Chavez's base, the poor, wobbles as election looms

[naaman fletcher]

Gloria Luna moved here believing President Hugo Chavez's brand of socialism would make life better for her family. Four years later her husband works occasional construction jobs and she sells lottery tickets. The couple and their four children, one of them 13 and pregnant, have no running water, their electricity comes through an improvised, illegal hookup, and rain turns the dirt roads to mud.

"We've been forgotten here," she said. "I feel so disillusioned."

...

In about three dozen interviews with The Associated Press in Caracas' poorest slums, many people reeled off a litany of grievances including crime, inflation and lack of sewers and running water. Only a few of those who identified themselves as traditional Chavez supporters expressed an intent to vote against his party, but many suggested they are feeling so disillusioned that they might not bother to cast ballots.

"Everything is worse now. With this crime, the high cost of living, there is no hope," said Gustavo Solorzano, a 31-year-old barber in the Petare slum.

In his wallet was the ID card of a younger brother shot and killed. He said people in his neighborhood dive for cover when gunfire rings out at night.

http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=1367033&lang=eng_news

[bherrera]

1. I understand the Chavez party already lost the elections in 2008

They lost the elections when they were held to elect the Caracas metropolitan mayor. The winned, Mr Ledezma, was not of Chavez' party, and Chavez ignored the popular will. What he did was he ordered the National Assembly to create a new post, which was to be named by Chavez alone. Then he named some woman to the post, and directed that all the money be given to her office. They also had outlaw members of the party of Chavez take over the office of city hall. Thus Chavez demonstrated his complete disregard for the will of the people of Caracas.

Because today things are a lot worse than they were in 2008, one would expect that indeed the people of Caracas, including a great portion of the poor sector, dislike Chavez and the corrupt and incompetent people who work for him. If these elections they will have are free and fair, then the Chavez party will lose.

[Peace Patriot]

2. This is typical Associated Pukes creative writing, designed to INFLUENCE the election.

They know that opinion polls cannot be published within the country in the last few weeks before the election--a standard "best practices" election rule--and they tried to false poll ploy in 2006 and got caught, so, in order to influence the elections--to add yet more anti-Chavez propaganda to the river of garbage that flows from the corpo-fascist press--they do a "poll" in a different way. They GO LOOK FOR a few disgruntled poor people to fill in the blanks for this clever, pre-written headline. It's almost a haiku. 5 syllables--"Chavez's base, the poor...", 7 syllables, "...wobbles as election looms"--needs 5 more syllables for the third line. How about,

Chavez's base, the poor,
wobbles, as election looms.
We pay cash for poems.

The Associated Pukes have never done any unbiased reporting on the Chavez government's astonishing popularity over the last ten-plus years, so, for the Associated Pukes to now provide its readers with poetry about the poor's "disillusion" may earn them prizes in cheap, "you pay for your prize" contests, but it ain't journalism.

Chavez has won every election that he has ever run in, by big majorities, and has furthermore maintained big majorities in the National Assembly that support his policies. He has been one of the most popular politicians in the world. He has done this in honest, aboveboard, transparent, internationally monitored and certified elections--something else that the Associated Pukes have never conveyed to their readers. The rightwing opposition boycotted the last National Assembly elections (giving Chavez a 100% supportive legislature). They are bound to win some seats, now that they have deigned to participate in Venezuela's elections. Most polls predict they will win about 25% of the seats. The Associated Pukes are preparing the narrative that this is a "defeat" for Chavez, and they are trying their darndest to up that MINORITY vote to, say, 30%, so they can then say that Chavez is "finished."

Contemplate the contrivance of this Associated Pukes "reporter," in trying to make the poor fit the headline:

---

Gregorio Mattey, a 33-year-old construction worker, said he has done well under Chavez.

"I consider myself a revolutionary," he said. "I'm living better now because I have my house, my work."

Yet he acknowledged inflation is squeezing him and he fears his 10-year-old son could get caught up in crime and drugs.

