Damn. Now Jon Stewart is ragging on Cindi

[CatWoman]

*sigh*

[LittleClarkie]

1. How?

What's he saying?

[K-W]

2. He really slammed Chavez

Edited post to more accurately reflect my thoughts.

[CatWoman]

6. I don't like the way he depicted her as King Kong

[K-W]

8. It seemed a harmless goof to me. EOM

[tatertop]

65. No, it was not harmless at all.

He knows better. It was very very destructive.
Maybe stewart should live in a state where Chavez
is providing life giving assistance.
What a bastard.

[K-W]

72. Destructive? How so? EOM

[personman]

137. One thing we do not need right now...

is prominent left-wingers with left-wing audiences helping republicans sling mud at a decent left-wing leader. He is adding to the noise around someone who already has far too much misinformation being spread about him. He is helping to ensure the American public writes Chavez off as a wacko and ignores him, just as the elites want us to. Chavez is only really a danger to the elites here if Americans start to pay attention to him and realize how badly they are being screwed.

The fact you even have to ask forces me to suggest you spend more time reading about Venezuela then posting about it.

Hell, you could have learned that from any one of the hundreds of Chavez/Venezuela threads that have been posted here in the last so many months.

[Zhade]

177. Believe me, K-W knows what's what.

He's not fooled by the anti-Chavez lies, as far as I recall.

But I fully agree, we don't need a decent guy like Stewart shoring up rightwing lies.

[Brundle_Fly]

216. The most important thing

is he brought to attention of the eyes of millions of disinterested youth, that Cindy was arrested for wearing a tee-shirt.

He isn't on the democratic side, he can say and do whatever he wants, I don't think you see John Stewart touting republicans every day, thus should you see him touting democrats. His logic is they all suck, and good for him. Its nice to have an unbiased news source, even if it is a fake one.

[mattclearing]

260. It's a joke, and Cindy surely knew she would be criticized for

her stint with Chavez, who is clearly an enemy of the American state.

[HEyHEY]

313. Oh, get over it

You know, it's fucking sad when you think a Comedian is some kind of a political Jesus, and that you can get so pissed when he says something you disagree with. Stewart is not an activist, or a politician... he makes JOKES for a living...
holy fuck.

[digno dave]

351. BINGO...should we all think alike...that's rediculous. He's a COMEDIAN!!!

[tatertop]

28. I agree. Someone should talk to that boy.

[The Backlash Cometh]

239. King Kong isn't depicted as an antagonist in the movie.

If anything, Kong is the good guy and it's the tragic, human reaction to Kong that defines society as the bad guy.

[LittleClarkie]

7. What was his issue with Hugo?

May I ask?

[K-W]

11. He hung his head because Sheehan was with Chavez.

And made some jokes about him being a friend of communist dictator castro and about how in venezuala if you speak against Chavez you go to jail.

[qanda]

31. Well, it's obviously the same policy in America

If you speak against the Bush administration.

[RandomKoolzip]

267. Really? I've been speaking against the Bush administration

for about five years now, and I'm free to type this in the comfort of my own apartment.

[thinkingwoman]

269. Sorry zip

no logic allowed in cindy sheehan threads.

No differing opinions either.

Fall in step now. What are you waiting for. :eyes:

[RandomKoolzip]

272. Oh, right. What was I thinking. KILL JOHN STEWART NOW!

PAPER BALLOTS NOW! CATHETERS NOW! FROSTED MINI-WHEATS NOW!!!!

[thinkingwoman]

284. Frosted Mini-Wheats NOW!!!!

NOW you're talking! :evilgrin:

[qanda]

303. I wasn't more clear about my post

I was referring to Cindy being arrested at the SOTU.

[Sparkman]

305. can you declare your disdain in a management job for Boeing,Haliburton

or any of the defense plants?
Can the network news anchors (Dan Rather) declare truth about the Fascist leanings about the military-industrial-congressional march on liberty?
Can you remember how the U.S. military planned to bomb Al Jezerra, the Apr. 2004 (2nd) Downing Street Memo had Blair & Bush planning discussing with Powell, to bomb Al Jezerra for their coverage of Falujah.
Censorship takes many forms here in the good ole U.S.A.
Try being anti-Bush in the military...see how far you get!
Try demonstrating and not have the Gestapo Photograph and Record your words (sedition laws in effect in the good old U.S.A.) against the right to FREE SPEECH. How free does that feel!

[Sparkman]

307. If you go to Cuba, don't come back...oh wait that's legal today. Cigars?

[JVS]

100. Something about being sentenced to 4 years in jail for criticism of...

Chavez in Venezuela's media.

[bobbieinok]

241. is this true?????

[JVS]

277. I don't know

[Atman]

10. Oh, sure he did!

His whole point was that Cindy "squandered our good will." He basically made her out to be a nutcase. It was pretty damning of both Chavez and Cindy.

[K-W]

15. No, I agree.

I think Chavez got far rougher treatment, thats all. They both got smeared there.

I edited the post because I was wrong there.

[tatertop]

22. You know, stewart is a real piece of shit

[ZanZaBar]

38. Geeez

That's a bit harsh, tatertop. This was the first time I didn't agree 100% with Jon, but I still think he's brilliant 99.99999% of the time. You need to chill out.

[tatertop]

56. Not at all.

Americans think Chavez is evil.
When stewart makes a joke of Chavez and Belafonte
stupid Americans believe him.
Fuck that shit.
This country is being flushed into the shit dump.
Chavez and Belafonte are 100 percent correct.
LET US ALL SUPPORT THEM NOW!!!!

[ZanZaBar]

85. Cindi isn't like enough as it is

Although I agree Americans are generally very stupid animals, it doesn't help that Cindi is now going to be called a 'communist sympathizer'. Just one more thing that will bring her down in mainstream American society. And what's with the language? Calm down, dude.

[balzac]

191. Amen Brother!

We have to pull together. There are real leaders in our midst, and they need our support now!

[Ray_Duray]

237. SUPPORT CHAVEZ AND BELAFONTE! YES! YES! YES!

I haven't seen the Stewart comments on Chavez, Belafonte or Sheehan today. Crooks & Liars doesn't have the clips up yet.

That said, if Jon Stewart in any way attacked Chavez, Belafonte or Sheehan with anything more than a bit of a jab, then Stewart deserves to rot in Hell.

I'm sure Mr. Liebowitz suffers from anxiety every day as he faces the fascist advertising representatives of the Establishment offering him an opportunity to work even fewer than 18 minutes out of a 30 minute cable TV slot by selling out to the dominant paradigm. Would Liebowitz sell out the same way the Loren Michaels did in order to have a seven-figure salary as the head of Saturday Night Live for the past two decades beyond the "use by" date? Of course Liebowitz will be tempted to sell us out. Who wouldn't be?

But can we trust him any longer?

The show seems like it is losing its edge, week-by-week. And that only on the weeks when the show is on the air.

Liebowitz is attacking Cindy Sheehan?

That's Cable TV for ya. One foot in the grave, one foot in the Seychelles off-shore-guaranteed-for-life-evergreen-pension fund for selling out.

Ugh!

[latebloomer]

245. Why do you insist on calling him "Liebowitz"? (sic)

[Bridget Burke]

249. Anti-Semitism--from someone now Tombstoned!

That was Jon's original last name--before he got into show business.

I didn't see the show in question, but it sounds as though it was not one of Jon's better moments. When I catch one of the reruns, I may be inspired to send the Daily Show an angry yet informative letter.

But I won't turn against the show for one bad night.

[latebloomer]

300. I know his name is Leibowitz

because his mom, Marian, and mine worked together and were pretty close at one time. But yes, I was calling him out on what sounded like anti-Semitism to me, too.

Glad he's gone.

And, yes, there might be things Jon says that I don't care for,but on the whole the show is excellent!

[CanuckAmok]

326. Your Haiku has too many lines. n/t

[tatertop]

57. Not at all.

Americans think Chavez is evil.
When stewart makes a joke of Chavez and Belafonte
stupid Americans believe him.
Fuck that shit.
This country is being flushed into the shit dump.
Chavez and Belafonte are 100 percent correct.
LET US ALL SUPPORT THEM NOW!!!!

[tatertop]

128. Time to start SUPPORTING Chavez, Belafonte, Sheehan

These are some of the anti Liebermans (along with
Kennedy, Conyers, Kucinich, Moore, and so on)
we need to begin this long long
battle aginst evil.

[balzac]

181. Amen Brother!

You are very right on this. I still love John Stewart, but tonight, I was very dissappointed in him. I hope he doesn't repeat this, or I'll begin to lose my good will toward him.

[Tigress DEM]

219. Someone who likes John Stewart should give him a heads up...

If he's a real reporter, he'll amend what he's said, maybe even do a bit of research on it.

[noamnety]

240. what do you mean if he's a real reporter?

He's not a reporter, he's a comedian.

[Tigress DEM]

266. My mistake. I don't have cable.

What I have heard about the daily show sounded more like news than the news, so I thought he was like Bill Maher or Al Franken in that their funny bits don't play into mis-informing people about DEMs.

And it was late at night for me.

[TInCanCommunications]

362. Support yes. Idolize no.

The cindy worship is out of control.

[K-W]

42. Because Im sure youve never been wrong about anything. EOM

[tatertop]

60. Duh. This country is in trouble

Some Americans watch dumb shit looking for the truth.

[K-W]

63. So if Jon Stewert isnt perfectly informed he is a jerk? EOM

[tatertop]

71. Not a mistake. This was an intentional trashing of a great man.

very sad

[K-W]

75. Your accusations are baseless and silly.

Jon Stewert wasnt intentionally doing anything. He has been misinformed about Chavez because he lives in a society full of misinformation.

[tatertop]

77. wha? are you joking?

[K-W]

83. About what?

What would I be joking about?

Jon told a joke based on bad information, he isnt a cia agent or something.

[personman]

99. This isn't the first time.

Don't you think he's probably heard from Chavez supporters since the last time he was dissing Chavez?

Thinking he was merely mistaken seems a bit naive to me, and coincidental, as there is alot of unjustified Chavez bashing going on.

If it really is based on bad information, then he needs to find the pulse and get his shit together, and he has no one to blame but himself.

I've been a loyal Stewart fan for a pretty long time, and this is really a shame.

[K-W]

104. You are jumping to a rather absurd conclusion.

Don't you think he's probably heard from Chavez supporters since the last time he was dissing Chavez?

I have no idea and neither do you. He is a comedian, not a journalist or academic, it is not his job to be right and he has never claimed to be accurate, in fact he has repeatedly pointed out that much of the facts on thier show are not true. So you cannot possibly assume he has been corrected or that if he had he listened or took it particularly seriously.

Thinking he was merely mistaken seems a bit naive to me, and coincidental, as there is alot of unjustified Chavez bashing going on.

So it is niave to follow parsiomony? It is niave to choose the most likely explenation, that a comedian who is loose with the facts happens to be misinformed on something that most of the population is misinformed about rather than jumping to the conclusion that Jon is an agent of the right?

If it really is based on bad information, then he needs to find the pulse and get his shit together, and he has no one to blame but himself.

No he doesnt. He is a comedian, not an academic or journalist. I hope he does get this straight, and it is irritating that he doesnt have it straight, but I dont expect academic standards from a comedy show.

[personman]

154. This isn't a simple factual innaccuracy...

Jon Stewart: Remember that time I said Hugo Chavez jails dissidents for 4 years?...well I meant to say..."is lifting his countries impoverished through his socialist revolution"...

Please. :eyes:

[LittleClarkie]

159. It looks like he does both, maybe

Or is Human Rights Watch a rightwing site?

http://hrw.org/doc/?t=americas&c=venezu

[personman]

190. I will keep an open mind

but I've seen MANY allegations against Hugo Chavez, some from even fairly reputable sources, turn out to be complete BS. For now I feel he has earned the benefit of the doubt, but I will continue to follow the story. I agree this looks bad. Thanks.

-personman

[LittleClarkie]

198. That's cool. That's all that can be asked. Just not to have him up on a

pedastal because some of his policies might be good.

I will try to keep an open mind as well.

[JohnnyCougar]

227. Most of those people that he has put on trial were coup plotters

What Chavez is doing is instituting a peaceful overthrow of the entire corrupt former kleptocracy that used to be the Venezuelan government. Remember, his right-wing political opposition has started violent protests, attempted coups and used car bombs to try and derail Chavez's reforms. And his right-wing opposition still owns numerous anti-Chavez media outlets that Hugo could shut down if he wanted. Before the anti-slander law, these right-wing outlets would play anti-Chavez propaganda nonstop for days on end, brainwashing the middle class.

If Chavez wants to complete his non-violent overthrow of the old government and turn Venezuela into a successful country once again, he is going to need the help of some of the middle class. But the anti-Chavez faction is extremely corrupt, and will go to any lengths to stop Chavez's reforms...even if it will benefit them and the country as a whole. This includes ridiculous slander tactics that were formerly employed by the right-wing media there.

As for packing the supreme court with his own justices, Chavez is simply filling the court with people who will not start violent coups. The former justices were just as corrupt as the former government. In fact, anything Chavez does to oust elements of the old government, whether fair or unfair, is fine with me. That former government there can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

[jbnow]

209. Not quite 4 years but pretty bad

The president, vice-president, government ministers, state governors and members of the Supreme Court are already protected from disrespect under the law. The new provisions extend this protection to legislators of the National Assembly, members of the National Electoral Council, the attorney general, the public prosecutor, the human rights ombudsman, the treasury inspector, and members of the high military command.

