Venezuela VP: Hugo Chavez has died

[ronpaulfollower999]

CBS News ‏@CBSNews
BREAKING NEWS: Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has died, the country's Vice President Nicolas Maduro announced http://CBSNews.com

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/309060191624761345

[TokenLibertarianGuy]

Venezuela's Hugo Chavez dies from cancer: VP (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/05/us-venezuela-chavez-idUSBRE92405420130305)

http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20130305&t=2&i=709786355&w=&fh=&fw=&ll=700&pl=300&r=CBRE9240DQ800


Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has died after a two-year battle with cancer, ending the socialist leader's 14-year rule of the South American country, Vice President Nicolas Maduro said in a televised speech.

Can't believe Castro outlived him.

[presence]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/world/americas/venezuela-chavez-main/index.html

(http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/world/americas/venezuela-chavez-main/index.html)


Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez dies

By CNN Staff

updated 5:01 PM EST, Tue March 5, 2013


(http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/world/americas/venezuela-chavez-main/index.html)

[ronpaulfollower999]

Beat you to it buddy.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?406393-Venezuela-VP-Hugo-Chavez-has-died

[sailingaway]

someone tweeted this... true?

On this very same day 60 years ago died Joseph Stalin.

[TokenLibertarianGuy]

someone tweeted this... true?

On this very same day 60 years ago died Joseph Stalin.

Yeah, Stalin died March 5, 1953.

Hate the comparison, though. Chavez was a socialist but not one of history's biggest mass murderers.

[TokenLibertarianGuy]

RIP Hugo.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Do we have any liberty candidates to run for his office?

[green73]

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/jFSiXNAFNm3xLE4woB7imw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD0zODQ7cT04NTt3PTUxMg--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/65f37e52ba2e3a072b0f6a706700aad7.jpg
BYE BYE (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/L/LT_VENEZUELA_OBIT_CHAVEZ?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-05-16-58-10)
http://www.drudgereport.com/i/logo9.gif (http://www.drudgereport.com/)

[juleswin]

I bet a lot of people in the white house will be popping champagne because of this news and would be mourning the day King Saud dies.

[jmdrake]

Venezuela's Hugo Chavez dies from cancer: VP (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/05/us-venezuela-chavez-idUSBRE92405420130305)

http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20130305&t=2&i=709786355&w=&fh=&fw=&ll=700&pl=300&r=CBRE9240DQ800



Can't believe Castro outlived him.

Castro wasn't standing in the way of globalization like Chavez was.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?406397-Conservatives-should-THANK-Hugo-Chavez-for-stopping-the-FTAA&p=4905521#post4905521

Don't forget the CIA had "cancer" guns.

http://guardian.co.tt/lifestyle/2012-02-27/cancer-secret-weapon

[compromise]

I'm not one to celebrate people's deaths, but hopefully this leads to more moderate leadership in Caracas.

[ronpaulfollower999]

"The devil came here yesterday, and it smells of sulfur still today, this table that I am now standing in front of. Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the President of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world."

-Chavez 2006

R.I.P. Hugo

[sevin]

Can we invade Venezuela now?

[ninepointfive]

I bet a lot of people in the white house will be popping champagne because of this news and would be mourning the day King Saud dies.

are you sure there won't be mourning?

[green73]

Rockwell: They're Dancing a Jig at the CIA

[mad cow]

They(Venezuela)are blaming the USA for giving him cancer in the first place.

[misean]

"The devil came here yesterday, and it smells of sulfur still today, this table that I am now standing in front of. Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the President of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world."

-Chavez 2006

R.I.P. Hugo

Really? You are going to say RIP to this ghoul. I hope he gets raped for eternity.

[susano]

I admired him for standing up against the NWO globalists. I've heard Venezuela is a mess, though. Anyone know about that?


Who will replace him?

[jclay2]

Really? You are going to say RIP to this ghoul. I hope he gets raped for eternity.

Agreed. This man was a monster who made life miserable for millions.

[susano]

Really? You are going to say RIP to this ghoul. I hope he gets raped for eternity.

Why do you say that? Is it because he nationalized industries?

[ronpaulfollower999]

I admired him for standing up against the NWO globalists. I've heard Venezuela is a mess, though. Anyone know about that?


Who will replace him?

Socialism normally leaves countries in a mess. I'm guessing his VP will replace him.

[gwax23]

good riddance,

Cant believe people are giving this proletariat dictator praise just because neocons didnt like him.

[TokenLibertarianGuy]

I admired him for standing up against the NWO globalists. I've heard Venezuela is a mess, though. Anyone know about that?

Venezuela has severe violent crime problems as well as pretty bad inflation.



Who will replace him?

Election will be held in April, probably.

[green73]

Goddamn it, did the CIA finish him off with the X-37 to overshadow the assassination story?

[UWDude]

Rockwell: They're Dancing a Jig at the CIA

I'm sure they are activating agents to throw the country into turmoil as we speak. There is tons of oil there. I fear for the people of Venezuela now. CIA is spooging their pants thinking about turning Venezuela into a new Syria.

[ninepointfive]

good riddance,

Cant believe people are giving this proletariat dictator praise just because neocons didnt like him.


Theoretical scenario: You live in Venezuela and there are two candidates. You must vote.
Who would you choose? - Obama or Chavez

[HigherVision]

Castro wasn't standing in the way of globalization like Chavez was.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?406397-Conservatives-should-THANK-Hugo-Chavez-for-stopping-the-FTAA&p=4905521#post4905521

What exactly do you mean by 'globalization'? That's a pretty loaded term.

[WM_in_MO]

Nothing good came from his life, nothing good will come of his death.

[green73]

Wenzel:


From what I hear, it was no random case of cancer. I wouldn't recommend anyone buying, the bed frame, mattress or box springs that Chavez used. You might say it was specially equipped to provide for a very short life.

[TokenLibertarianGuy]

Wenzel:

Didn't know Wenzel is an oncologist.

[AngryCanadian]

RIP Hugo. And why are NeoCons on twitter cheering his death and mocking it? thats rather disgusting.

[green73]

Didn't know Wenzel is an oncologist.

What part of "From what I hear" don't you understand?

[AngryCanadian]

good riddance,

Cant believe people are giving this proletariat dictator praise just because neocons didnt like him.

You do know that he helped the people in Venezuela right?

[susano]

Can we have some facts about life under Chavez v. life as it was before him? Does anyone actually know?

I've posted with a couple of people who live there and all I got was that the country was a bureaucratic mess but nothing about restricted freedoms or people being murdered by a police state. I think the food situation/people getting enough was greatly improved.

I've heard that crime is bad there. Was it bad prior to Chavez?

[UWDude]

Can we have some facts about life under Chavez v. life as it was before him? Does anyone actually know?

I've posted with a couple of people who live there and all I got was that the country was a bureaucratic mess but nothing about restricted freedoms or people being murdered by a police state. I think the food situation/people getting enough was greatly improved.

I've heard that crime is bad there. Was it bad prior to Chavez?

Obama has killed more of his own citizens than Chavez did, if that gives you any indicator of the hysteria about Chavez.
Comparing him to Stalin is just plain stupid. Stalin killed millions. Chavez killed 0.


You do know that he helped the people in Venezuela right?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/oct/04/venezuela-hugo-chavez-election-data

[sailingaway]

Yeah, Stalin died March 5, 1953.

Hate the comparison, though. Chavez was a socialist but not one of history's biggest mass murderers.

true. I don't recall major grief (in histories, at least), and people there love Chavez. At least from what I can tell.

[sailingaway]

Wenzel:

Chavez had been in decline for a long time.

[presence]

Can we have some facts about life under Chavez v. life as it was before him? Does anyone actually know?




Even before his death, Hugo Chávez had joined Fidel Castro and Ernesto “Che” Guevara in the pantheon of Latin American leaders who enjoy instant global recognition. And, like Castro and Guevara, Chávez is more than controversial. He is the subject of deep admiration that easily morphs into passionate worship, and antagonism that often mutates into equally intense hatred. Chávez, 58, died Tuesday, after two years of cancer treatments, according to Venezuelan Vice President Nicolás Maduro.
Inevitably, his legacy will be as hard to assess objectively as that of all other deeply polarizing leaders—from Mao to Perón. Nonetheless, even if Chávez’s deeds will be the fodder of endless debate, there are some incontrovertible aspects of his legacy.
The Good
Chávez’s most enduring and positive legacy is his shattering of Venezuela’s peaceful coexistence with poverty, inequality, and social exclusion. He was not the first political leader who placed the poor at the center of the national conversation. Nor was he the first to use a spike in oil revenue to help the poor. But none of his predecessors did it so aggressively and with such a passionate sense of urgency as Chávez did. And no one was more successful in planting this priority into the nation’s psyche and even exporting it to neighboring countries and beyond. Moreover, his ability to make the poor feel that one of them was in charge has no precedent.
Another positive aspect of his legacy is that he ended the widespread political indifference and apathy nurtured over decades by a system dominated by decaying and out-of-touch political parties. The political awakening of the nation sparked by Chávez has engulfed people in the barrios, workers, university students, the middle class, and, unfortunately, even the military. And here is where Chávez’s negative legacy begins.
The Bad
After 14 years in power, Chávez did not leave the nation a stronger democracy or a more prosperous economy. This despite his constant reminders that he had finally empowered the long-excluded poor and the fact that he presided over the longest and most exuberant increase in oil revenue in Venezuela’s history.
Chávez and his supporters claim that during his tenure 15 national elections and referenda took place and that his social programs promoted participation and “direct” or “radical democracy.” Yet, as Scott Mainwaring, a respected U.S. academic has noted, democracy requires “free and fair elections for the executive and legislature, nearly universal adult enfranchisement in the contemporary period, the protection of political rights and civil liberties, and civilian control of the military. The Chávez regime falls far short on the first and third of these defining characteristics of democracy. The electoral playing field is highly skewed, and respect for opposition rights has eroded seriously. The military is much more politicized and more involved in politics than it was before Chávez.”
In fact, President Chávez was a pioneer and one of the most adroit practitioners of a political strategy that became common after the Cold War in many countries that political scientists call competitive authoritarian regimes. These are regimes where leaders gain power through democratic elections and then change the constitution and other laws to weaken checks and balances on the executive, thus ensuring the regime’s continuity and its almost total autonomy while still retaining a patina of democratic legitimacy. It is not accidental that Chávez was the longest-serving head of state in the Americas.
The other paradoxical—and bad—legacy of Hugo Chávez is an economy in shambles. It is paradoxical because his term in office coincided with a boom in commodity prices and the presence of an international financial system flush with cash and willing to lend to countries like Venezuela. In addition, the president was free to adopt any economic policy he chose without any domestic or international constraints or institutional limitations. Yet, at the time of his death, few other countries had the economic distortions that besieged Venezuela.
It has one of the world’s largest fiscal deficits, highest inflation rates, worst misalignment of the exchange rate, fastest-growing debt, and one of the most precipitous drops in productive capacity—including that of the critical oil sector. Moreover, during the Chávez era the nation fell to the bottom of the rankings that measure international competitiveness, ease of doing business, or attractiveness to foreign investors, while rising to the top of the list of the world’s most corrupt countries. The latter is another paradox of a leader whose rise to power rested on the promise to stamp out corruption and crush the oligarchy. The Bolivarian bourgeoisie—the boliburgueses, as Venezuelans call the new oligarchy formed by close allies of the regime’s leaders, their families, and friends—have amassed enormous wealth through corrupt deals with the government. This, too, is part of the unfortunate legacy Chávez has left.



http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-05/hugo-chavez-rip-he-empowered-the-poor-and-gutted-venezuela

[susano]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/oct/04/venezuela-hugo-chavez-election-data


http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/10/4/1349347635293/Venezuela-key-indicators--009.jpg

Hmm. Strange mix of outcomes.

