Hugo Chávez compares his wounded pride to the suffering of Jesus Christ

[kurth]

Royal insult echoes persecution of Christ, says Venezuelan leader
Rory Carroll in Caracas and Paul Hamilos in Madrid
Tuesday November 13, 2007
The Guardian

Hugo Chávez is not shutting up. Venezuela's president stepped up his verbal counter-attack against the Spanish king yesterday by comparing his wounded pride to the suffering of Jesus Christ and Latin America's colonial oppression.

Three days after Juan Carlos urged Chávez to "shut up" at a summit it was the latter doing all the talking while the king retreated into silence. The "explosion" of royal disdain betrayed an enduring colonial superiority complex, the president said upon his return to Caracas. It echoed not only 500 years of imperial power and abuse, but also the persecution of Christ.

Should he accept the king's injunction to shut up, "the stones of the people of Latin America would cry out", said Chávez, paraphrasing a comment by Christ in Jerusalem shortly before his crucifixion. The Venezuelan information ministry issued press releases identifying the relevant part of the Bible.
The self-styled socialist revolutionary also suggested that Juan Carlos, whom he referred to as "Mr King", supported a coup which briefly ousted him in 2002.

At a reception in the royal palace in Madrid - Juan Carlos's first public appearance since the summit - the king made no reference to Chávez's allegations, The spat began on Saturday at a summit in Santiago, Chile, when Chávez accused the former Spanish prime minister, José María Aznar, of being a fascist. The king interjected: "Why don't you shut up?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,,2210129,00.html

[tabasco]

Who cares?

Enough problems here in the USA to worry about.

[seriousstan]

1. Most dictators are thin skinned.

[EFerrari]

2. LOL!

:rofl:

[MADem]

3. ..... !!!!!!!!!!

And I was critiqued when I suggested he had a megalomania problem!!!

:rofl:

Where dat crown o'thorns, there, bro?

And where-d holes in yer hands an' feet, dere?

When is the well fed fellow gonna drag the cross up the hill for the amusement of the rabble?

[EFerrari]

6. Did you read the article? He used a metaphor

and they're smearing him with delusions. I told you guys, these are going to be three really LONG weeks ahead of the vote.

[Cha]

8. People just love to jump on

the tiniest thing to prove they were right about Chavez all along.

And, here we have bushit talkin' to "god" and sayin' he was told to bomb the shite outta Iraq and he fucking sleeps like a baby and our m$$$$$mwhores just yawn some more.

[EFerrari]

9. I'm counting this as Hit Piece #2 for this week.

lol

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

92. Yeah, it's from the Guardian...

That well-known fount of right-wing propoganda. :crazy:

[redqueen]

129. You assume that any outlet is somehow unable to print propaganda?

Did you know the Beeb also echoed WH lies about the US-backed coup in Venezuela? You know, cause they're also not a "well-known fount of right-wing propoganda" (sic)

Hmmm?


Might want to at least *consider* being more careful about content, instead of assuming any outlets are 100% pure and unable to lie for the corporatocracy... and judging information on its merits, rather than the source.

[MADem]

18. Bush is crazy too. One nutcase doesn't "negate" another.

That's pisspoor logic, right there. There actually can be more than one crazy, halfbaked leader on the world stage...REALLY!!!!!!!

:rofl:

[EFerrari]

22. If I say small birds would cry at your argument

you could accuse me of the same thing.

lol

Come on, this is just silly. The guy uses a literary allusion and all of a sudden, he's Christ? If I quote Lear, does that make me Edmond?

lol

[MADem]

42. He used JESUS CHRIST, not Johnny Appleseed.

You just don't COMPARE YOURSELF to JC.

Well, maybe YOU do, but in most predominantly Christian countries, it IS considered poor form. No matter how much parsing anyone tries to use to get around it.

But hey, whatever.

No dissent. The Southern Hemisphere Santa can do no wrong.

Que Viva Chavezuela!

[EFerrari]

44. He did no such thing. Warren already explained that to you

but if you need to bray against Chavez for some reason that I don't really want to explore, please, be my guest.

lol

[MADem]

52. Well, if Tony Snow or Dana Perino came out and told you what Bush "meant" would you claim that Bush

had NOTHING TO DO with the remarks? That POOR BUSH was being "misconstrued?" That's what you are doing here:


Should he accept the king's injunction to shut up, "the stones of the people of Latin America would cry out", said Chávez, paraphrasing a comment by Christ in Jerusalem shortly before his crucifixion.

The Venezuelan information ministry issued press releases identifying the relevant part of the Bible.

[EFerrari]

75. Okay. You win. Chavez used a metaphor. Crucify him.

:rofl:

[MADem]

84. Before DEC 2--preferably. NT

[Warren Stupidity]

95. Please show exactly whereChavez compared himself to Christ.

I failed to find that comparison in the quoted statements from Chavez, with your degree in National Security perhaps you can decrpypt that coded comparison out of the text.

[MADem]

120. Read this entire thread, pick out my posts. I've explained it, clearly. NT

[nick303]

155. Please see post 152

I would suspect he would have to say something as literal as "Much like Christ, I..." or "I am just like Jesus in that..." before any of the choir around here would give it any credence. Actually, nah, they still wouldn't.

[Dorian Gray]

110. Not at all

But he was the one using biblical references. It makes him look as though he believes he's such a put upon martyr, and that isn't going to help endear him to those in the world who are sitting on the fence about him.

[Cha]

28. Yeah, you tell 'em..

MAdem.

[IsItJustMe]

101. Yep, nobody ever kicks a dead dog. Chavez is out there given the neo-cons hell and they don't like

it.

[Cha]

108. Yeah,

You get it..it's so transparent.

[MADem]

17. He used a HUBRIS LADEN and ABSURD metaphor.

But hey..Que viva Chavezuela!!

I get it!!

Say nothing negative about the red shirted fatman!!!

It's against the Chavezuela rules!!

No dissent!!! No discussion!!! The dictator has decreed it!

His acolytes obey!

:rofl:

[EFerrari]

19. Hubris laden?

lol

:rofl:

[MADem]

20. Glad you think it's amusing, as I do too!!!

:rofl:

[EFerrari]

25. This is like a bad episode of SNL.

:)

[Cha]

29. And they can get

really bad.

