Jump to content

Chavez "devil" Speech


des
 Share

Recommended Posts

Heck, I think Hugo Chavez is probably almost a dicatator. Has ties to Castro and Iran and so on.

I know he has people in his prisons he shouldn't have, and so on.

 

But I gotta admire his sense of the dramatic and pure theatrics. I actually think he kind of did

an impersonation of GW Bush. I'm not sure if it was intentional, but he draped himself in the cross

as GWB always drapes himself in God and the flag and general religiousity. I have seen the clip of

Chavez when he goes and crosses himself, "Yes the devil was right here". Now GWB actually hasn't

called anybody a devil but he does do the Axis of Evil and so forth. He paralleled GWB's speech in various

ways. Pretending to talk directly to the people, as GWB did, etc. I notice he is good for Chomsky book

sales, not that I have cared that much for Chomsky.

 

Speaking of book sales, the Pakistani president seems to be working on his.

 

Anyway, I just couldn't get all upset about Chavez like some Democrats. Or were they just pretending to be upset?

I thought he did great theatre, and should get an Oscar. :-)

Best Dictator impersonating George Bush.

 

BTW, Pat Robertson wants the government to go assasinate him.

 

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably. :-)

I think they share some things in common. I think neither one of them is worried about

torture or holding people in prison without good cause (did you see the case of the Canadian

"rendered" to Syria). I think it is interesting that Chavez held up the book on Empire about

the US. I doubt Chavez would mind getting around silly little things like elections.

 

They definitely like to "stick it" to each other. I think the heating oil was one way to stick

to GWB. Meanwhile GWB carries on some degree of hyperbole about Chavez. It's kind of

fun ot watch.

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, I think Hugo Chavez is probably almost a dicatator.

 

I don't claim to be an expert on Venezuela, but I see a lot of Republican talking points in the press that get bandied about unchallenged about how Chavez is supposedly not democratic, but from what I have seen there is a vigorous opposition within Venezuela to his government, and the country's democratic constitution seems to continue to operate. The fact that he is extremely popular with the Venzuelan people because of what he has done for the poor doesn't make him undemocratic. One thing to remember is that he faced a recall election and won, fair and square, in an election that was judged fair and free by international observers. Imagine George Bush, who has a dismal public opinion rating, doing the same! On that basis, one could argue that Venezuela could be said to be more democratic than the US is! Chavez's government is continually being threatened by the most powerful nation in the world, and Bush once tried to overthrow Chavez by supporting a coup attempt, so Chavez has every reason to hate Bush and to make contacts with other countries. I thought his comments on Bush were quite funny, and it is interesting that when he spoke in a Harlem church the next day, he was applauded. What a stark contrast between the way poor people in Harlem responded to Chavez and the way establishment politicians in our corporate-dominated political system responded, with leading Democrats coming to Bush's defense. I think it says just how much our country's political establishment is out of touch with the concerns of America's poor.

 

I am not saying that I agree with everything that Chavez does or that he is perfect by any means, but I give him credit for sticking it to Bush. This winter he is planning on doubling his heating oil support program for poor people in the US. Good for him!

Edited by Mystical Seeker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty hard to get fair coverage of what is happening in Venezula. I do watch BBC, which has pretty good international reporting (certainly better than CCN or the big three), but even there there isn't much news on South America.

 

He does seem to cozy up to people like Castro, but then again, why shouldn't he. He has oil to sell.

He has no obligation to keep the US's silly sanctions on Cuba. I imagine he likes sticking it to Bush (I don't remember him bothering the Clinton administration so much, or maybe he wasn't around back then??)

 

Yes, I like him giving oil to Harlem and the NE in general. And he is popular with the poor in his country.

 

He is one who is fun to watch for sure.

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may just be that Chavez and Bush are not dictators now but both want to be!

 

It will be interesting to see if Venezuela has a non-violent regime change in the years to come. I believe that democracy and socialism are compatible if capitalism is also allowed. Many prosperous nations have demonstrated that these two economic approaches can be integrated. Will Venezuela follow their example? Maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may just be that Chavez and Bush are not dictators now but both want to be!

 

It will be interesting to see if Venezuela has a non-violent regime change in the years to come. I believe that democracy and socialism are compatible if capitalism is also allowed. Many prosperous nations have demonstrated that these two economic approaches can be integrated. Will Venezuela follow their example? Maybe.

