[Reuters] Poll says Chavez loses Venezuela referendum lead

Reporters Without Borders? Jeez, now there's a Bushjuntaneoconimperialistyankeedog source!

 

I've never said Chavez was a great guy and I certainly wouldn't stand for what he is doing in Venezuala here in the US that said it is undeniable he came to power democratically and the majority of Venezualans have supported him. I agree he should rightfully be criticized for many things but this is the first vote where there is the real possibility of him being defeated and how he reacts to a defeat will be very telling about whether he is nothing more than a Castro wannabe or something more.

The problem I see is everyone has already presumed that the vote is over he lost but is remaining in power. That very well might be the case but I would like to see the vote first.

 

That's a fair point. I just don't think the vote will be fair, given the treatment of the opposition and the media supporting the opposition, or simply not supporting Chavez. Guess we'll see. I found his tirade today against Columbia to be a typical pre-election jingoistic act on his part. For your reading pleasure...


November 26, 2007

Tensions Rise for Colombia and Venezuela

By SIMON ROMERO

CARACAS, Venezuela, Nov. 25 — Venezuela and Colombia moved toward a diplomatic crisis on Sunday after an exchange of insults between President Hugo Chávez and his Colombian counterpart, Álvaro Uribe.

The spat threatens thriving trade between the countries, which are governed by ideological opposites who had cultivated a surprisingly warm political relationship. Mr. Chávez said he was putting ties with Colombia in the “freezer,” after Mr. Uribe’s withdrawal of support last week for his mediating role with Colombian guerrillas.

The Venezuelan president, speaking on television, described Mr. Uribe’s attitude as the equivalent of a “brutal spitting in the face,” and called him a “liar.” Mr. Uribe, the Bush administration’s top ally in South America, responded by accusing Mr. Chávez of legitimizing terrorists and advancing ambitions of “assembling an empire.”

Tensions between the countries have been rising as Venezuela prepares for a Dec. 2 referendum on a proposal by Mr. Chávez for a sweeping revision to the Constitution that would abolish presidential term limits.

Supporters of Mr. Uribe have similarly proposed legal changes that would allow him to run for a third term. Both leaders have presided over robustly growing economies in recent years, with Colombian companies in particular benefiting from rising exports of food and manufactured goods to Venezuela.

But both could also use some distraction from domestic travails. Opinion polls released here this weekend show Mr. Chávez’s reform proposal trailing among likely voters. And Mr. Uribe has recently faced criticism over revelations of ties of some of his political supporters to drug-trafficking paramilitary death squads.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/26/world/americas/26venez.html?ref=americas


It's not that the Columbian government is anything to write home about, certainly putting it mildly, but the timing of this "dispute" on the eve of the referendum is too transparent to ignore.



D&D. Attempt Civility!

Impeach Bush for Holding Hands with an Idiot.

 

Reporters Without Borders is a generally conservative organization, so like many stories on Venezuela, this must be taken with a grain of salt. So despite the name, that plays off of Doctors Without Borders it not to be viewed as a purely objective site on this issue.

*************
In spite of 14 months of stonewalling by the National Endowment for Democracy over a Freedom of Information Act request and a flat denial from RSF executive director Lucie Morillon, the NED has revealed that Reporters Without Borders received grants over at least three years from the International Republican Institute.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1865

For the record I am against muzzling the free press in Venezuela, though as in this country you can't have them actively promoting an armed coup as the RCTV did, at least according to my understanding.

 

I'm sure that venezuelananalysis.com is an impartial site, and not some cheerleader for 21st century socialism.

 

oh noes! we don't have impartial sources everyone agrees to on this issue.

 

Venezuelanalysis is definitely biased in the sense that it is highly supportive of Chavez.

Here's an article analyzing the bias that is usually found from the other side.
**********
Email to a friend | Printer friendly

Media Advisory

Coup Co-Conspirators as Free-Speech Martyrs
Distorting the Venezuelan media story

5/25/07

The story is framed in U.S. news media as a simple matter of censorship: Prominent Venezuelan TV station RCTV is being silenced by the authoritarian government of President Hugo Chávez, who is punishing the station for its political criticism of his government.

