Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Will the Bolivarian Revolution go on?

Posted 2 years ago on Oct. 6, 2012, 8:04 p.m. EST by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Though Hugo Chavez enjoys widespread support in Venezuela, and the polls show him far ahead of his opponent, the imperialist, capitalist powers are bent on destroying the progress Chavez has made for most Venezuelans. The country has turned the corner and has wiped out illiteracy, provides free health care for all, and continues on its course to eradicate homelessness. Chavez's revolution is only a threat to capitalist imperialism.

The article at this link explains whats on the line this October 7.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012%5C10%5C07%5Cstory_7-10-2012_pg3_6

133 Comments

133 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Ahhh, one of my favorite topics!! OWS forums are the only place where I don't get flack for loving Chavez.

America has been putting down the majority opinion in South America for decades, brutally, and now it appears they could not stop that train.

Here is a Venezuela news link > http://venezuelanalysis.com/news

[-] 3 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

The American propaganda machine has succeeded in painting Che Guevara as a cold-blooded mass murderer, though he was the one murdered while a prisoner of war by puppets of the CIA. The propagandists have painted Cuba as a failed state, when in fact typical Cuban life has vastly improved since the days of Fulgencio Batista and his American-backed regime. Now the oligarchy wants to paint Hugo Chavez as a monster, when he, Fidel, Raul, Che enjoy places of honor in most Latin American countries.

[-] 2 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

A lot of propaganda efforts there. American still doesn't want Americans to know that Cuba has better health care than Canada or the USA, and everybody gets as much education as they can bloody well stand, lol. And it is an excellent education - world class doctors, engineers, scientists, etc.

Its been a long fight, but they celebrate tonght!! Chavez wins the election 54% to 45%; You Go Hugo!! For the benefit of the 99% Venezuelans.

Election results: "Chavez received a total of 7,444,082 votes compared to 6,151,154 for his right-wing rival."

"Turnout was one the highest in Venezuela’s history, with 80.94% of the 19,119,809 registered voters in Venezuela participating in the election."

So, what does it take to get 80% of people convinced they can make a difference by voting? US elections get what, 55% turnout? Canada had less than 50% turnout....- because we know the power is with the corporations. Low voter turnout is one of the best indicators of the state of democracy of a nation. {ours SUCKS!!}

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Hugo has proven that Communism can succeed bypassing any notion of a "dictatorship of the proletariat." Venezuelan elections are undoubtedly less corrupt than ours, and despite all of Hugo's detractors, he has led the workers to a victory in the battle against the oligarchy and against American imperialism.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Former Pres. Carter has declared that the Venezuela elections are the most fair and honest elections he has witnessed anywhere. Bravo Hugo!!

Land reforms too - he has broken up large unused tracts of land owned by wealthy individuals and given small plots from it to poor peasants to scratch out a living on. It is good for the peasants, raises agricultural production and therefore boosts the economy as a whole.

Nationalising the oil industry brings the benefits of natural resources to the public, who are by rights the original owners of minerals beneath the ground. Besides Venezuela, there is also Norway's nationalised oil industry putting 80% of the revenues into government coffers; Alberta [Canada] oil industry is all privatised it gives back 3% to the govt coffers.

Doing what is best for the99%!!

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

"Doing what is best for the 99%!!" Absolutely. Time for the oligarchy to go.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Break the Myth that the US has the best Health Care system. We should look for websites or start websites.

One things we don't do in the US, yet ... might help dispell some myths. If people posted pictures on a website of loved ones that died to to overdoses of doctor prescribed medicine and photos of people that died since they did not go to get treatment due to the cost. And also maybe people that went bancrupt because of a major medical event eventhough they had health care.

Break the Myth that the US has the best Health Care system.

[-] 2 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Great idea - I think Americans just dont hear much about comparisons, but I am in Canada and when conservatives attack our government funded health system, the progressives get the stories out.

One fact kept quiet in the USA is that CUBA has great health care and doctors - in fact they have a deal with Venezuela where Cuba gets oil from Venezuela, and in return Venezuela gets Cuban doctors to practise in Venezuela for a few years. Oil for Doctors, imagine... someone knows what is important in life eh?

