And again, I don't necessarily disagree with you. Neither does the author of the NYT Op-Ed that Mikhail was so eager to dismiss on the sole grounds of him acknowledging that there was some debate about whether he was or wasn't. And yes, there was plenty of debate about whether or not Bush was becoming a dictator as well. A simple search for "Bush dictator" will turn up plenty of hits. Acknowledging that people discussed whether or not he was a dictator does not automatically mean that someone agrees with the premise.Save the word "dictator" for guys like Stalin and Hussein, not Chavez.
Jezuz.Saddam had his gold plated AK47's, one of Chavez's weaknesses was for motor racing. He got his government owned oil company to pay for one of his countrymen to take a seat in Formula 1.
The cost, a cool $46m in 2011 with the cost going up each year to the value of $60m by 2016, by far the largest pay driver deal in F1 history. Maldonado has been a highly visible and loud pro-Chavez supporter whilst he has been part of the F1 travelling circus to the surprise of no-one.
http://www.yallaf1.com/2012/02/15/ma...iams-for-2012/
Something something socialism. Why are you asking questions?I would just like to see something verifiable, something not an op ed for a start, that can explain to me why people are celebrating this dude's death.
I don't think those points are even remotely as important as the (undisputed) legitimacy of the elections that put and kept him in office. Whatever his performance, as evaluated by the citizens of the country he was president of, he was a success.And keep in mind, the author of that article went on to say that he wasn't a dictator or a democrat, but a hybrid. I think that's pretty accurate. Not to mention that he said such debate missed the more important points of his leadership, like performance and competence.
In precisely the same sense there is "debate" about whether or not bigfoot exists. Is bigfoot worthy of being mentioned in the biggest newspaper on earth? It implies a level of legitimacy for the position that is not warranted.And again, I don't necessarily disagree with you. Neither does the author of the NYT Op-Ed that Mikhail was so eager to dismiss on the sole grounds of him acknowledging that there was some debate about whether he was or wasn't. And yes, there was plenty of debate about whether or not Bush was becoming a dictator as well. A simple search for "Bush dictator" will turn up plenty of hits. Acknowledging that people discussed whether or not he was a dictator does not automatically mean that someone agrees with the premise.
Several of the links I posted were not Op-Eds.I would just like to see something verifiable, something not an op ed for a start, that can explain to me why people are celebrating this dude's death.
While the elections are considered "free", they've not necessarily been considered fair when Chavez has (again) shut down most media that opposed him and used government and PDVSA funds to lavish regions and people with gifts from on high, with his name on them. Read this report if you're interested:http://www.cartercenter.org/resource...-final-rpt.pdfI don't think those points are even remotely as important as the (undisputed) legitimacy of the elections that put and kept him in office. Whatever his performance, as evaluated by the citizens of the country he was president of, he was a success.
You mean the media that actively participated in an attempted coup?While the elections are considered "free", they've not necessarily been considered fair when Chavez has (again) shut down most media that opposed him
Yeah people voted for Obama because he gave them gifts. Got it.and used government and PDVSA funds to lavish regions and people with gifts from on high, with his name on them.
Besides the really silly notion of "stealing" the 2004 election, Obama has done everything else you've listed outside of the attorneys. In fact, in some cases - like violation of human rights and assaulting democracy, he's doing it more so.Is Gitmo closed yet?Are we killing american citizens without due process now?Are we still handing out cash to cronies in form of no bid contracts?If those are things that make Chavez a "dictator" then I can just as easily argue that Bush was a dictator.
assaulted democracy via PATRIOT ACT
violated human rights via torture of political/military prisoners, rendition of prisoners to black CIA sites, Abu Ghraib,
packed the judiciary with his own judges (Alito, Roberts for SCOTUS, many more in circuit)
dismissed multiple US attorneys to prevent them from investigating Republican crimes
misappropriated government money by handing out cash to cronies in form of no bid contracts
stole the 2004 election
Yeah you're right McCain or Romney would totally wouldn't have been as bad/worse on those vectors.Yep. But I know, republicans are vastly worse than democrats, so all this is okay. np. This is all just rabblerabblerabble. fingers in your ears. Who cares. no big deal. etc.
Quick question.Besides the really silly notion of "stealing" the 2004 election, Obama has done everything else you've listed outside of the attorneys. In fact, in some cases - like violation of human rights and assaulting democracy, he's doing it more so.Is Gitmo closed yet?Are we killing american citizens without due process now?Are we still handing out cash to cronies in form of no bid contracts?
Yep. But I know, republicans are vastly worse than democrats, so all this is okay. np. This is all just rabblerabblerabble. fingers in your ears. Who cares. no big deal. etc.
Did he give them Chavez-Phones and free healthcare check ups?While the elections are considered "free", they've not necessarily been considered fair when Chavez has (again) shut down most media that opposed him and used government and PDVSA funds to lavish regions and people with gifts from on high, with his name on them. Read this report if you're interested:http://www.cartercenter.org/resource...-final-rpt.pdf
I saw a couple but they didn't have verifiable information. Like that one you posted referencing some Venezuelan org that apparently doesn't exist or something. I did see the Human Rights Watch article, but it is cray long and without references so it is hard to gauge. Which is kind of what I'm getting at. I don't know what to believe or not believe about this guy based on what we know.Several of the links I posted were not Op-Eds.