According to CNN reporter T.J. Holmes (5/21/07), the issues are easy to understand: RCTV "is going to be shut down, is going to get off the air, because of President Hugo Chávez, not a big fan of it." Dubbing RCTV "a voice of free speech," Holmes explained, "Chávez, in a move that's angered a lot of free-speech groups, is refusing now to renew the license of this television station that has been critical of his government."

Though straighter, a news story by the Associated Press (5/20/07) still maintained the theme that the license denial was based simply on political differences, with reporter Elizabeth Munoz describing RCTV as "a network that has been critical of Chávez."

In a May 14 column, Washington Post deputy editorial page editor Jackson Diehl called the action an attempt to silence opponents and more "proof" that Chávez is a "dictator." Wrote Diehl, "Chávez has made clear that his problem with [RCTV owner Marcel] Granier and RCTV is political."

In keeping with the media script that has bad guy Chávez brutishly silencing good guys in the democratic opposition, all these articles skimmed lightly over RCTV's history, the Venezuelan government's explanation for the license denial and the process that led to it.

RCTV and other commercial TV stations were key players in the April 2002 coup that briefly ousted Chávez's democratically elected government. During the short-lived insurrection, coup leaders took to commercial TV airwaves to thank the networks. "I must thank Venevisión and RCTV," one grateful leader remarked in an appearance captured in the Irish film The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. The film documents the networks’ participation in the short-lived coup, in which stations put themselves to service as bulletin boards for the coup—hosting coup leaders, silencing government voices and rallying the opposition to a march on the Presidential Palace that was part of the coup plotters strategy.

On April 11, 2002, the day of the coup, when military and civilian opposition leaders held press conferences calling for Chávez's ouster, RCTV hosted top coup plotter Carlos Ortega, who rallied demonstrators to the march on the presidential palace. On the same day, after the anti-democratic overthrow appeared to have succeeded, another coup leader, Vice-Admiral Victor Ramírez Pérez, told a Venevisión reporter (4/11/02): "We had a deadly weapon: the media. And now that I have the opportunity, let me congratulate you."

That commercial TV outlets including RCTV participated in the coup is not at question; even mainstream outlets have acknowledged as much. As reporter Juan Forero, Jackson Diehl's colleague at the Washington Post, explained (1/18/07), "RCTV, like three other major private television stations, encouraged the protests," resulting in the coup, "and, once Chávez was ousted, cheered his removal." The conservative British newspaper the Financial Times reported (5/21/07), "[Venezuelan] officials argue with some justification that RCTV actively supported the 2002 coup attempt against Mr. Chávez."

As FAIR's magazine Extra! argued last November, "Were a similar event to happen in the U.S., and TV journalists and executives were caught conspiring with coup plotters, it’s doubtful they would stay out of jail, let alone be allowed to continue to run television stations, as they have in Venezuela."

When Chávez returned to power the commercial stations refused to cover the news, airing instead entertainment programs—in RCTV's case, the American film Pretty Woman. By refusing to cover such a newsworthy story, the stations abandoned the public interest and violated the public trust that is seen in Venezuela (and in the U.S.) as a requirement for operating on the public airwaves. Regarding RCTV's refusal to cover the return of Chávez to power, Columbia University professor and former NPR editor John Dinges told Marketplace (5/8/07):


What RCTV did simply can't be justified under any stretch of journalistic principles…. When a television channel simply fails to report, simply goes off the air during a period of national crisis, not because they're forced to, but simply because they don't agree with what's happening, you've lost your ability to defend what you do on journalistic principles.


The Venezuelan government is basing its denial of license on RCTV's involvement in the 2002 coup, not on the station's criticisms of or political opposition to the government. Many American pundits and some human rights spokespersons have confused the issue by claiming the action is based merely on political differences, failing to note that Venezuela's media, including its commercial broadcasters, are still among the most vigorously dissident on the planet.

