Venezuela promises Paraguay "all the oil it needs"

[bemildred]

Source: Reuters

Chavez, Correa and Bolivian President Evo Morales have turned back the free-market reforms that swept Latin America in the 1990s and have increased state control of their economies.

"People say, 'Don't trust Chavez, be careful with Chavez, be careful with Evo.' I'm not scared of Chavez. I'm not scared of Evo. I'm not scared of anybody ... We are going to be true Paraguayans and have respectful relations with all countries," Lugo said on Friday.

And in San Pedro on Saturday Lugo said again that ties with Venezuela did not mean Venezuela was imposing anything on Paraguay.

Chavez has helped his closest allies -- Ecuador and Bolivia -- with energy investments, sent cheap oil to the Caribbean and fertilizer to Nicaragua and made direct purchases of billions of dollars of bonds from Argentina, which has not been able to access international debt markets since a massive default.

Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN1634205420080816?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

[MasonJar]

1. I am so happy for South America and its people. We should be so lucky.

I hope that the Paraguay government confiscates Bush' property and gives it to the poor.

[WriteDown]

26. Yes.

We should become completely dependent on black gold and the wealth it brings. I think we should start drilling all over. Puuuulease! :sarcasm: I like the regional cooperation, but the reliance on the high price of oil doesn't set well with me.

[K8-EEE]

2. Chile is really doing well with out the US RWers "helping"

What went on in Chile under Pinochet (with the help of the usual suspects here), would make Saddam blush. Now they have a growing economy, and have made such strides in social justice & equality, even electing a woman president!

[Peace Patriot]

3. The beginning of the article (relevant to your subject line)...

Here's page one:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN1634205420080816?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

"SAN PEDRO, Paraguay (Reuters) - Oil-producing Venezuela promised to provide fuel-deficient Paraguay with all the oil it needs, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Saturday.

"Chavez, who has used his country's oil wealth to spread his influence in Latin America, was visiting San Pedro in the poorest area of Paraguay to sign agreements with Paraguayan President Fernando Lugo, who took office on Friday.

"'We've signed the first agreement to supply Paraguay with all the oil it needs, right to the last drop... for the development of Paraguay's people, industry and agriculture,' Chavez said at a public event.

"One of several agreements signed by the two presidents raised the amount of oil Venezuela supplies Paraguay to 25,000 barrels a day from the current level of 18,600 barrels a day.

"Paraguay is a big generator of hydro-power but produces no fossil fuels and consumes about 28,000 barrels a day of oil."

------

After taking a swipe at Chavez (who "has used his country's oil wealth" to "spread his influence"), Roto-Rooters, goes on (in Associated Pukes style) to take a swipe at Fernando Lugo, whom they imply lied about his leftist tendencies....

------

"Lugo has insisted that he is more moderate than Chavez and his socialist allies in Latin America. But in his first two days in office the Paraguayan leader showed interest in tightening ties with the region's leftist."

------

Earth to Roto-Rooters! Earth to Roto-Rooters! There is more than one "leftist" in South America! In fact, the place is crawling with them--in Bolivia, in Ecuador, in Argentina, in Brazil, in Chile, in Uruguay, in Nicaragua, and now in PARAGUAY (har-har on you fascist fuckwads!)--not just in Venezuela!

"The region's leftist." Jeez.

And get this: This frackin bishop then dares to...

-----

"On Friday evening he and Chavez held a news conference with Ecuador President Rafael Correa, who celebrated the socialist revolution he said they all belonged to."

-----

Facts: Fernando Lugo has NEVER portrayed himself as a "moderate." What he said was, "Paraguay is neither left nor right--Paraguay is poor!" He has consistently said that he favors the social justice policies of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and other leftist countries.

It's as if Roto-Rooters is saying, "We warned you! Align with Chavez, and we will do you in, Senor Bishop!"

It is alive with threats and anger. He didn't succumb to the Global Corporate Predators' kneecapping. He was FRIENDLY WITH CHAVEZ...and, um, a lot of other people.

As for Chavez "using his country's oil wealth" to "spread his influence"--where to begin? This is mindbogglingly prejudiced writing. Do they report that the Bush Junta is pouring billions and billions of dollars into South America--for instance, in military aid to the fascist thugs running Colombia, and pesticides from big pharma to poison peasant farms if they grow a few coca leaves, and in USAID funds only to rightwing groups to oppose elected leftist leaders throughout the continent, including supporting, funding, organizing, training--and probably arming--the white racist separatists in Bolivia, and other real assholes?

No! They don't report on this. How much more appropriate is it for like-minded South American countries to help each other, than for the behemoth to the north to infuse billions of dollars into the region, to foment coups and stoke up civil wars, and to solve Colombia's 'labor problem' (over 40 union leaders slaughtered by rightwing paramilitary death squads, with close ties to the Colombian military, so far this year)? Weapons for killing vs. oil for development? Which "influence" is the good one?

Chavez believes in integration and the newly forming South American "Common Market" (UNASUR). So, naturally, what integrated economies do--countries who have pledged mutual aid, regional development, and the "lifting of all boats"--is, when one of them needs something, they try to provide it, if they have it. What does Venezuela have? Lots and lots of oil. What does Paraguay need? Oil. See, that's how cooperation works. You don't plan coups. You don't try to destabilize countries. You don't fuck with people. You HELP THEM. And, in helping them, you help your own economy.

Example: The Chavez government helped bail Argentina out of ruinous World Bank/IMF debt (incurred by previous, thieving rightwing regimes). Argentina, with the leftist Kirchner government, immediately began to recover, and is now well on its way. Venezuela thus created a healthy trading partner for Brazil, for itself and for other countries. Similarly, Brazil and Venezuela just loaned Bolivia billions of dollars to build a road from the Atlantic to the Pacific, through Bolivia--which will greatly foster the Brazilian, Bolivian, Paraguayan and other economies. Money well spent.