Anyone convicted of offending these authorities could go to prison for up to 20 months. Anyone who gravely offends the president, on the other hand, can incur a penalty of up to 40 months in prison.

Protected from disrespect? Ouch! We'd be in trouble here. bush hates him but I bet he'd love to get this law here (for "disrespecting" his administration and buddies only)

Human Rights Watch would be a bad right-wing site considering what they say about us. Thanks for looking it up, I wondered if it was true but was too lazy to look yet.

As far as Jon...I sometimes don't like his jokes on us but he isn't our monkey either.

[tblue37]

243. In the US, if media promote a military coup against the

government, especially in GWB's America, then they are likely to end up in serious trouble, too. The media in Venezuela promoted the coup that actually took place, and some still agitate for Chavez's overthrow.

[Mabus]

316. Looking down another layer

I'm still learning too. I did a quick search using "Chavez" "journalists" and "jail". The first thing that caught my eye was this WaPo article. I've excerpted a portion concerning the law on censorship imposed by Chavez and one of its targets:

Ten days ago Chavez handed Izarra a still-bigger stick: a new penal code that criminalizes virtually any expression to which the government objects -- not only in public but also in private.

Start with Article 147: "Anyone who offends with his words or in writing or in any other way disrespects the President of the Republic or whomever is fulfilling his duties will be punished with prison of 6 to 30 months if the offense is serious and half of that if it is light." That sanction, the code implies, applies to those who "disrespect" the president or his functionaries in private; "the term will be increased by a third if the offense is made publicly."

There's more: Article 444 says that comments that "expose another person to contempt or public hatred" can bring a prison sentence of one to three years; Article 297a says that someone who "causes public panic or anxiety" with inaccurate reports can receive five years. Prosecutors are authorized to track down allegedly criminal inaccuracies not only in newspapers and electronic media, but also in e-mail and telephone communications.

The new code reserves the toughest sanctions for journalists or others who receive foreign funding, such as the election monitoring group Sumate, which has been funded in part by the National Endowment for Democracy. Venezuelans or foreigners living in the country can be punished with a 10- to 15-year sentence for receiving foreign support that "can prejudice the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela . . . or destabilize the social order," whatever that means. Persons accused of conspiring against the government with a foreign country can get 20 to 30 years in prison. The new code specifies that anyone charged with these crimes will not be entitled to legal due process. In other words, should Izarra determine that my Caracas-based colleagues continue to collude with the State Department against Venezuela, they could be summarily jailed. source: Chavez's Censorship: Where 'Disrespect' Can Land You in Jail

Since the National Endowment for Democracy was mentioned I decided to look it up. Here's what I found:

Overview

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was created in 1983 by the Reagan administration as a new instrument of Cold War U.S. foreign policy that aimed to roll back the Soviet Union and extend U.S. influence. It was to achieve this by promoting “free market democracies” allied with the United States, which would be driven by what Ronald Reagan called “the magic of the marketplace” and managed by political systems similar to that of the United States and where the dominant political parties were all U.S. aligned.

***
Network of Networks

By the late 1990s NED concluded that it needed to revamp its methodology of democratization. In the age of globalized communication and transnational cyber-networking, as exemplified by the anti-free trade movement, NED decided to start its own global citizens' movement. Rather than just channeling U.S.-government funds to disparate groups, Gershman in 1999 established his office as the “secretariat” for a World Movement for Democracy.

***

NED does not inform the participants in the World Movement for Democracy that this global citizens’ network is a line item in the U.S. State Department’s allocation to the purportedly independent National Endowment for Democracy while also closely coordinated with the democratization program of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). In many instances, like in Venezuela, USAID’s “democracy-building” program works closely with NED-funded organizations and pours more money into what the U.S. government regards as key democratic battlegrounds.

There are signs of backlash to this U.S.-led democracy movement. Throughout the Middle East, as in Cuba and Venezuela, democracy building is getting a bad name since it is so closely associated with U.S. “regime-change” efforts by undemocratic means.
source: Right Web's profile of NED

There's also this from Source Watch's page on NED

Involvement in Foreign Political Processes

NED regularly provides funding to opposition candidates in elections in countries other than the USA. According to Allen Weinstein, one of the founders of NED, "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA" (Blum, Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, 2000, p. 180).

NED has principally supported candidates with strong ties to the military and who support the rights of U.S. corporations to invest in those countries with minimal restriction. The NED has not supported candidates who oppose investments by U.S. corporations or who promise restrictions on investment rights of U.S. corporations.

***
Covert Embedded Reporters

Several articles about the political process in Haiti, Iraq, and the Palestinian-occupied territories have appeared in The New York Times, NPR, and other mainstream US media. The impression is given that the articles are from bona fide journalists, but it transpires that several of them are paid by the NED or its affilated organizations. The case of Regine Alexandre is particularly interesting. She wrote articles for the New York Times, AP, and commented on NPR. It transpires that she is on the NED payroll, and the NED confirmed this fact. However, when confronted with this information both the NYT and NPR failed to respond or take this seriously.

***

In December, 2005 PhD researcher Sreeram Chaulia noted that:

"...97 percent of NED’s funding comes from the US State Department (through USAID and before 1999, the USIA), the rest being allocations made by right-wing donors like the Bradley Foundation, the Whitehead Foundation and the Olin Foundation.(link to Adobe document: http://www.ned.org/publications/04annual/auditors04.pdf)

Based on this, I don't blame Chavez for going after some of these "journalists". What do you think?

And the part about "covert embedded reporters" sounds a lot like the fake "news" reports being used in Iraq that were written by contractors working for the DoD (I think it was the Do).

[balzac]

193. I'm with you dude. This was a bad thing to say

I definitely want to let john steward know I appreciate most everything he's done, up until tonight. A problem like this happening again could be a show-stopper for me. I hope Steven Colbert won't do anything like this.

[SOS]

339. Jon seems like a funny version of The New York Times.

Domestically liberal, votes Democratic, critical of Bush.
But on issues like socialism, wealth redistribution or labor activism,
both Jon and the NYT will always side with Wall Street.
Weekends spent relaxing on their estates in the Hamptons seems to have this effect on liberals.

[LittleClarkie]

92. Can we get some distance away from the man's presidency

before we declare him great yet?

Or is he automatically great because of his politics?

[manic expression]

73. Making patently incorrect claims

is worse than "imperfectly informed", wouldn't you agree? Moreover, it does mislead A TON of people on areas where there is already quite a bit of misinformation. To be concise, it doesn't help.

[K-W]

80. He got something wrong,

my point about the imperfect information is directed at the person calling Stewert a bastard because he got something wrong. Jon will get things wrong, quite a bit, and sometimes it will be in a very unfortunate circumstance.

He is misinformed about venezuala and told a joke based on right wing lies, its unfortunate, but all he did was get something wrong, he isnt trying to spread right wing lies and he isnt some betrayer of the cause.

[manic expression]

107. Well,

even though it can be understood, it is still very disappointing and frustrating. Especially when you consider the fact that people who don't know much about Venezuela will be misled into thinking complete falsities about Chavez. I mean, if Jon is spouting stuff like this, the country is surely collectively insane. Sure, some people are overreacting, but I think that is more understandable than his dreadful mistakes on this subject.

I know what you're saying, but I just think getting something that wrong when it comes to such a subject is more than unfortunate, to say the least.

[jbnow]

211. Jon was only 8 months wrong

Per Human Rights Watch you can go to jail for disrespecting government officials and it's 40 months if you offend the president.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/24/venezu10368.htm

[TInCanCommunications]

141. He does the same thing at teh Republicans' expense

come on.

[manic expression]

155. When has he

used blatantly false claims to poke fun at Republicans?

He may have, but I doubt it. Moreover, I seriously doubt it was to such a degree as Chavez and Sheehan.

[TInCanCommunications]

158. Too many times to mention

Look, he constantly glosses over facts, sometimes to the point of skewing them, to make jokes funnier.
He does it both ways.

[thinkingwoman]

273. No, not at all...it's more that...

if Jon Stewart doesn't agree about Chavez and Sheehan he's a jerk.

See, in some people's America, freedom ends where disagreement begins. It's frustrating.

[RandomKoolzip]

274. A few slams on a personal hero and all of a sudden everything else he

says and does is invalidated? Wow. It must be tough to find ANYONE else in the world with your ideological purity.

[SPKrazy]

13. He did imply it is hard to find sympathy for Cindy when she takes photo

with Chavez

And then they quoted her saying something good about him

Then said it would be on his Christmas cards that he would send to those who got 4 years for saying something negative about him.

[seabeyond]

21. husband watched it, and said, geez ... what, i say running in the room

he told me, cindy with sheehan with chavez. not going to help her cause any. at that point i explained what was happening on the board last two days.

this is the way it hits the average american. but we can all pretend otherwise. so that we are sure to support and have her speak for our party, ..... 100%

[tatertop]

109. Chavez is a great man,

When idiot slams him, stupido americano does not get it.
Why does idiot not understand this?

[LittleClarkie]

157. Yeah, he sounds just lovely. Unless you like human rights violations

that is.

http://hrw.org/doc/?t=americas&c=venezu

I dunno, dude. This and the law that makes it illegal to speak against him don't make him look all that wonderful somehow.

[balzac]

185. It's easy to nitpick Chavez

But he rose up out of Venezuelan peasantry to become the democratic champion of the indigenous people, usurping the wealthy european-descended, racist/imperialist upper class.

Chavez is helping poor Americans with fuel costs. Harry Belafonte digs him. The United States tried to take Chavez down in a coup, like they did to Aristide and they failed.

Chavez is the best leader in North and South America at this point. He helped set the tone for Evo Morales to win in Bolivia.

Thank You Hugo Chavez,

And may the propaganda-soaked minds of America's left be open enough to see the importance of not allowing Fascist America to do to Chavez what they did to Salvador Allende!

John Stewart was wrong.

[LittleClarkie]

195. Accusations that people turned up dead are not "nitpicks"

A law that prohibits his being criticized in the media is not a nitpick.

And is the Human Rights Watch propoganda-soaked and fascist? Or are they only right when they're criticizing Bush, and wrong when they criticize Chavez. Kinda like Stewart is right when he criticizes Bush, and wrong when he criticizes the darlings of the left?

[balzac]

218. You try leading a country under seige from George Bush

See if your people don't use a little force against the CIA-backed thugs who tried to topple you.

I don't doubt some ugly things happen, but the burden of proof is on the accusor to establish Chavez is guilty of anything at all.

Do you know what John Negroponte did in Nicaragua? What he's doing now in Iraq? The US has supported death squads to eliminate democratically elected socialist leaders, just like Chavez. They did it to Salvador Allende.

This is not a fucking game, and the Venezuelans don't have the luxury of playing with kid-gloves as Bush tries to topple their democracy and steal their oil.

[Tigress DEM]

222. See that is the thing... there are plenty of Right Wing Freaks...

that find this shit amusing. Laughed their asses off when Pat Robertson suggested assasignation of Chavez.

To have John join their side and take the cheap shots at the underdog instead of using the weapon of humor against this corrupt - and EXTREMELY absurd administration is disappointing.

I know a guy at work that stays away from politics mostly. His sole source for news he can tolerate? The Daily Show.

In an environment where we on the left are trying to prevent the collapse of Democracy this kind of stuff does matter. If things were different and we didn't need every break we can get just to stay in the game, it wouldn't be a big deal.

[LittleClarkie]

226. Sorry. No quarter for either man.

Make excuses for one, then make excuses for them both. Neither gets a pass.

Btw, I am a moderate. And rather than the definition of "wimp" or "fence sitter" that some prefer for such a position, THIS is what I mean by the term.

I don't care if you prefer the politics of one over the other. If people disappear, if bodies of opposition members are found, if people are tortured, then all is not well.

It would be a slippery slope to decide such tactics are acceptable because you approve of that person's politics. The other side approves of Bush's politics. It is not a game to them either. But most here would say that his tactics are not acceptabe.

Mr. Chavez does NOT get a pass.

[Name removed]

229. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tigress DEM]

293. Do you have links about the deaths?

I guess I need to know more about what he's being accused of before making up my mind.

I read some of the Human Rights Watch information and I see that people's rights are being violated, but it seems like they are saying, "It is happening on your watch" not that he is personally doing it. If he IS able to and controlling the people who are committing the abuses, then yes, no matter how he started out he's gone wrong.

But if he's only having the finger pointed at him and someone else is orchestrating these abuses to get him out of office, then THEY and NOT HE should be on trial.

[Cults4Bush]

251. So waht same can be said about us and a bunch of our allies.

We have serious HR issues here in the states. Its is very hypocritical to keep going after Chavez when we tried to coup his ass twice.

As far as communism goes well you know China owns at least half of our ass.

[seabeyond]

255. this is the thing. we dont like what bush is doing. we dont want to take

down chavez's country. personally, i think chavez is doing just fine without my concerns, and why i havent gotten information on chavez and have stayed out of threads. no one is patting bushie boy for attempted coups. no one validates bush taking our right.

but for goodness sake, surely we can look at the man, and be honest without it being bashing, right wing talking points. it is called being informed. that is NOT a bad thing. i really dont care about the man. i dont hoop and hollar cause he bad mouthed bush. i dont criticize him because he bad mouthed bush. and i ridicule robertson for what he said

when in a discussion talking about a person... for someone to say, but what about.....our country, bush, china. that isnt acknowledging the facts

republicans do that. i will talk about repug corruption and i immediately get, they all do it..... well no they dont, but regardless of if they do or not, i am not talking about all politicians, i am talking about the corruption of the republican party that is so prevelant and in face today. we dont ignore, just because someone else is doing it too.

i was hearing glorifying of chavez. i wanted to know what hte real story was so i read up on the man. that is all. no more, no less

[Cults4Bush]

264. fine thats all you have to do and I applaud you for trying to be nuetral

about developing an opinion.

