Venezuela's Chavez calls Obama "ignoramus"

[cali]

Source: Reuters


Sun Mar 22, 2009 3:24pm EDT

(Reuters) - Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez said on Sunday his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama was at best an "ignoramus" for saying the socialist leader exported terrorism and obstructed progress in Latin America.

"He goes and accuses me of exporting terrorism: the least I can say is that he's a poor ignoramus; he should read and study a little to understand reality," said Chavez, who heads a group of left-wing Latin American leaders opposed to the U.S. influence in the region.

Chavez said Obama's comments had made him change his mind about sending a new ambassador to Washington, after he withdrew the previous envoy in a dispute last year with the Bush administration in which he also expelled the U.S. ambassador to Venezuela.

"When I saw Obama saying what he said, I put the decision back in the drawer; let's wait and see," Chavez said on his weekly television show, adding he had wanted to send a new ambassador to improve relations with the United States after the departure of George W. Bush as president.

<snip>


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52L19G20090322?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

---

Have at it, Chavistas and non-Chavistas.

[Doctor Cynic]

1. Running out of time, running out of money, and running out of a bogeyman.

I know! Make another one!

[Taverner]

3. Hes trying to provoke him

Resist, and open the US to Cuba - that will LITERALLY show him!

[L. Coyote]

36. Remember the Arkansas Project?

The media wa part of the anti-Clinton propaganda war.
This is just more of the same genre liberal bashing,
albeit this is an improvement on shooting us in the heads!

Deja DU: Bush vs. Gore, the 'Arkansas Project,' the USA firings, and the Swiftboat Admiral
Jun-02-07 0 - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1029113

[ShortnFiery]

71. Yes, You make an excellent point. Remember our M$M is NOT free nor fair. n/t

[justinaforjustice]

162. Provocation -- From Whom?

The provocation came from Obama, who publicly castigated Chavez for "Exporting terrorism", a charge that is baseless. Chavez's contacts with the FARC were at the official request of Colombia's president, Uribe, who asked Chavez to negotiate for the release of FARC's Colombian hostages. Chavez did so with much success, although greatly hampered by the U.S.'s equipping a Colombian military team, from its base in Ecuador, which illegally bombed the Ecuadorian camp of the FARC's chief negotiator, thus committing murder, international crimes, and obstructing the release of hostages.

Obama's charge is also almost laughably hypocritical, coming as it does from a country which has done little but foment anti-democratic terrorism and commit international crimes Latin American and around the world for more than the last hundred years.
Is the U.S.'s illegal invasion of Iraq not a terrorist act of the most horrendous proportions?

But, in response, did Chavez even call Obama an ignoramus? No, the translation "ignoramus" is in-exact:

CARACAS, Venezuela — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Sunday called President Barack Obama "ignorant," saying he has a lot to learn about Latin America.

The socialist leader said he had been ready to name a new ambassador in Washington when Obama took office, but put that on hold after the new U.S. president accused him of "exporting terrorism" and being an obstacle to progress in the region.

"At least one could say, 'poor ignorant person,'" Chavez said on his weekly television and radio program, adding that Obama "should read a little bit so that he learns about ... the reality of Latin America

Either President Obama is truly ignorant about Venezuela and relying on the same State Department hacks who wrote Bush administration press releases about Chavez and Venezuela, or he is building Chavez into his own straw man, pandering to right wingers, to prove how tough he is on terrorism. In either case, Obama's accusations against Chavez are patiently false and he should be ashamed of them. Why go out of his way to make scurrilous remarks about the democratically elected president of another country who supplies the U.S. with oil and who has made statements indicating his desire to improve relations with the U.S.?

[EFerrari]

190. Justina, do you think that Obama repeated those remarks to Lula

during their recent meeting, and that's why Chavez is bringing this up again?

[justinaforjustice]

227. I Really Don't Know.

But obviously Chavez was not happy about the report he got from Lula on his meeting with Obama. It seems inexplicable that Obama is going out of his way to attack Chavez as "exporting terrorism" and disrupting Latin America, other than that Obama is using this apparent "toughness" against Chavez to prove he is not the "socialist" that the right wing claims.

It may be that Obama believes that if he shows even basic civility toward Chavez, he will be tarred as an evil Chavista. But, the right wing is going to call him a socialist -- and many things worse -- no matter what he does, so it is a destructive waste of breath to attack Chavez in order to stave off the right. I think Chavez was disposed to be a friend of Obama's, but these baseless attacks are driving him away.

The Venezuelan people were very, very supportive of Obama's election, and it is too bad that Obama is erasing that support by his
factually baseless attacks on Chavez and their country. Everyone here knows that Chavez is not a terrorist and doesn't support terrorism.

He has always acted to avoid violence, even refusing to attack or jail most of the oppositionists who carried out the illegal coup against him in 2002. Indeed, when the coup started, many of his supporters were pleading with him to resist it violently. He refused to do so, saying that armed resistance would cause a blood bath and he wasn't going to see people killed. He actually left the Miraflores Palace peacefully when they arrested him, although he refused to renounce the presidency, despite the fact that his thousands of supporters would have fought to the death for him had he called on them to do so. The thousands of people who took to the streets to demand his return did so peacefully, but there were so many of them that the coup leaders were completely overwhelmed.

In the two years I've been here, I've observed that, in face of deliberately provocative opposition demonstrations against him, Chavez has put the police under extreme restraints prohibiting them from injuring anyone. An inconvenient result of that restraint is that the oppositionists frequently block streets with tire fires in their demonstrations, stopping traffic and greatly inconveniencing the rest of the citizens.

One of the major impetuses to Chavez's revolutionary career was the terrible massacre of more than 2000 people by the Pérez government carried out against innocent protesters in Caracas in 1989, known as "El Caracazo". The protests were triggered by Pérez's imposition of severe International Monetary Fund restrictions.

Chavez organized progressive young officers and soldiers in the military to refuse to act against the people. It was these progressive soldiers, wanting to stop the corruption and repression in the country, who participated in the failed uprising of 1992 for which Chavez took responsibility and was jailed. Up until Chavez's election in 1998, the majority of Venezuelans were very poor and very brutally governed. Chavez, in contrast, has been the very opposite. He is certainly not a dictator by any stretch of the imagination. The majority of the people have an enormous human affection for him.

There is an excellent biography of Chavez's - and Bolivarian Socialism's -- development, titled "Chavez Nuestro" (Our Chavez) by Rosa Mirium Elizaldi and Luis Báez (Havana, 2006), though I'm not sure it has been translated into English. It sheds a great deal
of light on Chavez's roots, actions and ideas. I certainly wish Obama would read it!

[EFerrari]

235. Good points, especially about violence. Yes, I saw how peacefully

he left Miraflores and also have observed how much restraint has been exercised when those brats start setting fires in the streets.

Speaking of books, Obama's remarks about Chavez sound like they're straight out of that horrible Doug Schoen's new book. Thom Hartmann demolished Schoen when he was on his show. I hope Obama's State Department manages to get its act together. Lula didn't sound thrilled about his recent meeting with the president.

[rabs]

236. You are correct that Chavez was not happy

and for that matter, Lula apparently was not either.

From a Brazilian newspaper, the nut graphs: (translation mine)

"Lula foi se reunir com Obama (em Washington) e eu aceitei que fizesse uma intermediação entre nós. Mandei-lhe uma mensagem na qual escrevi todas as declarações contra a Venezuela feitas pelas autoridades da Administração de Obama, entre elas as da sra. (secretária de Estado americana, Hillary) Clinton", disse Chávez.

"Lula went to meet with Obama (in Washington) and I agreed that (Lula) mediate between us. I sent him (Obama) a message in which I wrote all the remarks against Venezuela made by officials of Obama's administration, among them by Hillary Clinton," Chavez said.

O presidente venezuelano, que não deu mais detalhes do conteúdo dessa mensagem, acrescentou que, "infelizmente, Lula saiu insatisfeito com a resposta de Obama".

The Venezuelan president, who did not give more details of the message's content, added "unfortunately, Lula emerged unsatisfied with Obama's response."

"Mediante o que li nas entrelinhas e expressões (da resposta), concluí que Obama sofre de algo que pode ser superado: a ignorância do que acontece de verdade na aqui (América Latina)", disse Chávez.

According to what I read between lines and the expressions (in the response), I concluded that Obama suffers from something that can be overcome; ignorance of what truly occurs (in Latin America), Chavez said.

Segundo o chefe de Estado, essa ignorância se deve ao fato de o presidente dos Estados Unidos "ainda ouvir a mesma coisa que lhe leem alguns assessores do Pentágono e da Casa Branca que serviram à Administração anterior".

According to the head of state, that ignorance is due to the fact that the president of the United States "is still hearing the same thing read to him by some advisors who worked for the previous administration in the Pentagon and the White House.

Full article (Portuguese)

http://portalmaratimba.com/noticias/news2.php?codnot=240391

[EFerrari]

237. The State Department is as polluted as the Justice Department.

Ditto for the Pentagon. It's going to take years to clean up this government if it can be managed at all.

[Judi Lynn]

238. This article from Lula's own country sounds exactly the way the more thoughtful

posters who also read the Spanish version of the news said it was written, and that it was the corporate message formed to mold public perception here which claimed, as always, Chavez was calling someone a name. What we got was a poor translation designed to inflame the slow, and willfully uninformed among us.

If I'm not mistaken I think you also mentioned in an earlier post your own reading of the Spanish articles.s

Isn't this sad? These passages are excellent, from portalmaratimba.com:

According to what I read between lines and the expressions (in the response), I concluded that Obama suffers from something that can be overcome; ignorance of what truly occurs (in Latin America), Chavez said.

And:

According to the head of state, that ignorance is due to the fact that the president of the United States "is still hearing the same thing read to him by some advisors who worked for the previous administration in the Pentagon and the White House.

I remember reading years ago you were in Brazil. I should have realized back then you also are fluent with that language, as well.

Thank you for shedding more and more light on this.

[Andrushka]

254. Actually,

he's been quite reserved considering the sort of comments coming out from the Obama administration about the Chavez government in the last 3 months. Guess he couldn't keep it back any longer.

[David_NSU]

39. Chavez is crazy...

he had a chance to be civil towards the US once again and he blew it

[Peace Patriot]

86. Doing you know what Obama did during his inauguration week, David_NSU?

If you know what Chavez is reacting to, then you know that it was Obama who had a chance to be civil to Chavez and he blew it.

