NYT Editorial: Mr. Chávez’s Power Grab

[jefferson_dem]

Mr. Chávez’s Power Grab

Newspeak is alive and well in Venezuela. Last week, President Hugo Chávez portrayed planned constitutional amendments that would allow him to be re-elected indefinitely as a step toward “participatory democracy.”

Mr. Chávez’s plan is just another step in the march to increase his government’s control over Venezuela’s politics and economy. Behind the Orwellian rhetorical tactics, his efforts to amass power and cling to it for as long as he can are undermining Venezuela’s democracy.

Mr. Chávez remains, at least technically, a democrat. He has repeatedly beaten Venezuela’s dysfunctional opposition in elections deemed fair by international observers. He won a landslide victory last December, extending his mandate until 2012. His proposed constitutional reforms must be submitted to a vote in the National Assembly and to a referendum.

But his government’s veneer of democratic respectability is wearing thin. Every member of the National Assembly is an ally of Mr. Chávez. His allies also run the Supreme Court, all but two state governments and Petróleos de Venezuela, the state oil company.

And his government has not been shy about using the apparatus of the state to boost Mr. Chávez’s vast popularity among Venezuela’s poor. After the government revoked the license of RCTV, an aggressive opposition television network, the government used it to create another pro-government mouthpiece. Buoyed by a public spending spree financed by high oil prices, Mr. Chávez has used his enormous popularity to extend his government’s power over big chunks of the economy, including the telephone and electricity companies.

<SNIP>

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/22/opinion/22wed3.html?ei=5089&en=7bbea7cadbe666b5&ex=1345435200&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

[1932]

1. Do you know that the New York Times endorsed the coup in an editorial?

It's kind of hypocritical of them to criticize a democratic process for amending a constitution after they endorsed an undemocratic coup attempt.

For perspective on why NYT might criticize someone like Chavez listen to last week's counterspin: the Times criticized Democrats who "cozy up" to labor and "bash" free trade because studies "prove that free trade is good" (start 3 minutes in and listen through to 6 minutes).

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3162

Also, here's a book that does a case study on the NYT's coverage on Venezuela:


http://fanonite.org/2006/12/14/the-record-of-the-paper-how-the-new-york-times-misreports-us-foreign-policy/

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Neocon Times?

The facilitator of the Iraq war? That newspaper? I'm shocked. Are they concerned about the end of democracy here in the United States? Are they concerned about Uribe in Colombia, who also has moved to eliminate term limits?

No. They are concerned that a democratic socialist government is in control of the oil wealth of Venezuela and is using those resources to benefit the people of Venezuela. You see, that is not the most efficient use of those resources, and that is very troubling.

[1932]

3. Here's a FAIR report on Times coverage of Colombia (by Juan Forrero, in particular)

Despite the dramatic nature of the attacks and the U.S.'s heavy financial involvement in the war, the New York Times did not report on a single massacre during the month of January. The findings of the human rights groups' "Certification" report, including its recommendation that the U.S. cease military funding to Colombia, also went unmentioned.

Far from documenting the recent wave of paramilitary terror, the Times has told precisely the opposite story. Juan Forero's January 22 dispatch from the city of Barrancabermeja, headlined "Paramilitaries Adjust Attack Strategies," gave a highly distorted version of events.

Forero claims that "the militia members are killing fewer people than the rebels, who have responded to the threat in neighborhoods they long controlled with a furious assault on those they accuse of supporting the paramilitaries," and that the New Granada battalion of the Colombian military "is sending specially trained urban commandos into the neighborhoods to restore order."

The notion that the rebels in Barrancabermeja have been responsible for more killings than the paramilitaries contradicts all available evidence. A recent dispatch from Inter Press Service (1/15/01) reported that "one of the top complaints of human rights groups in the area is that a leading cause of violence is the attitude of the armed forces, which have facilitated-- by inaction or omission-- the advance of the paramilitaries, who are responsible for 80 percent of the massacres perpetrated in and around the city, according to several reports."

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1700

[leftchick]

4. their pro-corporate propaganda is getting tiresome

I never read that rag.

[EFerrari]

12. I didn't know that.

But it shouldn't be surprising.

