I was watching a commercial on TV, where this poor veteran who had served this great country honorably in war, is forced to thank the "people of Venezuela" for oil handouts courtesy of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's empty largess, by way of Joe Kennedy's vanity, or rather his Citizen's Energy program. And it got me thinking, just what was President Obama's response to President Hugo Chavez's so called election abolishing term limits? This was an election which basically removed any pretense of a democracy in Venezuela, as if that were really a question anyway. It turns out, Obama's state department didn't really have a problem with it.
Democracy in Venezuela is now officially over, and the American President's bully pulpit is precisely the place to weigh in. American presidents have had a long history of speaking out in the name of freedom, as demonstrated by Kennedy and Reagan, not to mention President Lincoln whom the press has recently been fond of likening to President Obama. But apparently such a comparison isn't justified. Some try and defend the administration's (lack of) response as a smart, stealth strategy focusing on energy independence and I can agree that this should be part of our answer. But for the Venezuelan people who have had their assets nationalized, their voices squelched, and have seen their overall quality of life plunge at the hands of this wannabe dictator, perhaps they were expecting a bit more hope and leadership from America than, of all things, praising Venezuela's "civic spirit."
Elsewhere in the world, freedom took another step back. During her first trip to China, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked about pressuring the Chinese on human rights issues and Tibet. Mrs. Clinton said, "Our pressing on those issues can't interfere on the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crisis." On the economy and fighting terrorism, sure. But the "global climate change crisis" is more important than human rights? Really Hillary?
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dr Dreadful
"It turns out, Obama's state department didn't really have a problem with it."
Why would they have? Respecting the will of a foreign electorate is, or should be, part of the State Department's job. Not every country has term limits: just because the US has them doesn't make their abolition in another country a disaster.
"Democracy in Venezuela is now officially over"
It must have been the democratic national referendum that was just held there that gave you that impression.
For the record, IMO another referendum was unnecessary. The Venezuelan people did already vote on this issue and Chavez really should have deferred to their decision. Neverthless, another vote was held and electorates are entitled to change their minds.
2 - The Obnoxious American
Doc,
Naivete does not suit you my friend. Chavez has not been running a Democracy for years. Nationalized the media and major industries, the whole gambit. Hearing you suggest that this was an earnest expression of the people kind of surprises me to be honest.
3 - Dr Dreadful
Well, Obnox, the BBC report says that a variety of independent observers didn't note any skulduggery. It seems a bit pre-emptive of you at this point to conclude that the referendum wasn't democratic.
To be fair, the report also notes the opposition's objection that media coverage of the vote was saturated in favor of Chavez. Certainly that kind of bias can influence an election, although using it as a primary complaint casts nasturtiums on Jose Shmose's ability to think for himself.
I have growing reservations about Chavez, but it is also entirely possible that his 'socialist revolution' really is almost as popular as he makes it out to be. There seems to be just as much skewed rhetoric coming from the Venezuelan opposition as there is from the Chavistas.
4 - The Obnoxious American
If it looks, walks and quacks like a dictator...
5 - Cindy
O.A. Says: This was an election which basically removed any pretense of a democracy in Venezuela, as if that were really a question anyway.
The Limits of Term Limits
The bedrock of American democracy is the voters’ right to choose. Though well intentioned, New York City’s term limits law severely limits that right, which is why this page has opposed term limits from the outset. The law is particularly unappealing now because it is structured in a way that would deny New Yorkers â€" at a time when the city’s economy is under great stress â€" the right to decide for themselves whether an effective and popular mayor should stay in office.
Council Votes, 29 to 22, to Extend Term Limits
Here is a picture that sums it up nicely.
You want to extend term limits?
6 - The Obnoxious American
To anyone that doubts Chavez's "skullduggery", read the very first link in the article, section 2.1 of Wikipedia's "Criticisms of Hugo Chavez", which talks all about his electorial fraud.
That said, there is A LOT more in this article than Hugo Chavez. So siezing upon this first paragraph either means a lack of interest in reading, or a lack of arguments on the other points raised.
Enough chatting, enjoy the article!
7 - Cindy
Only addressing this issue on that Wikipedia page:
Allegations of electoral fraud and abuse
All those groups who found a problem seem to have one thing in common: U.S. business interests.
8 - Cindy
O.A. I agree with you regarding Hillary on China.
9 - Dr Dreadful
Oh, I'll get around to commenting on the rest of the article, Obnox, never fear. It's just that that first bit about Venezuela leapt straight out.
10 - Dr Dreadful
"On the economy and fighting terrorism, sure. But the "global climate change crisis" is more important than human rights? Really Hillary?"
(a) That's not what she said.
(b) Yes, Obnox, really. Neither Clinton nor many others are as skeptical of climate change as you.
At worst, Hillary's voicing of the new administration's policy toward China marks business as usual.
11 - The Obnoxious American
Doc,
Leapt at you how? When I read that Chavez had ended term limits, basically installing him as king, the only thing that lept out to me was the end of democracy for the people of Venezuela. This is a man who is in direct control of the media, the election commission and without term limits, he can keep running the country, so long as the vote count shows he has a majority, which it will given his control of the electorial process.
Why is anyone on this thread disputing this as a loss of freedom in the world, which is what it plainly is. I am suprised by the blinders people have nailed to their faces.
12 - Dr Dreadful
Obnox, another way Chavez could have held onto power was simply to declare some sort of national emergency in 2012 and suspend the constitution. Instead he put it to the vote. And, as I said before, there's been no indication so far that the vote was rigged.
