"Protect terrorists when we want to."

*cough cough taliban cough*

Me, I think it's annother no-name-until-now politician trying to get attencion

Then you're goddam ignorant, no two ways about it. Chavez is not a "no name" politician, you just have no idea what you're talking about.

trick people into thinking he's a threat

I'm not even going to begin here, other than to say if you think that Bush is good president (and note: I'm not saying that you DID say that. You might think that both Bush and Chavez are terrible. But it comes off as you being slightly pro-Bush) then you need to check into a mental health clinic.

Is art not appreciated here?


Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas
Marcathonas

It's our CIA making a mess for him that's got him pissed off. I can't blame him. He's just pointing out the obvious. I love how our press has begun painting him up so that in a few years we'll be able to invade them. (remind you that the people there love him)

I'm sure all the idiots will be out waving thier flags and goose-steping all the way.

Bush isn't a good president. But he's a hell of a lot better then Chavez.

The comments were immature.

Chavez is a Communist. Communism doesn't work. Bush is certainly an Ass, but for a foreign leader to come to the US and immaturely call the Prez (like him or not) is an insult.
New York City should reclaim that property (the U.N.) and trun it into more high-priced condos!
Move the UN to Switzerland, I say.

Chavez is God compared to Bush, whether we like him or not. His ideas are groundbreaking in that he actually tries to help the poor. Last winter when low income people in the northeast couldn't afford to pay their heating bills, our own government had the audacity to publicly ask the oil giants to lend a hand. Only one company sent aid, Citgo, aka Venezuela. Did Chavez sieze property and goods, probably. But I think the bigger picture was to take from the uber rich and give back to the needy, something the rich and politically inspired (they are both one in the same btw) in this country care nothing about. Our country is all about how much can I get for myself while depriving everyone else of opportunity. As far as Bush, he is no leader, he is not intelligent (except maybe like a fox), and he isn't in touch with reality. Neither are any of his ex CIA goons like Rumsfeld and Cheney.

I won't claim to know much about politics but Chavez calling Bush the devil is not all that surprising to me. Unpopular, incompetent, threatened and/or dictatorial leaders often suffer from an unrulier populace which hampers their efforts to follow their agenda. It is common practice for those people to create a foreign threat since that forms a feeling of unity on the domestic front. Even if the populace doesn't like their leader, they will often support him/her just because they feel they should. If you balance that with the correct level of oppression you're in the zone.

Chavez's remarks could be viewed as such. He isn't popular in his own country and he doesn't make a lot of progress on his election promises (or so I hear). By turning the US into an enemy and creating an atmosphere of fear, he can convince his underlings to support him. I'm not saying that's why he is doing that or even whether he is doing a good or bad job (I just don't know) but it could be an explanation.

Chavez, however, wouldn't be the only one doing this. North Korea and Iraq used similar techniques, and ironically, the US have used it as well at times. I would guess that the possibility of such a thing occurring is linked to the power the central government can exhert on for example the media.

Chavez is a Communist. Communism doesn't work.

Chavez is a Socialist. Its different. And whether he is truly a socialist, or another authoritarian dictator using an "extreme left" government as a guise for his regime (aka China & USSR) is yet to be seen. He *has* started many initiatives to help his country's poverty, to prevent starvation, to raise the standard of living, etc.

I for one have an open mind, and would like to give this radically different President's methods a chance... it could be that the ends will justify the means, and he will be vindicated. Or it could be that he ends up just another two-bit dictator only concerned with himself, his citizens be damned.

In any case, America definately supported Saddam Hussein in the 80s and the Taliban during the Cold War. We have helped terrorists when it suited us, plain and simple. Furthermore, based on how America likes to meddle, I could see that people from the Third World would consider us evil and our leader "the devil".

Certainly seems like a reasonable viewpoint when you look at things from someone else's perspective, but that might be too hard for those Americans who have never been to a third world country and seen *real* poverty first hand... poverty that isn't helped out with welfare checks, people who can't turn on a faucet and get clean water, or apply with their government to find subsidized housing.

All I'm saying is that I'm personally not offended or upset; I think that based on America's track record, and on the flimsy reasons of our "preemptive" Iraq war, his attack on our President is at least understandable.

If you don't like it in the US then move. One less idiots freedom of speech I have to protect.

Unpopular, incompetent, threatened and/or dictatorial leaders often suffer from an unrulier populace which hampers their efforts to follow their agenda. It is common practice for those people to create a foreign threat since that forms a feeling of unity on the domestic front. Even if the populace doesn't like their leader, they will often support him/her just because they feel they should. If you balance that with the correct level of oppression you're in the zone.

Hmmm...does this sound familiar to anyone?

If you don't like it in the US then move. One less idiots freedom of speech I have to protect.

Another intelligent response as expected. Ahhh, I can count on those to show their true intellect whenever there is an interesting post. Gotta love this forum.

The sooner we can start thining out these American whiners, the sooner we can get back to being the rightful lone World Superpower and not feel guilty about it.

If you don't like it in the US then move. One less idiots freedom of speech I have to protect.

I love how some people think that the US government and way of life are perfect... its not, nobody and nothing is perfect as things stand. Am I un-American to question some things that we do? Is it wrong to not agree blindly with everything our government says? Remember, America was founded on men who didn't like the way England was doing things, and they decided that they could do it better. If anything, I'd say that the definitive "American spirit" is the opposite of blindly trusting your leaders and out right dismissing anything that any opposition has to say.

I'm not a Democratic attacking a Republican, or anything like that. I'm just a person exercising his ability to think for himself. Its a shame that "Freedom of Speech" seems to be something that one should be ridiculed for exercising, according to people who follow our government blindly.