[EFerrari]

93. Do you have a ref, Peace Patriot? Because I remember that

but have lost the text.

[IndianaGreen]

112. When has the US ever been civil to the people of Latin America?

Do you even have a clue as to what America has done in Latin America?

Question: Where is the biggest terrorist training camp within the United States?

[WriteDown]

2. Chavez has shown me the light...

I guess we can right this down as gospel. :sarcasm:

[L. Coyote]

34. George Bush Sr. May Face Charges: Conspiring to Kidnap and Murder Political Activists

Yes, Chavez and Latin Americans are reacting to organized political murder of liberals and social activists.

Check out 160 some posts here if you are an Ignoramus about this issue:
==================
Deja DU: George Bush Sr. May Face Charges: Conspiring to Kidnap and Murder Political Activists
Dec-12-07 - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2459135

Plan Condor: Crimes Without Borders in Latin America
Marie Trigona - 12 Dec 2007 - http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1042/1

Former military dictator Jorge Rafael Videla and 16 other military leaders in Argentina will be prosecuted on charges of conspiring to kidnap and kill political activists in a scheme known as Plan Condor, developed by Henry Kissinger and George Bush Sr., head of the CIA at the time. Dictators in Uruguay, Chile, Paraguay, Brazil, and Argentina killed opponents in the 1970s and 80s under the plan, also known as Operation Condor. The United States and Latin American military governments developed Operation Condor as a a transnational, state-sponsored terrorist coalition among the militaries of South America. In Argentina alone some 30,000 people were disappeared as result, leaving loved ones to seek justice decades later.

Coordinating Terror with U.S. support

Plan Condor began with the U.S. supported military coup against Chile's democratically elected socialist president, Salvador Allende. Allende's government was targeted as a threat to U.S. strategic policy in Latin America early on. White House tapes reveal that on Sept. 14, 1970, then-President Richard Nixon ordered measures to force the Chilean economy into bankruptcy. "The U.S. will not accept a Marxist government just because of the irresponsibility of the Chilean people," declared Henry Kissinger, Nixon´s secretary of State.

Declassified U.S. Department of State documents have provided evidence to Plan Condor's broad scope. The Operation was an ambitious and successful plan to coordinate repression internationally. FBI special agent intelligence liason to the Southern Cone countries Robert Scherrer (now deceased) sent the letter to the U.S. embassy in Argentina on September 28, 1976: "'Operation Condor' is the code name for the collection, exchange and storage of intelligence data concerning so-called 'leftists,' communists and Marxists, which was recently established between cooperating intelligence services in South America in order to eliminate Marxist terrorist activities in the area."

The memo also specified Argentina's enthusiasm over the plan. "Members of 'Operation Condor' showing the most enthusiasm to date have been Argentina, Uruguay and Chile. The latter three countries have engaged in joint operations, primarily in Argentina, against the terrorist target." Operation Condor has been difficult to investigate, due to the selectivity of victims and lack of official declassified documents from the CIA and Department of State. Many of the documents that have been released have been heavily censored. However, following an extensive investigation by Argentine courts beginning in 1999 and the decade long work of human rights groups to collect forensic evidence, 17 military leaders will be put on trial for their participation in the illegal persecution of social activists.

............

[Freddie Stubbs]

150. George Bush Sr.?

How can we take the author seriously if she doesn't know the name of the person she is writing the article about?

[AlphaCentauri]

64. Thanks God the US has never promote terrorism

:sarcasm:

Brazil urges US not to interfere in Latin America


President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva used his weekly radio address on Monday to ask the White House to develop fresh Latin ties based on a "vision of partnership and not interference, of contribution and not intervention."

"I am convinced that the United States can definitely have another sort of relationship with Latin America," said Lula on Monday, after a Saturday meeting with US President Barack Obama in Washington, Xinhua reported.

Lula, who has not yet wrapped up his US trip, said Latin American countries and the US should join forces to tackle the global economic firestorm.

Lula, speaking at a Wall Street Journal-sponsored investment forum in New York, also insisted that the United States should lift Cuba sanctions, noting the controversial measure makes no sense in the 21st Century.

"There is nothing any more from the political perspective, from sociological perspective, from the humanitarian perspective that impedes the reestablishment of relations between the United States and Cuba," Lula said.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article159387.html

[Judi Lynn]

185. Well chosen, accurate words from Lula. Thanks for adding his informed, valuable comments. n/t

[EFerrari]

198. Judi Lynn, do you think Obama repeated the Bush State Dept talking points to Lula

during that meeting? I'm beginning to think that's what happened.

[Judi Lynn]

205. Haven't seen one word written about it. Not one. Sure would like to know,

since he's conducting our foreign policy in our names.

He hasn't made the slightest step away from that entrenched bully, dominator position which everyone knows is going to be going on a radical diet, once its constant feeding on Latin American forced submission and exploitation becomes curtailed. That shift is inevitable, only the blindest of the blind don't see it yet.

They don't want to go through their past over and over again. Too expensive in destroyed lives, broken people. They don't want it. What sane man/woman could hold it against them, after all?

Some U.S. President's going to have to face reality, and start acting civilized as our national leader, and treat Latin American leaders with honest respect, not just the one fascist Uribe, and his bitterly insufficient but obsequious collegue, Alan Garcia in Peru.

All I've heard of that meeting was that they expect to continue the conversation at the upcoming summit in April. What about you?

[EFerrari]

206. Well, the premise of this report about Chavez is that he got a report

from Lula and that's why he made these comments. It could be pure fiction but then again, it could be dead on. Hard to see any other reason for those unfortunate comments to be brought up again. :shrug:

[Judi Lynn]

211. I've looked around a while, and still can't find any real news on what was discussed.

It looked as if Lula da Silva and Chavez both had a bit of hope a lot of misunderstandings could be cleared up in that meeting. They had actually seemed optomistic about Lula's trip earlier in the month.

It doesn't look as if that happened, does it?

[EFerrari]

95. The word is "write". And you can also stop attending your grad classes on Latin America

which I'm sure will be a huge relief to you.

[No Elephants]

129. Obama is no ignoramus. However, whether or not Obama blew an opportunity with

Chavez (or vice versa) is probably neither gospel nor apochryphal, but something in between.

[w4rma]

4. Anyone who says Chavez exports terrorism *is* an ignoramus. I have not seen one act of terrorism

come out of that country since Chavez was elected President.

[ailsagirl]

5. And anyone who calls our President that is an ignorant SOB

Even the repugs don't resort to that!!

:puke:

[Bacchus39]

6. yes, and here what President Obama was referring to

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sEWDlTirWU

Chavez denying supporting the FARC after venerating the FARC.

Chavez is a disgusting pig. the meeting in Trinidad next month should be interesting though.

[AlphaCentauri]

66. Venezuelans Exiles: Parallels between Barack Obama and Hugo Chavez

Any one wonders how the Oligarch living in the US voted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgCI7fuIRRw

[EFerrari]

74. The point is too subtle for the people who read headlines

and never wonder where they came from. Of course the anti-Chavez Venezuelans were also anti-Obama. That's rocket science if I ever saw it.

[AlphaCentauri]

83. Are they the same who now say nobody mess with my president?

but want him to fail

[EFerrari]

88. What are you ref'ing, Alpha?

I checked out for most of the day and started learning Pipil (Nawat).

And, hey! Xipe Totec is a Corn Goddess among us and I NEVER knew! lol :hi:

[AlphaCentauri]

98. since we are at it

I'm referring to the center-right democ... }(

here are two more words in Nahuatl

Macehualtin: left wing peasants, farm workers, labors, teachers, doctors,

Pipiltin: CEO's (like AIG's executives), Bankers, Investors

you got the idea ;)

[EFerrari]

103. Pipiltin. I'll remember that one.

}(

[AlphaCentauri]

108. There is one name I like a lot

ITZEL: Rainbow Lady

:)

[EFerrari]

113. x!

[No Elephants]

133. I have not seen them saying "Don't mess with my President," only that someone

further left than our President is a POS in general.

If you read the posts, you can pick out those on this thread who probably have a lot more in common with Freepers than they do with DUers.

[Judi Lynn]

7. Don't think you can tell Democrats what Republicans call the President.

We know for ourselves what he's been called by the filthy right-wingers.

Democrats tend to read a lot more than Republicans, and Republican posters.

[dipsydoodle]

12. Something has probably got lost in translation.

You'd need to quote the exact word he use. Find out what it was before you jump on your high horse.

[Peace Patriot]

101. Good point, Dipsydoodle. Chavez has been mistranslated before.

And this is a Rotters report. They as as bad as the Associated Pukes and the Wall Street Urinal. They would most certainly misquote Chavez to stir up trouble, and try to prevent fairer and more just U.S. policy in Latin America--the global corporate predator rape and ruin playground. But Chavez is a blunt man, as I discuss below. And he has reason to feel injured in this case. Obama seems to be following the Bushwhack "divide and conquer" strategy which was a colossal failure. Isn't that the definition of insanity? To keep doing something that has been a colossal failure? I am hoping that "failsafe" has not been reached, continuing the Bushwhack insane course to a point beyond which good U.S./Latin American relations are irretrievable.

[No Elephants]

145. Not only misquotes or bad translations. Sometimes, media simply makes up

stuff from whole cloth. You want, at a minimum, a direct quote. Things like "So and so said" or "So and so broke a promise," etc. is very likely to be bs, utterly devoid of truth or basis. In the first example, you want at least one direct quote. In the second example, you want at least two direct quotes (the exact wording of original promise and also of the statement that supposedly recanted the original promise). Without direct quotes, don't even bite.

And, yes, if the source is in a foreign language, you want that, too. If nothing else, remember Hillary and her "reset" button. And that was not even the corporate media (or intentional). That was the U.S., making an effort to be lighthearted, but accurate.

[AlphaCentauri]

65. No body is perfect even the president may ignore some facts about latin america

I understand that president Obama could be speaking for what he was toll by third parties, knowing that Univision is a run by RW republicans he probably was trying to please that political sector.

