digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Venezuela's Chavez says "GRINGOS GO TO HELL!"

news.yahoo.com — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Sunday told the U.S. government to "go to hell" after it questioned his plan to seek special powers to legislate by decree as part of his self-styled socialist revolution. "That is a sacrosanct legal authority of Venezuela, go to hell gringos! Go home! Go home!" Chavez said...

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • mattman12345, on 10/12/2007, -78/+69what an *****
    • gcnaddict, on 10/12/2007, -29/+3everyone bury diggmirrors down when he posts here. Go flag his blog too. He'll do it once this reaches the front page.
    • ExposeIT, on 10/12/2007, -23/+3hey guys check this out! a mirror to the site:

      http://www.duggmirror.com

      LOLTHERMITE!!!! IT WAS A CONSPIRACY kekekekeke ^_^
    • LVsFINEST, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2@gcnaddict

      http://www.duggmirror.com

      ?
    • ThinkBox, on 10/12/2007, -22/+6This guy sounds just like a child, "I want a squirrel NOW daddy!"

      (wonka quote)
    • RoflcopterFUEL, on 10/12/2007, -61/+37Chavez is a great man. His presidency prooves that resisting foreign interference and imperialism is not at all futile. May the spirit of the amazon guard his soul.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -21/+43I love the hypocrisy. Chavez loves to talk ***** about the U.S. to get approval of the Venezuelan people, yet Venezuela remains one of the biggest oil exporters to the U.S.

      Just goes to show you that politics are corrupt wherever you look.
    • foobar5892, on 10/12/2007, -16/+9Ay caramba!
    • Kavok, on 10/12/2007, -15/+39@Ignignokt01
      If Venezuela denied oil to America what do you think America would do?
    • bazmail, on 10/12/2007, -18/+29@Ignignokt01

      shows the hypocrasy of the US to. They are lining Chavez pockets with US currency, and lots of it.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18Yeah, I know. Notice the last sentence in my comment?
      "politics are corrupt wherever you look."
      When I wrote that I wasn't excluding the U.S.
    • technoticau, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Business is business, politics is just another business.
    • 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -20/+31"Chavez is a great man."

      He is obviously not so great at history, watch his country fall. It must be a huge sense of arrogance that makes him think he will succeed where every other socialist country has failed, or has large cracks in it.
    • BetaMerc, on 10/12/2007, -14/+5You gotta have guts to say this, and i mean, really have guts!
    • clawoo, on 10/12/2007, -26/+18I don't know, but he does seem to make a point against Bush in this TV appearance (I don't know the date): http://www.fugly.com/view_video.php?viewkey=f85129b9953950665064

      "I'm going to tell you something, Mr. Danger. You are a coward. You know? You are a coward. Why don't you go to Iraq and command your army? It's so easy to command an army from afar. If you ever come up with the crazy idea of invading Venezuela, I'll be waiting for you in this savanna, Mr. Danger. Coward, assassin, genocist."

      And ends with "God save the world from this menace". Sadly, he's right.
    • gallagherFTW, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8well he had better hope no one ever opposes his government, because we'll probably end up secretly backing it :)
    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -11/+23I wish I could boycott Citgo even more. As it is, I haven't bought gas from Citgo in 4 years.
    • keyrat, on 10/12/2007, -15/+13@Ignignok

      It's not really hypocrisy. Chavez has nothing against the American people, but he's completely at odds with the administration, who is constantly trying to meddle with affairs in his country. He wants to provide everyone with cheap gas, and he's even come here to the US and opened the pumps to the poor (something completely rediculous).

      Chavez is also a ***** idiot, and a populist, which makes for some really stupid speeches that pander to that victimized mentality (kind of like Bush used to do, 'cept Bush wasn't so direct). Still, it's not a blow to your nationalism, you proud *****' retards.
    • sneakywombat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@ Bazmail -

      Chavez can say what he likes. The fact remains that the US cannot afford to do anything about it right now. We need the oil, they need the money. Let him carry on with his foolish rhetoric.
    • ilyag, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Chavez has done everything in his power to become a DICTATOR. Regardless of how you view socialism, you can't possibly support this man after he has rewritten his country's constitution to take a lot of the power away from Venezuela's democratically-elected legislature and give that same power to himself.
    • tyho, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5LOL Chavez
      This is the kind of thing you would expect from some childish, ignorant, America hating Digg user, not the head of state of Venezuela. Wait a minute, nicociri, is that you Hugo?
    • Daedalus317, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Who cares what this ass-hat has to say. I'm not loosing any sleep over it.
    • kuzotz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@h00paj00

      what about american citgo employees? Point being said. Only white Americans give a damn because they are losing their world privaledge. I'm black never had it so anywher eI travel I go through more ***** because I might be "nigerian" trying to smuggle in a bomb or some ***** like that... Anyway I can care less of what Chavez does.
  • mc7winkie, on 10/12/2007, -28/+19I would bet anything that Chavez is lacking "power" in a certain "area." ;)
  • bjtitus, on 10/12/2007, -48/+9Someone should definitely kill him (assassination anyone?). He obviously lacks the professional mindset to lead a country. That isn't to say you should be too professional, but he's obviously a loose cannon.
    • jinki, on 10/12/2007, -16/+57"He obviously lacks the professional mindset to lead a country."

      I couldn't agree more. Why can't he be more like Bush?

    • AniceAtheist, on 10/12/2007, -16/+24Someone should kill him because "He obviously lacks the professional mindset to lead a country."

      on that logic how come Bush is still terrorizing the world?

      Disclaimer for the NSA:
      I am not condoning assasinating anyone just pointing out the dumb logic. please don't knock on my door.

      Disclaimer for those without humor:
      It is called satire
    • sotopheavy, on 10/12/2007, -11/+23Nobody should kill him! It seems like he is promising a lot to his countrymen. Nationalizing many industries. Community building projects. Raising Oil export prices... uh oh I have a feeling something bad is going to happen to him :-O

      This guy also reminds me of Scarface. But with politics instead of drugs... maybe both
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -14/+10"Someone should definitely kill him (assassination anyone?)."
      I can see you've also been watching the 700 club with Pat Robertson. I love that show. Did you also know that he has his own protein shake? If you love his show you should definitely check that out too. The man is a prophet for our times:
      http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/5476/patrobertson1lc.jpg

      (BIGGEST SARCASM EVER!!!!)
    • mabhatter, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9His people like that! He's already survived 1 US backed coup by his generals...and the voters and some military officers hid him from harm and rioted in the streets to put him back. The video documentary over at google? is really quite telling... note the only country to recognize the "new govt" was the USA.. in less than 12 hours!!! The guy can pretty much do and say what he wants now. After all he holds the spigot to 15% of all the oil into the USA!! He doesn't need an army by his side to simply turn that spigot off. And he could easily get UN protection FROM the USA to prevent invasion... it would be 10 ways illegal he's not a terrorist, at this point he holds all the diplomatic cards.. of course he's courting China as the next big customer. Maybe he can trade some free oil for a few downed GPS satellites so the USA can't target his country with advanced remote control weapons of mass destruction.