[MADem]

39. Ooooooh, yes....they CAN. nt

[MADem]

37. Si, Pepe, Si!! nt

[EFerrari]

43. Excuse me?

[Warren Stupidity]

24. Really? Please explain.

I presented a rather straight forward analysis below that indicates nothing of the sort. Please show me exactly how the quote from Chavez and the related passage in the bible (Luke 19:40, but be sure to read all of Luke 19 to get the full context) demonstrates an absurd use of metaphor in the given situation (being told to shut up by a king) and extreme hubris.

[EFerrari]

30. The same critics that accuse him of being undemocratic

are accusing him of HUBRIS.

LOL

[MADem]

32. When he changes the law to make him President for Life, and then suspends elections, you remember

that, OK?

[EFerrari]

34. Yes and that same day, I'll fly. OK?

[MADem]

51. Those feathers are probably poking out of your back even now.

He's already packed the legislature, like BushCo did during the Frist years. And they're doing his "Que Viva Chavezuela!" bidding. The crap he's pulling makes BushCo look like rank amateurs.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/10/18/venezuela.amendments/

How long would you put up with this SHIT in the US? We only do this kind of crap to "furriners!!"

...(The Constitutional) amendment, if approved, would allow President Chavez to invoke a state of emergency to justify suspending certain rights that are untouchable under international law," Vivanco said.

These include the presumption of innocence and rights to a fair trial, to an attorney, against self-incrimination, for a defendant to know the charges and evidence against him, and against double jeopardy, he said.

The proposed amendments would eliminate limitations on how long a state of emergency could last and the requirement that a constitutional tribunal review the suspension of rights during times of emergency, Vivanco said.

They also would get rid of language requiring that any such decree "meet the requirements, principles and guarantees established in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the American Convention on Human Rights," he said.

Advocates of the amendments have cited the ill-fated 2002 coup attempt against the socialist president as evidence of the need for constitutional reform.

But Vivanco disagreed. "Recent Latin American history shows that it is precisely during states of emergency that countries need strong judicial protections to prevent abuse," he said. "Otherwise, what has historically prevailed is the brutal exercise of power."

From the Lefty Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,,2193346,00.html


As part of the same package of changes presidential term limits will be abolished, allowing Mr Chavez, who seldom seems to sleep or take time off, to continue his hyperactivity for some time to come.

Critics say the two proposals are directly related: the six-hour proposal is a populist sweetener to ease the constitution's passage in a December referendum which will give the president the right to stand for continuous re-election. They have also criticised a proposal to suspend due process in "emergencies", allowing citizens to be detained without charge.
Under the existing constitution the 53-year-old soldier-turned-president, first elected in 1998, is obliged to step down when his current term ends in 2012.

Opinion polls suggest the new charter, which the Chavista-dominated congress is due to vote through this month, will be endorsed in the referendum as the president is popular among the poor majority, although some remain sceptical.



This article is a beaut, it speaks from the perspective of both the supporters and opposition--a bit lengthy, but worth it: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=14258

On Sunday December 2, Venezuelans will return to the voting booths to ratify or reject two slates of constitutional reforms, 33 of which have been proposed by President Hugo Chávez and 36 additional reforms made by the National Assembly. Included in the proposed reforms to Venezuela’s 1999 constitution are an increase in the presidential term from six to seven years and a removal of the two-term limit, a shortening of the work week to 36 hours, the suppression of the right to information during national emergencies, the elimination of the autonomy of the central bank, increased funding for communal councils, the creation of new forms of collective property, the requirement of gender parity in positions of public office, and the recognition of Afro-Venezuelan groups, in addition to indigenous groups included in the previous reforms.

This mixed bag of proposed reforms has provoked polarized reactions across the country, and from international observers. The familiar cries of “dictadura” (dictatorship) coming from the opposition camp are no surprise, but the student protests coming out of the main public and private universities of Caracas, and the renegade voices within Chávez’s own administration have caused some confusion over where the fault lines lie. Some social movements supporting Chávez have been concerned that retrogressive proposals are mixed together with progressive reforms, making it difficult to campaign and vote on the issues as a bloc. What is at stake in Venezuela’s upcoming reform referendum? Does the outcry over the reforms signal yet again the frustrations of a thwarted opposition in its ongoing tussles with the government, or is there something more at play?

It is important to understand the anatomy of the various social forces who have thrown their hat into the ring. The long-term anti-Chavista camp, opposed to the proposed reforms, is divided over what strategy to take to the reform referendum. Some opposition parties, including Primero Justicia, Un Nuevo Tiempo, and the Christian Democratic COPEI have begun a campaign to encourage people to vote “No” to the reforms. By contrast, the National Resistance Command, which includes opposition parties such as Acción Democrática (AD), Alianza Bravo Pueblo and Bandera Roja called for a boycotting of the referendum and have mobilized people in the streets for their cause, although the AD retracted this position and joined the “No” campaign just a few days later. Like in earlier moments, the opposition’s indecisiveness and its inability to come to a united decision about how to confront Chávez has weakened its political impact.

In a surprising move, Chávez’s former Defense Minister Raul Isais Baduel who had played an important role in restoring Chávez to power during the 2002 coup, also came out against the constitutional reforms and urged people to vote “No” in the upcoming referendum. The former army commander described the changes as a “coup d’état” that would concentrate further power in the hands of the president, saying that there was no need to overhaul the 1999 constitution. Some were concerned that the defection of a senior military personnel could have an impact on the armed forces, but so far there is no indication that this should be the case. It also seems that Baduel’s opposition stems from his concerns over the proposed changes to Article 328, which would require changes to the structure of the Armed Forces.


.....As can be seen from the criticisms coming from social movements and commentators supportive of the Chávez government, it is possible and necessary to criticize the state’s attempts to monopolize power, not in the name of a procedural democracy, as the free-market proponents of the opposition would have it, but rather in the name of a substantive democracy that puts decision making power in the hands of people organized within communal councils, assemblies, and popular organizations. On this account, “participation” is not limited to campaigning and mobilizing people to vote in the recall referendum on articles that have already been decided by a small group of representatives. It aspires to a local level of decision making that would have people themselves determine the content of their laws and institutions.







The Shah did "land reform" to con the peasants. Hugo gives 'em a shorter work week in exchange for the opportunity to suspend the Constitution anytime he says "Emergency, Emergency, Everybody To Get From Street!!!" (The reference for that line is Alan Arkin in {i]The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming FWIW.)

You'll be able to fly to the top of the Rockefeller Center tree with those wings before they take it down this year! Bush could take lessons from the guy on "how it's done," but he waited too long--he doesn't have his rubber-stamp legislature like Hugo does, anymore.