The truth is here on DU the man gets attacked left right and center by the supposed moderates and nudniks (since he is now apparently anti semite as well despite the Jewish community in his own country strongly defending him), and of course the people who love to criticize Cindy hate him as well. They do all this thinking the rightwing repub talking points they have are truthful... I just dont even begin to fathom the level people will sink to in order to try and force their agenda.

Further people are patting bushco on the head when they take up their talking points and use them to further bushcos policy. The people that are spreading this BS about Chaves are helping bushco, pure plain and simple.

Personally though I think you just wanted to bang on me a bit because this argument from you is crap, "when in a discussion talking about a person... for someone to say, but what about.....our country, bush, china. that isnt acknowledging the facts" , uh yes it does indeed. Its about hypocrisy, if wed ont acknowledge or own problems and turn our hatred and vitriol upon people who at the very least are only as bad as the position being argued from than that needs to be held in consideration. Hypocrits who remain hypocrits even after they have been informed of the truth over and over again are nothing but operatives lobbying an agenda.

Do not ever insinuate I am a repug again or I will do the same for you... other than that I found it very hard to understand what you are trying to say.

In the end if you really dont give a fuck about Chavez than leave it alone, some of us have been heavily into Chavez for a long time so please dont come on here trying to frame me up as a repug, when several DUers insist on spreading lies and false hoods about him.

[seabeyond]

268. oh my. just reading your first paragraph

hey. the reason i am even here, or reading about chavez is because i am hearing he is hero. i went to check to see if he really is hero. and how dare stewart mention the fact of repressed media. let them shout that from the walls in this country. you want people to be open, but listen to you. and listen to the criticism, i and people like me are receiving, because we dare to suggest this man is repressing media. for whatever reason. you know i am not even judging why he is repressing media. to contain the bad guys?, maybe what he needs for control so he can do his good?. maybe out of fear or just feels end justifies the mean?

i think i and many others are being real gracious to you all that have such Passion for this man and cindy. i am not seeing an ability in your position, or people that hold your position, that allows me anywhere near that acceptance, respect, approval


"left right and center by the supposed moderates and nudniks"

listen to your disdain in just a few words into your post. how much must i tippy toe and allow you to believe your world, without infringing in anyway, so i am not dismissed so readily.

i just cant even read the rest of your post. you lost me

[Cults4Bush]

281. Right back atcha!

Really, no difference at all there.

Oh I see now you all are being gracious even though you dont know jack shit about Chavez except for what you recently read. Whatever....

You dont even make sense, quit attacking Chavez and Cindy and maybe ther wont be such disdain. That same disdain is in your words and all your cohorts words.

If you'd just admit that you like to try and frame people who disagree with you as republicans maybe we could moved past this... but then you aren't going to read this anyway so why bother trying to get to the truth, no matter how many times it is given to you, you all went believe it because it doesnt work with your agenda.

[seabeyond]

287. the man formed a failed coup 1992, served two years

won election 98. carter certified. took big chunk of money out of bank.....

had another election 2002? carter couldnt certify
coup from u.s.
started messing with their constitution, and courts
and in 2004 has appeared to focus how he wants to create his government and put out the doctrine. controls, yet a socialism to take care of the poor.

he is keeping his oil for his people and he isnt going to allow bushies to take it. go all the way back you had the oil bushies messing with his country. lots and lots of history here.

it is this mans power to do his country. i have absolutely no desire what so ever to inflict any conditions on him.


what are you talking about that i am not believeing about chavez. maybe this will help. tell me what you think i cant see. cause you know, i think we are going to have to learn how to listen, to resolve and agree. i am not opposed to that. trust, that i can be fair. you could go to past posts, and see,..... or you can just give it a try.

what am i not seeing.

[rinsd]

304. Don't you know HRW is a tool of the neocons....

Only Venezeulananalysis.com (run by some fine folks in his party) or Al Giordano can be counted on to tell the glowing radiant "unvarnished" truth about Chavez.

[LittleClarkie]

315. Venezeulananaysis.com is run by people in Chavez's own party?

Oh right, they're unbiased, I'm sure.

That would be like taking the word of the neocons ON the neocons.

Okay, I'll bite. How is HRW a tool of the neocons?

[rinsd]

319. Probably a little harsh on the direct party reference...

Let's just says birds of a feather. I can't find the foundation that sponsors it thru google. But if you google the authors, you'll notice a constant theme. That doesn't mean there truth here and there but va seems to be very touchy about anyone crticizing Chavez and goes to great lengths not to refute but to destroy ths source. See the slime piece on HRW on va. Also google Al Giordano and HRW and read his articles. These are the manin links to refute HRW's credibilty brought up by Chavez's more fervent supporters.

[LittleClarkie]

321. Oh wait a minute. There shoulda been a sarcasm smilie

by your original comment. You actually meant the opposite of what I thought you did.

I'm dense. I need smilies.

[debbierlus]

299. John Stewart is not a real representative of ANYTHING

He is a comedian on Comedy Central. He is full of himself. Sometimes, he is beyond funny. Many times his commentaries are really weak; he attacks dems when they are actually fighting or knocks them down for no reason.

People here are so desperate for liberal news coverage that they pin their hopes on Stewart. That is just silly...

As for attacking Cindy...Screw him and anybody who does. Cindy Sheenan is a incredibly brave woman. She is also a grieving mother who lost her world when her son died in Iraq. People sometimes call her a loose canon, or too extreme. I think she is beyond brave and strong.

I love Cindy, and I admire her tenacity and her continued efforts in the face of national bashing.

She calls a spade a spade...she goes beyond any party.

She is a voice of a victimized nation!

[upi402]

3. Huh?

[Atman]

4. He has an interesting take on Chavez, too

It is a pretty damning opening.

[LittleClarkie]

12. Details?

Some of us are nowhere near a tv. If you please.

[tatertop]

24. He should be SUPPORTING Chavez

Fuck Stewart

[tallahasseedem]

51. Why is that?

There are some interesting similarities going on between our two governments.

http://hrw.org/doc/?t=americas&c=venezu

[LittleClarkie]

144. Oh dear

This one sounds familiar:


"Letter to President Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías
In a letter sent to President Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías, HRW expressed deep concern about credible reports documenting that National Guard and police officers beat and tortured people who were detained during the recent protests in Caracas and other Venezuelan cities."

Are some willing to cut him some slack because of his politics? Much as I'm sure some conservatives cut Dubya some slack because of HIS politics?

Hrm.

[Mike Daniels]

270. You're tilting against windmills

Amnesty International could come out against some of Chavez's policies and they would be derided by some on DU as a facist front of neo-cons out to take down the great and honorable Chavez.

[NYCGirl]

333. I realized that when I did bring up

the views of Amnesty International and although the DUer who answered didn't say they were a neocon tool, he did try to defend Chavez over AI.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=309949&mesg_id=310619

[Tigress DEM]

285. Here is the thing....

Bush has been trying to get Chavez out of office because he wouldn't play the game.

Chavez has put more people in the Supreme Court to handle his civil unrest through legal means. Now it may seem bizarre to do it that way, but it may be their way of avoiding all out war among their people.

I don't know one way or the other if Chavez is actually ordering any of the violent treatment or if it is people who supported/participated in the coup trying to make it look that way.

It isn't because of his politics, but because of how much interference I suspect on the part of the *ush regime in his country. It is possible they are working with the opposition party and supporting them doing all this stuff and saying it is Chavez's people that are committing the crimes.

They have done this before and their MO usually stays the same. The actions being attributed to Chavez aren't consistent with his historical behavior, but they do look like dirty political shennanigans we've seen played out in other countries over the last 30-40 years.

I guess I'm saying it smells like rethug bullshit being smeared over someone - and I'm not saying he's innocent because I don't know enough about it - but with the way DEMS get tried by public opinion first and acquitted with facts later, I want to know more about it before I assume Chavez has lost his mind and gone totally against everything he's stood for in the past.

[LittleClarkie]

84. We don't take disagreements well over here in liberaland

do we?

[derby378]

5. And Henry Waxman, too

That "THE MAN / THE LEGEND" shirt is hilarious.

But that's what Jon Stewart does. His list of sacred cows is very short.

[DaveinMD]

45. that was incredibly funny

it wasn't really a shot at Waxman.

[BushOut06]

9. Well, he is a comedian first and foremost...

And that's what comedians do, take shots at people in the news. Letterman and Leno have made their careers joking about political figures from both sides of the aisle, I don't see why Jon Stewart should be any different.

[K-W]

16. The reason we like Stewert is the truth behind his comedy.

When he makes jokes based on Republican propaganda, its a bit disturbing.

[Posteritatis]

27. I like him 'cause he's *funny*, not because his politics match mine. (n/t)

[manic expression]

32. It's not about matching politics

when he spouts RW lies and misinformation as fact and slimes a peace activist who lost a son in Iraq, that's not funny at all.

I like Stewart, but that bit was absolutely unreasonable and flat out incorrect.

[BushOut06]

What exactly did he say?

I didn't catch the show, only that he made a joke about Cindy Sheehan.

[manic expression]

78. First,

I was mostly referring to what he said about Chavez. He said anyone who criticizes Chavez gets a 4 year prison sentence, which is completely untrue.

He also implicated Sheehan in this (about her meeting with Chavez).

[K-W]

33. I said his jokes are based on truth, not that I like his politics. EOM

[tallahasseedem]

14. I think he found...

an interesting angle of hypocrisy coming from Cindy. You cant complain about one leader about something when your hugging another that does the same thing.

[K-W]

17. Except Chavez doesnt do the same things so there is no hypocrisy.

Jon is grossly misinformed about Venezuala.

[jbnow]

213. Did you go to link

LittleClarkie provided at Human Rights Watch? (Who bash America even harder on what we do) I went there.
By law you can go to jail for "disrespecting" government officials and it's 40 months if you offend the president. So John was 8 months off.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/24/venezu10368.htm

Chavez does many good things for the poor (including some of the poor here) but he doesn't run a perfect government either. We'd all be in jail if we had that law here.

[seabeyond]

248. and that law may be coming soon..... to our shores... and i am

pretty sure we will be bitching protesting outraged by it. we are getting little tastes of it for the last couple years. lol lol who is to know. maybe bush read this about chavez, (ok not read, someone mentioned it to him) and he said.... i want, i want

[jbnow]

279. bush would love that law (as long as he is in power)

He'll make it a presidential order and declare it his way of compromising with the leftists here, since we admire the leftist chavez.

The new SCOTUS will agree with him because it's, uh, implied as a right for him to do in war time. To protect us. That's it.

[digno dave]

348. I have relatives htere...you are misinformed, i'm afraid

[Pirate Smile]

18. I think you nailed the exact point he was making.

[K-W]

20. Remember when Chavez invaded Iraq? EOM

[Pirate Smile]

23. Is that the only bad thing that can happen in the world?

Yesterday, I heard Sen. Boxer speak negatively about Chavez also.

I'm not an expert on Chavez but I don't assume he is a great guy just because he hates Bush.

[K-W]

30. You replied to a post that said he does the same thing as Bush.

And you seemed to be agreeing.

Is that the only bad thing that can happen in the world?

No, lots of bad things happen in the world, wars, torture, starvation, etc. Which of those are Hugh Chavez's fault exactly?

Yesterday, I heard Sen. Boxer speak negatively about Chavez also.

And your point is?

I'm not an expert on Chavez but I don't assume he is a great guy just because he hates Bush.

Congratulations?

[DaveinMD]

43. he infringes

on people's civil liberties just as Bush does.

[K-W]

47. No he doesnt. EOM

[seabeyond]

90. i just read up on chavez. election fraud, theft of money from a bank

1998, restriction of rights. about 2003 heavy duty restriction on media. that is about as bad as i read on the man. where as he also puts a lot of effort in social programs and truly appears to work to helping the poor. also taking down a union for the oil revenue and then those that protested were blackballed

again, in reading everything about chavez from the failed coup in 1992 on.... seems a lot like bush in a lot of respects,... but his motive seems to be to help the poor not the middle and rich class

[K-W]

98. The talking point that Chavez is like Bush is just plain silly. EOM

[seabeyond]

110. election theft, restriction of right, stealing money

bush.....

not a big deal dont make a big deal of it. and has nothing to do with talking points. after reading i asked hubby why he had a negative feel on chavez..... he told me basically trashing u.s. i told him, well if he thinks bush did the coup i can understand. he says ya, ... not really even u.s., just bush

my point, i went looking and i didnt find he was that bad of a guy. again like people say not perfect..... but he seems to be working for the poor in his nation and i am not finding a whole lot of trash. but..... if you prefer me to not look at him realistically and support him 100% or feel shame.... whatever

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez

[K-W]

131. The two simply are not that alike. EOM

[seabeyond]

139. no they arent. except the things i found on chavez is what we

are dealing with in u.s. and thought it was a little funny especially seeing how yawl had a thread going on it. i was reading it to husband and he laughs and said no different from here. i agreed, told him that was the funny. big difference though you are right.

[manic expression]

101. Where did you read up on him?

The first thing people have to know about Latin America is that there is a massive amount of misinformation about people who don't bend to Uncle Sam.

What you probably didn't read is that the opposition owns all of the Venezuelan media. What you probably didn't read is that after the recent coup against Chavez, he didn't even punish those involved. I would like to know exactly how he restricted rights, because people are allowed to speak freely, which includes mocking Chavez for being too "indigenous" (aka not white enough).

