4 replies to this topic

[eminimee]

I realize this may get closed as soon as it's open....but here is a response from my eldest son that would have gone into the thread below but was closed. ...Gentlemen, I do this only to attempt to expand your horizons in the spirit of frank and democratic discussion. "Hugo Chavez is a dictator" is taken as a self-evident thesis for your above discussion. Allow me to place a few facts at your disposal. One, in 1998, after Chavez was elected he initiated the first popular constitution review process in Venezuelan history. Local communities elected representatives to sit on a constituent assembly whose goal was to democratically write a new constitution. This new constitution of Venezuela included the first ever "right-of-recall" clause that specifically allows for any elected official to be removed from office if a majority of his/her constituents wish it. I wonder if Mr. Bush, with his 30% approval rating, would submit to such a law? The new constitution was approved via referendum in 1999. Chavez, not a socialist in anyway at this point, began to make modest reforms to help the nearly 80% of the Venezuelan population living in poverty. Because of this he faced a coup in 2002 launched against him by the upper class and sections of the army. President of the Venezuelan Chamber of Commerce, Pedro Carmona, proclaimed himself president after abolishing the courts, parliament and the constitution. Chavez himself was imprisoned. Within 36 hours, millions of Venezuelans had marched on the Presidential palace and surrounded the coup government. The majority of the army, which had been unaware of the coup plans, sided with the masses. The coup leaders fled and Chavez was restored to power. Leaked documents presented by Venezuelan-American attorney Eva Golinger in 2003 showed US links to the coup through funding, CIA support and political assurances of recognition. The USA was the only nation to recognize the Carmona government as legitimate during it's 36 hours in existence. You’ll pardon me if the Bush administrations hue and cry over “democracy in Venezuela” rings hollow to my ears. In 2004, the Venezuelan opposition utilized the Recall Clause, which they had originally opposed, to launch a referendum over Chavez’s leadership. Chavez won with 59% of the vote in an election recognized by several oversight organizations including the US based Carter centre. Once again in Presidential elections in December 2006 Chavez won a 63% mandate, the largest in Venezuelan history. This election was declare free and fair by the Organization of American states, the United Nations, the Carter Centre and several other international organizations. In everyone of Chavez’s elections he has increased his share of the vote. Though he may be unpopular with American stock traders, whatever he is doing must be good for the Venezuelan people. And that is the whole point of democracy.

[Sentient Being]

Democracy does not mean that those who are best for the people are elected, Only that those who are popular at some moment in time are elected. I'm sure those who hate Bush would agree to that. Many of the same arguments in support of this new dictator in South American might have been made in support of Hitler before WWII began. He, too, was at one time, elected. That doesn't mean that the germans wanted to become Nazis and see their nation burnt to the ground in World War III or that Hitler was the best for them. Chavez made himself popular in the left wing of the democratic party for his Bush hate. this was the merger of Bush hate and dictators, terrorists, and radical Islam. Chavez will remain popular among the left until his disaster in South America unfolds completely and is so tramatic those who support him most likely deny they ever "really" supported him or gave him propaganda aid. The verbal support the American left lends him, in my opinon, only go to create more human misry and suffering. He should have been denounced by all lovers of human rights from the very beginning. Those who hate Bush and hate Christan, convervative America need to hate those who oppress humans around the globe more. Mao, who may have killed upwards to 75 million of his own people, was also popular among many in the left wing of American politics of his day. And you will find many American Progressive "Intellectuals" today that still attempt to defend the undefendable....Mau. Calling him a rural socialist who did "great things" for his people and had wonderful ideas. In N. Korea we saw a leader take the same route as Mao. Kim starving millions while squandering his nations meger resources on supporting a massive army and developing nuclear weapons. The system Kim fosters is brutalizing his people. It saddens me personaly to see so many Americans stand with and support radical communists or socialists because they see them as brothers in arms against big, bad America. Such is the way of those who are radicalized for the "cultural war". I beleive they feel that any allie against convservative, christian American is worthy of their support, even though that support bolsters those who bring such suffering upon humanity. Clearly this is why the political posts are not allowed here. We don't want the cultural war playing out on this board? I fully expect and deserve to be deleted with the above post.

[PorkLoin]

Oh for Pete's sake; it's a Sunday and if it doesn't get personal between us posters, then what the heck? If we can't discuss politics, then we can't, but I bet we can, most of us, without getting nasty. I personally think Chavez is bullish for oil. Doug

[eminimee]

http://media.dorks.c...us-in-China.wmv

[OEXCHAOS]

Doug, It always gets personal. That's the problem. Folks who otherwise can be great friends, trading, learning, discussing TA, suddenly become enemies. You know as I do that a good political fight is fun, but all too often people take it WAAAYYY to personally. No good can come of it. Topic closed despite my desire to wade in. Guys, try to respect the rule. It's really for the best. Trust me on this. Mark