Anyway, here is a start for your Break the Myth idea: "The United States ranked last when compared to six other countries -- Britain, Canada, Germany, Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand" - from a Commonwealth Fund report in a 2010 news article here > http://tinyurl.com/4qr3pvk

Commonwealth Fund link: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

Thanks. Last year a forum member sent a link to pictures of Cuba clinics and poor people who didn't get proper treatment. Those pictures make an impact. So maybe there are two sides of the Cuba Medicine story... But the pictures are the key to speaking to people and telling the story of the USA Health Care Scandal. hundereds of thousands are victims in the US.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Ya, I think those pictures may have had a misleading caption - I believe the other side - that everybody in Cuba gets health care and can attend university, as much as they want, at very little cost.

[-] 1 points by Tanakasan (-7) 2 years ago

Just the guy you want to emulate, Che:

"As second in command, Guevara was a harsh disciplinarian who sometimes shot defectors. Deserters were punished as traitors, and Guevara was known to send squads to track those seeking to go AWOL.As a result, Guevara became feared for his brutality and ruthlessness".

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

"As second in command" to whom? Your source (uncited) seems to have a few facts confused. Che was not "second in command" during the Cuban Revolution. Fidel was the undisputed leader, and Raul generally acted as "second in command."

Che was one of several major military leaders during the Revolution and a major political player in the budding government, but he never called the shots, except in the short-lived Bolivian campaign.

[-] 1 points by trashyharry (3140) from Waterville, NY 2 years ago

Kofer Black,professional murderer supposedly wears Che's Rolex to this day.I wish guys like Kofer Black and John Negroponte would get what they deserve.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Black and Negroponte represent some of the worst of American global policy. People like them have pushed American imperialism to a psycopathic frenzy, in which any nation or person that disagrees with the party line is an enemy.

[-] 1 points by trashyharry (3140) from Waterville, NY 2 years ago

Kofer Black was the flies-walking-on-eyeballs guy.Neither one of the aforementioned Supercreeps actually ever does any of the foul deeds themselves.Their ongoing contribution? The Not-So-Little Shop of Horrors called the "School"of the Americas.What twisted,cowardly fuckheads they are.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

RT news on the socialist leanings of South America

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoPL-ojXuTM

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Thanks for the link. Latin America may be the wave of the future for the western hemisphere.

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

You're welcome.

The MSM's attempts to demonise socialist countries is failing in the light of this kind of evidence. What's needed is more tourist interaction with western nations.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Agreed on all counts.

[-] 2 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Anyone who thinks America is fighting for democracy throughout the world and not fighting to spread capitalism on behalf of the 1% needs to learn all about Chavez (a democratically elected socialist) and the US's demonization of him.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Didn't our last Pres attempt a military coup over there?

And by contrast, Chavez said if he were American he would vote for Pres Obama.

FYI

[-] 2 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Obama is superior to Romney. But he is not a socialist. There are socialists on the ballot and workers should vote for them over Obama.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Sure. People should vote their conscience. Study the issues and vote how you feel is best.

Obama absolutely NOT a socialist. Maybe a moderate dem which today (after 3 decades of rightward drift) is not very liberal at all. Obama is closer to Reagan than Carter.

[-] -1 points by marvelpym (-184) 2 years ago

Chavez admires how Obama boosted the Patriot Act and increased government surveillance of its citizens.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Nah. That was not why he said he would vote for Obama. That's you lying & twisting his words.

LMFAO

[-] -2 points by marvelpym (-184) 2 years ago

Looks like he needs Obama to vote for him. It's about to get very interesting down there.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Haven't followed it much. I know they are voting, can't say their elections have been fair but I believe most of the 99% down there love him.

I also know the 1% plutocrats that we support and used to try & push him out of office hate him. So I say good luck to Chavez and his South American socialist revolution.

Viva Chavez!

[-] -3 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Not something I would point out, not really a good endorsement.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

You got a problems with Hugo Chavez?

[-] -3 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Wow where to start..... Short version yea

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Well 80% of his people like him, and the big corp 1% plutocrats hate him so I guess as OWS supporters we like him, no?

He has improved the lives of the poorest in his country. Are you against that too?

[+] -4 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

One little problem all those poor are still poor! They live off his scraps, while he lies high on the hog. 80% love him? He won(lol right) by 54% he will make sure all those poor stay that way depend on him. That is the progressive way so no unlike you I'm not impressed.

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

You are absolutely wrong. On all counts. The poor have had their lives improved greatly.

You are simply spewing anti progressive partisan talking points.

