Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Marxist Hugo Chavez Stumps for Democratic Party

September 20, 2006

In a speech before the General Assembly of the Useless Nations on September 20, 2006, Marxist Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez came out swinging against President George Bush. That such a small minded despotic oppressive would travel to America to unleash his tirade against our President should be very distressing to Americans. However, given the left’s propensity for wallowing in their BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) we should not be surprised.

In fact, what I heard of the speech reminded me of what the leftist Democrats have been saying all along. Could it be that Hugo Chavez is also vying for the Democratic Party nomination in 2008?

From his rant today advocating a copy of another Marxists book, Noam Chomsky, we see:

Chavez Translator: “I think that the first people who should read this book are our brothers and sisters in the United States, because their threat is in their own house. The devil is right at home. The devil, the devil himself is right in the house. And the devil came here yesterday. Yesterday, the devil came here, right here, right here. And it smells of sulfur still today. This table that I now standing in front of, yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the president of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer to as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world, truly, as the owner of the world.”

I remember a time words as this, spoken about a sitting President while in America, would have drawn the ire of the entire nation. Given statements by prominent Democrats during the past six years, his words sound more like an every day campaign speech by any other Democrat.

Howard Dean, May 2005: “President Bush, for example, goes to these town meetings and doesn't allow Democrats or Independents who disagree with him into the town meeting. He has a crew of people who keep them out.”

October 2005: “The Bush White House is the most corrupt administration in U.S. history since President Warren G. Harding's.” "I'm tired of the ayatollahs of the right wing," Dean said. "We're fighting for freedom in Iraq. We're going to fight for freedom in America."

John Kerry, January 2006: Winning the 2006 congressional elections is the only way to change the dangerous path George W. Bush has put us on. We need to defeat those Republicans who have overlooked this administration's incompetence, turned a blind eye to its failures, and lent a helping hand to its dangerous ideology.

September 2006: "The administration's Afghanistan policy defines cut and run." "Cut and run while the Taliban-led insurgency is running amok across entire regions of the country. Cut and run while Osama bin Laden and his henchmen hide and plot in a lawless no-man's land."

Nancy Pelosi, June 2005: “The President's frequent references to the terrorist attacks of September 11 show the weakness of his arguments. He is willing to exploit the sacred ground of 9/11, knowing that there is no connection between 9/11 and the war in Iraq.”

September 2006: "The president's words need to be matched by sustained diplomatic engagement with our allies, and directly with our adversaries when necessary - not just when elections are near, but all the time. Mr. Bush's rhetoric must be matched by policies that are well devised and competently implemented - unlike the policies that have made the United States less safe…”

Al Gore, May 2004: "The unpleasant truth is that President Bush's utter incompetence has made the world a far more dangerous place and dramatically increased the threat of terrorist attacks against the United States.” "He planted the seeds of war. He harvested a whirlwind, and now the corrupt tree of a war waged on false premises has brought us the evil fruit of Americans torturing and sexually humiliating prisoners who are helpless in their care."

February 2004: "He betrayed this country! He played on our fears. He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure preordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place."

Ted Kennedy, Sep 2004: “President Bush has given a new meaning to the letters G.O.P. -Get Old People. While senior citizens are suffering, HMOs and drug companies are profiting.” (Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment)

Sep 2006: By riding roughshod over our laws, the Bush Administration has made America less safe and made the war on terror harder to win.”

Jack Murtha, May 2006: “U.S. forces [are] under undue pressure in Iraq because of poor planning and allocation of resources by the Bush administration.”

July 2006: “We have become occupiers. We cannot win this militarily. I decided this over a year ago. But I hesitated to say anything. I waited probably too long.”

Dianne Feinstein, May 2006: "The president is usurping power from both the legislative and the judicial branches and destroying this balance that has served our country so well." "I believe we are on our way to a most serious constitutional confrontation.''

April 2006: "It is deeply disturbing to learn that President Bush may have authorized the selective disclosure of our most sensitive intelligence information to the media to help justify a war and discredit critics.”

John Edwards, April 2006: "I think that George Bush deserves to be censured." "Leaking classified information for political purposes is really ugly."

