“He frequently accuses Washington of plotting against him, and has charged it backed an aborted coup in 2002.”

Does anyone actually think this is *not* the case?

Does anyone actually think this is *not* the case?

Oh snap! You’re right!

But there hasn’t been any smoking gun evidence.

Let’s send Pat Robertson armed with a squirt-gun filled with cyanide to bump him off. I can see the headlines now:
“Pat Robertson Riddled With Bullets During Laughable Assassination Attempt”

Bump-ba-BUMP-ba-BUMP

Ah’m KJ Ill, ridin’ high on the hog,
Ya better step back, or I’ll eat your dog!

Let’s send Pat Robertson armed with a squirt-gun filled with cyanide to bump him off.

Couldn’t Marion just ask Jeebus to give Hugo a heart attack or something?

I love that he’s got a weekly TV show called ‘hello president’. I’m sure it’s just a state-of-the-union type speech, but in my mind it’s a wacky sitcom, or possibly a chibi-style anime/comedy.

There was an episode several years ago where Sr. Chavez exhorted Venezuelans to work harder to avoid wasting water. The highlight of the show was when el presidente demonstrated the proper way to use a low-flow showerhead – by taking a shower on national TV.

In his Jockeys, of course.

It sounds pretty funny – and okay, let’s face it: it IS pretty funny – but when placed in the context of what was going on with el agua of their Bolivian neighbors, it becomes a bit more serious.

I strongly recommend that everyone download the documentary The Revolution Will Not Be Televised, made by some Irish filmmakers who had the poor luck of being in the presidential palace during the coup attempt. They also managed to stay in the presidential palace for the counter-coup.

The film is mostly notable, though, for its depiction of the media manipulation surrounding the coup. This will give it particular resonance to Americans, I think.

You have to download the movie since it is not sold anywhere and was indeed never released. It was aired once or twice on the BBC and has since had the kibosh put on it. Now isn’t that exciting?

This is the fa shizzle post. It is off da hook, homie-B!

Say, I have the aforementioned movie in mpg format (720 megs). I could probably conjure a torrent if I tried.

Seriously, though, as many criticisms as one can honestly toss Chavez’s way, how can he be an enemy of democracy when he’s been democratically elected? I mean, right-wingers keep calling him a dictator, but just how does that really wash?

I mean, right-wingers keep calling him a dictator, but just how does that really wash?

It’s projection.

George W. Bush (who was elected) argues for unitary executive power and is in bed with a bunch of fools who are fascist little asswipes right down to the soles of their jackboots, so therefore Hugo Chavez is a dictator.

It’s psychologically no different from that one minister known for his homophobic screeds who got picked up for cruising a cop while he was at an anti-homosexual rights ministry conference.

The biggest hurdle to understanding the world around you is a natural resistance to the idea that vast swathes of humanity – including very important elected officials – are completely batshit fucking insane. Once you get past that hurdle, it all starts to make sense.

Indeed, Jillian. And how painful it is to have to deal with their clownshoesian fucktardism.

This applies also to the typical black-is-white criticisms of the Dems as big spenders, as having no principles, as being out-of-mainstream, as being anti-family values, and so on– when the precise opposite is true.

Ah, Hugo. Making the Left FUN Again!

Hey, this is like the second time in two weeks or so that S,N! has whipped out the deathless “wiggedy-wiggedy-wiggedy wack”!

That’s a thing to make ya go “hmm”. What up, Chris? Blame it on the rain, yeah yeah?

I mean, right-wingers keep calling him a dictator, but just how does that really wash?

Dude, he’s brown.

The original Spanish was “No te metas conmigo, chica.” Venezuelans use the word chica/chica commonly in conversation. For example, “Qué te pasa a ti, chico?” would be like saying “What’s your problem, dude?”

Chávez loves to talk the colloquial. He also sent Rice a kiss during the program.

Oops, it should be “chica/chico.”

