September 21, 2006
Political Quiz [Updated & Updated & Upd....]
Today's pop quiz on world politics has one question. Good luck!
Question:
Who recently labeled President Bush as a devil, imperialist, fascist, assassin, stupid, criminal, killer, madman, and genocidal murderer?
Possible Answers:
A. Hugo Chavez
B. Sen. Harry Reid
C. Al Franken
D. The New York Times
E. All of them
F. Answer is A, but the rest didn't disagree.
Voters should be concerned when you cannot distinguish the crazed rants of a South American communist dictator from the impressions given by a major U.S. political party and its mouthpieces.
[Update]
Rep. Charlie Rangel, a Harlem Democrat who has called President Bush just about every name in the book including "our Bull Conner," just concluded a press conference on the Chavez anti-Bush speech in which Rep. Rangel said, "You do not come into my country, my congressional district, and you do not condemn my president. If there is any criticism of President Bush, it should be restricted to Americans, whether they voted for him or not. I just want to make it abundantly clear to Hugo Chavez or any other president, but do not come to the United States and think because we have problems with our president that any foreigner can come to our country and not think that Americans do not feel offended when you offend our Chief of State."
Well, when I heard him, I admit that I was surprised. Maybe he hates the competition on attacking President Bush. But, Rep. Rangel did let some people of the world know that we may have squabbles among ourselves, just like a family, but that doesn't mean that we want outsiders to come here and attack our family members. That's how it should be. Let's see how many other Democrats and members of the media follow suit.
[More]
Leading Bush critic at home calls Chavez a "thug"
One of President George W. Bush's fiercest political opponents at home took his side on Thursday, calling Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez a "thug" for his remark that Bush is like the devil. "Hugo Chavez fancies himself a modern day Simon Bolivar but all he is an everyday thug," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said at a news conference, referring to Chavez' comments in a U.N. General Assembly speech on Wednesday. "Hugo Chavez abused the privilege that he had, speaking at the United Nations," said Pelosi, a frequent Bush critic. "He demeaned himself and he demeaned Venezuela."
If this keeps up and if Michael Moore comes out to defend President Bush, then I'll know that I've entered "The Twilight Zone" or "Bizarro World."
UPDATE AGAIN (But this time from GM) Well, that didn't take long, for ole Tom Harkin (DIM-0-crat, Iowa) to up the ante:
Iowa Senator Tom Harkin, a democrat, today defended Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's United Nations speech in which Chavez called President George Bush the devil. Harkin said the comments were "incendiary", then went on to say, "Let me put it this way, I can understand the frustration, ah, and the anger of certain people around the world because of George Bush's policies." Harkin continued what has been frequent criticism of the president's foreign policy."What an ass this man really is. What happened to politics stops at the waters edge?
Oh, no! How bad can it get? Further talking about President Bush, Hugo Chavez said, "He walks like John Wayne." And, what's wrong with John Wayne? Chavez is producing more gas than Citgo.
Well, here you can see the kind of person that Hugo Chavez does like....
I'll take John Wayne any day, thank you.
Posted by Woody M. at September 21, 2006 10:20 AM | TrackBackAnd just maybe, the Democrats don't disagree with Chavez one bit, but, and I know this is a big BUT, Charlie Rangel is running in probably the safest seat in Congress. The Democrats may well have run him out to call down Chavez and Ahmadinejad because of a perceived (and I think REAL) growning backlash about what Chavez said, to molify the conservatives as it were to keep them coming out and voting republican. Paranoid? You aren't necessarily paranoid if they are out to get you! :-)
Posted by GM at September 21, 2006 11:21 AM
G.M., I suspect that there is quite some truth in what you said. The typical American understands internal fights and hates outsiders getting involved. Maybe the Democrats got lucky and realized that it would be in their interest to take the high road on this, despite how they personally feel.
Posted by Woody at September 21, 2006 11:28 AM
Pelosi jumps into Charlie Rangels territory:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - One of President George W. Bush's fiercest political opponents at home took his side on Thursday, calling Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez a "thug" for his remark that Bush is like the devil.
"Hugo Chavez fancies himself a modern day Simon Bolivar but all he is an everyday thug," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said at a news conference, referring to Chavez' comments in a U.N. General Assembly speech on Wednesday."
G.M., we'e hitting on the same cylinders at the same time. --Woody
Posted by GM at September 21, 2006 11:36 AM
Rather than overanalyze, isn't it simpler just to acknowledge that Charles Rangel and Nancy Pelosi did the right thing today.
When the sun breaks through the clouds, just enjoy it while it lasts. Take a break from grim calculations as you bask in the sun's rays and perhaps even daydream a bit.
Soon enough chill reality will intrude when the sun crawls behind the clouds again. But aren't we entitled to take some pleasure once in a while...
Posted by civil truth at September 21, 2006 01:29 PM
Civil Truth, indeed we are " entitled to take some pleasure once in a while...", but when the Democrats "defend" Bush, I smell a rat. While I'm delighted they did, I suspect their motives. I updated with the info about Tom Harkins "backing" Chavez, so maybe the "sun crawl(ed) behind the clouds." Gads, I wish it were otherwise.