 

I just googled Venezuela Election and I see that the next Presidential election is on December 3. Polls show that his opponent is popular and could win. So what does Chavez do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just googled Venezuela Election and I see that the next Presidential election is on December 3. Polls show that his opponent is popular and could win. So what does Chavez do?

 

MT

 

I just caught the news today that 7-11 is going to discontinue using Cities Service gas at its stores. Cities Service is the Venezuelan-owned oil operation in the U.S. If he loses, which I don't expect, perhaps Hugo could manage Cities Service and extend his largesse to SUV drivers here as he has done by providing low cost heating oil to people in the NE USA. Of course the new Prez in Venezuela would have to go along with this, but this would keep Chavez out of the new regieme's hair for a while... mebbe. Low cost investment...high payback.

 

Like your blog format BTW. Rock On !!!

 

flow.... :P

Edited by flowperson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Closer to home: I'm wondering what's going to happen closer to our elections? Esp. now that it sure looks like Democrats will win the House and maybe the Senate. Will gas prices get even lower? It's a major sticking point with many Americans. What about another terrorist attack? Finding Osama Bin Laden?

Or at least some key terrorist suspect? Of course, the voting machines could "work" to the Republican advantage.

 

I hate to sound paranoid, but I am not altogether sure we still have a democracy here. Many dictators were initially elected.

 

 

Gosh this sounds paranoid but I am posting anyway.

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is going unsaid in the media, re" Chavez and Venezula", is the origin of the U. S. /Chavez rift. Chavez actually had the audacity to put the wants and needs of his people before the profits of the big oil companies. He demanded a bigger cut of the oil revenues from Venezuela's oil .Needless to say, this didn't set well with with Bush and Cheney and the boys, so they decided to take Chavez out. He was actually out office for a couple of days. This is someone democratically elected, by the way. He is not a dictator. Chavez regained power, and his attitude went South after that. THEN he started hanging around with Fidel and the rhetoric statrted getting harsher. He lost some fans with the performance at the UN, though. He was obviously clowning

and, underreported in the press, he later stated, that he had an important meeting with "the Axis of Evil".A poor performance at the U. N., yes. But his country is now getting 80% of its own oil revenues and Democracy is flourishing in South America with his lead and our preoccupation in the Middle East.Our preoccupation with the Middle East has led to popular reform in Chile, Brazil, and Bolivia. Without our meddling, they are democraticizing.The U.S. record is Latin America is awful. We have perpetually been on the side of the rich, white, and dictatorial. If you look at the entire history of U.S. Latin American relationships , one can understand why Chavez has the bad attitude that he does. No excuse for the show at the U. N. but understand that Bush refers to other countries as "The Axis of Evil". Also understand that one of the leading Pharisees, Pat Robertson called for his assasination, and it is not hard to understand why Chavez's attittude is bad. "Con Los Pobres de la tiera". In English , " With the poor people of the earth" do I take my stand. Love and Light.

 

P.S. Anybody else out there old enough to remember Liberation Theology"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the update and info. I haven't really understood what is going on. All of a sudden his name

started coming up and I didn't even know he was there during the Clinton administration. Was he newly elected? Or did the ties with big oil make him a target for the Bush admin.? I also heard Pat Robertson's

outrageous comment, which he seems to get away with in his circle. (His pals don't say, "shut up".)

Yes, Chavez was obviously clowning, though I enjoyed it, I don't think it was appropriate for the UN.

I thought it was his play on the Axis of Evil thing that GWB is so good at. Washington Week made the comment that he might have been "campaigning" with nonallied nations for a seat on the security council, so his talk may not have been so dumb.

 

Yes, I am old enough to know of Liberation Theology. I don't know too much. It was a cause for Matt

Fox who did write about his experiences in S.America during his year when he was "silenced".

Apparently he had a lot of company down there. :-) And several high profile priests were silenced or put out.

In some cases they would set up a parallel church and do informal services which were more popular with the people than the regular ones.

 

Yes, our government will side with a wealthy very bad dictatorship as it once did for Sadaam Husain (then hero).

Disagree and you could be finished. I always had a feeling that Hugo Chavez's hanging with Castro, etc. were a reaction to something, I just did not really know what.

As I said, it isn't easy to get info on it. BBC does a nice job of Europe and Africa, but you don't hear much on it on South America. Even PBS, not much. The comment on Washington Week was right after all the bruhaha.

He did succeed in getting publicity!!!!

 

"Con los pobres de la tierra" that's from Guantanermera (sp?)-- see how old that makes me!!

:-) I can hear Pete Seeger singing it.