Now read it again:

"Chavez, who has used his country's oil wealth to spread his influence in Latin America, was visiting San Pedro in the poorest area of Paraguay to sign agreements with Paraguayan President Fernando Lugo, who took office on Friday."

Chavez's "influence" is a good influence. He represents millions of people in Venezuela, who keep re-electing him, because he has good ideas, for Venezuela and for the region. Ideas like, the poor should have food on the table, and access to education and medical care. Ideas like, South American countries should band together for mutual economic strength and self-determination. So what's wrong with him "spreading his influence"? They make it sound dirty. They make it sound wrong.

It's the Bushfucks who are wrong, not Chavez.

[Kaleko]

5. Fabulous post. Wish I could recommend it a few hundred times.

[Judi Lynn]

14. The region's LEFTIST! Oh, that's a hot one! Thanks for highlighting it.

That should keep some snickering for days!

Just found a map a short time ago which was created in 2006, showing the terrifying "leftist" countries at the time in South America. Obviously there's a need to add Paraguay to this map now:



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/americas/06/year_of_elections/html/nn1page2.stm
Which ones of these Presidents do you imagine would like to be known as "the other leftist?" Ah, ha ha ha ha.

Signed,

The Poster

[Joe Chi Minh]

32. Operation Condor Dead Meat !Viva la America del Sud!

[Lefty-Taylor]

28. Once again, Peace Patriot, you've nailed it. Great post and thank you.

[Ken Burch]

4. We HAVE to make sure that Barack doesn't take the U.S. capitalist side against these things.

If we've established anything, it's that there can't BE a humane "centrist" market economics in Latin America and there's no reason for our leaders to try to impose one.

[judasdisney]

9. Obama Labels Hugo Chavez A Dangerous Demagogue -- news link

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/5/24/173243/857

And "Talk Left" agrees with Obama: DEMOCRACY MUST BE ELIMINATED IN VENEZUELA.

Dark times ahead indeed. Fuck Obama's "hope."

[judasdisney]

10. and MORE from Mr. Obama

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6510561

Incidentally, I'm no supporter of Hillary. She parroted much the same Neocon lies about President Chavez.

Fuck the U.S. Democrats. I'll stick with the 65% of Venezuelans who voted DEMOCRATICALLY for Mr. Chavez.

[Peace Patriot]

23. I've been thinking a lot about Obama's 'Manifest Destiny' rhetoric on South America

and his positively Bushite statements about Chavez, and I think we have to recognize just how bad things are here--really, really, REALLY bad; fascist junta bad--and try to evaluate Obama in that context. The ruling junta (the global corporate predators behind Bush-Cheney) has several ways that they can destroy Obama: 1) outright assassination (re Paul Wellstone, JFK, RFK, M L King)--if they can cover up past assassinations, 9/11 and the anthrax attack, they can cover up anything; 2) character assassination in the corporate 'news' monopolies (much like they've done to Chavez, and to innumerable leftists in this country)--they don't have to have anything real upon which to base character assassination (witness the Howard Dean doctored "scream" tape)--they can just make shit up; and, finally, 3) --the ultimate destroyer--'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY vote counting, with the code owned and controlled (as with the media) by a handful of far rightwing billionaire CEOs and financiers.

1) They can just fucking blow his head off--and then we would have another "conspiracy theory" that never gets solved.

2) They can invent character assassination, out of whole cloth, or use their vast spying/black ops capabilities to discover some weakness or to plant something on him.

3) Diebold & brethren can easily--EASILY!--reverse an Obama win.

A lot of people--me included, you included--tend to fall into a pattern of thinking that these are normal times. We judge politicians as if they were free to say or do the right thing. But these are NOT normal times. We have suffered a FASCIST COUP. The Dark Lords have taken over our country. Nothing is the same as it was. EVERY statement and action by our political leaders occurs with an eye (their eye) on the assassins (outright assassins, character assassins, election thieves). Do you think, if these were normal times, Dick Cheney would still be in office? He is a fucking, unmitigated, provable TRAITOR to this country--besides being a dirty rotten, massive thief. Do you think, if these were normal times, George Bush would have been elected in 2000, or re-elected in 2004? No way! That idiot? The 2000 election involved a bought-and-paid-for Supreme Court. The 2004 election was just plain stolen by Diebold (run by a fucking Bush-Cheney campaign chair!) and its brother corp ES&S (whose far rightwing connections would make your hair stand on end).

Some of this we know for sure, if we think about it. Some of this we must infer. For instance, in the 2006 Congressional elections, the people voted to end the Iraq War. And what does Congress do? It ESCALATES the war, and lards Bush-Cheney with billions more of our tax dollars to keep killing Iraqis until they sign the oil contracts--and Congress ends up with an approval rating worse than Bush's! (Unbelievable!) The inference is: something is not right in our election system. And you don't have to look far to know what it is. Besides the money factor, and the media factor, far rightwing CEOs and financiers OWN AND CONTROL the SECRET code by which all of our votes are tabulated, and furthermore there are virtually no audit/recount controls in these new (circa '02-'04) electronic voting systems. They can (s)elect whomever they goddamn please, and the public has NO RIGHT to review the code that is tabulating the votes! Think about it. Our very voting system has been PRIVATIZED!

These are NOT normal times.

How does Obama fit into this picture? He is a grass roots kind of guy--came from relative poverty, didn't go the corporate route, worked in 'the projects,' tried to help the poor, got recognized and promoted by the Chicago Democratic political machine, got elected Senator, is very, very intelligent, and politically smart and innovative, and, jumped into the presidential race. And there he whomped the frontrunner--the Corporate Rulers' pro-war, 'free trade' choice, Hillary Clinton (whose chief campaign consultant was a paid agent of the Colombian government, for godssakes). How did he whomp her? By concentrating on the caucus states which ARE NOT COUNTED BY DIEBOLD & BRETHREN! That's how he got his edge. Then he was vetted by the Corporate Rulers--who made their own decision about him, for their own unfathomable reasons--and permitted him to win in totally unverifiable voting systems like South Carolina. The contest between Clinton and Obama either amused the Corporate Rulers (seeing a woman and a black duke it out, and bloody each other), or they have "plans" for Obama, for instance, they are going to permit him to become president, then they are going to crash this economy, good and properly, and blame that, and every other Bush-Cheney-created ill, on him, and bring in Hitler II in 2012. Clinton may be too well-connected for them to do this to her. As I said, unfathomable. I don't know what the Corporate Rulers intend. They may intend to simply steal it for McBush and the narrative will be because Obama is black. (There is growing evidence for this scenario, including the corporate opinion polls, which say it's close, as prep for the theft. I don't believe for a minute that it is "close," with SEVENTY PERCENT of the American people opposed to the Iraq War and starving for change.)

So, with this assessment in mind--that we have been royally fucked by a fascist junta--review what Obama has said, and especially, who he has said it to. In the case of Latin America, he chose to speak to--and lay his major policy out to--the most fascist and criminal anti-Castro lunatic fringe in Miami, Florida. He did not give this major policy speech about Latin America to the huge Latino population in Los Angeles, or anywhere in progressive California (half of the state is Latino!). He did not go to a border town in Texas, and say, "Tear down the wall!" He did not even speak to the rich, entrenched, Spanish dragons in New Mexico, in a Richardson venue. He went to the venue of the assassins of JFK, of the bombers of Cuban airlines, of the Bautista mafia, and there, what he said, given the venue, was actually rather mild: It was a reprise of the old 'Manifest Destiny' doctrine, that Latin Americans really can't decide things for themselves, they need "U.S. leadership," and, to that end, he is going to flood the place with Peace Corps volunteers, and billions of (non-existent) tax dollars in aid, and--lamentably-- continue the corrupt, failed, murderous "war on drugs" (military/police state boondoggle), but the capper was that he intends to sit down with Castro (or his brother) and find a diplomatic solution to what is entirely a U.S. created problem--U.S. corporate and Miami mafia hatred of the Cuban revolution.

He also took a swipe at Hugo Chavez--called him a "demagogue," as I recall. I noticed that he didn't use Donald Rumsfeld's word ("tyrant"), nor the corporate 'news' monopoly word ("dictator"), but he may have, there or elsewhere, called Chavez "authoritarian." (--none of which is true--Chavez is neither a "demagogue" nor a "tyrant" nor a "dictator," and he has furthermore been elected and re-elected in an election system that puts our own to shame, for its transparency, so, if Chavez is a "dictator," so are 60+% of the people of Venezuela.)

So--reading the entrails here--he speaks to one of the assassin groups--people who would applaud and celebrate the guy who put a bullet through his head--and says, 'I'm gonna talk to Cuba,' and doesn't say (stops short of saying) that Chavez is a "dictator." And he's going to solve South American problems with Peace Corps volunteers and lots of aid.

Here's my analysis: He doesn't want to get whacked.

If you evaluate his policy statements in this way--who has the power to whack him, destroy him in the media, or Diebold the election results--you begin to develop a certain compassion for Obama, even when he says things that make you very angry. He is a pretty good guy, who played his cards right, and got nominated. Now he has to take the Ring to the Dark Tower through a vile and fetid landscape of endless Orcs.

How do his policy statements stack up against what he really intends. I do not know. In this vile and fetid landscape, it is impossible to tell. All we know is that the other contestant for king of the hill is already a troll in the Dark Tower.

I am ambivalent about judging our political leaders as if these were normal times--that is, holding them to high progressive/leftist standards--or...giving them the benefit of the doubt, shutting the fuck up, and helping to get somebody at least half decent into what was once our White House.

I've noticed that we are not alone in this debate. There are some fairly blistering critcisms of several South American leftist leaders which sound just like this: Should we hold them to uncompromising standards, or shut up and be grateful for half-decent leadership? They see--like we see--that the alternative is horrid fascist dictatorship. It is appalling that our choices are so stark, but that is the reality. In South America, at least they have TRANSPARENT vote counting, so it really is a choice. They could conceivably run a purer leftist and get him or her elected. Here, we, at best, don't know who the voters are really voting for, and--at worst--have mountains of evidence that the wrong people are in office. There isn't the remotest chance that a thorough-going leftist could make it through Diebold primaries and a Diebold general election to the White House, or even to Congress. That kind of change has been completely blockaded. We have to settle for a moderate gradualist, or a nazi, as the Corporate Rulers decide.

My basic litmus test for presidential candidates comes down to this: Under whose regime will it be most possible to restore transparent vote counting (which I think can only be done at the state/local level, where ordinary people still have some influence)? If Obama gets (s)elected, it might be harder to convince people that something is very, very, VERY wrong with our voting system. On the other hand, I judge that he would be less nazi-like in enforcing Corporate control of the vote counting, than McBush. I frankly think that our democracy will soon be dead--it is in its death throes now--if they (s)elect McBush. It will mean that things are so far gone, that they don't even fear the reaction of the American people any more. (And they have been very fearful of it up til now--that's why they bother to propagandize us so much, and why they installed Diebold & co.) So I favor--and support, and give money to--Obama.