Chavez & all the South American socialist changes has helped millions of people, and will continue because the US right wing is not in power to destroy the progress.

Viva Chavez!

[+] -4 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

They still live in slums fact! Being a progressive means keeping the chains of your provider on (gov) tossing his crumbs is not help its keeping them dependent on him. I have a question if you love him and what he does so much why don't you live there? I mean all the viva crap you wouldn't way to look like a hypocrite would you?

[-] 3 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

"love him"? I don't love him.

I support his pro 99% policies. I reject your statement that the poor are not better off under Chavez policies. I reject your false definition of progressive goals.

I do not move their because I love America, My family has been here for 120 years and I want to help the 99% here.

Peace

[+] -5 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

You can reject common sense too that's your right, but it doesn't Change the fact his policies keep people dependant on him and deny them true freedom. He spends most of the oil money on himself and his ideology. He like all progressives, they deny people the chance to become anything you want. If he has a pro 99% policy why did he only win by 54% you turn a blind eye to all the crap Going on there. As long as you got.e for him he will toss you crumbs speak out agonist him and see what happens. Is that what you call 99% policies ?

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

You are absolutely wrong on all your skewed, exaggerated propaganda.

We disagree. That's all.

Good luck to you in all your good efforts.

[-] -3 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

For it to be propaganda I would have to be pushing a candidate or idea (neither of which I did) all I did was point out truth sorry it didn't fit your narrative. I too hope you find happiness in whatever you do

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Attacking me personally betrays the vacancy of your argument.

I ain't a dem campaign worker, I don't have my head in the sand. Ain't carrying anyones water.

Obama/dems made a small cut in Bushes annual deficit ($100B) would be more if your traitorous repubs didn't obstruct every effort to do so.

If you have nothing of substance to counter this reality please be an adult and refrain from personal attacks, admit defeat, or just don't respond.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Of course you think your bullshit is right you've lied to yourself so long it has become true to you. You are a hypocrite dem campaign worker nothing more. You rail agnist reps 1% bla bla but you give your dem 1% a pass the bs party line you spout is sad.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I have no interest in the right wing false distraction of "the lazy"

That number is minuscule to the point of unimportant.

My focus is on the weak, oppressed, sick, & poor who want to work & earn there keep. The vast majority fall into that catagory.

"the lazy", "welfare queens", "the 47%", that's all republican talking points, racist code words, false distractions to get white people to feel like their money is being used to help unworthy people.

It's all a lot of non sense.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

I guess you are the expert on nonsense you talk enough of it. You don't care about the sick or poor other than keeping them that way so thy vote the way you want. The sad old mantra of the progressives will take care of you and all you have to do is give everything to the state they know what's best for you is such crap. Ahh and you say racist code words again I guess you are the bigot I'm mean expert, keeping people poor is not compassion it's slavery.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

You are putting words in my mouthand twisting my beliefs.

I guess your position is so weak that you must resort to these dishonest tactics, but just because they pass through your word hole doesn't make them so.

I support boycotts against bad businesses, I also support the peoples govt influencing bad businesses to behave.

No slavery. That's you lying.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

What words did I put in your mouth? Boycotting is a far cry from taking the bus from the owner. I notice you left out how to keep a gov with enough power to just take a bus. Who will protect us from them? You say I lied yet I only used your words and that's what you call lies? You have serious issues.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I support having business serve the people. That is not enslaving people. That is giving people freedom from control of business.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

They have freedom by not buying what they are selling. What you said leaves no mistake what your intentions are you want to take from others and enslave them.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Business will have to submit to his socialist agenda or he WILL take there business away.

And the people are not worse off or kept as slaves. Most people have had an improved life.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

"most people have improved lives" lol wow talk about random unprovable statements.

[-] -3 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Your first sentence says it all about you. That flies in he face of freedom you don't care anything about freedom you want to control people, I'm am shocked that's progressive's true plans are to enslave people (not really I knew that all along) history is littered with men who did the exact same to their country and they all became drunk with power and ended up become the one oppressing their own people. At least you finally had the balls to tell the truth about what you really want.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I disagree. Many poor people have benefited as I listed. And the strike was engineered by the oil industry mgmt because they didn't want to submit to Chavez demands.

They struck, he took the oil industry away from the corps.

