There is nothing hotter than ...
an educated Maoist--or a Trotskyist. Wanna know where all the really hot college girls are? Hanging out with the lefties.
If Chavez is such an enemy of the US, why did we let him in?
Posted on September 21, 2006 at 03:05:16 PM by Yosterizer
If he's really a big enemy of the US, then Bush should have his citizenship revoked for allowing him in the country.
Face it, Chavez is a pimple on the ass of the US. If we wanted to pop him we could do it any time.
We don't because he is useful...
Posted on September 21, 2006 at 03:22:40 PM by goc
his "interference/endorsements" in the elections in Mexico and Peru was prolly just enough to keep the left-leaning candidates from winning.
Think about what you're saying here
Posted on September 21, 2006 at 03:41:39 PM by Jackwraith
Yost suggested that Chavez could be 'popped' at any time. What exactly does that mean? Assassinated? Removed from power in an illegal coup (the US already stood by and watched that attempt once)? Are either of those things ethical or pursuant to the goals of 'democracy' and 'equality' that so many of our own governmental tools proffer as the very bedrock of our nation's existence?
Then, you follow up by suggesting that Chavez isn't killed or illegally removed from office because he's 'useful', implying not only that the US can act in such a way at will, but apparently can do so in your opinion without any of the recriminations that would follow in a civilized society. When Chavez tosses around his rhetoric about 'hegemony', he's looking at people like you.
Furthermore, your assessment of the Peruvian and Mexican elections is inadequate. If anything affected the election in Peru, it was the victory by Morales in Bolivia. Likewise, the Mexican debacle is a consequence of bureaucratic snafus, incipient corruption, and pressure by the middle class feeling concerned about conditions to the north. Whatever Chavez says isn't really even on the horizon in these two cases. Unlike most US Americans, in my experience, most Latin Americans are very educated about the politics of their nation and wouldn't follow the shallow lies that politicans here feed the public with the implicit understanding that they'll follow through (e.g. gay marriage.)
With that in mind, it shouldn't be too surprising that Chavez has won election three times, precisely because of the very real benefits he has created for the underclass of Venezuela. Having said that, the guy is about as bombastic as they come and has been for his entire political career. His impact is based on his actions, not his excitable rhetoric.
I agree with your sentiments.*
Posted on September 21, 2006 at 03:47:47 PM by Allende
If Chavez is such an enemy of the US, why did we let him in?
Posted on September 21, 2006 at 03:05:16 PM by Yosterizer
If he's really a big enemy of the US, then Bush should have his citizenship revoked for allowing him in the country.
Face it, Chavez is a pimple on the ass of the US. If we wanted to pop him we could do it any time.
We don't because he is useful...
Posted on September 21, 2006 at 03:22:40 PM by goc
his "interference/endorsements" in the elections in Mexico and Peru was prolly just enough to keep the left-leaning candidates from winning.
Think about what you're saying here
Posted on September 21, 2006 at 03:41:39 PM by Jackwraith
Yost suggested that Chavez could be 'popped' at any time. What exactly does that mean? Assassinated? Removed from power in an illegal coup (the US already stood by and watched that attempt once)? Are either of those things ethical or pursuant to the goals of 'democracy' and 'equality' that so many of our own governmental tools proffer as the very bedrock of our nation's existence?
Then, you follow up by suggesting that Chavez isn't killed or illegally removed from office because he's 'useful', implying not only that the US can act in such a way at will, but apparently can do so in your opinion without any of the recriminations that would follow in a civilized society. When Chavez tosses around his rhetoric about 'hegemony', he's looking at people like you.
Furthermore, your assessment of the Peruvian and Mexican elections is inadequate. If anything affected the election in Peru, it was the victory by Morales in Bolivia. Likewise, the Mexican debacle is a consequence of bureaucratic snafus, incipient corruption, and pressure by the middle class feeling concerned about conditions to the north. Whatever Chavez says isn't really even on the horizon in these two cases. Unlike most US Americans, in my experience, most Latin Americans are very educated about the politics of their nation and wouldn't follow the shallow lies that politicans here feed the public with the implicit understanding that they'll follow through (e.g. gay marriage.)
With that in mind, it shouldn't be too surprising that Chavez has won election three times, precisely because of the very real benefits he has created for the underclass of Venezuela. Having said that, the guy is about as bombastic as they come and has been for his entire political career. His impact is based on his actions, not his excitable rhetoric.
I agree with your sentiments.*
Posted on September 21, 2006 at 03:47:47 PM by Allende
posted by Salomé at 3:29 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home