Venezuela Declares Ranch Lands Idle, Will Give Them to Poor Farmers

[NNN0LHI]

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBMFXYNR8E.html

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) - A Venezuelan land reform program has declared more than 10,000 hectares (24,700 acres) of private land idle, clearing the way for the farms and ranches to be turned over to poor farmers.

The National Land Institute recently announced the total amount of land affected since 2001, when a law backed by President Hugo Chavez gave the government authority to seize private lands if they are not used productively.

A statement Saturday said six farms, representing 4,521 hectares (11,167 acres), had been declared idle in the states of Aragua, Carabobo, Lara, Monagas and Zulia.

The largest plot, some 3,791 hectares of Hato Barrera in central Carabobo state, is to become a farming cooperative for poor farmers, the agency said.

[Deja Q]

1. OMG. Somebody over there is acting like a human.

In America, the lands would be given to the wealthy... or sold to the highest bidder or to a no-bid contract ala Halliburton.

[Cocoa]

2. he's an enemy of humanity

why can't he be more like our friends in Uzbekistan. :sarcasm:

[bahrbearian]

15. Don't forget our friends in the Middle East.., the Saudis.

[Cha]

3. First we get the LBN that

"Chavez has made plans in case he gets assassinated" and now this news.

Chavez is the gift that keeps on giving!

[knowbody0]

5. Chavez could write the book

on how to do it right. i love this man, he is absolute inspiration

[GirlinContempt]

7. The people just need to

push him a little harder. Which it seems like they've been doing. He has GOT to stop trying to placate the reactionaries, it doesn't work and it's destroying the good policies the government has been trying to put in place.

[aneerkoinos]

64. Not only pushing

Dialectic is pushing and pulling on both sides, and pulling brings better results than pushing. Sun beats North Wind, like Aesop told.

[AP]

27. Chavez has written a couple books, in fact:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1920888004/qid=1116197064/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-8183042-8461616?v=glance&s=books

[knowbody0]

42. thank you

[shanti]

71. would that he were OUR president

in every sense of the word!!

[mitchtv]

4. this is what did Allende in

hold tight.

[GirlinContempt]

6. Doesn't matter

the law isn't the doing of Chavez, not really. Its the masses of peoplethat put him in power and wrote their constitution that are really behind this. And unless someone is prepared to assasinate over 60% of the population, the laws aren't going away.

[K-W]

19. While great, your optimism is a little unfounded.

Allende was also the result of a popular movement. The US has crushed more populist movements in Latin America than I could count on two hands. Now I have hope for Chavez, but if he survives it will be becase the US has lost its ability to project overwhelming power in latin america, not because the people are behind chavez, while that is a neccessary part of the equation, people alone cant stop the US if the US can terrorize and massacre the people.

[GirlinContempt]

20. It's not unfounded

When you look at the history of the Venezuelan revolution, and the constant internal revolution, and the way they've dealt with the problems so far, it begins to look less like optimism and more like reality.
Defeatism is the tool of the bourgeois.

[K-W]

21. Realism isn't defeatism.

Your argument is that because he is supported by people, he will succeed where others have failed. That is simply bogus, people were behind all of the Latin American liberation movements. They simply could not stand up to foreign sponsored terrorism and violence.

As I said there is reason for hope, because Chavez has the benefit of learning from his predecessors and the global geopolitical landscape is different. But it is a mistake to underestimate the resources of the United States or its position of power.

One can be reasonably optimistic without ignoring the uphill nature of Chavez's battle.

And please don't make baseless accusations about me because I don't commit myself to senseless optimism as if acknowledging challenges hinders the ability to handle them. I know that Chavez has a better chance than anyone before him, that doesnt change the relative power of the US and the venezualan governments.

[GirlinContempt]

23. I'm not ignoring

the fact that it's been hard, will continue to be hard. But I'm also not ignoring the entire pattern of the revolution, which from it's inception has been like nothing ever truly tried in Latin America. The reactions of the people of the country to every attempt so far, and the actions of the government, we can see the dedication and the power of this movement.
The education and reforms that have happened over the last 9 years have laid a solid foundation for continuous revolution and have fed the awakening of the Bolivar spirit in Venezuela.
It's bogus to dismiss the power of organized massive movement of a people. Especially a passionate, educated people who're willing to lay down their lives for their country and their vision. I don't underestimate the US's resources, or it's power. I think that USians, especially those in government, underestimate the Venezuelan people and the Venezuelan government.