Suckas

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

What you call benefited is more like slavery it keeps them in their current situation. What about when he takes a business from someone you don't disagree with? You new to be very careful when you give someone that much power because sooner or later you will have a disagreement and then you will get what you have coming to you.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I believe Chavez took control of Venezuela away from the 1% plutocrat corp interests. Oil specifically but others as well. The country no longer bows to the western corp interests.

The wealth of the nation was concentrated amongst the top 1% and Chavez has begun to spread that wealth out more fairly. Health, education, shelter and food circumstances have all improved. Poverty still exists but it is diminishing because of Chavez policies.

The attempted coup is evidence of this reality. And the attempted oil company "strike" as well.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

All that happened was a change in the 1% he's now the 1% tossing out crumbs for you is enough well not for me. Poverty and crime are no different than when he took office. I thought striking workers were what ows supported? Nothing changed; new boss is the same as the old boss. That's the problem with progressives they want people to be happy with that and sorry I'm not.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Propaganda can also be AGAINST something genius.

As in against progressive/socialism & Chavez.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Then you spout propaganda all the time?!? My question is why is only your propaganda ok genius ? I question anything/one that claims to know what's best for me, while they line their pockets you do not. Like I've said before I hope you find happiness and enlightenment in all your endeavors.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I am a registered independent who supports the Dem agenda and votes for progressives whenever possible.

I believe all our problems are rooted in conservative policies that benefit the 1%. So I urge everyone to replace pro 1% conservatives w/ pro 99% progressives, & protest for change that benefits the 99%.

[-] 0 points by frovikleka (2563) from Island Heights, NJ 2 years ago

There are very few real 'progressives' in this country. You are talking about legitimizing 'political theater,' if you support the Dem agenda.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I've only been civil, and respectful.

I find it easier to demand civil respectful discourse if I start out that way.

It is useless for me to personally attack the people I debate with. I mean it doesn't change the facts of a given subject. Whats the point? I'm not gonna convince anyone by calling them names, And I don't come here to get some sick thrill from putting people down.

Do you?

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

After I talked I you about being civil you have gotten much better, and I admit I have no practiced what i preached in that regards (trying to keep myself honest) For that I apologize, I'm not trying to convince you of anything you drank the dem koolaid you will go down with the ship in that regards. I just find it disingenuous when you claim to be independent and only criticize one party.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

My problem is you don't debate in a civil, respectful way.

because your arguments are vacant you must resort to personal attacks.

Thats why you lose.

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

You don't exactly have a track record of doing the same, that's why you lose.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

ANY discussion of me instead of discussing the issue with civil, respectful facts is a clear indication that you got no substantive facts.

It shows your arguments are empty, vacant and without merit. It proves you know you are wrong and must resort to name calling.

Attacking the messenger means you can't handle the message.

That's why you lose, & I win. Sorry. Understand?

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Hmm you overlook the exact same behavior from your self how odd.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Meaningless nonsense offensiveness!

Please stop with the middle school insults.

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

I guess it would be offensive to have your party hack affiliation pointed out when you try so hard to come across as open minded and progressive.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

America only loses if the right wing wacko tea party gains any more ground and if the dems cave in to support conservative policies.

Biden was right to interrupt Paul Lyin. Rules are for the weak sheep that I guess Paul Lyin is.

LOL

[-] -3 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Nope we lose when our two options are this bad. At least your true colors are coming out "rules don't apply to you" rules are for the weak? Life is hard; it's even harder when your stupid.....you are very stupid. Do as I say not as I do dem hack you should be proud to be a tool.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I'm not an Obama campaign worker.

Biden interrupted and laughed at the laughable Paul Lyin because we cannot let lies go unanswered.

Biden was absolutely correct.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

He looked like an unhinged crack monkey who couldn't wait his turn. I guess rules don't apply to him? I noticed Ryan didn't interrupt one of bidens lies, he let him say it then refuted it. That is the way the rules say to do it not act like he did. The loser on last nights debates was America because those are your choices.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

More meaningless childish personal attacks. You got no substance. Our exchange can't be about each other. That is shallow and useless.

You ain't gonna bully me into changing my position. Is that what you think? Or do you just enjoy insulting people anonymously from the safety of your moms basement on the internet.

C'mon the schoolyard bullying tactics of your candidate Romney are useless on a virtual forum. Be an adult.

Have a civil debate of substance. Are you really so scared that your p0sition can't stand up in the marketplace of ideas that you must resort to unrelated personal attacks?

LOL

[-] 1 points by WSmith (1663) from Cornelius, OR 2 years ago

HEY!

I was going to chime (butt) in here, but... what the hell.

I have a lot of Central and South American experience. It's a very troubled bunch of countries almost entirely because of the US. You guys seem to agree with each other but fight over inflated minor differences.

You know who Chavez reminds me of? Huey P. Long (King Fish). He stuck it to the rich and corporate to help his people, and helped himself too. The Powers That Be let him have it, and portrayed him as a big crook. It's a miracle Chavez is still alive.

Where's the beef?

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Lol you have to give substance to get it, you talk about bullying ok how many times did bye byeden interrupt the other side? Why are you ashamed of being a Obama campaign worker? Other than it show's you for the partisan hack you are?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

The annual deficit is $100B less than when Bush left it to us.

That is a cut. Would be more if your traitorous repubs weren't obstructing all efforts to strengthen the recovery

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

You can't take your dem campaign worker hat off long enough to admit both side spend like like druken sailors. The gov. Regaurdless of which is driving is the problem but hey keepin your head in the sand makes you feel food then continue on! I at least hope they pay you for carrying their water like that.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Well Bush bailed without thinking about anyone except his 1% plutocrat cronies.

So now you say there was no surplus left to Bush.? Ok then perhaps we can say there is no deficit now?

LMFAO.

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

I'm sorry but you failed to see Obama has done nothing different! But you not only give him a pass but don't you vol. as camp. Worker for him.? And thr us gov has balanced a budget in a very very long time (way before Clinton)

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

The annual trillion dollar deficit (Pres Obama cut by 100 billion) was left to us by GWBush.

And we have annual deficits not because of the poor, lazy, takers you've complained about, but because of the 2 wars Bush put on credit card & the tax cuts on the 1%, and the economic crash repub created w/ their 1% plutocrat friends.

No?

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Every pres. For decades is responsible for def. no way anyone of them can take all the blame. See that is what a true independent would say. You just pointed out gw.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

We don't have anywhere near more takers than givers. Thats just more right wing lies.

We have very few "takers" And vastly more givers. So there is no risk to our system.

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Well the left wing lies you spout don't give me any comfort. When gov. Runs deficits like ours there's a problem. Do you think that is a right wing lie to? I mean you may as well stay on story don't want to veer off the dem talking Points do you? Then you would need ind. thought and that scares progressives, can't have that we need dependents not independents.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I want to lift people out of poverty. Progressives do not want to keep people poor. Repubs do.

Progressives do not believe in the state providing everything that is you blatantly lying about an ideology you disagree with.

But said you agree in helping people in need which we can agree on.

I just don't agree there are many lazy moochers. I say again that is just repub lies to distract and garner support to cut benefits for people deserving.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

I believe in a Hand up not a hand out. It's no more lying then what you do, you should hold your party to the same standards you do rep. Is that to much to ask?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

We disagree on your exaggeration that socialism is slavery.

Socialism is necessary for human beings to survive. It is natural to take care of the weak, unhealthy members of our family and our community.

It benefits all of us. All societies care for the weakest, ours continues to expand the social safety net and we are a better people for it. History shows that it is inevitable.

We disagree. that's all. doesn't have to the end of the world.

Peace.

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

The weak yes but not the lazy. I see the difference between those who can't take care I themselves and those who won't.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

You said about me : "you don't care anything about freedom you want to control people" That is a lie! I never said that, Don't support it, nor do I feel that way.

Anything else?

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

You support Chavez right you said if bus. Do not not submit to his his social agenda he WILL take their bus. Away your words not mine. History is full of guys that felt the same way as you do I really need to cite their names? Viva Chavez your words again not mine. You are a lunatic if you think you can take what's not yours.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I ain't a dem campaign volunteer. I didn't say that constituted an attack.

You can review the discussion below if you need to be reminded, or you don't know what an insult is.

LOL

[-] 1 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

I responded to you the same way you do to me so what's your problem?

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

"same behavior"? I ain't overlooked nothin' I ain't attacking you personally. don't have to. I got the truth on my side!

LMFAO

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Why is ponying out you are a dem camp vol. attacking you? Other than the fact it makes it hard for you to say your ind.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I do not volunteer for any campaign.

We had a balanced budget with a surplus when Pres Clinton left. Bush II blew that away. Pres Obama has cut $100B fr annual budget deficit. Would've done more but repubs obstructed.

So there. Those are the facts!

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Predicted surpluses are not actual ones when actual numbers came down there wasn't shit. He hasn't cut anything, not growing as large as hey wanted is what they call cuts, bullshit a cut is doing with less not well I was going to spend 100 million but now I'll only spend 80 million that is what progressives call a cut?

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

You mentioned deficits I told you why we have them. Every Pres is not responsible for the current deficit. GWBush was left a surplus and blew a hole in the budget and left us a trillion dollar deficit.

Bush is responsible for this deficit because of HIS policies. Why would I blame another Pres for his economic irresponsibility? Why would an independent do so. Would an true independent blame Clinton? But he left a surplus. Would he go back to Bush I or Reagan. Well they were also fiscally irresponsible but Clinton fixed that and left that pesky surplus again.

Do you know anything about deficit history?

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

He is partially responsible, just like the ones before him. Clinton didn't fix anything this gov hasn't really balance the budget in a long time Clinton counted revenue that wasn't collected yet to pad the stats. The gov calls not going the amount they wanted a cut you are insane if you think any politician cares about you they are all the same they line their pockets and bail leaving us with the bill.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I'm registered independent. I support progressive concepts of hand up actions.

I reject right wing "blame the victim", "people are lazy" and unworthy of hand up",.distraction rhetoric.

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Ahh your verbiage Is off, no one rejects someone needing a hand up but a hand out yes. Saying you're reg ind. that supports progressives is like saying I'm a tea party guy but I'm reg as an ind. it just doesn't hold water. No system can survive more takers than givers

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

"lunatic"? name calling betrays the weakness of your argument.

Punishing business is not crazy. We need to do it more here. We should have done it before the banksters crashed the world economy.

So if business is not serving the people as the people need then Business should be punished up to and including revoking their license to do business. Up to and including bringing criminal charges against businesses, & their owners.

.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

"random unprovable facts"

Not at all. The people have had much improvement in wages, healthcare, job security, food security.

You just refuse to acknowledge it because you are an anti socialist neocon?

[-] 0 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

I their healthcare is great why did thier leader Leave to get treatment? Job security? All they have is oil revenue (which you rail agnist here but seem ok with there) take that away and they are screwed. Their economy has no diversity take out gov oil and it all crumbles and you call that security? If that's you're standard the US is super stable. I am very anti socialist (slavery which is what socialism is) is not what I want in my life and if that in turn makes me a neocon then so be it. I am a supporter of freedom and if I'm a neocon then I can live with that. I don want to put chains on anyone, can the same be said for you?

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I suppose my opinion to you would be propaganda, since you don't believe it is true.

That's fine. I believe it, so to me it is truth. I do not believe your comments to be true so for me they are propaganda.

Cool?

[-] -2 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

It's not that I don't believe you I want to understand why you believe the way you do. You can't honestly disagree with someone unless you really know their motivations. I can't truly dismiss your "propaganda" until I know the source and I like arguing with you! :) I've said many times regardless of what we disagree on we still all have to live together an we had better disagree like it.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

How true, sad, but true.

[-] -2 points by marvelpym (-184) 2 years ago

Would Chavez allow a community like Alpine, NJ to exist? Or would they have to spread their wealth around to help the poor?

[-] 2 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

You need to get better educated on what socialism is. You have been subjected to a lifetime of propaganda.

Socialism is an economic system that does not exploit workers, that pays them the full product of what they produce.

Why would Chavez not allow a town like Alpine? Workers are free to build whatever kind of homes and neighborhoods they want.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

My wife is from Venezuela and I visited there in 2006 with her. My impression is first that the US has no business dictating to Venezuela and that Venezuela has the right even to make its own mistakes. Chavez no doubt means well but has made some mistkes as far as I can see, like for example letting the rich buy luxury cars overseas with subsidized dollars, subsidized by who? Also virtually giving away gasoline for the rich to joy ride around and for years and years having a currency regime that allowed people with dollars to really rape the country, Maybe politically Chavez couldn't do otherwise, it's not for me to judge. Venezuela inarguably is suffused with a "get over" mentality and a corrupt mentality. Trying to build socialism there is almost as hard as trying it here- maybe harder.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Though Chavez could have established a dictatorship, he has refrained, and while he has pushed through some authoritarian measures, the country still remains as representative as ours, with Chavez and his party representing the poorest.

Certainly, he has made mistakes, and his administration is far from perfect, but at least he is moving toward the right direction, whether his motives are opportunistic or not.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Things might have changed a bit since I was there. Obviously Chavez retains the support of the poorer 50% plus and this must be for good reasons, as the people ordinarily tune out the government TV and radio and gravitate to the oppositionist private media. I was making a point that no matter that Chavez has done admirable things and has admirable intentions - I believe this- What they have in Venezuela is not socialism and in fact as far as I know certain subsidies to the one percent like virtually free gasoline for their joyriding continue. Had I been a Venezuelan I would have voted for Chavez but just like here, elections are not going to resolve the problems they have.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

You are right, though Chavez has described himself as a Trotskyite, he seems to be very patient in implementing complete communist reform, perhaps sensing increased resistance from the well-to-do and wealthy of Venezuela and more US intervention.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Chavez my friend is all over the leftist board. He's also said he's a Maoist. Famously he is both a follower of Noam Chomsky and a 911 truther as well as a Fidelista.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

I'm not about to defend the 4th republic but how can anyone see Chavez as an improvement? The robolucion has its own rich elite. Chavez has brought Venezuela inflation, economic stagnation, shortages, a violent crime wave, & more corruption. He seems more a change in rhetoric than substance. Well, he has switched Venezuela from being a US client to being a Cuban one, the point being that Venezuela is still someone's client.

The previous regime engaged in much redistribution of wealth. There was a system of public hospitals & free universities, for example. PDVSA financed much of the govt's expenses (Chavez has only dug deeper into this black gold mine). No change, just the same old socialism. Anyway, the left shouldn't fear Capriles, he's promising to keep up the socialism, just that he says he'll do it right. LOL

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

I would like to see some sources for your information. You did read the link I provided, which indicated the overall improvement in the lives of the workers like free health care, wiping out illiteracy, working to eradicate homelessess. Most of what you say seems to be right-wing rhetoric that has nothing to do with everyday Venezuelan life; otherwise Chavez wouldn't enjoy such a lead in the polls.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Thanks for the links. This country, however, has its own elite, economic stagnation, shortages for the impoverished, violent crime wave, and rampant corruption. In fact, as far back as the 19th century, Friedrich Engels pointed out that American politicians were basically for sale. A good source for all my points is http://www.e-ir.info/2012/02/14/does-money-equal-power-in-american-politics/

More or less, you're pointing out problems in Venezuela that exist here as well, only in this country the workers have no real representative working for them.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

It's hard to call what is in Venezuela socialism. Chavez has tried to improve the lot of the poor and to a great extent that happened. At the same time the complex legal/ semi legal/ illegal but rampant currency arbitrage trade that went on unmolested for a dozen years under Chavez' presidency certainly retarded progress and allowed for tons of money to be shipped out of Venezuela which sorely needed and still sorely needs it. Also the government provided subsidized dollars for purchase of luxury cars by the rich- both the oppos and the Bolibougessa. This bled the country as well.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

If your point is to prove that Venezuela still has a lot of problems under Chavez, you're certainly right, but that ignores all that he has accomplished for the workers of Venezuela.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Sure and I especially appreciate his courage in standing up to the US regarding Cuba, Iran and yes, Russia. Just saying it isn't socialism that they have there.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

It's a compromise with Chavez pushing communism, while a strong reactionary sector pushes for the oligarchy. If Chavez pushed too hard, or the oligarchs push too hard, the whole society may start to implode.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

I'm not complaining against Chavez. He very well may have pushed things as far to the left as anyone could have. Of course as in all things something or other could be done differently or better but I have to take my hat off to him. The State Department and NYT counted him dead in 2002 and he surely made asses of them.

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

My hat's off to Fidel, Raul, Hugo, and others, who have shown Latin America that their countries are their own and not tools of American masters.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

agreed

[-] 0 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

Agreed that there are problems in the US. Criticism of Chavez isn't defense of the US. I disagree that Venezuela has a representative govt. There are more similarities than differences in the 2 countries systems. Well, not quite, the so called leaders tell different lies. ;-)

Your Mama's in bed, your father's in jail, your sister's on the corner yelling election for sale!

