Reply #72: Sir, you presume wrong.

[tom_paine]

I meant what I said. I understand that you will disagree, but that is exactly how I feel.

As I have said previously, for the longest time I have sat on the fence about Chavez. Some think him saint, others think him a devil. I have listened to both side and thought some merit in each.

But this, and a couple other of his recent moves, cast him (in my opinion) as being on the side of the Bushes of the world, the tyrants and autocrats. And yes, there have been many Left-Wing Autocrats and Tyrants in this world as well as Right-Wing ones.

Tyranny knows no political party. Tyranny knows no economic philosophy. Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism, have all been the economic partners of tyranny throughout history.

Let us not forget that historically, Communists and hardcore socialists have always cloaked their anti-freedom agenda (yes, I hate to paraphrase the vile Chimposter on anything, but that is how I see much of Chavez' agenda) in good works for the poor and downtrodden.

Do I think that taints or mitigates the good works Chavez has done for the poor? No. But I do think the other hand of his overall program is anti-freedom. And that is not made any better even if Chavez spent 24hrs./day 365 days/year helping the poor.

Chavez is one of the many varieties and degrees of autocratic tyrants (yes, I am aware he was elected on an election system likely more trustworthy than ours, but then, as Bushler clearly shows, just having the impimatur of legitimacy does not preclude descent into tyranny.

I'm sure we will have to agree to disagree on this one.