[K-W]

24. Look, I am on your side.

And you are arguing a straw man in accusing me of dismissing the power or organized massive movement of people. We pretty much completely agree about venezuala, I just thought you were overstating the chances for success. A fact you seem to be aknowledging now.

As I stated, Chavez has a better chance than anyone before him, that doesnt automatically mean he will succeed. I can see that you feel a sense of fate with Chavez, and that you believe this is going to be big. I cant say I dont get that feeling sometimes too, but the facts are the facts, and the odds simply are not with Chavez.

I can both be hopeful and aknowledge that, so please stop accusing me of not being hopeful.

[GirlinContempt]

29. I'm not making 'dishonest arguments' about you

I'm making generalized comments. It's something I'm passionate about, and I'm stating my position. This may be a novel concept, but if I'm going to accuse you of anything, I'll accuse YOU of it. Keep that in mind when reading my posts.

You think I'm overstating. I don't. We can disagree. I don't automatically think he'll succeed. I have great faith that the people of Venezuela will succeed in their revolutionary struggle, and I believe the odds are with the people.

I never said you can't be hopeful and acknowledge that it won't be a cakewalk. Some people are more extreme on either end of that spectrum, and thats fine. I never said you weren't hopeful. Stop deriving insults from statements made about... not you.

[K-W]

32. Generalized comments... right.

Yes Im sure you didnt mean to refer to me at all in the comments you posted in replies to my comments.

"Defeatism is the tool of the bourgeois."
"It's bogus to dismiss the power of organized massive movement of a people."

You fairly obviously accused me of defeatism and of desmissing power of popular movements, both completely baseless accusations.

You are overstating, that is simply fact. You can disagree that the US government is massively more powerful than the venezuala, that wont make it any less the clear truth. The odds are not with the people anyone with even a basic understanding of history should know that. The odds are with wealth and weapons.

You did in fact equate my realistic evaluation of the odds with defeatism. You can pretend you didnt say it all you want. The proof is in your post.

Edit: By the way Hugo Chavez aknowledges that the odds are not on his side and always has.

[GirlinContempt]

36. Well. I'm sorry you feel that way.

But I wasn't accusing you of anything. That's your interpretation of what I said. Now, admittedly, your first post sounded a little defeatist, though I wouldn't have labeled you *a* defeatist. I didn't assume when you said that my points were 'bogus' that you were attempting to attack me. I assumed that you were, you know, putting forward a point. I didn't say that the US was less powerful than Venezuela, but I've already stated what my position is on that.

I have to go right now but I'll be back later and finish that thought.

And I'm not pretending I didn't say something. I'm letting you know that you're being oversensitive and blowing what I'm saying out of proportion.

[K-W]

39. So you just posted random thoughts as replies to my post.

Having nothing to do with the contents of my posts, even though you phrased them as counterarguments?

Even now, when you admit you saw my post as defeatist you still have the gall to claim that your comment in a reply to the very same post about defeatism wasnt directed at me?

The fact of the matter is that while there is good reason to hope that Chavez will be able to effect lasting change, history and a sober analysis of geopolitics clearly show that Chavez is a David to the US Goliath, and while David did win that fight, he wasnt the favorite.

This is a fact that Chavez himself aknowledges. He openly admits that he is trying something that seems impossible, yet you claim that the odds are on him. Frankly I think he has a better read on the situation than you do.

[aneerkoinos]

63. LOL

Both of you, greatest danger against success of Bolivarian revolution is not US, but - What also Chavez constantly warns of - that the revolution becomes infested with petty and tedious infighting that stops creative dialogue, and thus the dialectic of the revolutionary movement. ;)

There can be no real socialist revolution without also spiritual evolution, deeper understanding of ourselves and others, and that there is no real boundary between but only compassion.

[GirlinContempt]

74. I agree.

I think Lenin was the first to start saying that. But we also can't stifle discussion based on it. We have to draw a line between fighting and debate.

[GirlinContempt]

73. For them to not be directly

attacking you, does not mean they are random. It means I took what you said, and then broadened it to include more than just your specific points. I said your post sounded a little defeatist, though I wouldn't call you a defeatist. Later posts would reflect that I took that feeling, and broadened it to make my points. I tend to do that in interviews and during speaking, as it's generally more effective for informational purposes of the stance that I'm presenting.
Re. Lax. I have no interest in fighting with you. I'm not going to continue to try and explain my position. I even said I was sorry. So, either drop it, or argue with yourself.