[gwax23]

You do know that he helped the people in Venezuela right?

What forum am I on? Fucking statists.

He didnt help them he took away there freedoms and forced collectivization on them for "the common good"

get off these forums if your going to spew the propaganda of a dead dictator.

[mac_hine]

"Well, no one lives forever. When Hugo, Hugo." ~George Takei :o

[politics]

Venezuela democracie is much better than before him, and is considered by a foreign observers as a very good one, I recomend these articles
Here is a link to http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/03/why-us-dcemonises-venezuelas-democracy
And Here is a link to the carter center study on recent general elections 2012, from there and I quoute the 8 page . "Under this system,
both the opposition and the government have won and lost elections and accepted the results. Overall, the parties agreed the voting system performed satisfactorily on Oct. 7, 2012." http://www.cartercenter.org/resources/pdfs/news/peace_publications/election_reports/venezuela-2012-election-study-mission-final-rpt.pdf

[HigherVision]

Democracy sucks though. I'd rather have a single king who believed in private property and non-interventionist government than the democracy we have today.

[jmdrake]

What exactly do you mean by 'globalization'? That's a pretty loaded term.

I guess you didn't click the link? Hugo Chavez was one of the main impediments to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). Basically NAFTA on steroids. Here's Ron Paul talking about CAFTA which was a prelude to the FTAA.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul254.html

And yes, Chavez was against CAFTA.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR2005072501352.html

I'm not saying that Chavez was a saint. He wasn't. He was a useful idiot.

[UWDude]

Democracy sucks though. I'd rather have a single king who believed in private property and non-interventionist government than the democracy we have today.

That's the enlightened monarch position. Unfortunately, such monarchs rarely, if ever existed.
All systems are flawed, because they are comprised of humans.

[susano]

What forum am I on? Fucking statists.

He didnt help them he took away there freedoms and forced collectivization on them for "the common good"

get off these forums if your going to spew the propaganda of a dead dictator.

Discussing Chavez, his failures and accomplishments, does not equate to anyone saying they would like a similar government.

Since you speak with such authority, perhaps you can tell us about life before Chavez and what occurred that led to Chavez coming to power.

[jmdrake]

You do know that he helped the people in Venezuela right?


What forum am I on? Fucking statists.

He didnt help them he took away there freedoms and forced collectivization on them for "the common good"

get off these forums if your going to spew the propaganda of a dead dictator.

I care more about what happens in the U.S. than in Venezuela. And Chavez helped the people of the U.S. by blocking efforts to create a "European Union" of the Americas. Ask yourself this question. Would you really want to be saddled with Mexico and Venezuela the way Great Britain is saddled with Greece?

[kcchiefs6465]

Castro wasn't standing in the way of globalization like Chavez was.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?406397-Conservatives-should-THANK-Hugo-Chavez-for-stopping-the-FTAA&p=4905521#post4905521

Don't forget the CIA had "cancer" guns.

http://guardian.co.tt/lifestyle/2012-02-27/cancer-secret-weapon
I would not be surprised one bit.

[talkingpointes]

What forum am I on? Fucking statists.

He didnt help them he took away there freedoms and forced collectivization on them for "the common good"

get off these forums if your going to spew the propaganda of a dead dictator.

Butthurt much. Can you not deal with another countries affairs being different from your own? I must admit he has helped his people economically in the short term. I don't think anyone is actually going to defend him. I think in the least we can extend condolences on behalf of his death. I can say myself I'm sorry to see him pass and that may Venzuela pick up and move on. Speaking ill of the dead unless in the face of ton of bodies or corruption I would resent.

[TokenLibertarianGuy]

What part of "From what I hear" don't you understand?

The part where we're supposed to take anything Wenzel says seriously.

[LibForestPaul]

Really? You are going to say RIP to this ghoul. I hope he gets raped for eternity.

I know I know. The Kirshners, Fox, Alexis, that's what Venezuela needs.:rolleyes:

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Later loser:

http://i2.wp.com/guardianlv.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/url-120.jpeg?resize=480%2C285

[Keith and stuff]

You do know that he helped the people in Venezuela right?

I thought he murdered people. Others, he stole from. Others, he put in jail. Helped? Perhaps his corrupt friends and their families.

[UWDude]

I thought he murdered people.

Who told you that? How about some evidence. Maybe you thought wrong.

Happens when you take in MSM demonization.

[kcchiefs6465]

Who told you that? How about some evidence. Maybe you thought wrong.

Happens when you take in MSM demonization.
He's probably referring to the protester who was shot in the head by a sniper. I doubt Chavez ordered such a thing and the CIA is strongly suspected as trying to incite a coup. Aside from that, I really don't know much of the man. If it comes out that the CIA poisoned him and other South American leaders I would not even blink. They probably did. I'll just leave it at either way, I would not be surprised.

[The Gold Standard]

You do know that he helped the people in Venezuela right?

Helped them how? By stealing their property and impoverishing them? We will no doubt go over there and make things worse, but this guy was no hero.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM2Q42onAXI
https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/309060191624761345

[UWDude]

I thought he murdered people.

Go on, Wiki and Google away to try and find any shred of evidence of this statement of ignorance. An opinion on a country you know nothing about. Nice.

[liveandletlive]

just yesterday i saw a commercial for CITGO extolling Hugo's generosity in providing heating oil for the needy here in America

[gwax23]

Discussing Chavez, his failures and accomplishments, does not equate to anyone saying they would like a similar government.

Since you speak with such authority, perhaps you can tell us about life before Chavez and what occurred that led to Chavez coming to power.

Just because things where bad before does not excuse him in anyway. You can say the same about any dictator, stalin, fidel, hitler, mao what difference does it make if things where worse before them they are still dictators who destroy freedoms wether in the name of the common good, national interests or whatever.


I care more about what happens in the U.S. than in Venezuela. And Chavez helped the people of the U.S. by blocking efforts to create a "European Union" of the Americas. Ask yourself this question. Would you really want to be saddled with Mexico and Venezuela the way Great Britain is saddled with Greece?


So we have to thank this guy for stopping a supposed EU from forming? I stress Supposed cause I dont see any hard evidence it was imminent. The EU doesnt include Switzerland and Norway among other EU countries. This American Union could of formed without him. Lets not give this guy anymore credit.


Butthurt much. Can you not deal with another countries affairs being different from your own? I must admit he has helped his people economically in the short term. I don't think anyone is actually going to defend him. I think in the least we can extend condolences on behalf of his death. I can say myself I'm sorry to see him pass and that may Venzuela pick up and move on. Speaking ill of the dead unless in the face of ton of bodies or corruption I would resent.

People are making all sort of excuses on this forum for this guy. The economic benefits everyone here is attributing to Chavez would of happened with him in or out of office. Nothing to do with him or his policies and more with the oil. If anything more economic growth would of happened had he not been in office and a free market minded individual was.

But yes hes was great a hero lets white wash him and rewrite history, anything to stress the fact we arent neocons even if it goes against everything we stand for.

[Fox McCloud]

Good riddance; he was a dictator and a tyrant, hopefully his passing will allow for a more freedom oriented leader.

[juleswin]

Gotta love people on the site talking trash Chavez. Oh he killed people, oh he took other people's property, oh he is a socialist etc etc. I hope you guys will say the same thing when say a Rand Paul/Amash or Mike Lee becomes president and the killing of people(wars), taking of properties(taxes) and the socialism(medicare and SS) in the country doesn't immediately end.

A wise man once said, if you are going in the right direction, all you have to do is keep walking. The man greatly improved the country and for the most part he stopped the thieving of the country's national resources by foreign corporations and if that makes him a monster then so be it.

[talkingpointes]

Gotta love people on the site talking trash Chavez. Oh he killed people, oh he took other people's property, oh he is a socialist etc etc. I hope you guys will say the same thing when say a Rand Paul/Amash or Mike Lee becomes president and the killing of people(wars), taking of properties(taxes) and the socialism(medicare and SS) in the country doesn't immediately end.

A wise man once said, if you are going in the right direction, all you have to do is keep walking. The man greatly improved the country and for the most part he stopped the thieving of the country's national resources by foreign corporations and if that makes him a monster then so be it.

Oh wait, you're trying to tell us you want to what -- suck this mans .... Can you believe the attitudes prevalent sometimes? I guess were just sheeple and he's waking us up to the evil Chavez.

[Fox McCloud]

Gotta love people on the site talking trash Chavez. Oh he killed people, oh he took other people's property, oh he is a socialist etc etc. I hope you guys will say the same thing when say a Rand Paul/Amash or Mike Lee becomes president and the killing of people(wars), taking of properties(taxes) and the socialism(medicare and SS) in the country doesn't immediately end.

A wise man once said, if you are going in the right direction, all you have to do is keep walking. The man greatly improved the country and for the most part he stopped the thieving of the country's national resources by foreign corporations and if that makes him a monster then so be it.


There's a sharp difference between being unable to end something (but working strongly towards it) and implementing policies or encouraging them, yourself. Nationalizing oil companies, banks, etc is hardly praiseworthy.

Likewise, I don't think anyone here who is criticizing Chavez is someone doing so because they think their own country/leaders/politicians are "good"--they're just pointing out that he's not worthy of an ounce of praise.

[qh4dotcom]

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/540776_10151847682305166_1644068228_n.jpg

[HOLLYWOOD]

You know it doesn't matter whether it's a Democracy, Parliamentary, Communistic, Fascist, whatever... evidence is there, that pretty much all governments are corrupt & evil... it's only the relative degree of intensity/severity that differs them. Man the corruption of the local government down the street is ramped, imagine when you get to the Billion & Trillion dollar levels.

Hugo is just another imperial victim, like the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in London by Russian agents. Chavez was assassinated in slow motion, most likely by the CIA, since their track record is there throughout history/world, plus they had missed their "mark" twice before in Venezuela.

It doesn't take much for the US agents to bribe conscripts/mercenaries with US taxpayer monies to do their dirty work, since most all is done by proxy these days. Many here have already posted about Hugo was a US target, especially when there's oil/minerals/natural resources involved.

Most know, US embassies & US consulates are just espionage and covert operations centers for the DEA, FBI, CIA, DIA, DOD, etc...