---

What happened here is that the poor guy didn't give Fabiola what she was looking for--criticism of Chavez ("disillusion," "wobble")--so she FEEDS HIM questions. "What about 'inflation'?" "What about "crime in the streets'?" (--two out of three rightwing "talking points" in the CIA memo). And he says, 'well, yeah, Inflation is inflation" (she makes up the word "squeeze"--notice there are no quotes), and he muses, 'well, yeah, what parent is not worried that his kid could get caught up in crime and drugs?' (and she sticks in the word "fear," again with no quotes). The guy's doing very well. His kid is fine. He credits Chavez's Bolivarian Revolution. She, struggling to find ANYBODY in the barrio "wobbling" about Chavez, frames a Chavez supporter's statements with CIA "talking points."

The whole article is like this. She uses a Catholic university professor as her "expert." (The Catholic universities are notoriously anti-Chavez. That's where the USAID recruits and "trains" anti-Chavez protestors.) She uses ONE poll that has anti-Chavez results and IGNORES all the more recent polls that say that he and his socialist party are going to crush the rightwing opposition in the National Assembly elections. Well, not if the Associated Pukes can help it, in their campaign to force the poor to be "disillusioned."

Chavez cuts poverty IN HALF, and cuts extreme poverty by 70%, but, but, but, but, this maid who lives in the barrio gets shit pay from her rich employer and says she's "waiting" for the Chavez to help her. ("'Here I am, waiting,' she said.') Wobble, wobble.

But the following takes the cake:

---

"High prices for oil, Venezuela's chief export, fed an economic boom between 2004 and 2008 and helped cut the share of Venezuelans living in poverty from about 60 percent to 33 percent during that period, according to the government's National Statistics Institute. It puts the present rate at about 30 percent, and says the number living in extreme poverty has also fallen sharply.

Chavez counts it as a triumph that the poverty rate has halved. Yet in the past two years, the recession and racing inflation have been eating away at those gains and breeding discontent.

---

"Eating" and "breeding." Another haiku in the making? While the BUSHWHACK DEPRESSION is "eating" whole governments round the world, and deflation "shock and awe" darkens the sky with an ominous cloud, with just about the only exceptions being Venezuela and its closest allies (Brazil, Bolivia, Ecuador), the poor in Venezuela are "breeding" with "discontent", like the barrio dweller who shouted from the window at the rightwing opposition candidates for whom AP staged this event, "Fascists! You will not return!"

"Eating and breeding."
A reporter goes shopping.
"Fascists! You will not return!"

"High prices for oil" did NOT help cut poverty in half in Venezuela. The CHAVEZ GOVERNMENT cut poverty in half in Venezuela, with the virtually unprecedented decision, in human history, to USE THE PROFITS FROM THE OIL TO BENEFIT THE POOR.

Haiku is a notoriously ambiguous form of writing. So is Associated Pukes "journalism." Learn to read between lines.

[bherrera]

3. Latin America's Poverty Rates Report

Here's a UN report from 2007 discussing poverty rate reduction in Latin America

http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/9/30309/PSI2007_Sintesis_Lanzamiento.pdf

The oil price Venezuela receives has gone up four X versus what it received before Chavez was elected, therefore it makes sense if the poverty rate has been reduced. It is also true the Venezuelan government has made efforts to improve the living conditions for the poor. But the effort has been uneven, and the efficiency of the way the money is spent is not very good. This is discussed by Heinz Dieterich in aporrea.org, in a comment which he states Chavez is creating clientelism, that is, he uses oil cash to distribute to the poor, but does not create the conditions which allow them to develop better lives.

The issue of crime has been highlighted in the press recently, because according to polls it is the main concern of the Venezuelans, and this will influence election results. The following report discusses the crime rate in Latin America in general

http://cidh.org/countryrep/Seguridad.eng/citizensecurity.toc.htm

The following is an interesting article from THE ECONOMIST about the crime rate in Venezuela, which impacts the poor a lot:

"Even by official figures, Venezuela’s murder rate is shocking. In the first 11 months of 2009, according to the interior ministry, there were 12,257 homicides. Independent experts put the figure at around 16,000 a year, more than three times as many as in 1998, the year before Mr Chávez came to power. That is a rate of around 57 per 100,000, one of the world’s highest. The government, however, seems less concerned with reducing the crime rate than with preventing press coverage of it."

http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2010/08/crime_venezuela

Therefore the picture is mixed. While the government does some efforts to reduce poverty, the living conditions of the poor remain miserable, due to this high crime rate, which has increased during the Chavez terms in office.