[aneerkoinos]

51. You are right

But first where I think you are wrong, there is no need to overestimate US power vis-a-viz Venezuela. Venezuela alone holds similar leverage over US oil addiction as did all of OPEC in seventies, US economy is giant on clay feet, military over-stretched and funded on debt, and Bolivarian revolution enjoyes wide sympathy and admiration among all the people in Latin America, including most of leaders. If US steps over the Rubicon, it has still enough power to do enormous damage to Venezuela, but Bolivarian revolution has the potential to respond in way that has good chances of collapsing US economically - and morally. Chile is not a good analogy, it had no oil and most of its neighbours were military dictatorships and US puppets.

Now, I agree that by necessity the Bolivarian revolution takes its pace and cannot be hurried by force - not by masses, not by political leadership, but must develop organically, dialectically. Because, WHAT A REVOLUTION IT IS! I'm becoming more and more convinced that is the first serious attempt of democratic and peacefull transition from oligarchic capitalism to democratic socialism, and it looks like Bolivarian revolution has a fair chance to pull that amazing stunt of!

To make that right, it takes time, at least a generation. First the people must learn to read, get basic education for all, get decent health care and livelihood, give equal opportunity to higher education for all, given access and control to people powered media, and for that new parallel people powered systems have to be invented and build from scratch and old public and private systems, infested with stagnated bureacrats, oligarchic interests, class contempt and racism, have to be first bypassed, then made needless by the superiority of new systems. Democratic control must be established in all institutions and oligarchic power bases disarmed. This is slow process, but so far its been going extremely well and seems to continue that way.

Next target seems to be capping the power of Central Bank, in what on surfece appears a technical matter about better use of forex funds, but I suspect - and hope - a start of a long process that ultimately will bring whole banking system under direct democratic control. The hallmark of definite transition from capitalism to socialism. It's a long way there, and there are zillion things to do before that, but from the barrage of news it seems Bolivarian revolution has now stepped on the gas, after gathering critical amount of mass and momentum.

[Darranar]

56. But the US has. A bit of sunlight through the clouds. n/t

[Darranar]

60. There already was a coup against Chavez. It failed. n/t

[Warpy]

8. Oh, boy, here comes the scream of "COMMUNISM!!!"

followed by an appeal to the rich man squatting in the White House to bail the rich out and let them keep their land idle but owned and out of the hands of the hungry.

It always happens this way in this hemisphere, over and over, a democratically elected reformer starts to do some timid land reforms, and the US ends up either invading or supporting a rich man's hired army to do the job with US weapons and technology.

I'm sick of it. How about the rest of you?

[Roland99]

9. I bet Negroponte is drooling over the thought of renewed death squads.

[GirlinContempt]

10. The scream has come and continues to come

The coup failed. The demonization continues to fail within the country. The people are too strong to be dominated.

It's time to fight back and support working alternatives to capitalistic imperialist controlled states!

[reprobate]

48. Yep. We invaded latin america 52 times in the last centuty.

[Robbien]

11. "Workers are cutting sugar cane on fields that once lay fallow

stitching together T-shirts at state-funded cooperatives and building thousands of homes to replace shantytowns.

. . .

But his supporters are cheering him on, arguing that no president in Venezuela's modern history has given so much to the poor.

"Before it was the rich who benefited from oil. Now oil is helping a lot of people," said William Riascos, a 31-year-old cutting sugar cane on fields planted by the state oil company outside the western town of Sabaneta, where Chavez was born. "Here there used to be nothing. Now there is all of this," Riascos said, sweeping a hand across a vast expanse of cane. Under Chavez, the state oil company Petroleos de Venezuela SA spent more than $3.7 billion last year on social and agricultural programs, housing and other public projects -- about a third of its earnings.

. . .

The state oil company is paying to build medical clinics and support government "missions," ranging from adult education programs to state-run markets. The government says oil money helped build 15,000 homes for the poor in 2004, and this year 120,000 more are planned.

Across the country, oil proceeds are flowing to about 130 centers with agricultural and industrial cooperatives. One center, built at an abandoned fuel depot in Caracas, has a sign over the gate that reads, "Venezuela: Now It Belongs to Everyone." It includes a farming cooperative, shoe factory and textile plant.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/5403064.html

[MasonJar]

12. The man is a true democratic ideal; take that neo-cons.

[K8-EEE]

13. Will Piss Off "Conservatives" More Than The Torture In Uzbekistan

Oh for sure, now we're talking about a threat to all the acreage Eternal Father Rev. Moon bought to build The Ideal World!

[Ouabache]

14. He may be following an Argentinian example, expropriation

by worker and farmer cooperatives.

A Good Movie that I recently watched is 'The Take'.

Produced by CBC and Naomi Klein of the Nation was one of the principles involved in it. A good documentary about Argentinian Cooperatives forming from the grassroots and taking possession of idled factories. (Idled by Globalization). The efforts in Argentina are strting with the workers and moving UP. Looks like Chavez is just taking the principle and applying starting from the top. As long as he really puts the power to run them in the hands of the cooperatives, and it sounds to me like he will. Imagine no managerial class, everyone earning the same salary or maybe 3 different salaries within the co-op, and eveything is voted on ! Democratic Managerial decisions. It works. Another world is possible.

[GirlinContempt]

18. The laws were passed in

'99, he's just finally enforcing them at least a little bit. The number of small farms and coops in Venezuela has grown enormously since '96.

[aneerkoinos]

22. from bottom to UP

That's the story in Venezuela too. There were factories idled by the general lockout, when the owning class shoot its own leg, taken over by workers. Venezuelan governement seems more ready for this than Kirchner, and adopting same system for state owned factories. There seems to be quite a lot of joint worker-governement management going on.

[Karenina]

28. Now all they need to do is start planting

LOTS OF HEMP!!!! It's quite a useful plant doncha know?

[killbotfactory]

16. This is an insult to social darwinism and the holy free market!

Err...

This is an insult to social "intelligent design" and the holy free market!

We must stop this monster immediately! BushCo to the rescue.

[HeeBGBz]

17. Rock on, Venezuela!

Wish you were here.

[murray hill farm]

25. Chavez gives us all something...

he gives humanity everywhere..a chance to believe again in the goodness and the potential for goodness that can be...if a country has a leader such as this great man.

[underthedome]

26. Why is this action supported in this thread?

Would you be okay if the U.S. government found out that you weren't using all the rooms in your home and decided to give them to the homeless? I don't support such measures and don't understand why you people do.

[GirlinContempt]

31. Right. Venezuela should leave

productive land in the hands of rich elitists who are letting it sit and do nothing while 70% of the population lives in abject poverty and has nothing to eat. While the prices of their food go through the ROOF because so much of their farm-able land is unused, and they have to import over 80% of their edibles.
Yes. Exactly. That makes perfect sense.
It doesn't matter what you or I support, the people of Venezuela decided on this law, and they're getting what they asked for. It only applies to lands that aren't being used.
I have the same type of law in the city where i live. If you own a building downtown and you do nothing with it for a couple of years, the city takes it from you and puts it to productive use.

[underthedome]

38. Lets make a law that lets the homeless use rooms in your house

If they aren't being "productively used", after all we don't want people to sleep in the streets.

What city do you live in? Is there compensation when the city takes away someones property?

[Judi Lynn]

44. You're beating a dead horse here. DU'ers have been through this

over and over again.

Compensation is officially correct. It's part of the arrangement if the owner has legal proof of ownership. There are a few owners in Venezuela who have expanded their areas to include land which was never actually purchased.

Don't have time to look up the references you would need to have the accurate picture. It's surely available for anyone, through an internet search, who wants to deal with, rather than hastily formed opinions based on right-wing propaganda created to provide bogus rationales for insipid citizens who wet themselves at the prospect of destroying another designated "enemy," no matter how contrived and downright obnoxious the charges, of the U.S.

[underthedome]

47. Forming my opinions on this subject based on whats in this thread

And if you can't site anything further then don't bother correcting me without facts.

[Judi Lynn]

75. Thanks to Robien you have a much better supply of information

available from other threads in which DU'ers participated some time ago. He lists three separate excellent threads.