Watch carefully down the road... if there are 'loose strings' tied to Chavez's assassination, they'll most likely be found dead floating in a river, burned in a car, shot in their home, or hanging in the tool shed out back... loose strings are almost the first thing to go after the objective has been met.

PS: I'm still searching for those innocent civilians Chavez killed in; Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Djibouti, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Mali, Palestine, Nigeria... how many countries did Hugo bomb... on and on.

[qh4dotcom]

https://www.facebook.com/wayne.a.root


"Hugo Chavez is dead. Amassed $2 BB fortune. Just like Obama, all marxists are frauds and hypocrites. They hate the wealthy and hate money- except for themselves:"
- Wayne Allyn Root

[misean]

Gotta love people on the site talking trash Chavez. Oh he killed people, oh he took other people's property, oh he is a socialist etc etc. I hope you guys will say the same thing when say a Rand Paul/Amash or Mike Lee becomes president and the killing of people(wars), taking of properties(taxes) and the socialism(medicare and SS) in the country doesn't immediately end.

A wise man once said, if you are going in the right direction, all you have to do is keep walking. The man greatly improved the country and for the most part he stopped the thieving of the country's national resources by foreign corporations and if that makes him a monster then so be it.

Good point. The comparison to Rand Paul is very accurate. Taxes are very much the same as communism. In fact, don't kid yourself. Chavez might be better than Rand Paul. I believe Chavez used to carry around a dog eared copy of Road to Serfdom.

[kcchiefs6465]

You know it doesn't matter whether it's a Democracy, Parliamentary, Communistic, Fascist, whatever... evidence is there, that pretty much all governments are corrupt & evil... it's only the relative degree of intensity/severity that differs them. Man the corruption of the local government down the street is ramped, imagine when you get to the Billion & Trillion dollar levels.

Hugo is just another imperial victim, like the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in London by Russian agents. Chavez was assassinated in slow motion, most likely by the CIA, since their track record is there throughout history/world, plus they had missed their "mark" twice before in Venezuela.

It doesn't take much for the US agents to bribe conscripts/mercenaries with US taxpayer monies to do their dirty work, since most all is done by proxy these days. Many here have already posted about Hugo was a US target, especially when there's oil/minerals/natural resources involved.

Most know, US embassies & US consulates are just espionage and covert operations centers for the DEA, FBI, CIA, DIA, DOD, etc...

Watch carefully down the road... if there are 'loose strings' tied to Chavez's assassination, they'll most likely be found dead floating in a river, burned in a car, shot in their home, or hanging in the tool shed out back... loose strings are almost the first thing to go after the objective has been met.

PS: I'm still searching for those innocent civilians Chavez killed in; Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Djibouti, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Mali, Palestine, Nigeria... on and on.
QFT. Plus rep. I've read a little about the CIA backed attempted coups of Venezuela and Chavez's kidnapping but not much. If you have any sources or aspects that you think are especially needed to understand the situation, I'd greatly appreciate them. That might just be what my night is. [refreshing my mind] Great post. Your foreign policy expertise is very hard to be matched.

[Danan]

A wise man once said, if you are going in the right direction, all you have to do is keep walking. The man greatly improved the country and for the most part he stopped the thieving of the country's national resources by foreign corporations and if that makes him a monster then so be it.

A country shouldn't own resources. People should own resources. He took away resources from people and gave it to the government. He was a socialist and like all socialists he was bad. There is no way the world is worse off without him.

[juleswin]

Good point. The comparison to Rand Paul is very accurate. Taxes are very much the same as communism. In fact, don't kid yourself. Chavez might be better than Rand Paul. I believe Chavez used to carry around a dog eared copy of Road to Serfdom.

You're funny but seriously. It is a matter of degree and intentions matters. I believe Chavez really wanted to improve the lives of Venezuelans but was greatly misinformed on how to do that, so in some ways he is similar to Rand.

[Danan]

There's a sharp difference between being unable to end something (but working strongly towards it) and implementing policies or encouraging them, yourself. Nationalizing oil companies, banks, etc is hardly praiseworthy.

Likewise, I don't think anyone here who is criticizing Chavez is someone doing so because they think their own country/leaders/politicians are "good"--they're just pointing out that he's not worthy of an ounce of praise.

^^ this.

[angelatc]

What forum am I on? Fucking statists.

He didnt help them he took away there freedoms and forced collectivization on them for "the common good"

get off these forums if your going to spew the propaganda of a dead dictator.

I guess it's ok to seize private property if you're doing it to help people?

[Danan]

You're funny but seriously. It is a matter of degree and intentions matters. I believe Chavez really wanted to improve the lives of Venezuelans but was greatly misinformed on how to do that

So did Hitler and Stalin. They truly and honestly believed they were making things better. Both were evil assclowns with terrible political philosophies though.

I'm not saying Chavez was as bad as Stalin, but at least domestically he was worse than any US president ever was. Get a little perspective people, that guy was a damn full-out socialist who took away private property on a massive scale. If people on this forum don't see that as inherently evil than there is really no hope.

[juleswin]

A country shouldn't own resources. People should own resources. He took away resources from people and gave it to the government. He was a socialist and like all socialists he was bad. There is no way the world is worse off without him.

And people shouldn't be paying taxes but under the best scenario we are still going to be paying taxes and govt will continue to own lands(national parks). So yes, Chavez did not renew the lease to the oil companies and if that is what you consider to be "taking" resources then he took resources.


There is no way the world is worse off without him.

I will disagree, you know what is worse than a socialist? a corporatism and that is what we have in Obama

[Feeding the Abscess]

And people shouldn't be paying taxes but under the best scenario we are still going to be paying taxes and govt will continue to own lands(national parks). So yes, Chavez did not renew the lease to the oil companies and if that is what you consider to be "taking" resources then he took resources.



I will disagree, you know what is worse than a socialist? a corporatism and that is what we have in Obama

Obama's not worse than Chavez. And it's not even close.

[Danan]

I will disagree, you know what is worse than a socialist? a corporatism and that is what we have in Obama

So people in the US are worse off than people in Venezuela? You know why corporatism is so "successful"? Because what's left of capitalism is so strong and powerful to keep people in relative prosperity, so that they don't question the government sucking away their wealth. Socialism is inherently doomed to fail and does that every time it's tried.

[juleswin]

So did Hitler and Stalin. They truly and honestly believed they were making things better. Both were evil assclowns with terrible political philosophies though.

I'm not saying Chavez was as bad as Stalin, but at least domestically he was worse than any US president ever was. Get a little perspective people, that guy was a damn full-out socialist who took away private property on a massive scale. If people on this forum don't see that as inherently evil than there is really no hope.

I dunno man, I see Chavez as a Kucinich type, someone who will propose lowering the retirement age to reduce unemployment because he doesnt know any better. This type of politician wouldn't purposely hurt someone or invade a country to achieve that goal unlike Stalin. That is the difference between Obama/Bush types and Kucinich/Chavez types.

Obama is really an evil person, I dont for a second think he actually believes that selling out the american people to the insurance companies or using depleted uranium on Iraqis or say funding the Syrian terrorist or paying of his fake industry or the dozens of other evil policies he supports is good for anyone. In that case, intentions are not everything but is factored when judging their actions

[ninepointfive]

i bet obama would be worse should he be allowed free reign

[RonPaulFanInGA]

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/540776_10151847682305166_1644068228_n.jpg

Cuba: best healthcare in the world according to Michael Moore. :rolleyes:

[juleswin]

So people in the US are worse off than people in Venezuela? You know why corporatism is so "successful"? Because what's left of capitalism is so strong and powerful to keep people in relative prosperity, so that they don't question the government sucking away their wealth. Socialism is inherently doomed to fail and does that every time it's tried.

I bet you a $1m on this but give Venezuela the world reserve currency and then take it away from the US, keep everything else the same and I promise you, Venezuelans will be enjoying a higher standard of living than Americans in 10 yrs. I also wonder if the American welfare infrastructure(read socialist) is bigger than Venezuelans

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Gotta love people on the site talking trash Chavez. Oh he killed people, oh he took other people's property, oh he is a socialist etc etc. I hope you guys will say the same thing when say a Rand Paul/Amash or Mike Lee becomes president and the killing of people(wars), taking of properties(taxes) and the socialism(medicare and SS) in the country doesn't immediately end.

A wise man once said, if you are going in the right direction, all you have to do is keep walking. The man greatly improved the country and for the most part he stopped the thieving of the country's national resources by foreign corporations and if that makes him a monster then so be it.

In your praising of this man, allow me to complement you as I now have a new found appreciation for Castro, who said the blessed end justifies any cruel means to achieve it, Adolph Hitler, who killed Jews, and Joseph Stalin, who tried to kill just about everyone. I do appreciate your open mindedness, but now isn't the time for such progressive thinking. Understand that we just feel that you are being ill mannered in your zeal as you are violating normal etiquette that sets ten years as the proper passing of time before any undoing should be taken regarding the unjustifiable demonizing of a monster . . . ahem.

[juleswin]

Cuba: best healthcare in the world according to Michael Moore. :rolleyes:

I like that because we all know its is an indictment on a medical system if they cannot sure someone from cancer, yes I know they couldn't beat a simple cancer. Pss, Edward Kennedy also died from cancer in our wonderful medical system.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

i bet obama would be worse should he be allowed free reign

How dare you diss His golden voice! Why, just a few precious drops of his spittle can cause a field of corn to grow hundreds of feet high! Praise our rock star president! Praise all those weirdos standing behind him as the foundation of his Feeblelosity. Look, I'm starting to dance! Why, I am Hillary Boy! Hillary for 2016!

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Pss, Edward Kennedy also died from cancer in our wonderful medical system.

Kennedy was also 20 years older.

[juleswin]

Obama's not worse than Chavez. And it's not even close.

I think he is worse than Chavez on all fronts but we wouldn't know that because one has the world reserve currency to work with and a military to twist a lot of country's arms.

For the record, I am not saying Chavez is an angel but I don't think he is a devil either. He is Dennis Kucinich as president, a man who I wouldn't wanna see become president but a man I will take over Obama or Romney any day. Also, I dont support socialism but I think there are worse political systems before anyone start to think I worship Chavez.

[juleswin]

Kennedy was also 20 years older.

So? you mean they would have definitely cured him if he was 20 yrs younger? The point is that he had fricken cancer and cancer is no cake walk even for the best medical system in the world (US not Cuba).

[Danan]

I bet you a $1m on this but give Venezuela the world reserve currency and then take it away from the US, keep everything else the same and I promise you, Venezuelans will be enjoying a higher standard of living than Americans in 10 yrs. I also wonder if the American welfare infrastructure(read socialist) is bigger than Venezuelans

It is bigger because what is left of the free market is able to fund government in the US. Also I believe you are wrong on the reserve currency. Austria or Switzerland or New Zealand do not have a world reserve currency and are better off than all the self-proclaimed socialist countries on the planet. US citizens are richer than Venezuela's because they are way more productive.

[juleswin]

It is bigger because what is left of the free market is able to fund government in the US. Also I believe you are wrong on the reserve currency. Austria or Switzerland or New Zealand do not have a world reserve currency and are better off than all the self-proclaimed socialist countries on the planet. US citizens are richer than Venezuela's because they are way more productive.