[EFerrari]

71. With Chavez 's long history of brutality in mind, this is indeed

very worrisome. :crazy:

[MADem]

85. The Shah of Iran actually started out as the shy, well-meaning, soft spoken

benevolent and timid son of an Army Colonel who took control of his country by decree.

A dictator is a dictator. Abrogation of democracy is DICTATORSHIP.

I've lived in one. It ain't fun.

[redqueen]

130. He was the son of the former Shah, not an Army Colonel.

Last of the monarchs, actually.

And what do you mean, "took control by decree"? He took over after his father was forced out.

:shrug:

[MADem]

137. Uh, the Daddy shah WAS an ARMY COLONEL. Jesus!!

His son, Last of the Monarchs? Are you mad???? By that standard, the 'last' is actually Little Reza, the middle-aged son of Shah, in exile in suburban MD. And HE has kids, too.

REZA Khan, the shah's daddy, TOOK OVER the country, deposed the existing monarch, wiped his ass on the Qajar Dynasty, and made HIMSELF the Shah. He had no "royal" pedigree. He was the son of an Army man, from a small village, who 'made good' and allied himself with the Brits, who helped him and other cronies with whom he was associated to achieve power.

He followed HIS father into the Army, rose through the enlisted ranks, to the officer corps, and made his bones as an Army Colonel, just like HIS daddy did, eventually promoting himself to General.

Then HE MADE himself the SHAH.

And he passed on the crown to his boy.

Before Reza Kahn, there WAS no "Pahlavi" dynasty!!!!

You really should check these things before you get didactic. It saves embarrassment.

A rather sunny history of the man: http://www.iranchamber.com/history/reza_shah/reza_shah.php

In 1911, serving under the overall command of Abol Hossein Mirza Farmanfarmaian or called Farmanfarma (The prime minister of the time) Reza Khan took part in battles against Salar al-Doleh who was attempting to topple the Government in Tehran and reinstate his brother Mohammad Ali on the throne. Reza gave a good account of himself in that campaign and was promoted to First Lieutenant. His proficiency in handling machine guns elevated him to the rank equivalent to Captain in 1912.

By 1915 he had come to be regarded as a brave and fearless soldier and was handpicked by his successive senior commanders to accompany them on military expeditions. Reza Khan's military reputation, his native intelligence and professionalism served him well and he soon became well known by some prominent Iranians in Tehran and other provinces. By 1915 he was promoted to the rank of colonel. .......In 1918 Reza Khan was referred to as a Brigadier General in the campaign of Cossacks in the Kashan area against the bandits. ....Reza Khan became prime minister of the new regime in 1923. He negotiated the evacuation of the British forces stationed in Iran since World War I in 1924.




In 1925 Reza Khan deposed Ahmad Mirza, the last shah of the Qajar Dynasty, and was proclaimed shah of Iran. He changed his name to Reza Shah Pahlevi, thus founding the Pahlevi dynasty.

[redqueen]

138. By last I meant the last one actually running the country.

And yeah, I know HIS DAD unseated the prior guy... but THE shah didn't... so... whatever.

I see you're still as charming as ever.

[MADem]

140. Try reading what I wrote. I was accurate, and you were not.

I told you that SHAH, the guy who deposed Mossadeq, was the son of an Army Colonel.

That is FACT. I gave you a cite to prove it. Your post "inferred" that he came from "royal" stock, and was the 'last of a monarchial line.' He did not and was not. He came from career military stock, that assumed power by force.

What's with the "charming as ever" crack?

Look, I'm not the one who is didactically "correcting" with false facts. You are.

If you got your facts straight in the first place, and didn't try to pull that finger wagging BS when it turns out you're dead wrong, you wouldn't get your little feelings hurt.

It doesn't thrill me to have to correct your incorrect assertions, BTW. But when you suggest that I am shopping one, it's a vested interest, you see.

[redqueen]

141. Shah is a title. More than one.

The last one... The one most commonly referred to as "The" Shah...

Oh nevermind.

Yes, the cack... that comes from experience "debating" with you.

Have a nice day.

[MADem]

143. Oh, bullshit. Shah is not just a title, it is a word with meaning. The word, translated into Engli

is KING. Shahinshah is King of Kings, i.e. Emperor.

Yeah, "nevermind" all right. You're dead wrong. I call you on it, and you get all pissed off because you couldn't pull a snow job of superiority, like you usually do.

And then, still you go for the cheesy, snark-laden put-down. Like you're persecuted, or something, or I'm being "mean" to you because I correct a falsehood you assert about a country that is not foreign to me.

You have one of those nice days, too.

[redqueen]

144. So... in your dictionary... "King" isn't a title?

:rofl:

Okay, man... whatever...

Peace. :)

[MADem]

145. You really DON'T read--I said "Not JUST a title"--you were trying to back off of your

monarchial assertions, that you made in post 130, and again, I called you on it. You can't do this kinda stuff on a message board and get away with it--see, your previous responses are up there for all to see.


But OK, man, whatever....

:rofl:

Peace. :hi:

[redqueen]

146. dupe...

[redqueen]

147. I wasn't backing off of anything.

Monarchs depose each other all the time.

The last monarch doesn't HAVE to be a blood relation to the FIRST monarch to be considered the last monarch. Does that clear it up?

I didn't want to have to go to the trouble of spelling all that out because honestly... I don't see much point. We've gone rounds on other issues and I've come away with much the same bad feeling from the lack of honest discussion and your propensity for shouting and cackling and that sort of thing.

Seriously... communication doesn't have to be this difficult or contentious. Peace. :)


and in case you're wondering what I mean about your shouting and cackling here's your FIRST response to me:

Uh, the Daddy shah WAS an ARMY COLONEL. Jesus!!
His son, Last of the Monarchs? Are you mad???? By that standard, the 'last' is actually Little Reza, the middle-aged son of Shah, in exile in suburban MD. And HE has kids, too.

REZA Khan, the shah's daddy, TOOK OVER the country, deposed the existing monarch, wiped his ass on the Qajar Dynasty, and made HIMSELF the Shah. He had no "royal" pedigree. He was the son of an Army man, from a small village, who 'made good' and allied himself with the Brits, who helped him and other cronies with whom he was associated to achieve power.

He followed HIS father into the Army, rose through the enlisted ranks, to the officer corps, and made his bones as an Army Colonel, just like HIS daddy did, eventually promoting himself to General.

Then HE MADE himself the SHAH.

And he passed on the crown to his boy.

