Chavez to eliminate presidential term limits

[obeygiant]

CARACAS, Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez was presenting his blueprint Wednesday for sweeping constitutional changes expected to allow him to be re-elected indefinitely, a move his critics call a threat to democracy.

Chavez, who is seeking to transform Venezuelan society along socialist lines, announced late Tuesday that he would unveil his proposal before crowds of supporters at the National Assembly. He predicted it would bring renewed political upheaval to Venezuela.

Chavez's political allies firmly control the National Assembly, which is expected to approve the plan within months. It then would have to be approved by citizens in a national referendum.

Chavez has revealed few details of his proposal, but has stressed the need to do away with presidential term limits that currently prevent him from seeking re-election in 2012.

Critics accuse Chavez of seeking to become a lifelong leader, like his close friend Fidel Castro in Cuba. They say his main goal is simply to expand his power and assure he will be able to run again in 2012.

"Chavez is seeking to reduce the territory held by the opposition and give his intention to remain in power a legal foundation," said Gerardo Blyde, an opposition leader and former lawmaker.

He said many other reforms are likely to be "red capes" like those used by a bullfighter "to distract Venezuelans from his real objective."

Venezuela's Roman Catholic Bishops' Conference has also complained that Chavez's reform proposals were drafted without public involvement.

Chavez, a former paratrooper commander who was first elected in 1998, denies copying Cuba and insists that personal freedoms will be respected. He and his supporters say democracy has flourished under his administration, noting he has repeatedly won elections by wide margins.yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070815/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_constitutional_reform;_ylt=ApGeceqtozTiv_JC0vvX7Vqs0NUE)

Chavez is starting to give socialism a bad name. :)

[ham_man]

This guy has nothing on Bush...

[bousozoku]

Funny that they didn't mention the reforms to create more local councils so that people can take responsibility for their own lives and end corruption between the top of the government so that aid money might actually get to them.

It's still disturbing but there were better things involved.

[it5five]

Funny that they didn't mention the reforms to create more local councils so that people can take responsibility for their own lives and end corruption between the top of the government so that aid money might actually get to them.

It's still disturbing but there were better things involved.

I had heard that on NPR today. Goes to show that NPR is one of the few real places to get news these days.

[bousozoku]

I had heard that on NPR today. Goes to show that NPR is one of the few real places to get news these days.

BBC World News and Deutsche-Welle Journal are usually my sources for alternative t.v. news.

[solvs]

What do you expect us to say? Do you want us to defend it? Ain't gonna happen, no matter how popular he might be among voters there. Just like that thing with the radio station down there.

Nice try though.

[obeygiant]

What do you expect us to say? Do you want us to defend it? Ain't gonna happen, no matter how popular he might be among voters there.

Who is 'us', solvs? And I wasn't expecting anybody to defend it, because to me its indefensible. nice try though. :) ;)

[MongoTheGeek]

Who is 'us', solvs? And I wasn't expecting anybody to defend it, because to me its indefensible. nice try though. :) ;)

All sorts of other leaders have done things like that before. I am surprised that it took him this long to do it.

Besides its the only thing he could do to prevent be kept from office by the imperialist American term limits.

[Swarmlord]

Wonder how Sean Penn and the other Hollywood halfwits that have chummed with Chavez feel after hearing this news about their socialist friend.

Another socialist dictatorship gone bad. Who could have predicted that?

[nbs2]

We didn't have term limits until FDR decided that he was a better man than GW. I like limits, but if not for the skewed legislature in Venezuela, I wouldn't care what they decided. It's their country.

This guy has nothing on Bush...

Conspiracy theories aside, what evidence in hand is there that Bush plans to stay in office past 1/20/09 or even to try and be reelected next year? The issue here is presidential term limits - that's it. No point in dragging every topic into the dirt...

[obeygiant]

What do you expect us to say? Do you want us to defend it?

Actually it5five and bousozoku, so far, are the only ones ballsy enough to try. So the question is, are you so much is favor of socialism that you wouldn't care about the dictatorship that comes with it.

[MongoTheGeek]

We didn't have term limits until FDR decided that he was a better man than GW. I like limits, but if not for the skewed legislature in Venezuela, I wouldn't care what they decided. It's their country.

I like limits too. Not just in how it prevents kingships and cuts down somewhat on corruption. It provides a sense of urgency to the office. If you know that you only have 8 years to get the job done. As a down side it creates a powerful bureaucracy.