[Peace Patriot]

96. Chavez is a blunt man. I wouldn't descibe Obama as an ignoramus. But

Chavez certainly has a right to. He is the one who was wronged, by Obama's interview on a rightwing corpo 'news' monopoly during his inauguration week, following some Bushwhack script about Chavez loving "terrorists" and being "bad for the progress of the region." Both things are wrong--untruthful, uninformed. So I would call Obama ignorant of South American events and trends, badly misinformed and very ill-served by someone, probably partly the Bushwhack holdovers in the State Dept., the foreign service and the CIA. Latin America has obviously been on Obama's "backburner," and that is understandable, considering what he has had to deal with his first two months in office (the Bushwhacks' Financial 9/11, and two wars). But Latin American policy has suffered, and somebody--or several parties--have been creating problems where there don't need to be problems. I would call that broadcast a major blunder. It was designed to provoke Chavez, and it did. Now Obama is stuck with that, unless he does something dramatic to reverse it. He has inflicted further injury on an elected president--not to mention a very popular president within Venezuela and throughout the region, including many Chavez friends and allies among South America's leaders--who was the target of Bushwhack assassination and coup plots. It must seem to Chavez that Obama agrees with that Rumsfeldian shit. And it is up to Obama to change that impression, unless he isinto that shit. Ignoramus, no. Ignorant, apparently. And making what may be grievous mistakes in Latin American foreign policy, basically pitting the U.S. against the vast majority of Latin Americans, once again.

[The abyss]

217. Peace Patriot – as always excellent analysis!

Question, if I may. Judi posted this story:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3796539

Not much in the way of comments, as of yet. I am wondering if there is not a linkage here? A kind of “good cop” “bad cop” approach in attempting to change the US historical approach to SA?

Yes/No/Maybe?



Thanks!

[No Elephants]

130. Anyone who calls Obama an ignoramus is wrong. However, Repugs have called

Obama that and a lot worse. Surprised a Democrat would say otherwise, but maybe you simply run into Repugs that post more civilly than the ones I run into. That's why I stopped posting where they are welcome to post. Then I learned some of the morans post here regularly.

I don't blame Rethugs for wanting to post with Democrats, but they don't belong here. Amoong other things, it's very dishonest to post on a Democratic board if you are not a Democrat. And they certainly don't fool anyone.

[L. Coyote]

23. If Obama said this he IS an ignoramus!

In a January interview with Spanish-language U.S. network Univision,
Obama said Chavez had hindered progress in Latin America, accusing him
of exporting terrorist activities and supporting Colombian guerrillas.

But, who trusts Reuters?

[No Elephants]

134. Or AP? Or UPI? Yet, they are going to supply most or all of the

actual national and international news. Newspapers are dropping like flies and those that remain mostly reprint stories from the wire services, as do Internet sources--at least the Internet sources that don't simple make up their stories.

It's a brave, new world into which we are entering and I don't like it.

[IndianaGreen]

84. The actual quote was 'pobre ignorante' according to Venezuelan press

Chavez did not call Obama an ignoramus, but an ignorant poor man.

Chávez califica a Obama de "pobre ignorante" y lo manda a leer

http://politica.eluniversal.com/2009/03/22/pol_ava_chavez-califica-a-ob_22A2264093.shtml

[wroberts189]

8. This is so mind boggling...does Venezuela really deserve to be our enemy?

do they have nukes? where is the threat ? We buy billions in oil from them and they have even helped our own poor with lower heating bills.

[w4rma]

9. We are wasting a huge opportunity by not allying with Venezuela. (nt)

[Bacchus39]

10. yeah, Obama can simply ignore Chavez. Chavez is just a big fat baby crying for attention n/t

s

[ohio2007]

17. Huge ego still pissed Obama keeps the weapons embargo in place against him

And after Chavez 'ordered' the price of oil cut from $60 to $40 bbl while the US laughed at his 'openness' to hosting Russian bombers


http://english.eluniversal.com/2009/03/17/en_pol_art_us-made-light-of-rus_17A2257417.shtml

[Grinchie]

51. Venezuela buys huge amounts of food from the U.S.

Except they will not grow GMO crops in Venezuela. I wonder how they get around not getting GMO food from America.

[tavalon]

168. That's why they make such a good enemy

No danger to the U.S.

"pobre ignorante". I'm glad someone grabbed the actual words. That isn't ignoramus.

[EFerrari]

244. It just occurred to me that while China is destroying Tibet

Hillary Clinton said, on her last visit, that she wasn't broaching the issue of human rights. But both Clinton and Obama has now repeated the Bush bs that Chavez supports terrorism, an accusation for which there is no shred of evidence. Unreal.

[tavalon]

245. Strawmen need to not be able to nuke us out of existence

Besides, we've used the Central and South American countries as our whipping boys for so long, it's hard to break the pattern.

[stillcool]

11. I wouldn't call Obama an ignoramus..

I'd call him a company man, or an American President following tradition.

[tavalon]

169. I like the phrase, "reluctant populist".

I think it hits the nail on the head.

[mecherosegarden]

13. and Chavez is one big "stupidamus"

me...

[zbdent]

14. this will be fun to watch ... the Repukes suddenly saying nice things about

Chavez ... after painting him as just slightly more evil than Satan ...

[No Elephants]

139. IMO, it's more likely, they will just bash Chavez without saying anything good about

Obama. At least, that's what the usual suspects have been doing on this thread.

[tuvor]

15. Did he really, really, really call Obama "an ignoramus"?

'Cause not all reports mention it. In fact, only two do:

http://news.google.ca/news?pz=1&ned=ca&hl=en&q=obama+chavez+ignoramus

For example, from the International Herald Tribune:

Chavez: Obama seems to lack knowledge on region

CARACAS, Venezuela: Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said President Barack Obama doesn't seem to know much about what's going on in Latin America.

Chavez made the remark in clips of an interview with Al-Jazeera shown late Friday, also saying Brazil's president came away from his recent talks with Obama not entirely pleased.

"What I read between the lines," Chavez said, is that "Obama has for now — and that can be overcome — a great lack of knowledge about what's really going on here" in Latin America.

The Venezuelan leader also said he thinks Obama "is still reading the same garbage the advisers pass on to him." He told the pan-Arab TV channel that Obama seems to be taking advice from many of the same officials who worked under former President George Bush.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/03/21/news/LT-Venezuela-Chavez-US.php

Sorry, Reuters, I smell bullshit.

[daleo]

18. Technically, ignoramus just means "ignorant person"

Yet it obviously has a much more pejorative sound than just saying someone is revealing his ignorance of a given subject. It may be that someone decided to translate this speech as provocatively as possible.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ignoramus

[ohio2007]

20. ..and not to be confused with "dances with morons"

splitting hairs to cover some translaters ass?

Hugo threw out US diplomats so the writing is on the wall, he doesn't want to lose a straw man

[EFerrari]

26. So did Nicaragua, Ecuador and Bolivia. I guess Chavez made them do it!

You slay me. lol

[bgr1938]

38. i have to agree

with eferrari on this. chavez calls them as he sees them,but in this Case it was probably mis-translated, someone trying to stir the pot. can't have President obama making friends with President chavez. no no no

[EFerrari]

43. Chavez is always reported this way. I bet you most people here

who jump on these threads couldn't name the leader of Ecuador or Bolivia. The corporate media has done a pretty good job of making him a negative figure. Here's a good article on that topic:

The New York Times Versus Chavez

May 23rd 2006, by Greg Grandin - CounterPunch.org

You can tell that the US-led campaign against Hugo Chávez has reached a critical stage when the New York Times starts providing rhetorical cover for Condoleezza Rice's and Donald Rumsfeld's increasingly desperate efforts to isolate the Venezuelan president.

Chile's center-left president Michelle Bachelet -- who Rice name-drops every chance she gets to prove she can have socialist friends -- just last week warned Washington not to "demonize" Chávez. Yet despite this endorsement from Latin America's most lauded reformer, the Times on Saturday ran a 1300-word, front-page hatchet job by Juan Forero titled "Seeking United Latin America, Venezuela's Chávez Is a Divider; Some Neighbors Resent His Style as Meddlesome."

The article quotes seven sources, all openly anti-Chávez save for Brazil's president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Lula, like Bachelet, has repeatedly defended his Venezuelan counterpart against Washington. But Forero ignores this support, instead choosing to cherry-pick through Lula's public statements to find, and take out of context, a rare criticism.

Other supposedly objective comments come from the center-right -- NYU's Jorge Castañeda -- to the Right-Right -- Johns Hopkin's Riordan Roett -- of the political spectrum. Its worth noting that Roett's primary claim to fame was a 1995 memo he wrote while an emerging-market consultant to Chase Manhattan Bank urging the Mexican government to "eliminate the Zapatistas" and to slowdown democratic reforms. Now that's "meddlesome."

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1755

[Bacchus39]

44. do you support Obama or Chavez? n/t

s

[Grinchie]

53. It's a small world, I support them both.

Why on earth would anyone want to do otherwise.

[AlphaCentauri]

73. Re-pugs, divide and conquer

in post #66 there is a video where RW nuts compare Obama and Hugo Chavez, at first they did not Obama to win then they are trying to create discrepancies between the two countries.

[tavalon]

170. We have been one of central and south Americas biggest problems

I don't blame them for throwing us out on our asses.

[tuvor]

21. I agree with your hunch.

I'm having trouble taking any news item at face value anymore. Probably should have adopted that attitude years ago, but better late than never, I guess.

[tkmorris]

24. Exactly so. This sort of thing exasperates me.

Of course, you have only to look at several of the posts above yours to see why they do it. It works. So many Americans have already decided what they want to believe (in this case that Chavez is a dictator, that he steals elections, eats babies, etc.), all they need is someone to give them justification for it. It doesn't need to be true, hardly anyone is going to check anyway.

Honestly though, as the President of a nation that was unjustly accused of exporting terrorism, I wouldn't blame him if he did say exactly what was claimed. It's an outrageous accusation to have leveled against Venezuela.

[EFerrari]

55. Today, some posters were upset because Obama was asked if he was punch drunk.

:shrug:

[dixiegrrrrl]

30. thank you.

[L. Coyote]

32. OF COURSE NOT!

[Zhade]

46. Yup. More bullshit.

Figures.

[roody]

16. Why did Obama say those ignorant things?

rhetorical question

[ohio2007]

19. Maybe Chavez will 'challenge' Obama to a bowling match next month in Trinidad

and settle the he said she said tiff once and for all

[L. Coyote]

22. Reuters = Propaganda

"Chavez, who heads a group of left-wing Latin American leaders..." What BS.

They don't need a leader to be "opposed to the U.S. influence in the region".

What a horrid piece of journalism.

[EFerrari]

25. Peace Patriot calls them "Rotters" and she's right. n/t

[EFerrari]

27. 'Way to post flame bait, cali. n.t

[cali]

29. guilty as charged

I think the Chavez wars are the most amusing thing on DU.