There is one other possibility--that the America people will overwhelm the election theft machines, with a massive turnout, and put Obama in the White House over the heads of the Corporate Rulers. I do think this can happen--but Obama's temperizing on so many vital issues makes it less possible to generate such an enthusiastic turnout. And the Democratic Congress is also a real drag on peoples' enthusiasm (the likelihood that they will vote). But the election theft system is a complex affair, and does have to be pre-programmed, and they might, for instance, miscalculate the numbers. Also, people are much savvier about this system now (public vigilance is a deterrent). The Corporate Rulers need these machines--this election theft capability--and they might judge that one term of a "win/win" progressive won't cut into their looting or their Forever War that seriously, and they can easily make things happen to confine him to one term. If they let him win (but, say, shave his mandate, and give him a difficult 'Blue Dog' Congress), they might do so to prevent a reaction against the machines, and preserve that capability for future uses.

In sum, the bigger the turnout, the harder it is for them to reverse it. So I'm all for maximum activism on GOTV and support for Obama. Neither I nor anyone else knows what will happen, and all these prognosticators on the left or on the right are full of shit when they don't take 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting into consideration in their political prognostications. The 'TRADE SECRET' vote counters are "the Deciders," not what any politician says or seems to say. What they say is just how they get vetted (thumbs up? thumbs down? middle finger? so-so?) by the Corporate Rulers.

One other thing: I do think there is a war going on within our political/corporate establishment. Some think that torturing prisoners, for instance, has gone too far--and it is seriously crimping corporate profit opportunities abroad. So also nuking Iran. I think Bush-Cheney has been curtailed in some respects. This might be a good omen for Obama--that a period of consolidation (of corporate gains) is in order, with some little items of relief for the American people. There are plenty of playgrounds for the war profiteers (Russia-Georgia just opened one up), Afghanistan, of course (Obama intends to move the Forever War there), and I just hope and pray that South America is not one of them--but the Bushite reconstitution of the 4th Fleet off Venezuela's coast (where the oil is, in Venezuela's state of Zulia) has me very worried. (There is a fascist civil war/separatist scheme afoot in Zulia.)

[Bob Dobbs]

25. And DU'ers are agast that we would have the temerity to protest in Denver.

The corporatist overlords need to understand we see through the "two party" charade to the real power elite enemies of The People who would continue to control the sheeple.

[judasdisney]

35. Very serious thoughts, and I agree with everything you said ... BUT

Indeed, I agree with everything you wrote, and actually, beyond what you wrote.

"We are living in fascist times/have undergone a fascist coup" is, I believe, worse than you have written.

My opinion is that the coup is finished, and only the finishing touches of a "organic narrative of a Democratic President's irresponsibility requiring the military to step-in and take over" remain for us.

In other words, the Underground Reich requires a Democratic President to be a weak patsy and play the role of a doomed irresponsible authoritarian who will "force the Pentagon to act" and "take over."

Obama's not that patsy. Hillary is. The Neocons wanted Hillary. Obama can still be discredited and contained, however -- because the CIA has been purged and stacked, the NSA is under full Neocon control even after Obama is President, Blackwater has built an EXACT REPLICA of Langley. There is now a privatized, shadow, parapolitical "intelligence network" and it will be used against the fucking retard Democrats.

Leaving the final question:

What can Obama do? Besides have an artificially-induced cardiac arrest that will be blamed on "smoking cigarettes"?

Hope is not a strategy.

Do you really think the "at-least-there-is-a-chance-with-Obama" is really a good strategy?

What's the backup plan?

On top of that, leaving out the parapolitics that makes weak and foolish "mainstream Democrats" whine, there are two political dynastic families that want Obama "neutralized": the Bushes and the Clintons.

Hillary will be President in 2012, and there will be a military coup by 2015, but it has been over since 12/12/00. And you have Al Gore to thank for his spinelessness.

[Peace Patriot]

39. "...it has been over since 12/12/00..." Nope, I don't agree with that.

I think American Revolution II has just begun. Cup half full, or half empty argument, I guess.

A fascist coup has occurred. The American people are only just awakening to it. Very slow to awaken, because of the relentless propaganda, and relatively good times (compared, say, to Latin America). But it is happening, believe me.

I don't think the American people can be controlled by the military, and I don't think they will try it--and I don't think the military will agree to it. They can't even keep control of Iraq, with most of the U.S. military in Iraq and in the region. They've lost control of Afghanistan. And the military itself balked at attacking Iran. Iran is too well defended. So how is the U.S. military going to control the U.S. of A.? It is unfeasible. They are already deeply into stoploss, for one thing. They don't have enough troops to do what they're doing. How can they spare enough to control this huge country of people of very diverse cultures, all of whom have our democracy in living memory? And what will those troops think and do, anyway? A lot of them are already angry at their predicament.

Are there some really bad dudes entrenched in the NSA and other dangerous agencies, and within the military? Oh, yes. But they'll have to be subtler than a military coup.

I just don't think that the Corporate Rulers are that interested in a nazi state. It is a very troublesome thing--martial law. Costly, difficult, always teetering with threatened revolt. I may be wrong. A strong argument could be made for it, with things like the Patriot Act, and other evidence. But I can also make a strong case for at least Bush/Cheney (not sure about powers behind the throne) being a fairly simple, straightforward looting expedition, with a lot of the laws they've passed, or signed in secret, intended as ass-covering (fear of indictment), and actually no designs of empire (NeoCons driven by dreams of empire, but Corporations just into thievery, including all kinds of "Homeland Security" and military profiteering). How can I say this (no intention of empire)? Because you can't have an empire with a broken manufacturing base, and millions of really pissed off, jobless, homeless people, unable to feed their children. You might create conditions for the rise of a nazi state, eventually. By a nazi state, I am thinking of Hitler's model. And consider what Hitler did: He took a completely broken country and turned it into a powerful industrial war machine. Is that what's happening here? No. They've done the opposite. They've taken a prosperous, well-run country and turned it into basket case, with a $10 trillion fucking deficit, all systems breaking down (infrastructure, emergency services, etc.), and out-of-control looting of every kind.

It doesn't make sense--unless you see it as a lootingfest. Also, Hitler was very popular. These guys' approval is in the toilet, and has been for a long time. People hate them. They see no benefit. They hate their goddamned war. They are deeply worried. These are just NOT conditions for creation of an American empire. The empire is PAST. It is being looted and destroyed. Why would they bother to install a military dictatorship, and martial law, and all kinds of nazi measures--with all the difficulties that a nazi boots operation would entail--to control a huge, and basically uncontrollable country, that has already been looted? To what purpose?

Do you see nazi youth groups goosestepping through the streets? On what basis will they create a nazi state? They have to have enthusiasm in some significant portion of the population, and there is no evidence of that. The corporate media are still cheerleading but nobody else is. People are fed up. They're having trouble recruiting for the military, as it is. They have an 18% approval rating. They don't have the basis of support for a nazi state. If they try it, it will fall apart very fast. I don't look forward to the civil chaos that might ensue, but I'm sure they could not sustain it. It would be temporary.

Could happen eventually, if things get really bad. Not in the near future, is my guess. And that means we still have time--time for the revolt to gather steam, time to get certain critical things done--like restoring PUBLIC vote counting--time to do the social movement organizing that we've seen in South America (one of the foundations of leftists' electoral victories).

I tend to think that what's going to happen over the next decade or so will be less dramatic, subtler, harder to identify and fight, than an outright nazi state. It might be harder to understand what's going on, and to gin up the adrenalin needed to restore our democracy. I think we're in for a long, hard, slogging struggle, which we will win in the end. I think the Bushites are actually weak, and the Corporations that are behind them have no captivating ideas (like a 'master race' or national pride), no constituency, no organizing principle (they are like pirates and brigands), and they also have other fields to plunder (China, India, Southeast Asia).

I hesitate to bring up the Hitler model, because I think our situation is much more complex. We are oppressed by powers that are already global in their reach. They have scads of money, and control of our government, but no loyalty from anyone, and no ideas except 'give us rich fuckers more of your money.' I mean, who gives a fuck about Exxon Mobil or Halliburton or Chase Bank or MacDonald's? They have insinuated themselves into our patriotic symbolism, but they are empty and meaningless. Our deepest feelings are not with them. And they can loot us and abuse us--until we stop them--but they can never inspire us the way our democracy inspires us, or the way, say, an FDR would inspire us.

I don't mean to downplay the dangers that we face. They are real enough. But whatever we have to face, we can only endure and keep struggling for what we believe in, even amidst appalling horrors. There are many, many brave people among us, and many good people, and many smart people. Do not underestimate the American people.

As for strategy--you ask, what's the backup plan?--I have only one thing to say:

Throw Diebold, ES&S and all the election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor'! This most recent atrocity must be peeled back, as a start. And it can still be done.

Obama is not likely going to purge the malefactors from our government, and he may pay dearly for that. But we have to endure. We cannot depend on our leaders.

[bonito]

37. What you said n/t

[fascisthunter]

19. You are Correct... It is Up to Us to Help Mold Foreign Policy

and whatever may be the case, we need to try.

[NashVegas]

21. In His Own Bizarre Way, Bush Helped Create That Map

By having such an incompetent admin. Sometimes, I really do wonder ...

[Preening Fop]

6. South America's further distancing itself from the Blood Lusting imperial us is for the best.....

And leave the u.s. citizens to wallow in their narcissism.

[truedelphi]

7. Those lousy lousy South American Commies!

How dare they abandopn "free-market" policies and nationalize oil.

How dare Bolivia end Bechtel's privatization their water.

Why can't the people of the Southern hemisphere bow in worship to the Corporate Gods of Oil and Water. Do they want to have Milton Friedman spinning in his grave??

[fasttense]

8. We can only hope.

That Milton, Pinochet loving, Friedman is spinning in his grave. Nice to see South America come beck from the brink of chaos caused by those right wing idiots' interference. Now if the US would only take a hint from their Southern brothers and sisters.

[Joe Chi Minh]

29. Friedman will probably be too busy stoking the fires and burning. Weird to think

he got a Nobel prize. Seems Mr Dynamite is still raising Cain from the grave with his Nobel Committee. Can a bad tree bear good fruit?

[lib2DaBone]

38. How dare they....

Not trust George Bush, the CIA and the Oil Companies. Why, they only have the best interests of everyone involved, right Mr. Sakaasvilli?

[Judi Lynn]

11. Apparently the Reuters writer and the AP reporter, Pedro Servin attended the same event,

but you'll see something of a small difference in the two stories! Most likely Pedro Servin hasn't learned the ropes, yet, and learned to pile on the venom in order to please his corporate masters:

New Paraguayan President Meets With Poor
By PEDRO SERVIN | Associated Press
August 17, 2008

SAN PEDRO, Paraguay — - Paraguay's new leftist president returned Saturday to the province where he spent 11 years as bishop, and pledged to raise living standards by eradicating poverty and corruption in this South American nation.

Accompanied by Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez, President Fernando Lugo spoke to about 1,000 peasants gathered in a plaza in San Pedro, the biggest municipality in a neglected province where most eke out a living while rich soy farmers profit from high international commodity prices.

"This is where I learned to love the peasant, the indigenous people, and to admire their efforts to excel despite adverse conditions," Lugo said after arriving in the town of 29,000 several hundred miles north of the capital of Asuncion.