      I think it's fun just to see some other leader have our "cowboy" president's buttons so ready to push. It's a unique position and it's not like he's supporting terrorists or planning to overthrow anybody, he just wants his nation to be truly sovereign...and stop being treated with second class international rights.
    • kuzotz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's sad man we now have to make NSA disclaimers in all of our internet post?
  • homerj14, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2be careful what you say Bjtitus
  • starfisch, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1chavez wrote for amputechture?
  • erikf, on 10/12/2007, -12/+43Imagine if a White politician said "Spics, go to hell."
    The press wouldn't even say the word "spic" or ""wetback" or "cockroach", the press would say "a derogatory term used for hispanics that implies them crossing the rio grande or breeding like a populous, unwelcome household insect."

    • sotopheavy, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2Imagine if God said that. (sorry thats just wrong)
    • transeunte, on 10/12/2007, -22/+14I don't know if you're aware of that, but "gringo" is not an offensive word.
    • erikf, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17Yeah it is. Addressing people by their race or culture is almost always offensive. And the way he said it is so obvious you retard. He didn't even say "gringos we love you"
    • transeunte, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5"Addressing people by their race or culture is almost always offensive."

      And since when is "gringo" a race or a culture? Are gringos the people of Gringoland?
    • gathly, on 10/12/2007, -19/+14When I see what some Americans post on this thing, I really wonder if democracy would ever work. The US is terrifying as a corrupt plutocracy, but I can't see it working any better as a real democracy. People are so stupid in this country. Chavez is a small power in a tiny nation that is directly threatened by the biggest empire in world history and he makes a few comments about Bush and Gringos?? So the ***** what. Are people really that ***** stupid?

      "dude, he said something against Uh-merica, let's ***** kill him, dude."

      And if you do believe in democracy, then shouldn't you support Chavez after being overwhelmingly re-elected in his country after millions of dollars were spent by the US on a propaganda campaign to defeat him?

      And if Chavez and Morales are able to create a United South America as a block against the never ending rape of their countries by US business interests then it's about ***** time. They've earned that. The US has been messing in their internal politics for over two hundred years, and Europe has for 500.

    • erikf, on 10/12/2007, -11/+23"And if you do believe in democracy, then shouldn't you support Chavez after being overwhelmingly re-elected in his country after millions of dollars were spent by the US on a propaganda campaign to defeat him"


      You think Chavez actually won the elections fairly? You bash America, the greatest democracy in the world yet you heap praise on Chavez as he seeks to abolish the checks and balances and gain all the trappings of a despot? You fell for his propaganda campaign and he didn't even have to spend a dime. That makes you a huge sucker. You have so much hate for America, if you live here you should leave already. Though you sound like you're 15 and you'll probably grow out of your typical manufactured, unoriginal rebellion stage enough.
    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -10/+12@transeunte: Yes it is. It is offensive.

      ***** Chavez, right in his chalupa.
    • Valarauka, on 10/12/2007, -9/+9erikf - yes, I DO happen to think he won fairly. If you don't believe that, read about the 2002 US-backed coup attempt against him: the only reason it failed was because the whole country started rioting in the streets. That's a pretty stunning endorsement.

      Just because YOU don't like him doesn't mean the Venezuelans don't. And unfortunately for you, democracy means electing who they like, not who you like. I suggest you think about what propaganda you yourself have fallen for before you go spouting off like that again.
    • keyrat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@erikf

      Something like 70% of Venezuela lives in poverty. He panders to that majority. The other 30% couldn't even come together under a single candidate, so you had two choices for his opposition. How could Chavez lose? It would have been impossible. Not only that, he's won the elections twice, and once under US and international scrutiny.
    • bruffner, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Gringo is taken from Mexico where the Mexicans used the word to mean Green Go.. Or Green Go Home. Which was aimed at the American army who wore green uniforms. During our occupation they were not very fond of us. The term is used in the same sense by him to mean the US government/military.
    • transeunte, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3So this is about being called "gringo"? (which is a generic word for FOREIGNERS, not aimed toward any particular culture or place in the world)

      Or is this about Yankees throwing a hissy fit over some bold cholo? :)
    • dk911, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gringo

      1) Usually Disparaging. (in Latin America or Spain) a foreigner, esp. one of U.S. or British descent.
      2) Used as a disparaging term for a foreigner in Latin America, especially an American or English person.

      Wow, sounds pretty inflammatory to me...

    • kronix2, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1@erikf:

      "You bash America, the greatest democracy in the world"

      Consider the following: your elected President lost the popular vote in the 2000 election, had his brother fix the vote in Florida, and had his dad's appointees in the Supreme Court effectively declare him the winner. If America is truly the greatest democracy in the world, the world is in a terrible state.

      I'd wager that precisely 5.7 billion people don't believe America is the greatest anything. :)
    • Karyyk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2grin·go (grĭng'gō) Pronunciation Key
      n. pl. grin·gos Offensive Slang
      Used as a disparaging term for a foreigner in Latin America, especially an American or English person.

      Offensive slang... Yes, there are offensive terms for white people too. Honkies...
    • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@Valarauka

      Yes, Chavez got elected democratically. And yes, he has the support of the poor in Venezuela.
      However, he is a despot who cracks down on his opposition without regard for their rights.
      People who oppose Chavez can't find work in Venezuela and their lives are made miserable by the government.
      The town where I live (in Florida) has a very large population of Venezuelans. Many of them had to leave their country because of persecution.

    • keyrat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Nobody has had to leave Venezuela because of persecution, but it is true that if you're not with the majority you're screwed. It's not really Chavez, though. It's the people who discriminate, and they're the majority.
    • transeunte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Offensive language usually suggests stuff. I wonder what gringo does suggest. Is it a diminishing term? If so, what does it imply? That all foreigners are schmucks? If anything, they are for looking up foreign slang on their English dictionaries.

      Really, you guys wanna come out offended on this one and don't even know why. Plus, since when can't Latins be "white", as you call yourself? As far as I know, we're as racially mixed and just as Americans as you.
    • kuzotz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2lol @ekif

      America = the greatest democracy?

      Wow have you seen how our system works?

      IT goes down to a two party system.. This is very unusual for a democracy. There are usually atleast 5 parties competing.
  • voteforblank, on 10/12/2007, -18/+30Chavez does not have a problem with the American People... who he has helped out with fuel assistance... It the American Government that he is bashing.

    Our State department has done such a fine job of working with other governments.... Communism on the rise... Terrorism has set in... Pat yourselves on the back Bush Administration.... more Gringo News to follow!
    • sicc, on 10/12/2007, -29/+17No, he does hate whites. He also hates America. The only reason he goes into poor black areas and gives free fuel is to stir the pot and see if he can cause internal problems. They guys a douchebag.
    • Kavok, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11@sicc
      proof please?
    • spartan777, on 10/12/2007, -15/+10Chavez does hate the US, all of it. Chavez hate the US before Bush, and the last time I looked in the dictionary, gringo meant a white, not the Bush Administration.
    • Kavok, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7@spartan777
      I will repeat, lets see some resources for this "Chavez hates all of America" claim.