[Reterr]

40. The Chavez wars on DU are stupid and completely unproductive

Chavez is fucking annoying as are arguments on both sides of this. I am not sure why anyone cares about this dude enough to flame on about him and I am not sure why anyone would purposely want to start a flame war based on Chavez and give the mods more crap to clean up.

Isn't posting flame-bait against the rules anyway?

[L. Coyote]

50. Chavez is not

annoying! Isn't posting flame-bait against the rules?

[Grinchie]

56. Cause he's got oil, and is nationalizing the Big Corporate Interests

Which is in his right as a leader of a Sovereign country.

I puts the idiotic policies of the CIA in their respective place.

[EFerrari]

41. So you've said over and over and over. In fact, that's usually

the sum of your contribution. How nice for you to find the war on democracy in Latin America so entertaining! It must be a relief to the insects and small animals in your neighborhood.

[cali]

123. yes, yes. finding the silly battles over Chavez

here funny is de facto evidence that I pull the wings off flies. Sorry, it's not. And face it, virtually everything posted here about Chavez is flamebait to those who worship him and those who loath him.

[No Elephants]

136. Well, at least we've had a demonstration of the difference between classic trolling

and having a sense of humor. No one with a sense of humor would have responded to the insect post as though it had been meant literally.

"And face it," what you said about Chavez threads applies equally to threads about Hillary or Obama or any prominent personality, including the Pope.

[cali]

143. nah, chavez threads

are actually quite revealing. they illustrate the black/white good/evil mindset that so many have here in a way that's pretty singular. chavez isn't an actual human being so much as a symbol. I find the whole thing fascinating. And it's not like he has any real impact on the lives of Americans.

.

[No Elephants]

149. In your mind, MAYbe, the black/white reactions to Chavez are singular. However, that opinion may

say more about your fixation than it does about objective reality. Or it may be something you say to justify yourself.

To my mind, posts on threads about Hillary, Obama, Pope, etc. threads are equally black and white as posts about Chavez, if not more so. Then again, I have no investment making one of those folks wrong (or right).

And, as you know, Chavez most certainly does have real impact on the lives of many Americans. As I posted on another of you Chavez threads, his donations of home heating fuel alone have quite an impact, lifesaving, in fact.

However, none of the above addresses your self-confessed enjoyment of your intentional flamebaiting, does it?

[cali]

158. lol.

no, Chavez really has very little impact on the lives of Americans. There are only about ten thousand things that have more of an impact. That he sold cheap heating oil to those in MA for a short time is pretty irrelevant to the lives of the vast majority of Americans. And he hasn't done it in a couple of years.

And you're just wrong about threads about Hillary and Obama. The flame wars were in the context of a heated primary. Chavez threads are a different animal. They bring out those that have a very black white view on political phiolosphy.

And I hardly have an obsession. It's more like a casual past time.

[earth mom]

166. So you admit it-you're all about shit stirring as a past time. I knew it all along.

:puke:

[EFerrari]

179. You're misinformed, cali. The heating oil program is ongoing.

[Judi Lynn]

184. People receiving heating oil from Venezuela in 23 states would disagree with your view

the heating oil program is irrelevant.

Last year, the heating oil program provided some 200,000 households in 23 states with fuel, including over 65 Native American tribes and large low-income housing cooperatives in New York City. In addition, the CITGO funds provided heating grants to over 210 homeless shelters in 14 states. The 2008-2009 heating season marks the fourth year of CITGO’s donations.

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/38785

If you took only a fragment of the time you spent attempting to slash away at people you want to mock, in getting informed on the subjects they have made a point to find out about themselves, you'd be doing yourself a favor, and have a more positive impact when you decide you want to set up some serious people for ridicule by starting another flamefest.

[No Elephants]

248. You are misinformed. Citgo has donated oil every year, including this one. Limbaugh was babbling

that Chavez (Citgo) left Joe Kennedy "high and dry" this year, but he was wrong. Citgo came through this year as well. According to Joe Kennedy, Citgo provides ninety percent of the funding for Joe Kennedy's program nationwide, not only in Massachusetts.

As to my being wrong about the Hillary or Obama threads, LOL. Just post something in any forum that criticizes Hillary and see what happens.

[bitchkitty]

228. Speak for yourself. n/t

[No Elephants]

135. Now, THAT's actually funny.

[Regret My New Name]

52. haha I agree.. Chavez and guns.. Imagine the two topics combined.. GASP..

I'm easily amused.

[No Elephants]

137. Apparently, you are not alone.

[and-justice-for-all]

28. Why would Obama say such a thing if he wants to mend

broken relationships that shrub Co caused?

Chavez is not doing himself any favors by stirring the pot. Who cares if Chavez lets Russia house bombers in his country, it is his country. At least they do not have military bases all over the world. The US attitude of 'Do as I say, not as I do' is bullshit and needs to stop.

[Bacchus39]

47. do you think Obama is overly disappointed that Chavez hasn't named an ambassador?

I think not. Obama just met with President Lula of Brazil. Mexico is a much more pressing concern. Colombia remains a US ally. Chavez and Venezuela are not at the top of the list if they are even on it. Venezuela sells oil, we buy it. what else?


its just crap mouth Chavez spouting off. Obama isn't going to dignify this pig with a response.

[eridani]

212. And you just love an "ally" that accounts for half the murdered labor organizers in the world

Quite a few of us don't at all identify with the white sociopathic shitstains who have been bleeding Latin America dry for a few centuries.

[Freddie Stubbs]

151. Perhaps the President believes what he is saying is true

[Posteritatis]

31. Chavez a histrionic troll; film at 11 (nt)

[L. Coyote]

33. THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED - 1:14:31

THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED - 1:14:31 - Apr 23, 2006
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144

THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED DIRECTED AND PHOTOGRAPHED BY KIM BARTLEY AND DONNACHA O'BRIAIN IRELAND, 2003 74 MINUTES IN SPANISH WITH ENGLISH SUBTITLES HUGO CHAVEZ ELECTED PRESIDENT OF VENEZUELA IN 1998, IS A COLORFUL, UNPREDICTABLE FOLK HERO, beloved by his nation's working class and a tough-as-nails, quixotic opponent to the power structure that would see him deposed. Two independent filmmakers were inside the presidential palace on April 11, 2002, when he was forcibly removed from office. They were also present 48 hours later when, remarkably, he returned to power amid cheering aides. Their film records what was probably history's shortest-lived coup d'état. It's a unique document about political muscle and an extraordinary portrait of the man The Wall Street Journal credits with making Venezuela "Washington‚s biggest Latin American headache after the old standby, Cuba."

[espiral]

35. Typical US media bias

"left-wing Latin American leaders", oy vey. Anything to keep that good ole McCarthyism endlessly stoked in this country...

[L. Coyote]

37. Thomson Reuters is the world's largest international multimedia news agency

Thomson Reuters shares are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: TRI);
Last Trade: 25.46
Down from 39.75 in just the last year!!!

Thomson Reuters is the world's largest international multimedia news agency ....
"Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests."

[espiral]

57. re:

Come on; do you honestly believe that the world's mainstream press is immune from capitalist bias?

[EFerrari]

69. I believe that was the poster's point.

:)

[L. Coyote]

121. Indeed. Propaganda often is released in international media.

Corporatism has no boundaries. Ask Murdock!

[EFerrari]

207. When I want to see what the right wing is up to, I google a story

and count the reiterations aka, spam.

[Deja Q]

42. Oh, Mr Chavez, I want you to be the father of you children!

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :sarcasm: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[No Elephants]

140. You may get your wish, then. Men are often the fathers of their children.

[Judi Lynn]

189. Amazing, isn't it? It's one of life's mysteries, for sure. n/t

[bitchkitty]

176. Too bad you wasted all those smilies on a dumb joke

that you didn't even get right.

[Zhade]

45. If Obama said that, Chavez is right -- he's not "exporting terrorism".

Only idiots believe THAT horseshit.

So I'm wondering if that's really what Obama said.

[EFerrari]

70. Obama has said that. I was hoping it was just because

there's so much else going on that he was just reading from State Department crib sheets. I guess, I'm still hoping that's the case.

[Zorro]

78. Or maybe he knows more than you do

There is that possibility.

[EFerrari]

79. Yes, and I might be your long lost twin. It's possible.

[UTUSN]

48. K&R #4 for, and ignoramus calls CHAVEZ "chavez"!1 n/t

[ima_sinnic]

49. that IS an ignorant thing to say about Chavez

obama needs to step away from the DLC corporatist troglodyte shitheads and educate himself.

[Dorian Gray]

125. Yes....

he needs to educate himself.

Cause he's such an ignoramus. LOL!


:eyes:

[ima_sinnic]

126. well, if he is aware of the reality, why would he say something like that?

if he's NOT ignorant, maybe he's just trying to make brownie points with the PTB. I am disappointed that he insists on appeasing the status quo instead of trying to demonstrate some understanding and even appreciation for the positive changes that Chavez has spearheaded. He might even learn a couple of things from him about running a country truly for the benefit of The People instead of for the stinking corporations.

[Dorian Gray]

180. Or maybe

his opinion, and the opinion of people that run this country, is that Chavez's actions are a danger to the freedom of some groups of people in Venezuela, Colombia and Latin America. They can reach a different conclusion through intelligence available to the government than what we have.

Or he's pulling ideas out of his ass.

[EFerrari]

182. The thing about Chavez is that he says what everyone else is thinking.

Lula must have been pretty displeased with the meeting he had with Obama for Chavez to have made these comments.

The only group in Latin America that Chavez and the host of left leaning leaders endanger are oligarchs and multinational corporations. That's where this "he supports terror" cr@p comes from. In fact, recently a right wing shill published a book that says the very same thing that Obama is saying. Schoen, The Threat Closer to Home, and it's about Chavez It's a work of considerable art, lol! You have to know if Schoen put out a book that some entity with deep pockets is invested in spreading the meme. I'd love to know who cut that check.

[Dorian Gray]

208. Well, I in no way

mean to imply that we haven't had our fair share of questionable interactions and dealings when it comes to Latin America, however, I am of the opinion that Chavez is neither saint nor demon. He is a man with faults. He has some wonderful political moments and some questionable deals.

I also don't think Obama is perfect and incapable of making a mistake. I just took umbrage at calling him (Obama) uneducated. I'm sure that he knows more than any of us the background and history of Chavez's popularity and performance in Venezuela.

