbeciles yammer about him, you'd think he has taken South America and perhaps Central America hostage, rather than having been elected, and re-elected by a HUGE majority of Venezuelans, while being hounded and harrassed from his first day in office, February 2, 1999.

We all know what they do to left-wingers, or even very centrist people like Bill Clinton, the subject of relentless yapping and sensation mongering every single day HE was in office, as well.

People surely recall these same assholes repeating how much they hate (still) the memory of FDR, Harry Truman, John and Bobby Kennedy, and what the HELL did they do to Al Gore and John Kerry? Idiots. Disturbed, sick, depraved.

If there's anyone who doesn't see the pattern yet, it's about time to wake up and smell the coffee. DEMOCRATS surely do!

http://weekly.ahram.org.eg.nyud.net:8090/2004/674/inter111.jpg

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

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

[struggle4progress]

71. Do you generally support assassinating folk you dislike?

[leaninglib]

72. No, only backward thinking totalitarian dictators.

How would you react to a proposal for gb lifetime presidency?

[struggle4progress]

73. Gotta link to support your claim that this would make Chavez "President for life"?

cuz that's not how I read the proposal

[Bo]

67. LOL ....I saw this one coming a mile away....el presidente por vida

[La Lioness Priyanka]

68. if 70% of his country agree, its really not our business.

[tidy_bowl]

77. Quack...quack....quack......

Yep its a duck.

[devilgrrl]

78. Blaa blaa blaa blaa blaa blaa blaa blaa blaa

:boring: