I totally agree with Markos about Hugo Chavez, except for the little P.S. thing. I’m glad he explained his position to the MSNBC booker that wanted to find a left-wing blogger to defend Chavez. As for Charlie Rangel, he’s just doing some smart politics. He ought to know that just because the UN headquarters is located in his congressional district doesn’t mean that everything that goes on there reflects on him or his constituents. Hugo Chavez didn’t mean to be disrespectful to Charlie Rangel. But, if Rangel wants to get all huffy about it, that’s his decision. Maybe he’ll do better the next time he runs for office in Nebraska. I don’t feel the need to correct Rangel.
When it comes to Chavez, calling Bush “el diablo” was kind of silly. We have enough name calling and satanizing of political differences going on in the world. Here is the message to Chavez: shut the fuck up before you get your nuts stomped by right-wing special-ops that are just dying to take down your government. And when I say that, I include most of the Democratic Party in Washington. Keep playing around, and you’ll find out what Salvador Allende didn’t know. Bet on it.
Message to Bush, MSNBC, the nausea-stew of pundit-heads: Chavez is not a dictator. He has been elected to office twice. He is popular with his people. Not the people you associate with. But the majority of his people are pleased with the job he is doing. He isn’t a communist. He is not a coddler of terrorists. He has no intention of doing any harm to United States civilians. Leave him the fuck alone.
There. Do we have peace yet?
Chavez is a useful distraction for Bush. While he plays to his base of support by standing up to Bush, he also aids Bush and the Republican Party in the US. It’s sad but true. It’s almost as if Chavez and Ahmdinejad were are both employed by Karl Rove, because whatever they say will be used by our media as an excuse to justify Bush’s policies.
Chavez is the leader of a populist progressive democracy. Rove is doing his job if he can get the US progressive community to be dismissive of the government of progressive democracy that has significant oil reserves. It makes Rove’s job to set up VEN for another US sponsored coup attempt to put in a neo-con allied puppet regime that will hand all that oil money over to US oil companies that much easier.
Chavez is a populist leader in a culture that can feature a little too machismo for it’s own good at times. Nobody ever accused Chavez of being a good diplomat, but he’s doing pretty much every thing else right in Venezuela right now. Right now, Venezuela is on it way to becoming a South-American Norway/Sweden model state. That’s a good thing. So what if the leader is coarse, and has a bit of big mouth at times.
How am I helping him?
Responding to Steven D comment, not your post.
Chavez is what he is. A politician. And frankly I don’t blame him for calling Bush the Devil. After Bush tried to have his regime overthrown by a right wing coup.
The problem is that Chavez’s remarks and those of Ahmdinejad as well get far more airplay and excessive discussion in our meida than they should. Why? Because the Republicans know how to make use of these leaders as totemic villains with which to scare Americans, and the media plays along with them, giving these stories far more air time and “debate” than is justified by their newsworthiness.
I was sitting in the Ritz-Carlton lobby in cushy chairs with Chris Bowers, Duncan Black, Markos, and Jerome Armstrong discussing politics with Gov. Mark Warner. And Warner started making remarks about Chavez that insinuated he was some kind of anti-Democratic force.
He was a little taken aback when I interrupted him and asked him to give me some examples of his anti-democratic tendencies. He collected his thoughts and told me that the had attempted to stack the supreme court. He had one or two other lesser items that escape me memory right now. It might be in the piece I wrote that day, or not.
Anyway, I went on to tell him that it concerned me that the administration would call an elected official a dictator and that I saw those same allegations in mainstream news columns.
I said it was baloney and that we just didn’t like his economic policies and that it was an energy issue. He agreed that it was an energy issue.
But, here’s the problem. You can’t get elected President in this country unless you see Hugo Chavez as virtually ‘el diablo’. And Warner knows that. I don’t know if we’ll ever be able to change that, of it a Dealey Plaza awaits anyone who tries.
Well, Dealey Plaza wouldn’t have happened if more people had been out in the streets – not literally, but figuratively, providing Kennedy cover.
I am so proud of you, BooMan, for calling Warner on his bullshit. I assume you were the only one in that group to do so, though, which is too bad.
Chavez has been the victim of two separate coup attempts backed by the Bush Administration, and the ONLY way Chavez has responded is by occasionally calling Bush an a$$hole. That’s seems incredibly reasonable.
Do you point out when Chavez is discussed that Chavez might have a very legitimate beef with Bush? NO. You claim the victim of two separate US backed coup attempts is wrong for displaying anger without putting that anger in it’s proper subtext.
Chavez might have very legitimate war crimes accusations against Bush. Foreign sponsorship of coup attempts is in the same category of aggression acts as invasions are.
What I’m saying, and Steven is saying, is that Chavez should use some common sense.
If Bush is gunning for you, why hand him a clip of ammunition?
Same thing for Ahmedinejad. If you know that Dick Cheney has a viagra-induced 4-hour hard-on for your oil fields, why say that Israel should be wiped off the map?
That makes you a dickhead. Or an enabler for Cheney’s dickhead.
What would you say to someone who said a woman that was raped “deserved it” becasue of the short skirt she was wearing? You’d unload on them.
You just showed tolerance toward’s Bush gunning at people, but no tolerance for those who get angry Bush shot at them?
Look up intenational law. Tell me where you find “insults” listed anywhere in it. It’s not. Chavez can broadcast a stream of obscenities 24/7 about Bush and there’s not one thing Bush can do about it.
Jeez… Bush needs to grow up. Every single American President during the Cold War had to deal with verbal barrage on a daily basis. The US was not allowed to nuke the Soviet Union because the Soviet Union called a US President names.
And please don’t link Chavez and Ahmedinejad. Chavez has justification for calling Bush an a$$hole, and he’s been very careful only to yell at Bush. Ahmedinejad blaming the Jewish people as a whole, and his holocaust denial are a whole different kettle of fish – it’s full-blown propaganda. Propaganda is not justification for bombing/invasion, but it is seen as a serious issue by international law.
You are using the wrong analogy. If a woman was almost raped and almost raped again, and then went over to the guy’s house a third time, then I would question her sanity.
That’s what Chavez is doing. I don’t begrudge him the right to speak his mind. I think he is making it easier and easier for the U.S. to intervene in his country like we did in Chile, in Guatemala, and in Panama, and elsewhere.
I expected a better from you than that. As far as the rape analogy, that attempt to circumvent the primary discussion to get the dig in was cheap.
The US HAS NO RIGHT TO INTERVENE in the affairs of sovereign nations. NONE.
US intervention is Chile was ILLEGAL. US intervention is Guatemala was ILLEGAL. US intervention is Panama was ILLEGAL.
US intervention in Venezuela is ILLEGAL. Period. There is no justification. At all. Period.
Huh?
After reading the comments, this doesn’t seem sequitur.
BooMan has never argued the US has the right to intervene. I’m sure we’d all be in agreement that we don’t.
But history shows that agreement or not, we do, frequently, interfere in the affairs of other nations.
I agree with BooMan to the extent that making these statements is like waving a red flag in front of a bull.
I agree with you that Chavez does not get favorable press here, and that’s more a function of his policies than his silly statements.
ALSO – I saw a video of him making the comments, and it was clear he was making a joke, a pointed one, but not a serious political comment. For anyone to treat it as such is just being typically shallow and frivilous, as one would expect from the mainstream media.
See my post below on enablers.
Any time spent attacking victims enables their attackers.
I would suggest any time you spend attacking Chavez would be better spent pointing out it is illegal for the US to to sponsor coup attempts against Chavez.
That might be the most assinine thing you’ve ever said. So Chavez isn’t supposed to go to the UN? That’s the only way he “went to the guy’s house”. What you’re saying is that the rape victim should just shut up and take it. Shame.
Nobody has to make it easier for the US to murder, bomb, rape, torture, or invade. It just does it and makes up lies to justify it. Quit blaming the victims.
Blaming the victim?
Is it never possible to blame the victim?
Have you never tried to help someone and found that they were beyond help?
Chavez was stupid to call Bush the devil because Bush wants to take him out and now we have Charlie Rangel demonizing Chavez for him.
Should I blame Rangel? Should I blame Bush? Or should I blame the moron that should have known better?
Don’t throw this rape victim shit at me. Chavez is the one who is responding to threats by inciting a response.
So what you’re saying is, nobody better say anything bad about the US of A because if they get nuked by the psychopaths (and I mean that absolutely literally) who run the US of A, they asked for it. So shut up, world, we’re number 1 and you’re a moron. Gosh, where have I heard that before? I think his name rhymed with Tush.
If you think Bush needs “inciting” to do whatever his voices and his idiot arrogance tell him to do, you really oughta sober up and look around you.
I didn’t say any of the things you just attributed to me. Did I?
Chavez should understand the way his words will be presented and what effect they will have. Are you one of the ones that blame the media for the media’s coverage of Dean? No. Dean should have known better. He didn’t, and I blame him for letting down his movement with his own stupidity and tin ear.
“Are You an Enabler?
Do You Know Why?
Do You Know How to Stop?
Do you enable others to proceed/progress in their unproductive patterns of behavior? Perhaps it’s your partner, a co-worker, your child (adult or minor), your parent, friend, or sibling. Do you understand why you do this, and how you can stop?
Enabling is Very Often Part of Codependence
Any time you assist/allow another person to continue in their unproductive/unhealthy/addictive behavior, whether actively or passively, you are enabling!
Silence condones. So even when you say nothing (such as `minding your own business’), you are enabling the behavior to continue.
Sometimes you say nothing out of fear — fear of reprisal, fear of the other person hating/hurting/not liking you; or fear of butting in where you don’t think you belong. Perhaps even fear of being hit… or worse!
In the media we now see messages about reporting child abuse, or reporting domestic violence. The message is attempted to be conveyed that it is your business to report these things — whether it’s happening to you or to someone else. Our former First Lady’s book says “It takes a community to raise a child” — and it does. It takes everyone caring… enough to “butt in” when you see something that you know is not right….”
http://www.inspiredcounseling.com/enabling.asp
BooMan, time spent criticing Chavez is time you have spent enabling illegal actions Bush takes.
but then again, as the leader of a democracy which has as much right to free speech as the next guy I would be pretty disappointed if he didn’t speak his mind. I’m glad Bush speaks his mind for that matter as it shows the world he truly is the devil. Did you see him smirking and belligerent as freakin’ tow the line Blitzer was interviewing him? Man, that guy is everything Chavez says he is. And I’m glad he has the cajones to say it. Fuck instigating Cheney or Bush. If that is what this world has come to – better not speak ill of the President or else he may off you we are in some deep shit.
So, like V in the movie, any many real life activists, I’d rather go out speaking truth to power and living democracy than cower in fear before a tactical nuke or the jackals.
Rove is doing his job if he can get the US progressive community to be dismissive of the government of progressive democracy
beautifully said!
The media machine is set to spin and always come up with a positive for Bush.
You forgot one thing. Chavez has oil, and lots of it.
That automatically makes him a target.
Can’t have mud slinging now can we, not while there’s little girls being raped and shot in the head all in the name of “freedom”.
In fact, let’s just call Bush what he is
A murdering, torture supporting, liar who is a DANGER to all of us on this planet.
Because I don’t think “playing nice” really is saving any lives or protecting any of us now.
How long will we “allow and tolerate” Bush?
Mr. Chavez spoke to the world community.
I imagine there are a number of people around the world who were cheering and nodding in agreement as they listened or read his speech – “truth to power.” And all that oil – makes people pay attention. Maybe they are even beginning to consider that they really don’t have to tolerate U.S. policies or practices.
Seems to me this speech was pretty important.
Rangel’s and Pelosi’s unfortunate remarks palyed right into their hands. They don’t speak out when they should and do when they shouldn’t.
Chavez was right although his manner was perhaps not consistently the best choice. But truth is a defense, Bush is a devil.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/22/nyregion/22chomsky.html?ex=1159070400&en=e16d4a1670935c26&
ei=5070
If Mr. Chomsky can speak (and eloquently at that) about the subject, what a shame the blogosphere has made itself unable to speak to the Mainstream Media.
is willing to ignore democracy when it doesn’t suit their ends (Venezuela, the Hamas victory), and ignore the lack of democracy when it does suit them (Pakistan).
Wonder when they’ll start ignoring democracy here in the US…
Wonder when they’ll start ignoring democracy here in the US…
They already have.
Would one of the formerly “left” bloggers who are now getting the patriot vapors over Chavez’s speech please specify one statement they regard as untrue?
I’ve never seen Kos being such an asshole before. It sure don’t take much to scratch the surface and see the reality, does it?
And please allow me to add: Reality-based my ass.
Keep in mind that Chavez did not give his speech in english. I heard it in its raw spanish form on Telemundo and it’s amazing how differently one can interpret the speech given the linguistics.
The “diablo” section was hardly the focus, he said alot more as referenced by Arthur’s recommended diary right now. In fact, Chavez chose to save his fiery and very serious delivery for the imperialism parts of the address.
To be honest, I was laughing in hysterics at the start of the whole thing because it was one of those cultural things as a Catholic latino that I’ve done many times – the whole “Ay! Sign of the cross in dramatic form while putting your hands together in faux prayer” routine.
I guess some things don’t translate well. Either way, I thought it was a fantastic speech. The time for common sense and “decency” passed nearly six years ago, imo.
Hey Manny, nice to get your take on his speech. I’ve only read one transcript where they put in the applause he received after his ‘diablo’ lines. Barring the theatrics of those lines-even though the truth-his speech was certainly a hundred times better and more far reaching than bush’s idiotic regurgitated mish/mash of 9/11, terror, etc etc.
I heard the translated version of the speech before the unedited spanish and it was like hearing two different things. Good to ‘see’ you 🙂
(and I agree about Shrubzilla, I can’t listen to him anymore)
Yeah!! I was laughing too, Man Egee, and surprised how people were making such a big deal about it. It was a show. He was doing his own Saturday Night Live skit, in a way, and when he said it still smelled of sulphur, waving his hand as if to clear a bad fart, I just laughed out loud! ;-D
but I guess he should moderate himself next time and join the rest of the civilized world in their polite demeanor. [cough]
🙂
Maybe we are not taking this Chavez claim seriously enough!
Bush seems to claim to know the forces of evil and how to fight them on God’s behalf! Bush says God blesses America and guides his hand. Well maybe Chavez’s connection to the almighty is more complete and formal than Bush’s. Maybe Chavez is telling us something from the theological side that we need to actually pay attention to and embrace rather than dismiss so quickly! Is Bush the representative of the Devil?? If not, he sure could have fooled me.
Am I kidding here? Who knows?
Well, the thought has crossed my mind that he is, in fact, the anti-christ. And yes, I’m only half joking. ;D
I don’t think Chavez’s remarks were either silly or stupid. First, he broke a taboo that needed breaking. Politeness among our political caste is just a cover for gormlessness. Almost everyone I know agrees with Chavez. Actually, everyone I know agrees with him. And apparently we’re not alone, because Noam Chomsky’s Hegemony or Survival (2003), which Chavez held up, is top of the bestseller lists at both Amazon and Barnes & Noble.
Second, it showed what the Democrats could be doing — which is representing us — and instead how utterly hamstrung they are. If Bush can represent himself as a man of God, I have no problem replying that he is, or has far more in common with, the devil. They should be piling on, instead of which the House Minority leader and the representative from New York can’t wait to kiss them some Bush butt. Pathetic. I lost respect for Pelosi some time ago, but Rangel is a real disappointment.
Yeah, it’s not like he took off his shoe and banged it on the table ….the media once again proved how pointless they are by taking a non-issue-the diablo remarks and beating it into the ground for days..making it sound as if you gasp dared to agree with anything Chavez said than your one of those commie/pinko/anti-american yahoos who are trying to help destroy the country.
Might have been really nice if they actually did their job and focused on his whole speech.
As for any of the democrats trying to sound tough against Chavez..that’s all just pathetic, actually they must all be beyond pathetic. Kinda like the old battered wife syndrome…the democrats being the wife yet when anyone speaks out against husband(bush) they defend the husband..pathetic like I said.
I just cannot believe you people! Do you really believe this nonsense about Chavez being leading a democracy?!? He is a wonderful, populist leader and Bush is evil?!? Give me a break!!!
As I said in my comments to the nonsense posting about a new cold war, Chavez is a thug and a dictator. He ruthlessly stifles all dissent. You wouldn’t last 10 seconds in Venezuela if you criticized the government the way you do here. Also, explain to me how leading the largest military build-up in South American history is good for the desperately poor in Venezuela? What has he done for them? Anyone…?
Finally, all of you say that you are ignoring Chavez, yet the leftist blogs are full of agreement with his rantings. You deny reality then conjure up some insane pictures of torture and attribute them to Bush. It is impossible to attempt reason with you.
Frank.
Calm down.
Can you provide some links to support what you are saying about Chavez. Please do not include any links from the Moonie Times, Fox News, or any Rupert Murdoch outlet. Preferably, I would like to see any report from any non-American source that will support your allegations about Chavez suppressing free speech, dissent, or in any other way acting in a dictatotial matter.
I WILL READ THEM. And I will tell you what I think about them. But I will not respond to allegations without impartial sources of information that back them up.
Booman, you clearly did NOT understand what Kos said, since Kos made an effort not to insult Chavez or warn him that insulting Bush could bring on the death squads. You’re only a step from “oh, well, he brought it on himself.” This post was beneath you.
P.S., I think it’s pretty funny that the spellcheck button on the Booman Tribune alerts posters that Booman might be misspelled. It also doesn’t like “spellcheck” as one word, though that’s how it’s written in the Run Spellcheck button.
I really don’t care about Hugo Chavez…I mean he is no Simon Bolivar. But two things..first I he just used Bush’s line..I don’t hate the people of (enter country here) I just don’t like their leader (enter country president here). Second does anyone have a picture of Chavez shaking Saddam’s hand…you know like thay pic of Rummy?