August 28, 2005

AND NOW THE STORY IS PERFECTED:

Jackson offers support to Chavez (AP, 8/28/05)

The Rev. Jesse Jackson offered support for Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Sunday, saying a recent call for his assassination was a criminal act and the United States and Venezuela should work out their differences through diplomacy.

Has Jesse ever met a Marxist thug he didn't want to keep in power?

Posted by Orrin Judd at August 28, 2005 7:40 PM
Comments

No.


Posted by: Noel at August 28, 2005 10:50 PM

Is anyone else seeing the comments appear before the post? It's like Jeopardy. Find a question to fit the answer. This category is particularly tricky because the comment by Noel is a simple, "no."

Ah the post appeared and Joel has supplied the correct answer. Nice work.

Posted by: erp [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 29, 2005 8:03 AM

Like most 'men of the left', Jesse would like the job himself. He sees himself as a 'kinder, gentler' sort of thug.

Posted by: at August 29, 2005 9:57 AM

Yeah, it really sucks when Latin Americans actually have democratically elected nationalizers of their resources. It makes it a lot harder to convince the liberals that we need to kill him. Allende's death still gets quoted a lot.

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 10:18 AM

Reiko;

First they nationalize the resources, then they nationalize the people. You're clearly not paying attention if you think it's the former aspect of Chavez that the conservatives are upset about.

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at August 29, 2005 10:33 AM

Allende's killing and what it did for Chile is the main argument for whacking a Castro or a Chavez.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ci.html#Econ

Posted by: oj at August 29, 2005 10:38 AM

What's so bad about Chavez?

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 10:48 AM

Oj - Yeah, im sure the CIA factbook is a reliable source of information for what the assassination of a democratically elected peaceful leader did for Chile. Lucky for us no one is making arguments for asssassinating American leaders (or are they?)

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 10:50 AM

Yeah, "what's so bad about Chavez?" After all, he was democratically elected, unlike George Bushitler, whose Fascist Regime now runs Amerikkka.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at August 29, 2005 10:55 AM

Reiko:

You find a source that has GDP per capita numbers that don't show Chile is fabulously better off than Cuba or VZ and I'll concede the point.

Obviously we've had presidents who we'd have been better served had they been removed. We've never had anything remotely resembling a Marxist though.

Here's a bit about Chavez:

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed040505a.cfm

Posted by: oj at August 29, 2005 10:57 AM

OJ - Howabout a source that isnt a conservative think-tank?

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 11:20 AM

Raoul - Bush wasn't democratically elected; he stole 2 elections.

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 11:21 AM

OJ - I don't care, and I'm sure the people of Chile don't care, about a simple GDP answer. The point is that Allende was a good guy, who wanted to make changes that would negatively affect US business interests, so we killed him. That kind of unjust brutality should only be expected from the former Soviet Union and China.

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 11:23 AM

Reiko:

The people of Chile don't care about their unusually high GDP or the stable democracy it makes possible?

Posted by: oj at August 29, 2005 11:29 AM

Reiko:

He stole them fair and square though.

Posted by: oj at August 29, 2005 11:33 AM

Reiko-

Allende was a political simpleton with dangerously dumb ideas who wished to place his nation under Soviet and Cuban influence at the height of the cold war. Whether you, or your pea-brained professors approve, the US has a long-standing policy of disallowing such behavior in this hemisphere. By your logic, the German officers, in their attempt to rid themselves of Hitler, were acting in bad faith. Chilean communists and the German National Socialists has similar pluralities bringing them to power. "Allende was a good guy...", proves your ignorance.

Posted by: Tom C., Stamford, Ct. at August 29, 2005 12:16 PM

Bush wasn't democratically elected; he stole 2 elections.

That's all you need to know, folks. The guy's working on home-made faith alone.

Posted by: Twn at August 29, 2005 12:19 PM

Tom C. - Bush has more similarities to Hitler than Allende did. Yeah, I know the Monroe Doctrine. It was a polite way of announcing the precedent of US imperialism in Latin America.
So tell me how US policy has improved Chile, Colombia, Argentina, Panama, El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua? You don't have to answer all, but if you can, than you're even more of a sick person than I would think that you are after reading your last post; I don't care what the CIA propaganda line reads. Howabout Mohammed Mossadeq in Iran? Was he a simpleton? Is Iran better off now?

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 12:31 PM

Everyone - Are you guys are all selfish, egotistical, upper-middle class bourgeoisie from New England? Does anyone here not fit that mold? It seems pretty homogenous from the quality of the posts around here.

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 12:34 PM

Reiko:

Hardly. Few are so blessed.

Posted by: oj at August 29, 2005 12:44 PM

Reiko:

Iran is the exception to the rule. Chile is obviously better off --as is most of Latin America where we stopped communism -- but Iran would be in better shape today had we not staged the coup. Communism was not a serious concern there.