Before Reza Kahn, there WAS no "Pahlavi" dynasty!!!!

You really should check these things before you get didactic. It saves embarrassment.



Do you see the nastiness?

[MADem]

148. Again, this isn't correct. Each 'dynasty' is a separate entity.

Particularly when the monarch is booted off the throne by force of violence, and the booter decides to make himself king after the fact.

There was a gap between the Qajar and Pahlavi 'dynasties' too.

If you don't like my tone in my reply you cited, above, look at what I was responding to--you "corrected" me, when you were wrong.

[redqueen]

150. So if someone dares to *contradict* you, and you think they're wrong...

then to you, that legitimizes being rude and nasty to them?

And what difference does it make if they're wrong? Is it that you think if someone contradicts you and they're right, then you have to be polite about it? But people who are mistaken don't deserve civility?

Okay.

[MADem]

160. Your characterization is falsely "personal." You take excessive offense, unnecessarily.

What you are trying to tell me, and what isn't true, is that the Qajar and Pahlavi Dynasties are part of the same "line" when they aren't. You're the one getting annoyed when I point out that this distinction is IMPORTANT to anyone with roots in Iran or who has an understanding of the people and culture, to say nothing of those who think accurate history, not propaganda, counts for something.

That's like trying to suggest that Fidel Castro was heir to Fulgencio Batista's regime. Certainly, one followed the other, but that occurred as a result of force of arms, not an inheriting of the mantle, a passing of the torch. It's both a distinction and a difference. If that hurts your feelings, well, it's not intended. But the point matters. Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.

[MADem]

126. OOOh, because they're "mutually exclusive" qualities? Gee, I never KNEW!!

A lot of people didn't know that, either!!! In fact, I think you're the only one who "knows" that.

Of course, what's more likely is that you have a problem with a definition of a word, or two.

[MADem]

31. You did? BELOW, you say? Why, ain't that special.

Most world leaders who are sane compare themselves to Jesus, and compare their struggles to those of Jesus. Especially when a figurehead tells them to callate.

YEAH, that's the ticket.

My concern for your opinion is about equal to your concern for mine.

I said, already, I GET IT!!! Que Viva Chavezuela!!!

Please, dictator, don't take me to the reeducation camps!!! That red shirt makes you look...THIN!!!!

:rofl:

[EFerrari]

33. He didn't compare himself to Christ.

The press made the comparison.

Oh, Christ.

:rofl:

[MADem]

54. No, he QUOTED CHRIST in relation to himself, and his press SECRETARY, not "the press"

made damn sure the "press" UNDERSTOOD what he meant.

:rofl: indeed!!!!

Here, one more time, with feeling:

Should he accept the king's injunction to shut up, "the stones of the people of Latin America would cry out", said Chávez, paraphrasing a comment by Christ in Jerusalem shortly before his crucifixion.

The Venezuelan information ministry issued press releases identifying the relevant part of the Bible.

[EFerrari]

70. I hope your degree isn't in English. n/t

[MADem]

86. No, it's in National Security. But I'm not the one with the comprehension problem.

I get it. You don't.

[EFerrari]

117. Are we clear that he did not say either of these things:

Hugo Chávez compares his wounded pride to the suffering of Jesus Christ

(He didn't say that.)

Royal insult echoes persecution of Christ, says Venezuelan leader

(He didn't say that either.)

[MADem]

119. No, he didn't cite those headlines, to my knowledge. But he did DO what the headlines say.

He quoted a suffering/persecuted Christ, in the context of the remark by the King, and his very own PRESS SECRETARY (not the mean old Chavez-hating press, his very own Dana Perino) made goddamn sure the PRESS took the point by handing out the Biblical quote--just so the stupid heathens would not MISS THE POINT that he WAS, in fact, QUOTING Christ.

How tortured can your excuses get? Jesus Christ, indeed!!!!

But hey--que viva Chavezuela!!!

Why would a dictator quote "headlines?" Your effort to pretend he didn't mean what he clearly, plainly meant makes no sense.

He sure did do what those headlines said he did--he quoted JC in the context of Christ's persecution, and made sure that his press secretary let the media know who he was evoking.

[Common Sense Party]

156. "Chavezuela" I like it.

¿Constitución? ¡We don´t need no stinkin´ Constitución!

[Selatius]

4. His oratory style tends to be very flamboyant if not provocative and polarizing.

Hyperbole is something one would expect in his repertoire.

[BuyingThyme]

5. Isn't that the whole point of Christianity?

[EFerrari]

45. Shh!

[JVS]

80. No. It's actually quite a faux pas to do that

[cali]

7. climb on down from that

cross of yours hugo. Sheesh, can't he just let it go. Talk about ego.

[Warren Stupidity]

16. why would a progressive like you join in with the Chavez bashing?

[MADem]

23. Yeah, you tell 'em---dissent is NOT ALLOWED. Nothing but PRAISE for the fearless leader!!

Or you'll get what's coming to ya!!!

:rofl:

[Warren Stupidity]

26. Did you have anything remotely intelligent to contribute?

[MADem]

35. Why yes, I did.

Que viva Chavezuela!!!!

No dissent!!


Toe that line!!

Wear that red shirt with PRIDE, now!!

President for Life Chavez, Ruler of Chavezuela, is Our One True Lord!

[EFerrari]

38. Thank you for checking in.

:rofl:

[EFerrari]

27. Dissent? What about some common sense?

lol

[MADem]

36. Yeah. What about it?

Que Viva Chavezuela, who will fuck his constitution so hard that it will make what Bush has done to ours look like a peck on the cheek.

Que Viva Chavezuela!!

No DISSENT!

[EFerrari]

41. The venom against Chavez is always surprising to me.

Whatever.

[MADem]

56. I'm venemous against guys that want to take away all human rights from people,

as I have quoted elsewhere.

He is going to destroy Venezuela, and replace it with "Chavezuela" on 2 December; he intends to crayon over the Constitution in ways that would cause riots in the streets here in placid, sleepy, who-gives-a-shit America.

Guilty until proven innocent, does that sound OK to you?

Chavez can declare a state of emergency and suspend ALL LAWS except his decrees, whenever he wants, for as long as he wants, without ANY judicial check--does that sound good, too?

Even his DEFENSE MINISTER doesn't like it.

But it's probably gonna pass, because he's giving everyone, all those poor slobs who just can't see past their next meal, to their children's bleaker futures, a 36 Hour Work Week!!! Wheeeeee!!!!

I am appalled at the slavish support of this dictadura.