"There was a 30% surge in pre-election spending. Meanwhile, inflation is 18.1% and poverty in Venezuela is 31.6%. This is not the path to prosperity." http://www.thefreemanonline.org/in-brief/chavez-extends-socialist-rule/

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Poverty is less than pre Chavez and extreme poverty is almost eradicated. That's not a brand new world but it is something to defend.

[-] -1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

I hardly consider putting people on the dole eliminating poverty. They still live in shanty towns suffering under the astronomical crime rates & high inflation. Don't worry as time goes on & Chavez's policies impoverish Venezuela even more I'll keep you posted.

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

I saw all these houses being built when I went to Venezuela in 2006 and was impressed but it turns out the construction was not enough even to keep up with the growth of population. The housing situation in Venezuela is horrible. Not being an expert on Venezuela's history or politics I can't easily criticize anyone for trying to make things better there and I absolutely oppose the US butting in and giving orders and making threats.

It seems to me a better idea not to subsidize consumer gasoline below actual cost of production as is the case now, it's almost free, and not to allow currency system playing and importation of luxury items with dollars subsidized by the state. I don't know if that still is the case but it had to have been an enormous waste. I know a previous government tried to raise gasoline prices and there were terrible bloody riots with hundreds dead. Given Venezuela imports gasoline this subsidy is a terrible burden, but perhaps even Chavez dare not mess with it. Too bad because someone ought to.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Chavez has vastly improved the life of the average Venezuelan, as per the link on the original post. Cuba has been on the road to a more equal society since the revolution in spite of the American embargo.

To point out the defects of third-world countries and compare them to the US is like comparing apples and oranges. Bolivia, now with a socialist government, is just in the infant stage of moving toward a Communist state. Chavez allows as great a representation, as the oligarchy allows here. Yes, inflation and poverty are high in Venezuela, but poverty in the US, one of the richest countries in the world, is at least--depending on whose figures one uses--10% and a whopping 32% for children. That points out the failure of our system. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/210758.html http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/09/understanding-poverty-in-the-united-states-surprising-facts-about-americas-poor

The point is Chavez has moved a backward country forward, while our politicians have moved an advanced society backwards.

[-] 0 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

The "progress" that Chavez brought about is mostly smoke & mirrors. I lived in Venezuela. I came back to the US in 2000 because of the economic disaster Chavez caused. I visited Caracas in '08. It sure looked like the same old decaying place. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/06/in_pictures_life_in_a_caracas_barrio/html/1.stm Look at these pictures, this isn't progress.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Obviously, a large percentage of Venezuelans, mostly workers, disagree with you. Chavez continues to be re-elected.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

Bush got reelected. That didn't make him good. DeMOCKracy produces elected dictatorships.

[-] 0 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

True. Still, even when Bush was re-elected, only a few claimed election fraud the second time. We may not always agree with the majority, but must accept the results even if we know the process is a sham.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

You've just pointed out a major problem with corrupt electoral (did I just repeat myself?) systems. No, we shouldn't be forced to accept the results of a fraudulent process. We deserve better.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Yes, we do deserve better.

Legality aside, to have people we are supposed to be trusting, ripping us off from the the start of their tenure as people's representatives is not what anyone would call a "good start".

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

It's the nature of the beast:

"Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Thus the beneficiaries are spared the shame, danger, and scruple which their acts would otherwise involve. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons, and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim — when he defends himself — as a criminal. In short, there is a legal plunder" http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html#SECTION_G019

[-] -3 points by Clicheisking (-210) 2 years ago

Don't confuse these red fucks with facts. They are students of the Sean Penn Head Up My Ass school of infantile world views. Funny how more of these MasterCard Marxists don't live in that wonderful utopia!

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Hey your not supposed to point that out. How can they be hypocrites and fair weather Marxists if you keep pointing out the truth.......that kind of thing is not welcome here! They luv Chavez here but for some reason do not want to live in his great society.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 2 years ago

You guys' comments bring to mind of an old girlfriend, a Panamanian communist. When I asked her why she chose to come here instead of going to communist Cuba all she could do was mumble about the sanctions making Cuba poor. I wonder if she lives in Venezuela now. :-)

[-] -1 points by podman73 (-652) 2 years ago

Lol probably not I'm sure she still lives here and bitching about it (like most people on this forum) lol funny how they do that