Lugo's inauguration a day earlier was a historic day for Paraguay — marking the end of a 61-year stranglehold on the presidency by the Colorado Party, which supported the brutal 1954-1989 dictatorship of Gen. Alfredo Stroessner.

Chavez told the crowd that oil-rich Venezuela will finance a fertilizer plant in San Pedro and send the country "all the oil Paraguay needs" to ensure that periodic diesel fuel shortages don't get worse.

More:
http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-paraguay0817.artaug17,0,2025048.story

Odd, isn't it?

[bemildred]

16. LOL. Yeah, way to much historical context, not near enough name-calling.

Who can forget Stroessner, what a comedian.

[dipsydoodle]

36. You may also have noticed

that the report is on UK Reuters. :)

[Judi Lynn]

12. Basking in the glory of corporate Hugo hate, the L.A. Times makes a mighty leap onto the bandwagon

and does itself proud with a hissing stink bomb of its own:

Hugo Chavez basks in Paraguay President Fernando Lugo's glory

The Venezuelan travels with the new president to spread their leftist message in the countryside.
By Patrick J. McDonnell, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 17, 2008

SAN PEDRO, PARAGUAY -- On his first full day in office, President Fernando Lugo traveled Saturday to this agricultural zone where he first won acclaim as a Roman Catholic bishop defending the landless poor against large landowners.

Lugo told an ecstatic crowd of his goal to improve living conditions in the region, one of the poorest and most backward parts of one of the least developed countries in South America. Many San Pedro residents emigrate to seek better lives in places such as Argentina, Europe and the United States.

"The time of Paraguay has arrived," Lugo said, echoing the egalitarian themes that helped him topple a ruling party entrenched for six decades, including 35 years of military dictatorship. "From now on, all Paraguayans will be treated the same, without distinction."

Sharing the stage was a euphoric Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, clearly viewing the newly installed Paraguayan chief of state as his newest ally in the Caracas versus Washington political battle that has split Latin America.

~snip~
Lugo has praised Chavez, but has repeatedly said Paraguay must find its own way. He has spoken in favor of a good relationship with the United States, while adding that the days of Washington dominating the region's politics are over. A generation ago the region was largely ruled by U.S.-backed military dictatorships.

"I don't think the United States has any choice but to accept these changes," Lugo told The Times in an interview before his election.

Diplomats will surely be watching the evolving relationship between Lugo and Chavez. U.S. officials do not want Lugo to become as closely aligned to Chavez as Bolivian President Evo Morales or Ecuador's Rafael Correa.

More:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-leftists17-2008aug17,0,4693478.story?track=rss

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"U.S. officials do not want Lugo to become as closely aligned to Chavez as Bolivian President Evo Morales or Ecuador's Rafael Correa."

In the words of _{George W. Bush,} "who cares what you think?" Why would anyone give a flying #### if _Bush genocidal sociopaths don't want Lugo go be aligned with the rest of South America or not? Only Republicans, isolated pockets of fascists scattered around various countries, the Colombian fascist Uribe and his orcs and dark riders can't accept it. Colombian death squads who kill entire villages after torturing them with chainsaws don't like it.



The REST of South America seems just fine with this good man's election.


We need an update on this map, published in 2006. When you see it, color in Paraguay, between Bolivia and Argentina on the east, as leftist, too. Then ponder the credibility of the L. A. Times claim in the article posted above:

"......the Caracas versus Washington political battle that has split Latin America."

[Judi Lynn]

17. Sorry, I forgot to explain what the photo is of the "soldiers." They are members of an AUC death

squad controlled by a true monster, Carlos Mario Jiménez Naranjo, also known as "Macaco."



http://colombiaherald.wordpress.com/2007/06/12/paramilitary-leaders-self-interview-causes-outrage/

Colombia extradites warlord to US to face charges
Posted 5/7/2008 5:34

~snip~
But Jimenez was among the least cooperative of some 50 warlords, and in August he became the first to be stripped of peace deal benefits that include protection from extradition. Now, he is the first to be extradited.

In February, the U.S. Treasury Department listed him as a specially-designated narcotics trafficker, freezing his assets in the U.S. Washington also accuses him of money laundering and financing terrorist groups.

Many victims of the private militias -- which killed thousands of people and stole millions of acres of land -- opposed Jimenez's extradition, arguing that sending him overseas would hurt efforts to seek compensation for his victims and prosecute his partners in crime.

Attorney Alirio Uribe of the National Victims' Movement said Jimenez's absence means the bodies of many victims will never be found.

But Judge Angelino Lizcano, speaking for the seven-judge panel Tuesday, said prosecutors can still travel to the United States seeking information to help victims.

In a statement Wednesday, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Washington and Colombia "share the concerns of the victims of paramilitary crimes for discovering the truth and seeking justice and reparations."

Legal instruments exist in the United States to ensure that extradited Colombians continue to provide information to prosecutors in their homeland and that civil remedies could also be pursued, McCormack said.

Before his surrender, Jimenez was accused of ordering massacres and shipping tons of cocaine to the United States. Prosecutors say that while in jail, he became involved in a new gang war in northern Colombia.

Colombia's paramilitaries were organized and funded by wealthy landowners and drug traffickers in an effort to wrest control of the countryside from leftist insurgents.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2008-05-07-3644563933_x.htm

[Judi Lynn]

13. McClatchy: Venezuela's Chavez seeks to pull Paraguay's new leader into his orbit

Venezuela's Chavez seeks to pull Paraguay's new leader into his orbit
Tyler Bridges
August 16, 2008 4:41 PM
McClatchy Newspapers
(MCT)

SAN PEDRO, Paraguay - This dusty farm town, where Fernando Lugo ministered to the poor as its activist, left-leaning bishop, welcomed him back Saturday as Paraguay's unlikely president with hugs, cheers and exhortations that he not fail them. But for the second day in a row, it was Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez who stole the show, as part of a determined effort by Chavez to tug Lugo into his political camp.