The comparison by association of Chavez to N Korean dictator Kim by is ignorant and juvenile. As has been noted by many observers who know and care about the facts of Venezuelan democracy, the latest being the mayor of London,(http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1675)
Hugo Chavez is a democratically elected leader, with much stronger demcoractic credentials than GW Bush (In the 2004 Venezuelan referendum on Chavez, voting machines were open to inspection by all sides, as was the software, and every vote produced a paper receipt. By comparison OH looks like 1950’s Chicago.) and Venezuela has one of the most vibrant democracies in the Hemisphere.

And if you knew anything about Venezuela you would know that the pop-culture reference Chavez was making was not to US sitcoms but to a Venezuelan folk song.

How sad that a supposedly liberal blog is engaging in the same kinds of ingorant smears (Chavez = Dictactor X, IE Hitler, Kim, etc.) as Donald Rumsfeld and Pat Robertson.

Learn something about Venezuela before you go smearing their democracy. Here’s a good place to start: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/

If you can’t get hold of the Irish flick there’s always Venezuela – Anatomy of a Coup, first broadcast on SBS Australia’s Dateline program.

What a remarkably unfunny comment.

Also, w/r/t whether there is “smoking gun” evidence of US complicity in the April 11, 2002 coup vs. Chavez, Eva Golinger has assembled that evidence at:
http://www.venezuelafoia.info/english.html#foia

Bottom line: US war planners knew via the Senior Executive Intelligence Brief of April 6, 2002 that coup plotters planned to instigate violence in a march in Caracas as a means to validate their coup (on the agreed-upon in advance pretext that Chavez has shot unarmed protesters) and after the coup Ari Fleischer endorsed the (false) alibi of the coup plotters from the WH podium.

Long story short, and just the tip of the iceberg of US intervention to subvert Venezuelan demcoracy.

I mean, right-wingers keep calling him a dictator, but just how does that really wash?

http://www.watchingamerica.com/eltiempovz000001.shtml

To Thwart Washington, Chavez Suggests ‘Indefinite Extension’ of His Term

DB: Granted, Chavez is no L’il Kim Jong, but he’s funny and nuts, too. (Yes, our Bush is funny and nuts also.)

Socialist Worker Weekly might be more fun for you than Sadly, No! is all I’m saying.

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised is an astounding doc, one of the best I’ve ever seen for putting you right on the ground and contextualizing a story that’s hard to understand from the outside. It’s especially damning of the so-called “free press” that Chavez is accused of supressing. When you see the private media channels lying, manipulating, urging their citizens on to violence, and plotting with the coup planners, it’s easy to understand why Chavez might not have handed them unlimited freedom post-coup.

The US administration – and CNN – are seen lying egregiously while the clear democratic will of Venezuelans is thwarted. It is a must see for any anyone, especially Americans, who are willing to have their pre-conceptions overturned. If you think you are getting even close to the real story from network news, watch this doc and weep. Our own media and our politicians were either ignorant or seemed so – crafty – and that’s not good.

I was a bit sceptical of Chavez before I watched the doc, but it’s hard not to empathize with the guy and his struggle to serve his constituency.

I wonder…hmm… if a bunch of American businessmen and generals had failed in a coup attempt against Bush, would George have been as forgiving as Hugo was, or would they have disappeared into Gitmo?

I am just as amused as anyone else by some of President Chavez’s comments. But I don’t think having the balls to stand up to George Bush and tell Tony Blair to go to hell makes him crazy. (Many Labour MP’s feel the same way, after all.)

But my main point, which I guess was acknowledged in a half-ass way, is that Chavez’s demcoractic credentials are much stronger than those of his coup-plotting, election-fixing, illegal war-starting critics in the Bush Administration.

Socialist Worker, eh? Oh, I get it. I defend Venezuelan demcoracy, so I must be a humorless Commie. OK, very funny. Ha ha. Didn’t see that one coming.

Since my sense of humor has been called into question, I would say in my defense that for web humor I go to The Onion. That, and Scott McClellan’s Press Briefings.

This is stupid. Chavez is not like Kim Jong Il. Ignorant bullshit. Chavez was elected. He has the guts to put Condoleeza in her place.