Conspiracy theories aside, what evidence in hand is there that Bush plans to stay in office past 1/20/09 or even to try and be reelected next year? The issue here is presidential term limits - that's it. No point in dragging every topic into the dirt...

Yeah, its not like his wife is running or anything.

\i keed, i keed

[Swarmlord]

<snip>
Yeah, its not like his wife is running or anything.

\i keed, i keed

I found that funny! :)

Still waiting for the reporters to get a comment from Sean Penn. He was just down there snogging with ol' Chavez. I want him on tape repeating what a wonderful guy Chavez is. Anyone want to bet that Penn will be in deep cover for quite a while now?

[takao]

We didn't have term limits until FDR decided that he was a better man than GW. I like limits, but if not for the skewed legislature in Venezuela, I wouldn't care what they decided. It's their country.

i would say that too.. that's why my guess is that it won't get approved

on the other side the US isn't that limited ...after all a son of a former president got president just 8 years later ... in austria relatives are excluded up to a certain degree so that there can't be huge political dynasties like in the US (Bush, Kennedy most famous)
i think his father having been member of parliment can be enough to create some restrictions

[Desertrat]

Just another little tinpot dictator following the common model: "One man, one vote, one time." Chavez is setting up another Cuba, as has been expected and predicted. No surprise, there.

"...people can take responsibility for their own lives and end corruption between the top of the government so that aid money might actually get to them."

Chavez' policies to date have been ensuring that there's less and less money for the getting. He's run all the "capitalist pigs" out; he's run all the more highly skilled people out, and he's run off the expertise to deal with his sour crude in the Orinoco Basin. Were he not getting his crude refined in Corpus Christi, he'd be out of gasoline.

A really sharp cookie.

Not.

'Rat

[leekohler]

Wonder how Sean Penn and the other Hollywood halfwits that have chummed with Chavez feel after hearing this news about their socialist friend.

Another socialist dictatorship gone bad. Who could have predicted that?

They probably felt about the same as you did when you found out that Rush Limbaugh was a lying, drug addict, hypocrite who ran to the ACLU like the whiny pathetic swine that he is. ;) Let's not forget that rehab is good for him but not for the "pooer". They probably felt about like that.

[pdham]

Another socialist dictatorship gone bad. Who could have predicted that?

This is just such a ridiculous statement... What happens when someone is in power has nothing to do with the system they come to power in or promote. It has to do with what power does to people and, especially in poorer countries, the abundant opportunities to usurp power for personal gain.

For example, in post colonial Africa numerous countries were set up as democracies by the various western governments that had their hand in the pot. Virtually everyone of those governments ended with a tyrannical dictator or military state because the lure of personal gain was too great and family politics too strong. So I guess by Swarmlord’s logic democracy should be condemned as a system because of its ability to be corrupted by power hungry individuals.

By the way Swarmie there are plenty of countries that are heavily guided by socialist principles that are very successful. We just usually call them Democratic welfare states.

[IJ Reilly]

I wasn't aware that Chavez had become a dictator. Has he suspended any elections? Overthrown any elected governments? Shut down opposition media? I'm not going to argue that he's a friend of democracy, or defend his power-grabbing, but clearly the Venezuelan people in whatever wisdom have chosen to elect him by wide margins, and to give him a large legislative majority. On a continent where truly dictatorial regimes, both left and right, have flourished, all of this hand-wringing over Chavez seems just a little over-blown.

[Swarmlord]

They probably felt about the same as you did when you found out that Rush Limbaugh was a lying, drug addict, hypocrite who ran to the ACLU like the whiny pathetic swine that he is. ;) Let's not forget that rehab is good for him but not for the "pooer". They probably felt about like that.

Really? Who went into hiding after expressing public friendship and support for Rush? I must have missed that report.

As for your crack about "drug addict", he's the highest functioning drug addict that I've ever seen. Conservatives even make better drug addicts than liberals evidently.

[nbs2]

I wasn't aware that Chavez had become a dictator. Has he...Shut down opposition media?

;) (http://www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/statements_detail.html?ctxid=CH0055&docid=CMS1180432968135)

[leekohler]

Really? Who went into hiding after expressing public friendship and support for Rush? I must have missed that report.

As for your crack about "drug addict", he's the highest functioning drug addict that I've ever seen. Conservatives even make better drug addicts than liberals evidently.

Did Sean penn go into hiding? I must have missed that one too. Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, he'll admit he was wrong- something you conservatives have a hard time doing?

As for Limbaugh, who gives a crap if he was functioning or not? He was a drug addict who used his maid to get him drugs, when he himself has said that drug addicts don't need rehab, they need prison. I guess he doesn't stand by his convictions. And he is an addict, he's admitted as much. It wasn't a "crack", it was the truth.

