Cynical Synapse

Thu, 13 Nov 2008

Less Animosity from Chavez

Filed under: Economy, Gas Prices, Hugo Chavez, Michigan, Oil, Patriotism, People, Politics, Racism — cynicalsynapse @ 9:54 pm

With gas prices under $2 per gallon (something I never thought we’d see again back in the $4 a gallon days), I figured Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez must just be beside himself. Now, remember Venezuela is a significant oil producer on the world market, and one of the founding members of OPEC. Never mind Chavez’ strongly anti-American rhetoric of the last year or so.

From Venezuela’s view, change has moved north. The implication is Obama is more Chavez-friendly. I didn’t see that on Obama’s website. In fact, I don’t recall Obama saying anything about Chavez or Venezuela during the campaign. That leads me to believe Venezuela’s statement is based solely on the fact Obama is the Democratic candidate.

Make no mistake: Venezuela and Chavez are not our friends. That doesn’t mean we can’t have cordial relations; only what they say shouldn’t be taken at face value. You be the judge from the text of the Venezuelan release.

There were a lot of comments on Jonathan Martin’s blog. Here’s my response to some of them:
I agree. Chavez is huffing and puffing to put his spin on the election results. He’s also feeling the waters to see how Obama will respond. And he’s using this as an excuse to take a softer line. I suspect that has as much to do with gasline having fallent to under 2 bucks a gallon, meaning Hugo’s take from Citgo has fallen like a rock.

@Bison:
What’s your point? Jonathan Martin had very little commentary; rather, he posted Chavez’ press release. It doesn’t matter who’s POTUS, Chavez is still a radical demagogue. His statement is intended just as much to boost his credibility with his people and the surrounding South American countries he’s trying to exert influence over. Make no mistake. There’s nothing benevolent about Hugo Chavez.

@ThanksHugo:
Ok, Blacks are all happy Barack got elected. I understand that. Personally, race is not a factor for me. But I really get annoyed with people trying to play up the “half black” aspect. Who cares? Is that supposed to make it alright for White people? That comes across to me as extremely racist.

@the guy who was too chicken to give any kind of a name that says Obama will play Chavez like a violin:
I’m not convinced Obama has the experience to play anyone like a violin. And, while I don’t like or trust Chavez one bit, I recognize he’s no fool. We’re too ethnocentric to realize he is regionally significant. Venezuela is an OPEC member. And Russian interests in Chavez and Venezuela are simply Russian huffing and puffing by bringing a military presence to the western hemisphere. It’s like they’re saying the Monroe Doctrine doesn’t count anymore. It’s just a different version of when the Soviets would probe US airspace with their Bear bombers.

@GoodRiddance:
Obama’s so-called landslide is in Electoral votes (365-162) but the popular vote varies by about 6-1/2% (52.7%-46.0%). That’s not “check the chads” close, but it’s no landslide. Don’t forget there are nuts at both ends of the spectrum. You just sound like a poor winner.

@Frankie D:
I wish it was that simple. Although I doubt Chavez is sincere, we could have good relations with Venezuela. What’s different in the 21st Century is non-state actors have a voice. No country attacked us on 9/11, it was a radical terrorist group. Those are, as you put it, ‘enemies’ we can’t talk to. They don’t care; they’re extremists. They don’t have a country, they don’t have tangible assets or influence like legitimate states. They have only their own secret agenda and the ability to corrupt the disenfranchised.

Aside from your broad generalization, it certainly makes sense to open dialog with Chavez. We avoided nuclear confrontation with the Soviets for 50 years that way. But Chavez is not the only thing going on in diplomatic relations.

@Imchanged:
Gag me with a spoon. Obama’s a first term US Senator. He’s a newbie. I hope he’s up to the challenge of the economic crisis and the issues on which the Global War on Terror is based. Whether you agree with the Iraq War or not, there is no mistaking this country was attacked on 9/11. Even Biden said Obama will be tested. I hope he passes.

It actually boils down to whether he surrounds himself with good people. That was Bush’s downfall—he surrounded himself with yes men.

@HugoKnows:
That’s a bizzare comment. Do you have any statistics on Venezuelan illegals? There can’t possibly be enough of them to “destabilize the regime!”

@luis T:
You’re right. We’ll still have an oil dependence well beyond Obama’s term. Most of the issues facing the next president, from economics to Global War on Terrorism to energy are not one-term issues. Folks need to remember, too, the President (or a candidate) can say great and wonderful things, but Congress (House and Senate) have to agree before it can really happen.

@dotmafia:
I ignored your first anti-Republican diatribe and incorrect characterization of “right-wing nutjobs.” The second one was over the top. Nazis are right-wing nutjobs. Please help me understand the difference between a right-wing hate group and someone as mean-spirited as you seem to be. Does being a left-wing nutjob make it ok?

@Frederik:
Please don’t start the 2012 election already! I was sick of this one two years ago! All bets are off until we see what kind of job Obama does anyway.

@RightWinger:
Your comment is just ignorant and makes me think of the “You might be a redneck…” jokes. I suppose you’re in favor of the Wall Stree bailouts? It’s okay to take care of greedy businesses, but to hell with people, eh? Will your story change if you lose your job unexpectedly or become disabled? You should be ashamed of mislabeling everyone who is trying but needs help with the slur of that small percentage of people who work the system.

@BigBlkGr8Dane:
Not sure what you’re trying to say. Socialism and controlled economies don’t necessarily go hand-in-hand. We fought WW II, allied with the Soviet Union’s controlled economic state, not to end Socialism (or controlled economies), but because Hitler and his allies spread their lust for conquest far and wide. Would the US have gotten involved in WW II if the Japanese hadn’t attacked Pearl Harbor?

@Bolivar:
CIA isn’t trying to destroy Venezuelan democracy or gain control of their oil. If we just wanted the oil, why would we have let the Iraqis keep control of theirs? And make no mistake—Chavez has his agenda and he could care less if ours matches his or not.

@Santos:
An interesting perspective. Did Chavez actually make a difference? Or did he inherit circumstances that will end up serving Venezuela? What keeps the Venezuelan economy going? Other bloggers claim there are shortages and Venezuela’s not doing so well.

@hb:
Dude, you need some serious help with grammar and word usage. But you make a good point in that we must treat other countries as equals whether we agree with them or not (or them with us).

@guy who was too chicken to use a name who says Obama got elected because the media didn’t report his ideology:
Where’s your proof? Before the election, I went to Obama’s website and it had way more points of interest than I wanted to wade through. I live in Michigan; our economy is in a serious crisis (not the Wall Street kind). I don’t see anything Marxist in Obama’s plan.

@last guy who was too chicken to use a name:
And this is different from any other election how?

C’mon, folks. You can be a petty political drone, spouting anti-right or anti-left crap, or you can look at what’s best for the country and advocate for that. This is the 21st Century and single-party folks are not thinking big picture. This is more important now than it ever was before!

Advertisements

%d bloggers like this: