Evo Morales responds to John Kerry: Never Again Will We Be Your Backyard

[Catherina]

Last edited Fri Apr 19, 2013, 11:39 PM - Edit history (4)

The leader of Bolivia, Evo Morales, responded to US Secretary of State John Kerry's recent statement, in which he referred to Latin America as the US' 'backyard'


"So you think U.S. government, that we're your backyard? (...) I condemn, repudiate that. We will never again allow Bolivia or Latin America to be your backyard. We have much dignity" he stressed.

Morales was speaking at a public event, before leaving for Peru to attend the summit of the Union of South American States (UNASUR) to discuss the situation in Venezuela and in which the Bolivian President plans to request a statement repudiating the John Kerry's claims.

Morales said it is "humiliating and offensive" that the U.S. denominated Latin America as its backyard, however, and stressed that such claims drive the unity and equality of the countries of Latin America.

He pointed out that the Andean Bolivia is no longer Washington's backyard due to economic independence, nationalization of hydrocarbon resources and the efforts of social movements.

...

Bolivia's government will study the possible departure (expulsion) of the U.S. embassy and its Agency for International Development (USAID) he said.

"Before, the U.S. Embassy in Bolivia used to decide who was to be the commander of the Armed Forces, Police, Government Ministers. The excomandantes of those times had to have an endorsement of the embassy. That is over and they still think we're their backyard, "he said.
...

http://www.contrainjerencia.com/?p=65928

“Así piensan los gobiernos de Estados Unidos, (que) nosotros somos su patio trasero (…) Condenamos, repudiamos y no vamos a permitir que nunca más Bolivia ni Latinoamérica sean el patio trasero del gobierno de EE.UU., tenemos mucha dignidad”, ha recalcado.

Morales ha hecho estas declaraciones durante un acto público, antes de desplazarse de su país rumbo a Perú a fin de asistir a la cumbre de la Unión de Estados Suramericanos (Unasur) que contemplará la situación que vive Venezuela y en la cual el presidente boliviano tiene planeado pedir una declaración de repudio a las afirmaciones de Kerry.

Morales ha afirmado que es “humillante y ofensivo” que Estados Unidos denomine a Latinoamérica como su patio trasero, sin embargo, ha resaltado que tales afirmaciones impulsan la unidad y la igualdad de los países de América Latina.

El jefe de Estado del país andino ha recordado que Bolivia dejó de ser el patio trasero de Washington debido a su independencia económica, la nacionalización de los recursos de hidrocarburo y el esfuerzo de los movimientos sociales.

...

El gobierno de Bolivia estudiará una eventual salida del país de la embajada de Estados Unidos y de su Agencia para el Desarrollo Internacional (Usaid), dijo.

“Antes, la embajada estadounidense en Bolivia decidía quién iba a ser el comandante de las Fuerzas Armadas, la Policía, el ministro de Gobierno. Los excomandantes de aquellos tiempos tenían que tener un aval de la embajada. Eso ha terminado y todavía piensan que somos el patio trasero”, dijo.

...

Edit to add more details:

"We can not accept these offensive statements by the Secretary of State of the United States (...) When you say 'backyard', are we your trash dump? I say it is contempt, a hatred of Latin Americans," the president said in the press conference later and confirmed his "repudiation" of these claims.

According to Morales, "the relationship with the U.S. is desirable" but "not final" in political economics because, he said, Bolivia has economically freed itself of that country.

He stressed that Bolivia is now has "allies" with "power" like China and some European countries, but especially its South American neighbors.

"Who can accept being told you're someone's backyard? We may be ill-fed, ill-clothed, still under development, but despite that we have dignity (...) We simply ask for more respect from the United States towards our people, towards Latin America" said the president.

http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/163664/morales-pedira-a-la-unasur-que-repudie-declaraciones-de-kerry-sobre-venezuela/

“No se puede aceptar estas graves declaraciones del secretario de Estado de EE UU (…) Cuando dice ‘patio trasero’, ¿somos su basurero? Yo digo es un desprecio, un odio que nos tienen a los latinoamericanos”, dijo el gobernante en la rueda de prensa posterior y ratificó su “repudio” a estas afirmaciones.

Según Morales, “la relación con Estados Unidos es deseable”, pero “no es definitiva” en las políticas económicas porque, según dijo, Bolivia se ha liberado económicamente de ese país.

Destacó que Bolivia tiene ahora como “aliados” a “potencias” como China y algunos países europeos, pero sobre todo a sus vecinos suramericanos.

“¿Quién puede aceptar que nos digan patio trasero? Podemos estar mal alimentados, mal vestidos, todavía en proceso de desarrollo, pero por encima de eso tenemos la dignidad (…) Sólo pedimos más respeto de Estados Unidos hacia nuestros pueblos, hacia América Latina”, dijo el mandatario.

http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/163664/morales-pedira-a-la-unasur-que-repudie-declaraciones-de-kerry-sobre-venezuela/

[dipsydoodle]

1. That digusting expression should've died long ago

Backyard indeed.

[karynnj]

12. Except here it has no negative connotations - in fact it is saying we are close neighbors

The same would be said for Canada. Kerry's point was in fact that it was wrong to ignore Latin America and he admitted we often had in the past.

[dipsydoodle]

16. That depends on who's saying it.

In the eyes of Latin America its derogatory . It was like saying you owned it : you don't.

[ieoeja]

19. If it is derogatory in their culture, we should not use it.

But that just requires education, not denunciation.

[karynnj]

27. That is true - and Kerry should call to explain what he meant

I seriously do not think the phrasing is intentionally negative. I took it to mean that we are neighbors and should be good ones. I also think that people here - more than the President of Brazil - should at least consider Kerry's record. He risked his career fighting Reagan on arming the Contras! He has consistently been one of the strongest voices on Latin America. You might remember that he and Congressman Berman were very strong against the coup in Honduras - which Hillary ended up agreeing with.

[karynnj]

24. My point is that I do not think that is the most usual interpretation

In most places I have lived, the houses were built on blocks where there were two parallel lines of houses. Both houses faced their street and had their backyard behind them. The phrase backyard neighbor is not hard to understand.

[karynnj]

36. In that case, the one saying it is Kerry

The person who:
- Was the ONLY Senator willing to risk his career and reputation investigating the US illegally arming the Contras at the height of Reagan's popularity.
- Who was the strongest, most vocal official in the US against the Honduras coup.


Not to mention, context is everything. Why is the full quote not given. Hearing it, there was nothing suggesting that we own Latin America.

[still_one]

18. The term backyard implies ownership, and that is the problem. However, whether it is South America

or other parts of the world, the U.S. is not the cause of all the worlds problems.

[karynnj]

23. It was not implying that at all to me

- maybe because my concept of "backyard" was from the area I grew up in where all the houses had land behind them that connected to the backyard neighbor's land. I think that is how blocks work in most places.

[still_one]

26. understood, and I suspect that is not what Kerry meant, but that is the conotation today

[SharonAnn]

33. "Our backyard" means we own it. "Backyard neighbor" means they own it and we're neighbors.

[JDPriestly]

38. Here, it is a joking way of saying we are physically close.

In fact, if you translate it literally, it means that we are suggesting we own a place. But we don't attach that meaning in our feelings.

That's another trick of English, another sort of idiom that does not translate.

When we say, "You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours." We do not really mean we are going to scratch each other's backs.

If you didn't know English and translated that literally, you would think that was about a cat fight. It isn't at all.

[dipsydoodle]

47. In this case its demeaning

The equivalent of bulk bigotry.

[JDPriestly]

48. I don't agree with you. It is a cajoling remark, not an insult.

Saying something is in your backyard means it is your neighbor, not literally that it is in your backyard and you own it.

Somebody lives a few streets from you, and you say, "Oh, you're in my backyard."

[Judi Lynn]

50. "In our backyard," illustrated all these long years before Latin American unity started to develope,

clearly played out, as the whole world knows, has been exactly the same as "under our thumb," nothing other than that.

[limpyhobbler]

69. sure

That's why they always never refer to Canada as the US' back yard.

[Laelth]

2. k&r for self-determination, and for the end of imperialism. n/t

-Laelth

[Voice for Peace]

5. +++ whatyousaid

[ReRe]

11. What you said!

+1 1 1 1

[hifiguy]

34. Yes, indeed!

[zeemike]

49. K &R for the same reason...n/t

[cascadiance]

3. A good documentary to watch is "Our Brand is Crisis" featuring James Carville...

... and other "Democratic consultants"...

It documents the history of how many Americans tried to get "in their backyard" to keep Evo Morales from getting in power many years ago... I'm sure this story is what is rubbing him raw now...



http://www.amazon.com/Our-Brand-Crisis-Mauricio-Balcazar/dp/B000GDIBSO

[Catherina]

7. Oh awesome! Thank you. I just found it on youtube too

(I can't watch Amazon or Netflix down here so I'm thrilled youtube has it.)

I can't wait to watch it after the Inauguration. Thank you

[SamKnause]

52. Evo

Thanks for posting this video.

It sickens me how the U.S. has influence in almost every country of the world.

The U.S. is the one who holds back democracy.

I don't think anyone in D.C. even knows the definition of democracy.

They sicken me !!!!

[zeemike]

62. Very interesting...thanks for posting it.

What a slimy business that is...it is all about manipulation people...I am sure The Prince is required reading for them.

He said something at the end that shows just how sick we are ...he said democracy only works if the people get something from it materially...
That is his outlook on things and may well be our problem...we can't see or understand that if democracy gave us fairness and justice it would be more than enough.

[silverweb]

32. Found and saved for later.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]Thanks!

[Judi Lynn]

74. Good old Goni fled to his brand new home in Maryland, where he's happy as a clam.

Nothing can touch him there, he'll NEVER have to stand trial for all those lives he stole through violence from protesting indigenous Bolivians, he never have to stand trial for all the people his soldiers mowed down as they tried to flee, and took severe injuries by lived long enough to run out of sight before some of them died much later after suffering long and horrendously first, taking shots in the back, shot from behind for "exercising their 1st Amendment Rights," the same rights protected for Goni, the proud new Maryland homeowner and citizen.

He's not going to be extradited for trial in Bolivia. The Obama administration stated that during the first term.
He's got it made.

[Judi Lynn]

88. More on US-protected killer President, Bolivia's Goni:

Act Locally » May 2, 2007

Gone, But Not Forgotten

Why Bolivians want the United States to extradite their exiled ex-president
BY Wes Enzinna

When, on Oct. 15, 2003, Filomena León was shot in the back by military soldiers in the Bolivian town of Patacamaya, near El Alto, she had no reason to believe hers would be anything other than an anonymous death in the Andes.
“I was in front of the soldiers and the bullet entered me from behind, into my spine,” León, an indigenous miner and mother of six, told Verónica Auza and Claudia Espinoza, editors of Gas War Memorial Testimony. The shot left her paralyzed, and she told Auza and Espinoza on April 20, 2004, “[After being shot] I wanted to die. … I still feel the same.” She died 10 days later from a lethal infection.

But three years later, as the country struggles to rebuild its economy and empower its large indigenous population, Bolivians are rallying to remember–and vindicate–the death of León as well as 66 others who were slain. In October 2003, protests erupted in the impoverished and largely Aymara Indian city of El Alto over a government plan to export natural gas to the United States via Chile under economic terms protesters said would not benefit most Bolivians. The demonstrators filled El Alto and organized strategic blockades to stop gas from reaching the nearby capital of La Paz and later being exported. They also demanded nationalization of the country’s gas reserves.

President Gonzalo “Goni” Sánchez de Lozada, widely recognized as the architect of Bolivia’s neoliberal “shock therapy,” had orchestrated the gas deal, and on Oct. 11 he ordered the military into El Alto to quell the protests and break the blockades. By the end of October, more than 60 demonstrators were dead and 400 wounded–the result of soldiers firing “large-caliber weapons, including heavy machine guns,” into the crowd, as the Catholic Church testified in a public statement. León, stopped by troops along with four others, was unarmed when she was shot. Among the others killed were small children and a pregnant woman. In the wake of the massacres, Sánchez de Lozada fled the country for the United States, where he remains today.

~snip~

For a country where Indians were banned from walking on the sidewalk until 1952 and where neoliberal policies were typically carried out at gunpoint, Sánchez de Lozada’s trial would give the nation’s indigenous majority something they’ve always been denied. Says Guzman, “The extradition of Mr. Sánchez de Lozada, as part of a process that is in strict accordance with Bolivian laws, has only one meaning for the Bolivian people, and that meaning can be summarized with a single word: justice.”

More:
http://inthesetimes.com/article/3136/gone_but_not_forgotten/

[Judi Lynn]

89. More about this brave indigenous Bolivian woman, Filomena León:

On the morning of October 15, 2003, while the demonstrations that two days later would take down a president spread through La Paz and El Alto, the mineworkers’ leaders of Oruro province decided to march to the capital to support the rebels. In the La Salvadora mine, a 36-year-old woman, widow, and mother of six children between the ages of two and twelve, joined the miners’ contingent. Filomena León, who months later would tell her story before the cameras of Verónica Auza and Claudia Espinoza, was among the people who arrived that morning in the town of Patacamaya, a little more than 100 kilometers (60 miles) from La Paz.

I don’t know how they surprised us. We were getting out of the car peacefully to drink some tea.”

The soldiers had orders to stop the caravan, and held back the miners with gunshots. First, they burst the tires on the miners’ trucks and seized their few belongings, then they attacked the miners, who, armed with sticks of dynamite, resisted the offensive. The palliri (woman miner) was among those injured in the clash. “I felt the bullet, just the bullet. I haven’t risen since. I was ahead of the soldiers and the bullet entered me from behind. I don’t remember anything else.” The high caliber projectile embedded itself in Filomena’s spinal cord. For months, in at least two public hospitals, the brave woman slowly lost her health and will to live; she was paralyzed, and her younger children couldn’t even recognize her.

On April 30, nearly six months after being shot, Filomena León died of a lethal infection at the La Paz Clinic Hospital, according to the Gas War Memorial Testimony – a book put together by Auza and Espinoza to record the dozens of deaths, the hundreds of wounded and mutilated, that were the high price paid by the Bolivian insurrection last year. In the last weeks of her life, one could see a fist-sized hole in her back. Filomena’s sweet voice and black, abundant braids left this land forever. The same happened to Teodocia Morales Mamani (who was pregnant), Marcelo Chambi Mollinedo, Ramiro Vargas Astilla, and many other Alteños (from the city of El Alto), Aymara peasant-farmers, children and grandparents, men and women. And today, despite the Bolivian National Congress having authorized their prosecution, those responsible for so much pain go unpunished.

More:
http://www.narconews.com/Issue35/article1138.html

[Catherina]

90. Incredible documentary

I just watched it this morning. It deserves an OP of its own. I hope you won't mind if I make one giving you credit of course.

It was unbelievable to me that the US thought slick marketing of a gringo President for Bolivia was going to work. I can't thank you enough for this learning experience.

I know another thing that's rubbing Evo the wrong way is the failed coup Bush instigated against him in 2008 when the US was doing its best to stop more countries from joining ALBA.

[cascadiance]

96. Thank you. Glad it helped a number of people here... It had helped me see the truth about Carville

... and many of the other corporate Democrats that were shaping our party at the time in to the direction it currently is where it claims to support us, but people like Harry Reid hold up their hands after stopping filibuster reform saying that they can't do anything when they "don't have the votes" to stop corporatist BS crap from stopping bills, or shaping the crap that does go through now. They're sneaking CISPA through now and the corporatist crap in the immigration bill (expanding the "indentured servant" H-1B visa program caps when neither foreign or American workers want or need it as opposed to true IMMIGRATION reform) while we're distracted conveniently with other events from paying attention to this (and to what's going on now in Bolivia as well).

People used to joke about how it was odd that Democrat James Carville is married to Republican Mary Matalin, and how "odd" a combination that was. But I don't think that these two corporatists are an "odd couple" at all. They demonstrate with their own marriage as a macrocosm of the BS smoke screen that is going on over Washington as the CORPORATIST party controls everything and it is hard for any true progressive pols to be heard at all, let alone elected now with Citizen's United in place.

I wish I could have responded more to this thread earlier this week, but was swamped at work with situations that has arguably been made worse by the current tech sector work environment alluded to above.

[Catherina]

99. I made an OP here (link)

"Our Brand Is Crisis" - Greenberg Carville Shrum in Bolivia, America's Backyard

Cascadiance, if all you do is drop in once and week and share gems like that, I'm at your feet.

I agree with everything you wrote except I think "joke" should be in quotation marks because the joke was on us, the workers, the whole time. And it's still on us until we wake up, unite in our own country, unite with our worker brothers in other countries, and push back.

[cascadiance]

107. Sorry the joke was meant as more of a comment on how Carville and his wife were earlier perceived...

And like you said many of us didn't see how that "joke" was a joke on all of us here in the U.S., as well as those in places like Bolivia. I felt that something was wrong with us putting people like that in powerful positions with the Democrats early on, and I think now we're seeing the evidence mount as to how our two party system is really not serving us all due to people like that controlling it and our political process too much.

If you've followed my posts here, you'll see that I've been adamantly wanting the Democratic Party to clean house of the corporatists like Carville, Rahm Emmanuel, etc. And I've even been bugged by Bill Clinton as a part of the corporatist element, who has done some things that compared to the Republican leadership that have been better, but has also done many damaging things that have set us back (with the DLC group he started that recently we discovered was heavily funded by the Koch Brothers). Legislation that he signed in to law like NAFTA/GATT, the telecommunications act, ending welfare program, laws that took down Glass-Stiegel that eventually lead the housing meltdown we have now we are still paying for.

That is why, as the first woman president here to set the path for other women in the future, I want someone who is far more populist in the Evo Morales mould like Elizabeth Warren (as inexperienced as she might be to some), than someone like Hillary Clinton. With Hillary Clinton, I think we'll get a lot of the same regrets that we've gotten with Barack Obama on so many issues, that I hope won't hurt other African American candidates in the future who have more progressive and populist constructive goals than Mr. Obama has tried to take on in his terms in office.

I liked the way the film was done in that it offered you a good inside look in to what Goni's campaign was like, but Ms. Boynton was tactfully careful not to let it be partisan in Goni's favor, and just try to present a slice of history. Now with Evo in power and doing a lot of positive things in Bolivia, like so many newer leaders are in South America now, the way she shot this film makes it very helpful to look more as a historical reference and perhaps what shapes Evo's political perspective now, than something we have to potentially doubt every place as a purely partisan piece.

[ocpagu]

4. Good for Evo.

John Kerry needs urgent updating. His "backyard" couldn't care less about what he thinks. His "backyard" has been electing leaders to do the opposite of what the "frozen-in-time" vultures in the Department of State want. His "backyard" told Hillary to f* off when she started whining, kicking and screaming over Iran and the recognition of Palestine. And his "backyard" will tell him the same if he starts pushing.

The unprofessionalism, lousy quality of US diplomacy is something impressive. I expected more from Obama.

[Judi Lynn]

44. It was a shock to learn how far he actually is from what people expected.

As people have said, there is no difference whatsoever in his policy and that of George W. Bush.

What a sorrowful discovery for so many U.S. Americans, too, people who have been so sick of what the Republican Presidents have done to Latin Americans, the hideous, criminal actions taken behind everyone's backs which many US Americans STILL don't realize.

Hideous.

[SamKnause]

6. Evo

Cheers for Evo Morales !!!!

The U.S. does not like democracy of the people, by the people, for the people.

The U.S. only likes democracy for global corporations, CEOs, Wall Street, big oil, natural gas, coal, the MIC, Free Trade Deals, deregulation and weapons manufacturers.

The opinions and needs of of U.S. citizens are not really a concern for the corrupt politicians and lobbyists in D.C.

The Supreme Court leaves much to be desired.

Our fake and failed war against marijuana has devastated this country !!

The scales of justice are so out of kilter in the U.S. it is alarming !!!

Viva Bolivia
Viva Venezuela

Hugo Chavez you are sorely missed !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[byeya]

43. +

[Maedhros]

116. I think this is a good place to leave this:

[Tempest]

8. I had hoped Kerry would be better than this

Can't say I'm surprised at his kowtowing to U.S. corporate interests in Latin America.

[karynnj]

20. Too bad you did not hear the full comment in context

I don't have a link - other than to the House Foreign Relations committee. The comments were Kerry saying that we needed to pay more attention to Latin America. The comment was essentially saying that we were neighbors.

It is true that you could say that this is something that did not translate well - however, you could also say that a President of a country should consider the FULL statement and the tone in which it was delivered. Here, he is ignoring Kerry's record on Latin America which is better than most American leaders and likely the best of any of his stature. ie Kerry, unlike the Clintons was strongly against the Contras in the 1980s - and continued to speak on that for years.

In addition, in 2005, Kerry won praise of the AFL/CIO for leading the fight on the Finance committee on CAFTA. He fought for an amendment in the Senate Finance Committee that would have added some worker’s and environmental rights to CAFTA. The amendment was defeated in the Republican controlled committee on a 10 to 10 vote and there are no such provisions in the CAFTA treaty that Senator Kerry voted against. That amendment was praised by John Sweeney , head of the AFL/CIO as:
“Senator Kerry (D-Mass.) will introduce an important amendment to the administration’s draft implementing legislation that would address a key failing of agreement by giving workers’ rights the same priority as corporate rights. His amendment would go a long way toward fixing the inadequate workers’ rights provisions in this lopsided trade deal by making protections for core labor standards fully enforceable. The Kerry amendment would ensure that all the CAFTA countries meet international core workers’ rights standards, a change to the agreement that has been a key demand of workers in both the U.S. and Central America.”

He may be the only person to have ever quoted Latin American Liberation Theory bishops in the Finance Committee on the harm done by NAFTA and the fact that CAFTA was worse. In early 2005, at the hearing on the nomination of Robert Portman to be the U. S. Trade Representative, Senator Kerry spoke of earlier treaties and their negative impacts of workers in both the US and the other countries and reiterated that he would not support CAFTA as it was. Senator Kerry in his comments spoke of the fact that in addition to NAFTA having the known negative impact on US jobs, it had hurt poor Mexicans as well.

“Obviously, in the opposition to CAFTA in the Central American region is striking in and of itself. You’ve got small farmers, indigenous groups, environmentalists, bishops, parliamentarians. Many others have spoken out against it. And what they do is they cite the experience of Mexico as one of the reasons that they’re deeply concerned about it. In Mexico, real wages have fallen. Poverty has risen. More than a million small farmers lost their land. Many civil society groups and people of conscious believe that you’ve got an even, you know, worse enforcement mechanism and a worse starting point here. Tens of thousands of Central Americans have taken to the streets to protest this. They’re demanding a public referendum on the agreement. A recent Gallup poll found that 65 percent of Guatemalans think it’s going to harm rather than help their country. You’ve got a number of immigrant groups here in our country, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, CARACEN, Salvadorian American National-Network, others have come out against it.
Why do you think such a broad and diverse range of Central Americans here and there are against it? And what does that say about this consensus that is so necessary to proceed forward and make it work?”

I do think that SoS Kerry should call him and apologize for how it sounded and explain what he was speaking of.

I frankly am not surprised at your lack of surprise - as your cynicism about Kerry - makes you jump to conclusions far beyond anything said in this article.

[Deep13]

9. good for him.

I'm sure Kerry did not believe he said anything offensive. He was unaware of the degree to which he has naturalized the American paternalistic, condescending attitude.

[whathehell]

14. Not to nitpick, but you claim

you are "sure" he did not believe he said anything offensive but that he's "unaware of the degree to which he

has naturalized the American paternalistic, condescending attitude"...


Wow. I can't imagine how you are "sure" about that. Do you know him personally and have you spoken to him

about it?

Frankly, it sounds like you, in the interests, I'd bet, of scolding all those supposedly "unaware" Americans,

are being both presumptuous AND condescending to both him and the rest of us.


I don't know about you, bro, but no one I know is possessed of that "paternalistic, condescending attitude" you speak of.

[Deep13]

45. Yeah they are.

We are all constructed by the cultural norms of our environment.

[whathehell]

64. Fail.

unless you can tell us how someone like you, for instance seems

to have escaped those cultural norms, when someone as experienced and well-traveled as

Secretary of State John Kerry did not?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

17. "I'm sure Kerry did not believe he said anything offensive."

That's what makes this funny.



"What did I say?"

[whathehell]

65. Um, only if John Kerry was even remotely like the fictional Archie Bunker, LOL

What's "funny" is that someone like Deep would imagine he has the

inside track to John Kerry's brain. It's an amazing assumption, really.

Consider what his value, even what his potential to be "compromised" might

be to the entire International Community !

[Spitfire of ATJ]

66. Kerry is obviously just as clueless....

He actually believed he was paying a compliment.

[whathehell]

76. Exaggerate much?

One mistake does not an Archie make, and I

doubt you know what Kerry "actually believed"

[Spitfire of ATJ]

84. I swear,....if you have to explain a joke.

[whathehell]

92. Nah..If you have to explain a joke, often it's either

"off the mark" or just not funny.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

93. Or it's the room.

[whathehell]

94. Good try, bro, but in this case,

I'd say "unlikely".

[Spitfire of ATJ]

105. That's what I get for being subtle.

[whathehell]

110. "Subtle"?

[whathehell]

10. Good for him...No nation should be the "backyard" of another. n/t

[bvar22]

13. John Kerry really stepped on his **** this week,

Of course, he was just restating the Official Policy.

You would think that a country that pays so much Lip Service to "democracy"
would be more supportive of actual DEMOCRACIES that elect their governments in transparent, verifiable elections.

But No.
The US Policy is to demonize the true democracies emerging in Latin America,
and continue full support for the few remaining Right Wing Death Squad 1% governments like Colombia,
the 3rd largest recipient of US Foreign Aid and just rewarded with a brand new "Free Trade" treaty by the Obama Administration.

The USA IS on the wrong side of history in Latin America.
If we were more supportive of these emerging democracies,
we would be opening markets in Latin America for OUR manufactured goods,
instead of chasing these countries into the arms of Iran, China, and Russia.


Viva Chavez!
Viva Maduro!
Viva Morales!
Viva Democracy!
I hope we get some here soon!

[karynnj]

22. This is - at most - a problem in the translation and I suspect a call from the Secretary

could remedy this situation immediately. I heard the comment and did not take it as offensive, nor would I have taken a comment by a Canadian leader saying this of the US as anything wrong.

I do think that Kerry should call the President and explain the context, though I would have guessed the President should have seen that it was not offensive due to the context it was in - where Kerry was saying we needed to pay more attention to Latin America.

The fact is it is ridiculous to parse every sentence seeing slights where they really aren't.

[bvar22]

25. This is more than a mistake,

or an error of translation,
or comments taken out of context.

The US Policy toward the new Social Democracies in Latin America has been to consistently Oppose them, De-legitimize them, Demonize them, Destabilize them, and support those who wish to Overthrow them with publicity, propaganda, arms, and money.

[hifiguy]

39. ^THIS^

And anyone who thinks otherwise is simply not paying attention.

[karynnj]

55. What has John Kerry's position been?

say - on the Contras
say - on the Sandinistas
say - on El Salvador
say - on Honduras

[ReRe]

15. Go Evo!

K&R

All you have to do is read Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism" to understand why Evo Morales and everyone from the southern hemisphere of the Amerca's feel the way they do about the big bad USA.

And GO Catherina.. for linking to this news from South America. Thank you!

[mountain grammy]

56. I've read it and you're correct. It's a life changing book.

I've never seen things the same way since I read it, and, if Kerry would read it, he would chose his words more carefully and check the interpretation himself.

[ReRe]

59. Honestly....

.... It's like we have two worlds of intelligentsia. We read and they read, but it must be two completely separate sets of books that we're reading from. Beats all I've ever seen. I have an extra copy of it...Should I try sending it to him?

[mountain grammy]

60. It's worth a try.

[riverbendviewgal]

21. after reading the book Confessions Of A Economic Hitman

I believe Morales

[Cary]

28. I would think that we could focus our energy on the positive,

rather than worry about semantics.

[Catherina]

29. Here's what Kerry said, in image form

Yesterday, at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing Secretary of State John Kerry called the Western Hemisphere the U.S.'s backyard, a throwback to the days of the Monroe Doctrine. He also said that the U.S. intends to "to do everything possible to try to change the attitude of a number of nations", implying clear intentions for intervention in the region. The transcript of his statement follows:

CONGRESSIONAL TRANSCRIPTS Congressional Hearings April 17, 2013 - Final House Foreign Affairs Committee Holds Hearing on President Obama's Fiscal 2014 Budget Proposal for the State Department and Foreign Affairs

KERRY: Well, thank you very much, Congressman Meeks. I am very, very hopeful. I am planning a trip shortly to both Columbia and Brazil, and other countries, hopefully, as time permits. We've had some issues, obviously, with Argentina, (inaudible) over some debt issues and repayment, so forth, which we need to work through. But look, the Western Hemisphere is our backyard. It's critical to us. Too often, countries in the Western Hemisphere think that the United States doesn't pay enough attention to them. And on occasion, it's probably been true. I think we need to reach out vigorously. We plan to. The president will be traveling to Mexico very shortly. And then south, I think he's going -- I can't remember which other countries. But he's going to the region. I will be going, other high-level visits. And we intend to do everything possible to try to change the attitude of a number of nations where we've had, obviously, sort of a breach in the relationship over the course of the last few years.

http://www.facebook.com/world.rev/posts/420906808005524

[karynnj]

58. Only a jaudiced eye would read his comment as you did

Now, if his past was one of supporting the Contras, never speaking of the wrongs of the US in Central America, then you COULD argue that you used that as your context. However, there are fewer who did more than he did on the right side of these issues. From risking his career as a Freshman Senator with Presidential ambitions who took on the investigation of the Contras - at the height of Reagan's popularity - earning him the life long hatred of many on the right. Then he disagreed PUBLICLY with Obama and Hilalry on Honduras - calling it a coup and arguing for standing with OAS against the coup.


Never has "our backyard" in a context like this meant what you suggest.

[Catherina]

67. The comment is in black and white. Only a apologist or naive mind would read it the way you did

How's that. Jaundiced vs apologist or naive. Take your pick.

I really suggest you educate yourself on the Monroe Doctrine before jumping into threads and lashing out at people because that's the context.

You can start with the 101-level wiki entry AMERICA'S BACKYARD

What's that? AMERICA'S BACKYARD? The official entry?

Please stop. I'm too embarrassed for you to continue this conversation.

[barrybar]

112. Backyard versus Front Yard

Very well presented, Catherina.

I wonder if any of the US and Kerry apologists ever heard the US refer to Canada as its backyard? It would never insult Canada in that manner. Has anyone here ever heard a Latin American or Caribbean country refer to the USA as its backyard? Why not? Because backyard is massa referring to the hired help, the weak, so weak that it has controlled and manipulated every single country for years, changing regimes at will.

Whether one takes the word literally or as a manner of speech, it has never been uttered as flattery. Suppose you have little space and a lot of crap, where do you put the crap? In your backyard.

This is how sacrosanct some US authorities consider the front yard:

Orlando Couple Threatened with Severe Fines for Front Yard Vegetable Garden -- http://www.http://capitalismmagazine.com/2013/01/orlando-couple-threatened-with-severe-fines-for-front-yard-vegetable-garden/

Government Threatens Jail Time for Growing Produce in Front-Yard Garden -- http://www.infowars.com/government-threatens-jail-time-for-growing-produce-in-front-yard-garden/

NH Woman Sued For Planting Flowers In Her Front Yard -- http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/03/19/nh-woman-sued-for-planting-flowers-in-her-front-yard/

In other words: Put that crap in the backyard! Along with Latin America!

[Catherina]

113. An excellent commentary

Thanks for illustrating this in reference to our own customs too.

Welcome to DU barrybar!

[Judi Lynn]

114. Good one! Thanks. n/t

[gcomeau]

30. For cripes sake...

The expression that a place is "your backyard" or "in your backyard" just means it is IN CLOSE PHYSICAL PROXIMITY.

It is not a damn insult or demeaning or derogatory characterization. It is geography. I can excuse someone whose grasp of English is perhaps not great for not recognizing that but the people here on this board cheering him on are being idiots. Period.

[karynnj]

57. That is the way I always heard it as well

Not to mention, his comment suggested to me repairing past breeches in relationships.

[Flatulo]

68. Many posters in the group literally leap for joy at the opportunity to rub America's nose in shit.

They contort themselves in amazing ways to find insult or take offense where none exists.

The USA has committed many sins in LA, but this isn't one of them.

So it goes.

[karynnj]

31. This is an incredibly unbalanced ridiculous article

It does not even bother to quote Kerry's comment. It takes two words and expands them to a long list of things Kerry never has supported - and many that he has condemned. You know why the article fails to actually quote Kerry? The reason is because it would show that his full statement was one of respect - not derision. This is a rant that reflects WORSE on Morales than the phrase does on Kerry. Yet nearly every person posting here has taken Morales' rant as gospel and has taken a phrase that was never intended to be anything like the meaning Morales - for purposes of his own - has given it.

Now, why do I suggest that Morales is playing to the jingoist feelings of his country and his base? The reason is that I heard the comment when watching Kerry's testimony before the House Foreign Relations Committee. One would think Morales likely would have taken the effort to hear the same thing. What Kerry was saying was that we should not, but often had ignored Latin America - and that we shouldn't.

Now, given that that was the context, Morales's rant seems rather ridiculous. If he were really troubled, I assume that calling Kerry and asking him what he meant could have done - especially as Kerry was speaking of reaching out to Latin America.

I am appalled by the lack of respect that is given to Kerry's actual positions and actions towards Latin America and the complete faith given to Morales. I have always been suspicious when an article does not quote the statement that it is angry about. We have seen it on the right - and this is an example of it on the left.

The really stupid sad thing is that between the Republicans in Congress and the majority of Democrats in Congress to the right of Kerry on this - especially Menendez, the Clinton hold overs, etc, Kerry probably represents the person in power MOST likely to hear out people like Morales in the US government. Brilliant move, Morales. Seriously guys, name one person with near his power who has taken better positions than he has.

[ocpagu]

40. Well...

Catherina just showed us the quote:

"... look, the Western Hemisphere is our backyard. It's critical to us. And we intend to do everything possible to try to change the attitude of a number of nations."

- John Kerry.

Really, Kerry didn't leave much room for speculation. And what does he mean by "trying to change the attitude of a number of nations"? Force them to elect right-wingers?

[karynnj]

53. That is again your speculation

Do you think there is no need for improvement in the relationships?

[ocpagu]

54. It's a question, above all.

What does that mean?

Whatever he means, it's quite an arrogant remark. Why is he expecting Latin American countries to change their attitude to have "better relations" (if that's what he really intends...)?

If US wants "better relations" with Latin America, the US is the one who has to change its own attitude.

You see, whatever is his explanation to his remark, he's already reinforcing the classic arrogant attitude of US government toward Latin America.