[donheld]

5. NYT Editorial: Mr. Bush’s Power Grab

Please tell me when they are going to publish that?!? Should we not clean our own backyard before we clean anyone else's.

[NNN0LHI]

6. Ever notice they refer to true tin-pot dictators like Mushariff as "President"?

Thats what they used to call Saddam too. The NYT really blows.

Don

[Deja Q]

7. 'Common frame of reference', aka 'being patronizing'.

Though why they don't mention Saddam, et al, as dictators, I have no idea...

[bemildred]

8. So repeatedly winning free and fair elections is a "power grab"?

Mr Chavez has accomplished in Venezuela what Rove set out to do in the USA, but legally and against the strenuous opposition of the US Government. Rove is a Chavez wannabe.

[UTUSN]

9. Too late. I was going to warn you that you would be flamed for citing the NYT.

Or, actually, ANY OTHER source that is critical of Saint Hugo. As for all those "elections" he as supposedly won, with the opposition sitting out the last election, all that resulted was a 100% Saint Hugo legislature, so that he can get rubberstamped even more than Shrub. Him and Shrub, they make a good pair and will be fine fishing buddies and dominoes contenders---oh, Saint Hugo will still be working as pResident long after Shrub IF Shrub really retires.

I really really hope that the proposal for a Latin American forum is incorporated by DU, where all the Saint Hugo threads can go, and I will never ever pop in there and irritate the followers. Hey, I need my flamed wounds to scar-over and heal, so I'll get something out of it, too.

[EFerrari]

11. Here you go --

:)

[The Straight Story]

15. I am with you on all that - I have never seen someone so worshipped that nothing they do is ever

wrong, and if you say it is wrong you must cite a source, which will be considered no good.

Hell, we can bash hillary and edwards all day and have good discussions over it, but chavez?

He is the Jesus of some, the Satan of others, and to some of us like me - just another person in power not above criticism.

[EFerrari]

10. Speaking of participatory democracy, did I miss the NYTs investigation

of Ohio that we were promised in December 2004 by the readers' rep? :shrug:

[AngryAmish]

13. NYT plays Bush's rusty trombone again

What else is new?

[ShaneGR]

14. What if Bush had done the same in 2002?

That is, seized personal control of several oil companies, had congress revoke term limits on Presidents, etc. Would the flamers here have cheared for that?

[EFerrari]

16. But Chavez hasn't done that. That's the propaganda.

And the corporate outlets like the NYTs run hit pieces on him about twice a week and repeat this cr@p endlessly which is why you believe that he has. It works!

[The Straight Story]

17. So which news outlets are the only ones that tell the truth? Does chavez have a paper we can read?

Just wondering and looking for links on objective news sources authorized by the chavez folks.

[EFerrari]

18. The same people that lie to us about Bush lie to us about Chavez.

That's a pretty good rule of thumb, aside from using your own critical thinking skills. :shrug:

So, in general, McClatchy is more reliable, right? And the magazines that do investigative reporting, like Vanity Fair and Harper's, no? Independent outlets like Amy Goodman, Bill Moyers, Greg Palast.

It's not about worshipping Chavez for me as much as it is trying to keep whatever slender grip on reality I can, lol, in the middle of this propaganda hurricane.

/OOPS

[The Straight Story]

19. I dunno, reminds me of bush supporters saying the NYT is liberal and if they talk bad about bush

they are the mouth piece of the liberal elite.

So the right and the left hate the NYT times now :) Are their movie reviews any good? :rofl:

[EFerrari]

20. Lol! I know -- that's hilarious.

But, I wonder how the wingnuts would know NYTs is "liberal" since they don't read? :silly:

Is Frank Rich still writing movie reviews?

[1932]

22. I wish everyone would read Aleida Guevara and Richard Gott's book about Chavez.

[SOS]

21. Looking forward to NYT articles on

The family-run dictatorship in Saudi Arabia.
Or the butcher of Equatorial Guinea.
Or the military dictatorship in Burma, complete with genocide.
Or the mass executions and slave labor camps in China.
Or the boiled-alive dissidents in Uzbekistan.
Or the murder of opposition supporters in Egypt.

But since all of these countries are on the Wall Street/Washington consensus payroll, it's going to be a long wait.

The Neoliberal Times is so predictable, it's become boring.