      Maybe you've been watching cable news too much?
    • spartan777, on 10/12/2007, -9/+10well think about it. does gringo mean George Bush, or does it mean, according to Dictionary.com: (in Latin America or Spain) a foreigner, esp. one of U.S. or British descent? Methinks the latter.
    • erikf, on 10/12/2007, -13/+13Chavez hates America but he loves you naive leftist suckers that fell for his anti-American propaganda campaign that tried to divide Americans against each other.
    • Jemulov, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7It's ***** like this that makes me want the U.S. to screw other nations and just become self sufficient. We need to start by making it more popular to use other means of transportation and cutting down on driving places in general. People will start finding other ways to do things. Then all we need to do is say, "To hell with you Chavez! You too oil sheiks!" then start developing alternate fuels. It's simple. We'll just go through a decade long transitional phase where we switch over from oil to biodiesel, Hydrogen, or whatever. Then we won't have to kiss the ass of every single country that trades oil with us. But it's that transitional phase that scares people to doing things the easy way and have our ass handed to us by the rest of the oil producers.

      It's times like these, where punk ass countries give us the finger and we bend over backwards for them, that I feel that we aren't the world's greatest nation.
    • keyrat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@Jemulov

      It's not about the difficulty, guy. It's about interests. For all the bad that Bush has done for this country, the one thing he has managed to do perfectly is make his friends and family super rich. Oil is at an all time high, and Bush and his friends all make tons from oil. It's not in the administration's interest to come off oil. It will be when the next president comes in, because (hopefully), he won't be so invested in oil.
    • strebormj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Chavez does not have a problem with the American People... who he has helped out with fuel assistance... It the American Government that he is bashing."

      This is a canard. His racial slur appears be directed at all white Americans, who he ignorantly equates with the entire ethnic body of the government and nation. Whites are actually underrepresented in the government. At least two minority groups are vastly overrepresented. So, it's hardly a white government, let alone, a white country and it's still a bigoted racial slur impugning the character and dignity of all white Americans.
  • Holyfool19, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8There is no good reason, in 2007, for the UN to allow ANY president or country to not hold general elections at least once every five years.
    • Akaji, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25Other than, you know, the fact that the UN is about as influencial as a castrated milkman.

      Or, on a more serious note, that we ought not force political ideas on other nations, except in cases in which those nations' governments are causing grave acts of violence or brutality towards their citizens or other countries' citizens.
    • niczar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12The UN was never meant to tell countries how often they should hold elections, nor if they should hold elections at all. So yeah, it's useless in that respect, just as a broomstick is useless for flying, even if you believe in witches.

      Besides, Chavez just got reelected in a landslide.
    • jdanielcaldwell, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6The UN is only useless because the United States has made it so by ignoring most of it's policies and decrees.

      Also the article states that Chavez would call for removing the term limit, which doesn't suggest that there wouldn't be elections but that a president would be allowed to continue running and serving terms indefinitely.
    • clawoo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3I used to think there was no good reason, in 2004, for the UN to allow ANY president to fraudulently win general elections by using tampered electronic vote machines and then not allowing them to be tested.
    • mabhatter, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1wait for it.... I'm thinking in 2008 Bush will start another war and say the USA shouldn't hold elections or change the party of the White House in order to "stop terrorism".... Wait for it... it will come... they wanted to loosen term limits with Regan... you know he'll personally be asking for it come 2008.
    • Holyfool19, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Of course the current UN is a big joke, but this is in big part because of the USA, who are happy to put their weight behind the UN when they feel like it, and to discard it when they dont think the same way. I'm not expecting the biggest power in the world to submit to a reasonable form of world government in which every country can voice its views, but it's okay to dream sometimes.
      And I DO think that part of the UN's work should be to make certain democracy is respected all through the world. If a leader is popular, he just has to get re-elected in a proper re-election.
    • Lionstone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@mabhatter
      I can't remember a President that DIDN'T bring this up in their 2nd term. It'll never happen here.
  • dle5, on 10/12/2007, -11/+11The good reason is, the UN is an irrelevent archaic body infested with corruption.
    • squidi, on 10/12/2007, -10/+11thanks to bush
    • jdanielcaldwell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5The UN has been made irrelevant to the United States of America.
    • cdahlkvist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Thanks to Bush? I think not.

      The uselessness of the U.N. was inevitable from the onset. Just like the League of Nations.

      You start putting too much importance on the opinions of one country and you are no longer a "League" or "United" and thus, will be dissolved.

      The U.N. is not a fair and evenly distributed power system.

      The fact that you blame Bush shows what little you know of how the U.N. works. The U.N. did not approve of the war in Iraq.

      Bush, whether you like him or not, was not the cause of distrust of the U.N. Most politically aware people know the U.N. was useless long before Bush came into power.
  • aidang, on 10/12/2007, -8/+38"Someone should definitely kill him (assassination anyone?). He obviously lacks the professional mindset to lead a country. That isn't to say you should be too professional, but he's obviously a loose cannon."

    You're kidding me right? Have you ever looked at the leader of your country? He tells entire groups of countries that they're pure evil, and he invades countries and kills hundreds of thousands of people for zero reason, holds and tortures people for years without any semblance of a trial. Chavez tells your country to stop interfering in their politics and your response is to suggest an assassination?

    Seriously. It's because of this attitude that the rest of the world looks on you with contempt.
    • jerkfaceirl, on 10/12/2007, -7/+17I support this statement.
    • cdahlkvist, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23As a Swede living abroad I find it shocking that so many people bash on the U.S. and yet seem to maintain their own patriotic dedication to their own countries.

      I suspect it's because the U.S. is in the media so much. The U.S. and many other countries are doing nothing more than business as usual. The difference now is just the media attention.

      I'd like to remind the non-U.S. digg community that they might want to pay attention to what their politicians are doing while the focus is on the U.S.

      Glass houses and all.
    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@cdahlkvist: It's a case of "US Nationalism BAD! US Patriotism BAD! BUT MY COUNTRY NUMBER ONE!!! YAAAAY"

      And they don't see the irony...
    • andrew1193, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5"You're kidding me right? Have you ever looked at the leader of your country? He tells entire groups of countries that they're pure evil,"

      Lie.

      "and he invades countries and kills hundreds of thousands of people"

      Lie.

      "for zero reason, holds and tortures people

      Lie.

      "for years without any semblance of a trial. Chavez tells your country to stop interfering in their politics and your response is to suggest an assassination?"

      Chavez is a madman. Nothing he says is taken seriously by any sane individual.
    • Valarauka, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Andy, do you really think just saying "Lie" automatically makes something not true?
      1. Axis of Evil
      2. Iraq
      3. Guantanamo.
      All of these are out there, plain as day. He's not exactly making controversial accusations...