Hope he sits in a comfortable chair while he waits for Latin America to review their attitude.

[Catherina]

61. Did you really type all of that with a straight face? Lol

Lack of respect blah blah.

"One would think Morales likely would have taken the effort to hear the same thing" To hear what you want him to hear and look the other way as the US backs coups in Latin America, continues its murderous drug war dumping tons of toxic chemicals on entire villages, building more military bases, funneling money to shady NGOs, enacts laws like "The Countering Iran in the Western Hemisphere Act", illegally and immorally blockading Cuba, siding with vulture fund capitalists as they rape and loot Latin America ....

Let me tell you something about lack of respect lol. WHERE WAS KERRY'S SHINING FACE for Nicolas' Maduro's inauguration? Where's his congratulatory message? Oh that's right, he's the porte-parole for "we refuse to recognize the results".

You must think the Latin American politicians and citizens are as naive and uninformed as most US citizens.

As to your ridiculous complaint that the article didn't spoonfeed you the quote, this is Latin American News, miles above in quality than the spoon-feeding swill the US puts out with partial quotes for the uninformed and brainwashable.

Everyone, everyone in Latin America is aware of the full quote and the full intent.

The better of two evils line doesn't play well in Latin America because there's no difference from down here. US Foreign Policy never changes and skips a beat so the good cop/bad cop routine is for domestic consumption only.

Kerry doesn't represent shit for Latin America and Morales just clearly told him so.

[whathehell]

77. Thank you.

Maybe they're feeling a bit lonely, since most of the board has been

caught up in positive events here, such as the the live arrest of that

sick shit who, along with his brother, killed four innocents in Boston.

They certainly couldn't join in that, now, could they?

That might violate the code.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

35. Considering our history in LA --

the idea that the US wants to start "paying it more attention" is -- rightfully so -- terrifying to them. Lots of democratically elected Leftists to be overthrown....those are OUR resources, dabnabit.

[Judi Lynn]

46. Exactly right. They know exactly what "paying more attention to them" will do.

They've been shown too many times.

[hifiguy]

37. This is one of those infinitely revealing

small slips of the mask that reveals what is actually underneath.

To rise to national-level power in this country one must believe in and promote American imperialism. The only difference between the parties is that the Democrats try to hide or blur this fact and the Pukes just say it openly. Corporate interests must, MUST be served before anything else, now and forever. That is the only enduring principle in US foreign policy. It may be the only principle, period.

[Judi Lynn]

51. Anyone unaware of this fact absolutely MUST start doing some crash research, and keep at it,

until he/she finally understands what people have been talking about ALL THIS TIME!

My God. You'd think from time to time some of them would feel slightly curious.

[idwiyo]

41. K&R Go Evo!

[SleeplessinSoCal]

42. Evo should've said "We are your backyard. Wanna play?"

[Zorro]

63. Evo needs to go chew some coca leaves

and chill the fuck out.

[limpyhobbler]

70. At least he didn't say Latin America is the USA's litterbox. nt

[Catherina]

71. "What are we? Your trash dump?" "We may be ill-fed, ill-clothed..." (more details)

"We can not accept these offensive statements by the Secretary of State of the United States (...) When you say 'backyard', are we your trash dump? I say it is contempt, a hatred of Latin Americans," the president said in the press conference later and confirmed his "repudiation" of these claims.

According to Morales, "the relationship with the U.S. is desirable" but "not final" in political economics because, he said, Bolivia has economically freed itself of that country.

He stressed that Bolivia is now has "allies" with "power" like China and some European countries, but especially its South American neighbors.

"Who can accept being told you're someone's backyard? We may be ill-fed, ill-clothed, still under development, but despite that we have dignity (...) We simply ask for more respect from the United States towards our people, towards Latin America" said the president.

http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/163664/morales-pedira-a-la-unasur-que-repudie-declaraciones-de-kerry-sobre-venezuela/

“No se puede aceptar estas graves declaraciones del secretario de Estado de EE UU (…) Cuando dice ‘patio trasero’, ¿somos su basurero? Yo digo es un desprecio, un odio que nos tienen a los latinoamericanos”, dijo el gobernante en la rueda de prensa posterior y ratificó su “repudio” a estas afirmaciones.

Según Morales, “la relación con Estados Unidos es deseable”, pero “no es definitiva” en las políticas económicas porque, según dijo, Bolivia se ha liberado económicamente de ese país.

Destacó que Bolivia tiene ahora como “aliados” a “potencias” como China y algunos países europeos, pero sobre todo a sus vecinos suramericanos.

“¿Quién puede aceptar que nos digan patio trasero? Podemos estar mal alimentados, mal vestidos, todavía en proceso de desarrollo, pero por encima de eso tenemos la dignidad (…) Sólo pedimos más respeto de Estados Unidos hacia nuestros pueblos, hacia América Latina”, dijo el mandatario.

http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/163664/morales-pedira-a-la-unasur-que-repudie-declaraciones-de-kerry-sobre-venezuela/

[Sekhmets Daughter]

72. A jury voted 6-0 to Leave it Alone

At Sat Apr 20, 2013, 12:01 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Evo Morales responds to John Kerry: Never Again Will We Be Your Backyard
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110814325

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Obama and Kerry must be doing something right if it brings all the haters out on a site that supports Democrats. Personal attacks is now constructive criticism now. Sounds like GOPers getting a free ride again. Strange!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Apr 20, 2013, 12:07 AM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: What is so wrong about a post tht states what has occurred? Some spelling errors, but I can't see the post being deleted for that reason.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Read some history! This is not a republican vs democrat issue...this is US foreign policy vs the world.

[Flatulo]

73. No doubt Morales intends to immediately return every dollar in cash assistance the US has ever sent,

although I didn't see that mentioned anywhere. Just to jog his memory, it's about $150m since 2004.

He can address the check to John Kerry.

[Judi Lynn]

75. The US has done its major dealing with the racist, secessionist white supremicists in Santa Cruz,

the European descended wealthy landowners, that's what.

Bolivia currently has no relationship with the U.S.

Haven't you taken the time to follow US relations with Bolivia? Yet you still have time to try to tell DU'ers the US has been benevolent to Bolivia? Is that what has happened?

The money goes to further US interests in Bolivia and that does NOT include the poor, the suffering, the hungry, uneducated, helpless indigenous majority.

The US started trying to screw Morales even before he was elected. The US went behind the back of the previous President, to the higher officers in the Bolivian military who assisted the US in spriting out their shoulder-mounted missiles, wiping out their arsenal, taking their missiles to Texas before Morales who was leading by far in the polls could get elected.

When the sitting Bolivian President learned what had happened those officials were canned on the spot, pitched the hell out of their jobs, and there was real hell to pay. Morales learned this sabotage had been arranged to clean out some powerful weapons in the military before he could take power.

During his first term, a Bolivian tv camera team followed the US ambassador Philip Goldberg to a late night meeting, AFTER MIDNIGHT with the racist, secessionist leaders from Santa Cruz, Bolivia. It was all captured on video.