And not everything is black and/or white.

[EFerrari]

210. That's right, not everything is black or white at all.

I've written as many defenses of Obama as of Chavez. But, there is no indication whatsoever that Obama knows more than several posters to this board about the mixed bag that is Hugo Chavez. None. At the moment, his line about Chavez is identical to the Bush line. Maybe that's simply due to all the other horrible fires he has to put out right now. That's my guess, anyway.

But, he did chose an ultra conservative right wing venue for his first speech to a big Latino group last summer. I'm still hoping that was about the money.

[Regret My New Name]

54. I'm curious how the freepers are taking this...

heads explode?

[No Elephants]

141. If you really want to know, read this thread and see if you can pick out the

posts of Freepers who dishonestly pose as DUers. Hint: High post count does not always equate to "Democrat."

[Summermoondancer]

58. Personal Experience on Chavez

Chavez has sent no less than four planes into Honduran territory that have been caught(note that have been caught so I am sure more) all of them had large amounts of drugs and were clearly marked as Venezuelan...the drugs weren´t headed for Honduras it was a stopping point and he was sending drugs to the US...he is exporting drugs we know to the US and he is probably doing more. I am surprised the news media in the US hasn´t gotten a hold of the activity here in the department of Colon since the DEA has been involved in some of those operations. The way to neutralize him of course is legalizing drugs, but it seems with oil falling through the floor he has to keep his pocket full somehow. Chavez is not a liberal or a Democrat do not fool yourself he is a communist and he is a drug smuggler. He is calling Obama names to try to deflect and minimize the truth about who he is.

[Zorro]

59. Welcome to DU

I hope you're well-prepared for the impending attacks.

[EFerrari]

68. Right! No one should be questioned when their recounting of personal experience

CONTAINS NO PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.

:rofl:

You guys, seriously, I don't know what I'd do without the constant Cavalcade of Comedy!

:rofl:

[Zorro]

76. So what's your question?

Didn't see one, which seems a rather ignorant thing to omit when attempting to make a point about questioning someone's personal experience.

[EFerrari]

81. So touchy! Maybe you and your friend should cook up some personal experience

to put in that post about personal experience. It would be a start, anyway.

[Zorro]

148. Still no questions, I see

For someone with admittedly no personal experience in South America, you'd be advised from challenging those that do.

[EFerrari]

174. LOL

[Alamuti Lotus]

115. I, too, have a personal experience to share

A real one. I personally witnessed the Red Devil sodomizing puppies, skinning babies (ALIVE!), farting out the Star Spangled Banner on a snare drum, and plotting the destruction of America. This horrible dictator must be stopped!

[EFerrari]

117. Traitor to the Revolution!

:rofl:

[Alamuti Lotus]

120. Apologist for the Red Devil!

:rofl:

[Summermoondancer]

160. Yep

[AlphaCentauri]

165. Good

lol:rofl:

[devilgrrl]

60. Yep, uh huh, sure, right.... I get it. He's Manuel Noriega... sure, ok.

:boring:

[provis99]

63. Is that you, Eugene Hasenfus?

do you like trolling silly ass crap?

[EFerrari]

67. OMG! I'M SO GLAD YOU POSTED THIS!

He's a COMMUNIST? OMG!

And a DRUG SMUGGLER? OH, NOES! WHAT WILL THE DEA DO WITH ALL THAT COMPETITION!

[G_j]

77. that is personal?

like hemorrhoids? The department of Colon doesn't ring a bell.

[AlphaCentauri]

90. There are many personal experience in Nicaragua and El Salvador

on how Honduras was training terrorist to kill people in those countries.

[Summermoondancer]

161. Ok I live in Honduras

what the crap are you talking about? If you are referring to the 3-16 battalion that was a long time ago and it wasn´t Honduras that was training them it was the USA and the CIA that was funding that operation and it wasn´t necessarily to kill people in El Salvador and Nicaragua it was to keep them out of Honduran territory and to keep the democracy here from collapse. That in no way justifies what occurred because many Hondurans lost their lives too. However, the Sandinista were clearly plotting to import communism to Honduras and I will always defend a countries right to defend itself regardless. Life isn´t the same as it is in the US here and the rules are played differently. It is sort of like keeping South Carolinians out of Georgia...the size of the two countries of Nicaragua and Honduras are comparable in size. However, Honduras is economically getting better and Nicaragua is collapsing right now. Do I think the 3-16 still exists and keeps people in check..yes, I do. They appeared seven years ago and took out quite a few gang members and made the streets safe to walk again. El Salvador and Nicaragua had their own death squads they didn´t have the need for a Honduran death squad to keep them in check.
If you want to know real information on the School of the Americas that you refer to I can tell you plenty about it, but remember that the US didn´t see first hand what went on down here and to blame Honduras for defending themselves from invasions to implement communism in this country is a little short sighted.

[AlphaCentauri]

163. "I will always defend a countries right to defend itself regardless"

How honduras was defending it self?

Didn't Honduras was the training camp for many of those death squad, the governments of honduras have allowed to train murderers but they have never done it to defend them selves.

http://www.nytimes.com/1983/06/22/world/around-the-world-honduras-approves-a-us-training-camp.html

http://www.ww4report.com/node/1127

[Summermoondancer]

175. They were defending themselves from Sandanistas

It was just one death squad the batallion 3-16. They were trained in tactical forces to defend the borders at all costs and sometimes they got a little heavy handed inside the country too. They were a tool that ended up being used by the government to also carry out political assasinations so it was both positive and negative. However, they didn´t train any foreign forces and they were trained by the School of the Americas from the US.
They still exist. However, some of the stuff was hype. There were graves and yes they did kill people. However, some of the graves were people who died in combat and were buried all together because no one came to claim the bodies and they had nowhere to put them. My husband was in the Honduran military at that time. The Sandanistas didn´t fight fair so I guess they figured a taste of their own medicine was in order. They snuck into the country planted land mines, killed people, ect. So the Honduran government took action against them. They were wrong for that, but I will bet if they hadn´t taken that hardline stance we would be here under communism...now what to do about Zelaya...he wants to try to place a continuous government. The constitution forbids this specifically no president here can serve more than one term. I think it should be two terms, but I am an American...so I stay out of it. There will be a rebellion though if he does try to pass continuism here and I really do not want to be in the middle of it all.

[EFerrari]

178. During the Contra War, the Contras drove Nicaraguan Miskitus in to Honduras

were they were kept in camps by the Honduran government and where the young men were forced to bear arms. So, no, it wasn't "just" one death squad at all. Honduras collaborated with the United States and their Contra whores.

And the Sandinistas were too busy trying to pave roads and feed people to export anything.

"Just" one death squad and a few convenient mass graves. This thinking is why my mother left El Salvador. Thank you, Mom. :wow:

[Summermoondancer]

186. Mosquitos

aren´t all Nicaraguan. They live in the Mosquitia department of Honduras. Remember I live here. No one forced them to bear arms they live in a remote region and pretty much do what they want to. If they took up arms they are seperate from the government and do their own thing...most of them are fairly untouched tribes. So to say that they were Nicaraguans isn´t very longsighted. They are a native population in Central America including Honduras and Nicaragua. I would not want to tick one off either, because they will take your head off no questions asked

[EFerrari]

188. Yes, they aren't all Nicaraguan which is why I made the distinction.

And you are wrong or you've been misled. In Blood on the Border, my friend Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz describes in some detail what she found in her investigation of those camps in her capacity as a UN worker for indigenous autonomy.

[Summermoondancer]

192. It is different

for someone who sees it through the eyes of the UN and someone who actually experienced the situation. My husband fought in the war..so my knowledge is not book knowledge.

[EFerrari]

193. Roxanne was in and out of the North Coast throughout those years.

Her knowledge is not "book learning", which I presume you don't value very highly.

[Summermoondancer]

194. No it isn´t that I don´t value it

No, it isn´t that I don´t value it...it just sometimes is not the complete picture. It is different for someone on the outside and someone actually fighting in the war. My husband was in the Honduran military until 1992.

[EFerrari]

196. Roxanne didn't write a report at a desk in New York.

She went into those camps herself on numerous occasions. One of the things she did was to take photographs as proof of life to the families there -- they were basically hostages. The Honduran government told them the Sandinistas had killed their relative(s) and Roxanne would bring letters and photographs to show them that their people where still alive. It was a pretty heartbreaking situation.

[Summermoondancer]

199. My husband never did anything like that.

He never held anyone that was Honduran hostage and he never told anyone that some family member was dead that wasn´t dead. He was in the battalion decimoseis in the department of Olancho. There were a lot of cross border kidnappings. In this country, if a family member is killed the family gets revenge and they don´t wait for the police to do something about it, because they never do. Even car accidents end up deadly sometimes. The Contras and the Sandinistas invaded the territory and they defended the borders not just Nicaraguan mosquitos crossed over, it was rebels, Sandanistas, and population escaping the war plus they had El Salvador doing the same thing. There is no way to really distinguish between one or the other. A UN worker isn´t informed of all military operations or what actually goes on all of the time..military does most of their movements without public imput. Ironically, my husband nearly got killed for helping American soldiers through the jungles here it earned him asylum in the US the hard way. He didn´t talk about what happened then for years..but he has started talking about it again, because he fears that the 3-16 is being resurrected for use by Zelaya. He thinks that he is using them to quiet people that oppose his positions and to eliminate those who may stop him from sitting permanently as president. There are always two sides to every story.

[EFerrari]

200. Right. I'm not talking about cross border kidnappings but camps.

Maybe at some appropriate moment, you could ask your husband about them because they have been thoroughly documented after Roxanne discovered them.

[Summermoondancer]

213. You are not going to like his response.

He said it wasn´t Hondurans that did that but Sandinistas. He said in 1986 the Sandinistas signed a treaty with the Miskito Indians. He also said that Nicaragua would fight bitterly with the Miskitos over the land there. They granted them autonomy in 86 about the time he joined the military..he said that Nicaragua had bad habits of breaking that autonomy. Many of the Miskitos did live in refugee camps if they were from Nicaragua and that about 1,000 were armed against Sandinistas, but Sandinistas wanted to control their region which was supposed to be autonomous. He said to look up YATAMA and it is the council for the Miskito. They felt very threatened by Nicaragua takin control of them during that time frame. He said that Contras also took refuge in the moutains of Honduras he said they also kidnapped people. He did say that in 1990 they deported several back to Nicaragua when Violeta Chamorro won. He said that violence broke out there for lack of food in 91 and that it was quelled by force. He said that Contras and Yatima fighters united to sieze Puerto Cabezas. He said the situation is very complicated but they weren´t poor me..
Also, he says that the Contras had Honduran uniforms. The US was supporting Contra behind the scenes. He said that they dropped ration boxes and guns in the middle of the night to fight the Sandinistas.