 

--des

Edited by des
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, "Con Los Pobres de la Tierra" is from "Guantanemero". There is a contemporary artist that is re-doing Pete Seeger songs and traditonal anti war songs. Does anybody know his name, I might get a CD and see if I can get some kids interested. Music is so important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, "Con Los Pobres de la Tierra" is from "Guantanemero". There is a contemporary artist that is re-doing Pete Seeger songs and traditonal anti war songs. Does anybody know his name, I might get a CD and see if I can get some kids interested. Music is so important.

 

Yes, and it's driving me nuts that I can't remember the *rest* of the lyrics. It's been awhile.

At least you gave me the right spelling and I could look it up. Folk songs are always fun to play on the recorder. I will work out how to play them, even though sometimes it takes me an hour or so.

 

Mystical seeker. Thanks for the link.

 

BTW, did you'll hear the recent comments by 7-11 I think. They will no longer buy oil from the democratically elected government of Venezula, whatever its issues, due to his comments. No, no, instead (I guess) buy their oil from the Saudi sheks who don't let women drive cars and are breeding grounds for terrorists. That's good of them.

 

BTW, do you have any good news links that would give me more info on S. America?

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

--des

Edited by des
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and it's driving me nuts that I can't remember the *rest* of the lyrics. It's been awhile.

At least you gave me the right spelling and I could look it up. Folk songs are always fun to play on the recorder. I will work out how to play them, even though sometimes it takes me an hour or so.

 

Mystical seeker. Thanks for the link.

 

BTW, did you'll hear the recent comments by 7-11 I think. They will no longer buy oil from the democratically elected government of Venezula, whatever its issues, due to his comments. No, no, instead (I guess) buy their oil from the Saudi sheks who don't let women drive cars and are breeding grounds for terrorists. That's good of them.

 

BTW, do you have any good news links that would give me more info on S. America?

 

Thanks.

--des

 

Des, I've heard that 7-11 will no longer use Citgo gas, but I wasn't sure whether it was in direct response to Chavez's comments or not.

 

I really don't know of any good links on South America in general. I still have a lot to learn about what is going on in the region myself.

 

There are a couple of interesting movies that might be of interest, one I've seen and the other I haven't. The one I've seen is called "The Take", about workers taking over abandoned factories in Argentina. The one I haven't seen, so I obviously can't recommend it but I have been meaning to watch it myself, is "The Revolution Won't Be Televised", about the coup attempt against Chavez a few years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On that basis, one could argue that Venezuela could be said to be more democratic than the US is!

Considering the way that elections are rigged in this country, it probably is! :lol: There is a reason why only two political parties are all that are in power at both the state and national levels...the differences between them don't threaten the stability or challenge the foundations of The Empire! Case in point: here in CT there is much horn-blowing and drum-beating about 'Vote 2006' and 'The Decision: 2006' for the election of governor. The contest, if you pay attention to the establishment press, is between warm and fuzzy current governor Jodi Rell and the street-wise mayor of New Haven John DeStefano. But wait...Here come The Great Debates! Oh...it's an invitation only debate sponsored by that bastion of democracy League of Women Voters! :rolleyes: Oh, I'm sorry... the Green Party, the other party fielding a candidate, was not invited. :unsure::o Why? They want to make sure there are no embarrassing questions, no real tough issues that challenge the mind sets of the candidates, nothing to make people think. This has HISTORICALLY been the case locally and nationally for decades! Go around asking people on the street why we only have two political parties in Congress. People may just tell you it's becauese it's written in the Constitution or it's 'the law'! :( The press gives NO coverage (or scant coverage) to serious challengers, and not simply disgruntled billionaires who decide to challenge the incumbent via the back door. Real social and political change in this country will take place on a grass-roots level IN SPITE OF secret agendas, hidden constituencies, Democratic Party soft-talk, red-baiting, etc. etc. etc. Every social group must be represented in order for their needs to be adressed and met in this 'democratic' society. We need a Black Party, a Latino Party, a Gay & Lesbian Party, a Worker's Party, a Women's Party, an Undocumented Worker's Party...and proportional representation in Congress, too. If the Gay & Lesbian Party candidates for Congress get 5% of the vote, they get 5% of the seats. Now...where would this leave wealthy white male candidates? In a minority, I'm sure. Why? BECAUSE IN REALITY THAT IS WHO THEY REALLY REPRESENT...WEALTHY WHITE MEN!! :D Elections are simply the inconvenient 'hiring' process that the Demublican and Republicrat candidates go through in order to get to the positions of power and influence necessary to serve their real constituents! The elections are simply an archaic formality, personality contests, arguements over who the bigger crook is, who can lie the most to the American people, who can appear to be more caring, more patriotic, and blah, blah. Pretty transparent, really. :blink: And pretty disgusting, too. It's all about making, getting, and keeping power and money. That's why the more things change, the more they stay the same! :P