You are right about his motives, he wants to help the Venezuelan people and not the rich. However, he could not be more different from Bush.

[NYCGirl]

105. I was wondering myself about what he said, and found this information

on the freedom of the press in Venezuela.

http://infovenezuela.org/cap4_en_3.htm

[manic expression]

119. Well,

the stuff that can be considered actual "facts" are taken out of context, twisted and shown in a biased way.

For example, it says that a journalist was charged for "mentioning" a grandchild of a public figure. What it doesn't say, however, is how the grandchild was mentioned, which could have been anything from a racial slur to suggesting an extra-marital affair. The only extra info we have is a fuzzy newspaper clipping in Spanish, that was almost surely published by the opposition-controlled media.

Again, there is a ton of misinformation about any leftist individual or movement in Latin America.

[seabeyond]

122. idolize the guy

i dont give a f*ck.

[manic expression]

133. Am I supposed to care

if you are ignorant about the situation in Venezuela?

[NYCGirl]

124. Even if it was a racial slur (something we deal with here a great deal),

does that merit imprisoning a journalist?

[manic expression]

140. Even from this source,

they don't mention imprisonment. They would've if he was. From what we can see here, it isn't unreasonable (at least in my opinion).

[NYCGirl]

146. In my opinion, it is. It's sort of like getting arrested for wearing the

wrong t-shirt. And Venezuela doesn't have the best rating from Amnesty International, either.

[manic expression]

147. How so?

you can't possibly conclude that from what we know, especially from that source.

AI isn't always the most reliable when it comes to partisan claims such as this. Well intentioned? Of course. Accurate? Perhaps not.

Just my take on it.

[NYCGirl]

150. I trust Amnesty International. So I guess we'll have to disagree on this.

[manic expression]

152. That's fine

but trusting something regardless of the situation can have pitfalls, IMO.

[seabeyond]

161. have you done research on chavez?

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/01/18/venezu12258.htm

[LittleClarkie]

172. Of course not. He's a lefty, and so gets a pass

I'd almost like to start a thread with that link, and ask for an explanation for why this person is supposed to be so "great".

[seabeyond]

180. cause he helps the poor and attacks bush. i have left chavez alone

i have just left the whole chavez thing alone. there is too much to research with bush and remember without bring a whole other continent into study. i didnt want to head down south. but i agree with you

[LittleClarkie]

184. I haven't been terribly motivated past wikipedia to research him either

but that is one damned disturbing link. He may do some good things. And I don't want to see us invade his country over oil. But I am sort of wondering now about the hero worship of the guy.

[tuvor]

192. I'd encourage you to start that thread.

But the chances of a flamefest are too great.

[seabeyond]

197. reading on the poll thread and this thread i am always surprised

by what people well allow themselves to believe or ignore to meet their agenda. really that doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me. it is never productive, it doesnt work..... all one is doing is lying to themselves., everyone else looking at the facts, just dismiss them. they are no longer viable in argument.

nope, i have no desire to get into my own thread on chavez. i have had enough with the whole support cindy a 100% or shame on you.

[tuvor]

200. Sorry. Meant to reply to 161 (LittleClarkie) n/t

[seabeyond]

203. you probably did. cause i was talking to you and showing

i am talking to me. must be one of those threads the line went too far, lol lol. i get it now.

[manic expression]

332. Not really

maybe it's because he doesn't need a pass from anything. I guess the fact that the media is completely controlled by the opposition has no meaning for you, or the fact that Chavez is not only criticized regularly but also mocked. Of course, you wouldn't know the actual situation by reading HRW's mistaken conclusions.

Oh, and that US-backed coup against him? Yeah, the Venezuelans behind it haven't been punished. REAL iron-fisted! :sarcasm:

[seabeyond]

lmao.... dont believe anyone, or anything you hear. they are all wrong

they are picking on him. they are not being fair. i have listen to this talk with bushco for a long time. they are key words to manipulation in non think. unacceptable. what i am going to do, is go into further reasearch. i have a pretty good start. a pretty good understanding. but really a bunch of bullshit for a bunch of people to say all neg you hear, regardless of where you get it, it is wrong. trust me.

[Name removed]

342. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[seabeyond]

343. you think we should invade venz?

what surprise. you are right, i did make an assumption you didnt want to invade.

[manic expression]

344. I fail to see how that related to the topic at hand

in any way.

I would appreciate it if you responded to my post.

[seabeyond]

346. in you post you say we agree on nothing

i say we dont invade. i made that assumption, you say we agree on nothing, ergo, i must conclude you agree to invasion. how does that NOT relate to your post

if you would like me to talk about how i know nothing, i will argue i can recite the history and events since 1991.... that is knowing something anyway. then you propose i ignore everything and trust in not believing any information i receive, lol lol and that, i initially talked about in my first response to you, but i will say again, bolder dash

did i adequately address your post?

[manic expression]

353. OK

I think the earth is round. We agree on something. Yeehaw.

Now back to the topic. Cite events since 1991 as much as you want, but the fact remains that Chavez is a legitimate leader who has not curbed rights in any real way. History shows this more than anything else.

You should recognize that HRW is mistaken in this regard, as it has been thoroughly proven that they are. You should be skeptical about the information you find about Chavez, as there is a ton of RW lies about everything not reactionary in Latin America.

That was better.

[manic expression]

331. That's nothing new

HRW has been known to peddle RW lies. They repeat assertions as truth when they are only baseless assertions. This holds true in Latin America, in regards to leftist movements. This just in: HRW is not all-knowing.

Maybe you should do some actual research, instead of blindly accepting one organization's poor and mistaken summary.

[paulk]

355. the same can be said of trusting Chavez

no?

[LittleClarkie]

153. Off topic: what's with the FrankenAl in your sig?

I'm having "FrankenKerry" flashbacks.

Is it meant to be a positive thing?

[NYCGirl]

156. I think it's a charming photo. That's not photoshopped. It's Gore in

costume for a Halloween party — Tipper took the picture. (I just added the caption. He is the GOP's biggest nightmare, after all.)

[LittleClarkie]

162. Oh. My. God.

Ahahahahahaha!

That IS good. Okay. Just had to ask. Never saw it before. Thanks for the smile.

[NYCGirl]

169. This one may be more frightening. It's of Al Gore portraying Trent Lott

on Saturday Night Live. Now, that's scary!

[Pirate Smile]

183. Right. They were always known for their big Halloween parties and

going all out dressing up.

I believe he was taking an important call as VP at the time (I can't remember what - foreign policy of some sort) which made the photo kind of funny.

edit to add - you must have just done it recently. It's great.

[NYCGirl]

186. You gotta love someone who has a sense of fun like that!

Yep, it is new (as my sig). I just added the text the other day. Thanks so much!
:hi:

[seabeyond]

111. i read this cause it seemed like it was just giving out fact

not agenda. i know we would like to have all have an agenda. i dont much care about agenda. i just wanted to read if there was anything bad on chavez. doesnt seem that much bigger of a deal than most all leaders, again.... adn he helps the poor


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez

[High Plains]

221. Could you tell me a little more about the Venezuelan media,

their role in fomenting the failed coup, and all that?

[Pirate Smile]

59. I discount criticisms by BushCo and RW'ers because, of course,

they always lie and their coup attempt showed exactly what they want.

But when I hear criticism from people I respect, like Sen. Boxer, I become a little more cautious.

Cautious, not hostile.

[K-W]

87. The truth is in the facts. EOM

[seabeyond]

174. i am the same. this might help you out why. jsut found it

the first few sites i explored jsut gave me the basics and history of chavez. but defenders of chavez encouraged me to do a little more research. just the facts, maam. just want facts. dont need any talking point from either side.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/01/18/venezu12258.htm

[Pirate Smile]

179. Exactly. I just responded to you on another thread when you looking

for facts.

I think we tend to analyze things the same way.

[seabeyond]

188. i see that. the other thread. it is never as black and white

as people would like to make it. that is for sure. and thank you for that information on the other thread

[mitchtv]

26. Yup, he used the infamous Clenis weapon

[Union Thug]

82. When was the last time Bush offered cheap heating oil to low income...

families?

Viva Hugo!!!

Buy your gas at CITGO!

[PunkPop]

19. 4 years in jail for criticizing Chavez in the media?

Is that true? I have heard Chavez is openly mocked in some Venezuelan media.

[Tom Joad]

29. Is that what Jon is saying. sounds like bullshit, and not the first time.

Jon said that "Israel does not use torture", when in fact anyone who reads Amnesty International reports would know otherwise.

[PunkPop]

34. Yes, that is what he said.

My bullshit detector started screaming and I came right over here to DU.

Jon likes to play the moderate because he's convinced the truth lies in the middle. Well in this case it doesn't. I'd like to see him try to yuck it up at Cindy's expense with the families of the five soldiers that died today.

[sasha031]

35. has it ever occurred to you that the media may be corrupt

in Venezuela, it's corporate just like us, full of hacks.

[PunkPop]

46. Yes it has. That's what I'm saying.

How could what Stewart is saying be true if the media is corrupt and anti-Chavez? There's no way reporters are being put in jail for four years for criticizing Chavez.

[manic expression]

44. It is most assuredly not true

the opposition actually controls pretty much the entire media in Venezuela. It is true that he is mocked (racist mocking no less, as he is more "indigenous" than other public figures), regularly criticized in the opposition-owned media and the media openly attempted to support the (US-backed) coup which tried to overthrow Chavez. Interestingly enough, the Venezuelans who supported and tried to benefit from the coup (as in take control) were NOT punished by Chavez.

Yeah, what Jon said had absolutely no basis whatsoever. Completely incorrect.

[PunkPop]

49. Thanks. I thought so.

[seabeyond]

202. i dont know about the amount of time they are jailed

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/01/18/venezu12258.htm

[jbnow]

Not 4 years, but yes 40 months

per human rights watch you can go to jail for "disrespecting" government officials and it's 40 months if you offend the president.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/24/venezu10368.htm

[Snivi Yllom]

302. according to this Cindy Sheehan would serve 40 months for her t-shirt

if she wore a disrespectful (whatever that is) t-shirt to protest a Chavez speech.

oh the irony

[rinsd]

306. But that law hasn;t been used....

...so much like most of the Patriot Act its okay.

:eyes:

[Tom Joad]

25. Jon really is an idiot sometimes.

[K-W]

40. He is, in the end, just a comedian. EOM

[DaveinMD]

41. he's 100 percent correct

about her hurting her own cause with her alliance with Chavez.

[manic expression]

50. Maybe, but

he is 100 percent incorrect in his assertions against Chavez. Those claims have no truth to them whatsoever. Oh, and calling Fidel Castro a "dictator" is inaccurate, as well.

[DaveinMD]

52. how is Castro not a dictator

there are no open elections in Cuba.

[manic expression]

66. Fair question

He's not a dictator because he was elected into his office. Furthermore, to be a dictator, one must possess and exercise a great amount of power. Castro does not. In fact, the Cuban Assembly, which represents the Cuban people, has most of the power in the Cuban government. Cuban elections are different from our two-party system (which sucks, by the way), but that does not make them "closed" in any way. The difference is that candidates are nominated by a council (not by corporate parties), and then subject to a yes/no vote by the people (a sort of confirmation, in a way).

Here's a site you might find interesting on this subject:
http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQDemocracy.html

[DaveinMD]

76. Hitler was elected

that doesn't mean he wasn't a dictator. And yes/no elections under armed threat are not open elections. The council is the Party. These are sham elections. I favor opening up Cuba because more relations will lead to more democratization sooner. But Castro is still a dictator.

[K-W]

91. Actually Hitler wasnt elected.

He was appointed to the position based on backroom deals.

[manic expression]

94. Well, his party was

and he first gained office because of that, but he became a dictator when he seized sweeping powers after achieving office. Castro has not expanded his powers in any significant way. Also, he does not have very much power, and he exercises less.

On an interesting note, genocide is explicitly banned by the Cuban Constitution (as well as gender discrimination).

Do you really think Castro would just give Cuba such an amazing healthcare system (among other things) just because he wanted to? Of course not. The Cuban people made sure they were fairly represented and they worked for what they have. Castro is not a dictator at all.

The yes/no elections are not under armed threat at all. Why would you make such a conclusion?

The candidates are selected in open, public meetings. That is hardly through a party. Furthermore, the parties have very little to do with the actual election process.

"Opening up Cuba" means opening it to the imperialist corporations, who would try to rape Cuba once again.

(edited title and first paragraph in light of the above poster's info)

[skipos]

123. I am Cuban. Castro is no hero. nt

[manic expression]

145. That's interesting

pues, quiero saber como esta en Cuba. Donde vivias en Cuba? Como fuiste a Estados Unidos? Cuando? Fue dificil? Estas viviendo con otros cubanos? Lo ciento, pero tengo que preguntar mucha!

Lo ciento, senor, pero no tengo los "accents", y no tengo los otros "!".

[manic expression]

148. Oh, and to add on

why would you say that? I'm just wondering what would lead you to have such a view.

[K-W]

53. I guess if democrats are going to play along with repub lies,

you are right.

[Tom Joad]

62. Chavez is not perfect.

i think what Cindy is saying is that Bush is the biggest terrorist on the planet.
The people of Venezuela, and the govt they elected, should not be attacked by that madman.

[DaveinMD]

69. and this why she is an amateur

hugging him detracts from what is a very strong message. Focus on the troops, the war and how we need to bring our men and women home. If she stuck to that, the cause would have been helped more.