When Patrick McElwee of the U.S.-based group Just Foreign Policy interviewed representatives of Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists—all groups that have condemned Venezuela's action in denying RCTV's license renewal—he found that none of the spokespersons thought broadcasters were automatically entitled to license renewals, though none of them thought RCTV's actions in support of the coup should have resulted in the station having its license renewal denied. This led McElwee to wonder, based on the rights groups' arguments, "Could it be that governments like Venezuela have the theoretical right to not to renew a broadcast license, but that no responsible government would ever do it?"

McElwee acknowledged the critics' point that some form of due process should have been involved in the decisions, but explained that laws preexisting Chávez's presidency placed licensing decision with the executive branch, with no real provisions for a hearings process: "Unfortunately, this is what the law, first enacted in 1987, long before Chávez entered the political scene, allows. It charges the executive branch with decisions about license renewal, but does not seem to require any administrative hearing. The law should be changed, but at the current moment when broadcast licenses are up for renewal, it is the prevailing law and thus lays out the framework in which decisions are made."

Government actions weighing on journalism and broadcast licensing deserve strong scrutiny. However, on the central question of whether a government is bound to renew the license of a broadcaster when that broadcaster had been involved in a coup against the democratically elected government, the answer should be clear, as McElwee concludes:


The RCTV case is not about censorship of political opinion. It is about the government, through a flawed process, declining to renew a broadcast license to a company that would not get a license in other democracies, including the United States. In fact, it is frankly amazing that this company has been allowed to broadcast for 5 years after the coup, and that the Chávez government waited until its license expired to end its use of the public airwaves.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3107

 

RCTV is only the latest of opposition media that the Chavez-led government has shut down. The only truly free reporting on Venezuela right now is coming out of Miami and Houston.

 

Yeah, there really is no place in Venezuela for coup plotters/participants.

Chávez made extensive preparations for a military coup d'état.[14] Initially planned for December, Chávez delayed the MBR-200 coup until the early twilight hours of February 4, 1992. On that date, five army units under Chávez's command barreled into urban Caracas with the mission of assaulting and overwhelming key military and communications installations throughout the city, including the Miraflores presidential palace, the defense ministry, La Carlota military airport, and the Historical Museum. Chávez's ultimate goal was to intercept and take custody of Pérez, who was returning to Miraflores from an overseas trip.

Chávez held the loyalty of less than 10% of Venezuela's military forces;[15] still, numerous betrayals, defections, errors, and other unforeseen circumstances soon left Chávez and a small group of rebels cut off in the Historical Museum, without any means of conveying orders to their network of spies and collaborators spread throughout Venezuela.[16] Further, Chávez's allies were unable to broadcast their prerecorded tapes on the national airwaves in which Chávez planned to issue a general call for a mass civilian uprising against Pérez. As the coup unfolded, the coup plotters were unable to capture Pérez: fourteen soldiers were killed, and 50 soldiers and some 80 civilians injured in the ensuing violence.[17] Nevertheless, rebel forces in other parts of Venezuela made advances and were ultimately able to take control of such large cities as Valencia, Maracaibo, and Maracay with the help of spontaneous civilian aid [dubious – discuss]. Chávez's forces, however, had failed to take Caracas.[18]

Chávez, alarmed, soon gave himself up to the government. He was then allowed to appear on national television to call for all remaining rebel detachments in Venezuela to cease hostilities. When he did so, Chávez quipped on national television that he had only failed "por ahora" (for now).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Chávez#_note-Guillermoprieto_2005

 

Here's a read from the NYTimes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/30/w...45d7d091&ex=1354078800&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

November 30, 2007
In Chávez Territory, Signs of Dissent
By SIMON ROMERO

CARACAS, Venezuela, Nov. 29 — Three days before a referendum that would vastly expand the powers of President Hugo Chávez, this city’s streets were packed on Thursday with tens of thousands of opponents to the change. The protests signaled that Venezuelans may be balking at placing so much authority in the hands of one man.