Edited by Russ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the way that elections are rigged in this country, it probably is! :lol: There is a reason why only two political parties are all that are in power at both the state and national levels...the differences between them don't threaten the stability or challenge the foundations of The Empire! Case in point: here in CT there is much horn-blowing and drum-beating about 'Vote 2006' and 'The Decision: 2006' for the election of governor. The contest, if you pay attention to the establishment press, is between warm and fuzzy current governor Jodi Rell and the street-wise mayor of New Haven John DeStefano. But wait...Here come The Great Debates! Oh...it's an invitation only debate sponsored by that bastion of democracy League of Women Voters! :rolleyes: Oh, I'm sorry... the Green Party, the other party fielding a candidate, was not invited. :unsure::o Why? They want to make sure there are no embarrassing questions, no real tough issues that challenge the mind sets of the candidates, nothing to make people think. This has HISTORICALLY been the case locally and nationally for decades! Go around asking people on the street why we only have two political parties in Congress. People may just tell you it's becauese it's written in the Constitution or it's 'the law'! :( The press gives NO coverage (or scant coverage) to serious challengers, and not simply disgruntled billionaires who decide to challenge the incumbent via the back door. Real social and political change in this country will take place on a grass-roots level IN SPITE OF secret agendas, hidden constituencies, Democratic Party soft-talk, red-baiting, etc. etc. etc. Every social group must be represented in order for their needs to be adressed and met in this 'democratic' society. We need a Black Party, a Latino Party, a Gay & Lesbian Party, a Worker's Party, a Women's Party, an Undocumented Worker's Party...and proportional representation in Congress, too. If the Gay & Lesbian Party candidates for Congress get 5% of the vote, they get 5% of the seats. Now...where would this leave wealthy white male candidates? In a minority, I'm sure. Why? BECAUSE IN REALITY THAT IS WHO THEY REALLY REPRESENT...WEALTHY WHITE MEN!! :D Elections are simply the inconvenient 'hiring' process that the Demublican and Republicrat candidates go through in order to get to the positions of power and influence necessary to serve their real constituents! The elections are simply an archaic formality, personality contests, arguements over who the bigger crook is, who can lie the most to the American people, who can appear to be more caring, more patriotic, and blah, blah. Pretty transparent, really. :blink: And pretty disgusting, too. It's all about making, getting, and keeping power and money. That's why the more things change, the more they stay the same! :P

 

You'll get no argument whatsoever from me. I am in complete agree with with you about the way the ruling two-party duopoly shuts third party candidacies out of the electoral process, thereby limiting the range of issues that are debated, and perpetuating the status quo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Des, I've heard that 7-11 will no longer use Citgo gas, but I wasn't sure whether it was in direct response to Chavez's comments or not.

 

Well, I heard it twice that it did, but they also stated other reasons for instance they want to do their own brand(?).

 

>There are a couple of interesting movies that might be of interest, one I've seen and the other I haven't. The one I've seen is called "The Take", about workers taking over abandoned factories in Argentina. The one I haven't seen, so I obviously can't recommend it but I have been meaning to watch it myself, is "The Revolution Won't Be Televised", about the coup attempt against Chavez a few years ago.

 

 

Sounds worthwhile watching.

 

You won't get any arguments from me about the two party system; big money in elections; jerrymandering; and a power grabbing executive branch; etc. etc. and their effects on our "democracy". We also have problems with the voting machines.

 

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Closer to home: I'm wondering what's going to happen closer to our elections? Esp. now that it sure looks like Democrats will win the House and maybe the Senate. Will gas prices get even lower? It's a major sticking point with many Americans. What about another terrorist attack? Finding Osama Bin Laden?

Or at least some key terrorist suspect? Of course, the voting machines could "work" to the Republican advantage.

 

I hate to sound paranoid, but I am not altogether sure we still have a democracy here. Many dictators were initially elected.

Gosh this sounds paranoid but I am posting anyway.