Lugo acknowledged Chavez's aim on Friday, telling reporters in the capital of Asuncion just after his inauguration that people have warned him not to get too close to Chavez and Bolivia's Evo Morales, who is Chavez's close socialist ally.Lugo, 57, said he would chart his own path. ''I'm not afraid of anybody,'' Lugo said, adding that he planned to seek help and ideas from a wide range of countries.

Lugo has also said in recent days that he expects to have good relations with the United States, a statement seconded by U.S. officials.

Lugo's ascension to power is historic. No former priest has been elected president of a Latin American country in living memory, and Lugo breaks the 61-year stranglehold on power in Paraguay by the Colorado Party-the longest by any current political party in the world.

When Lugo shouted ''Yes!'' on Friday morning that he would uphold the oath of office, it marked the first peaceful transfer of power from one political party to another in Paraguay's 197-year history.

A poll published Friday by the ABC Color newspaper showed that an astounding 93 percent of Paraguayans approve of Lugo, up from only 41 percent in April that elected him as president, as the country is convinced that he will change the practices of the discredited Colorados.

Against that backdrop, on Friday and Saturday, Chavez seemed determined to gain Lugo as a new adherent in what he calls ''socialism of the 21st century.''

Chavez drew reporters and crowds wherever he went, oozing charisma at every stop as he reprised the role previously played by Cuba's Fidel Castro at gatherings of Latin American leaders, until a stomach disorder sidelined Castro two years ago.

Chavez hugged children, embraced everyone he met as if he or she was his long-lost friend and identified Lugo's unexpected victory with changes in the continent that he hopes will bring South America together under his leadership. Chavez sees himself as fulfilling the broken dream of Simon Bolivar, the 19th century Venezuelan who fought to free South America from colonial Spain and who is Chavez's inspiration.

More:
http://www.newspress.com/Top/Article/article.jsp?Section=WORLD&ID=565351686518210787

[mod mom]

15. Wonder how this will effect the bush and moonie compounds. Maybe the Paraquayians

can secure their aquafer and water rights away from them (bu$h & rev moon).

[fascisthunter]

18. You Have no Idea how This Makes Me Smile

I hope the best for South America, and hope one day we all can be allies. Hopefully, those on the right will understand and grow to accept what is being done for the people. It will make them all stronger in the end.

[bemildred]

20. What I like is none of them seem to want to go to war with each other.

They want to cooperate for the common good. What a refreshing, innovative point of view.

[fascisthunter]

22. Imagine that.... what a Prosperous and Peaceful Solution

I seriously think we are in the last throes of the neo-con, right wing ideology. It's not over, but I do see their way of thinking becoming something of an old, out-dated method of resolving issues. We are at a major turning point, but as we "turn" there will lot's of turbulence (death, war, famine, etc.). Those on the right know change is coming, and it's there last chance to garner as much power and wealth before this change happens.

Am I being optimistic? Yes and no.... the reason I believe this will happen, is because the other alternative, right wing, is suicidal.

[Peace Patriot]

24. I don't know. It took over a 1,000 years to start overturning the transnational cabal that

ran (controlled, dictated to) Europe from circa 500 AD to 1600 AD--that is, the Roman Catholic Church, which the Global Corporate Predators who rule us now have a haunting resemblance to. And even after Henry VIII broke away, it took another 300-400 years to firmly establish the primacy of secular rule, the free speech and freedom of conscience of the individual, and everything else that distinguishes us from the Middle Ages (science, reason, innocent until proven guilty, not having to quarter the king's troops).

Like the Medieval Catholic Church, our Global Corporate Predators answer to no government or law--they pick the kings, they write the laws. Obeisance to their doctrines (predatory capitalism = democracy, piratical "free trade" = progress, happiness can be bought, putting lots of poor people in jail for minor drug use/trade is a good idea, etc.) is required of politicians who aspire to become "made" men or women in this corporate oligarchy, and, of course, it is required of any aspiring employees within corporations. The oligarchy's corporate entities live forever, accumulating vast quantities of money, land and power, just as the transnational Catholic Church gobbled up land, resources and power everywhere they set foot. The corporates also put a cage around the human mind, much like the Catholic Church did (offering the only gate to Heaven), forbidding, exterminating thoughts of socialism, cooperation, peace, generosity, equality, and even democracy (real democracy) and the rule of law (true law), and they enforce these cages on the human mind with a monopoly of all news media, the way the Church monopolized literacy, education, libraries, books and all communications (even--or especially--scientific communications, as Galileo learned). (Consider the fate of global warming science over the last two decades!)

The parallels go on and on--if you want to scare yourself. One thousand years and more to the Enlightenment!

But I'm with you. Something's gotta give. The American people are not so cut off from their memories of democracy, a prosperous middle class and upward mobility for the poor, as were those miserable serfs and slaves in Medieval Europe (for whom the actually fairly enlightened Roman Empire was just so much rubble down the road, to be quarried for stones). (The Roman Empire had universal education and literacy, for instance, and, at the height of their glory, the Alexandria Library--a totally open-minded university and repository of all scientific, literary and religious documents). WE have the internet--our Alexandria Library--and the rebellion of the people against unjust war in the 1960s, and the civil rights movement, and strong labor unions, in living memory. We are not so easy to oppress, and we are impossible to nazify. During the darkest hours of the Bush junta, I asked people--people who were understandably frightened: Where are the nazi youth parading in the streets, seig heilng to Bush? Where are the millions of adoring, lockstep worshipers at Bush's speeches? They have to hide him! They can't put him in front of a unvetted crowd! Cuz Americans are Americans, you know what I mean? Somebody would fart. Somebody would get on camera giving him the finger. Somebody would sneak in a big sign and unroll it, calling Bush a dickhead, and at least some of the people in an unvetted crowd would applaud--and maybe lots of them.