But having the world reserve currency sure makes it easier to produce a higher standard of living than without it. Also culture matter, work ethics, language and lost of other things matter. Also the countries you mentioned all have significant amount of socialist policies. Australia has I think a $15 minimum wage and a very robust welfare system but they are prosperous in spite of it

[gwax23]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR70gNnXOYQ

[Danan]

But having the world reserve currency sure makes it easier to produce a higher standard of living than without it. Also culture matter, work ethics, language and lost of other things matter. Also the countries you mentioned all have significant amount of socialist policies. Australia has I think a $15 minimum wage and a very robust welfare system but they are prosperous in spite of it

I'm not going to get into political philosophy now, I've got to get some sleep. But there is a huge difference between marxist-style socialism (government ownership over the means of production, justified by labor theory of value and "capitalistic wage-exploitation") and modern Western welfare economics. What every Western country, including the US follows is not corporatism or socialism, it's practical welfare economics in various degrees ranging from "fixing" only the most accepted "market failures" and imperfections to making a market failure out of every imaginable supposed imperfection.

Both philosophies are deeply flawed and hinder prosperity, but the latter is so much better (or less bad) than socialism, it's not even a fair competition.

[thequietkid10]

Wenzel:

...wasn't he getting most of his treatment in Cuba?

[juleswin]

I'm not going to get into political philosophy now, I've got to get some sleep. But there is a huge difference between marxist-style socialism (government ownership over the means of production, justified by labor theory of value and "capitalistic wage-exploitation") and modern Western welfare economics. What every Western country, including the US follows is not corporatism or socialism, it's practical welfare economics in various degrees ranging from "fixing" only the most accepted "market failures" and imperfections to making a market failure out of every imaginable supposed imperfection.

Both philosophies are deeply flawed and hinder prosperity, but the latter is so much better (or less bad) than socialism, it's not even a fair competition.

I see but I actually don't think Venezuela have a Marxist style socialist system, I assume its more like a Norwegian style socialist system. In both the nation owns the oil companies, drills the land and shares the profit and they also have a very generous welfare system but you one can still own property and make profit out of it.

I think you might be confusing Venezuela with Cuba.

[kcchiefs6465]

I'm more concerned with our possible involvement in his death. With all of the attempted coups, assassinations, and coups in the region, I don't find it unlikely that we contributed to his cancerous death. My thing is that there are unintended, unpredictable, consequences of overthrowing sovereign States and assassinating various leaders. Dimitri Medvedev has stated as much, and one of the things he mentioned was a thermonuclear war. We nonchalantly bomb on whim, assassinate those who don't walk lock in step, and bully countries with our arrogant, foolish, foreign policy. It is madness. One way or another it will come to an end. Whether that is because of a nuclear world war or whether it is from our [seemingly more and more imminent] bankruptcy.

[thequietkid10]

so wait, why did the CIA kill Chavez? He opposed a trade agreement that was scheduled to go into effect in 2005?

...so what took the CIA so long?

[kcchiefs6465]

so wait, why did the CIA kill Chavez? He opposed a trade agreement that was scheduled to go into effect in 2005?

...so what took the CIA so long?
I am suggesting, or rather thinking, about the seeds we have planted. Why did the CIA kill Chavez?... Without having researching the specifics of this specific [attempted] coup too extensively I'd be inclined to believe it is for the immense oil field he was sitting on and his lack of willingness to play ball. Why did they back Pinochet in the '70s? I am not privvy to all of the answers but as time goes on, more and more will come out. What took the CIA so long? They botched the assassination of Castro more times than I have fingers. I don't specifically know what took so long - perhaps the carcinogens took a while to fester before becoming cancerous - I really couldn't say, and I am simply speculating. With our presence in the region [the entire South America, damn near] and with our past actions coming to light, I would not be surprised to find out that polonium water, or certain cancerous 'salts' caused his condition. Sad to say.

[Anti Federalist]

In fact, President _______ was a pioneer and one of the most adroit practitioners of a political strategy that became common after the Cold War in many countries that political scientists call competitive authoritarian regimes. These are regimes where leaders gain power through democratic elections and then change the constitution and other laws to weaken checks and balances on the executive, thus ensuring the regime’s continuity and its almost total autonomy while still retaining a patina of democratic legitimacy.

LOL - I thought we were talking about Venezuala.

[ClydeCoulter]

QFT. Plus rep. I've read a little about the CIA backed attempted coups of Venezuela and Chavez's kidnapping but not much. If you have any sources or aspects that you think are especially needed to understand the situation, I'd greatly appreciate them. That might just be what my night is. [refreshing my mind] Great post. Your foreign policy expertise is very hard to be matched.

I found this interesting some time back (the coup against Chevez):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id--ZFtjR5c

[UWDude]

Cuba: best healthcare in the world according to Michael Moore. :rolleyes:

People don't die of cancer in America.

[UWDude]

So did Hitler and Stalin. They truly and honestly believed they were making things better. Both were evil assclowns with terrible political philosophies though.

I'm not saying Chavez was as bad as Stalin, but at least domestically he was worse than any US president ever was. Get a little perspective people, that guy was a damn full-out socialist who took away private property on a massive scale. If people on this forum don't see that as inherently evil than there is really no hope.


Obama's not worse than Chavez. And it's not even close.

How many people died in Chavez' wars? How many of his own citizens did Chavez kill?
How many people died in Reagan and Johnson, Kennedy and Bush and Obama's wars?
How many of his own citizens has Obama killed with drone strikes? How many American kids has Obama killed in drone strikes? What about COINTELPRO, how many did they kill?
How many Venezuelans, much less Venezuelan kids did Chavez have killed?

Domestically? US soldiers wasted in wars for oil and profit and now disproven ideologies like the domino theory don't count?

How about the draining of an economy for these wars? How much property has to be taken via taxes for a worldwide empire before it is considered evil?

[Antischism]

RIP, Chavez.

May America have an anti-imperialist with your foreign policy sense soon.

[UWDude]

Good riddance; he was a dictator and a tyrant,

Tyrant?
in 2002, the miliary tried to stage a coup against chavez.
They took him prisoner, and dissolved the National Assembly and the Supreme Court.
A million people poured into the streets, and the palace guard turned on the coup leaders and captured them.

A tyrant would have had them summarily executed for treason.
What did Chavez do?
There were not even any charges.
Many of the coup leaders are still active in opposition parties today!

You have really cheapened the word tyrant if you are going to call Chavez one.

Believe me, if this happened in the United States, there would be massive executions.

[J_White]

quick, lets bring freedom and democracy there - CIA must be thinking !

[UWDude]

quick, lets bring freedom and democracy there - CIA must be thinking !

Venezuelans are up shit creek now, that's for sure.
Give it a few years. It will be hell on earth that will make people think of the Chavez days as the garden of Eden.

[Cutlerzzz]

He was a tyrannical monster, but I still hope God can take some mercy on him. RIP.

Hopefully Venezuela won't be as bad of a place to live anymore.

[UWDude]

He was a tyrannical monster, .

who did not even have charges brought against the coup leaders of 2002.

What tyranny?

[alucard13mmfmj]

Chavez thinks that the USA gave him cancer with some kind of slow kill weapon...

I don't remember where I heard that. Could be on Alex Jones.

[Cutlerzzz]

The Venezuelan economy has been nothing but a disaster. Anyone who says otherwise is on the wrong forum.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20795781

Even with all that oil he has had awful results.

[kcchiefs6465]

Erased a hell of a post.. :mad:

I'll edit when I'm less annoyed.

[green73]

From Ron Paul's FP advisor:


"If a man can be defined by the enemies he makes, then Chavez was a saint."
-Raimondo (https://twitter.com/JustinRaimondo/status/309130227886456833)

Also don't miss Land Destroyer's analysis (http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2013/03/us-plots-conquest-of-venezuela-in-wake.html), "US Plots Conquest of Venezuela in Wake of Chavez' Death."

Excerpt:


"US military contractors and special forces had been caught operating in and around Venezuela (http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/world/339025/venezuela-expels-second-us-embassy-official). Just as there were warning signs in Syria years before the 2011 conflict began, the US' intentions of provoking bloodshed and regime change in Venezuela stretch back as far as 2002. Just as Syria is now facing a Western-engineered proxy war (http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2012/05/syrian-war-prequel.html), Venezuela will too, with the AEI already declaring US plans to wage a Syria-style proxy war in South America."


http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/133317.html

[vita3]

My opine on Chavez is neither too positive or negative. He was the leader of a huge oil reserve Nation who helped out his people's poor. Certainly never invaded & destroyed another Nation. Not too bad if you ask me.

He was elected Venezuelas leader 3 separate times.

[talkingpointes]

My opine on Chavez is neither too positive or negative. He was the leader of a huge oil reserve Nation who helped out his people's poor. Certainly never invaded & destroyed another Nation. Not too bad if you ask me.

He was elected Venezuelas leader 3 separate times.

Great another Chavez butt buddy. Buddy get lost OK, were anti-anyonewhoisn'tus ! Even if they don't evoke negative or positive feelings!

[vita3]

Great another Chavez butt buddy. Buddy get lost OK, were anti-anyonewhoisn'tus ! Even if they don't evoke negative or positive feelings!

He's not my HERO & I'm not going anywhere. & I can respect another Nations choice to elect any leader they want. You sound like a PSYCHO. Lol

[tasteless]

Will I still be able to buy cheap gas subsidized by the Venezuelan taxpayer?

[K466]

Good riddance to another socialist scumbag dictator.

[jmdrake]

So we have to thank this guy for stopping a supposed EU from forming?


You don't have to do anything. You don't have to eat food or drink water or breathe if you don't want to.



I stress Supposed cause I dont see any hard evidence it was imminent.


Then you can't see very well.



The EU doesnt include Switzerland and Norway among other EU countries. This American Union could of formed without him. Lets not give this guy anymore credit.


Switzerland and Norway didn't have leaders that were the architects of the EU. Our president was the main one pushing for the FTAA and CAFTA. If you want to be obstinate and not face facts then fine. But drop of the "Let us" and "we" crap.

[jmdrake]

Tyrant?
in 2002, the miliary tried to stage a coup against chavez.
They took him prisoner, and dissolved the National Assembly and the Supreme Court.
A million people poured into the streets, and the palace guard turned on the coup leaders and captured them.

A tyrant would have had them summarily executed for treason.
What did Chavez do?
There were not even any charges.
Many of the coup leaders are still active in opposition parties today!

You have really cheapened the word tyrant if you are going to call Chavez one.

Believe me, if this happened in the United States, there would be massive executions.

Don't try to confuse some people with the facts.

[jmdrake]

He's not my HERO & I'm not going anywhere. & I can respect another Nations choice to elect any leader they want. You sound like a PSYCHO. Lol

Check sarcasm meter.

[angelatc]

And people shouldn't be paying taxes but under the best scenario we are still going to be paying taxes and govt will continue to own lands(national parks). So yes, Chavez did not renew the lease to the oil companies and if that is what you consider to be "taking" resources then he took resources.