      Chavez is just looking out for his own country's interests.
    • andrew1193, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Andy, do you really think just saying "Lie" automatically makes something not true?"

      I say 'Lie' because I don't have the time, nor the desire to correct such obvious *****.

      "1. Axis of Evil"

      Referring to the governments, not the people.

      "2. Iraq"

      "Hundreds of thousands of people" is *****, and most of the carnage in Iraq is caused by Muslims blowing up other Muslims, not U.S. forces blowing up Muslims.

      "3. Guantanamo."

      Allegations of torture are ***** accusations from the scum who were imprisoned there, limited mainly to being kept in air-conditioned rooms that were too cold, being subjected to loud music, or being sexually harassed by women.

      Real torture is the breaking of fingers and limbs, beatings, etc.

      "All of these are out there, plain as day. He's not exactly making controversial accusations..."

      Perhaps it's not controversial to anti-American maniac leftists, but it certainly is to ordinary Americans.

      "Chavez is just looking out for his own country's interests."

      Chavez is a socialist. His primary goals are expanding and solidifying his power over others.
  • bazmail, on 10/12/2007, -17/+27Yeah how dare Chavez, as a democratically elected leader, do ANYTHING without our say-so and approval.
    AMERICA OWNS THE WORLD, PEOPLE!!!!!
    • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4If Bush got congress to pass a law giving him power to make laws without congressional input, would you say that was ok?

      That is what Chavez is doing. Digg is full of hypocrites who worship socialist dictators.
  • thexfile, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2I think this is true comedy.

    Chavez reminds me of a yappy chiwawa dog.
  • Iroxorsju, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3Get off the we went in for zero reason. The only thing wrong was not having a good enough plan once we got in. We should have went all the way in and done it 91. Then people would not be bitching.
    • Iroxorsju, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Hmm invading Kuwait. Never mind we should have just let him run around in the middle east like a mad man. He Invaded another country! Right then he should have been taking out of power just for that. But you don't remember that far back when people asked us to come over and help. If he would have never made that mistake to try and take Kuwait none of this would have happened you never heard a damn thing about Iraq till that.
    • Lionstone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ever since WWII, any white race has to fight "polite wars".
      We could have defeated Iraq in days if we had to. Wouldn't be much left of the country, but it could have been over a long time ago.

      *
  • ws002, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8If the comments above are from citizens of the USA, then how do you expect other country's to respect you? Really, I"m from Europe and you're attitude stinks. Other country's are free to do as they want. And you are not free to go invade country's under false pretenses, torture people, keep people imprisoned without trial, force a regime change in a country with free elections just because they do not do what you want....

    You should get rid of Bush and those neocons.

    To the NSA: I am not implying to kill a president or some other American.
    • Wonderkind, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6"I'm from Europe"

      Any particular country or just from Europe in general?
      And btw, other countries are NOT necessarily free to do what they want.
      Venezuela is on the way to becoming a dictatorship. Chavez is very power hungry.
      Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
      No, it's not Americas place to force our will on other countries, but your statement shows your ignorance.
    • jger82, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4The same sentiment is echoed in the statement from the US State Department. "State Department spokesman Tom Casey on Friday said the legislation by decree proposal was "a sovereign right of Venezuela but certainly ... a bit odd in terms of a democratic system."

      Some spokesmouth from the state department calls the way Chavez is running things odd (a gigantic understatement) and he blows it up into something grand to impress the ignorant Venezuelans who think that he's actually in some sort of battle with Washington DC.

      Seriously, how can this *not* end up badly? A dictator removing term limits, changing the constitution, and seizing private properties all under the name of social justice? This has never, ever, ever, ever, ever turned out well. More government=more corruption, an authoritarian rule or both.
    • niczar, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5"And btw, other countries are NOT necessarily free to do what they want.
      Venezuela is on the way to becoming a dictatorship. Chavez is very power hungry."

      And Iran is on the way to getting nukes. Just like Iraq got WMDs.

      Except that it didn't, but hey, don't let facts get in the way of good ole' imperialism.
    • jdanielcaldwell, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3First of all Chavez is not a dictator. He's the democratically elected president of Venezuela. Second of all it's a little premature to call the removal of term restrictions and the nationalization of oil 'power hungry'.
    • orbit1979, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@ Wonderkind:

      "Chavez is very power hungry."

      What, and Bush isn't? *****, what leader isn't?
    • andrew1193, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"If the comments above are from citizens of the USA, then how do you expect other country's to respect you? Really, I"m from Europe and you're attitude stinks. Other country's are free to do as they want. And you are not free to go invade country's under false pretenses, torture people, keep people imprisoned without trial, force a regime change in a country with free elections just because they do not do what you want...."

      Stuff like this just makes you look stupid.
    • Desslok, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"First of all Chavez is not a dictator. He's the democratically elected president of Venezuela. Second of all it's a little premature to call the removal of term restrictions and the nationalization of oil 'power hungry'."

      Amazing. With the exception of nationalizing oil, Diggers have commented on each and every point here against the Bush administration and constantly call him a dictator and leader of an evil empire.

      Bush is not a dictator, but most Diggers still call him one. And a fascist to boot.
      He was elected president twice, like it or not, conspiracy theories aside.
      We've also read about some add-on to a bill where the administration wanted to remove term limits, and it was called imperialism and fascism.

      When Bush and his administration are in the spotlight, he's a power hungry dictator *****. WHen a real up-and-coming dictator does all this crap, he's a good man watching out for the little guy. You people are blind.

      (Oh yes, I think Bush is a ***** idiot, but I expect I'll get the usual "you're a neo-con Bushie *****" rants from people who are afraid to think for themselves. I don't like Bush, but we're stuck with him until '08. Deal with it.)
    • Lionstone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0And what pussy country is going to do it? France? lol
  • TDR25, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5You tell 'em Chavez, you tell them damn Gringos! OLE!!!!!!!!!!!
    • elamer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@dopplerdog

      well i don't agree with orwell completely. i know some about the spanish civil war after reading hemingway's "for whom the bell tolls." i don't know if that guy was being sarcastic or not but either way i agree that a lot of hard working people get screwed. i'm a little out of it because i've worked the last 10 days in a row and i've been drinking so if i'm a little hard to understand, i'm sorry. :)
  • elamer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5this is a little off track but i just wanted to give my two cents on communism/socialism. i think it's a great idea morally but it fails in the real world. i'm a waiter right now. the harder i work, the more money i make. i made triple the amount of money that a coworker made today. why? - becaise i worked harder. same goes for immigrants (illegal or not). if one of the mexican guys helps me out, i give him more money. I tip this one immigrant more than i should because he busts his ass and it's only right that i should. communism/socialism sucks because i think i deserve more money if i work harder than everyone else. it's simple. i don't want to be giving away my hard earned money for people who do less that me.

    communist/socialist ideals make you feel great about being caring but when you think about it, the people who work the hardest get screwed.
    • Wonderkind, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3George Orwell thanks you.
      Oh, and the horses thank you too.
    • Kavok, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Maybe you haven't been paying attention but the people that work the hardest typically get screwed no matter what the government/economic structure is.