The Bush junta is something that has been imposed upon us. It is artificial and a poor fit. Corporate Rule, on the other hand, is the underlying reality. It is so pervasive, and in such control of our lives (much like the Medieval Church), we hardly see it. It is an unusual thought, among us, that we might rebel against these fuckers (Exxon Mobil, Halliburton, Bechtel, Blackwater, Diebold, ES&S, et al), re-assert our sovereignty as a people, and cast them out (as they are doing--with amazing peacefulness--in South America). (Transparent vote counting is the key--believe me.)

And it is they who have imposed this ugly thing upon us--the Bush junta. Their purpose: one big fat looting expedition. Secondary (but very important) purpose: to break the back of the American people as a progressive force in the world.

The Corporate Rulers have to be somewhat careful with us, nevertheless. We are a big country, of multiple cultures, with strong democratic traditions, including the original armed rebellion and its fiery rhetoric about "all men" being "created equal." We are probably impossible to control by force. But we are vulnerable to control by subtle means--non-stop propaganda (making us feel hopeless), 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting (also aimed at hopelessness)--and with the use of massive secrecy and exclusion of the public, even as to the counting of our votes (we don't know what the fuck is going on--so it's harder to organize against oppressive government actions).

Maybe they'll just lose interest in us--after we are totally looted and on our knees--and go off to rob and plunder more lucrative venues--China, India, Southeast Asia. A lot of corpos have already jumped. They've had it with high wages and benefits and the payment of taxes in the U.S.A. They've done all they can to destroy those progressive policies, but it's not enough. They want slave labor and ZERO responsibility for the common weal. Their hunger for more money and power is insatiable.

That might free us to restore democracy here--in a looted country. (And, when you think about it, that's kind of what's happening in South America, except that they still have lots of oil, trees and other resources.) OR, we might use the relief of a half decent regime in the White House (if the Corporate Rulers decide to give us that relief) to begin working, slowly, methodically, patiently--like the South Americans have done--to rebuild our democratic institutions, and work through some "centrist" regimes toward a real leftist (majorityist) regime and a second "New Deal" or something comparable.

We have never been faced with a fascist coup before. The South Americans, they know what this is all about. That is why they have gotten so smart, and are now, for instance, organizing a South American "Common Market." The new leftist leaders want to create new, cooperative, regional, institutional strength, as a bulwark against U.S. dictation (and imposition of dictators). But we are impatient. We are shocked. We feel alternately powerless and furious at what these fuckwad Corporate Rulers and their pawns in government have done to us. We think we can overturn it overnight. We cannot. We're going to be living with bad policy for a long time--until we get our election system back into the PUBLIC venue and start electing real representatives of the people--the new FDR's.

I agree that change is in the air, but it's going to difficult--a long term struggle--and it is not going to happen as a result of this election. If we can get Obama elected against the will of the Corporate Rulers (who may be divided on this question) or, if they (s)elect Obama for their own reasons (say, as the dumping ground for their induced Great Depression II--to turn him into Herbert Hoover), we will have a chance to accelerate change and reform, and I think we should go for election reform first, and be wary of disruptive protests and fractiousness (how Hitler came to power). We want to avoid the center-left getting torn to pieces, because change is not fast enough. As the South Americans know, change will come, if you just keep plugging away at civic institutions and organizing. It took them two decades.

I'll go with that--two decades, not a thousand years. Two decades, and we will have the multi-billionaire CEO's of a number of corporations in jail, and their corporations dismantled, and their assets seized for the common good. 2028. Then we will join Latin America's thriving "Common Market."

[Demeter]

27. I Believe Obama Can Listen and Learn and Change

and I believe he will. Other than that, there is no hope, no chance for change without bloody revolution.

[Vidar]

30. K&R.

[helderheid]

31. Isn't Paraguay the country with the huge water table and where * bought a ton of land?

[Duck Soup]

33. Hugo is running circles around Bush and McCain

Bush and McCain are up to their eyeballs in oil. It has gotten into their brains.

Bush and McCain would have you believe that we must drill to get control over the energy crisis facing this country. To the contrary, the facts demonstrate that the technology for America to achieve energy independence from the Middle East exists and is being used by hundreds of millions of people today. As I will show, if we Americans were using this technology today, we currently would be saving more than twice the amount of oil we import from the Middle East.

It is up to each of us to become more conversant with the facts around oil so we can rebut the false claims of Republican politicians. It is not enough to rely on one "guru" or another as a source of information, whether it be the Sierra Club, or for that matter Anne Korins or T. Boone Pickens.

Whether it be hybrids or wind power or whatever solution they offer, these gurus will frame the facts to point you towards their solution. I will show you the basic facts. You can draw your own conclusions.

Neither I nor any guru can predict how we can reduce our dependence on oil. I just know we are an industrious people. If we elect a leader who guides Americans to set our minds to the task, if we set our goals high, or at least not low, one way or another, America can do it.

Much more:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/17/142624/520/168/569362

[L0oniX]

34. Gee too bad our crime syndicate government isn't more friendly toward ...

Chavez. Maybe we'd get some oil from him if were nice to him and that could bring down the price of fuel. Oh no it can't be that simple can it? Well I am sure it would help our fuel problem but not solve it of course. You gather more flies with honey and it's really fucked up that we can't be friends with Chavez because of the asscarrot nut bag religious asscarrots and the stupid asshole we have for a president and the predator capitalists who attack anything and anyone who is socialist.