As for Chavez, who here said he was a good guy? And don't you consider all of us who don't agree with you "liberals"? Shouldn't we all have been ga-ga for him? We weren't. Sorry to disappoint you and obeygiant.

[bousozoku]

Actually it5five and bousozoku, so far, are the only ones ballsy enough to try. So the question is, are you so much is favor of socialism that you wouldn't care about the dictatorship that comes with it.

It wasn't a defence. I was just perturbed by the poor reporting and omission of details to get ratings/hits, as I believe it5five was.

The Latin world seems to thrive on corruption. Chavez doesn't seem to be any worse or better than any other--just different and more outspoken.

Anyone who is willing to attack the U.S. President from another country gets attention but have people forgotten about all that? Apparently, the people who buy Citgo gasoline have forgotten already.

[IJ Reilly]

;) (http://www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/statements_detail.html?ctxid=CH0055&docid=CMS1180432968135)

I'm well aware of this, and other actions the Chavez government has taken to intimidate opposition media, and I'm certainly not defending them. Something very similar occurred in Peru a few years ago and I don't recall much gnashing of teeth over it. Dictators do not allow opposition media to exist, period. My point is the definition of the word has apparently become highly elastic.

[leekohler]

I'm well aware of this, and other actions the Chavez government has taken to intimidate opposition media, and I'm certainly not defending them. Something very similar occurred in Peru a few years ago and I don't recall much gnashing of teeth over it. Dictators do not allow opposition media to exist, period. My point is the definition of the word has apparently become highly elastic.

And another thing- the use of the words "socialist dictatorship" by some in this thread. It appears that the attempt is to always paint anything remotely socialist as also always being dictatorial. Let's be honest guys, a dictatorship is a dictatorship. There are plenty of socialist countries that aren't dictatorships.

[nbs2]

I'm well aware of this, and other actions the Chavez government has taken to intimidate opposition media, and I'm certainly not defending them. Something very similar occurred in Peru a few years ago and I don't recall much gnashing of teeth over it. Dictators do not allow opposition media to exist, period. My point is the definition of the word has apparently become highly elastic.

If it was under Fujimori, I wouldn't be surprised. If I remember right, much of the reason his people cut him some slack was because he had broken the Shining Path. I think if Chavez was dealing with the problems Columbia has, people wouldn't be as concerned either.

As for within the US, our relationship with Venezuela is too strong to ignore what is happening there. I mean, how much have you read about the earthquake? Almost nothing. If that had happened in Caracas, we would see it everywhere.

I agree that we have expanded the definition of dictator to include a lot of folks that don't come near qualifying for it, which I think has caused it to lose a lot of meaning. But, I disagree that opposition media is stopped in a dictatorship. The smart dictator will closely monitor the media and turn the thumbscrews if it looks like it may go too far, but letting it be goes a long way towards placating the public and letting him maintain control. My point was that Chavez has clearly begun the march towards dictatorship, and his expressed interest in modelling himself after Castro (I think we can agree he is a dictator) indicates where he would like to end up.

And another thing- the use of the words "socialist dictatorship" by some in this thread. It appears that the attempt is to always paint anything remotely socialist as also always being dictatorial. Let's be honest guys, a dictatorship is a dictatorship. There are plenty of socialist countries that aren't dictatorships.

And there are plenty of dictatorships that aren't socialist. The problem is that most states with socialist leanings still maintain their democracy - the socialism is in place because that is what the people want. If the people changed their minds, I would expect that the socialism would be scaled back. But, when you look at the more well known socialist states, you see more centralized control - where the people hold nominal control at best: N. Korea, Cuba, China, Vietnam. When you think of socialist, Sweden just doesn't get the same coverage. I don't think that the unstated goal is to paint socialists as dictators is the goal, just the most outspoken socialists are the dictators.

[IJ Reilly]

If it was under Fujimori, I wouldn't be surprised. If I remember right, much of the reason his people cut him some slack was because he had broken the Shining Path. I think if Chavez was dealing with the problems Columbia has, people wouldn't be as concerned either.

As for within the US, our relationship with Venezuela is too strong to ignore what is happening there. I mean, how much have you read about the earthquake? Almost nothing. If that had happened in Caracas, we would see it everywhere.