Democracy and socialism are not mutually exclusive. Get a clue, moron!

I agree with all these other comments. I will brook no criticism of Mr. Chavez. Let us not forget that he opened his people’s eyes to the fact that Hallloween is “gringo terrorism,” and that he explained to them that their economic woes are the fault of the descendents of Christ’s killers. That’s real democratic action!

“George W. Bush (who was elected)”

So you say.

Lighten up, people!

OK, put down the knives and step away from the table, people. The equivalence that I drew from the juxtaposition of Chavez and Kim was not “two evil dictators” but “two prominent foreign leaders who say/do things that can be quite amusing from time to time”. I found the whole thing funny and didn’t see any slur of Chavez, and I’m a socialist commie who’d fax all your credit card numbers straight to the Politboro if I had the chance.

I didn’t think anyone was maligning Chavez until after a couple of strident “he’s a hero of the people, how can you make sport of him” posts. I get the sense that the comments critical of him that came after were intended not to contribute to any useful discussion, but merely to further enrage those who did not appreciate Brad’s humor, causing hurt feelings, anger, and further pointless arguments. Good work, carry on!

I’m just eternally grateful that Dumbya hasn’t ever done a PSA in which he demonstrates a low-flow showerhead while showering in his tighty-whities, ‘cos that’s a sight that no one should have to see.
Or, worse yet, Darth Cheney doing the scrub-a-dub-dubya. Eeew!

i have to say that i took it as a two-peas-in-a-pod comparison, as well.

I find Chavez entertaining as well. And given that he is a democratically elected leader and seems quite politically astute although he is opposed to the Bush Admin, I dont’ see he has much in common with a crazy hereditary dictator like KJIl who I don’t even find very funny. Now if you had used Qadafi I might have felt it to be a more germane comparison because that dude is really funny (in a batshit crazy way).

To further add to the silly metanarrative which has developed, I saw the juxtaposition of El Hugo and El Kim-o as a subtle commentary on the current administration’s tendency to tar with the same brush all those who oppose the administration, no matter how disparate their governing styles are.

It’s kind of funny to think that inside the little cartoon brain that fills the parts of Dubya’s skull not filled with old liquor, everyone who isn’t on board with his agenda all have some sort of nefarious connections with each other. It’s like he must think that Chavez, Kim, and, say, Jacques Chirac all get together at a big Legion of Doom style table and plot to use their global freeze ray on Crawford or something.

Good points, Jillian!

Chirac: “We will work together to defeat Monsieur Bush’s plans, unless he delivers us the sum of… One… Million… Dollars!”

Guys- I know that Chavez was democratically elected while Kim was not. I chose them b/c they’re both hated by the administration, and for the sake of the joke, not because I think they’re the same thing.

Lighten. Up. Humorless. Lefties. Please.

The Central Committee for the Oversight of Liberal Humor in Pursuit of Revolutionary Goals for the Furtherment of the Cadre Program for the Political Advancement of the Masses toward Enlightenment will overlook your rightist deviationism this time, Brad.

But it’s going on your permanent record. Don’t let it happen again.

“Bombings, physical attacks and threats to journalists and media hostile to President Hugo Chávez were fewer than last year in Venezuela but remained frequent and partly explain the country’s low place (90th) on the list. However tension has eased a little since Chávez won a 15 August referendum confirming him in office.”

What up girls with the “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”? Mr. Chavez is whack, and U know it!

Not every socialist is a saint. Lukashenko was elected too. He also just passed law last year to stay in power forever.

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend” is a dangerous fallacy.

Yes, Jim, we can all agree that “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” is a dangerous fallacy. However, the friend of my enemy is my enemy’s friend. And my friend’s friend’s enemy is my enemy’s friend’s nemesis, while my enemy’s friend’s next-door-neighbor plays his music way too loud.

I think that the “the friend of my enemy is my enemy” is defendable enough when it comes to say, Cuellar-type pro-Shrub Dems, for instance.

What’s that you were quoting from, Jim? Sounds like the Press Freedoms Index.