Even some of Mr. Chávez’s most fervent supporters are beginning to show signs of hesitation at backing the constitutional changes he is promoting, which would end term limits for the president and greatly centralize his authority. Other measures would increase social security benefits for the poor and shorten the workday.

New fissures are emerging in what was once a cohesive bloc of supporters, pointing to the toughest test at the polls for Mr. Chávez in his nine-year presidency.

In the slums of the capital, where some of the president’s staunchest backers live amid the cinder-block hovels, debate over the changes has grown more intense in recent days.

“Chávez is delirious if he thinks we’re going to follow him like sheep,” said Ivonne Torrealba, 29, a hairdresser in the gritty Coche district, who has supported Mr. Chávez in every election since his first campaign for president in 1998. “If this government cannot get me milk or asphalt for our roads, how is it going to give my mother a pension?”

Both Mr. Chávez, a self-described socialist who has won previous elections by wide margins, and his critics say opinion polls show they will prevail, suggesting a highly contentious outcome. But departing from its practice in last year’s presidential election, Venezuela did not invite electoral observers from the Organization of American States and the European Union, opening the government to claims of fraud if he wins.

The intensified polarization has altered this city’s appearance, with graffiti of “Sí” by the president’s supporters competing with “No” scrawled throughout Caracas. A pro-Chávez march is scheduled here for Friday before the frenetic campaigning around the referendum ends. Polling places are to close at 5 p.m. Sunday, with results expected as early as that evening.

“I’m out here because I want my children to live in a country ruled by a president, not a king,” said Alexander Dávila, 42, a bank manager at Thursday’s march who carried a sign reading, “Socialism is the philosophy of failure.” “All I want is for Venezuelans to live in peace.”

Violence has already marred the weeks preceding the vote. Two students involved in anti-government protests claimed they had been kidnapped and tortured this week by masked men in Barquisimeto, an interior city. And in Valencia, another city, a supporter of Mr. Chávez was shot dead this week in an exchange of gunfire at a protest site.

Tension has also been heightened by rare criticism of the constitutional overhaul from a breakaway party in Mr. Chávez’s coalition in the National Assembly and former confidants of the president; the government has called this dissent “treason.”

Some of the most stinging criticism lately has come from Marisabel Rodríguez, Mr. Chávez’s ex-wife and the former first lady. In an interview this week with Caracol Radio of Colombia, she said he had threatened her with death after she publicly criticized the government’s policies. (Mr. Chávez has not publicly responded to her accusation.)

Mr. Chávez and senior officials here have exhibited increasingly erratic behavior. Mr. Chávez has lashed out at leaders in Colombia and Spain and asked for an investigation into whether CNN was seeking to incite an assassination attempt against him.

Reports of such plots are not in short supply here. The main state television network broadcast coverage this week of a memorandum in Spanish that it claimed had been written by the C.I.A. in which destabilization plans against Mr. Chávez were laid out. American involvement in Venezuelan politics remains a particularly delicate issue here, after the Bush administration tacitly supported a coup in 2002 that briefly ousted Mr. Chávez.

“We reject and are disappointed in the Venezuelan government’s allegations that the United States is involved in any type of conspiracy to affect the outcome of the constitutional referendum,” Benjamin Ziff, a spokesman for the United States Embassy here, said in a statement.

A C.I.A. spokesman called the document “a fake,” while analysts, including investigators who had previously uncovered financing of Venezuelan opposition groups by the United States government, expressed doubts about the authenticity of the memo.

“I find the document quite suspect,” said Jeremy Bigwood, an independent researcher in Washington. “There’s not an original version in English, and the timing of its release is strange. Everything about it smells bad.”

Even some of Mr. Chávez’s critics have welcomed some of the proposed constitutional changes, like measures to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual or political orientation. Political discrimination has been one of this country’s most contentious issues after Mr. Chávez’s purge of dissident employees from the national oil company and the politicization of the federal bureaucracy.