I agree that we have expanded the definition of dictator to include a lot of folks that don't come near qualifying for it, which I think has caused it to lose a lot of meaning. But, I disagree that opposition media is stopped in a dictatorship. The smart dictator will closely monitor the media and turn the thumbscrews if it looks like it may go too far, but letting it be goes a long way towards placating the public and letting him maintain control. My point was that Chavez has clearly begun the march towards dictatorship, and his expressed interest in modelling himself after Castro (I think we can agree he is a dictator) indicates where he would like to end up.

It was under Fujimori, during the late '90s I believe. Sure he had his "reasons," but then, don't they all?

I don't honestly know where Chavez is going, but I don't believe he has actually expressed a desire to model himself after Castro.

[mactastic]

Aw shucks. You guys just hate Chavez because the corporate media doesn't print all the good news coming out of the country. Schools are opening and running all over the place. Health care. Womens rights and education. Etc. etc.

All snark aside, the sad part is that Bush's policies and actions have only served to bolster Chavez's prestige in the region. It should be easy to make this guy look like a chump, yet our esteemed POTUS cannot seem to do so.

[it5five]

;) (http://www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/statements_detail.html?ctxid=CH0055&docid=CMS1180432968135)

RCTV still broadcasts online.

And N. Korea is the furthest thing away from a socialist country. Just because countries declare themselves something doesn't make it so.

China - not socialist.

Vietnam - not socialist.

It's funny, because when I think of socialist countries, Sweden is one of the the first countries that comes to my mind. It's only because you (and most other Americans) are really misinformed about Socialism, that you eat up all of that "Socialists are evil" ********, you actually think North Korea is socialist.

I have a question for you: Is the Democratic Republic of the Congo actually a Democratic Republic? Of course not, but using the same reasoning as you, they are.

[j26]

...
I have a question for you: Is the Democratic Republic of the Congo actually a Democratic Republic? Of course not, but using the same reasoning as you, they are.

And are the United States really united??


While what Chavez is doing with the country is laudable, I had a feeling that something like this would happen. Another small step towards dictatorship has been taken.

[Macky-Mac]

....

It's funny, because when I think of socialist countries, Sweden is one of the the first countries that comes to my mind. It's only because you (and most other Americans) are really misinformed about Socialism, that you eat up all of that "Socialists are evil" ********, you actually think North Korea is socialist....

uh, sweden isn't a socialist country either.....despite having an extensive welfare system......and they don't even pretend to be a socialist country.

[solvs]

Actually it5five and bousozoku, so far, are the only ones ballsy enough to try.
I don't think they were, as said above, just criticizing the article's lack of some info.

So the question is, are you so much is favor of socialism that you wouldn't care about the dictatorship that comes with it.
I'm not in favor of socialism. Even the kind without the dictators that call themselves socialism. Just because I want better healthcare and think corporations should be held accountable for their actions doesn't make me a socialist. Thank you for proving my point though.

Still waiting for the reporters to get a comment from Sean Penn.
Nobody cares what Sean Penn says. He only buddied up to Chavez because they both hate Bush. I don't remember anyone ever saying they supported everything Chavez said and did. Especially after that silencing-the-media thing, which I actually heard nothing but criticism and disappointment for.

As for Chavez, who here said he was a good guy?
I'm glad it wasn't just me thinking that, cuz nobody.

There are plenty of socialist countries that aren't dictatorships.
I don't think that the unstated goal is to paint socialists as dictators
It shouldn't be, but that's exactly what it is. Re-read the comments above. I will admit to not supporting full socialism, even the nondictator kind, but demonizing it by attempting to associate it with dictatorship, much like communism (which I also don't support), is irresponsible at best. But come on, just because a dictatorship calls itself communist or socialist, doesn't make them all automatically dictatorships. And that's exactly what's being implied here. Even worse when attempting to paint us all as liberals, and therefor somehow socialists, and by proxy supporters of dictatorships. Clever. :rolleyes:

It's pretty blatant, so of course they're going to be called on it.

[it5five]

uh, sweden isn't a socialist country either.....despite having an extensive welfare system......and they don't even pretend to be a socialist country.

Sorry. What I should have said is that Sweden is one of the closest examples of what a socialist country would be. There are really no socialist countries in the world today.

[Agathon]

Did anyone notice that Chavez isn't imposing the extension to term limits by degree, but is proposing a national referendum to amend the consitution by popular vote.

Hardly dictatorial when the public get to vote it down.

And it seems to be a peculiarly American fetish to limit terms. In Britain you can stay the Prime Minister as long as you can convince people to vote for you.

And how many news networks in the USA would get away with actively colluding in a conspiracy to overthrow the government and the constitution? Somehow I think they'd get shut down a lot quicker than Chavez took to shut down RCTV, a station which did just that.