      How many people are out there sitting on the asses doing nothing making millions while you bust your ass to make rent?
    • elamer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@kavok

      i agree with you. at the end of my shift i get to choose how much i tip this mexican immigrant. if he helps me out, i give him him $15 or $20 when i should only be giving him $5. he works his ass off helping me. if he did nothing, i would give him nothing.
    • elamer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0@wonderkind

      what the hell do you mean? i'm guessing it may be a reference to animal farm but i read that years ago.
    • dopplerdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@elamer

      In Animal Farm, the horse was symbolic of the factory worker. He was the hardest working animal in the farm, but as soon as he became injured and unable to work, the pigs (the political class) sent him off to the glue factory.
    • dopplerdog, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@Wonderkind

      You DO know that George Orwell was a socialist, don't you? You DO know that he praised the anarcho-socialists in "Homage to Catalonia"? And that his beef was not with socialism (he had no love for capitalism) but rather with Stalinism? (the Stalinists backstabbed the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War).
    • elamer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@dopplerdog

      thanks. so i guess that guy may have been agreeing with me that i support hard working people, whoever they may be. all i remember from animal farm is the pigs, lol. :)
    • elamer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0edit: double post, i posted it in the wrong place.

      @dopplerdog

      well i don't agree with orwell completely. i know some about the spanish civil war after reading hemingway's "for whom the bell tolls." i don't know if that guy was being sarcastic or not but either way i agree that a lot of hard working people get screwed. i'm a little out of it because i've worked the last 10 days in a row and i've been drinking so if i'm a little hard to understand, i'm sorry. :)
    • dopplerdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@elamer

      Hard working people are always getting screwed. Anyway, Orwell was in the thick of it during the Spanish Civil War, on the side of the socialists/communists/anarchists - and wrote his Homage to Catalonia based on his experiences there. He saw a society run by working people, for working people. Too bad that they had to rely on help from the Soviet Union for help against the Fascist Franco - and this help was refused unless they fell into line with Soviet policy. Needless to say, they were ultimately crushed by Franco. Orwell never forgave the Stalinists for what they did - a betrayal of workers by a party that claimed to to represent them.

      To my knowledge, however, Orwell was a socialist to his dying days - and was never a supporter of capitalism.
  • Rfriaz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14It fills me with despair every time someone posts a story in regards to Latin America, and stereotypes and prejudiced comments are Dugg up.
    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Like praise for Chavez for calling American's Gringos. It's sickening.
  • howea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10He's just doing it to get press.

    I love this statement "... charging he has used the nation's oil wealth to meddle in the affairs of neighboring countries."
    The U.S. has flexed their wealth to meddle in the affairs of as many countries as they can.
    • niczar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9No *****. The US has been supporting dictators all over South & Central America for over a century now, overthrowing democratically elected governments on a whim.
    • fitogordo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You know, regardless of the U.S. comparison, that statement is actually true. Chavez does meddle a lot in other Latin American country’s internal politics. There is even a rumor that circulated a while back here in Brazil that Chavez donated sizable quantities to Lula’s presidential campaign. Since it is illegal to accept money from foreign donors for political campaigns in Brazil, were are talking about low flying unregistered flights over the Amazon with suitcases stuffed with dollars, corruption, and other types of nastiness we usually associate with drug dealers. Some people even claim that the whole reason why Brazil has been mostly subservient and reluctant to engage Chavez, Evil Morales and company, is because if we were to openly oppose them he would go public with the illegal campaign donations, probably bringing about Lula’s impeachment. Since these are mostly rumors in political circles, I’m not going to bother trying to come up with a link, but it does sound rather plausible when you take in consideration how the whole Bolivia petroleum industry nationalization imbroglio played out. Brazil was the biggest investor in Bolivia through Petrobras, and when Evil Morales seized all the company’s assets and production facilities, unilaterally and forcefully (he occupied facilities with the army), all Brazil’s Foreign Ministry did was actually try to justify Morale’s actions rather than defend the country’s investments and interests.

      Fact is Chavez is spending sizable quantities of his petrodollars in bulking up Venezuela’s military, and the real reason for this is not to fight off a possible U.S. invasion like he claims. His anti-U.S. posturing basically serves two purposes: Appease his population by creating an external cause for his country’s misfortunes, rather than looking inward for the cause of their problems, and creating an excuse for bulking up militarily. If you think that Chavez is buying Russian planes, helicopters and guns like there is no tomorrow because he wants to fight off the “gringo” invaders, you are dead wrong. In my opinion, the real reason for his military buildup is to counteract Brazil’s and Argentina’s natural leadership role in the region. Or that matter, to apply pressure any country in the region that might oppose his Bolivarian revolution designs for the continent. Now, I’m not saying that Chavez actually has plans to go to war with Brazil or anyone else, but it is quite clear how his newly acquired military might could be used as tool in his power politics in the region. I’ll leave you with this question: If Chavez is so concerned about the poor in his country, wouldn’t the billions of dollars he is using to buy armaments be better spent in social and educational programs?
  • wachter1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5It is one thing to resist and defy a superpower. It is quite another to do it in such a crass and bombastic way. This is all a show designed to distract people from his consolidation of power. He will eventually prove to be just as corrupt as any other South American dictator. None of his ranting and raving is going to help the average Venezuelan in the long run.
    • jger82, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Well it's a classic move. Unite the people by creating a phantom enemy while you dismantle the government piece by piece.

      This is not just happening in Venezuela...hint, hint.
    • erikf, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2How has the US government been dismantled in any way? Give examples or STFU. And united? The country is more divided than ever genius.
    • Valarauka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Dismantling the government? How about PATRIOT acts 1 and 2 and the Military Commissions Act, for starters? Suspending Habeas Corpus, illegall wiretaps without FISA approval, firing US Attorneys using a loophole in PATRIOT, etc. etc. etc. So you're ok with them ***** all over the Constitution?
      And about the country being more divided than ever - who's fault is that? It's not like it's for lack of trying, what with all the fearmongering...
    • orbit1979, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"He will eventually prove to be just as corrupt as any other South American dictator."

      Like all the ones the U.S. has helped install and maintain over the last century?
    • Valarauka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3orbit - so true. In fact, if Chavez was corrupt I doubt the US would have any problems with him. It's those annoying types that stand up for their own country and people that need to be dealt with...
  • mogydy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9WTF does the US has to say anyway in Venezuela? the Venezuelan people have willingly voted for Chavez for a second time.
    i don't give a rat's us what the US administration thinks about this.
    • 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5It is ironic as democracy is the neo-cons second religion.

