Sunday Howard Dean: Dissed Bolivia & Venezuela - anyone else catch that?

[clitzpah queen]

I forget whether it was with Wolf or on another show. I usually LOVE what Howard Dean says. He was going great guns about Abramoff -- then he takes this ridiculous detour re: because of the arrogance of the Repubs we have 2 leaders in charge of Latin American countries hostile to the U.S. in Bolivia and Venezuela. That if Dems were in power, that would not have happened -- we wouldn't be having to deal with these regimes that are hostile to capital. WTF??? We need him to help grease the cogs for U.S. intervention there?

[0007]

1. No! Give me more than just your take. Transcript or video will do.

[OKNancy]

2. I think what he meant was

that because of the Bush people are hostile toward them, that they are hostile back. The Bush folks don't believe in diplomacy, they believe in pushing others around. " My way or the hiway" crap.

[Kahuna]

3. That's how I take it too. We all know that Howard tends to be a bit loose

with his words. Given how spectacular he was with the rest of his performance, I give him a pass on this one.

[clitzpah queen]

5. Sorry can't find link now...maybe later. I'm NOT making this up.

Problem is he defined Bolivia and Venezuela as being hostile to the U.S. and to capital. (heaven forefend!) One can praise him for some things (i.e. the uncompromising way he handled the unfolding Abramoff scandal) and be critical for others. It is BAD to give a pass on Imperialistically Arrogant messages being conveyed by Anyone-- In This age of uncontrolled imperial Hubris -- and Empire Building.

[Bucky]

4. I think Chavez was in office before Bush was.

Bolivia and Venezuela elect their leaders based on local issues, not based on how screwy George Bush acts. Bush's actions against Chavez are criminal, no doubt. But I hardly think Dean mentioning the fact that anti-US leaders exist in the world in any way enables further efforts at toppling them.

[droidamus]

6. Not different leaders, different attitudes

I think that Dean means that with the Democrats in charge the leaders in these countries would not feel threatened by our country and would be more willing to work with us. This in no way indicates that somehow the Democrats would interfere with election or that it would even be necessary for there to be different leaders. It 'would not have happened' because the Democrats would have approached the leadership of the two countries before the relationship got out of hand.

[sandnsea]

7. Don't put words in his mouth

He said what he said, let's stop concluding that our Dem leaders mean anything different than exactly what they say. Preferring governments that are more open to capitalism does not remotely mean supporting CIA coups.

[zbird]

8. Link inside to transcript.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/08/le.01.html

This was discussed here yesterday too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2356568

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2356650

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. You're right. Dean deserves a slap from progressives.

Sounds to me like he's apologizing for American neo-colonialism/capitalism in South America.



DEAN: We had an enormous opportunity, when this president took office, and he said he was going to reach out to Latin America. Instead, he has turned them off. He's been high-handed with them; he's rejected them.

He's ignored the economic plight of their folks. And so, we're getting something that I think most Americans wish we didn't have, which is left-leading regimes in these places. We need a president who will work constructively and cooperatively with our allies around the world so that we really can move capitalism and democracy further into the world and not turn off people. When you turn people off, as the most powerful nation in the world, they are obviously going to do something that is not in our best interest. And that's exactly what's going on right now.

[zbdent]

10. Problem is, Bush couldn't find Latin America on the map

With help, he found North America, South America, and Central America . . .

He couldn't speak Latin, though . . .