Why isn’t Obama fighting Colombia’s dirty deal with Chavez?

[alp227]

by Jackson Diehl, deputy editorial editor, Washington Post

The Obama administration is about to lose an extraordinary opportunity to prosecute one of the world’s biggest drug traffickers. It will fail to break up a network that annually smuggles hundreds of tons of cocaine to the United States. And it will miss delivering a devastating blow to the most dedicated U.S. adversary in Latin America, Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez.

You wouldn’t have known that from watching the White House meeting last week of Presidents Obama and Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia. They gathered to celebrate the completion of an “action plan” that could lead, maybe, to congressional ratification of a long-stalled free trade treaty between Colombia and the United States. Remarkably, they said nothing in public about the judgment of no-confidence Santos has made about Obama — a product of Obama’s previous neglect of a valuable ally.

In fact, the U.S.-Colombian trade plan, which leaves the treaty several steps from ratification, may matter less than the decision Santos announced two days before reaching Washington. The democratically elected Colombian leader is a graduate of the University of Kansas and a lifelong friend of the United States. He nevertheless confirmed that he will deliver a man named Walid Makled Garcia, whom Colombia arrested last August on a U.S. warrant, to his native Venezuela rather than to the United States.

Full story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why_isnt_obama_fighting_colombias_dirty_deal/2011/04/07/AFGdwrGD_story.html

[Webster Green]

1. He's too busy taking pot from cancer patients.

Very sad. He's a regressive.

[Keith Bee]

2. He's got plenty of dirty dealing to handle

by Republicans in DC.

[bemildred]

3. LOL.

Someone ought to explain to Mr Diehl that this is not about Obama. They cut a deal, Chavez and Santos, and Garcia was part of the deal.
:popcorn:

[txlibdem]

4. They're just pissed that our coup attempts in Venezuela have failed

This is just another in a long, long line of smear tactics against a Democratically elected leader, Hugo Chavez, who isn't in the pocket of the multinational corporations. No lie is too big for the CIA - Capitalism Imposition Agency (sic) :-)

[Judi Lynn]

5. A lot of people are more aware than they'd like with Jackson Diehl's obsession with Hugo Chavez.

What a grotesque waste of skin.

Most people would see his name and move on without reading it. Once you know who he is, you've had enough.

http://www.borev.net.nyud.net:8090/jackieD.jpg http://www.borev.net.nyud.net:8090/eviljacksondiehl.jpg

Jackson Diehl
A good example of the respect Diehl has evoked from the Washington Post's readers, accidental or intentional. This is a quick grab from a very quick search, from the organization Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting:

April 18, 2006

Jackson Diehl
The Washington Post

Dear Jackson Diehl:

In your column, "In Venezuela, Locking Up the Vote" (4/10/06), you write that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez "has never enjoyed overwhelming support in Venezuela," adding, "his ratings have mostly fluctuated a few points above and below 50 percent."

While the term "overwhelming support" may be somewhat subjective, Chavez has won three elections with 59 percent or more of the popular vote. In the U.S. context, such winning percentages would be considered landslides, comparable to Ronald Reagan’s win with 59 percent of the vote over Walter Mondale in 1984.

What is less subjective is the record on Hugo Chavez’s approval ratings. A recent report in your own paper (12/5/05) pegged Chavez's support at 68 percent, as measured by the opposition Venezuelan polling firm Datanalisis. In May 2005, Datanalisis reported his support at 71 percent.

According to a Venezuelan Institute for Data Analysis poll published last week, 60 percent of respondents characterized Chavez's presidential performance as either excellent (18 percent) or good (42 percent). Only 16 percent rated Chavez as "average to bad" or worse.

A February 2006 poll by North American Opinion Research Inc. found 66 percent of Venezuelan respondents saying they would vote for Chavez in the election later this year--more than four times the number who say they would vote for all other candidates combined. And on a related issue, the Chilean polling firm Latinobarómetro found more people in Venezuela considered their country "totally democratic" than in any other nation in Latin America.

More:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2876

~~~~~

The Washington Post’s Jackson Diehl Strikes Out on Venezuela
by COHA Director Larry Birns and COHA Research Associate Mark Scott


Isn’t it fitting that Jackson Diehl uses a baseball metaphor in his August 2 “A Missile from the South,” which savages Venezuela’s President Chávez with surprising immoderacy. The author’s appraisal of that country’s political situation grossly “strikes out” due to its surfeit of flaws. But, in true Chávista style, Diehl’s extended “rant” exemplifies the misdirected assessment that permeates some, but by no means all, media accounts, which often have heightened tension rather than enhanced comprehension of Venezuela’s political complexities. By referring to Chávez’ predicted referendum victory as an “incoming missile,” Diehl’s own inflammatory rhetoric can only worsen the explosive atmosphere existing in a country already split in half. If heeded, it is likely to cause grave damage to Washington’s alarmingly strained standing throughout Latin America.

Diehl’s attempt to label Chávez as an ultra-leftwing populist leader distorts the Venezuelan president’s commitment to reforming the country’s long neglected institutions while reversing the chronic disregard for its impoverished majority. This poverty was not produced by Chávez, but has profoundly motivated him to address the nation’s protracted social conflicts. Economic set-backs, exemplified by last year’s opposition-orchestrated general strike, cost the country several billion dollars. But this expense is now being offset by unanticipated revenue from Venezuela’s daily production of 2.9 million barrels in oil output. Nor, was it Chávez who pauperized the middle class; a series of work stoppages called by the opposition, including the infamous January 2003 strike, markedly worsened its members financial standing. Due to the country’s recent oil windfall, Caracas now has been able to earmark funds to implement an estimated $1.7 billion in welfare programs targeted at the poor.

Such social-spending priorities, however, will almost certainly be overturned after the August 15 referendum, if the pro-business opposition gains power. In a brazen attempt to resurrect the unpopular neoliberal policies that dominated the pre-Chávez era, the president’s critics plan to “flexibilize” the current Hydrocarbons Law and auction off state-owned electric companies to the highest bidder. Although such moves will go down well in Washington, they will not in the barrios of Caracas.

Diehl’s failure to spell out the anti-Chávez bloc’s continued controversial relationship with Washington further undermines his argument, leaving it one-sided and flawed. Chávez’ foes have repeatedly petitioned the Bush Administration for both funding and guidance in their numerous attempts to thwart Venezuela’s democratically-elected president. While Chávez’ recent hounding of Súmate could be called an abhorrent attack on civil liberties, Diehl also should have told us that it would be patently illegal for the Venezuelan government to fund anti-Bush political groups, like Súmate, to operate here in the U.S., as Washington has financed Caracas-based anti-Chávez entities. What would the White House do if Chávez funded U.S. organizations trying to unseat the Bush administration? During the build-up to the 2002 opposition-led failed coup, Washington spent at least $4 million in semi-covert funds to assist anti-Chávez activists to overthrow the Venezuelan leader.

More:
http://www.coha.org/the-washington-post%E2%80%99s-jackson-diehl-strikes-out-on-venezuela/
Council on Hemispheric Affairs

[naaman fletcher]

6. ridiculous

The guy is wanted for two murders in Venezuela. Furthermore, Venezuela asked for extradition before the US did. Santos did the right thing.