Call me naive if you want, but I'm not trying to talk Chavez up so much as I'm objecting to your fallacious logic. There's much about Hugo to cause concern but no reason to view this event in particular as 'the end of democracy' in Venezuela. Plenty of free nations around the world - including the one of which I'm a citizen - somehow get by without term limits. As Cindy noted above, it is in a way an abridgement of democracy to impose arbitrary restrictions on who can run for office. Politicians have a natural shelf life, and when they start to lose the plot the people will get rid of them - as happened to Thatcher/Major in Britain and more recently to Howard in Australia.
13 - Hope and Change?
NEW YORK (AP) - Investors' sagging confidence has pulled the major stock market indexes to their lowest levels in over a decade.
The reason that the economy is falling like a rock..is that NO ONE HAS CONFIDENCE IN KING BARRY....Funny he is blaming the market when HE is the one driving the market down!
14 - STM
What a laugh. I thought better of you OA.
You are drawing a very long bow there, old boy, and I bet you know it. Seriously mate, not your best work.
I'll address some of the rest of the article, though ...
It tries to draw some bizarre parallel that doesn't exist between Hugo Chavez's Venezuela and Barack Obama's America.
America is currently going down the pan and is at risk of taking the rest of the world with it because of policies traditionally favoured by the Right but embraced by most in America.
In normal circumstances, they'd be policies favoured by the Democrats too.
Except the global financial conflagration that began with the packaging of debt for sale as "safe" investment by Wall St and caused the sub-prime disaster that left the US economy falling over in bits like a row of dominoes has absolutely nothing to do with Obama nor any tenuous links to Hugo Chavez's rogue state.
It was caused by lack of regulation, and "small government".
This is the issue all Americans should now be addressing as it threatens to upend their very way of life. They shouldn't be asking how it's all happened, but why.
I love the way blokes like OA will try to draw a tenuous link between what's going on in places like Venezuela - and he's right, Doc, you could hardly call the place a democracy - and what's possibly, just possibly, going to happen under Obama - who's been in office for a bit over a month.
Sometimes I get the feeling that there's a bit too much navel gazing going on over there while the real concern should be in trying to understand the magnitude of what the swinging dicks on Wall St have done to you all while you were bending over for a better look.
The real pain in your collective arse is the global financial meltdown, not the attempt by government (not unlike those now being attempted all over the world) to fix it.
Finance #101 ... what amount to giant pyramid selling schemes like the CDOs and CDS that caused a collapse driven by exposure to toxic debt that now threatens to bring about the greatest crisis since WWII will only benefit those closest to the top before they collapse and burn everyone.
The real culprit in sub-prime, the spark that lit the fire, is a Wall St run riot and left to its own devices by a string of successive administrations that thought "regulations" made them look too much like "socialists".
That may now mean a massive reappraisal of what it means to be un-American.
Why not point the finger where it should be pointed, OA?
15 - The Obnoxious American
"It tries to draw some bizarre parallel that doesn't exist between Hugo Chavez's Venezuela and Barack Obama's America."
You must not have read my article. What I was saying in the article, which you can read here on the same page if you like, is that as the "Leader of the Free World," President Obama has a duty to speak out when freedom is in jeapordy. Instead, this is a lousy vote, in a country being run by Iran's best buddy, Hugo Chavez, now without any term limits.
Comparing Chavez's Venezuela to the UK or Austraila is what's really drawing on the long bow. I am amazed by how many people seem to want to defend Chavez. I'd definitely need to take a shower after doing something like that.
16 - Roger Nowosielski
Good shot, mate. As I say, it helps being an auslander.
17 - The Obnoxious American
"The real culprit in sub-prime, the spark that lit the fire, is a Wall St run riot and left to its own devices by a string of successive administrations that thought "regulations" made them look too much like "socialists"."
That's the reader's digest version. Show me the regulation that caused banks to lend to risky borrowers, and caused risky borrowers to take out loans they had no business getting into?
18 - Clavos
Yes, Obnox, really. Neither Clinton nor many others are as skeptical of climate change as you.
I could be wrong, Doc, but it seemed to me that OA's reservation is with Hillary's idea that GW should take precedence over fixing the economy, not her belief in it.
And on that point, I agree with him, if for no other reason than without our economy, the entire world will be unable to deal with GW effectively.
We're the global deep pockets...
19 - Roger Nowosielski
Another thing to add, perhaps. If this continues to be the prevailing opinion, I might as well hang it and give up my U.S. citizenship. Don't want to be counted among the morons.
Any room down under, STM? I do have a cousin in Sidney.
20 - Clavos
There's much about Hugo to cause concern but no reason to view this event in particular as 'the end of democracy' in Venezuela.
This is true. It ended long ago, when he began to shut down and nationalize opposition media.
21 - Dr Dreadful
Well, Clav, unfortunately an isotope of uranium-238 decays faster than that Daily Telegraph link that Obnox posted loads, but I don't think that's what she said either.
22 - Roger Nowosielski
Who is the "she" in the above statement?
23 - Clavos
The other half of the Clinton funny farm...
24 - Roger Nowosielski
Got you! I've got to re-activate that link. Sorry.
25 - Clavos
Doc,
I had no trouble downloading the link. According to the Telegraph, she said it. Here's the cut-and-paste:
"Our pressing on those issues can't interfere on the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crisis."