Posted by GM at September 21, 2006 02:55 PM
Rangel's position is not only opportunistic but tis idiotic. Following his silly logic Bush or any other US president has no right to comment on the actions of any foreign leader in the world. In an interconencted world where the actions of the US government have an impact far beyond our own shores whyu should world leaders have to censor themselves. I forged my politics in south Africa as a member of the ANC in the struggle against apartheid. Most experts know acknowledge that Reagan's policies of appeasement and "constructive engagement", arm trades and de facto military support for overseas adventures, with the racist regime probably stalled political progress towards bi racial democracy by about a decade. In those times we were rightly critical of American policies which streghthed our enemies adn acted as a barrier towards social justics. Rangel should be embarassed
Posted by Ahmed at September 21, 2006 03:47 PM
GM, don't put the Democrats in a no-win situation, where they get criticized whether they attack or defend Mr. Bush.
The sun rays which give me some hope, fleeting as it may prove to be, is that I think Rangel and Pelosi were defending the office of the President rather than Mr. Bush personally. That distinction between office and office holder has become blurred or worse with the onset of BDS in the body politic. Perhaps Mr. Chavez has belatedly roused at least some Democrats to recognize the critical importance of defending the office of the President as the leader of our country despite disapproval with and/or dislike of the individual.
Based on his appalling speech, Mr. Harkins' next logical action is to mount a sign on his posterior on which is written Kick Me!
Ahmed, you continue to show an inability to distinguish between legitimate diagreement on issues and ad hominem attack (exampled here by Mr. Chavez).
Posted by civil truth at September 21, 2006 04:38 PM
CT, I'll grant you your point, but I'll really have to see much more support when it comes to the Democrats vice Bush before I'll agree. 6 years of carping on their part, agreeing with every Schroeder, Chirac and sundry others has taken its toll with me.
Posted by GM at September 21, 2006 06:54 PM
Excuse me CT but if i read Rangel's idiotic statement correctly he said that only Americans have the right to criticise their presidents. That it 's right restricted to them as oppossed to foreigners. Reread what he said then take another look at my principled objection. Under his logic the anti apartheid movement had no right to attack policies supported by Republicans at the time which provided political support to the apartheid regime couched in the langauge of "constructive engagement". My objection then has nothing to do with Chavez in particular but the broader point
Posted by Ahmed at September 21, 2006 08:11 PM
I agree with civil truth. Rangell and Pelosi did the right thing. Bully for them. Let's all hope that Chavez keeps talking. It seems to be shocking some folks back into reality.
Ahmed, I don't recall that any US president has gone into another country and criticised its leader in a public speech. Very simple distinctions seem to elude you in your zeal to squeeze in everything you'd like to complain about about the US.
As to South Africa - then your position would be that Reagan should have boycotted South Africa because it was a generally racist and mildly corrupt government run by white people, as opposed to the extremely racist and massively corrupt African nations run by black or brown people?
Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at September 21, 2006 08:20 PM
Assistant Village Idiot,
Too true. For decades, the truly horrid treatment of black Africans by other black Africans has mostly been ignored.
It isn't PC.
Why?
Posted by tad at September 21, 2006 10:40 PM
Not to get too nit picky but Hugo Chavez delivered his speech, on US soil, yes, but at the United Nations. That's a small but significant detail. As for Apartheid South Africa you really dont want to get into this discussion with me. The bi racial movement for democracy led by Nelson Mandela and the ANC was in my opinion one of the most profoundly insipirational and corageous social of its era. The apartheid regime was not "generally racist" as any foolk would know. Race governed every single human relation from voting rights, to the groupo area act, to where you could live, work and marry. It was a white supremacist, a regional bully, viwed by the US as an ally in the Cold War, which sought on numerous occasions to destabalise other regimes. More than that South Africa always pocessed far more resources and wealth than the tin pot dictatorships surrounding it. US policy, thankfully changed over time away from "constructive engagement" as awareness grew in the States. We can thank those in the civil rights movement, unions and progressives for thta. I still remember the noxious and repugnant Jerry Falwell returnong from his visit to Aparthied South Africa praising the banstutan system which the whole world knew was an absolute fraud. Today those on the left and right all acknowledge the strength and courage embodied by Mandela and the struggle he represented. Not too long ago though many in the contemporary right wing (Cheney voted agaisnt a bill calling for Mandela's release) were appeasing, supporting and financing his jailers
Posted by Ahmed at September 21, 2006 11:53 PM
GM, don't put the Democrats in a no-win situation, where they get criticized whether they attack or defend Mr. Bush.
Par for the course...
Posted by e. nonee moose at September 22, 2006 06:07 AM
Ahmed, Chavez also said the same things about Bush and worse in a church in Harlem, which is U.S. soil last the that I checked.
Also, I'm not an expert on this, but it seems to me that the new government of South Africa has been making a mess of the economic situtation there and has made everyone equal by pulling some people down rather than pulling other people up. How do you view it?
Posted by Woody at September 22, 2006 09:32 AM
tom harkin is lucky he lives in the use because if he lived in the 2 countries of these disgracing animals that torn into our country and our beloved President Bush and spoke so bad and did not defend this country and Bush, mr harkin would be DEAD. it makes me and other americans wonder why he stays in the usa and why he serves in the senate with the thoughts and feeling he. we have the greatest gift of all, freedom and tom harkin abuses it, tom you need to go live in another country, SUPPORT YOUR PRESIDENT AND YOUR COUNTRY, DON'T BE A TRAITOR
Posted by joanhoward at September 23, 2006 08:58 AM