But the proposed expansion of the president’s power to issue emergency decrees has alarmed human rights groups. The new charter would allow the president to suspend some due process rights, like the right to be tried by an independent tribunal. And Mr. Chávez could declare states of emergency for unlimited periods and censor news organizations.

“Proponents of these amendments insist that this government would never violate these basic rights,” said José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director for Human Rights Watch. “But why, then, have they gone to such lengths to empower the president to do so?”

At the simple home of Ms. Torrealba, the hairdresser, near open sewage alongside a deafening highway in southwestern Caracas, the shifting loyalties of some voters were on full display. In December, she and her siblings awoke at dawn with fireworks to celebrate Mr. Chávez’s re-election to a six-year term, with 63 percent of the vote.

This year, the mood in Ms. Torrealba’s home is glum. Her sister, Yohana Torrealba, 20, said she was alarmed by what she viewed as political intimidation by teachers in Misión Ribas, a social welfare program where she takes remedial high-school-level courses.

“The instructors told us we had to vote in favor and demonstrate on the streets for Chávez,” Yohana Torrealba said. “They want Venezuela to become like Cuba.”

Throughout the slums of Coche, confusion persists about how life could change if the constitutional proposals are approved. Many residents who own their homes, however humble, fear that the government could take control of their property, despite efforts to dispel those fears by Mr. Chávez’s government.

Others wonder what will happen to the mayor and the governor they elected if Mr. Chávez wins the power to pick rulers for new administrative regions he wants to create. Others said they feared that if they voted against the proposals, the government could discriminate against them if their votes were made public.

But Mr. Chávez has an unrivaled political machine, with supporters controlling every major government institution. He also retains the loyalty of many voters in Coche and elsewhere. “It’s a lie that they’re going to take our houses away,” said Yanelcy Maitán, 40. “No one has done more for the poor than Chávez.”

Mark Mazzetti contributed reporting from Washington.

 

Chavez LOST!!! Outstanding!

(breaking news)

CARACAS, Venezuela (CNN) -- Venezuelan voters narrowly rejected a constitution referendum that would have bolstered President Hugo Chavez's embrace of socialism and grant an indefinite extension of his eligibility to serve as president, the National Electoral Council reported early Monday.

About 51 percent of voters opposed the amendments, while approximately 49 percent were in favor of them.

"Don't feel sad. Don't feel burdened," Chavez told supporters immediately after the results were announced.

More than nine million of Venezuelan's 16 million eligible voters went to the polls Sunday.

President of the National Electoral Council, Tibisay Lucena, said the process "shows the entire world that we are a democratic country."

Chavez, in what he called a talk "from my heart" acknowledging the results, thanked those who opposed his proposal, saying the election had proven that Venezuelan democracy is maturing.

Thousands of people gathered in the streets, many of them university students who worked to defeat the measure, burst into singing their country's national anthem upon hearing the news.

Earlier in Caracas, Chavez -- clad in his trademark red shirt and cradling his grandson -- made the sign of the cross when he voted, then took his paper ballot and placed it in a box. "For me, it's a very happy day," he had said.

He dipped his right pinky in ink, collected his paper receipt from the voting machine and then gave an uncharacteristically short talk with the news media.

"Let's wait for the results tonight," he told reporters. "We'll accept them, whatever they may be."

Chavez called Venezuela's electoral system "one of the most transparent in the world," and said its voting machines are among "the most modern of the world."

At stake were 69 amendments proposed by Chavez, who has said he wants to steer Venezuela toward full socialism -- a state his detractors describe as full totalitarianism.

The most controversial amendment would do away with term limits, thereby allowing the 53-year-old former paratrooper, who has already served almost eight years in power, to hold it indefinitely as long as he is re-elected.

If the amendments were approved, Chavez could have run for president in seven-year terms.