      In reality it is just a bunch of poor people who voted for some socialist dictator, in a similar way to how a bunch of religious zealots voted for Bush.
    • Valarauka, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Actually, democracy is definitely NOT their second religion. It's just a good cover story. The best situation in their minds is a world full of puppet dictators propped up by the US, willingly letting their countries get economically raped. If you look at US interventions all over the world in the past fifty years, they've invariably been on the side of a dictator, *against* the popular (and often democratically elected) leader of the country.
      Allende. Mossadegh. Castro. Qaddafi. Bosch. Arbenz. Chavez. There are many more.
      Here's a good summary: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/US_Interventions_WBlumZ.html
  • q3ctf4, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6I know I'll probably get modded down for this but I give Chavez credit for having the balls to say what he says. Obviously, he's not being diplomatic as a leader of a nation is suppose to be, but let's not forget the U.S DID TRY to assassinate him and failed miserably. He knows everyday that his life is in danger but talks tough to show that he's not a chicken *****. I give him credit for that, and that alone.
  • nipplash, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4Congrats Hugo, you have proved to be a bigger douchebag than George W.
    • avasol, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2That's sooooo not possible. He'd have to grow horns 'n stuff first.
  • FalconHoff, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I don't know why you north-americans complain so much. Your president is trying to protect your interests, make you richer. If it wasn't like this since your Independence you would not have SUV and all that crap stuff that you can't live without. If you didn't invade Iraq your economy possible could halt in the near future due to oil prices.

    I don't give a damn for Venezuela, all I want is to MY country be a better place. Hugo Chavez is helping that by going against the biggest economy in the world. That indirectly help my government, and eventually, me.

    On a side note: If your industries/companies get wealthier, more money will be taken from the other countries and eventually more money your government will have to attend to popular demand. So you should ask/complain about HOW you should make you wealthier, if possible without making others poor.
    • elamer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I understand what you're saying about why Americans complain so much. I think it has to do with a sense of guilt that a lot of Americans have. My girlfriend, for example, is nearly 50% native american but she doesn't get any money off college tuition because her grandfather claimed he was white so he could get a job easier. Now she has to go to school and work almost full time to pay for it. Americans feel guilty because people like her get screwed. A lot of us feel bad that a good amount of US policy is done in order to make our lives better. (such as gas prices going down a ***** load more then it was this summer). It's complicated because US foreign policy always has its up and downs. It helps Americans but it screws other nations. American's always have some type of guilt.
    • andrew1193, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"On a side note: If your industries/companies get wealthier, more money will be taken from the other countries and eventually more money your government will have to attend to popular demand. So you should ask/complain about HOW you should make you wealthier, if possible without making others poor."

      You have a pretty ***** view of how capitalism works.

      Stuff like this makes you look stupid.
    • millyuns, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Continuous use of the phrase "makes you look stupid", makes you look stupid.
  • dopplerdog, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Gringo is not meant as a racist word, and it's not usually used to offend. It supposedly comes from the old Irish songs the US army used to sing during the Mexican-American War: "Green Grow the Rushes" (or something like that). But it's really not used in a derogatory way, no more so than "Canuck" or "Yankee". Yes, I'm originally from Latin America.

    Of course, when it's followed by "go to hell".... Anyway, the point is that he clearly wants to offend, but not through racism.
    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4*****. It's an offensive word. Just because it might have started off as an inoffensive word doesn't mean it isn't now.

      Go call a "African American" a negro, or colored, or the other N word. And see if you don't get punched in the face. At one point those words were considered "OK" (yeah yeah, in the 1700s, etc) and then they became offensive.

      Gringo IS offensive. End of story.
    • FalconHoff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0In Brazil, gringo means any withe foreign guy (usually north-american). It also is used to offend or diminish that person. Other times it is used only to generalize foreigners.

      Also, black people in brazil are called "negro" (wich means dark), call someone "preto" (black) is considered an offense. Those things really depend on how those people were treated and how they don't want to be treated that way again. Although we aren't so much crazy about racism, law suits are rare...
  • Drakonianheart, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Venezuela, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and every other retarded country is FREE to do as they please, FREE to test nuclear weapons, free to set up a commy/ dictatorial gov ( its always worth a shot right lol ), and free to stand up against any over nation they feel threatens them. BUT, the United states of America, is FREE to isolate nations that can potentially harm it , Cuba ( Cuban missile crisis), north Korea (with there leader with the funny hair, who i wouldn't trust to run a walmart {no offense walmart employees} ). FREE to topple any gov that harms its citizens, Afghanistan (911) or potentially harm---> Iraq (seriously i really did think they had weapons of mass distructo) .......the point I'm trying to make here is as free as other countries are to do as they please......so are we so :P

    • dopplerdog, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Don't worry, the Commander-In-Chimp also really, really thought Iraq had weapons of "mass distructo".
      I guess that makes it alright, then.

      /SARCASM
    • joeTaco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"(seriously i really did think they had weapons of mass distructo)"

      Are you trying to say the fact that the goverment's agitprop can trick idiots like you into believing lies somehow justifies the war in Iraq?
  • Rojer64, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2So what do we have here ? some "press" puts a couple of sentences from Chavez online. Without any kind of context. And here you go : assassination, UN, forced democracy ...

    I find the article much more interesting in its form and the very fact that it was published. More interesting than a non capitalist politician bashing on a capitalist country. Where do you go there, guys ? He bashed on us, let's bring democracy to this country ? The US ALREADY tried to get him killed, not the first country, not the first time. Hence Chavez has good reasons to HATE the US.

    But Chavez is just another non american guy : remove 100% of the corrupt politicians and filthy businessmen in the world, what is left ? you guessed : anti-americans. Sorry to disappoint.

    This is why the article is interesting in the end : instead of saying something to the american people about the other side of the world, it triggers assassination debates. I'd gladly say that you guys deserve what's coming next but, unfortunately, the rest of the world will take it even harder.

    BTW, Wonderkind , the "European" guy sounded very much french. Why the question ? Any trouble with that ? Which state are you from, yourself ? Some red neck infested area ?
  • venuspcs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Oh man....If Hugo Chavez can find the strength within himself to lead and not get corrupted by the absolute power he is seeking (and likely to receive) it would be very good for Venezuela and the world.....but that is on hell of an IF!
  • orvtech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4why is this news ? why is not news all the people that he is taking homes from, all the people that he is killing, all the private companys that he is taking over, the TV and Radio channels that he is closing?

    There are worse things going on in Venezuela than he taling Sh*t about U.S. (he does every day BTW).
  • daxsymbiont, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3at least he didn't go to your country and tried to stage a coup.
  • 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The thing with socialism and capitalism (not state capitalism!) is that it isn't really a fight between both ideologies it is a fight between coercion and non-coercion. It just so happens that capitalism works because both parties in a trade profit and prices are calculable. State socialism and state capitalism requires force so one group of people loose out at the expense of another.

    Families are socialist, you can't really imagine telling a baby to pay it's own way!
    • Rojer64, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2More to me like a fight between those who have something and those who want it... In the long run, it turns into a fight between those who HAD something and those who have it... Just look at the states' balances, including those of so called "developpped" countries : they owe so many billions to bankers that you might wonder who owned the ressources in the first place. Capitalists have done their job very well : they have traded valuable ressources for useless paper (or electronic currencies). What they want now is concentration : they don't need those hundreds of millions puppets any more. This is why you have more poor every other day in the US and in Europe.