[EFerrari]

215. I have no need to like his response. That the Honduran government

had these camps is not up for debate. It's been documented. I know about the conflict and resolution between the Sandinistas and the Miskitu because I translated those meetings.

[Summermoondancer]

216. Did you realize

that the Contra rebels were wearing Honduran uniforms? When were you here debating it? If it was 91 there were riots, but those riots were over food. I have family that is Miskito Indian and Mayan Indian. My husband is Mayan but his nephews and his sister in law are Miskito. What you document or what you are told is not always the complete truth here...these people are very reserved when they talk because they don´t want to be killed for what they tell you. Remember that there are always two sides to every story. It is like Honduras being critisized for eliminating gang members with the death squads...the gang members here are terrorists but the UN classified them as children.

[EFerrari]

234. Roxanne is Native American and she has no trouble moving

among the communities.

[Summermoondancer]

242. Me too

so that is something we have in common. However, the communities distrust outsiders. It took me a very long time to gain people´s trust. They don´t talk to the police, authorities on any level...and they certainly don´t like to talk to reporters. In countries like this one it gets you killed if you run your mouth too much. I maintain that there was really no reason for Honduran military to do anything with the Miskito Indians except for quelling any rebellion which is their right to do...many of the Miskito were Nicaraguan and guests here. You don´t get to launch a rebellion in a host country you respect your refugee status. Nicaraguan rebels did have an interest in forcing anyone they could into their battle. Most of the border fighting went on in the areas along the borders with El Salvador and Nicaragua and there was much infiltration. I don´t think it would be appropriate at any level to tell Honduran military to just disarm and give up to Communism and that they couldn´t defend their border at all costs. People died, there were serious mental affects on many of the soldiers involved...and in the end the bearer of the responsibility was the US. The US ran EVERYTHING here so if any Miskito were forced into anything the US should be the one to shoulder that responsibility.

[EFerrari]

243. You're so right about that. The man we refer to as "Death Squads" Negroponte

-- one of the Iran Contra criminals -- was working out of Honduras at the time. You bet the United States has to shoulder that responsibility.

[Summermoondancer]

257. Thank you for recognizing that

there are many unanswered questions. What is most frustrating is the man in charge now...Zelaya...you know his father was implicated in the murder of Franciscan priests that were protesting the deforestation of Olancho right? That happened I believe in June of 1975. They dumped the bodies in a well in their front yard. Ironically now the son is president and he just announced that he is going to try to ´reform´the constitution...also this goon is resurrecting the death squad from what one can see...to use against opponents. Amazingly four politicians have shown up dead this campaign season. He is also deforesting his property with rapid pace and refusing to allow anyone else to remove any lumber even clearing out brush in the same area..we shall see how far he gets with his ´continuism´

[IndianaGreen]

92. I wish Chavez were a Communist. He wouldn't have the opposition press that he has.

And he would have tried and executed every single one of the coup plotters, and he would have put the Caracas elites and the stupid Catholic Church in their place!

The fact he hasn't done any of those things, tells you that Chavez is just a socialist, like Bernie Sanders or many Europeans.

[No Elephants]

144. Chavez has been nationalizing means of production lately. Many Europeans, though? Dunno. I'm not

even sure about Sanders, who, AFIK, currently calls himself Indpendent (wiki notwithstanding).

[No Elephants]

142. Chavez is not a Democrat? He faked his voter registration, too? Shameless.

[justinaforjustice]

147. Where is Your Documentation for This Nonesense?

What department of the CIA do you work for, perhaps its well documented drug smuggling operation? Calling Chavez a drug smuggler is patient nonsense, as are the charges that he exports terrorism, subverts elections or eats babies.

I am an American who has lived in Venezuela for two years and observed Chavez and his government closely. Chavez's concerns are improving the lives of the Venezuelan people, which his government is doing -- dramatically. Chavez's Venezuela provides free medical, dental and optical care, education, subsidized food and housing to the people with the profits from their oil resources which used to go to American corporations. Chavez is promulgating the same social services policies which we Americans so desperately need, but do not have, because our corporate profits go only to the top 1% of our population.

From his statements about Chavez, Obama proves that he is ignorant of the true facts about Chavez and his government, which the United States conspired to remove from power in the 2002 coup. Armed U.S. officials were in the Venezuelan military headquarters during the 2002 coup personally advising the oppositionist coup leader, Pedro Carmono, then head of the Venezuelan Chamber of Commerce, as he decreed the abolition of the democratically elected National Assembly, imprisoned its representatives, and kidnapped Chavez to the island of Orchila. Carmono commenced the coup by ordering his U.S. trained sharp shooters to kill innocent Venezuelans in the streets of Caracas. ("Chavez Nestro", Elizalde and Báez, 2006, "El Codigo Chavez" Golinger, 2005, "Bush v. Chavez", Golinger, 2006).

Did you know that two months before the 2002, the United States replaced its then ambassador, Donna Hrinak, with Charles Shapiro, the same man worked for the U.S. advising Pinochet in Chile during the U.S. supported coup against the democratically elected Allende government?

In 2003, Shapiro was quoted by the AP as saying "It is not necessarily a crime to kill a president..." (). After the 2002 coup was successfully stopped by the thousands of Venezuelans who flooded the streets demanding the return of Chavez to the presidency, documents were found in the possession of Carmona's oppositionists detailing their plan to murder Chavez. Who is it that collaborates with terrorists?

The U.S.'s terrorist history in Latin America is abysmal. It is very sad to see the Obama administration so ignorantly continuing the imperialist policies against Chavez and Venezuela. Unlike Bush, Obama is an intelligent man. One only hopes he will take the time to read some history and learn the facts about Chavez, his government and the appalling role the U.S. has played against them.

[Judi Lynn]

191. Thanks for providing background on Charles Shapiro. Had no idea of his connection with Pinochet.

His behavior regarding Chavez, even down to his vile dinner after the coup, in which he regaled his oligarchy guests with an entertainer ventroloquist mocking Hugo Chavez has been contemptible, and unprofessional beyond imagination itself. Filthy, absurd little man.

It's time our government started behaving toward the Latin American countries like a government worthy of their respect, rather than their fear. That way isn't going to be accepted any longer, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize it.

What a shame so much suffering, grief, and pure hell has been poured upon so many people in our names, behind our backs. If our country's policies had been virtuous, had been worthy, they wouldn't have needed to hide what they were doing in Latin America, would they? They have been afraid of public outrage, clearly, which would be expected among decent people.

I always look forward to hearing your INFORMED comments which have real value here. Thank you.

[justinaforjustice]

230. Charles Shapiro May Still Be At State Department.

After his failed attempt to depose Chaverz and his government in 2002, Shapiro went on to become a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Estate at our State Department, heading a trade section. He may still be there, working no doubt to skew Obama's attitudes toward Chavez.

I must admit, I would feel much, much better if I could attribute Obama's mis-guided attacks on Chavez to Bush-administration carry-overs like Shapiro. It would be extremely depressing to learn that the attacks come from Obama's new appointees or his own independent views.

Thanks for, Judi Lynn, for your comments and for all the important articles you post here on DU about Latin America. They are extremely valuable as our mainstream media carries so little information about events here, and what it does carry is all too frequently, fact-less, right wing propaganda, not objective reporting.

[Judi Lynn]

239. Bush's ambassadors were truly destructive people, all over Latin America.

They caused problems for their leftist host Presidents, made public statements ridiculing and contradicting them, got funding for opposition groups working to destabilize their elected Presidents, met with provocateurs, and clearly, in Venezuela, conspired with coup plotters and supporters, etc., and in general behaved in ways one would NEVER expect to see any ambassador anywhere conduct him/herself.

You saw the evidence, no doubt, of the havoc that followed _Bush when he made his sweep through Latin America, trying to badger the Presidents into isolating and shunning Hugo Chavez. He was met with resistance in each location, and the people themselves poured into the streets bearing signs telling him to go home, he wasn't invited, in Spanish, "Fuera, Bush" and "Fora, Bush" in Brazil. Those photos didn't get broadcast by our own corporate media tv news shows, not splashed across our newspapers. They can be seen if people go to google images and do a search for Fuera Bush or Fora Bush. Clearly that story was suppressed. People just didn't hear about it here. Perception molding has been in effect for many years, unfortunately.

Thank you for any and all of your comments here. I always am so glad to see your posts any time you've posted. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever which comes close to your impeccable, honest, very intelligent remarks about what you have witnessed yourself.

Hoping we'll all be able to share some very good news this year, after the nightmare of the previous 8. Hoping this is the year we'll finally turn this horrendous tale of exploitation and horrendous abuse around and create a policy, a new history which doesn't dishonor any of us any longer.

[Odin2005]

61. Go fuck yourself, Hugo

And to think I used to support him. Jeez, he's turned into a joke.

Evo Morales, now there is a reformer with no authoritarian tendencies and who just oozes class and comes across as a nice guy, unlike Chavez.

[IndianaGreen]

89. Have you even bothered to read the actual quote in the Venezuelan press?

http://politica.eluniversal.com/2009/03/22/pol_ava_chavez-califica-a-ob_22A2264093.shtml

Or do you still believe as Gospel what the MSM tells you? Haven't you learned a frakking thing in the last 8 years?

[Bacchus39]

94. yep, Chavez called him a poor ignoramus. Chavez, what an asshole!!

good to see a few Obama supporters here.

[IndianaGreen]

97. Chavez called him an 'ignorant poor man.' When is Obama going to close SOA?

Accusing Chavez of being a terrorist puts Obama on the same knowledge level as John Bolton, as far as Latin America is concerned. I hope that Brazil's Lula brought some enlightenment to Obama.

I suppose you are an Obama cultist, as opposed to a rational supporter. We must oppose Obama when he is wrong, correct him when he goes astray, and support him when he is wrong.

[Bacchus39]

100. he called Obama a "pobre ignorante". that's an insult. Chavez is a cochino asqueroso

but you won't hear that from Obama's mouth. unlike Chavez, Obama has class.