A new Peace Corps worker, a Fulbright Scholar arrived in Bolvia, only to be counseled by the American Embassy that he was expected to spy on Cuban health workers, and Venezuelan personel in Bolivia, and to report back to the embassy on their activities and addresses, etc. He protested, he made a public statement, he went completely public with his deep sense of outrage, and the ambassador apologized for it, and the Bolivian President was once again sick and furious.

There are tons of examples of filthy behavior rolled out just during Morales' Presidency, but the history of US meddling, and manipulation of events in Bolvia goes back a hell of a long way.

For instance, Hugo Banzer. This small description of this monster was written before he was brought back to be President in the 1990's, only to privatize Bolivia's water, sell it to a subsidiary of the Bechtel Company from the US, George H W Bush's own connection, and this company hiked the price so high for the citizens budgets many could no longer even afford the water they had used for years. The people protested, as in Cochabamba, marched in the streets, and Banzer sent a military sharp shooter out to put the fear of God into them. This part was not included in the small paragraph I am posting below, but it's damned easy to locate in any search, even photos of the sharp-shooter croucning in the street.

COLONEL HUGO BANZER

President of Bolivia

In 1970, in Bolivia, when then-President Juan Jose Torres nationalized Gulf Oil properties and tin mines owned by US interests, and tried to establish friendly relations with Cuba and the Soviet Union, he was playing with fire. The coup to overthrow Torres, led by US-trained officer and Gulf Oil beneficiary Hugo Banzer, had direct support from Washington. When Banzer's forces had a breakdown in radio communications, US Air Force radio was placed at their disposal. Once in power, Banzer began a reign of terror. Schools were shut down as hotbeds of political subversive activity. Within two years, 2,000 people were arrested and tortured without trial. As in Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil, the native Indians were ordered off their land and deprived of tribal identity. Tens-of-thousands of white South Africans were enticed to immigrate with promises of the land stolen from the Indians, with a goal of creating a white Bolivia. When Catholic clergy tried to aid the Indians, the regime, with CIA help, launched terrorist attacks against them, and this "Banzer Plan" became a model for similar anti-Catholic actions throughout Latin America.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html

Do yourself the honor of taking time to learn the history of US actions and the aftermath in Latin America and the
Caribbean first before far more time has been wasted.

[Flatulo]

80. So you're saying that Morales has never taken a cent from the US?

[ocpagu]

98. Thank you, Judi, for the info...

... and for being conscious of the meaning of US foreign policy regarding Bolivia.

Anyone thinking that USAID money somehow benefited Morales is completely out of contact with reality.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

78. The US never gives "assistance" without expecting something in return.

We piss away $150m every day on perfectly ridiculous stuff. If that is all we have provided to Bolivia since 2004, you should be happy.

[Flatulo]

79. I guess my question is, has Morales taken even a nickel from the US? If not, great. If so,

then shame on him for his hypocrisy. You shouldn't piss in someone's eye if you have your hand in their wallet.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

81. It is a common misperception that the US is the most generous of nations...

There are others that give a greater percentage of GDP to foreign aid.

My belief is that Morales can piss in the eye of anyone who attaches strings to aid... The US can, if it chooses, withhold further aid...and watch China pick up the slack. Morales is doing what best suits his agenda...

[Flatulo]

87. Hah, I wish them luck with the Chinese. If you think the Yanqis have screwed over our southern

neighbors, wait until they see the rogering they'll get from the Chinese. The Chinese do not negotiate in good faith. They are interested in only one thing - Bolivia's lithium reserves. The Chinese will build a pilot plant there, they'll master the technology, but the mass production will go back to Asia, where they will then turn around and compete on the open market with Bolivia's native production. And they will win.

They've done this with wind, they've done this with solar, and they're doing it with advanced battery technologies. They partner with another government, then steal the technology and bring it all back to China.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

97. I think you miss the point....

However, Bolivia will still control the lithium and that lithium will go to China.

[Flatulo]

101. My point was that the Chinese will pursue their national interests more aggressively than the hated

Yanqis ever did. They'll strip the earth of anything useful and then move on to the next resource. Think the Borg from STNG.

After the Chinese are finished with them they'll remember with great fondness their dealings with the US.

[ocpagu]

103. Is this just wishful thinking...

... or do you have any evidences that such a thing could happen?

After all, unlike the US, China does not have a global reputation of deposing democratically elected presidents and replacing them with fascists, nor funding militias, death-squads or being involved in proxy wars.

[Flatulo]

111. Wishful thinking, as in I would do a happy dance if the Chinese screwed Bolivia? No, I have

absolutely no axe to grind with Morales or his countrymen. I know exactly one Bolivian, and he's a pretty nice guy, but of Euro descent, not indigenous.

No, the Chinese practice their warfare on the factory floor, where they happily conduct industrial espionage and intellectual property theft on a daily basis. They steal American software to the tune of billions of dollars, and they form partnerships under which they illegally transfer knowledge and IP to themselves and then compete against their partner. You can read about what they did to General Motors with the Spark, when the state-owned auto enterprise Chery set up a factory across the street from GM, and on a nightly basis pirated the design, right down to the smallest detail, from GM. It was a staggering case of intellectual property theft. GM sued them for billions, they pretty much said Fuck You.

Or you can read about what they did to Evergreen Solar, a Massachusetts startup with an innovative process for growing silicon. They partnered with a Chinese state-owned entity under which Evergreen would provide the wafers, and the Chinese would assemble them into panels. The key to Evergreen's advantage was their silicon furnace design, which was the result of a fifteen year project started by MIT. I worked on Evergreens furnace, and it was a magnificent machine and cost tens of millions to design and perfect. It could produce wafers at 1/3 the cost of competitors' processes. We sent furnaces to China, where they were placed in a secure facility (to prevent theft of the design), and only the wafers were sent to the panel assembly plant. Well, the Chinese got access to the furnaces, copied the design and replicated them, then proceeded to produce silicon at an even lower cost and putting Evergreen out of business.

Just a few examples. I have others. If you enter into a business agreement with the Chinese, it is the kiss of death for your enterprise. I expect they'll pull similar stunts with LA enterprises. They may think they're avoiding dancing with the devil by eschewing trade with the US, but it's just a different devil.

Oh, and they're incredibly rascist. They sincerely believe that all other cultures, even other Asian cultures, are animals.

[Catherina]

83. Not that 150 million in 8 years is very much but that's interesting. Where did you find that?

Where did you find that information?

I'd like to see what that money was for and if they accepted it because your post piqued my interest. I agree with you about returning/not accepting it unless those millions were used for the coup against Morales and to undermine him; in that case the US made a bad gamble and lost.

Evo Morales didn't become President until 2006 and your figure covers 2004-2005

All I could hastily find were obscure references that "the US designated $150m in aid" and this article where a few of those millions seem accounted for:

Bolivia rejects USAID
Sunday, May 1, 2011
By Federico Fuentes

In another important step towards winning Bolivia’s national sovereignty, the country’s Plurinational Assembly has announced the expulsion from Bolivia of USAID’s Environment and Economic Development (EED) program.

USAID is funded by the US government and on its website says one of its aims is “furthering America’s foreign policy interests”. The agency has come under fire for its role in funding pro-US right-wing organisations in Bolivia and the region.

Deputies from the governing Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) declared the expulsion the first step towards the complete removal of USAID from Bolivia.