It's just incredible to me.

[EFerrari]

68. And I am appalled at the consistently bad reading and

knee jerkish posts on these threads.

You have a prediction for Venezuela? Cool -- don't expect me to take it as fact.

You don't know that EX defense minister has his own agenda, cool. Please don't make me explain it to you.

Every Western democracy has a provision for states of emergency. If it's codified, it can be challenged unlike in Pakistan where Mussarif is making it up as he goes along.

The proposed reforms have been actively and systematically debated all over the country. And with a lot more skill and thoughtfulness than you have seen fit to bring to this thread.

[MADem]

87. Horseshit. Every western democracy does NOT have a provision for a

state of emergency that can be declared by a single individual, with no check or balance, that can last forever.

You gripe about reading, and you don't even read what I offer you. In VZ, if these laws pass, it will NOT be able to be challenged. Guilty until proven innocent. No rights.

Chavez, who makes fun of kings, will be EMPEROR-DICTATOR and all of the power of the state will be vested in him if he declares it so.

Franco did the same fucking thing. And he hung on, doing that State of Emergency shit, for DECADES.

[EFerrari]

104. Chavez is not Franco, either. There are plenty of sources

that describe the proposed reforms in detail and that do not come pre-distorted from the BushCo backed opposition. There are some in the Latin America forum. You might want to compare them to the hit pieces you've read so far. They might surprise you.

[MADem]

118. Even FRANCO didn't start out as FRANCO. Fidel didn't start out as Fidel, either.

They all start out with good intentions. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

This is not rocket science--Dictators suck.

Anyone who tries to mitigate or justify the rule of ONE PERSON, without ANY input from the people (for their own "unwashed peasant" good, of course) has a serious problem.

And all of the well meaning "proposed reforms" do not, can not, and will not mitigate the fact that if you are in VZ and Hugo wants you shot, it's bang-bang time for you. No lawyer, no trial, no nothing. You're guilty because HE said so, and you're DEAD because HE said so.

You can't be a progressive in favor of representative democracy and support Hugo Chavez's "reforms." He's buying off the poor and dumb, who are selling off their freedoms and rights foolishly and trustingly, with a shorter work week.

Don't try to tell me that the EVIL media has made up the fact that he will be able to wield absolute power at the snap of his fingers, either. That is bullshit--the proposals are that ALL POWER can be vested in Chavez simply by HIS decree. To say nothing of him controlling all the money, all by himself.

But hey, whatever. Que Viva Chavezuela. Knock yourself out.

[IsItJustMe]

103. Just wondering why you are so passionate about what happens in Venezuela, to bad some of that Passio...

couldn't be directed towards something that really mattered.

[MADem]

121. You are unschooled as to what the man is planning to do, I see.

Would you like to live in a society where you can be arrested without charge, held forever, not allowed legal counsel, guilty until proven innocent, convicted by the decree of one man, who can declare a state of emergency forever and put the mantle of President for Life upon his person?

Yeah--things that REALLY MATTER, eh? I see people whining and crying quite dramatically that Bush is TRYING to do these things here.

Guess what? They VOTE on that shit in VZ on 2 DEC. And the trade-off for the poor, unwashed, stupid people going to the polls? Let Uncle Hugo take care of everything--you can trust him, you have so far, and he's been fine, isn't that right? Yes, let Uncle Hugo worry about all that government stuff, and you get.....(drum roll) A SHORTER WORK WEEK!!!!

Your willingness to flush the democracy of Venezuela down the toilet is more than a little off-putting.

I've lived under dictators--it is a soul-crushing experience.

[redqueen]

132. They think they're psychic.

I think they're really just obsessed. Rational thought doesn't seem to enter into what passes for 'debate' in that crowd.

[MADem]

142. December 2, 2007. nt

[IsItJustMe]

102. Folks at top, such as Bush and Pat Robertson, have done a good job.

[redqueen]

139. But how would those guys' influence cause so much venom HERE?

:wtf:

[cali]

49. oh, it's the little progressive policeman, running around the thread

telling people what they have to believe to be a progressive.

Fuck that.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I support much of what Chavez has done. At the same time, I recognize that he's a bombastic egotist. And this remark, and continuing peevish fit about this minor incident, demonstrate that he's exactly that.

[Warren Stupidity]

94. I just wondered why you claim to be so progressive on the issues

but post so consistently against other progressives and take positions here that are anything other than progressive. For example "I support much of what Chavez has done" but you join in with the rightwing chorus of anti-Chavez folks. Did you even read the quote and try to analyze what Chavez actually said vs. what you were told it meant?

I am not policing anyone. I simply asked why you behave the way you do here, as I find your stances in these discussions in contradiction to your stated positions on issues. Unlike some of the rightists on this board, I am not calling for a purge of anyone or demanding anyone be silenced or alerted on. I just asked why. And as usual, the answer is some complete distortion.

[cali]

98. Of course you're playing progressive policeman

or call it purity cop if you wish. Sorry, I can appreciate some of what Chavez has done, without succumbing, as you and others have done, to the cult of personality surrounding him. But I've noticed you have a tendency toward hero worship- something I straight out abhor. I'm wary of all power. Period. You find some kinds of power just dandy. Have fun with that.

[redqueen]

133. Who worships him?

I see lots of obsessive hatred of the guy... and lots of bizarre fixation on the political goings on in Venezuela (where the people actually DO elect him... so... :wtf:)

I also see lots of claims that people who attempt to counter WH/CIA attempts to discredit this elected leader are somehow "worshiping" him or members of a "cult"... it's really baffling. The reason it's baffling is because this same group of people can seem to differentiate between substance and bullshit if it's about dems... but if it's about CHAVEZ they go into fits to try to rationalize the framing of him as a madman / dictator / whatever.

It's quite puzzling.

[PVnRT]

96. "No true Scotsman..."

et cetera

[question everything]

10. Does not matter. He can be found standing next to

a murder victim holding a bloody knife and DUers will still admire him as... Jesus incarnated?

But watch him saying something positive about Bush or the U.S.A and all of a sudden he will be a pariah on these pages.

[EFerrari]

11. You didn't read it either, did you?

lol

[Warren Stupidity]

12. uh, hmmm... wait one second here.

The article cited contains exactly one relevant quote from Chavez: "the stones of the people of Latin America would cry out". That does not translate at all to the headline: Royal insult echoes persecution of Christ, says Venezuelan leader.

Chavez is not comparing himself to the Christian god, he is paraphrasing Luke 19

39Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples!"