[IndianaGreen]

102. Obama lacks class when he smears Chavez as a terrorist

Obama knows nothing about Latin America. Taco Bell is not Latin America!

[Odin2005]

156. Right, I'm sure those FARCistas are just swell people!

:sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

177. FARC has nothing to do with this unless you believe Bush's

lap dancer, Uribe.

[Odin2005]

202. Uribe's being a fascist asshole has no bering on the facts of the matter.

"He's an asshole so he must be wrong or lying" is a fallacy.

[EFerrari]

204. Oh, but it does, absolutely. Uribe invites Chavez to negotiate with FARC.

Chavez negotiates with FARC and pretty successfully, too.

Uribe AND Bush then accuse Chavez of supporting terrorists. It was a set up from the beginning.

[Judi Lynn]

209. Anyone who bothered to follow current events saw that a mile away.

It was noteworthy because of its treachery.

Uribe approached Chavez on the hostage negotiations. No question about it. Then Uribe shifted tactics, and started accusing Chavez of being a FARC supporter. Talk about political opportunists! That little back-stabbing bastard is a pro.

[No Elephants]

146. Or an unfortunate, uninformed person.

[espiral]

232. re:

Yeah, he has class. Bourgeois class...

[pampango]

124. Perhaps we should apply the same standard to Presidents Obama and Chavez.

"We must oppose Obama when he is wrong, correct him when he goes astray, and support him when he is wrong (right?)." True AND we must oppose Chavez when he is wrong, correct him when he goes astray, and support him when he is right, otherwise we become Chavez' cultists.

I get your point that anyone whose support is unwavering and uncritical runs the risk of being perceived as a cultist.

[Odin2005]

155. I CAN read some Spanish you pobre ignorante, I know what the phrase means.

This thread oozes with estupido mucho. :banghead:

[tavalon]

172. What the hell?

Are you saying that we are required to demonize Chavez to be able to support Obama? Not very good logic circuits, eh?

[selous]

62. funny!!

Just 2 years ago Chavez was the darling of DU!
Now he is yesterdays trash!!

[ShortnFiery]

72. No, a few people haven't learned NOT to trust the musings of the M$M, specifically Reuters.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

75. You have to see this. It's an ad that anti-Chavez Venezuelans

in exile (read: they took their money and ran) ran against Obama. When will we EVER learn.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgCI7fuIRRw

[iamthebandfanman]

82. while i have nothing against chavez

i fail to see what that proves?

jbecause a group opposed to him also doesnt like obama...
then that means if you dont like chavez you really dont like obama?
that chavez should be perfect in all leftist eyes?

enlighten me on why opposing chavez means aligning with extreme right wing ideology..
nobody is perfect,
pretty sad when you cant even disagree with a foreign leader on anything without being labled something

[EFerrari]

85. What? I was pointing out that the extreme right wingers that oppose Chavez

came here and opposed Obama, too.

I'm not sure what you're asking. And, I don't think I've ever labeled you as anything but a DUer.

[AlphaCentauri]

107. Lets start by listing why we should oppose Chavez?

just because Chavez calls president Obama ignorant in a single issue?.
Isn't it a good opportunity for president Obama to show why he did call Venezuela a country that export terrorism? if president Obama has no proof of it, then he will be just pleasing a group of rich powerful RW'ers who don't even like him as president.

[sufrommich]

131. No fair! You have to pick the black team or the white team.

DU rules.:sarcasm:

[IndianaGreen]

80. Obama hasn't closed the School of Assassins at Fort Benning, Georgia

a good indication that he knows nothing about Latin America, and surrounding himself with the neoliberals that he has, doesn't give me hope that Obama will ever oppose the Latin American elites.

[IndianaGreen]

87. The actual quote is 'pobre ignorante' which means 'ignorant poor man'

Translation: Chavez describes Obama as an ignorant poor man and directs him to read.

Chávez califica a Obama de "pobre ignorante" y lo manda a leer

02:16 PM Caracas.- El presidente Hugo Chávez calificó hoy de "pobre ignorante" al mandatario estadounidense, Barack Obama, por unas declaraciones que dio meses atrás acerca de que el líder venezolano exportaba actividades terroristas.

El mandatario, que ha dicho que espera que con Obama puedan ser recompuestas las lastimadas relaciones diplomáticas entre las dos naciones, reveló que unos comentarios del mandatario estadounidense en enero le hicieron echar para atrás la designación de su nuevo embajador en Washington.

"¿Ahora me va a acusar a mi Obama de que yo exporto terrorismo? Al menos uno pudiera decir, pobre ignorante, que estudie, que lea un poco para que aprenda cuál es la realidad de lo que está viviendo y la realidad de América Latina y la realidad del mundo", dijo durante su programa dominical de radio y televisión.

"Pero son muy malas señales de un Gobierno. Nosotros seguiremos a la espera pero no estamos desesperados, ni nos va ni nos viene el imperio de los Estados Unidos", agregó.

http://politica.eluniversal.com/2009/03/22/pol_ava_chavez-califica-a-ob_22A2264093.shtml

[EFerrari]

91. Which is pretty much what students and scholars of Latin America have been saying for a long time.

But it sounds so much more sexy if you put it in Hugo Chavez's mouth and make it sound like an insult.

Obama needs to get a clue about the democratizing wave sweeping over Latin America. He's a smart person. He can do that.

[Bacchus39]

99. you don't think calling someone an ignoramus is an insult?? Hugo, por que no te calles??

what a prick!!!!

[IndianaGreen]

104. Obama called Chavez a terrorist. That's untrue, and an insult to boot!

BTW, Obama is now responsible for all the crimes committed by SOA graduates, so when is he going to close the School of Assassins?

[Bacchus39]

105. Chavez and the FARC were what Obama was referring to

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sEWDlTirWU

speak Spanish????

what a total pendejo!!

[IndianaGreen]

109. Remember when the FARC came down the mountains to live in peace?

Their leaders were assassinated, so they went back to the mountains. This war has been raging for longer than most people been alive.

You hablo español.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

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

[IndianaGreen]

114. Does this mean you support Colombia's Uribe?

The man that had his own paramilitary death squads?

[EFerrari]

111. So did the Sandinistas and the Miskitu

during the Contra war. I know because I translated the tape from their meetings -- public meetings -- that our press and Congress claimed were not happening.

What the powers that be are trying to do to Chavez is what they always do. And this time, it didn't work. That a few here still fall for the old bullshit is just statistically predictable.

[EFerrari]

106. He is now responsible. You're absolutely right.

[Art_from_Ark]

226. I think it's more like "poor, uninformed person"

"Ignorant poor man" carries the meaning that Obama has neither knowledge nor money.

"Poor, uninformed person" conveys the meaning of "pobre" as poor in the sense of "pitiful"

And after having spent much time myself with Venezuelans from the barrio, I learned that they often used "ignorante" in the sense of "uninformed". They had choicer words for "ignorant", but their favorite expression seemed to be "No sabes nada, cojeburra"

[Peace Patriot]

116. People, Obama STARTED WITH THE INSULTS during his inauguration week!

Chavez didn't start it. He is REACTING to what Obama SAID. And Chavez doesn't take shit like that by sitting back and not responding. He has not survived a Bushwhack coup and assassination attempt, and several more attempts, and a Bushwhack instigated oil professionals' strike, and a Bushwhack-funded recall election, and non-stop demonization by the Bushwhack State Dept. and the corpo/fascist press, by being a weenie. He is not polite. Why should he be?

This is Obama's own goddamned mess to clean up. It was blunder. He let somebody among the Bushwhack holdovers in the State Dept., or possibly a member of his own team, lead him by the nose, to do exactly the wrong thing. It was very stupid--if he intends a new, more just U.S. policy in Latin America. The left is winning in Latin America. Chavez is a very, VERY popular guy in his own country and throughout the region. Needlessly insulting him--and repeating Bushwhack lies about him--is no doubt producing the predictable reaction of most of Latin America thinking that Obama is an "ignorant poor man." His own words made him look like a dunce! Doesn't he realize what has been taking place in Latin America, with country after country electing leftist leaders in accord with Chavez--and even the center-left (Brazil, Chile, Guatemala) in accord with Chavez? Does he think he can "divide and conquer" a continent--South America--which just last September strongly and unanimously repelled a Bushwhack funded and organized bloody coup attempt in Bolivia? He can't! And yet that is what he seems to be trying to do! These unfair, untruthful comments on Chavez set him up horribly for the upcoming Americas conference. It puts him in a very bad position. That's why I think it is the doing of the Bushwhacks--and Obama fell into it, during his inauguration week, because he was/is so preoccupied with a failing economy and on-going wars. But if he wants to get anywhere in Latin America, he needs to purge the Bushwhacks from the State Dept., the ambassadorships and the CIA, NOW--or whoever on his team advised this Univision crap in January.

[IndianaGreen]

118. Obama also insulted LGBTs by having Rick Warren give the invocation

Let's not forget that one!

[No Elephants]

152. LOL, now who's flamebaiting?

[EFerrari]

119. But Chavez should just turn the other cheek because he's just the president

of our backyard.

:sarcasm:

[David__77]

122. Obama deserved harsher words than that.

If he's gonna act like a typical imperialist in his lies about Chavez and Venezuela, then he deserves it. I voted for Obama and would happily do so again, but he needs to be educated to mend his ways on this issue. I know he's compelled to say these things, but he needs to do better.

[ima_sinnic]

128. yes, you hit it right ont he head. Obama's LIES about Chavez were totally uncalled for.

he demonstrated complete ignorance in his inauguration week comments, and that is regrettable because there is no reason at all that we should be hostile to Venezuela. Obama CLAIMS to have been a "community organizer," yet denigrates someone whose entire administration is devoted to the cause of The People of his country.

[sufrommich]

127. Regardless of Venezuela's policies, Chavez has the maturity

level of a 16 year old. What a buffoon.

[EFerrari]

201. Chavez is a plain spoken man defending himself from very serious allegations

made by the president of the United States. And if Chavez is saying this outright, you can only imagine what other progressive leaders in Latin America are thinking.

It finally won't matter very much. Latin America is much more independent of the US now than it has ever been. But if Obama doesn't want to lose his Latino constituents, he might rethink the way he talks about other leaders in public.

[No Elephants]

132. I've been critical of Obama and I have also commended and/or defended Obama,

depending upon the story we're posting on at the time. I consider that a sane perspective for anyone, including a Democrat.

