He has been elected several times and was even reinstalled after a coup because of the massive protests of the people. The people describing him as a "thug" are the oligarchy that are losing money because Chavez thinks it is more important to take care of the people than to further line the pockets of people who are already very wealthy. You either agree with democracy or you don't. The people of Venezuela want Chavez to be their leader and that is good enough for me. It is disgusting that the Bushies think that it is right to manufacture evidence to start a war and then claim after the evidence is proven false that the war was meant to "spread democracy" and then come out against a man whose people have elected him by HUGE margins several times.
you and mr. moonbeam are certainly examples of extraordinary parodies of liberal democratic concern. human rights abuses? government sanctioned murder? fine! he was democratically elected! dude, this guy is a leftist pinochet- why are you licking his balls so sweetly?
Have you looked at the history of Venezuela when it was ruled by the oligarchy? The abuses were far worse and they were committed by people who did not have to face elections. And when his abuses get to be too much for them to bear, he will be ousted through election. That is the way a democracy works. There have been plenty of human rights abuses by GWB and his cabal since they took over, but I don't hear you asking for Bush's head on a platter. To some of us, leaning left is not as evil as you make it out to be. Chavez is doing good for the people at the expense of the elite who milked that country dry for decades. If that is leftist, then I say GO LEFTISTS!!
Folks, things have been getting a bit snippy around here lately, again, after a pretty good period of relatively "civil" behavior. (we wouldn't want things too civil, or it'd be boring as hell!) Can't the various actors of both sides, along with a particular China apologist, try to maintain our hard-won civility? Thanks. Oh, and I'll be gone a few days, not that anyone will notice! Keep D&D Civil!!
Spare me this crap. Go back and read my first post on the subject: "Chavez is kind of a chump, but he's their chump for better or worse." I've never made claims to being anything other than a realist. I don't spout off bullsh-t about how I'm blowing stuff up to cause the flowering of democracy like you do (which was necessitated when the great WMD easter egg hunt came up empty) and then get pissy when the democracy sandwich tastes bad - or ignore it when its convenient. Do you understand how much credibility is lost when you (and we) do these types of things? I guess you probably can't.
Do you understand how much credibility is lost when you (and we) do these types of things? Credibility? That left ages ago.
Basso, there were seven elections in two years. I won't even say the source you provided isn't valid because there are some anecdotal evidence and polls in there. I will say a couple of things. The article points out that Bush initially praised the election yet only Carter was conned. The article also points out the problem is based primarily on a random number generator used on a computer. Carter was against using the govt. computer but finally acquiessed when the govt. wouldn't use Carters. That doesn't sound like he got conned. Furthermore that isn't so different from the questions regarding diebold machines. The CEO of diebold made all sorts of promises about Bush's election and there was no paper trail in this case either. The random generator of sights audited doesn't nullify the election in the first case, and in the second case it doesn't show that the Carter Center's participation was a farce. The other big beef seems to be polls. The polls didn't match up and people they knew were in line early to vote against Chavez didn't win. That evidence doesn't add up. None of it adds up to it being a farce or the Carter Center's involvement being a farce. You also did not provide the names of any more respected observers. In addition you didn't show what any independent observers thought about it at all.
It isn't the left who is propping him up it is the people of Venezuela who voted for him time and time again that are propping him up. Is this your answer to, 'Do you support democracy?' I would like to know. Chavez is up for ELECTION in 2006. If he isn't wanted by the MARJORITY OF THE PEOPLE he will be VOTED out. Just because you or I or Bush don't like everything a leader does, doesn't mean that the leader isn't democratically elected. I don't like Bush, but I understand that he was democratically elected. You can't argue for democracy when what you really want is only leaders who agree with YOU. That isn't democracy.
I don't know, but I do know that this is coming from the same poster who had a complete mental breakdown when I noted far more serious allegations about Afghanistan's elections. http://bbs2.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=85514&highlight=karzai+election So if you question elections where basso likes the results, and in his words, you're a "pathetic excuse for [a] human being", but if you don't question the ones he wants you too, you're a nuthugging dictator lover. You should write a self-help book basso.
I don't. I rely on observers who were there and witnessed it. I allow for errors and understand that the elections aren't perfect. But I saw what happened when the military coup happened. I saw what happened in recall elections, I saw what happened in election after election. I will listen to other more reputable international observers of the process if they would care to speak up. If instead of 60% of the vote he only got 55% of it because of voting irregularities he would still have won the election. Again Chavez is the one who requested outside observaton. He doesn't do that because he feels the only way he can win is to cheat. If one candidate asks for outside observation in an election, and wins time and time again with outside observation, and they win by a large amount, I will beleive democracy has won out. By the way the democracy in Iraq didn't have outside observers who were there. It was too dangerous. There are accusations of irregularities in the Sunni areas, but you are more than happy to proclaim that democracy won the day there. Why when there is much scrutiny over the course of not 1, but 7 elections are you not willing to proclaim that democracy has won the day?
Oh we must so ever thank basso, the bleeding heart that he is. Letting us know how bad Chavez is for the Venezuelan people, did you ever think of working for Amnesty Intl.? And to bigtexx, do you need a link in order to answer any question or just any question you feel like not answering. To answer your question texx I have no link other than what I recall about the gas price issue during the election. Now that may not be sufficient for you and it's totally understandable, but when oh when will you guys answer a question without using the spin cycle. Actually texx I only asked one question related to another thread. But I won't hold my hand on my a$$ waiting for an answer from you. Your silence speaks volumes enough.
Oh plcmts17, please forgive me for not answering your question. It's kind of hard to take somebody seriously when they state that I am giving another man colon cancer due to residing so far up his anal cavity. Grow up child, I don't have time for your silly musings. I didn't even read the credit card thread. My time is very valuable. Very valuable. I can quantify just how valuable my time is based on actual market data, but I wouldn't want to do that in a public forum.
Well you could of fooled me, child. So sorry to waste your valuable time. Let me just let you on a little secret. You were just going to waste it anyway.
my comments stand. you seem far more exorcised by what you, incorrectly, perceive as my inconsistency than you are about the crushing of dissent in venezuela. :fascinating:
I know Sam doesn't need to me to speak for him, but he's said it twice he doesn't approve of Chavez. How many times do you need to read it to understand it? I don't like dissent crushed in Venezuela, I don't like the media coverage in the U.S. It is horrible.
I don't love Chavez. I don't think he's the demon some make him out to be. I don't approve of crushing dissent, or his control of the media. I do approve of him setting up clinics with Cuban doctors in the neediest of areas, and other programs that benefit the neediest in Venezuela. But whether I love him or not, doesn't matter. I can accept that whether I like him or not, he is the democratically elected leader of Venezuela. So as a supporter of democracy even when I don't like the outcome, I defend his right to hold power. My support of democracy is more than just lip service.
how do you reconcile the conflict when your support of democracy and respect for human rights are in opposition to one another?