      Chavez is very much irritating to these people (the bankers and the remaining puppets) : he will refuse to trade valuable ressources for monkey currencies only : he wants his people to get something real out of it. And tries at the same time not to inflict a war to his country, which is very difficult with the US on the other side of the table of "negociation". I guess that expressing his anger for the propaganda media to amplify is no smart move. But the guy must be hot blooded. Latin DNA, nicht war ?
    • floorman56, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Families are socialist, you can't really imagine telling a baby to pay it's own way!

      To a point... I DO expect a 25 yo to be out working for his self and not laying around the house watching TV and posting on Digg all day.
    • 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Rojer64

      That's why I emphasised "state capitalism". I wouldn't consider central fractional reserve banking real capitalism as the state has a coercive monopoly on money creation, and then it requires it's taxes to be paid in that form.

      And forieng aid given to African governments which in turn screw their people over and get the countries in to dept is one of the results of these state polices.
    • 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Rojer64

      That's why I emphasised "state capitalism". I wouldn't consider central fractional reserve banking real capitalism as the state has a coercive monopoly on money creation, and then it requires it's taxes to be paid in that form.

      And foreign aid given to African governments which in turn screw their people over and get the countries in to dept is one of the results of these state polices.
  • majortom1981, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Question. Since the U.S. is the biggest buyer of that countries oil, and chavez gets the U.S. upset and that countyr either stops us from buying or we stop on our own wouldnt that be really bad for chavez country ?
    • fcbfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Venezuela could always sell its oil elsewhere, and America can always buy it from somewhere else, but the implications would be too expensive for both countries for this logistical change to be worth it. What Chavez wants is to gain more support from his people by being a "hero" and "saving" them from the evil US empire, the problem is, most Venezuelans only see one side of the story (state controls most media) and blindly believe everything their government says, mainly because they are poor or uneducated...sound familiar? Having his people favor him, means that he can change his constitution in anyway he wants and basically do whatever he chooses is "right" for his people. The Venezuelan people did democratically elect him and now it seems they will be stuck with him for a long time and so will the U.S. And even though the U.S. don't agree with him there isn't much they can do because Chavez really hasn't done anything illegal so he can say whatever he wants.

      You have to admit he has balls...
    • faskippy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"Seriously, how can this *not* end up badly? A dictator removing term limits, changing the constitution, and seizing private properties all under the name of social justice? This has never, ever, ever, ever, ever turned out well. More government=more corruption, an authoritarian rule or both."

      I worry about our govt. for the same reason. We have seen the raping of our Constitution, eminent domain to take peoples' homes to make room for parking lots for shopping centers, and I can't help but see distinct similarities between our two Countries. I find it odd that a White House spokesman would find this odd.
    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Except in the US, political opponents and their familes are NOT silenced and/or killed.

      Sure we can't say "*****" on the radio, but radio and TV are allowed to bash the President day in day out, as long as there are listeners (HA HA Air America) they will stay on.

      Hugo stealing the private radio and TV stations is squashing any dissent. Sure 80% of the population may like him now... but 10 years from now it will be officially "100% of the populations Love Dictator Hugo!" because the government controlled press will say so.

      Bush will be out in less than 2 years. No question about it. Meanwhile Chavez will be doing his Weekend at Bernie's impression in 40 years from now.
  • faskippy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Imagine if you replaced his name in that story with GW's, wouldn't this look like the conversations we've been having about our govt?
  • Venezolano55, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2After nine years of not increasing gas prices, he announced an increased on unknown size yesterday. Gas is 16 cents a gallon in Venezuela, a silly subsidy which only helps those that have cars, which is not precisely the poor.

  • sterlingtjones, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If Hugo wasn't so fanatical with his words perhaps we could offer more respect.
    It gives him some media time, but it doesn't help his credibility or rationality for his cause.

    Unfortunately he just comes off as a punk, what will he say next "***** the System!!" ?



    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Whoever said crazies were rational?
  • dwhitbeck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Chavez talks a good talk about helping the poor. I believe, however in his grab for power he will turn into a dictator ultimately serving only himself.
  • skipere, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3This Dude is smart, this is political 101. He picked and define an enemy in this case the US so he can push his political
    agenda effectively. When your have a common enemy they less likely to picking on each other. Same go with Iran.
    • kettle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Uh, and the U.S. - you can add us to that list.
  • hellotyler, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4LoL I hope this ***** is prepared to be assassinated.
  • amightywind, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The wetback Chavez is feeling the pressure because oil is below $50 and he has a lot of friends to keep happy. I don't think 2007 is going to be a good year for him. Sadly the average Venezuelan will suffer.
    • hode, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wetback? That's mature... Not only did you use a derogatory term, you obviously don't know its origin or what it is referring to.
    • amightywind, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2One racial slur deserves another I say (Gringo?!) . I couldn't think of anything derogatory specific to a Venezuelan so I chose the next best word. Even if it is imprecise it is still an effective insult.
  • vastrightwing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Chavez is yet another Arafat. Sorry Venezuela, you are in for a long hard, hard ride. It's sort of amazing that despots are still alive and thriving today. I would suggest getting your passports ASAP. It’s probably going to be difficult to get them if you wait too long.
  • ThisIsBob, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Chavez claims (probably correctly) that bush had a hand in an attempted coup, then rushed to recognize the new government, which soon was run off. Why should he have any love for bush (why should anybody)? bush and his little missey have not had a diplomatic success anywhere in the world that I can recall. Add Venezuela to the long list of failures. Socialism is not the issue. The US has been buddies with socialist governments, when it suited. I swear, just about everything that bush touches turns to *****.
    • millyuns, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ThisIsBob

      "I swear, just about everything that bush touches turns to *****."
      So, he's King MyAss?
      Sorry, couldn't resist.


  • nicociri, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5Dear northamerican diggers: don't you have enough troubles in your country and/or all the other countries you are unlawfully invading?
    Or are you setting the stage for another one? this time venezuela perhaps?

    If you want to assasinate somebody (i mean, BESIDES the thousands you already have in Irak), try to start with your OWN president. You shouldn't worry about venezuela nor ANY other latinamerican country. You could be amazed at how well we can handle ourselves without your intervention (wich, by the way, is NOT welcomed).

    Mind your own business people, you are not the world's police...
    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4***** off. I hope your own Dear Leader dies in a hottub full of sulphuric acid.
    • h00paj00, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Also... if you don't want our intervention, stop sending your "migrant workers" (yes, that's more than just Mexicans) into our country to work for cash, and wire the money back home to their families. Thank you for not accepting our cash. Thank you for not being hypocritical.
    • pixelbeat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Totally agree with you. So, now, we're talking about foreign affairs here. Please, check out, "Children of Men", or better, look out indymedia.org or any independent news feed and see what's going outside your country.
      Don't act like you and your country it's the very center of the universe. Will our generation see a time in this world, when people who can really understand each other, (not in everythin', coz it will a boredom), but been a little bit more tolerant.