This is just a lie. He didn't simply refuse to renew the leases. He seized control after the French and Italians refused to turn over their half of what had previously been joint operations.

He also seized private food stores and grocery stores from retailers and wholesalers who refused government price controls, complaining that there was a shortage of foreign currency available to pay for imports. This is just one example - there are many more: http://laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=357223&CategoryId=10717

Here's another: http://www.examiner.com/article/chavez-seizes-more-private-property

Freaking liberal taint on this board. "He was good to the people and mean to the evil corporations, so we love him!!!" STFU.

[green73]

Writes Danny Sanchez of the Mises Institute:


Hugo Chávez may have been oppressive, but at least he wasn't a lapdog for Washington like so many other heads of state. The world would be a much more free and decentralized place with more anti-imperialist "rogue" nations. And it is important to put his depredations in perspective. Bush, Obama, Blair, Hollande, etc., have caused more death and suffering in the world than Chávez ever did. And this should be no surprise.It is often the less authoritarian states that afflict more humans more seriously, even if those afflicted the worst happen to be foreigners. That is because the most "free" countries are also often the most imperialistic. This is what Hans-Hermann Hoppe calls the "paradox of imperialism." States that allow more domestic freedom have more wealth to tap to fund more conquests and interventions.

Considering the chaos, terror, and wanton murderous destruction perpetrated on a daily basis by the West upon its recipients of "liberation," the evil of Chávez is dwarfed by that of the governments of the "free world."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/133329.html

[AuH20]

Good riddance to another socialist scumbag dictator.

Interesting that he embezzled 2 billion dollars before his death. I will say this. Chavez was a scumbag dictator, but his public notoriety was his downfall. At least the western oligarchs maintain a relatively low profile.

[AuH20]

This is just a lie. He didn't simply refuse to renew the leases. He seized control after the French and Italians refused to turn over their half of what had previously been joint operations.

He also seized private food stores and grocery stores from retailers and wholesalers who refused government price controls, complaining that there was a shortage of foreign currency available to pay for imports. This is just one example - there are many more: http://laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=357223&CategoryId=10717

Here's another: http://www.examiner.com/article/chavez-seizes-more-private-property

Freaking liberal taint on this board. "He was good to the people and mean to the evil corporations, so we love him!!!" STFU.


He died with 2 billion dollars that he STOLE!!! That's the real irony in this bizarre worship of the man.

[angelatc]

He's not my HERO & I'm not going anywhere. & I can respect another Nations choice to elect any leader they want. You sound like a PSYCHO. Lol


He used public money and resources to finance his campaign. Jesus, we cry that the media here is controlled bu the corporate government, but there it literally is owned by the government.

He had public employees going door to door on his behalf, while paying them with tax money.

Yeah, I'm sure the elections were fair.

[green73]

Why are some people so goddamn black and white on this issue. Retards.

[vita3]

Foreign oil companies wanted Venezuelas resources desperately, especially Bush's cabal. The dude kicked them out & did what he thought was best for his Country. For better or worse. I'll give him credit for that.

Don't totally get the lefties that think he was a God or righties dancing on his dead soul. Both are misguided IMO.

Let's see where Venezuela goes from here

[juleswin]

This is just a lie. He didn't simply refuse to renew the leases. He seized control after the French and Italians refused to turn over their half of what had previously been joint operations.

He also seized private food stores and grocery stores from retailers and wholesalers who refused government price controls, complaining that there was a shortage of foreign currency available to pay for imports. This is just one example - there are many more: http://laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=357223&CategoryId=10717

Here's another: http://www.examiner.com/article/chavez-seizes-more-private-property

Freaking liberal taint on this board. "He was good to the people and mean to the evil corporations, so we love him!!!" STFU.

I did not know about the price caps, property seizures and all but I have said before the man was definitely misguided on economic issues. But again I will ask you this, how is this different from tax liens on real estate, regulations that can shutdown a business (think rawsome foods), medicare price fix we have in the states? Listening to some of you guys one would come out thinking he was a full blown socialist, that one cannot own private property in Venezuela i.e it is Cuba-like (I know u can own some private property in Cuba) when that is not the case.

Also one of the reason I do not go full blast on him is because believe it or not I think he actually moved Venezuela a few dial towards the positive freedom scale. Not as much as I would like to but it is progress. One last thing, a lot of RPF member are pro state rights, they are pro state rights knowing full well that it was not end the aggression and tryanny from the state but they have that position because it is an improvement from federal rule. You take what improvements that you can and move on.

[HigherVision]

I guess you didn't click the link? Hugo Chavez was one of the main impediments to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). Basically NAFTA on steroids. Here's Ron Paul talking about CAFTA which was a prelude to the FTAA.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul254.html

And yes, Chavez was against CAFTA.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR2005072501352.html

I'm not saying that Chavez was a saint. He wasn't. He was a useful idiot.

Chavez opposed these things because he was an opponent of legitimate free trade and capitalism. People on the left who say they oppose 'globalization' oppose worldwide free trade, which is the key to peace and prosperity and civilization. Instead they support coercive force via unions and governments hampering voluntary, mutually beneficial transactions.

Paul opposed those agreements for the opposite reason, because he believed that they were actually anti-free trade measures. Completely different reason to why Chavez and people like Noam Chomsky oppose them.


Foreign oil companies wanted Venezuelas resources desperately, especially Bush's cabal. The dude kicked them out & did what he thought was best for his Country. For better or worse. I'll give him credit for that.

How would you like it if I confiscated all your property, deemed it my 'country', and declared that you had to get the hell out so I could enjoy it and share it with people that I like? That's what Chavez basically did. Countries are bullshit, private property is all that's legitimate.

[Giuliani was there on 911]

RIP
He was a good man. Also hated by all the worst people.

[misean]

"If a man can be defined by the enemies he makes, then Chavez was a saint."
-Raimondo

"Rand Paul has no principles: he’ll do or say anything to get into that Senate seat – yes, even give up his faith in Aqua Buddha."

Just to get everyone up to speed Rand Paul is an evil neocon, statist, compromising Judas who has the gall to talk to Bill Kristol.

Hugo Chavez-not too bad; not great because he is a politician and that inherently makes him bad; but hey Bill Kristol doesn't like him so he must be okay. And Rand Paul supported sanctions on Iran and Hugo Chavez was against the war in Iraq, so really the guy should be praised. And Obama uses drones and stuff so clearly Hugo Chavez is more moral than Obama. Did I mention Bill Kristol doesn't like Chavez?

Too bad Chavez died. I mean I think he was going to get his own Chavez Liberty forum along with Dennis Kucinich.

[Cutlerzzz]

Chavez stole 2 billion people while his people suffered, and his government took control of the media to cover it up. What an awesome guy.

This reminds me of when Gaddafi died and half of the board talked about what a great loss it was.

After all, if they oppose American Imperialism, they can't be that bad. Hitler, Stalin, Tojo, Mao, Mussolini, Kim Jong Il, and Saddam must not have been that bad either since they were enemies of American Imperialism. Castro is a great guy in Cuba too.

[heavenlyboy34]

"If a man can be defined by the enemies he makes, then Chavez was a saint."
-Raimondo

"Rand Paul has no principles: he’ll do or say anything to get into that Senate seat – yes, even give up his faith in Aqua Buddha."

Just to get everyone up to speed Rand Paul is an evil neocon, statist, compromising Judas who has the gall to talk to Bill Kristol.

Hugo Chavez-not too bad; not great because he is a politician and that inherently makes him bad; but hey Bill Kristol doesn't like him so he must be okay. And Rand Paul supported sanctions on Iran and Hugo Chavez was against the war in Iraq, so really the guy should be praised. And Obama uses drones and stuff so clearly Hugo Chavez is more moral than Obama. Did I mention Bill Kristol doesn't like Chavez?

Too bad Chavez died. I mean I think he was going to get his own Chavez Liberty forum along with Dennis Kucinich.

Chavez stole 2 billion people while his people suffered, and his government took control of the media to cover it up. What an awesome guy.

This reminds me of when Gaddafi died and half of the board talked about what a great loss it was.

After all, if they oppose American Imperialism, they can't be that bad. Hitler, Stalin, Tojo, Mao, Mussolini, Kim Jong Il, and Saddam must not have been that bad either since they were enemies of American Imperialism. Castro is a great guy in Cuba too.

:rolleyes: Less bad =/= good. None of the people you mentioned used nuclear weapons on civilians (unlike the US regime). That doesn't make them good at all, it just makes them less bad. Likewise, the US regime hasn't operated gulags or major death camps. Doesn't make it a good regime, just better than those that have done that.

[Cutlerzzz]

:rolleyes: Less bad =/= good. None of the people you mentioned used nuclear weapons on civilians (unlike the US regime). That doesn't make them good at all, it just makes them less bad. Likewise, the US regime hasn't operated gulags or major death camps. Doesn't make it a good regime, just better than those that have done that.

What the hell is your point? The US government is bad too? Yeah, that excuses any crime committed by any of America's enemies.

[vita3]

Chavez stole 2 billion people while his people suffered, and his government took control of the media to cover it up. What an awesome guy.

This reminds me of when Gaddafi died and half of the board talked about what a great loss it was.

After all, if they oppose American Imperialism, they can't be that bad. Hitler, Stalin, Tojo, Mao, Mussolini, Kim Jong Il, and Saddam must not have been that bad either since they were enemies of American Imperialism. Castro is a great guy in Cuba too.

Curious to hear recent Head of Gov you admire?

[Cutlerzzz]

Curious to hear recent Head of Gov you admire?

None, as a matter of fact.

[heavenlyboy34]

What the hell is your point? The US government is bad too? and all the others so far as well.


Yeah, that excuses any crime committed by any of America's enemies.
If you believe so, that's your opinion. I never said that.

[heavenlyboy34]

Curious to hear recent Head of Gov you admire?
As am I.

[angelatc]

Foreign oil companies wanted Venezuelas resources desperately, especially Bush's cabal. The dude kicked them out & did what he thought was best for his Country. For better or worse. I'll give him credit for that.

Don't totally get the lefties that think he was a God or righties dancing on his dead soul. Both are misguided IMO.

Let's see where Venezuela goes from here


OMG - the foreign oil companies were partners with the Venezuelan government. Chevez let them invest in the infastructure, then kicked them out and kept the profits. There is nothing to do with free market economics in that business model, and migrating from public/private partnerships to total state control isn't a move to freedom.

I don't care one whit about the man, alive or dead. But the attempts to paint him as some sort of modest revolutionary, every man's hero is delusional.

[angelatc]

As am I.
The President of Iceland.

[angelatc]

I did not know about the price caps, property seizures and all but I have said before the man was definitely misguided on economic issues. But again I will ask you this, how is this different from tax liens on real estate, regulations that can shutdown a business (think rawsome foods), medicare price fix we have in the states?


How is it different? In all those instances, you can either comply or go out of business. Under the Chavez plan, there was no option to comply. If he wanted your property, he came and took it. Google Venezuela Private Property Seizures, and you'll see that he was coming after the ranches and farms.