[it5five]

Exactly. Chavez is really good for Venezueala, and South America in general.

Practically that whole continent suffered under US backed dictators for decades. When they finally overthrow those people and elect a *gasp* socialist the right-wing in the US throws a fit.

[solvs]

And it seems to be a peculiarly American fetish to limit terms.

Look at who we vote for. We need term limits. Plus, the people who set up this country came from a monarchy. They didn't want that anymore. Sure, we get power hungry idiots in office, but we can vote them out in a few years. And if they're really bad, we will vote for the other party just to get away from anyone even close to them.

[bemylover]

I think those who like Chavez so much should go and spend the rest of their lives in that wonderful country. Starting with Sean Penn.

[yg17]

I've always been trying to figure out what's so bad about Chavez other than the fact he despises Bush and isn't afraid to say it. So far, I've come up empty. Seems like overall, he's done some good things for his country, more than can be said about some other presidents in the world today....

[obeygiant]

I think those who like Chavez so much should go and spend the rest of their lives in that wonderful country. Starting with Sean Penn.

Penn wouldn't go. He'd have to share his wealth with the rest of the populace.

[AP_piano295]

I've personally never seen the sense in term limmits it seems I'm in the minority there, but to me they seem to limmit freedom of voters. If a elected leader is accomplishing goals and maintaining his public support really why shouldnt he be allowed to at least run again?

To me term limmits have always seemed anti-democratic as they limmit the power of the majority, and thus the power of the people.

So the question is. Is pure Democracy actually a good way of running things? Personally I idea of putting massive ammounts of political power into the hands of a public which is for the most part poorly educated, easily spooked, supersticious, etc, etc. A little bewildering, though I cant really think of a better idea of how to run things.

[AP_piano295]

I think those who like Chavez so much should go and spend the rest of their lives in that wonderful country. Starting with Sean Penn.


Wow you sound like a Red Neck from South Park. "If you dont lie America you can gerrrr ouut!!"

Seriously though, it's a retarded thing to say.

[bemylover]

Wow you sound like a Red Neck from South Park. "If you dont lie America you can gerrrr ouut!!"

Seriously though, it's a retarded thing to say.

Excuse the hell out of me my very thoughtful, well mannered, stealing quotes from Winston Churchill friend, but did I even mention America?

[IJ Reilly]

The Sean Penn reference, now that was a thoughtful contribution.

[bemylover]

I mentioned Sean Penn because he is the guy who said Venezuela is a wonderful country, not because he lives in the US.

If somebody says Venezuela is a nice country and yet he would never consider living there, then the guy is simply lying. That is my point and it has nothing to do with living in America or liking America.

[it5five]

I think those who like Chavez so much should go and spend the rest of their lives in that wonderful country. Starting with Sean Penn.

You = *edited because I don't want to get banned again*

Reminds me of something I saw tonight. A Mexican couple was walking around Target talking to each other in spanish (probably the language they are more comfortable talking to each other in), and some guy said to them "This is America, speak english".

I couldn't believe someone would say that to another person. But then I remembered this is America, where bigotry and racism are widely accepted.

[yg17]

If somebody says Venezuela is a nice country and yet he would never consider living there, then the guy is simply lying.

Uh, no. Iceland is a nice country. From the pictures I've seen, it's got a beautiful landscape and wildlife, and I hear the people there are some of the friendliest you'll find on this planet. But I'd never consider living there (sorry Icelanders :p). Too damn cold for my tastes. But that doesn't mean it's not a "nice" country. So it's perfectly acceptable to call Venezuela a nice country and yet, never consider living there.

[bemylover]

You = everything that is wrong with this country.

LOL

I am not American.

[it5five]

Had me fooled, you'd fit right in.

[yg17]

Reminds me of something I saw tonight. A Mexican couple was walking around Target talking to each other in spanish (probably the language they are more comfortable talking to each other in), and some guy said to them "This is America, speak english".

I couldn't believe someone would say that to another person. But then I remembered this is America, where bigotry and racism are widely accepted.


I know, I HATE that. People like that guy seem to forget that unless his ancestry can be traced to native Americans, someone from his family was once an immigrant to the US and likely didn't speak any English either. It really makes me sick when I hear remarks like that. If they want to speak in a language that's more comfortable for them, then let them, what's the big freakin deal?