Here's something I posted in the first thread he mentioned. It CITES the following:

The Land Reform law provides for expropriation with compensation of idle farmlands, as well as arable lands exceeding 12,350 acres in areas of poor soil (350 acres in areas of rich soil), to be redistributed to landless workers. It is also important to note (though Hadden doesn't) that in the 1960's big landowners and ranchers expanded their fences to expropriate most of the state-owned marshlands the government intended for redistribution. Current stats on land concentration are appalling: One percent of farms account for 46% of farmland, one percent of the population owns 60% of arable lands, and 40% of all Venezuelan farmlands lie fallow. As a result, Venezuela is agronomically undiversified and chronically dependent on oil and imports, while the urban population has exploded, causing crime, unemployment, and pollution rates to soar. Even the middle-class Chavez foes I spoke to said the need for land reform is a no-brainer. Does this make them Castro-communists? The mere suggestion is ludicrous.
(snip/...)

http://www.counterpunch.org/carlton01112003.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It still would be helpful if you take the time YOURSELF, just as we all do, to start your own investigation to prepare you to take part in adult conversations on the subject.

It won't help to check in to offer your opinion alone, if that opinion is fact-free.

[AP]

46. If it was their house originally and you got it by force and/or exploita-

tion, that might not be a bad idea -- especially, if it means giving it back is going to create more wealth for the community (rather than for rich people overseas).

[underthedome]

49. I agree, except Venezuela is going after legit land owners as well. *nm

nm

[AP]

53. Actually, I don't think that's the case. I believe they are considering...

...chain of title in addition to whether the land is being used.

But the fact that you can afford not to use land that would be productive is a pretty good sign that you didn't pay fair market value when you aquired it.

[killbotfactory]

33. What, like with "eminent domain"?

It's not as simple as you make it.
----
The Facts Regarding Chavez’s Land Reform
The Venezuelan leader first articulated his land reform plan, what he calls "Vuelta al Campo," (Return to the Countryside) under the Law on Land and Agricultural Development in November 2001. The goals of this legislation were as follows: to set limits on the size of landholdings, tax unused property as an incentive to spur agricultural growth, redistribute unused, primarily government-owned land to peasant families and cooperatives and, lastly, expropriate uncultivated and fallow land from large, private estates for the purpose of redistribution. On the last and most controversial goal, the landowners would be compensated for their land at market value. The National Land Institute (INTI) was set up to facilitate achieving these goals by establishing criteria to determine what land could be redistributed and the eligibility of those applying for new land deeds. Under Plan Zamora of 2003, both the INTI and its sister organizations, the National Rural Development Institute and the Venezuelan Agricultural Organization, have been tasked to administer agricultural expertise to the new peasant landowners and to provide markets for their goods. After a slow start, the Chavez government has redistributed about 2.2 million hectares of state owned land to more than 130,000 peasant families and cooperatives (1 hectare = 2.47 acres). So far, although not one acre of private property has been expropriated by the government, tensions are beginning to mount as Chavez extends his reform program from government-owned land to the latifundios (large, privately owned estates of more than 5,000 hectares, roughly 12,350 acres).

http://www.rethinkvenezuela.com/news/03-01-05coha.html

[ret5hd]

34. it's more like...

if a corrupt gov't had assisted a corrupt elite in using eminent domain to steal homes from the rightful owners and then years later a reform government decided to give the homes back to the rightful owners.

don't be a corporate tool...do your research.

[K-W]

35. Because we believe in freedom and democracy, while you dont.

Nobody has taken rooms from anyones homes, your hyperbole is uninformative.

[underthedome]

37. No they have taken land that is "not used productively". & I disagree

with it. This could be easily abused to get back at those who disagree with gov. polices.


And Freedom doesn't mean stealing land to give to the poor Robin Hood.

[Robbien]

41. They are only reclaiming lands so far

which are idle and the current rich squatters could not prove ownership (i.e. power elites grabbed the land back in the late 1800's and early 1900's). If they could prove ownership, the law provides payment for any land reclaimed.

That's a better deal than what we are getting by the oil and timber companies who are grabbing our public land in our national parks and reserves.

[underthedome]

45. It doesn't state that in the article, can you cite your source?

The article does not state that they are only taking land away from those who can't provide ownership, could you cite your source?

[AP]

55. I can confirm this -- if you look in the archives there's an article about

this. Chain of title is one of the considerations.

[Robbien]

66. Yes, there are several really good threads here at DU

which include links to the Venezuelan land reclamation law.

for instance
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1334709
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1135089
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=789652

and there is this article which outlines how these rich elites grabbed the land in a power grab
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1157

[K-W]

43. Right, you support tyranical economic arrangements,

where individuals based on family linneage and social maneuvering get to control the resources of a nation at the expense of the majority of the people. You are indeed against freedom, and yes, freedom does mean taking the power from the unelected elites, that is what it has always meant.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[aneerkoinos]

68. Actually

Private ownership of land is stealing. And because land is holy, it is also blasphemy.