Despite my own approach, I can totally understand posters who defend him no matter what. He's a brilliant guy who inherited an ungodly mess at the end of January. And he is the POTUS and a Democrat, which, in itself, is an awesome combination, IMO.

However, posters who never have a good word for Obama unless and until someone further left attacks him make me laugh.

I really wish only Democrats would post here.

[EFerrari]

203. Your post sort of confuses me.

Are you meaning, those posters who seem to look for occasions to bash Obama? If so, it's funny because those are usually the same posters who look for an occasion to bash Chavez. :)

[No Elephants]

247. Exactly. To them, the only thing worse than Obama is someone to the left of Obama. You don't seem

at all confused to me.

Are you sure you're uncertain? (j/k)

[EFerrari]

250. I can be very slow.

lol

[Chulanowa]

138. I'm not seeing a problem.

Obama accused Chavez of supporting mass murder.

Chavez called Obama dumb.

Look folks, I like Obama, voted for him of course, you know the whole deal. But if he's going to say shit like "you support terrorism" about another nation's leader, well, fuck yeah, I'm going to agree when that nation's leader turns around and goes "Wow, you're a dumb son of a bitch. Go read a book"

Hopefully, Obama will take the advice, pick up a couple decent books (or better yet, actually talk to the nation he just insulted) and educate himself. We all have our ignorant spots, after all.

[No Elephants]

154. Chaez did not necessarily call him dumb. The translation could easily be uninformed. Technically,

that is what "ignorant" meant in English--simply uninformed, not boorish or dumb.

Those connotations have been added by people who were ignorant of the actually definition of :ignorant." "Ignoramus" is pejorative. "Ignorant" is not.

[rabs]

222. Excellent point you make No Elephants

Seems the nuances of the Spanish language often escape the gringo reporters.

Ignorante: Adj. y s. Que no tiene instruccion o concimiento. (One who does not have instruction or knowledge.

Ignorar: v. No saber. (One who does not know)

Pobre: It can also mean "lacking," for example "a book lacking in content."

You are correct; "pobre ignorante" was not necessarily an insult or pejorative. It was just framed that way by the reporters.

[No Elephants]

249. Thanks. I try. Reading this thread, the reporters are not the only ones who framed it that way.

[subsuelo]

153. Divide and Conquer.

With Reuters to help with the Dividing part, the Conquering is made all the more easier

[endarkenment]

157. And he burned mah Kittehs!

CAN WE INVADE NOW?

[Algorem]

159. Obama will continue to export terrorism and obstruct progress worldwide

and project on Chavez

because he doesn't want to end up like the last Irish-American U.S. President.

He's not that much of an ignoramus.

Even if he does crack "tard jokes" on national television.

[cali]

171. delusional nonsense

and you're the one using the disgusting phrase, genius;. Fuck that. And no there are no excuses for using it. None.

[Algorem]

240. Naner naner.

[slackmaster]

164. Democratically elected by a supermajority multiple times

:popcorn:

[tavalon]

167. Gosh, Chavez must really miss having Bush to knock around

Ignoramus is the last word I would use to describe our current President.

[EFerrari]

187. Do you remember that speech Obama gave last summer in Miami?

He was talking to a very conservative group of anti-Castro Cubans, CANF? He told them exactly what they wanted to hear and everyone who follows democracy in Latin America got a stomach ache.

And the ironic thing is, CANF *has* exported terror to Havana and sponsored it in Miami itself, but Obama was happy to take their campaign contributions. :crazy:

[Swede]

173. Right back at ya,Mr. Poopypants.

[960]

181. What a conflict for those who worship both Chavez & Obama.

Personally I think Chavez' days are numbered.... down into the double digits.

[Bushknew]

183. We support Israel, what does that make us?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=266334&mesg_id=266334

[cali]

195. OK, every state supports terrorism by that standard.

and seriously, I could give a fig if Chavez supports FARC.

[EFerrari]

197. It's ironic because Chavez is the one who told them publicly

to put down their arms where Uribe in Colombia only stands to lose if they do.

[Tocque Deville]

214. I've read the whole thread and not one person has stated the obvious

and not one person has stated the obvious.

FARC is not a terrorist group. Unless you're a fascist supporter.

Even those defending Chavez do so by claiming, accurately, that
Chavez was requested by Uribe to negotiate with FARC. This is an
accurate argument but it concedes too much. The terrorists in Columbia
are agents of the government and/or the corporations who back the
government. FARC are defenders of human rights, common decency, and
the interests of the common people in Columbia against the tyrannical
despotism of the corporatist state.

[Bacchus39]

218. here is the obvious: Colombia is spelled with two "o"s

shows how much you know.

[EFerrari]

219. There is no doubt that Uribe and his whole apparatus are butchers

but FARC's hands are not clean and I won't defend their behavior. Sorry.

[marasinghe]

224. agree with you that farc's hands are not clean - but -

then you should include the french maquis and the greek and yugoslav partisans who fought the nazis, the jewish partisans of the warsaw ghetto, the spanish maquis who fought franco's fascists, Mandela's anc and so many other freedom fighters - in the same category.

btw: no reflection on your post. agree with most of yours i've read.
just wanted to point out that - circumstances sometimes make people resort to desperate measures, which we might personally abhor, but can understand the motivation behind.

[EFerrari]

225. Armed struggle is one thing. FARC lost me the first time I saw

that they had put Bettancourt in what appeared to be a dog collar. There is no reason to do something so brutal.

[marasinghe]

231. did not know that. thanks for the information. (n/t)

[EFerrari]

233. If you're interested in FARC, you might want to read James Petras.

He's outstanding in general and in particular, very knowledgeable about FARC. I think if you google his name, his site comes right up.

[marasinghe]

221. good post. sadly, even some liberals, pseudo or not, shut down on logic with the chavez button.

fuming over rhetoric, few look at actions & results. let's list some.

obama:
- mass bail out of wall street & bank corps. but middle & low income workers & home-owners - not so much.
- sends out mass-murdering scum* kissinger, on diplomatic missions.
- appoints corporate hack & kissinger associate, geithner, to one of the most important cabinet posts.
- keeps bush flacks on in important cabinet posts; viz.: secdef gates.
- spends more effort trying to cajole repukes into his bipartisan coalition, than listening & providing a say, to true progressives like kucinich.
- allows a free hand to the cia & pentagon, in continuing the status quo. cases in point: as many posters pointed out - school of the americas; drone attacks in pakistan; continuing presence of troops in iraq.
- vote in support of govt. eavesdropping.
- but, he's a smart, intelligent, ivy-league post-grad, and - i agree - a nice, decent guy, who is sympathetic to those not at the top of the money pyramid, and did & does try to help and look out for them.

chavez:
- nationalization of resources to benefit poor & indigenous venezuelans.
- free elections, vetted by the european union, jimmy carter, et al.
- oil assistance to poor countries, and the poor in rich countries.
- trying & succeeding in increasing literacy in venezuela.
- trying & succeeding in decreasing the poverty rate in venezuela.
- tried to bring farc to the negotiation table; negotiated on hostages.
- allowed the fascists who tried to shut his govt. down in the coup attempt to continue their miserable existence, ad our nauseam.
- helped to propagate a renewed nationalism in the south american continent, to benefit the people of the land; instead of a bunch of rich oligarchs, and the multi-national corps. they ride on.
- but, he's a blunt, plain-spoken, rough-talking, drop-out from grad school, who doesn't have the smooth facade of your average statesman; and will insult other world leaders at the drop of a hat, when they indulge in b-s.

yet, who's the more progressive here?

[cali]

241. oh bullshit. Whether FARC is a terrorist group can be debated

but an organization of such light and goodness as you worshipfully describe, doesn't kidnap civilians, murder civilians or engage in the cocaine trade. And Chavez disagrees with you about FARC being this ooh so wonderful organization, dear.

On January 13, 2008, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez stated his dissaproval with the FARC strategy of armed struggle and kidnapping saying "I don't agree with kidnapping and I don't agree with armed struggle" <3>. President Hugo Chavez has repeatedly stated his dissaproval of the practice of kidnapping stating on April 14 that "If I were a guerrilla, I wouldn't have the need to hold a woman, a man who aren't soldiers...Free the civilians who don't have anything to do with the war. I don't agree with that."<4>. On March 7 at the Cumbre de Rio, Chavez stated again that the FARC should lay down their arms "Look at what has has happened and is happening in Latin America, reflect on this (Farc), we are done with war... enough with all this death"<5>. On June 8 Chavez repeated his call for a political solution and an end to the war, "The guerrilla war is history...At this moment in Latin America, an armed guerrilla movement is out of place". <6>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Armed_Forces_of_Colombia

common decency. What an absurd claim.

[jzodda]

246. FARC is awesome

They sell high quality cocaine in large quantities. They are the defenders of all things decent about the growing and manufacture and sale/export of Cocaine. They have killed for it, kidnapped for it and raped for it, all in defense of NARCO dollars. They do it as well as any of the cartels that they have been in bed with for the past 15 years.

Viva FARC!

[EFerrari]

251. And that puts them head and shoulders above the Colombian government

Bush's lap dancers.

[jzodda]

258. That's true it's much harder to get good Coke from the gov

n/t

[EFerrari]

259. Wrong. Just about every part of the government has been implicated

in drug dealing, money laundering or the murder of union activists. But, thanks for playing.

[jzodda]

260. You know you keep telling me about the government there

I responded to this thread because I read some nonsense about how FARC was some group of freedom fighters, which they haven't been for probably 2 decades. I didn't praise the gov there nor said a word about them beyond a sarcastic joke about buying coke from them. I don't see the need to criticize both sides each time I want to talk about just one of them. I can never understand the need of people to do that. If somebody posts nonsense about the gov then I would be happy to criticize that too. Trying to find something pure about the political situation in that country is an exercise in futility.

[EFerrari]

261. Agreed. Poor Colombia is between the devil and the deep blue sea. n/t

[Name removed]

220. Deleted message

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

[tritsofme]

223. Thanks for an answer to my question. Head still firmly in ass.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3393934

[defendandprotect]

229. Sad to see this --- who provokes first? Rather, we should be trying to amend our ways

in Latin America!

[BootinUp]

252. how endearing nt

[EFerrari]

253. Rght. Being accused of supporting terror should only be met with

Margaritas and sarapes.

[BootinUp]

255. Chavez is little more than a gobfly

and should learn some diplomatic skills.

[EFerrari]

256. Another expert weighs in.