Oh, and I also think these people are forgetting that there is no official language in the US. So English is no more of an official language here than Spanish or Klingon

[it5five]

My girlfriend called the guy a racist, which makes me slightly less angry about the situation. But every time something like this happens I count down to the day I finish my B.A. so I can apply to get the hell out of this country.

People like that won't ever change. They raise their kids that way, so we have a continuous cycle of ********s that vote terrible people into office.

EDIT: And what makes that whole situation funnier is that we live in Arizona, and if this guy knew anything about American history he'd know that the pretty much the whole western US used to be Mexican territory.

[bemylover]

Uh, no. Iceland is a nice country. From the pictures I've seen, it's got a beautiful landscape and wildlife, and I hear the people there are some of the friendliest you'll find on this planet. But I'd never consider living there (sorry Icelanders :p). Too damn cold for my tastes. But that doesn't mean it's not a "nice" country. So it's perfectly acceptable to call Venezuela a nice country and yet, never consider living there.
Well, if I tried to make my statement bulletproof I would have to write much more, so I skipped stuff that I though was obvious. I thought it was obivous that I was not referring to Sean's liking of Venezuelan climate.

[bemylover]

You = *edited because I don't want to get banned again*

Reminds me of something I saw tonight. A Mexican couple was walking around Target talking to each other in spanish (probably the language they are more comfortable talking to each other in), and some guy said to them "This is America, speak english".

I couldn't believe someone would say that to another person. But then I remembered this is America, where bigotry and racism are widely accepted.

Wow, man, I would prefer you kept that funny line instead of saying I remind you a racist guy.

BTW, which country are you thinking of going to, if it's not a secret?

[it5five]

Most likely Canada. I'd like to go to the EU but it is a lot more difficult to get in.

[IJ Reilly]

I mentioned Sean Penn because he is the guy who said Venezuela is a wonderful country, not because he lives in the US.

If somebody says Venezuela is a nice country and yet he would never consider living there, then the guy is simply lying. That is my point and it has nothing to do with living in America or liking America.

Okay, I guess my problem is I don't care what Sean Penn, or any other celebrity, says or thinks, and don't see the relevance of it to this discussion. I would not even have been aware of his opinions had you not told me.

I also don't understand the meaning of "nice country" in this context. If Sean isn't going to join this discussion and explain what he meant, then maybe we should stick to discussing the opinions of the people who actually are here.

[AP_piano295]

Excuse the hell out of me my very thoughtful, well mannered, stealing quotes from Winston Churchill friend, but did I even mention America?

What quote did I steal from Winston Churchill, I know he had similar ideas that does'nt mean I stole any quotes.

It doesnt really matter if you mentioned America or not, or if your an American or not. It doesnt change the fact that the arguement. "Well if you think it's so great than why dont you go there?" is stupid. In all probability Venezuela is'nt as nice as America, or most European countries, but that doesnt mean that Chavez is'nt improving the quality of life their despite what the media says.

[imac/cheese]

Uh, no. Iceland is a nice country. From the pictures I've seen, it's got a beautiful landscape and wildlife, and I hear the people there are some of the friendliest you'll find on this planet. But I'd never consider living there (sorry Icelanders :p). Too damn cold for my tastes. But that doesn't mean it's not a "nice" country. So it's perfectly acceptable to call Venezuela a nice country and yet, never consider living there.

You would probably live longer though. Icelanders have one of the longest lifespans on the planet.

[mozmac]

yahoo (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070815/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_constitutional_reform;_ylt=ApGeceqtozTiv_JC0vvX7Vqs0NUE)

Chavez is starting to give socialism a bad name. :)

Chavez sucks. I can't believe that people can't get away with stuff like that. He tried to take over the country in a coup and failed...and pissed off lots of Venezuelans in the process. Then what do they do a few years later? Elect him. He obviously has lots of cronies "campaigning" for him, much like Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.

[IJ Reilly]

An attempt to overthrow the Chavez government with coup also failed. Maybe the entire country sucks.

[mactastic]

An attempt to overthrow the Chavez government with coup also failed. Maybe the entire country sucks.It can't possibly suck. No less of an authority than THE Sean Penn once claimed otherwise. Game, set, and match.

[solvs]

If Sean isn't going to join this discussion and explain what he meant, then maybe we should stick to discussing the opinions of the people who actually are here.
Sorry, one more.

Penn wouldn't go. He'd have to share his wealth with the rest of the populace.
He already does. He gives a ton of money to various charities. Sometimes even without the cameras there giving him publicity. But I'm with everyone else here, what the **** does Sean Penn have to do with anything?