[K-W]

95. She has stuck to that cause, and she has worked tirelessly on it.

She is an amateur... meaning she isnt being paid a lobbyists salary?

[DaveinMD]

97. meaning

she has to be smarter about how she promotes the causes. Hugging Chavez is off message and detracts from the strong message.

[balzac]

196. Cindy and Chavez are Excellent. John Stewart is forgivable.

I'm so proud of Cindy, Chavez, Belafonte, Michael Moore, and others that stand up all the way erect, with clean conscience for social justice.

[Quixote1818]

165. You are absolutly right Dave

nt

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

36. I have never turned the station in the middle of his show before.

Local news is as bad as I remember it.

Better than what I saw with Jon tonight, though.

[doc03]

37. Limpballs and O'Liely have

been attacking her for being controlled by far left wackos and what does she do, she does exactly that. The same thing Clinton did, they accuse him of being a womanizer and he justifies the criticism with his Lewinsky affair. One advantage the Republicans have going for them is the Democrats.

[bdot]

39. Well Cindi does do stupid things sometimes.

It does't help her to make stupid photo ops.

[sasha031]

64. Oh great, some more cindi bashing post

:puke:

[Tom Joad]

68. She is sitting next to a very popular, and ELECTED president.

[Guaranteed]

89. Well, if Americans love him so much, there really shouldn't be

a problem.

[doc03]

96. That may be true in his country but he has been

portrayed as our enemy here weather deserved or not. It was just stupid to go there, why don't she visit Castro and Saddam Hussein while she's at it. She has lost her credibility with most Americans now and has made the O'Liely's and Limpballs look like they were right about her a along.

[Tom Joad]

143. Chavez has been portrayed as our enemy. bush has been portrayed

as our friend.
You blame cindy for this?

[Craig3410]

48. OH MY GOD, HE"S NOT A RAGING LIBERAL!1

Geez, I hate threads like this.

He doens't rag on just conservatives.

He rags on

POLITICS, IN GENERAL

.

He's said before: he's an equal opportunity ass-hander. IT'S JUST THAT THE REPUBLICANS GIVE HIM MORE TO WORK WITH.

Jesus H. Christ on a tap-dancing moped squared. I need a drink.

[Seen the light]

54. Thank you

I see threads like this all the time. That should send some of you people that are upset a message, he rags on people other than Republicans ALL THE TIME.

[manic expression]

55. Sure,

he rags on all politics, but anyone who saw it knew it was forced. He's done stuff like this before, criticizing Democrats and liberals to appear balanced and occassionally try to appease the Republican viewers (if there are any).

Oh, and being an "equal opportunity ass-hander" does not give one the right to spout completely incorrect and wrong claims (the ones about Chavez).

[tallahasseedem]

61. Exactly.

When Stewart agrees with DUers on things, they cant love him enough. But hell...say something against someone DUers consider an "icon" and suddenly he is a stupid bastard that knows nothing. Usually this behavior is reserved for Bill Maher, but since he is on hiatus Stewart is on the hit list.

[ZanZaBar]

70. Yeah no kidding.

I've been reading this site for many years and people's opinions change like the wind. God forbid Jon Stewart says something that doesn't conform 100% with a DUer's particular ideals... As if there is ANYTHING ELSE on television that is worth watching more than TDS.

[billbuckhead]

67. While far from perfect, Chavez is a good guy compared to our leaders

And Chavez has been actually democratically elected in fairer elections than ours. I think most observers acknowledge that Chavez also faces a very hostile media in Venezuela and in Latin America.

[CatWoman]

74. I don't give a shit

I love Jon.

Just not when he's stuck on stoopid.

[tatertop]

81. Problem is this:

Most americans know nothing of the world.
When jon shits on Chavez (a great man),
Belafonte (a great man), and Sheehan ( a very great woman),
I just gotta say: (fill this in).

What are you thinking, defending this asshole?

[TInCanCommunications]

103. Stewart's audience goes beyond us

Come on.

[Tonya]

301. Most Americans know nothing of the world.... Uhuh, mkay..

Tater -

What gives? Where do you get off calling Americans stupid? I'm American, I'm educated, I've got a passport and I use it. I've lived abroad and speak several languages...

You do yourself a disservice when you underestimate the "average American".

[liberalpragmatist]

224. If a Democrat wins in '08, I don't think DU's gonna like Jon very much

I'm all for media criticism, but I don't want a left-wing mouthpiece any more than a RW-mouthpiece. And that goes doubly for comedians. I didn't watch TDS back when Clinton was still President, but I can quite imagine that he didn't exactly give Clinton a free pass.

I don't think that Stewart is above criticism. Some of his anti-Democrat jokes *DO* seem forced, like he feels he needs to balance out his criticism of Republicans. (Like joking that the Democrats were more unappealing than Hamas.) But that isn't the whole story, and I'm sure that were the Democrats in power, JS would be ragging on them when they pull bullshit as well.

[Maat]

58. I hate it when Jon is an idiot.

And sometimes he's an idiot.

I don't think Cindy ever said Chavez should be the world's leader or anything; she seemed to be reacting to something Chavez said.

I support Cindy 110% - she's an advocate for peace. She doesn't have to be politically correct.

And I'll still watch the Daily Show; this isn't the first time I thought Jon was wrong and not funny, and it won't be the last.

[Cleita]

86. I agree with you. I hope though that his idiotic moments

are few and far between. Most of the time he doesn't fail to please.

[Maat]

106. Agreed.

I just don't think that he and I see things the same way sometimes.

[digno dave]

350. becasue you two don't agree on every single issue makes Stewart an idiot?

that's very odd

[Southsideirish]

79. Like Bill Maher , he blows hot and cold. I don't like the inconsistency o

either of them. You're either with me or "agin" me.

[meisje]

88. I stand with Stewart

[Guaranteed]

93. He's right on this.

It was dumb. She doesn't know where the line is.

[Cleita]

108. Excuse me? There's a line that women who don't know their

place aren't supposed to cross? I dare you to draw that line in front of me!

On edit, I forgot I have two lines to cross, one as a woman who doesn't know her place and the other as a Latina that doesn't know her place.

[TInCanCommunications]

114. Oh, the melodrama

nt

[Cleita]

115. Oh, the lack of word skills to say what you want to say.

:boring:

[TInCanCommunications]

118. Okay

Whatever.
I'm just a little put off by the constant release of hot air around here when it comes to Sheehan.
It's like a freakin' day time talk show.

She ain't all that and a bag of chips.
Oh no you ditn't.

[iamthebandfanman]

214. im sorry but

how did you get that he was saying that women should know their place ?

i dun mean to upset you, but, thats kinda putting words into the persons mouth isnt it(or in their keyboards as it be)

[Cleita]

308. Unless my English is different than yours, crossing the line

means you are daring the bully to hit you. I think it's very appropriate to cross the line when your freedom to express yourself is being curtailed by the bully.

That same expression was used in the south for Blacks, who sat in the front of the bus, who drank out of the white peoples drinking fountain and who were seen out after dark.

[iamthebandfanman]

335. actually

i think 'crossing the line' is an expression for taking something to far.

i still fail to see how he insulted women?
for you to assume that he means woman should 'stay in their place' is just crazy.

you are looking for reasons to be angry.

im a woman and i saw nothing that you did in that post
care to explain to me why?

oh, i know, i didnt dis-agree with the guy who made a point n had no return arguement so i decided to play the cheap card of him insulting my sex.

[Cleita]

349. Women are always referred to as going too far and not knowing

their place, moreso than white men ever are. Also, men of color get the same scrutiny as women. This criticism of Cindy excercising her civil rights is an example of it. I'll bet if it had been Cindy's husband who was demanding accountability from the Bush administration for this war, none of these remarks would have been made if they disagreed with him.

It would have been phrased more like he's misguided and someone should explain to him why we needed to invade Iraq because of the "terraists". I say this because a freeper showed up at the last war protest I went to with a sign that said just that.

[iamthebandfanman]

356. I c

"I'll bet if it had been Cindy's husband who was demanding accountability from the Bush administration for this war, none of these remarks would have been made if they disagreed with him"

Thats where disagree with you, so I cant understand your point. Yes, maybe 20-30 years ago.
Maybe I'm to young to understand what its like to be oppressed.
Ive always been treated as an equal with my male friends.
If I were a male, I'd be offended by what you said. Makes you sound just as sexist in my humble opinion.
Thanks for explaining your point of view to me though. I have nothing else to add :)

[Cleita]

358. If BushCo keep pushing to take away women's rights, you

may yet find out what it was like 20 or 30 years ago.

[Guaranteed]

328. That's what people do when they want to get angry about something.

And you're right. I didn't say anything like that.

[Maat]

112. I just disagree.

I think that she had the right to go the event where she saw Chavez. She gets to go enrich her mind, and listen to what Chavez has to say; she merely reacted to something he said. She doesn't have to restrict her behavior to please anyone else. She never said that she thought he was the cat's meow, in my opinion. She's a peace activist, and an advocate for social and economic justice. I have a great deal of respect for her.

[TInCanCommunications]

116. Sure she does

But it's pretty clear she's aligning herself with the ultra-left.

Not that I care.

But if she's going to try to attract media attention to her cause/campaign, she'd better start understanding how she's going to be viewed by meat-and-potato dems.

[Maat]

126. I don't think she worries about how she's going to be seen by ..

meat and potato Dems, and I wouldn't want her to be.

If she runs, it will just be as herself. Fortunately, it will be in California, and I'll be able to give her a little support. She's a great advocate, and I love to hear her speak. Maybe she won't win ... but she will have many interesting things to say.

[TInCanCommunications]

136. Will she???

Yeah, well the democratic party has done a good job turning its back on meat and potato dems since Clinton signed NAFTA.
So it's no surprise.

In my opinion, a high-profile Sheehan senate campaign would DOOM the party in 06.
She's just become too easy a target.

[Bridget Burke]

250. The "ultra-left"? Don't you mean Loony Left(tm)?

Of course, sometimes it's "far left."

Perhaps you tweak your terminology so we won't notice the talking points are identical.

[TInCanCommunications]

327. No I don't mean "looney left"

I consider my self to be far left of the democratic party.
But I know there are certain opinions best kept to myself in certain circles.

[clitzpah queen]

134. During the RNC in NY Stewart hit his stride -- During the Bush regime

Stewart has been more than just a comedian. He's been one of the ONLY voices of dissent that has broken through the corporate stone wall. Over the last YEAR, I have found Stewart getting weaker and weaker, with occasional exceptions. His interviews with anybody Republican -- like Colin Powell are total Softballs -- not funny either -- kinda dormant love fests. Colbert seems stronger of late.
What he did tonight re: Cindy was disgusting. Humor isn't Neutral. Just watch Dennis Miller. Miller has played a definite role in promoting ignorant public opinion. Jon's piece tonight contributed greatly in that camp as well. We're DYING out here for Some voice breaking through -- and while he never signed up as a soldier in any progressive army, when he actively contributes to the RW Disinformation program: i.e. casting Hugo Chavez as a dangerous repressive dictator, who supports that other evil communist dictator, Fidel Castro -- in a historical period where you have corporate/military yahoos hot on the trigger for targets -- hey they already attempted a coup -- it's just very maddening.
Ya know, Stewart is so skeptical of the Main Stream Media in how they report our domestic news -- why does he buy what they say about Chavez hook line and sinker?

[Maat]

163. The reason the media attacks Chavez ..

is because they're told to. Chavez isn't playing ball with BushCo, and that is why BushCo attacks him. The Bushbots certainly don't care about human rights or living conditions around the world.

I agree with you - I liked Stewart when he railed against the Iraq War; that's when I became a big fan. Lately, his humor has not seemed as funny to me. In my humble opinion, Jon does not understand what made him a success. It wasn't just his humor. It was a place where progressives could go, and see him recognize and validate the unique things progressives knew about. He developed a cult following (me included) of PROGRESSIVES. I don't tune in to see him mock everyone equally - I turn in to see him ravage the Evil Junta with his sharp wit. Trying to please everyone - well, in the end, you please no one. Hope he doesn't turn his back on those who helped him succeed. He'll make the same mistake many have before him.

[Guaranteed]

329. The point Stewart was trying to make was that Cindy's cause

wasn't helped by posing with Hugo Chavez. That's just true. It was pointless, and it seriously hurt her image with everyday Americans. She's not focused, and she messed up.

[TreasonousBastard]

102. So what? Are we so fragile that...

we can't take any ribbing from a TV comic?

Some people go nuts over the Prophet in a bomb turban, others go nuts over a comedy routine on Cindi. Is there really a difference there? OK, no riots or bomb threats that I know of from our side yet, but that's not the point.

Stewart has said many times that his politics are his own and he's just a comedy show. He's also said many times that anyone who gets their news from him is an idiot. Said it on his own show, he did.

He has made it very clear that his show is neither "liberal" nor "conservative" but just comedy, and the Republicans simply give him more material for now.

BTW, it's not the first time he showed that picture of Cindi with Chavez, and I doubt it will be the last.

[TInCanCommunications]

113. This is the issue with Cindy

By her own fault or not, she's become very easy to ridicule.
The media has been setting her up for this, and it's here.

We like her because she's an ordinary woman who's fighting an extraordinary fight.

Well ordinary people get eaten alive by the national spotlight, especially when they're taking on the powers that be.

I am not criticizing her.
I am criticizing the movement for putting her under the freakin' spotlight so much. It's not good for the movement, and I wonder if it's any good for her, because I don't like the way this is headed.

Now, you can attack me as a freeptard cindy hater, but that's not the case.

We have to act when we see the tide turning. The tide turned on Cindy months ago.
And the media is going to turn her into a joke to the public.