This decision follows Bolivian government’s decision to kick out the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) from its territory and expel the US ambassador for his role in the September 2008 right-wing coup attempt.

USAID projects in the coca growing area of the Chapare region were shut down in 2008 after local unions voted to call on local councils to expel the agency from the region.

MAS deputy Antonio Molina told La Razon on April 18 that the USAID program was being shut down due to its interference in hydrocarbon projects in the northern part of the department of La Paz.

Molina said USAID was working to undermine “the good relations between Bolivia and Venezuela” in the joint oil exploration project, and was instead seeking to use the natural resources for US benefit.

The US government had set aside US$14.4 million of the $62 million assigned by US Congress to USAID projects in Bolivia for its EED program, La Razon said.

With “classified” US documents in hand, MAS deputy Edwin Tupa accused the agency on April 26 of working to undermine the leadership of Evo Morales and other social movements since at least 2002, La Razon said.

Tupa said the files showed that during 2002 and 2005, when national elections were held, USAID gave $9 million and $12 million to two right-wing parties standing against MAS.

Material published on Green Left is welcome to be reposted providing a link back to the original is included.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/47460

[Flatulo]

85. Wikipedia

In 1998 the World Bank and International Monetary Fund awarded Bolivia a debt relief package worth US$760 million [1]. Bolivia has also received relief under the World Bank’s Heavily Indebted Poor Countries program, which, if Bolivia meets all checkpoints, will total US$1.2 billion by 2011 [2]. In 2004, the United States designated more than US$150 million for assistance to Bolivia [3].
Under President Evo Morales, Spain has agreed to forgive $120 million (99 million Euro) in Bolivian debt on the condition that the money go towards developing educational programs.[4]. Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez may also buy up Bolivia's foreign debt to institutions such as the World Bank and IMF.[citation needed]

[Catherina]

91. Thanks but is there anything that shows where that $150 went, and how much of it went anywhere?

I don't see anything there really because Morales is under no moral obligation to return money that was used to meddle in the 2005 elections and the word "designated" just says the money was put aside. He would also be under no moral obligation to return money that went to USAID there. That's what I'd like to find out. But thanks for this.

[Catherina]

82. I'm laughing so hard it hurts lol

Thanks for posting those. I'm quite stunned. Agreeing or disagreeing with Morales is not the point. The point is remaining informed. Whether we like it or not, this was said (and not in a vacuum as anyone following Latin American news knows). When a foreign government informs us that they're examining expulsing what's left of our Embassy down there and expulsing an NGO that Wikileaks confirmed as not being on the up and up, since when don't Americans deserve to know?

I would think people would want to know and use this for some introspection to learn how to get along with our neighbors, with what our neighbors are now demanding- a little respect.

Since when do we flail about treating another nation's leader, especially its first indigenous President, as stupid because he shouldn't have taken exception to a phrase that has a lot of negative and ugly history behind it?

This story is only 2 days old and already there are over 586,000 google results for this incident, and none that I see are happy with it or defending it. Is it our intention to refuse to learn and continue to offend? I hope not.

Thank you for posting this here Sekhmets Daughter. I humbly and sincerely thank the jury and promise the famous jury #4 that I'll make an effort with spelling.

[Flatulo]

86. 'Backyard' is a simple colloquialism. We used it all the time. I grew up in Mssachusetts,

and when someone would say "where are you from?" and you'd reply "Grafton" they'd nod and say "Oh, I'm from Millbury. You're in my backyard."

Talk about flailing about to find an insult. If Morales wants respect and better relations, he's not going to get it by pissing in our ear over a colloquialism. If he wants to get testy over this, then he can fuck himself with a feather for all of me. I need Bolivia like I need cancer of the nuts.

Jesus goddam fucked up Christ.

[Catherina]

95. I don't think your analogy works in this case

If you started redecorating your neighbor's backyard in Massachusetts and, when they complained, told them it was your backyard, I doubt that would have gone over very well. That's what's been going on here.

This isn't a silly matter of inadvertently using an offensive term loaded with centuries of history. The 2009 coup in Honduras, the current meddling in Latin American organizations, our actions over Venezuela elections, are a few recent examples of how we still act like it's our backyard and we have the God-given Monroe-Doctrine right to interfere in their internal affairs.

It's ok that you don't need Bolivia. They don't want us to need them. They want us to leave them alone. I know they'd love it if everyone in our government had that same attitude.

See, that's another thing. They don't want respect and better relations. The shoe's shifting to the other foot and what they're telling the US, is that if the US wants relations with them, the US needs to dump the colonial Monroe Doctrine and start respecting their sovereignty.

Morales isn't just speaking for Latin America. There are over 250,000 dead Mayans in Guatemala alone, courtesy of the backyard policy. The view's a lot different from Latin America.

[Flatulo]

102. I don't believe that Kerry meant to be insulting.

I believe that the expression just doesn't translate we'll. We'll just have to disagree on this.

Regardless of past sins, I don't expect our diplomats should have to bend the knee or throw their backs out in a bid for penance. Their job is pretty much to represent our interests, no more, no less. If people want no dealings with us, as you imply is the case with Evo, then we really shouldn't get too worked up over how they respond to our comments.

[ocpagu]

104. "Their job is pretty much to represent our interests"

Are you sure?

How are your interests represented by Kerry's intention of doing "everything possible to try to change the attitude of a number of nations"?

[Flatulo]

106. Nice try.

John Kerry does not report to me personally. Foreign policy is set by the Administration and implemented by the State Department.

We don't live in a direct democracy. It's a representative republic.

[ocpagu]

108. You're missing the point.

In a representative republic we can assume that the foreign policy will be formulated according to the interests of the people OR that other interests will help formulate the foreign policy.

What does Kerry stand for? How is he helping Americans by wanting Latin America to change their "attitudes"?

[Flatulo]

109. Ok, I see. We're a capitalistic society, and we have an inbred fear of leftist governments.

Probably a holdover from the Cold War. Although we do do a lot of business with the Chinese, who are ostensibly commies. But they sell us their cheap labor, so they have something to exchange for our dollars.

I don't think the fear of us becoming commies is very rational, because, frankly, the commies will sell you their mothers' boots, just like the Capitalists will. So at the end of the day, we're not really all that different. Everyone is looking out for their own self-interests. The only difference is that under our system, the rich hold the power, and under the emerging LA models, the poor hold the power (although it looks to me like there could be some struggles in the future).

Even Hugo Chavez, who was diametrically opposed to literally everything the USA stood for, didn't seem to mind very much that his oil was making its way to our shores in exchange for dollars.

On edit: it's possible that The US also wants the rights to that lithium, although it doesn't make much sense to me, since we'd ship it all to China to be turned into batteries anyway. Maybe we could get a little of the value added, but I don't think it's all that much.

[Zorro]

100. Evo's got a chip on his shoulder

He always seems to be looking for an opportunity to insult the administration.

[Judi Lynn]

115. Kick. n/t

[Judi Lynn]

117. Viva Evo Morales, and his hard work toward a much better world. He is respected,

no matter what the right-wing a-hole propagandists try to do to mislead the intellectually, and personally slow about his character.