[Peace Patriot]

4. Well, you think the majority of Venezuelans have been voting for Adolph Hitler all this time.

...you and Donald Rumsfeld (who also compared Hugo Chavez to Adolph Hitler). We gotta wonder about the company you have placed yourself in. Truthful? Honest? Reliable? Cherrypick your facts much?

The Economyst is extremely hostile to the Chavez government, and to the entire leftist movement that has swept Latin America. They are just trumpeting the three rightwing "talking points"--"Blackouts, Inflation and Crime, Oh My!"--chanted by the rightwing in Venezuela, and thought up by some USAID 'contractor' in Washington DC. They are as bad as the Associated Pukes and the New York Slimes. They get the "memo"; they construct articles around it. It is THE SAME MEMO throughout the corpo-fascist press, with the SAME three "talking points," and what they are doing is trying to INFLUENCE the Venezuelan National Assembly elections on Sept. 26, so that the rightwing won't get a drubbing (as the polls are predicting), but edge up to, say, 30% of the seats in the legislature, so they can all say that Chavez "is finished." (And will any of them note that the rightwing boycotted Venezuela's transparent, honest, internationally monitored and certified elections last time around, and are bound to gain SOME seats, now that they have deigned to participate in Venezuela's elections? You heard it here first--they won't!)

What would Donald Rumsfeld say? Do tell us.

Here's Rumfeld (comparing Chavez to Adolph Hitler)...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11159503/

Here's you (doing the same)
(first comment) http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=405x40695

So, guess what? I don't believe anything you say. And I urge others to employ my rule of thumb for Bushwhacks, and posters like you: whatever you say, the opposite is very likely true.


(edited for typo)

[bherrera]

5. It is sad to see those who will not see

Evidently you are convinced Chavez is a socialist. I am convinced Chavez is a fascist. It is an old trick to smear people by saying "oh, but you think like such and such person who has a terrible reputation". I do not read what Mr Rumsfeld has to say about anything. I posted some of the articles I have read which convince me Chavez is practicing a form of fascism. I also posted comments by Dr Dieterich which reveal he thinks Chavez is not a true socialist. Dr. Dieterich is evidently not Mr Rumsfeld. Therefore your argument, I am afrarid, is empty. You do have a technique which is very common by those who want to divert attention and silence dissent: change the subject, smear, and personally attack. I understand what you are doing, and I hope others do as well. In the end, I think I am seen as an honest person who will not attack others for their opinions, and who is willing to discuss the topic openly.

I don't see your side discussing the realities, the benefits and harms of the various options. I support the model adopted by President Lula da Silva, which is quite different and more effective than the one being applied by Mr Chavez. And please don't tell me the two men are allies. I don't really care if they make love in bed every night, in the end, the two are using very different approaches, and the one used by Brazil is winning, while the one being used by Venezuela is losing.

[Peace Patriot]

8. You compared Chavez to Adolph Hitler. It's right there in black and white,

in your own words.

Donald Rumsfeld said the same thing. Do you take it back? Do you condemn Rumsfeld for making such an unfair, unreal, twisted, lying, scumbag, mass murdering statement?

WHO is the mass murderer, hm? Tell me. Rumsfeld or Chavez?

I repeat: Do you take it back? Do you condemn Rumsfeld for saying it? And who is mass murderer--Rumsfeld or Chavez?

Cuz until you answer these questions satisfactorily, I am going to continue to attack your posts as the products of a mind that thinks like Donald Rumsfeld--who will say ANYTHING, no matter how outlandish, no matter how insane, now matter how twisted, no matter how untrue, because he lives in an "Alice Wonderland" world where anything he says is true because he says it: the Red Queen ordering the natural white roses to be PAINTED red, because she is THE QUEEN and her color is RED, and therefore everything must be red. Lewis Carrol was describing a psychosis just like Rumsfeld's. That is who and what you have associated yourself with, by comparing Chavez to Adolph Hitler. And nothing you say has any meaning or any credibility after making a statement like that. It is not possible to have a reasonable discussion with someone who thinks like that. And if you can't understand what you did, well, that is too bad. I will not let such a lie stand. I am going to comment on as many posts of yours as is humanly possible, pointing out that abominable lie, so that you don't get away with it and continue PRETENDING that you want a reasonable discussion.

[naaman fletcher]

6. The press talking politics leading up to an election?

How unbelievable!!!!!