He sent soldiers in to confiscate residential property from real estate developers and builders who were supporting his political opposition.

Even if there were no difference, that would still mean Chavez was nothing to celebrate.

[jmdrake]

Chavez opposed these things because he was an opponent of legitimate free trade and capitalism.

Ummmm...how many times to I have to say I'm not saying that Chavez was a saint. He wasn't. He was a useful idiot. before people like you get it?

[Giuliani was there on 911]

Chavez stole 2 billion people while his people suffered, and his government took control of the media to cover it up. What an awesome guy.

This reminds me of when Gaddafi died and half of the board talked about what a great loss it was.

After all, if they oppose American Imperialism, they can't be that bad. Hitler, Stalin, Tojo, Mao, Mussolini, Kim Jong Il, and Saddam must not have been that bad either since they were enemies of American Imperialism. Castro is a great guy in Cuba too.

word of advice; stop getting your news from Fox and the Wall Street Journal. It's also good to try learning history from non state sanctioned sources.

[UWDude]

Chavez stole 2 billion

where is the source for this?


After all, if they oppose American Imperialism, they can't be that bad. Hitler, Stalin, Tojo, Mao, Mussolini, Kim Jong Il, and Saddam must not have been that bad either since they were enemies of American Imperialism. Castro is a great guy in Cuba too.

Logical fallacy: guilt by association.

The people you named were each individually responsible for at least thousands of political executions. Chavez never had any political opponent executed. He never even had charges pressed against the leaders and collaborators of the 2002 coup against him. Find me any other "tyrant" that would not press charges against coup instigators.

[heavenlyboy34]

word of advice; stop getting your news from Fox and the Wall Street Journal. It's also good to try learning history from non state sanctioned sources.
this^^

[UWDude]

He used public money and resources to finance his campaign. Jesus, we cry that the media here is controlled bu the corporate government, but there it literally is owned by the government.




State television was the only station that supported Chavez. All the other private stations are openly hostile to him. And these stations supported the coup against him in 2002. More people any other "tyrant" would have rounded up and executed for trying to overthrow the government, dissolve the national assembly, dissolve the supreme court, and hand over the "tyrant" himself to a US plane landed to come pick him up.

[UWDude]

The Venezuelan economy has been nothing but a disaster. Anyone who says otherwise is on the wrong forum.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20795781

Even with all that oil he has had awful results.

Put the BBC hit job into perspective. The economy was in shambles before Chavez took over.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/oct/04/venezuela-hugo-chavez-election-data

[HOLLYWOOD]

State television was the only station that supported chavez. All the other private stations are openly hostile to him. And supported the coup against him in 2002. More people any other "tyrant" would have rounded up and executed for trying to overthrow the government, dissolve the national assembly, dissolve the supreme court, and hand over the "tyrant" himself to a US plane landed to come pick him up.

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/800


Opinion and Analysis: International (http://venezuelanalysis.com/topic/international)
The CIA Was Involved In the Coup Against Venezuela's Chavez
By Eva Golinger - VenezuelaFOIA.info,
November 22nd 2004

On April 12, 2002, White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer stated:

“Let me share with you the administration's thoughts about what's taking place in Venezuela. It remains a somewhat fluid situation. But yesterday's events in Venezuela resulted in a change in the government and the assumption of a transitional authority until new elections can be held.
The details still are unclear. We know that the action encouraged by the Chavez government provoked this crisis. According to the best information available, the Chavez government suppressed peaceful demonstrations. Government supporters, on orders from the Chavez government, fired on unarmed, peaceful protestors, resulting in 10 killed and 100 wounded. The Venezuelan military and the police refused to fire on the peaceful demonstrators and refused to support the government's role in such human rights violations. The government also tried to prevent independent news media from reporting on these events.
The results of these events are now that President Chavez has resigned the presidency. Before resigning, he dismissed the vice president and the cabinet, and a transitional civilian government has been installed. This government has promised early elections.

The United States will continue to monitor events. That is what took place, and the Venezuelan people expressed their right to peaceful protest. It was a very large protest that turned out. And the protest was met with violence.” (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321#_edn1)


On that same day, U.S. Department of State spokesperson Philip T. Reeker, claimed:


“[I]In recent days, we expressed our hopes that all parties in Venezuela, but especially the Chavez administration, would act with restraint and show full respect for the peaceful expression of political opinion. We are saddened at the loss of life. We wish to express our solidarity with the Venezuelan people and look forward to working with all democratic forces in Venezuela to ensure the full exercise of democratic rights. The Venezuelan military commendably refused to fire on peaceful demonstrators, and the media valiantly kept the Venezuelan public informed.
Yesterday's events in Venezuela resulted in a transitional government until new elections can be held. Though details are still unclear, undemocratic actions committed or encouraged by the Chavez administration provoked yesterday's crisis in Venezuela. According to the best information available, at this time: Yesterday, hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans gathered peacefully to seek redress of their grievances. The Chavez Government attempted to suppress peaceful demonstrations. Chavez supporters, on orders, fired on unarmed, peaceful protestors, resulting in more than 100 wounded or killed. Venezuelan military and police refused orders to fire on peaceful demonstrators and refused to support the government's role in such human rights violations. The government prevented five independent television stations from reporting on events. The results of these provocations are: Chavez resigned the presidency. Before resigning, he dismissed the Vice President and the Cabinet. A transition civilian government has promised early elections.

We have every expectation that this situation will be resolved peacefully and democratically by the Venezuelan people in accord with the principles of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. The essential elements of democracy, which have been weakened in recent months, must be restored fully. We will be consulting with our hemispheric partners, within the framework of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, to assist Venezuela.”[ii] (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321#_edn2)


Why re-cite these statements here? These statements from the highest levels of the U.S. Government show the prepared version of the events that took place during the April 11-12 coup d’etat against Venezuelan President Chávez. Moreover, these revealing statements now prove, in light of documents recently obtained from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), that this prepared version of events was knowingly false and made with the intention of deceiving the international community in order to justify a violent overthrow of a democratic government.

The White House and the State Department both claimed that the Chávez government had provoked violence and actions that resulted in the President’s alleged resignation. They also asserted that the Chávez government had fired on unarmed, peaceful protesters and that the Venezuelan military and police had refused orders to “support the government’s role in human rights violations”. The U.S. Government referred to the protests and actions of that day as though they were spontaneous, unplanned events. The U.S. Government has also continued to deny to this day any involvement whatsoever in the April 2002 coup d’etat.

However, there is a vast amount of evidence that has surfaced since the coup demonstrating that the events on April 11, 2002 were entirely premeditated by a sector of the opposition intent on overthrowing the Chávez government. Furthermore, my own investigations have provided a plethora of evidence proving the U.S. involvement in the coup on various levels. Most revealing on the Venezuelan front was a news program on Saturday morning, April 12, 2002, “24 Horas” with host Napoleon Bravo. On that program, Bravo interviewed Vice-Admiral Carlos Molina Tamayo, a professed coup leader, and Victor Manuel Garcia, Director of the polling company CIFRA who claimed to have represented the “civil society” during the coup. Both Molina Tamayo and Garcia gave a jaw-dropping, detailed account of the events leading up to the coup and those key Venezuelans involved, including crediting the private televisions stations for their complicity and aide. Their testimony, along with Chacao municipal mayor Leopoldo Lopez of the Primero Justicia political party and Napoleon Bravo’s own admissions of complicity in the coup, provided plenty of proof that the overthrow of Chávez was a premeditated event.

Later, an extraordinary and award-winning documentary by filmmaker Angel Palacios, “Puente Llaguno: Claves de un Masacre”, revealed how the Venezuelan private media had manipulated and distorted the events that unfolded on April 11, 2002 in the opposition march, which resulted in widespread violence and death. The documentary also provided sufficient proof that snipers unrelated to the Chávez government had provoked the violence in the opposition march that justified the forced removal of Chávez from office. Furthermore, the documentary succeeded in proving that a well-planned military-civilian coup d’etat had taken place that day and that those involved were connected to the highest levels of the U.S. government.

But the evidence of actual U.S. involvement in the coup itself remained scarce up until recently. On www.venezuelafoia.info (http://www.venezuelafoia.info/), I have posted hundreds of documents that evidence the intricate financing scheme the U.S. government has been carrying out in Venezuela since 2001, that includes financing well over twenty million dollars to opposition sectors. The funding of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a quasi-governmental entity in the U.S. financed entirely by Congress and established by congressional legislation in 1983, has provided more than three million dollars since late 2001 to opposition groups, many of which were key participants in the April 2002 coup. And in June 2002, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), set up an Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) in the U.S. Embassy in Caracas, allegedly for the purposing of helping Venezuela to resolve its political crisis. The OTI in Caracas has counted on more than fifteen million dollars in funding from Congress since June 2002 and has recently requested five million more for 2005, despite the fact that it was only supposed to be a two-year endeavor. All evidence obtained to date shows that the OTI has primarily funded opposition groups and projects in Venezuela, particularly those that were focused on the August 15, 2004 recall referendum against President Chávez.

I have written other articles explaining the intervention model applied through NED and USAID in Venezuela. This method of intervention is very sophisticated and complex, as it penetrates civil society and social organizations in a very subtle way and is often either undetectable or flimsily justified by the concept of “promoting democracy”, which is what the NED claims to do around the world, despite evidence to the contrary. The mere fact in Venezuela that the NED has financed exclusively anti-Chávez groups and those very same organizations that were involved in the April 2002 coup shows that “democracy” is far from the NED’s intention.

But the CIA intervention in Venezuela is of the crudest, simplest kind. Top secret documents recently obtained and posted on www.venezuelafoia.info (http://www.venezuelafoia.info/) show that in the weeks prior to the April 2002 coup against President Chávez, the CIA had full knowledge of the events to occur and, in fact, even had the detailed plans in their possession. An April 6, 2002 top secret intelligence brief headlining “Venezuela: Conditions Ripening for Coup Attempt”, states, “Dissident military factions, including some disgruntled senior officers and a group of radical junior officers, are stepping up efforts to organize a coup against President Chávez, possible as early as this month, [CENSORED]. The level of detail in the reported plans – [CENSORED] targets Chávez and 10 other senior officers for arrest…” The document further states, “To provoke military action, the plotters may try to exploit unrest stemming from opposition demonstrations slated for later this month…” (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321#_edn3)

So the CIA knew that a coup attempt would take place soon after April 6, 2002, and moreover, they knew the plan would include Chávez’s arrest and an exploitation of violence in the opposition march. In other words, they knew the plans before the coup occurred and surely they knew the actors involved, many of whose names are probably in the censored parts of the top-secret documents. One could assume that if the CIA had the detailed plans in their possession in the weeks prior to the coup it was because they were associating and conspiring with the coup plotters. So, when Ari Fleischer and Philip Reeker made those statements on April 12, 2002 on behalf of the U.S. Government, they did so with full knowledge that a coup had taken place, Chávez had been arrested and the violence in the opposition march, which they attributed to Chávez, had actually been a premeditated part of the coup plot. The top secret documents that prove this information show they were sent to the U.S. Statement Department and the National Security Agency, which means frankly, the White House knew what was happening all along.