At present, the president's term runs six years, and current law would not allow Chavez to run again after his term ends in 2012.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/12/03/venezuela.referendum/index.html#cnnSTCText




Great news for the people of Venezuela. If anyone had doubts about the stability and ambition of Chavez, his call for numerous changes to their constitution, so he could be president for life of a socialist state, should put those doubts to bed. Chavez attempted a backdoor coup and did everything out of the playbook for creating a one party state with a leader who holds power indefinitely. Putin has been successful in Russia, the b*stard, but Chavez has lost his bid. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, and if Chavez will attempt to bring this about anyway, by hook or by crook. Stay tuned.



Trim Bush!

 

^ The story isn't over but so far it appears that for all of Chavez's other problems he is still respecting democracy.

 

Thank goodness. Let's hope it holds up. I'm glad he lost, and I'm happy that he's willing to go along with the rule of law and democracy.

I hope it means good things for the people there. He's improved their lot so far, Then he started on his power grap, consolidating power, and trying to shut out the opposition.

 

So far so good when it comes to respecting democracy. Can't call Chavez a dictator. Dictators don't lose elections 49 to 51%. Some of the changes he proposed were very good-- such as giving pensions to all older Venezuelans. It appears that the country has enough money to give all the street venders etc. a little something for their old age. This is done in the more economically advanced countries.

Chavez should go back and reintroduce some of those provisions. Work slower towards his goals. Some are very good. Some appear to concentrate too much power in his office and are the reason why he lost some of his support.

 

Let's see what happens in 2012 when he is scheduled to step down.

 

Exactly, this is far from over.

 

I think that it is good that the opposition won, though some of the proposed changes were good. Chavez needs to slow down and start compromising more with the more responsible opposition.

Good enough. Let's see what happens when Bush is scheduled to step down.

Let's see if the US government can accept that Chavez is the president and try to not plot to remove him or actively sabotage the economy till 2012. With the amount of oil Venezuela has (I have seen estimates that it has 5 times the amount of Saudi, but it is some sort of very heavy tar or somesuch that is only economically viable at 50$ plus per gallon.) It will be very hard for the US to not try to interfere overly with Venezuelan politics.

It would not surprise me if Chavez proposes another referendum say to give him another term, and it might be approved, if he is still popular and things are still going well for most of the people in a couple of years. Nothing inherently wrong with that. Term limits are not clearly the only good form of government. If Chavez is a serious democrat he needs to start grooming successors for his movement.


If Chavez does bow out in 2012 it will also be interesting to see if it will be a return to oligarchy as usual in this rich oil state. It might be hard to shove the poor majority back to quietness and suffering in their slums. This could create great instability.

The type of changes that Chavez is instituting may in the long run, by creating a larger educated middle class, lead to a more democratic Venezuela than the traditional oligarchy the US has supported there.

 

He's respecting it, apparently in this instance (so far), but he did everything he could to hinder the opposition prior to the vote, short of mass arrests and completely rigging the voting, ala Putin. I'll give him credit for not being the Russian dictator, at least.

Chavez proposed 69 amendments! That is a staggering number. Compare it to our system in the US, where it takes years to get a single amendment passed or defeated... sometimes decades. And sometimes the whole idea is simply dropped. As glynch pointed out, a few of those 69 amendments may have been good ideas for the majority of the people, but they like democracy, they want democracy, and they did not want to vote to install a dictator, and regardless of the democratic dress Chavez may have wrapped himself in, that's what he was aiming at.

(yuck... my sentence above, rereading it, brought an image of Rudy to mind that I'm just as soon see disappear! Rudy and Hugo at a dance in their best formal gown, wondering when they'd be asked to glide on the floor with a cute boy, waiting forever. The horror!! )



Trim Bush!

 

I'll bet he steps down - how much action are you taking?

Chavez is just taking his time. This was an attempt to get the people to give him more dictatorial powers than he's already asserted. It was a no lose proposition for him. When he feels strong enough he'll just take if he doesn't get.