Posted by: oj at August 29, 2005 12:45 PM

Oj - Well, in a few cases it was called communism, but later revealed to be "faulty intelligence." Its funny how often we get faulty intelligence.
I forgot to mention Haiti, Peru, and Ecuador.
Everywhere else, we will never know. Costa Rica is probably to only real safe, stable, and just government in all of Latin America. The rest of the region is still struggling against the after effects and continuing interventions of the US.
It was not a battle against communism; it was a battle against Latin American independence and nationalization which was a threat to American business interests. I can't believe you guys still believe all the Cold War propaganda.

Posted by: Reiko at August 29, 2005 12:52 PM

"Bush wasn't democratically elected; he stole 2 elections."

Which is exactly what I said. What part of "unlike" can't you understand?

Sheesh. Gotta love the trolls with both a comprehension problem and a malfunctioning sarcasm detector.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at August 29, 2005 12:59 PM

Reiko:

As soon as the Nicaraguans had free and fair elections we ignored them.

Posted by: oj at August 29, 2005 1:00 PM

Me, I'm selfish, egotistical & from South Carolina.

Nicaragua: Anything we did to help oust the Sandanistas was a net postive.

These folks might agree, at least a little:

http://www.efenews.com/detalleFrontPage.asp?opcion=0&id=8442979

So now do I get to be sick, too?

Posted by: Twn at August 29, 2005 1:09 PM
I can't believe you guys still believe all the Cold War propaganda.
People tell me that there are those who still don't believe in the oppression and misery of Communism. I found that hard to credit, but there it is. The gulag, the mass arrests, the environmental devastation, the engineered famines – all just propaganda.

As for the horrific aftermath of US intervention, all I can say is compare Chile and Cuba.

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at August 29, 2005 1:09 PM

"Are you guys are all selfish, egotistical, upper-middle class bourgeoisie from New England? "

If I didn't live in a few miles from salt water here in the Upper Left Washington, an area which at time seems to act like it wishes it were a part of Little Canada, I'd be insulted. Then again, why is an accusation that we come from the whitest and most sanctimoniously Leftwing part of the country supposed to be an insult? Is this like those times when homosexuals accuse their opponents of being in the closet?

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at August 29, 2005 1:12 PM

It would be funny if an endorsement by Jackson becomes to be seen as the 'kiss of death'. You get an embrace by JJ, and within 6 months you're knocked off.

Posted by: Robert Duquette at August 29, 2005 1:25 PM

Their people were saved from absorption into the Soviet sphere of influence.

"Symbol of peace and construction, flagship of the revolution, of creating execution, of human feeling expanded until its plenitude."

Allende re;, Death of Stalin

Allende liked the Stalinists. You call Allende 'a good guy'. Sorry to offend you but all I'm trying to do is point out the ignorant idiocy of the simple-minded left and it's basis for assigning heroic status to someone like Allende. How am I wrong?

Posted by: at August 29, 2005 1:26 PM

Regarding the "democratically elected" Chavez (all emph. add.):

Jimmy Carter’s Election Fraud

By Joel Mowbray
September 29, 2004

Carter’s love of thugs has not waned over the years. Last month, he certified the widely condemned referendum in which Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez supposedly won by a wide margin of 59-to-41.
Exit polling conducted by the highly regarded Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, however, found the exact opposite result: 59 percent opposed the communist “President,” with only 41 percent in favor.
As explained by the Wall Street Journal’s Mary O’Grady, Carter lacked the ability to prove the exit polls wrong (which could not have been 36 points off), because he only had access to a sampling of the easy-to-manipulate software tabulations printed out by voting booths.

Observers Rush to Judgment

BY MARY ANASTASIA O’GRADY
Saturday, August 21, 2004

The problem was that the “observers” hadn’t actually observed the election results. Messrs. Carter and Gaviria were only allowed to make a “quick count”–that is, look at the tally sheets spat out by a sample of voting machines. They were not allowed to check this against ballots the machines issued to voters as confirmation that their votes were properly registered.
If there was fraud, as many Venezuelans now suspect, it could have been discovered if the ballots didn’t match the computer tallies. The tallies alone were meaningless.

Exit polls in Venezuela

By Michael Barone
8/20/04

Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez has been running an authoritarian regime. By various means he has taken control of the legislature, the courts, the armed services and the police. His thugs have been intimidating and even killing the regime’s opponents. The literature on this is voluminous, but consider these reports from the Wall Street Journal:
www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005494 and
www.opinionjournal.com/wsj/?id=110005478.
[Chavez] sought to block the referendum by extralegal means and, having failed at that, resorted to intimidation to win it. There is no reason to believe that he would stop at election fraud.
One weapon against such fraud is the exit poll. As Doug Schoen of Penn Schoen points out, his firm has conducted exit polls in Mexico and, just a few days ago, in the Dominican Republic, which produced results very close to the election results. His partner Mark Penn points out that the firm conducted two previous exit polls in Venezuela, both of which were on the mark.


Posted by: Michael Herdegen [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 29, 2005 4:28 PM

Yeah but, Chavez is a good guy. He just trying to create a perfectly just society. It's not the possible election fraud that matters but the utopian intentions of the Marxist ideologue.

Posted by: Tom C., Stamford, Ct. at August 30, 2005 10:23 AM
« THINK OF AN ELEPHANT: | Main | YES, TO TRADE--NO, TO UNION: »