Furthermore, the CIA documents make no mention of any attempts to have Chávez forcibly resign from office. The CIA warnings indicated as early as March 5, 2002 (which is the date of the earliest document provided) that a coup was on the rise and even hinted that prospects for a successful coup were limited. The CIA rightfully felt the opposition was too disperse and divided to successfully overthrow Chávez. But the concept that Chávez had “resigned” as the White House and State Department “confirmed” on April 12, 2002 was merely a set-up, a false claim made with the intention of deceiving the U.S. public and the international community. Remember that the U.S. stood practically alone in the world in its endorsement of the coup-implemented Carmona Government, which it later weakly condemned but only after the coup came tumbling down and the U.S. realized it needed to save face quickly.
A top secret CIA document from April 14, 2002 shows concern that Latin American governments will view U.S. foreign policy as “hypocritical” because of its sole endorsement of the Carmona coup government. The CIA also seems surprised that the region of Latin America so quickly rejected the coup in Venezuela and that the Carmona government “stunningly collapsed”, which demonstrates a possible out-of-date view of the hemisphere and a failure in intelligence gathering and analysis. In fact, the CIA never imagined the coup would buckle because of support for Chávez – their analysis all along showed possible failure due to lack of opposition unity and hasty actions. This is a very important point, because it demonstrates that although the CIA was involved in the coup plotting and the collaborations with dissident military factions and opposition leaders, it was fairly detached from the reality of Venezuelan society.

The CIA’s intelligence failures in Venezuela were apparently repeated during the oil industry strike later in 2002 and the [I]guarimba destabilization attempt, an old-school CIA tactic applied in Chile and Nicaragua. Both of these harsh actions injured the Venezuelan economy and affected the government’s international image, but failed in their goal to oust President Chávez. The NED’s and USAID’s tens of millions of dollars in financing to build and maintain the opposition movement and finance the recall referendum campaign against President Chávez also failed to achieve their mission. In fact, all of these bungled attempts by the U.S. government and its marionette opposition movement have served to strengthen Chávez’s support within Venezuela and paint him as a strong and solid international leader.

Now that some of the top-secret documents have surfaced that show the CIA’s complicity and involvement in the April 2002 coup, it leaves one to wonder what is next on the agenda. In September 2001, shortly after the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, President Bush unconditionally authorized former CIA Director George Tenet’s “Worldwide Attack Matrix”, which targets leaders and prominent figures in 80 countries around the world for assassination. The authorization of the Worldwide Attack Matrix provided the CIA with a virtual carte blanche to conduct political assassinations abroad, justified under the “war against terrorism”. The “Attack Matrix”, a top secret CIA document, authorizes an array of covert CIA anti-terror actions that range from “routine propaganda to lethal covert action in preparation for military attacks”.[iv] (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321#_edn4)

The plans give the CIA the broadest and most lethal authority in history. Some analysts have indicated that Venezuela is possibly included in the plans.

The recent assassination of Venezuelan Prosecutor Danilo Anderson, conducted in a style reminiscent of CIA operations, could be setting the stage for future political murders. History shows that when the CIA fails to remove a target via non-lethal means, more desperate measures are taken. Despite the fact that the Venezuelan government and its supporters appear to have foiled the CIA numerous times already over the past few years, vigilance, intelligence and increased security measures should become a priority.

[i] (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321#_ednref1) http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020412-1.html

[ii] (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321#_ednref2) http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/9316.htm

[iii] (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321#_ednref3) http://www.venezuelafoia.info/CIA/ SEIB_04-06-02-pre-Coup-conditions_ripen/CIA-04-06-02.htm

[iv] (http://venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321#_ednref4) http://www.i2osig.org/cia.html

[angelatc]

word of advice; stop getting your news from Fox and the Wall Street Journal. It's also good to try learning history from non state sanctioned sources.

There's that liberal bullshit again. Word of advice: quit pretending facts aren't facts when they don't fit your narrative.

Every site I can find - right, left, American, or international cites that number. So perhaps you could enlighten us as to where you're getting your truth, since you're obviously so much better informed than the rest of the entire English speaking world.

[politics]

venezuela unemployment is at 5.9 % right now, it was over 16 % when he assumed, http://www.tradingeconomics.com/venezuela/unemployment-rate
but the real issue with chavez is not economics, is on ideas, you may dont like him, thats ok, but try to understand why the the most of venezuelan people felt for the first time that they were rulede by someone who takes care of them.

[angelatc]

State television was the only station that supported Chavez. All the other private stations are openly hostile to him. And these stations supported the coup against him in 2002. More people any other "tyrant" would have rounded up and executed for trying to overthrow the government, dissolve the national assembly, dissolve the supreme court, and hand over the "tyrant" himself to a US plane landed to come pick him up.


So that's the liberal definition of a good leader? One who doesn't round people up and kill them when he's stealing their property and using government to quash political opposition.

Got that bar set pretty damned low, don't cha?

[angelatc]

venezuela unemployment is at 5.9 % right now, it was over 16 % when he assumed, http://www.tradingeconomics.com/venezuela/unemployment-rate
but the real issue with chavez is not economics, is on ideas, you may dont like him, thats ok, but try to understand why the the most of venezuelan people felt for the first time that they were rulede by someone who takes care of them.


Try to understand why that's a horrible reason to elect a leader.

And again - it's not like he won by a landslide. He used the government to strip away the financial resources of his opponents, and forced government workers to campaign for him while on the clock. There's a significant number of people who voted for him simply because they didn't want to lose everything they owned.

This man is in no way, shape or form a good role model for leadership. He was a bully on a power trip.

[heavenlyboy34]

So that's the liberal definition of a good leader? One who doesn't round people up and kill them when he's stealing their property and using government to quash political opposition.

Got that bar set pretty damned low, don't cha?
Don't point out a splinter in your neighbor's eye when there is a log in your own. ;) People in this country tend to have pretty damn low standards too. (keep teh boogiemen away and keep the welfare river a-flowin'!)

[UWDude]

So that's the liberal definition of a good leader?

Did I say that?

No I said he wasn't a Tyrant.

There is a big spectrum between "good leader" and "tyrant"

your strawman failed. Try again. hopefully without the strawman this time.

[UWDude]

There's that liberal bullshit again. Word of advice: quit pretending facts aren't facts when they don't fit your narrative.

Every site I can find - right, left, American, or international cites that number. So perhaps you could enlighten us as to where you're getting your truth, since you're obviously so much better informed than the rest of the entire English speaking world.

How about a link?

I Googled it, found NYT.... but nope, that was actually just a comment left by someone. Where is a link to a reputable source for this $2B embezzlement claim? Also, where is the flashy displays of wealth that most corrupt politicians display when they embezzle billions?

Where did this $2B figure come from originally? Right now, it sounds like nothing more than a baseless rumor, based upon a story from celebritynetworth.com. Can we get an itemized list of his assets, please? I want to know if this is true, or deliberate mis-info. Kind of like the preposterous claims he "killed thousands".

[politics]

Try to understand why that's a horrible reason to elect a leader.

And again - it's not like he won by a landslide. He used the government to strip away the financial resources of his opponents, and forced government workers to campaign for him while on the clock. There's a significant number of people who voted for him simply because they didn't want to lose everything they owned.

This man is in no way, shape or form a good role model for leadership. He was a bully on a power trip.
I cant agree with you
You may don’t like his ideas, that’s ok. But don’t get confused with misleading ideas from mainstream media. He suffered a coup ten years ago, during 48 hs was in jail. So please don’t tell me he was bully. Chavez didn’t even accused them. And most of them left the country without any restrictions.
Also in 2007 he signed a pardon to all the people involved in those actions, and try to read why he did it.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2007-12-31-1482318110_x.htm

[mad cow]

How is it different? In all those instances, you can either comply or go out of business. Under the Chavez plan, there was no option to comply. If he wanted your property, he came and took it. Google Venezuela Private Property Seizures, and you'll see that he was coming after the ranches and farms.

He sent soldiers in to confiscate residential property from real estate developers and builders who were supporting his political opposition.

Even if there were no difference, that would still mean Chavez was nothing to celebrate.

A Venezuelan used to work for me as a deckhand on a fishing boat for several years.Real nice guy.
His Father owned a dairy farm/cheese making operation and was relatively well-off.
Chavez confiscated his business and kicked him off his property.

I have a hard time understanding the anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism wing of this "Ron Paul R3volution".

[heavenlyboy34]

A Venezuelan used to work for me as a deckhand on a fishing boat for several years.Real nice guy.
His Father owned a dairy farm/cheese making operation and was relatively well-off.
Chavez confiscated his business and kicked him off his property.

I have a hard time understanding the anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism wing of this "Ron Paul R3volution".
I didn't see any anti-private property/anti-free market capitalism sentiment in this thread. What are you referring to?

[AuH20]

How about a link?

I Googled it, found NYT.... but nope, that was actually just a comment left by someone. Where is a link to a reputable source for this $2B embezzlement claim? Also, where is the flashy displays of wealth that most corrupt politicians display when they embezzle billions?

Where did this $2B figure come from originally? Right now, it sounds like nothing more than a baseless rumor, based upon a story from celebritynetworth.com. Can we get an itemized list of his assets, please? I want to know if this is true, or deliberate mis-info. Kind of like the preposterous claims he "killed thousands".

You can't be this gullible?????? You do realize that most "socialists" are crooks and simply utilize the common man's system to plunder for them. Crony capitalists and socialists like Chavez are basically the same person.

http://newsfromvenezuela.tumblr.com/post/867542155/analyst-estimates-chavezs-family-fortune-at-around-2

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Did I say that?

No I said he wasn't a Tyrant.

There is a big spectrum between "good leader" and "tyrant"

your strawman failed. Try again. hopefully without the strawman this time.

What is a tyrant?

[mad cow]

I didn't see any anti-private property/anti-free market capitalism sentiment in this thread. What are you referring to?

Hugo Chavez seized the private property and privately owned businesses of Venezuelans at gunpoint countless times during his sorry tyrannical reign.Do you deny this? Does Ron Paul support this?Murray Rothbard?Lew Rockwell?

Please provide me with any so-called libertarian source that supports the reign of Hugo Chavez.

[heavenlyboy34]

Hugo Chavez seized the private property and privately owned businesses of Venezuelans at gunpoint countless times during his sorry tyrannical reign.Do you deny this? No, as I said earlier. But the destruction he caused was only a fraction of what has been caused by western regimes.