[bherrera]

7. Maybe it should be like in Cuba

In Cuba, the press and television are controlled by the state. Their elections are a fake system. I suppose the Cubans who run that demagogic regime, more focused on maintaining its power than in anything else, are now in Caracas mentoring the chavistas to convince them the only media which is fair is one which describes with glowing terms the great accomplishments of the Bolivarian Revolution. Like Cuba's media, they are supposed to sing hymns to the record potato grown by a farmer in a comune, or to the great oil reserves they have, oil reserves which might as well be in China, because I don't think the Venezuelan people will benefit from them. And now I go to sleep, and my vacations are over in two days, thus I will not be writing much. Good luck to the Venezuelans, may you avoid violence during these elections, and hopefully you can recover your National Assembly for the people.

[Peace Patriot]

9. The "press" is simply repeating the three RIGHTWING "talking points" over and over again.

They're all doing it--the SAME three "talking points." That is not journalism. That is a disinformation campaign. And if you can't recognize a disinformation campaign when you see one, then you are a prime candidate for being led down the garden path by tyrants and evildoers. You are who Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were worried about when they put the First Amendment into the Constitution: gullible citizens fed crap news by the powers-that-be, tyrants and cartels, controlling information. They hoped that citizens would arm themselves with their own sources of information against control of the news by such forces.

You may not be able to see it because you agree with anti-Chavez views. So it doesn't matter to you what is being done to him by the corporate-run press. But be warned. The relentless, repetitive propaganda against Chavez is a very bad and dangerous thing. The power of the corporate-run press to publish only anti-Chavez information, and to spread it all over the world, is a tyrannical power. They used this power to promote the Iraq War. They use it on many issues. It is not journalism. It is sophisticated brainwashing and manipulation, in the interest of the multinational corporations and war profiteers who own and control the news media.

It is a plain fact that there has NEVER been a positive news story about the Chavez government. NEVER! NOT ONE! The man has had a 60% range approval rating throughout his tenure in office. He has been elected and re-elected by big majorities of the Venezuelan people. He is is a respected figure in Latin America, and friends and allies with many other Latin American leaders. NOT ONE positive or even reasonably objective story. NOT ONE! Do you not SEE how wrong, how dangerous and how tyrannical this is?

This disinformation campaign has highly sophisticated aspects to it--for instance, their dwelling on Chavez himself, the creation of a bogeyman whom they can beat up on every time anything goes wrong in Venezuela, and even if nothing is wrong. They have sometimes used made up shit like Chavez is anti-semitic. This sophisticated technique makes the news consumers oblivious to the Venezuelan voters--to the people who who support him, who put him in office, who risked their lives to keep him in office when the coup attempt occurred. Tens of thousands of people are thus disappeared into a black hole where news of them should be. But the cruder techniques that they use should be obvious to anyone who tries to think for himself: that there has NEVER been a positive or even a nominally objective story about this hugely popular president and government. That should set off your alarm bells, if you have the capacity for objective thinking.

You are saying that "the press talking politics leading up to an election" is normal--i.e., why am I having a conniption fit over it? What I am saying is that it is NOT normal for ALL the corporate-run media to publish ONLY hit pieces against ONE side, leading up to an election--with, in addition, all of them saying the same things. That is not journalism. It is advocacy, by the entire press corps, of ONE side in an election. And they have NEVER treated Chavez otherwise. Never! News coverage of Chavez has been seamlessly negative, by the corporate-run press, from the beginning.

It is unbelievably distorted. And I think that that is not just wrong and unfair, it is dangerous. This enormous power they have to demonize, to distort, to promote an unreal view of the world has led us down one disastrous path--the Iraq War--and others lurk, including more wars, economic depression, government obliviousness to climate change, potential rebellion and repression, and descent into chaos. As to Chavez, the unreality of not understanding his popularity and his political power, especially regionally, could lead to disastrous economic and political decisions, for instance, north American isolation and alienation from the entire Latin American region. The corporate-run press is making us STUPID, in addition to everything else.

[naaman fletcher]

10. Well,

I guess what you are saying makes sense supposing that in fact there are no major papers that ever write positive stories about Chavez. Can anyone enlighten me on that? I have assumed that for all the "opposition" papers that thee are pro-chavez papers as well.