40"I tell you," he replied, "if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out."

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=19&version=31

Meaning of course not that Chavez is the messiah, the clear implication of Yet Another Hit Piece, but that he has a duty to the people of Latin America to not shut up on the demand of kings. In this quoted section those ordered to 'keep quiet' are the disciples, not Jesus. If the author of the Guardian article wanted to be at all accurate, Chavez was comparing himself to a disciple of Christ, a messenger of truth in the Christian mythology, not to Christ himself.

In cultures as overwhelmingly Catholic as is Venezuela, making these sorts of biblical references to current situations is evidence of a Catholic education, not of a messiah complex.

[EFerrari]

15. 2 hit pieces in one day. Someone is worried. n/t

[EFerrari]

13. This is what he said:

Should he accept the king's injunction to shut up, "the stones of the people of Latin America would cry out", said Chávez, paraphrasing a comment by Christ in Jerusalem shortly before his crucifixion.

THAT is what this second flap in the same day is about.

[MADem]

57. And what did his Tony Snow do?

Come on, context, now--he quoted CHRIST in relation to himself...and just in case the dumb press didn't get it, his Tony Snow did this:

The Venezuelan information ministry issued press releases identifying the relevant part of the Bible.

That's called making a deliberate comparison, and making SURE the unwashed Trotskyites listening to his diatribe "get" it.

[EFerrari]

72. Yes, the passage was identified. The misreading is willful.

Geezus on a trailer hitch.

[MADem]

83. Indeed, if Bush quoted Jesus and Tony Snow handed out the relevant Biblical passage

you'd SURELY be as blase about it.

Come off it.

There's no misreading going on here, save by you. You're being deliberately obtuse, because it's all about Que Viva Chavezuela...

[EFerrari]

93. That's just silly. I think you have Hugo mixed with John Lennon.

lol

[MADem]

123. No, it isn't silly. It's EXACTLY what happened. Hugo quoted Jesus, and his "Tony Snow" handed the

press the passages from the Bible, just to make SURE that the dumb, atheist press knew where that quote was coming from.

But thanks for playing! I've never seen such tortured excuses made for a dictator in my life!

[Common Sense Party]

157. Hey! He may be a dictator, but he's OUR kind of dictator!

[Swamp Rat]

14. Es la verdád.

Aznar es facha y el Rey es un asqueroso lameculo.

Hace poco minutos llegarán los malditos lamearbustos. :eyes: :D

[EFerrari]

46. The press would report a peanut butter sandwich

as cannibalism and some posters would buy it. It's just hilarious in a way. But all those Bush lickers who helped get our people killed never got this kind of attention, did they?

[Shlomo Yehudim]

21. >_> And I care why?

Between our emperor.....oh I mean president........and The Whole Global Warming Hoax I have to much to think about than a fool like Chavez feeling persecuted. His words are about as sincere as bush's and thats not at all.

[redqueen]

135. Ah well there's a new tactic.

Claim to not care, but post about what a fool and a liar he is.

Welcome. Enjoy your stay.

[fishwax]

40. a deceptive headline in a Chavez thread. What a shocker.

[redqueen]

136. I know! Can you believe it?!

:wow:

[barb162]

47. He should compare his wounded pride to that of a spoiled little brat.

[EFerrari]

48. You didn't read it either, did you?

lol

I see a pattern here.

[barb162]

50. Yes I did. The comment stands. He's an arrogant little dictator.

Did you see the article in the NY Times today about his repression of students who are against his dictatorship?

[EFerrari]

63. LOL! Yes. I did! I am a consumer of fiction but at least

I recognize the genre. By the same people who brought you your war.

That would be Hit Piece #3 for this week alone. BushCo is not happy.

[barb162]

69. Well take a good look; if you think that's fiction, I can't help you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/10/world/americas/10venez.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Students Emerge as a Leading Force Against Chávez
By SIMON ROMERO
Published: November 10, 2007
CARACAS, Venezuela, Nov. 9 — Finding Yon Goicoechea, a leader of the nascent student movement protesting the expanding power of President Hugo Chávez, is not easy. He changes cellphones every few days. After receiving dozens of death threats, he moves among the apartments of friends here each day in search of a safe place to sleep.

In an interview this week in a back room at one such residence, a villa in a leafy district in this city, Mr. Goicoechea described the movement that has supplanted traditional political parties in recent weeks as the most cohesive and respected challenger to Mr. Chávez’s government.

“We believe in exhausting the democratic options available to us through peaceful action,” said Mr. Goicoechea, 23, who studies law at Andrés Bello Catholic University here, referring to the students’ opposition to a constitutional overhaul. In the polarized world of Venezuelan political debate, such parsed and polished statements are rare.

But what about the claims, from Mr. Chávez and his loyalists, that the students ultimately want to oust him from office? “We want social transformation, not a coup,” Mr. Goicoechea said. “The real coup d’état is coming from Chávez, who wants to perpetuate himself in power.”


snip

[EFerrari]

74. No, you can't help me because you don't know what you're talking about.

That is a private school for the wealthy, for the same group that has been busted for using scripts and choreography supplied by the oligarchy. Over and over.

[barb162]

78. You don't know what you're talking about. That kid is from the slums.

If you read the whole article, you'd know that. I hate to burst your bubble, but don't presume it's just rich kids marching against that little tinhorn dictator. MAybe there are people in the country, rich and poor, who don't want their rights trampled. Gee, ya think?

[EFerrari]

91. The only rights being trampled are the rights of the elite

to suck the life out of the country.

Last week this same group set fires and carried signs explicitly calling for violence and tried to break into a government building. They're not just students peacefully demonstrating just as Chavez didn't say he was Christ.

And if this is the kid you're referring to --

'“I live in Catia,” said Ricardo Sánchez, 24, a student leader at Central University, referring to a conglomeration of slums on Caracas’s western fringe. “I leave home at 5 in the morning, and I have to go home very early so the thugs won’t attack me.

“This reform doesn’t solve those problems,” Mr. Sánchez continued, referring to the proposed constitutional overhaul.'

--he's talking about a police problem, crime not government suppression. And since all the student groups are planning further actions, it's difficult to see how they're rights are being "trampled".

[barb162]

114. Do you call Human Rights Watch an elite organization too?

Venezuela: Disturbing Plan to Suspend Due Process
Chávez Supporters Seek to Suspend Rights in Emergencies
(New York, October 16, 2007) – A constitutional amendment proposed by a pro-government committee in Venezuela’s National Assembly would allow the suspension of due process protections, Human Rights Watch said today.