Does Ron Paul support this?Murray Rothbard?Lew Rockwell?
I don't speak for them, but Lew quoted a reader in his blog (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/133329.html):

Writes Danny Sanchez:
Hugo Chávez may have been oppressive, but at least he wasn't a lapdog for Washington like so many other heads of state. The world would be a much more free and decentralized place with more anti-imperialist "rogue" nations. And it is important to put his depredations in perspective. Bush, Obama, Blair, Hollande, etc., have caused more death and suffering in the world than Chávez ever did. And this should be no surprise.It is often the less authoritarian states that afflict more humans more seriously, even if those afflicted the worst happen to be foreigners. That is because the most "free" countries are also often the most imperialistic. This is what Hans-Hermann Hoppe calls the "paradox of imperialism." States that allow more domestic freedom have more wealth to tap to fund more conquests and interventions.

Considering the chaos, terror, and wanton murderous destruction perpetrated on a daily basis by the West upon its recipients of "liberation," the evil of Chávez is dwarfed by that of the governments of the "free world. And I agree.


Please provide me with any so-called libertarian source that supports the reign of Hugo Chavez.
None do. They simply place it on the scale of evil as less evil than imperial regimes like the US and UK. Not everything is as black and white as you seem to want it to be.

There is a famous Chinese proverb: "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." In a way, it applies here. I wouldn't regard Chavez as a "friend" per se, but he was the enemy of my enemy (the US regime), and to that extent he was good.

[Feeding the Abscess]

No, as I said earlier. But the destruction he caused was only a fraction of what has been caused by western regimes.


I don't speak for them, but Lew quoted a reader in his blog (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/133329.html):
And I agree.


None do. They simply place it on the scale of evil as less evil than imperial regimes like the US and UK.

I don't disagree with saying that Chavez, on a global scale, was less bad than Obama. But that has nothing to do with the beliefs of each person, and all to do with the institutions they head. If Chavez were at the helm of the Empire, he'd have been an outright monster, far worse than any president we'd ever had.

[UWDude]

If Chavez were at the helm of the Empire, he'd have been an outright monster, far worse than any president we'd ever had.

You are condemning him based on hypothetical situations that may have happened in the future. How about condemn and compare him to world leaders based on the realities of the actions he did.

[Feeding the Abscess]

You are condemning him based on hypothetical situations that may have happened in the future. How about condemn and compare him to world leaders based on the realities of the actions he did.

I'm condemning him on his ideology, which is entirely abhorrent.

[UWDude]

You can't be this gullible?????? You do realize that most "socialists" are crooks and simply utilize the common man's system to plunder for them. Crony capitalists and socialists like Chavez are basically the same person.

http://newsfromvenezuela.tumblr.com/post/867542155/analyst-estimates-chavezs-family-fortune-at-around-2

I'm gullible? Here is an indicator of the agenda and slant of your "source"

“We believe that organized bolivarian criminal groups within the Chávez administration have subtracted around $100 billion out of the nearly $1 trillion in oil income made by PDVSA since 1999.”

Uh huh. Try again. Can we get an unbiased source, please?



What is a tyrant?

wiki says:
In its modern English usage, is a ruler of a cruel and oppressive character[1] who is an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution, or one who has usurped sovereignty.

You are the ones calling him a tyrant. You are the ones uttering Hitler and Stalin in the same breath as Chavez. Why don't you tell me why he was a tyrant, instead of continuously flinging the word so cheaply around.

[mad cow]

Hugo Chavez was anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism.
Anybody that supports Chavez is anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism.

[UWDude]

I'm condemning him on his ideology, which is entirely abhorrent.


No, you weren't. You were condemning him by saying he would be worse if he had more power. You said nothing of his ideology.

[heavenlyboy34]

Hugo Chavez was anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism.
Anybody that supports Chavez is anti-private property,anti-free market capitalism.
okay, but no one supports him-except in a Sun-Tzu-ish sort of way. Also, anyone who supports the Federal government is anti-private property and anti-free market capitalism. So there.

[Feeding the Abscess]

No, you weren't. You were condemning him by saying he would be worse if he had more power. You said nothing of his ideology.

Where do you think I got the criticism? Did I just pull it out of a hat? "But that has nothing to do with the beliefs of each person, and all to do with the institutions they head." was the sentence before your quote.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

wiki says:
In its modern English usage, is a ruler of a cruel and oppressive character[1] who is an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution, or one who has usurped sovereignty.

You are the ones calling him a tyrant. You are the ones uttering Hitler and Stalin in the same breath as Chavez. Why don't you tell me why he was a tyrant, instead of continuously flinging the word so cheaply around.

Okay, well, I'd say president Obama is a tyrant as the man just has to fuck with everyone and everything. He seems to be the only person in the United States who made that while everyone else is a jerk who didn't. So, using him as a model, I'd say Chavez is also a tyrant as he also seemed to be a major fuckwit.

[UWDude]

Where do you think I got the criticism? Did I just pull it out of a hat? "But that has nothing to do with the beliefs of each person, and all to do with the institutions they head." was the sentence before your quote.

Yeah, your first sentence condemned his ideology. Your second sentence then just used a crystal ball or tarot cards or maybe it was numerology to make a prediction based on no facts whatsoever. Chavez had power in Venezuela, and he didn't do nearly the same shit in 14 years some past presidents have done in four. Alien and Sedition acts? Executive order 9066? Drone bombing American citizens? Not to mention all the unconstitutional wars.

[HigherVision]

okay, but no one supports him-except in a Sun-Tzu-ish sort of way. Also, anyone who supports the Federal government is anti-private property and anti-free market capitalism. So there.

All governments are basically bad but they all aren't bad to the same degree. At least the American constitution has private property rights written into it. That's a lot better than Chavez's Marxist system. The qualm I have with some Ron Paul supporters sometimes is taking contrarianism too far. That is, that anything that opposes the current establishment political system is good. Supporting people like Dennis Kucinich and Chavez who I think are worse than the establishment. At least in the current neoliberal or whatever you want to call it order there is some recognition of individual rights existing. Even Obama has to pretend at least that he isn't totally against stuff like the second amendment.

[kcchiefs6465]

WRT to your post, Highervision, I, and a few others, are mainly concerned at what role our government has played in his death and what our role will be in Venezuela now that he is dead. The CIA is rumoured to have been involved in his attempted coup. We have a record in the region and I am sad to say that I would not doubt our government having a role in his assassination, if and that's a big if, it was one. Whether that be from thallium salts, or whatever. I do not consider the man to be a hero personally, though I haven't really read much about his exact policies and presidency. I really would not have cared less either way, had it not been for us being suspected in the earlier attempted coups and our suspected attempted poisonings of other leaders around the area. I really haven't a clue how they might have done it, and haven't ruled that they did or did not. I am simply concerned with the running wild of the CIA and the various plots they have partook in. I hope that it is untrue as that is not what America stands for. [Though they have assassinated people in the past]

[heavenlyboy34]

All governments are basically bad but they all aren't bad to the same degree. At least the American constitution has private property rights written into it. That's a lot better than Chavez's Marxist system. The qualm I have with some Ron Paul supporters sometimes is taking contrarianism too far. That is, that anything that opposes the current establishment political system is good. Supporting people like Dennis Kucinich and Chavez who I think are worse than the establishment. At least in the current neoliberal or whatever you want to call it order there is some recognition of individual rights existing. Even Obama has to pretend at least that he isn't totally against stuff like the second amendment.
The regime believes it has the right to kill you on a whim. You can say they generally recognize rights, but only conditionally. If your rights become inconvenient, they will find a way to screw you. Remember the Kelo decision (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London)? A lot of people seem to have let that fall down the Memory Hole. :(

[KrokHead]

Can't believe Castro outlived him.

Can't believe anyone can outlive Castro, he probably used the dragonballs and wish for immortality.

[Ender]

We've been fed the same shite about Chavez as we are currently being fed about Ahmadinejad, so it is best to take everything with a grain of salt. We can at least thank Chavez for stopping a union of the Americas, that would have put us in the same predicament as those in the EU, so give him some credit.

[Ender]

All governments are basically bad but they all aren't bad to the same degree. At least the American constitution has private property rights written into it. That's a lot better than Chavez's Marxist system. The qualm I have with some Ron Paul supporters sometimes is taking contrarianism too far. That is, that anything that opposes the current establishment political system is good. Supporting people like Dennis Kucinich and Chavez who I think are worse than the establishment. At least in the current neoliberal or whatever you want to call it order there is some recognition of individual rights existing. Even Obama has to pretend at least that he isn't totally against stuff like the second amendment.

Property taxes wiped out private property rights. Stop paying your taxes and the real owners show up.

[Bossobass]

Never been to Venezuela, so I restrict my thoughts to the facts:

2007:


April 14 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuela said it paid off $3 billion in loans owed to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank this week, ending ties to two multilateral lenders it says curtailed its ``economic sovereignty'' for decades.

The government will save $8 million in interest payments with the World Bank through 2012, Finance Minister Rodrigo Cabezas said at a press conference at his office in Caracas. The government will continue to borrow money from the Washington- based Inter American Development Bank and the Caracas-based Andean Development Corp., to finance future infrastructure projects.

``With this we just want to say `bye' to these two institutions that imposed their police recipes to us for years,'' Cabezas said. ``It's a historic moment for Venezuela because our policy-making is finally gaining freedom back.''

Cabezas reiterated the government's goal of eliminating the nation's debt by 2021, and said the repayment of all obligations to the IMF and the World Bank puts the country on track to win investment-grade ratings.

Standard and Poor's Corp. and Fitch Inc. rate Venezuela a BB-rating, three levels below investment grade. Moody's Investors Service has a B2 rating on Venezuela's long-term debt.


Goldman Sachs, in a phone interview, warned that everything points to a downgrade of Venezuelan debt rating.


Analysts fear that against a background of low oil prices, in the event of applying for lending, Venezuela will pay dearly for leaving the IMF.

2011, 4 years later:


Fitch:

--Foreign currency Issuer Default Rating (IDR) at 'B+';

--Local currency IDR at 'B+';

--Country ceiling at 'B+';

Chavez told the IMF/World Bank, BP, Exxon and Bush to get bent. For that he survived a coup attempt and assassination attempts and did not survive the latest assassination attempt. He set the precedent and Brazil, Argentina and other SA countries followed.

Brazil, Paraguay, Venezuela and Argentina have leaders with or recently dead from cancer.

Venezuela sits on $50 trillion in oil, the largest proven reserves in the world, twice the reserves of Saudi Arabia. It has never defaulted on a loan. Its debt to GDP is less than 1/2 the US debt/GDP.

The rest of the media 'data' is bull-shit.

Left, right, conservative, liberal, libertarian, communist, socialist, monarchist, blah, blah, blah. Irrelevant bullshit from those who must ascribe a label to every human on earth.

Learn how it has worked for 100 years:

We find resources, CIA installs a puppet, the IMF/World Bank floats loans for infrastructure (to extract the resources), Haliburton gets the infrastructure contracts, Exxon gets 97% of the profits from the resources and the country with the resources gets saddled with debt they can never repay.

You dare to buck that playbook at your own peril because we Constitutional Republic citizens have absolutely zero control over what 'our' POTUS, Congress, SCOTUS, CIA, Haliburton and Exxon do here or internationally.

The banks are the problem in every country. Iceland treated the problem correctly and it doesn't matter to me what religion their government is, I applaud that. Same for Chavez.