 

--des

 

We are on the same wavelength. I am on a Conservative-Liveral Debate Yahoo! group and this is what I just posted:

 

patrick wrote: "On the contrary, you are wrong . Both countries were pro USA up till George became our dictator."

 

I wrote: This reminds me of a huge concern of mine and I will start a new string: I know that people on the Right (and even in the Center and on the Left possibly) here are not concerned about our country becoming a dictatorship but I sure am. How do dictators get power and maintain power? By stealing elections and making sure that most of the populace believes the elections were legitimate. There is no paper trail for recent elections in many states and I am not at all convinced that the people's will was reflected in the results in several states, particularly Florida and Ohio.

 

I am sure Bush will step down at the end of his term. He is not the dictator. It is people behind the scenes. I am not sure which person in this group has the most power. Maybe we will find out some day. It doesn't really matter. They have the purse strings and control most of the propaganda outlets. It is a huge concern of mine. I don't like what's happening. There is no real debate about the major issues in this country. It is all spin and rhetoric and sloganeering and soundbites. If we do not change course soon, the results of this are going to be catastrophic.

 

Both parties are cooperating in this dictatorship. Some Democrats and some Republicans are willing to buck the system at times but not many at all. We haven't lost our democracy yet but are well on the way.

 

The people who are in power do not trust the people, do not trust the democratic process. Most Americans believe our democracy is still strong. It isn't. We have become a plutocracy with some democratic institutions still working at some level of health but all are in danger.

 

I hope I'm wrong but the evidence is mounting that we are becoming a Fascist dictatorship like many third world countries. The poor and the middle class -- both in the USA and on the rest of the planet -- are losing more ground every day as those on top steal more and more from the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I am glad there are other paranoids out there. I think you're point is well taken on GWB not really holding the power. I think that's true.

 

Last night I was with some people and we also discussed the coming elections. They were also thinking in terms as I was re: lowering gas prices(some of it is because it is not summer anymore, but still..), finding some famous terrorist (Bin Laden, comes to mind), or even an attack. It happened before, there was an October Surprise that involved the hostages coming home from Iraq. Cheney was around then too.

I do not consider that one a coincidence.

 

And I also know dictatorships do come to democracies. I don't know that any of these involved a country with such long standing democratic traditions and roots.

 

I do think Democrats share blame. But I also feel that after 9-11 that there was such a change in attitude and perspective that it made lots of people just forget who we were, why we were.

I heard someone on tv today (BookTV on CSpan2) say that Bin Laden may be getting exactly what he wanted, and what he wanted was an overreaction, some major gaff in foriegn policy that would lead more moderate countries and so forth to his point of view. And he got it.

 

--des

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dictatorships aren't historical accidents or malformations, but are the direct result of one economic class gaining and maintaining control over another. The political system isn't a neutral entity in and of itself that becomes corrupted, but a tool through which political and economic power is maintained. The mouthpieces and apologists for the current US junta freely use tear-jerking phrases like 'democratic institutions' and 'American way of life' and love that F-word, 'freedom'. This is the empty school-boy talk used to justify persuit of foreign and domestic policies that directly benefit corporate pirates. Case in point: 'We must end out dependence on foreign oil'. :ph34r: Okay...let's end our dependence on 'foreign' oil. :D But wait! The North Slope Alaskan pipeline and part of the oilfield operations are owned by BP...British Petoleum! :unsure: Hmmmmm...British Petroleum is a foreign company, right? But the Alaskan oilfield is on US soil, right? Ah, um... :blink: An article popped up on the NY Times on-line and involved a statement made by the US Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. He said that American oil companies are prepared to go into Iraq NOW, regardless of the violence, install the necessary infrastructure, and start pumping out oil. No...Wait...Stop...No...Wait! :o Do you mean that US oil companies are willing to be safeguarded by their own private armies and invest billions in industrial infrastucture just to pump Iraqi oil? And who, pray tell, would be on the receiving end of this said oil? <_< So, let me get this straight. The Bush regime is made up of GWB (a texas oil businessman) and Dick Cheney, the former president of Haliburton, one of the world's largest oilfield service companies. The regime uses the 9/11 attack as a cover to invade Iraq under the pretext of the existence of weapons of mass destruction and a direct connection with Al Quida, the purpatrators of the 9/11 attack. The regime's army invades the country to protect us against The Terrorists, but behind the scenes American oil companies stand ready to go in and start getting the oil fields back in full operation regardlss of the dangers? Hmmmmmm...all we have to do is draw the conclusion to see how things REALLY work. :D

Edited by Russ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service