This amendment, if approved, would allow President Chávez to invoke a state of emergency to justify suspending certain rights that are untouchable under international law.
snip
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/10/16/venezu17104.htm


Venezuela: TV Shutdown Harms Free Expression
(Washington, DC, May 22, 2007)—The Venezuelan government’s politically motivated decision not to renew a television broadcasting license is a serious setback for freedom of expression in Venezuela, Human Rights Watch said today. The decision will shut down Radio Caracas Television (RCTV), the country’s oldest private channel, when its license expires on May 27, 2007

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/05/22/venezu15986.htm

[EFerrari]

115. Human Rights Watch is doing its job.

This is an explanation of that change:

Among the more controversial of the reforms put forth by the National Assembly on October 15th, Article 337 calls for the suspension of some political liberties during a national emergency, including due process and the right to information. Similar limitations on civil and political rights were in force in Venezuela in the past, most recently in the 1961 Constitution. This reform has been hotly debated by lawmakers and across Venezuelan society. Progressives and supporters of President Chavez have also raised concerns, hoping to elevate the debate.<6> However, it is fully consistent with international law, which recognizes the right of governments to limit certain rights in extreme circumstances. Article 4 of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by Venezuela on August 10, 1978, notes, “In time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed, the States Parties to the present Covenant may take measures derogating from their obligations under the present Covenant."<7> Certain rights, however, would still be guaranteed such as the right to life, freedom from torture, disappearances, and going incommunicado.



Similar laws outlining the imposition of a state of exception or a state of emergency are in place in many of the world's prominent democracies, including Australia, Canada, France, Ireland, Spain and the UK. In the U.S., the 1976 National Emergencies Act allows the president to invoke a state of emergency and limit certain rights – including the right of habeas corpus – for up to two years. There were 32 declared national emergencies between 1976 and 2001 in the United States.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=405x393

And as far as RCTV, that has been gone over on this board a brazillion times. This is what FAIR said:
Coup Co-Conspirators as Free-Speech Martyrs
Distorting the Venezuelan media story
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3107

/oops it's->its

[MADem]

125. "Similar laws" have checks and balances included in them, even when declaring emergencies.

They either need the OK of another entity, like a judiciary or legislature, or they have a TIME LIMIT.

Chavez's proposals have NEITHER. He snaps his fingers, and he makes it so.
Forever, if he so desires, or at least until he croaks.

That's why Human Rights Watch and other humanitarian agencies are fucking APPALLED by this effort at a power grab.

[EFerrari]

127. Please post the text or the link to back up your claims.

You know, we're not going to agree on this. So, post some evidence or don't. I'm done arguing with with fortunetellers.

[MADem]

134. Uh, I already DID. To YOU. In post 51. You're too busy Chavez cheering to READ, I see.

It's quite plain, in ALL of the cites I posted (which I see you have not read for comprehension) what he wants to do.

You're just refusing to see it because it's causing huge cognitive dissonance on your part, that your socialistic hero could actually be a power hungry fat fuck in a red shirt who wants absolute power over his people and their oil resources.

Here, let's review--and, after we do, you might go back and actually read all the links I bothered to give you, foolishly thinking that you would actually take note of them. If anyone is shopping absolute SHIT without references, and nothing but foot stomping, accusations of "Tighty Righty" and insistence that people who have a problem with Hugo for any idiotic reason other than his BAD BEHAVIOR, it's you:

The proposed amendments would eliminate limitations on how long a state of emergency could last and the requirement that a constitutional tribunal review the suspension of rights during times of emergency, Vivanco said.



They also would get rid of language requiring that any such decree "meet the requirements, principles and guarantees established in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the American Convention on Human Rights,"

he said.


Yeah, those bozos at the International Covenant and the Convention on Human Rights....they must be ....uh, BUSH BOTS....yeah, that's the ticket!!!!!! Or perhaps they hate Hugo because he's so pretty????

:eyes:

[nick303]

154. Remember to use logic, as another poster in the thread suggested

The logic goes something like this:

If ( Information is Pro-Chavez )
Then
Accept without question
Else
Label as Propaganda;
Discard

[cigsandcoffee]

97. Bingo. That's exactly how I read it.

He's reacting like a loudmouthed 6-year-old who was rebuked for the first time.

[JVS]

53. It is Britney Spears who has truly carried the cross this year. Chavez is being an attention whore.

[The Inquisitive]

58. Agreed!

Britney has clearly cast away her worldly wealth and status and attempted to live amongst the commoners of America and experience everyday struggle and strife American whitetrash deal with, just as Ghandi did before embarking on his campaign to end the British Raj. Chavez understands little about the plight of the poor, and stands as a pale comparison to Britney.

[JVS]

59. And remember how she cut of her hair to protest the vanity and conceit of worldly life...

before entering a period of quiet meditation at that retreat. Very monastic. Clearly going by the example of Jesus in the desert

[The Inquisitive]

60. Yes the similarities are striking

and perhaps maybe more the mere coincidence. I believe she will be a force of great social change and progress for America, and the world in the near future.

[JVS]

61. I'm not so sure about that. I don't think her kingdom is of this world.

But she can provide a spiritual example to those who suffer. Just as Paris Hilton's ordeal reminded us of the merciful work of ransoming the prisoner.

[The Inquisitive]

66. Yes you are right

She transcends this world in that regard. She provides something that no earthly leader or kingdom could possibly provide. Perhaps Lindsay Lohan's self destructive behavior and Cocaine use is a self destructive protest similar to Ghandi's fasting to express her disatisifcation with the state of the world. I think there is much more to woman than people realize. Most are so wrapped up in their petty, and trivial daily affairs to realize the great sacrafices these woman are making for humanity, both in this life, AND the next!

[JVS]

67. You know, these women are all out there, fighting injustice in their own ways, but the Patriarchy...

can't accept their penetrating criticism and instead twists people's perceptions so that they are viewed as drunken, coked-up sluts. I've had enough of this kind of bullshit!

[The Inquisitive]

79. Well of course!

The patriarchy can't hope to directly confront women with such moral fortitude that they have to resort to such social manipulation. It's a shame how many feminists play right into the patriarchies hand and perpetuate the opression they ultimately seek to destroy. By portaying these woman as coked up sluts, rather than selfless agents of change, the message these celebrities seek to convey is muddled, and distorted to undermine their own cause. What is even more admirable however is the fact that these woman relentlessly persist despite the undeniable abuse they face from those who they wish to save, they truly are martyrs.

