I agree that the best way to handle Chavez is to ignore him. I think his
verbal attacks against America were aimed more at Bush than America as a
whole.
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:18 AM, G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think we killed Qaddafi's daughters, .maybe his sister or wife, don't
>
I think we killed Qaddafi's daughters, .maybe his sister or wife, don't
remember..was messy though. I dunno what caused him to start playing
ball. As for Castro, things may be different with Raulwe'll see. Obama
should ignore Chavez.
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Scott Stroz <[EMAIL PRO
We tried to kill Castro what 30-40 years ago? Can't count that. We may
have missed Qaddafi, but we smacked him down enough to stop fucking with
us. OBL...yea, wel, we really screwed th epooch on that one.
> We couldn't kill Castro.we can't find OBL.we missed Qaddafi.our
> track rec
Wait...so if Chavez had brought in tanks and Bush was still president you
would not be concerned?
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 6:59 AM, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i suppose that due to previous comments i am obligated to worry about
> chavez npw that bush is gone. Preliminary assessment =tanks
The first time I remember hearing about Chavez in the news, and there being
issues with Bush was before Katrina. IIRC it had to do with venezuela
selling oil to some organizations at a cheaper price so people could afford
it. It was right after these same groups had asked Congress to do something
the United States did do that apparently
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/apr/21/usa.venezuela
don't kill me, I am just the messenger, reporting the results of a google :)
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:20 AM, G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Vivec <[EMAIL PROT
He and Evo Morales have CLEARLY been backing the FARC in Colombia. Remember
when the Colombians killed the FARC leader on the other side of the border
and Morales and Chavez were on the verge of declaring war on Colombia?
Chavez is a thug who idolizes tin-pot dictator Castro, another thug who
tort
I was just trying to picture it from the "US Gobbermints" point of view.
I actually think ignoring him is the 2nd best idea, getting a friend of his
to talk us up a little is out best bet.
Head on confrontation is not useful at this point. But that is the "Bush
Doctrine". For now.
~
I disagree Jerry.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Did we try to kill the guy? With all the resources of the US, why didnt we
> kill him? Are we that bad at it?
We couldn't kill Castro.we can't find OBL.we missed Qaddafi.our
track record is
Did we try to kill the guy? With all the resources of the US, why didnt we
kill him? Are we that bad at it?
Trying to overthrow him is because he has shown through his rhetoric and
actions that he wants to do bad things (things that the US consider bad),
and are not in the US's interests (I assume
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 8:13 AM, Vivec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not talking about criticising, I am talking about
>
> trying to kill the guy,
Who's trying to kill him?
> funding the opposition in his country,
If we are doing that, we should cease immediately...we need all our money
HERE.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 8:00 AM, Vivec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If he has broken no laws, if he has been elected DEMOCRATICALLY and
> rules according to the DEMOCRATIC laws of his country, why is he so
> vilified??
Give me a break. George W. Bush was the DEMOCRATICALLY elected leader of our
Not talking about criticising, I am talking about
trying to kill the guy,
funding the opposition in his country,
plotting to overthrow him in a coup,
trying to align him with terrorists and
making him out to be a major security/terrorist/communist threat.
2008/11/11 Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROT
Have you read his speeches and rhetoric?
If he ranted that way on the corner of any nation on earth (except his own),
he would be escorted to a place he couldn't hurt himself or others.
He is vilified because he spends all day every day VILIFYING US.
Sure he is democratically elected. That does
If he has broken no laws, if he has been elected DEMOCRATICALLY and
rules according to the DEMOCRATIC laws of his country, why is he so
vilified??
Is it that Democracies only count as such when they follow a certain world view?
2008/11/11 G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> He has broken no laws...the
Yeah it really did.
The guy is a nut job.
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 1:32 AM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: Chavez: oh, well, you know if the dude loses an
> election, tanks just might sh
He has broken no laws...the Venezuelan people have fucked themselves fairly
and squarely. My congratulations to them.
Here's hoping we can go back to ignoring Venezuela like we always did.
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Vivec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What laws has Chavez broken?
>
> Ha
i suppose that due to previous comments i am obligated to worry about
chavez npw that bush is gone. Preliminary assessment =tanks are not a
good sign...
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Judah McAuley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I knew I could depend on you to think that. And yes, I think that 10
What laws has Chavez broken?
Have there not been fair and democratic elections in Venezuela?
Has he not had two referendums thus far?
The last referendum which he lost, did he not submit to the loss as
was required democratically?
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Robert Munn wrote:
> Agreed, I am perfectly happy to give him the chance to run things. I'm just
> pointing that secrecy among politicians in general needs to be viewed with
> skepticism.
Ha1 =]
--
Men are swayed more by fear than by reverence.
Aristotle
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:47 PM, Judahwrote:
>
> Message discipline in a campaign is equal to a
> systematic foundation of baldfaced lies, evasions and a steadfast
> belief that the law doesn't apply to the executive branch? Hello false
> equivalence!
>
I'm not comparing them from that perspecti
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> One of my key concerns is that checks and balances will go out the window
> because of the Democratic control of Congress, something like what happened
> 2005-2006. Fortunately, they only have two years and then we get to
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Judah wrote:
>
> That's why I worry about the consolidation of executive power under
> Bush and why I sure as hell hope that we get a greater balance of
> power in the coming administration between the branches than we did in
> the last one.
One of my key conce
It started way before Katrina.
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Maureen wrote:
> I find it intriguing that the vilification of Chavez originated with
> the Bush propaganda machine after he rightfully called Bush to task
> for the failures after Katrina. I clearly remember the first time I
> hea
I find it intriguing that the vilification of Chavez originated with
the Bush propaganda machine after he rightfully called Bush to task
for the failures after Katrina. I clearly remember the first time I
heard a newscaster denigrate Chavez, and thought "there is Shrub's the
new villain".
On Mon,
And for what its worth, I'll take it as a sign of progress if they
value process as much as accomplishment. When you are faced with so
many troubles, as we are now, the temptation is to cut corners to "get
things done". I think that history shows that that is a losing
strategy in the long run. So w
I knew I could depend on you to think that. And yes, I think that 10
years ago he did think he was protecting the poor and disenfranchised.
History is littered with stories of a similar nature. Fighting for the
little guy turns the person popular, the adulation gets to their head,
they start seizin
I don't think Chavez took power with any intention of helping people. He
used populist rhetoric to win support from the poor and then consolidated
his power through a series of moves that would have never been allowed in a
mature democracy. He actually tried to get himself elected president for
li
Maybe its just because I'm part way through watching Last King of
Scotland, but it sure seems like there are a lot of people who seem to
take power with the best interests of the people in mind and then turn
into raving lunatics.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKTRE4A83DT20081109?pageNu
29 matches
Mail list logo