November 2005: “President Bush promised to be a "uniter, not a divider." Apparently that was just talk. Under his watch our nation has become bitterly divided…”

Harry Reid, June 2005: There is a growing feeling among the American people that the President's Iraq policy is adrift, disconnected from the reality on the ground and in need of major mid-course corrections.

January 2006: "President Bush needs to quit stonewalling about his White House's connection to corruption, and finally tell us how he's going to reform Washington."

Hillary Clinton, May 2003: “I am sick and tired, of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic, and we should stand up and say we are Americans, and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!”

January 2005: “The fear factor has become the overriding strategic approach that this administration uses."

Russ Feingold, March 2006: "This conduct is right in the strike zone of the concept of high crimes and misdemeanors, [Bush has been] openly and almost thumbing his nose at the American people."

March 2006: "The president authorized an illegal program to spy on American citizens on American soil."

Maria Cantwell, October 2005: "Recently, the administration has rejected conservation attempts like more accurate fuel mileage for cars and bipartisan proposals for reducing our dependence on foreign oil by a million barrels a day."

I don’t see much difference between what Chavez spouted today and what Democrats have been saying for years. Have the Democrats aligned themselves with Marxists now? Is their hatred of George W. Bush so deep that they would subject our country to the ideals that brought the nation of Russia to its knees a few years ago?

I only have my suspicions about this, but it appears we are headed for very dangerous ground if we return power of the country back over to Democrats.



Anonymous said...

thank you for all the dim party words of wisdom. this illustrates my point exactly IF u take it one step further to where charlie rANGLE went off so dramatically and then pEL OSI and clitton barked too.
They ALL knew they better pretend to be upset and retort back at hugo and on top of this they were extremely grieved that chaVEz not only stole their material,he presented it at the greatest show on earth aaaaand got applause..which is more than they ever got.

LewWaters said...

My impression of those that made remarks against Chavez's rant today is they first had to wait for the polls to come out to see whether they should be offended or not.

Wouldn't it be great to have politicians that actually held values, for a change?

Anonymous said...

I am a democrat (sort of, although I admit i'm in the left-wing of the party, and historically I've voted green..) But I absolutely think US imperialism as practiced by the current president (as well as the somewhat less blatant imperialism of previous presidents) is a bigger threat to world peace than saddam husein ever was.

I think you are right about democrats in general... I would vote for Hugo Chavez over George W Bush, and I've heard other democrats say the same. The poorer, less informed, less educated, amazingly seem even more radical, I've heard one say he would vote for Castro over Bush... For me, that's a tough call.

Chavez is a politician appealing to his voters too, he's not just a marxist, he's a christian, as are the majority of his supporters... and his binary rhetoric rivals Bush's.. I favor a more philosophical, less emotive approach personally, but I am grateful for the progress toward closing the gap between rich and poor that has come into being under Chavez, as well as the improved literacy.

Also I don't think the kind of commentary/rhetoric that would be more appealing to me would have the mass appeal that his does in that country.

I didn't read all the comments from dems you posted, but of what I did read, I don't find anything really objectionable about them. Chavez's rhetoric is annoying to me sometimes, but even if i prefer intellectual arguments, i easily empathize with the emotions behind the emotive ones, including those of Chavez.

Personally, I am definitely not anti-marxist. I think I share most of their values. And I believe there are non-authoritarian strains within marxism.

- Anonymous Leftist Democrat

LewWaters said...

Anonymous, people in Venzuela may not have much of a choice but vote for Chavez; Chavez supporters await call to arms

I have to disagree with you about Impreialsim, though. It means The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.

Bush nor any previous President has exercised this in a manner that would be considered "imperialistic." In fact, it is he socialist governments that have actually practiced it, such as Chavez.

One cannot be both a Marxist and a Christian. If they claim both, one is phony. The two beliefs are completely opposite each other.

Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Marx, Castro and many others have come up preaching the socialist message and all have failed. Not because they weren't done right, but because they strip people of the natural drive to better themselves that most have.

There is no free ride in life and no one is entitled to the fruits of someone else's labor. In Capitalism, anyone can make it, if they try hard and yes, get a few breaks. All too often, they need to make those breaks themselves, but at least they are free to do so.

As for we conservatives, I have no problem with how you live your life, it's your choice. I have a problem when others start telling me how to live my life their way, by them increasing what I pay for others lack of work or passing laws restricting my freedoms and liberties because they "know better."