If she keeps putting herself out there in front of the cameras at every turn, it's only going to get worse.

[Marleyb]

117. The TRUTH about Chavez and jon stewart

Okay, Jon Stewart pretended that the last election was 'won' by Bush and completely ignored the obvious evidence of election fraud.

Chavez, who used diebold machines for the last election, demanded that they include a paper receipt ie paper trail.

Who has credibility?

True,Stewart is a comedian, but he has a responsibility to not be spreading obvious lies of such an important nature. Afterall, we all know that Bush wants to invade Venezuela after Iran.

A quick glance at the headlines about Chavez illustrate the real picture...

Chavez Announces Wage Hike in Venezuela
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/3632069.html

Chavez to visit Cuba, receive U.N. award
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/nation/13775674.htm

Venezuela's Chavez Vows to Accelerate Land Handovers in 2006
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000086&sid=ad0Rr2TQKiqY&refer=latin_america

Interesting, he is dealing with the same problems Americans are...
Chávez Ousts U.S. Diplomat on Spying Charge
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/03/international/americas/03venez.html

and then we have
Rumsfeld likens Venezuelan President Chavez to Hitler
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14133085

Who are you going to believe? There is no reason for Cindy to distance herself from Chavez. He is a hero and a humanitarian.

These attacks on Chavez are absurd at best. It is sad that Jon Stewart and others, even at DU, are helping to catapult the propaganda.

[TInCanCommunications]

121. He's a comedian on a CORPORATE NETWORK

Just how far outside of the lines do you expect him to go?

[LittleClarkie]

138. It all looks spiffy except for about the middle there.

Wassup with the "handovers"? From who? Who's doing the handing over?

[balzac]

189. I agree. Solidarity with Chavez is very important

The US needs help, badly. Thank goodness for Chavez.

[jbnow]

217. Human Rights watch isn't propaganda

Per Human Rights Watch you can go to jail for disrespecting government officials and it's 40 months if you offend the president.(Which means Jon exaggerated by 8 months)

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/24/venezu10368.htm

Chavez does many good things that bush does not do and bush does many evils Chavez does not do.

But if we had that law here that they have there we would all be in jail for 40 months.

[lostnfound]

225. Agreed. And such propaganda efforts usually culminate in coups.

or helicopter crashes,etc. whereby leftist leaders get replaced with bloodthirsty RW tyrants.

Awareness of the breadth and depth (and success) of such propaganda campaigns takes time to develop.

So the vast majority of people innocently abet in them by accepting as fact what is often a very distorted view presented via AP reports, for example.

[Dixie Flatline]

120. Stewart is right about Chavez

Venezuela law passed under Chavez:

"Anyone who offends with his words or in writing or in any other way disrespects the President of the Republic or whomever is fulfilling his duties will be punished with prison of 6 to 30 months if the offense is serious and half of that if it is light."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/03/27/AR2005032700679.html

[TInCanCommunications]

127. Grass is always greener

People act like life is roses in Venezuela.
Sure, I admire many of Chavez's principles. But truth be told, I'd live in America under Bush before Venezuela under Chavez.

[manic expression]

130. No, he isn't

show me an actual case where this has been used. The Venezuelan media is controlled exclusively by the opposition, and they are not shy about criticizing Chavez (going as far as mocking him, even for racial reasons).

[Dixie Flatline]

142. Kind of like saying...

Show me an actual case where the PATRIOT Act has been used to violate someone's rights.

The point is Jon Stewart is right. Venezuelan law bans speaking out against the president. Whether the law has been used is irrelevant.

Anyways, Stewart is a funny and brilliant comedian. He isn't a cheerleader for foreign leaders.

[LittleClarkie]

151. So he gets the benefit of the doubt because you like his politics

How is that different than a Bushbot mentality?

[Catchawave]

168. I bet Bush wish we had that law...LOL nt

[kittenwithmittens]

242. Not exactly

Jon said people were in prison for FOUR YEARS. The law only calls for six to thirty month sentences.

[AnnieBW]

125. Equal Opportunity Comedian

Guys, Stewart is an equal-opportunity comedian. He's ragged on Dems for a lot of issues. It's satire - not serious commentary.

[TInCanCommunications]

132. I think that's what people forget

He sometimes does such a fabulous job articulating the fallacy of Bushco, that we're certain he's one of us.
(he probably leans our way)

But he's got to go after the Dems to.
I wish he'd go after some of the pigs in Washington instead of Sheehan. But after hearing some of SHeehan's speech over the weekend, it's becoming way to easy to lampoon her.
It's almost unavoidable at this point.

[abex]

129. stewart is well-acquainted with his image

won't tamper with it or his sponsors.

[CanCon]

135. Thoughts

I think Ms. Sheehan has become a little misguided. Posing with communist dictators while he rails on America doesn't exactly endear her to her countrymen.

[Bridget Burke]

256. Your comment will be given due consideration.

But it's not due much...

[CanCon]

317. Zing!

:P

[Marleyb]

149. Venezuelan discounted oil arrives in Philly

On Jan. 27 Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-Pa.) announced that Citgo, a U.S. subsidiary of the publicly-owned Venezuelan national oil company PDVSA, was going to begin shipping 5 million gallons of discounted heating oil here as part of a plan to provide assistance to 25,000 low-income families throughout the city.

Currently over 7,600 households in Philadelphia and surrounding areas that use heating oil have run out of their LIHEAP (Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program) aid.

The first Citgo delivery was made the next day to Geraldine Shields in the West Oak Lane section of Philadelphia. Neighbors and friends applauded, waving U.S. and Venezuelan flags, as they welcomed the oil delivery to their community.
http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/8521/1/307

[Marleyb]

160. Chavez Exposes US Gov’t Values: Chicago turns down cheap fuel for the poor

http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/2710
Chavez Exposes US Gov’t Values: Chicago turns down cheap fuel for the poorhicago, Dec 28 - The Chicago Transit Authority is refusing an opportunity to alleviate commuting costs for hundreds of thousands in the Windy City’s low-income neighborhoods. Instead of accepting deeply discounted fuel from the Venezuela-owned Citgo Petroleum Corporation, the city is instead raising fares to solve budget shortfalls.

In an October meeting with representatives from the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA), the city’s Department of Energy and other city officials, Citgo unveiled a plan to provide the Chicago with low-cost diesel fuel. The company’s stipulation, at the bidding of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, was that the CTA, in turn, pass those savings on to poor residents in the form free or discounted fare cards.

But two months later, despite claims of a looming budget crisis, the CTA president “has no intent or plan to accept the offer,” according to CTA spokesperson Ibis Antongiorgi. She gave no explanation.

[Marleyb]

164. Venezuela sends cargo of 300,000 barrels of gasoline direct to Louisiana

http://vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=45995
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez Frias has confirmed that a cargo of 300,000 barrels of gasoline is on its way to the USA to help Southern States affected by Hurricane Katrina.

The President as confirmed that before traveling to New York to attend the UN summit, Louisiana State Governor Kathleen Blanco phoned the Venezuelan President accepting his offer of help.

Chavez Frias broke the news on arrival in the USA and has reminded reporters that the Venezuelan government had offered 8 electrical plants and drinking water supplies to help the homeless, aid which has been rejected.

While Bush prevaricates, Venezuela offers help to US poor
http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/chavez_hurricane_bush020905.htm

Venezuela was the first country to offer help to the United States in dealing with the effects of Hurricane Katrina. Chavez has offered money and personnel to help in the relief operations. The answer of an unnamed "senior State official" was that “unsolicited offers can be counterproductive." They would rather some of their own people died than have the people of the USA see Venezuela for what it is, a country where its people are challenging the very capitalist system upon which so much poverty and devastation is based.

Venezuela was the first country to offer help to the United States in dealing with the effects of Hurricane Katrina. On Wednesday, August 31st, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez announced that Venezuelan state-owned CITGO Petroleum Corporation had already pledged US$1 million for hurricane aid. "It’s a terrible tragedy that our North American brothers are living through," Chavez said. "We have a battalion from our Simon Bolivar humanitarian team ready in case they authorize it for us to go there, if they give us the green light." He offered humanitarian workers and fuel to help. "We are willing to donate fuel for hospitals, for public transport, everything we can do," Chavez said.

[Gabi Hayes]

312. how DARE you interrupt this ignorance-fest with actual facts?

my brother lived in Venezuela for seven years, as an uber capitalist, and readily admitted what the upper class had in mind for Chavez. they ONLY want to regain the power and inluence lost when he became pres.

they fear nothing more than an expanded middle class, both from the bottom up and the top (them) down.

and they've proven they'll stop at nothing, just as the powers that be in the US are proving every day

too bad the tools here are acting like frogs in warm water. it's getting hotter every day, and Stewart appears to be helping to turn up the flame

also, his show has been getting less and less funny all the time, regardless of whether he's making fun of dems or pugs. has he lost his best writers? he's certainly losing his edge

[BushOut06]

166. Wasn't it just yesterday and day before we were praising Jon Stewart?

In fact, hasn't Jon Stewart been almost univerally praised on this site for his slams against the BushCo regime? But oh my, let him make an offhand remark about Cindy Sheehan, and suddenly he's the enemy! As a comedian, you make jokes about the main topics of the day. Are you going to tell me that he's never cracked on Teddy Kennedy's drinking habits, or Al Gore's stiffness? And I'm sure he's never said anything bad about Bill Clinton!

He's a comedian! And a damned talented one at that! I understand many of us are a little on edge, especially after the past few days since the SOTU and the T-shirt situation. I think there is a definitive difference between someone taking a slam at Cindy on an internet message board, where you can cloak yourself in anonymity, and a comedian whose job it is to poke fun at current affair figures.

[Marleyb]

167. CHAVEZ WARNS BUSH AGAINST INVASION OF VENEZUELA TO SEIZE OIL RESERVES

In an interview with US network ABC, on September 16, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez claimed he had proof the Bush administration were ready to invade his country in an attempt to seize control of some 300 billion barrels of oil.

He warned the Bush administration to retreat from such aggression and spoke of “a 100 year war” and the doubling of oil prices to more than $120 a barrel if any attempts of invasion or occupation were launched against Venezuela.

“I’m telling you that I have evidence that there are plans to invade Venezuela,” Chavez said in the interview. “Furthermore, we have documentation (to prove it).”

Chavez claims miliary intelligence sources have revealed details of ‘Operation Balboa’, a US plan to invade Venezuela using bombers and aircraft carriers.

If such a plan were carried out by the US, Chavez said he would withhold the 1.5 million barrels of oil his country transported to the US every day.

He called ‘Operation Balboa’ a “foolhardy plan” and said the US would not be able to control Venezuela, “the same way they haven’t been able to control Iraq.”...

Chavez has now ordered five ships carrying 300,000 barrels of gasoline each to the US, despite Bush’s non-reaction to offers of help from Venezuela.

Chavez said he is not shipping the fuel for the benefit of Bush, or to curry favour. “We’re not doing this for the administration. We’re doing it for the people of the United States.”

“We love the people of the United States,” Chavez said on the ABC. “Our desire is to have a world of brothers in peace. God grant that that be the case.”

[Marleyb]

182. Amy Goodman has an interview with Chavez that speaks of this and more....

I’ve learned to appreciate the thinking of John Kennedy. John Kennedy once said, and that's why he was assassinated, listen to the South, he said once. The recent revolution going on in the south in Africa, in Asia, and Latin America. It was in the 1960's, where the people, the black power was raging. Che Guevara said, one, two, three, Japan, and Vietnam and Asia. The world was fed up with misery and inequities. As he said, the cause of all the revolution is poverty. And he said this sentence, today more than ever is valid, he said, those who shut down the doors to peaceful resolutions open the doors to violent revolutions. That's a reality. I do believe that the U.S. people – is the other super power that Noam Chomsky is referring to. What is the other super power? Public opinion. The peoples of the world. That's the other super power. And the U.S. People have a major responsibility in the world. I think that we're going to save the world. And I hope that you take part in this struggle in the same way we are doing today. And many other people, women and men in this country, in this soil.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/19/1336214


Chavez in New York

[ruggerson]

170. Does this mean Jon Stewart is a Freeper troll?

I'll have to readjust my Tivo.

[donco6]

296. Of COURSE!

His litmus turned blue long ago :sarcasm:

[Mz Pip]

171. Who nominated Cindy for Sainthood?

Is she some untouchable icon that is off limits to people like Stewart? Honestly, I think you protest a bit too much. She put herself into the frontlines and now she has to deal with the ramifications. Too bad if it offends someone. She doesn't get to hide from satire, sarcasm or criticism.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[LittleClarkie]

178. Sometimes I get the feeling

I'm supposed to kiss her ring or something.

What I've tried to tell people before is that you can support someone and not agree with everything they say. I support my family, but I don't agree with them 100%. They don't speak for me.

I reject putting anyone on a pedastal. Not Cindy. Not Chavez.

[balzac]

201. Cindy is hit by all kinds of cheap shots from the shadows

She gets vigorously defended by people like me, because we're so damned sick of seeing good people like her picked on by bullies.

I don't put her on a pedestal, but I'm twitching with readiness to lay the smack down on anyone that treats her unfairly.

[progressivebydesign]

210. disagreeing with her activities is NOT treating her unfairly.

DU has gotten really odd. I swear that DU is populated by 3 types of people now: 1/3 staunch liberals to the point of being unable to function in the real world because of their self interests. 1/3 infiltrators from republican sites, who love to say really inane things that make liberals look like that 1/3 above. and the final 1/3 which are progressives and moderates who are trying to figure out what the rules are supposed to be around here.

Contrary to what Will Pitt posted, we do not have to support ANYONE 100%. I think that's the stuff republicans are made of.. not us. If someone is putting themselves into the media constantly, then they should expect to be scrutinized. The thing that people here who become hysterical defending ANY criticism of Cindy need to rememeber is that Cindy probably doesn't care what anyone thinks. She's grown up enough to know that she is going to piss some people off... I suspect she doesn't care.

[Name removed]

212. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[balzac]

205. Sheehan isn't trying to hide. She doesn't consider herself a Saint

I don't either. I just consider her a very righteous leader against evil. Gee, that almost sounds kind of saintly, doesn't it? Well too bad. She's working very hard to stop a hellish nightmare, and that's what saints do. But I'm not superstitious, so I'll just call her a wonderful, benevolent, bold person.

[mwb970]

292. I loved everything she did at first.

Now half the things she says and does leave me rolling my eyes. Sorry, that's just what I am seeing.

[Catchawave]

173. Public figures are fair game for comedians

He's much worse on Republicans, and his show would be boring if he didn't take jabs at our side now and then!

[balzac]

175. I was dissappointed in John Stewart Tonight

He was bad to Cindy and especially to Hugo Chavez. John, we expect better of you.

[Balbus]

176. But was it funny?

That's all Jon cares about - and should care about, him being a comedian and all... :shrug:

[balzac]

187. Not Funny

[iamthebandfanman]

194. haha

i find it funny that when people on DU hear something they like him say he gets tons of praise, but he says one thing thats disagreed with and hes all of a sudden the devil.

hes free to think however he wants after all

[balzac]

199. So are we free to think what we want.

If enough of us expressing our thoughts can change John Stewart's mind, so be it. He was wrong.

But there's one reason I give John Stewart a little slack on this one:

The Simon Weisenthal Center in LA criticized Chavez for what they thought was an anti-semitic slur. Weisenthal is a very strong and credible name, but he's dead. The people there made a sloppy accusation about something strange that Chavez said.

Chavez was incautious to refer to "the people that crucified Christ" in the same sentence as an elite minority. These things all jumbled in the same sentence set of the guys at the Weisenthal Center.

I have a feeling that's what's got John Stewart riled up. That and the fact he hasn't been paying close enough attention to how much we need Chavez and a democratic-socialist latin America.

[iamthebandfanman]

204. lol

"He was wrong."

in your opinion.

[balzac]

207. ROTFLMAO!!!!

"in your opinion."

Gee, isn't that already implicit?

[iamthebandfanman]

208. hah

but you say it with such conviction!
even i almost thought he was a lying bastard ;)

[Name removed]

236. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gabi Hayes]

314. never mind.....your later post seems to negate this one

.

[seabeyond]

206. he isnt a democrat any more than moore or sheehan

we shouldnt make thse people be a part of our party. they arent, they dont want to be and they wont do our bidding. jsut gotta honor where we agree with them, and know they dont represent us. thank you for what they do accomplish

[Pastiche423]

220. English is not your 1st language, correct?

[LittleClarkie]

223. Is that all you got?

She made a valid point sans a few apostrophes. Big fuckin' deal.

[Pastiche423]

324. My comment was not to you

I was asking an honest question, as I have a lot of trouble reading her posts. Thus the question of language.

There are people that post here that have stated that English is not their 1st language.

What's your big fuckin' deal?

[mtnsnake]

341. Tactfulness isn't your first priority, correct?

Her post was just fine.

[Pastiche423]

357. Is your screen name seabeyond?

If not, why are you answering for her?

I've read many, many of her posts and have a difficult time understanding them.

If English is not her 1st language, then that would explain why.

[seabeyond]

359. over a 1000 posts, i am sure you are aware, people post on everyones

post, not specifically, and only to those that a poster is talking to. to say something to each person who responded to your post is not very tactful, lol lol. i am funny. hey... a lot of people have a tough time reading my posts, and a lot of people dont. you dont understand my posts, dont read. i could explain to you why i type this way, but i am sure you wouldnt understand and i wont waste my time.

i re read the post you are complaining about. i didnt use any big words. i dont understand why you dont understand that post..... doesnt seem too complicated to me.

but.... feel free to put me on ignore. wont hurt my feelings at all.

[Pastiche423]

361. Why was asking a simple question so upsetting?

I asked the question so that, maybe, I would better understand how/why you communicate the way you do.

You don't want to answer, no skin off of my nose.

Btw, I find it more tactless NOT to respond to someone who commented to me.

[seabeyond]

363. firstly, making an assumption to say i am upset.

i dont see anywhere you could have concluded from my post i was in the least upset. further, i would think you would get exactly the opposite from my post seeing how i said it would not bother me at all for you to put me on ignore. second, wooooosh, i am not tactless, thank goodness wink, seeing how i responded to your post and thirdly, not seeming like my post is too hard for you to understand since you were able to reply to my post.

[Pastiche423]

364. Where did I say YOU were upset?

If you had read my previous comments, you would have seen that I was referring to posts.


"I've read many, many of her posts and have a difficult time understanding them."


I also did not call you tactless.

I will now take your advice and not read your posts. Obviously you do not care to communicate.

[mtnsnake]

340. You are exactly right about that

It's amazing how quickly someone can go from hero to goat and back to hero again, all depending upon what happened last

[WCGreen]

215. It's a freakin' comedy show people.....

It's absurd that those two are hugging each other...

It really is...

And, Jon Stewert doesn't speak for the left or progressives....

IT'S A COMEDY SHOW....

[Zinfandel]

228. As says Limbaugh...

[WCGreen]

275. No Comparision there,,,,

Jon aims his comedy at the folly in government and leadership in general....

With Rush, all of his barbs partisan....

[rinsd]

322. Yeah that's a legit comparison...

Rush Limbaugh and Jon Stewart...have you lost your mind?

[Name removed]

230. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

231. Are you trying to get banned?

You can't accuse other DUers of being freepers/Republicans, particularly someone like WCGreen who has been posting here for quite some time.

[Name removed]

232. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

234. Well, if you'd like to stick around...

Perhaps you should take some time to find out who's been on this site for much longer than you (which, at this point, is almost everybody) and how many of these people, such as WCGreen, are highly regarded here.

Just some helpful advice.

[Ray_Duray]

233. TIME TO WAKE UP AND SMELL "ESTABLISHMENT" COFFEE?

To the Youth of America,

Do not be deceived. Jon Stewart Liebowitz is no Che Guevara. Although both have changed their names for theatrical purposes.

Che Guevara was the hope of my generation. He was a child of the middle class who became a revolutionary, a humanist, a philosopher and a mensch.

Jon Stewart is the hope of the youth generation of today. He is a child of the middle class who became a comic, a social critic, an erstwhile "street philosopher" and kibbitzer.

So, who you gonna trust? The real deal, or the phony, made-up-for-late-hour, never-sell-more-than-18 minutes-in the half-hour show guy?

Goy or guy? Who is real? Here's a clue..... It ain't Liebowitz. He's just ghost-dancing on the corpse of the American Republic.

GOD BLESS CINDY SHEEHAN! WE NEED MORE RIGHTEOUS BITCHES STANDING UP TO FASCISM, and far fewer little kibbitzers hedging their bets on how they'll make the big money with the corrupt advertisers who hire their sorry little kitschy asses.

[balzac]

235. I disagree. John Stewart is usually decent.

Stewart probably got thrown off by the Simon Weisenthal Center accusing Chavez of anti-semitism. That charge didn't stick, upon close examination of the quote in question.

I'm witholding judgement on Stewart because I have too many Jewish friends that get everything right politically, except for things that have to do with Israeli/Palestine issues or issues related to accusations of anti-semitism.

[Bridget Burke]

254. Do you have proof that Che was also anti-Semitic?

Ernesto Guevara de la Serna did not "change" his name. "Che" is a word used in Argentine Spanish--kind of like "Dude." Cubans & others who don't speak that version of Spanish often use "Che" as a nickname for Argentinos.

Spanish speakers often drop the "2nd" last name for brevity's sake. When making an introduction, "Guevara de la Serna" would be used; but "Guevara" would do for everyday conversation. Of course, you know that.

Jon Stewart is not the new Che Guevara? I never thought he was. He never said he was.

I'm not happy about the Daily Show bit being discussed. But I'm not upset that Jon is Jewish.

[KittyWampus]

258. Intentionally or not, this is one of the funniest posts on DU EVER!

:rofl:

[T Town Jake]

238. Chavez is a dictatorial piece of shit...

...so Jon Stewart is consistently "ragging" on those whom apologize for tyrants. That's called "not being a hypocrite," in the vernacular.

I used to remember when Jon Stewart could do no wrong hereabouts...*sigh*

My admiration for him remains high, despite this *sighful* "revelation."

[underpants]

252. The Chavez move was not a smart one by Cindi

[peacebaby3]

244. I wanted to see this for myself before I made any comments so

I watched the late night repeat. I was expecting to be really disappointed in Jon Stewart based on the comments here, BUT I thought it was actually really mild. Stewart points out extremism on both sides. He wasn't negative toward Cindy Sheehan at all about the T-shirt. In fact he noted that she, sadly, already had to alter it by hand, but he did point out her lauding Chavez. Chavez has some good points, but he and his government also have some bad points.

The dissent laws were updated and became more stringent in Venezuela in March of 2005 so what Stewart said is pretty close to accurate. If you offend the president or government you can go to jail for 20 months. If you gravely offend the president or government, you can go to jail for 40. If convicted of defamation, you can go to jail for 4 years. They are definitely stopping freedom of expression/speech in Venezuela under Chavez.

Chavez and his government are also practicing intimidation of political adversaries by taking them to criminal court. He and his government have also gone after a prominent human rights attorney.

Stewart was right to point out the hypocrisy of someone speaking at a public event in Venezuela lauding Chavez for standing up to their horrible president and government when if the roles were reversed, the Venezuelan could by law be jailed.

I support Cindy Sheehan but I do think she didn't really think out the praising Chavez moment. She's human, and last time I checked, none of us were perfect.

I admire Chavez for some of his policies and for helping out the poor here when their own government allows the oil companies to screw them and make record profits, but he also stifles dissent in his own country and I don't completely trust anyone who will not let the people of their country speak freely.

[BlueStateGirl1995]

246. Umm...

...could it be possible that he did it all for laughs? You know, being a comedian and all. :shrug:

[Lerkfish]

247. to the thread in general: If we applaud Stewart against the RWingers,

but not Stewart against the left, then we are operating with a double standard.
I'd of course prefer he attack the RW only, but that's not going to be realistic of an
expectation.
he's said some VERY brutal things about BUshCO, so if he gets one thing in against Cindy's
choices, I'll have to still think that's a relative good score overall for us.

[Guitarman]

253. I do not understand all this support for Chavez.

Is it just because he is anti Bush? Hopefully not, that is what is wrong with a lot of what is going on these days. It is not good enough to bash Bush. Hell, that is too easy. In order to make a real difference, those who oppose this administration and it's policies need to come up with ideas that will make a difference and then push for these new policies to be enacted.

Chavez is no great shining beacon of freedom and liberty. Certainly no one I want to hook my wagon to. He is popular in his country. But that does not make him a great leader. Look no further than our own fearless leader for proof of this.

Under Chavez a proposed new constitution increased the president's term by one year, allows him to succeed himself, eliminated one chamgber of the legislature, reduced civilian control of the military, expanded the government's role in the economy and allowed the assembly to fire judges. This to me sounds like our own president! Perhaps that is one reason they each dislike each other so much. They both see themselves in each other.

Currently in Venezuela 4 out of 5 people live below the poverty line. 20 years ago, the country had one of the highest standards in living in Latin America. Is this a leadership that we want to emulate?

As far as Cindy Sheehan goes, it appears that she has lost her focus. It is not enough to go around and bash Bush anymore. If she wants to be a leader, give the country alternate solutions to the problems of today. Give us a way for getting out of Iraq. Give us a way to make sure that no other president can decide to go to war so easily.

[Bridget Burke]

257. Please supply your source for the Venezuelan standard of living.

Chavez is not perfect but he's got his good points.

It's up to the politicians to come up with ways to get out of Iraq. Cindy can bash Bush all she wants.

[Guitarman]

259. Fareed Zakaria's book "The Future of Freedom"

Cindy wants to be a politician. She had better come up with something better than t-shirt slogans if she wants to succeed.

[Bridget Burke]

283. From the Publisher's Weekly review on Amazon.com

"Democracy is not inherently good, Zakaria (From Wealth to Power) tells us in his thought-provoking and timely second book. It works in some situations and not others, and needs strong limits to function properly."

Yup, Limits on Democracy are exactly what we need. Look what happens when we give peasants the right to vote. They actually use it.

Since Zakaria is a scholar, his book must have references. Why don't you look up the relevant passages, type in a snippet & give us his source?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

290. I read a Newsweek interview with him in which the reporter referred

to him as a former Neocon. Having read some of his stuff. I'm not surprised. He makes good points here and there but that's about it.

[Guitarman]

298. The limits that the book speaks of

relate to not giving any one portion of the government too much power. That goes for everyone from the president all the way down to the people.

Speaking of snippet. you are awful snippy today! It seems like you and this administration are all hung up on democracy. Democracy without liberty is not a lot to brag about.

While I am looking up my information. you can look up and tell us all of the wonderful things that Mr. Chavez are doing to ensure the liberty of his people.

[MadHound]

261. This whole broo ha ha has been very revealing

I think that a large part of the backlahs that we're seeing here has to do with the fact that Cindy justifiably criticized Clinton and all the deaths he caused in Iraq. All that Cindy did was golden up until then. All that Chavez did was golden up until then, including providing low cost heating oil to Mass this winter.

But then Cindy told the truth, and Chavez became a convinient whipping boy. And all the Clinton worshippers and DLC folks came a-swarmin'. Now Cindy is associating with radicals and communists, and blah, blah, blah. Laughable people, truyly laughable.

Face the facts, Clinton was not god come down to earth. In fact if you would examine his record dispassionately you would find that he was another cold hearted capitalist who did much harm both here at home and abroad. Was he better than Bush? Certainly, but that's really not saying much.

So stop with the Clinton worship and take a look at reality. Attacking a woman who has done more than anybody in this country to attack Bush and re-energize the peace movement should be beneath us. But sadly, it appears not to be.

[seabeyond]

276. no clinton was not god on earth, but madhound, nor is cindy

or chavez. that is all those that oppose on this board is saying and have been saying. three days ago we were shamed into suporting cindy 100%...... yesterday we are now told chavez is a hero that has created utopia.

i say NOOOOOOOT

look how you create, and decide what i see. you are wrong. i get to say that.

stewart, sheehan, moore are not democrats. they do not represent the deomcratic party. they dont want to. you want them too. they are not democrats, they dont want to be a democrat, and they wont represent the democratic party

that is the only thing i am saying in cindy, chavez...... and whomever else a group wants to put in the party...... like nader, he is NOT our friend. no he isnt

then i get called so many names.

why am i being unreasonable?

[MadHound]

280. Seabeyond, I'm pointing out the general hypocrisy that I see here

Three weeks ago, Cindy was a revered figure around here, admired for her stand, and credited for revitalizing the anti-war movement in this country.

Three weeks ago, while Chavez was acknowledged as doing good, both for his country and ours. Yes, he was a socialist, but he was looking out for the welfare of his people, and the poor worldwide, and taking a firm anti-Bush stance.

But then Cindy, in a fairly offhand comment, had the utter gaul to justifiably criticize Clinton. And all the sudden, her name turned to mud, her achievements brushed aside and discounted. And her appearance at a seminar with Chavez was taken as an opportunity to bash her for being to liberal, for reflecting badly on the Democratic party(even though she isn't a member, nor does she speak for them) and this whole scenario escalated to McCarthy like proportions.

This is hypocrisy friend, plain and simple.

And nowhere have I said that Cindy or Chavez are gods friend, nor have I stated that I want either one, or Moore for that matter, in the Democratic party. I've noticed this before, that you have a bad tendancy to stick words in peoples' mouths that weren't spoken or even implied. You really need to stop that. It is insulting to others, and makes you look foolish. Ever thought that that is one of the reasons you get called names?

All I'm doing here is pointing out the hypocrisy of many peoples' stance, including Stewarts. Perhaps people should learn from this. I hope they do.

[NYCGirl]

282. You can't include Jon Stewart in that. He was poking fun at Sheehan long

before she made the Clinton statement.

[MadHound]

286. From what I saw of Stewart last summer,

He was praising her an awful lot. Granted, I don't watch Stewart every night, but the impression I got from what I did see was that he admired and respected what she was doing and who she was. To have these attacks come on the heels of her Clinton comments seem rather telling to me:shrug:

[NYCGirl]

289. You're just projecting, IMO. NT

[MadHound]

291. Projecting what?

I have nothing here to project. I like Stewart, I like Sheehan, and I seriously doubt that I'm projecting hypocristy. Just analyzing the situation and putting my own two cents in.

[seabeyond]

297. i remember the trshing i saw of cindy on stewart. again, another one

i didnt like and didnt think he represented well to the public. it was that answer rally. hugest amounts of people and he focused on answer, and just trashed the whole thing. and there was cindy. yes. i had forgotten.

[seabeyond]

295. maybe she wasn't revered from all. i never revered her.

i am sorry if that is the expectation. i admire support value her work, but i never revered. many people didn't. but then we weren't talking cindy, if you wanted to revere her, so be it. you get to. but when we are told, that she must be supported 100%, then the people that didn't revere her, now say, wait a minute. no i dont. then, the argument is shifted to..... i am bashing cindy.

we could go on. but i would at least like someone to acknowledge, because i dont revere this woman, i am not bashing her either.

you say that is prevalent on this board. bashing.

most of what i am hearing from people is saying, i dont revere her.

they are saying no more than that.

what is the insistence that we revere this woman, why is respect not enough. and thank you not enough.

[peacebaby3]

288. I actually agree with Cindy's statement about Clinton, but I do think

it was fair of Jon Stewart to point out the hypocrisy of Cindy speaking out in dissent of her government while praising Chavez, when in his country there is a law on the books that limits free speech against the government and the president. She has every right to speak her mind, but that doesn't mean it can't be analyzed or criticized by those who disagree. I like a lot of things about Chavez as well, but I'm not going to deny the bad things about him either.

In my lifetime, I have never agreed with anyone 100% of the time and I think to do so would actually be really dangerous and a very right-wing, neoconservative value. I have agreed with Cindy Sheehan about 95% (or more) of the time and that is pretty damn good because I can't say that about many people including good friends and family members so I'm not bashing her in any way. My husband is a veteran of the Iraq war and has supported Cindy as well.

The sanctions on the people of Iraq and completely ignoring the genocide in Rwanda are two of the things I really think were horrible under Clinton.

I'm certainly not DLC and actually consider the Democratic Party too conservative on most issues, but the best option when I go to vote.

I've seen some posts from both sides of this issue that have been way over the top, IMHO.

[MadHound]

294. I don't disagree with a thing you've said

All I'm saying here is that I find all of this slamming of Cindy around here lately rather suspicious, in light of the fact that it comes on the heels of her Clinton comments. Just one of those things that make you go Hmmm:shrug:

[rinsd]

309. I think you have a point with Cindy and Clinton

I mean this is Democratic Underground after all.

"Now Cindy is associating with radicals and communists"

Who do you think was at the World Social Forum? Shriners?

As far as Chavez, its been going on far longer. There are rabid Chavez lovers and hatersas well as folks who like the socila progrmas, do not like the power grabing and it tends to get ugly. People here freaked out when Dean called Chavez a whacko. In the Chavez world, HRW and AI are tools of the necocons or CIA. In Chavez world, creating and training militias made up largely of your supporters is considered a good thing. In Chavez world, eliminating term limits is a good thing. In Chavez world dramatic restructuring of the judiciary is a good thing. In Chavez world a law against disrespecting the government is a jailable offense(though no one has been prosecuted it reminds me of the no abuses under the Patriot Act)

Chavez has done extrodinary wonderful things in terms of literacy, medical, voter participation etc etc. But when people point out some of the autocratic tendecies he has shown, it all out war, fur us or agin us.

[Sparkman]

310. sayin Bill was better than * IS TOO a big deal. Stark contrast twixt the 2

Let's not get carried away with this Clinton/DLC analogy to the Fascists in power. Hell, even the neo-cons don't act like Republicans, even if Clinton does.
I can't remember a worse climate since Vietnamese died by the millions, and Nixon criminalized the FBI.

[Guaranteed]

330. I hate the DLC. Cindy messed up. nt

[NNN0LHI]

262. I do not understand all this support for Jon Stewart

I never thought he was funny. I have only watched him a couple of times.

Don

[underpants]

265. We have one day of atoning for ours sins

You christians have what a MONTH. Even in sin you guys are paying retail.

This is part of the same set in which he says that the three major religions of the world all started in the same city...basically it is an old grudge from high school.

Stewart is funny IMHO. He also doesn't have to be he just shows the outright hippocracy (of both sides). It is funny to watch Frist diagnose Schiavo on the Senate floor from a videotape and then see him deny that it happened.

[NNN0LHI]

271. I am not suggesting his script writers don't write funny stuff

But I am saying the boy just doesn't do anything for me.

Some comedians are funny and some are not. He struck me as not funny.

Don

[donco6]

338. I think he's hilarious.

To each his own, I guess. I find his clips of Bush particularly guffaw-inducing.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

263. Was it funny? n/t

[seabeyond]

278. i was in the next room. i heard repug hubby walking away

from republican, and for the first time voting dem kerry say,.... wow

i came around corner, what, what happened. he never says wow about anything, so knew it must be interesting. he tells me, thats gonna help her cause. was being sarcastic. that is all it meant to him. he knew i supprted sheehan and spent a lot of time and his money he earns on sheehans campaign. my boys were really informed at part of the story. honoring what sheehan was doing. we are in texas. we felt a closeness and conection. i wanted to go down,..... but didnt. but that was also talked about here.

that was how he saw it

and then this is how he responds. take it for what it is worth. he also thought sheehan shouldnt have gotten arrested, and wearing a tshirt into speech would get you thrown out

this is average joe

did i think it was funny. not really. but then i admit, i am pretty baised. i have watched stewart bash dems at every turn. even when the dems stand up, he bashes them. then, when he doesnt shwo something about the dems, he bashes them for NOT standing up, ever.

jsut feeding the same old tired tired lines

that isnt funny to me.

colbert, though,.... he is very creative. ia m liking htat guy

but stewart interview was good. i wasnt watching but about data gathering. hsuband really needed to hear that man. he has believed that all this stuff is really happening. so..... it is going to make him think twice and explore.

its a show

i keep saying, these people arent democrats, so dont expect them to represent dems. they arent repugs either

[Guitarman]

311. Just saw the clip. Do not see anything wrong with it.

Cindy and Belafonte both need to look a little closer into what is going on in Venezuela especially in the area of human rights. Hanging out with Chavez just because he is a Bush basher was not a smart thing to to. Both Belafonte and Sheehan, in fact, everyone who is anti-Bush needs to be smarter than to just engage in random Bush bashing. The two of them appearing together like that was nothing more than mutual masturbation. For each of them, tt feels good for a minute but it does not accomplish anything.

I believe that in appearing with Chavez, it has hurt her credibility. It was a stupid thing to do and it has nothing to do with getting America out of Iraq and preventing future wars from being fought for made up reasons.

[Generator]

318. Wow just reading the subject titles of this one is fun

Hitler not elected and Clinton not a God are two faves.

I can't watch The Daily Show anymore. I'm taking this nightmare that's happening to our country too seriously. I haven't lost my sense of humor-but I'm more a Colbert Nation gal these days. (It's a 100% parody of cable news) He was my favorite part of of the TDS anyway. I did like Samantha Bee a lot. But it just makes me cringe when I turn it on. I miss it..but what's happening is just too serious these days. I caught a little of his state of the union one-that's the first one I've watched for months. IF Bush ever really does go down-I'll be a loyal viewer again. I don't like beating the underdogs much even if it is kinda funny.

[Gabi Hayes]

320. more humorous topics for Stewart to make fun of, besides.....

mothers whose sons were slaughtered in an illegal war:

quadruple amputees

holocaust victims

Emmit Tyll

Christopher Reeve

humor is all in the eye of the beholder, but his targets are too often becoming those who are most damaged, most helpless.

does he think he's maintaining some sort of balance by bashing the powerless almost as regularly as he does the neofascists?

I used to tape his show every day, but am probably going to stop, cause it just isn't as funny (to me...let's include that caveat) as it used to be.

the new 'reporters' don't do it for me, either, and the interviews, never a strong point (with the obvious exceptions of Hitchens, Krystol and a few others), are getting more and more sycophantic, credulous

[rinsd]

323. Posts like this just makes me more supportive of Jon....

That people have such a cult of worship around certain figures that ANYTHING negative whether its humor or crtitque is treated as if the nastiest insult possible was uttered.

[Gabi Hayes]

325. you GO, then.

more jokes on those out of power, PLEASE, John!

keep making fun Cindy, by all means

maybe he ridicule the people out on the ice floes, trying to stop the seal hunt.

now THAT's funny

[redherring]

334. Cindy Sheehan has lost even more credibility

Oh come on, Chavez is America's enemy.

[NYCGirl]

336. I don't see how "Chavez is America's enemy", as you say.

He can't do anything to threaten us, except for not giving us any oil. But he's not anyone to admire either, IMO. His human rights violations are just too troubling.

[redherring]

337. Well because he has decided to ally himself with

Fidel Castro. Even if he isn't America's enemy, do you admit that this move by Cindy Sheehan will hurt her reputation?

[NYCGirl]

345. I don't think Fidel Castro is a threat to the US either —

but I also don't think he's a good guy. He's more of a threat to his own people than to us.

Cindy is, of course, free to do any damn thing she wants to. But there is a certain irony in being thrown out of an event because of what was wriiten on one's shirt after praising a man who threatens to jail anyone who disrespects him.

[digno dave]

347. Cindy lost me some time ago...Chavez is a thug, a leftist thug, but a thug

She has wandered into a caricature of herself with her recent behavior. She has shown a lack of dignity in my vew, sad to say. My mom went to see her in Crawford and feels differntly than me...but that's just how i feel. I haven't disaggreed with her message, just her tactics.

[phrenzy]

352. Wow!

Many DUers are sounding frighteningly like the crazy islamists burning down embassies ...

WTF - I guess Cindy and Chavez are your Jesus figures and beyond reproach. Fatwah time for "Liebowitz"

And people wonder why some people call us the 'looney left'

(Replace Islam with Sheehan / Chavez)

[robcon]

360. Excellent point, phrenzy

DU should accept the idea that Chavez and Sheehan have faults... some of then very serious faults.

[robbedvoter]

354. Did the same to Belafonte also re: Chavez. DU-ers bit my head off

for trying to defend belafonte from St Stewart (whom I usually like, but....)