      And about hypocrisy.
      First World Diggers who feel that people of the world hates your government scare tactics to take over the global economy:
      Ok, I think, there was a lot of "cooperation" between countries to help people to get rid of poverty, but we're failing because we can see the real issues. The economy in several countries in South America, were completely destroyed by the financial attendance of the IMF/World Bank and his "rules to follow..." putting pressure on people and embracing a global economy model. There is no such thing, there is no a progress model that fit in every country. People, culture, habits are different. But our world is a common place for all of us. Any person have a universal right to live and enjoy his freedom, and we as human race need to understand that we need to pursuit the wellfare for the human kind.
    • yogy13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@h00paj00,
      you dumb *****, learn your history.

      US started the Bracero Program, bringing Mexicans into this country to work for ***** wages to keep building the Empire (African-Americans were sick of that *****). As the Empire figured out through corporation that they can build plants where cheap labor is, not bring labor where the plants are, globalization started ***** 3rd world countries in their asses by ***** up their economies. When people get sick of living in the dirt and hearing stories about promise land, they come to US to work their ass off, just like your grandfather did. It is the empire who sent them here, now go thank papa Bush that he is still building it.
  • kettle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As long as they are still having interntionally certified elections, I don't see what right the US has to butt in. They're still shipping the oil the US so covets; so what further legitimate claim does the US have to peddle influence South of the border? The US has a pretty poor record in Latin America. Let them work things out themselves.
  • nils, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The US gov't is REALLY the last entity that should try to teach others what is right and what is wrong. Have you guys all already forgotten Bush's uncontitutional wiretaps? His lies to get his little pet war authorized? Really. Chavez may not be the coolest dude on the block, but he's in no way worse than anything the US has in its government right now.
  • OriginalLucid1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The love the Leftists feel for Chavez,Ortega and Castro is admirable indeed. What puzzles me is why no one on the left is in any hurry to move to these "paradises".
  • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4It's too bad, I liked Chavez's anti-American posturing, but now he's just another dictator. South America seems to be regressing.
  • Cablito, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Come on Gringos, relax.

    Go back home on your luxury SUV, worry about when is the next iPod named product will be launched, post some stuff on digg about ubuntu and repeat the old patriot oriented brain washing speech about how US is the best democracy and the world most powerfull nation.

    In the meantime, let the other countries deal with real issues.

    Btw. Just don't go into war with N. Korea cause it won't be the same as Iraq; you will get your ass wooped. (thats why you guys did nothing against the test, you wossies only go to war with weaker oponents, not that I would do otherwise, but hey, you lose the right to brag right there)
  • RojoKayako, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Chavez is destroying Venezuela and we all know it. After all he failed Socialist Regimes of the 20th century, after over 100,000,000 deaths caused by Socialism - Chavez going to make it work? Nope.

    Nevertheless, Chavez and his buddies will have a fun ride on the way down. They'll be grandstanding against "Imperialism" while excercising control as "Strongmen". While thier people suffer, Chavez and his cronies will be knee-deep in whores and champagne - and the center of media attention while they spew thier rhetoric.

    Pretty sad, Pretty typical.
  • naio21, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Chavez, what a picturesque Che Guevara wannabe...
    • realperson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Venezuela as the rich guys knew it.. yeah that is being lost.
  • aceg1357, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It just baffles me that a President of a country can say such an ignorant stupid thing.
    What is even more amazing is how radical liberals think his quote is great.
    Imagine the uproar if Bush told the Palestinians to "go to hell"?
    Those same people would talk about how terrible it was and how unbecoming of a President that was.
    • pixelbeat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Imagine the uproar if Bush told the Palestinians to "go to hell"?"
      Dude, GW doesn't need to say "go to hell", he just says: "we suspect that Palestinian State support Terrorism" then start an invasion out of that suspicious suppose.
    • aceg1357, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The only country Bush invaded due to "terrorism" was Afghanistan.
      You remember 9/11 don't ya?

  • strfiter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Cablito

    "Come on Gringos, relax.

    Go back home on your luxury SUV, worry about when is the next iPod named product will be launched, post some stuff on digg about ubuntu and repeat the old patriot oriented brain washing speech about how US is the best democracy and the world most powerfull nation.

    In the meantime, let the other countries deal with real issues.

    Btw. Just don't go into war with N. Korea cause it won't be the same as Iraq; you will get your ass wooped. (thats why you guys did nothing against the test, you wossies only go to war with weaker oponents, not that I would do otherwise, but hey, you lose the right to brag right there) "

    I totally agree with you.
    I'm a Socialist living in the states and I try to look at stories from all the angles I can. All I can see here though is mindless verbal bashing from country to country with no action to back up the claims.

    Now that is pretty sad and typical.
    • strfiter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Now: Chavez.

      He's just one more leader of one more country that not all Americans agree with. So what if he uses some harsher language than what we're used to seeing political stateheads using. Guess what? When international citizens see the "American" life on a day to day basis (be it through movies, news, media, etc) it is pretty simple to see how greedy we represent ourselves as. Also, it is quite simple to see how this view of the American lifestyle can be reflected onto the political policies and actions that the government takes. So what, Chavez disagrees with them and lets the world know it. Can you really blame him?
    • hiscity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Chavez is another despot. He won't just stop at nationalizing corporations. Guyana, Trinidad & Tobago, Columbia, etc. are all within his grasp for takeover. Follow the money, not what he says.

      = quote =
      Venezuela's Arms Purchases Since 2005 Top China, Iran, Pakistan

      By Tony Capaccio

      Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuela, the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, has spent more on arms purchases since 2005 than China, Pakistan or Iran, according the U.S. Defense Department.

      Venezuela, under President Hugo Chavez, spent $4.3 billion compared with $3.4 billion spent by China, $3 billion by Pakistan by $1.7 billion by Iran, Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lieutenant General Michael Maples reported in a review of potential national security threats worldwide.

      = unquote =

      more at.... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=a1yScHOQvMm8&refer=latin_america

      This is like watching the rise of Hitler, Stalin, or Mao.
    • svicente, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@hiscity
      So it is OK for U.S. to spend billions on arms but it is not OK for a President, elected in FAIR ELECTIONS (don't come with "oh he bought the election" crap) to buy arms... especially when he was almost taken down by a US backed coup.
    • jger82, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@svicente
      You're naive if you think he's building this gigantic nationalized military-industrial complex to fight off gringo invaders. He's using this rhetoric as misdirection against other countries in the region. If a politician from Brazil, Columbia, etc. voices concerns over how militarized Venezuela is becoming, Chavez can go on the radio and accuse them of turning on their heritage by siding with gringos...so no politician says anything for fear of offending their electorate. It's pretty brilliant, actually.

      What do you think he's going to do with this gigantic military once it's completed? Have them plant daisies or save cats stuck in trees? South America has much more to fear from Chavez than the US.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 58 of 58 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.