If we want to start criticizing people for what their friends do, we can just pull out this golden oldie:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/rumsfeld_saddam.gif

[obeygiant]

He already does. He gives a ton of money to various charities. Sometimes even without the cameras there giving him publicity. But I'm with everyone else here, what the **** does Sean Penn have to do with anything?


Well I didn't bring up Sean Penn, but whenever someone brings up Chavez you can bet someone else will bring up Penn. Because hes the only actor besides Danny Glover that I know who would go hang with a foreign dictator and bad mouth the US.

Giving money to charity is a little different then having it taken from you by the government. Thats why he won't move to Venezuela, get it?

Also I can see why you wouldn't want to talk about Penn. He's a traitorous blow-sniffing pseudo-communist living on a bed of money whos actions are indefensible.

Sean Penn in action (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwZfyoN4RW4).

[Swarmlord]

<snip>
Also I can see why you wouldn't want to talk about Penn. He's a traitorous blow-sniffing pseudo-communist living on a bed of money whos actions are indefensible.

Sean Penn in action (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwZfyoN4RW4).

That really rolls off the tongue well. I'll have to remember to use it sometime.

[IJ Reilly]

Why would any serious person give a second thought to the political opinions of celebrities? Why would they give them even a first thought?

[Swarmlord]

Why would any serious person give a second thought to the political opinions of celebrities? Why would they give them even a first thought?

If we were a nation of serious people, then I wouldn't care, but unfortunately too many potential voters hang on the lifes and words of these celebrities, so the serious have to combat it before their influence takes hold.

[Ugg]

If we were a nation of serious people, then I wouldn't care, but unfortunately too many potential voters hang on the lifes and words of these celebrities, so the serious have to combat it before their influence takes hold.

Can you back that up with any substantial data?

Of course not, so it boils down to bigotry on your part.

[dswoodley]

If we were a nation of serious people, then I wouldn't care, but unfortunately too many potential voters hang on the lifes and words of these celebrities, so the serious have to combat it before their influence takes hold.

I agree with IJ, most of the electorate is smarter than this (no, no data). But in my experience most people know what when a celebrity talks on political issues it's just another way of that celebrity saying "look at me, i'm talking!".

[mactastic]

Well I didn't bring up Sean Penn, but whenever someone brings up Chavez you can bet someone else will bring up Penn. Because hes the only actor besides Danny Glover that I know who would go hang with a foreign dictator and bad mouth the US.

Giving money to charity is a little different then having it taken from you by the government. Thats why he won't move to Venezuela, get it?

Also I can see why you wouldn't want to talk about Penn. He's a traitorous blow-sniffing pseudo-communist living on a bed of money whos actions are indefensible.

Sean Penn in action (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwZfyoN4RW4).
As for your crack about "drug addict", he's the highest functioning drug addict that I've ever seen. [Liberals] even make better drug addicts than [conservatives] evidently.

I mean, two can play at that game, right?

[Swarmlord]

Can you back that up with any substantial data?

Of course not, so it boils down to bigotry on your part.

Yeah. Look at the sales of tabloid magazines, the viewership of tabloid TV shows and the fixation that the public has with everything associated with the A list celebrities: what they eat, drink, wear, say and do.

Unless someone is buying up all those publications to create the illusion that people are fixated on these people, I stand by my statement.

If you're looking for proof that the general public is smarter than that, you're barking up the wrong tree here. It's almost chic to appear vapid these days.

[IJ Reilly]

I agree with IJ, most of the electorate is smarter than this (no, no data). But in my experience most people know what when a celebrity talks on political issues it's just another way of that celebrity saying "look at me, i'm talking!".

We are celebrity-obsessed society to be sure, but that doesn't mean we need to entertain the views of entertainers in our discussions. I used the words "serious people" on purpose. I've been working under the assumption that most of the people who'd spend any significant time in a forum like this discussing political issues aren't the kind to be hanging on the latest words of some mouthy Hollywood lightweight. But I could be wrong...

[dswoodley]

We are celebrity-obsessed society to be sure, but that doesn't mean we need to entertain the views of entertainers in our discussions. I used the words "serious people" on purpose. I've been working under the assumption that most of the people who'd spend any significant time in a forum like this discussing political issues aren't the kind to be hanging on the latest words of some mouthy Hollywood lightweight. But I could be wrong...

We are also more likely to vote than the crowds buzzing to find out what the likes of Sean Penn, George Clooney and Rosie do next. Don't get me started on Britney and Paris.

[skunk]

Don't get me started on Britney and Paris.Why, what's the latest goss? Got anything juicy? More to the point, what does Britney think about Chavez?