What's worse is what the patriarchy does to those who attempt to take a stand and reach out to these saints. I think none other than Chris Crocker truly understands this cycle, in his/her Immortal words, "LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!" Unfortunetly such heartfelt measures only redoubled the patriarchies efforts and caused the media to label Crocker an "attention whore". Society is SICK! How did it all come to this?

[nick303]

153. C-

I've often wondered what makes posters go off on these long, bizarre side threads.

[The Inquisitive]

159. A+

for your arbitrary grading.

[TAZller]

81. Casting Britney Spears as a Christ figure is beyond offensive....

BRITNEY SPEARS IS A REAL HUMAN BEING. YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT. DEAL WITH ME! :hide:

[JVS]

82. Just as Christ was true God and true man, Britney is true Celebrity and true woman.

Please check out my celebrity stations of the cross in the Lounge. They're not done yet, but I think they're going to be awesome!

[ruiner4u]

107. amen, brother....

[defendandprotect]

55. Does that mean that Bush and Chavez are twins talking to the same Jesus?

[bridgit]

62. Chavez seems to me an insufferable egotist n/t

[EFerrari]

64. The press would have you believe so. It's working. n/t

[bridgit]

65. oh honey please, we understand whom thee premier Hugo Chavez...

apologist is :hi:

[EFerrari]

73. You have to resort to some faux attempt at condesenscion

for what reason?

I called it last week. There's a vote coming up in three weeks. The hit pieces will be out hot and heavy between now and then. It might not matter to the fall of a sparrow (there: I just compared myself to Christ, lol) but that's how it will go.

When there's something to apologize for, I will. Until then, I prefer my facts straight up.

[bridgit]

77. few here condescend as you do...

:hug:

[Dorian Gray]

112. I get that there will be a vote coming up

but what do hit pieces have to do with anything, here or in England, where none of us can vote?

[devilgrrl]

76. Oh, bet it's true!!!!!!!!!!

:sarcasm:

[spoony]

88. Everything from that guy's mouth is comedy gold

I wish he had a reality show.

[JVS]

89. "Big Brother"

;-)

Actually I like Chavez, but he sure does say some boneheaded things at times. Long may he reign.

[The Inquisitive]

111. I think he hired Muhammad Saeed al-Sahha after the invasion

because Chavez might be the most entertaining public servant of the year.

[lateo]

90. So his wounded pride isn't real?

[ShaneGR]

99. Just wait, if he gets his way he'll be offering up those gems for at least another 10 years...

Probably for the rest of his life. But hey, he called Bush the devil, he's perfect and any criticism means you are a corporate pig propoganda master. lol

[Odin2005]

100. Hugo should read some Greek tragedies to see what happens to people with hubris. n/t.

[The Stranger]

105. "I'd say there's potential."

--Ben Stiller

[rAVES]

106. My suffering of this anti Chavez propaganda blitz is like when winne the pooh got no honey

in that episode, and a bee stung him on the bum!!!

[Dorian Gray]

109. He's so put upon...

Sorry, he needs to get over it.

[Dr. Strange]

113. As punishment, can we get Kenny G to do a Chavez album?

Let Chavez know what true suffering is.

[hiphopnation]

116. ...

:spray::rofl:

thanks for that

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

122. That does it.

I'm burning all my Beatles albums.

[Snarkturian Clone]

124. Hugo Chavez, the Illustrious One, wept. John 11:35 NT

[redqueen]

128. Wow... DUers sure love their anti-chavez agitprop.

:rofl:

I just wonder how many are the certifiable anti-CHAVEZ rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth, "logic-has-no-place-in-my-view-I-just-think-he's-BAAAAD! so shut up!" obsessives.

:crazy: x infinity x a brazilian!

[ShaneGR]

149. Weird that you say that

Because most of the people who post about the other side of the Chavez regime think he's actually doing a lot of good things, but like me, believe there's another side to everything and everyone, regardless of who they are, should be examined carefully. I personally believe that Chavez wants to be the next Castro, President for life, and doesn't really respect political dissent of any kind. So basically I'm "unreasonable."??

[redqueen]

151. This article isn't about any of that. This article is BS.

So... really no gray area on this thread. Or any other thread about this "issue" of him comparing himself to Jesus (as if he did... ugh).

[cynatnite]

131. Will someone please pass the man a cross and some nails?

Geez, give me a break.

:eyes:

[nick303]

152. Original text including full quote

For those interested (Must be able to read Spanish or make use of a dictionary, so I apologize in advance to all the Chavistas on the thread):

In a literal sense Chavez does do what the headline in the OP says:

"Tuvo suerte el Señor Rey, de que yo no lo oyese", dijo Chávez.

Si lo hubiera oído, el Presidente Chávez piensa que le hubiera dicho:

Mire señor, recordando aquel pasaje de Cristo: él entraba en Jerusalén y mucha gente gritaba. Y le dice alguien: 'Señor, señor, diles que callen'; lo mismo que dice el Rey. Pero Cristo respondió: 'no les voy a decir eso, porque si se callaran ellos, ¡gritarían las piedras!' Señor Juan Carlos, si yo me callara, ¡gritarían las piedras de los pueblos de América Latina que están dispuestos a ser libres de todo colonialismo después de 500 años!

..

Here, he shows the class you would come to expect from a head of state (sarc):

"O a lo mejor le hubiera dicho: '¡Vaya a lavarse ese paltó!', exclamó Chávez para risa de los periodistas

Reminiscent of the behavior of someone in junior high.


http://www.radiomundial.com.ve/yvke/noticia.php?t=1076&sid=f2e9fd60da970484befcfb87a42649a5

[MADem]

161. My, my, my--that kinda shuts down any debate, doesn't it?

That's actually plainer than the translations, and it shows decisively what he was saying, word for word--which was what those 'mean' headlines said he was doing.

And to make it more interesting, no one can say that's coming from the 'vicious, cruel' enemy media, either, can they? He clearly, plainly WANTED the comparison to be made--and here are all his so-called supporters raining on his little parade...!

Mire señor, recordando aquel pasaje de Cristo.....Pero Cristo respondió.....

I'm reminded of that Chris Tucker fellow in those goofy Jackie Chan movies: Can you understand the words that are coming outta my mouth?

Can you help me with that last sentence you cited? I'm unclear as to the meaning of paltó. TIA.

[Bacchus39]

158. hahahahahahaha

this is too much.