Or at least so said the Americans, before White man came and stole the land of People.

[AP]

50. If those rich landowners didn't agree with the gov't before they lost...

their land, they're going to disagree afterwards (unless they're in a business that benefits from a big, wealthy middle class of Venezuelans) and I'm not sure if trying to make them happy is going to be the sin qua non of this being good policy.

And "Freedom" definitely didn't mean taking the land from poor, indigenous people at the point of a gun or with disproportionate political and military power.

[mitchtv]

76. it appears to me as if they are practicing agrarian reform

breaking up the latifundias of the oligarchy and returning it to the people. The current owners conicidentally , I'm sure are opponents of the present government. as for your nonsenual ano=alogy to unused rooms in our homes., I wouldn't object to takeover of unused buildings abandoned in cities where the "owners" allow them to deteriorate for tax or rent control reasons. The giant mothball fleet in the bay area could be used also.

[AP]

40. If people with guns and a lot of money moved into your town, took all

the land, let 90% produce no income (and create no jobs or wealth for people who work for a living), and they exported the little bit of wealth the remaining 10% created overseas, and you sat around and saw wealth polarize as result so that the poor got poorer (including you and 85% of the people you knew) and the wealthy got wealthier, wouldn't you pass a law or two which found a reasonable way to fix that problem, like, say, "adverse possession" statutes or eminent domain laws which are on the books of lots of American states.

[underthedome]

65. Of course, and I appreciate your posts and will try to gather more info

on the matter. Thank you. -utd-

[Tinoire]

59. In a nutshell- for the same reason we didn't vote for Bush. n/t

[Darranar]

61. You are totally misunderstanding this law...

If I own a large amount of land, and am only using part of it, then the government should give that part away to the poor.

Frankly, even if I am, there's a good argument for that.

[aneerkoinos]

67. Yes

When Finland lost Karelia to Stalin we had half a million refugees to relocate. It was decided that it's better to take them into homes of those that didn't loose their homes, untill they could have their own homes, and those with land to share land with those who lost their land, rather than to locate them in slums and consentration camps. And that was not possible without coordination at governement level.

[Sandpiper]

70. Ever heard of Adverse Possession?

Look it up and then check back with us.

[shanti]

72. "you people"????

hmmmmmm your analogy sucks.

[Judi Lynn]

30. Gee, if he only had the intelligence and great goodness of W.,

he would take the properties, and create a few large baseball fields! Just think how wealthy a couple or three Venezuelans could be, instead of simply improving the lives of some very poor people Whoa! Swimming pools! Lotsa cars! Tennis courts!

Everyone knows how enjoyment much "the poor" derive from living on the sides of hills, anyway. There's the excitement that comes with hard rains, and mud slides! What about fires that sweep the entire neighborhoods off the face of the map? Nothing heightens the senses like fleeing for your life.

Aw, he should be like W, and create unbelievable wealth for a very tiny number. Or maybe not.

[Tinoire]

54. Lol. Very nice Judi Lynn

:thumbsup:

[Judi Lynn]

62. Hi, Tinoire! Populists really get them going, don't they?

Nothing brings out the fiend in these guys like the thought other @$$####$ somewhere in the world might be losing even a fingernail paring. It moves them to violence!

Have to go, hope to be seeing you again soon. :hi: :hi:

[Judi Lynn]

52. Nothing brings out the fighting spirit in absolute @$$####$ like the idea

a poor person might be getting something he wants for himself. It gets them wild. They completely overlook the need to think things through, and assume everyone is as fatally anal as they are.

They overlook the fact they look at life through twisted perspectives. They reveal more about themselves, all delivered with the prissy snottiness of a pampered child trying to tell on a sibling, than they realize.

[Darranar]

58. ¡Viva Chávez!

May he be imitated.

[KoKo]

69. Everytime I see a post about Chavez...I love him more and more.

He sticks fingers in the "Little Emperor's eye" and shows leadership to all of South America who has suffered for Decades under the Bush/PNAC'ers who have tried to keep South America weakend so it wouldn't be a threat to us.

If I show socialist leanings here in this post, it's because I moved from Democratic Centrist over to the way LEFT seeing what's been going on in those in power in America corrupting our Constitution to destabilze the whole world to subject to the "Globalists."