[IJ Reilly]

What does Chavez think about Britney? That's what real inquiring minds want to know.

[dswoodley]

Why, what's the latest goss? Got anything juicy? More to the point, what does Britney think about Chavez?

Yikes!!!

Let me clarify, don't me get started on the crowds buzzing to find out the latest on Britney and Paris. I'll admit a certain fascination, but akin to peeling off a scab. I know it's not good, but I can't help it....

[bemylover]

What quote did I steal from Winston Churchill, I know he had similar ideas that does'nt mean I stole any quotes.What you said about democracy is exactly what Churchill said put in slightly different words. When you say something like that you should mention the author, otherwise it's stealing.

It doesnt really matter if you mentioned America or not, or if your an American or not. It doesnt change the fact that the arguement. "Well if you think it's so great than why dont you go there?" is stupid. In all probability Venezuela is'nt as nice as America, or most European countries, but that doesnt mean that Chavez is'nt improving the quality of life their despite what the media says.

(you don't like Bush && Chavez calls Bush el diablo) != you should like Chavez

Quite simple. IMO that was the exact reason why Penn praised Chavez so I said what I said implying that he was not being honest in his statements. And I did not want to make a big deal out of it, I just wrote one line.

Now I believe one does not have to be a genious to get what i said right, but it must have taken a real *autocensored* to start calling me stupid and retard right away.

[IJ Reilly]

I'm sorry, did I miss something? Did somebody call you stupid or a retard?

[skunk]

And did you just call somebody an *autocensored*? :eek:

[AP_piano295]

What you said about democracy is exactly what Churchill said put in slightly different words. When you say something like that you should mention the author, otherwise it's stealing.



(you don't like Bush && Chavez calls Bush el diablo) != you should like Chavez

Quite simple. IMO that was the exact reason why Penn praised Chavez so I said what I said implying that he was not being honest in his statements. And I did not want to make a big deal out of it, I just wrote one line.

Now I believe one does not have to be a genious to get what i said right, but it must have taken a real *autocensored* to start calling me stupid and retard right away.

No if I quoted Churchill used his exact words, which I do not know btw, then I should have mentioned him. If I happen to have simmilar views to Churchill, and a simillar writing style I dont need reference Churchill for every sentance I write.

Your style seems very simmilar to O'Reilys, or that of whichever religious nut job suggested that we assasinate him but I dont see you referencing those men.

I dont really know what to think about Chavez, but from what I've read he's done a reasonable job of redistributing some weath to the lower classes, and I think Venezuela could do far worse. I would be interested to see how many Venezuelan's attempt illegal immigrations to America each year, compared to say Mexicans.

Just because I'm not immediately prepared to condem the way a country is run because the president says I should, doesnt mean I assume everything he says is bad, is good. I make it my buisness to do my own research and do my best to form my own opinion.

Example. I hear alot about how much everything sucks in Cuba, so I thought, really? I know things probably arent excellent there the Island has some real problems with poverty, but is it really as bad as everyone wants me to belive. So I did a bit of research, it seems that recently the number of illegal immigrants have been estimated around 2500 anually, and roughly 100,000 Cubans live illegally in America so obviously a fair number of people dont want to live there or they at least want to live in America, still that numbers not that big considering the island has about 11,000,000 inhabitants, less than 1 percent. So I thought what other country is the source of a large ammount of illegal immigration even though I dont hear much about how backwards its government is?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_emigration#Cuba

I said to myself why Mexico, alot of people immigrate illegally from Mexico, as it turns out roughly 10&#37; of Mexicos population was living in America in 2004 (Mexico's population is a aprox 100,000,000). Now I thought that's odd I hardly every hear about how backwards the Mexican government is, I hear alot about how bad Cuba is and sometimes how crappy Canadian heathcare is but I hardly ever hear people on the news talking about how backwards Mexico is, I dont think I've ever herd Bush criticize Mexico's system after all they're capitalists like us. Yet roughly ten precent of Mexicans have so much trouble there they come here.

http://irpshome.ucsd.edu/faculty/gohanson/JEL_Mexican_Immigration_0306.pdf

So forgive me for not immediately condemming Venezuela just because my government and the media tells me that I should.

[solvs]

It's almost chic to appear vapid these days.
And this coming from a party that ignores scientific data on a regular basis on so many subjects because a bunch of talking head tolds them to.

More to the point, what does Britney think about Chavez?
I don't know, but she was once quoted as saying we should, like, respect our president y'all, cuz he's, like, the president or whatever.