"gringos" is easily one of the funniest racial slurs out there

1/24/2007 11:26:45 AM

Its not a big deal they will become the new Cuba. They have oil but if he doesn't spend it correctly then they will just waste a resource.

1/24/2007 12:03:51 PM

Quote :

"I'd say shutting down the opposition media is a good place to start."

The opposition media commited treason. It's not too much to say that they should be shut down after they tried to illegally overthrow the democratically elected and constitution provided government. If they want to get him out of power, fine, but if they try to do so by resorting to crime, then he shouldn't hold punishing them just because they are the opposition media.

1/24/2007 5:10:57 PM

If they did what you say then why are they only now being arrested and imprisoned, many years after the fact? What's that? They're not being arrested? But, why, if the government has convincing evidence that the owners of the TV station committed multiple felonies then why are they just revoking their broadcast license?!?!?

This strongly implies that either:
A) the government cannot prove its case, so it is using extra-legal means of punishment
B) they are innocent of treason and are being punished for their political affiliation
C) they are innocent of treason but the government refuses to believe it, given their political affiliation
D) the government is run by morons who don't realize they can actually arrest people for criminal activity

None of these scenarios place the government on the moral high-ground. If they are criminals then make the case before a jury, don't show up years later and break their tail-lights.

[Edited on January 24, 2007 at 11:34 PM. Reason : .,.]

1/24/2007 11:33:15 PM

Quote :

"If they did what you say then why are they only now being arrested and imprisoned, many years after the fact?"

Initially Chavez pardoned them in order to return stability.

Quote :

"What's that? They're not being arrested? But, why, if the government has convincing evidence that the owners of the TV station committed multiple felonies then why are they just revoking their broadcast license?!?!?"

I honestly don't know, I know venezuela doesn't have a death penalty, but I would have went with a much harsher penalty than what they're getting. Of course he's getting shit from people here for the very light punishment he's imposing. It seems all he wants to do is prevent the same thing from happening again.

Quote :

"f they are criminals then make the case before a jury, don't show up years later and break their tail-lights."

Chavez publicly pardoned pretty much everyone involved, so he didn't really take any of the criminals to court. What he's doing now is simply not renewing their broadcast license, which is completely within his power. I'm sure he'd be happy to give other people in opposition to him a TV show, but not these animals.

1/25/2007 10:21:57 AM

Quote :

"What he's doing now is simply not renewing their broadcast license, which is completely within his power."

Which is what we are objecting to. He is revoking their license for personal reasons, which makes this an arbitrary abuse of power. They are being punished by the government yet have not been convicted of any crime, do you not see why we might find that scary?

This way, they have no ability to defend themselves against the charges, they are being found guilty by decree.

I guess due process is another one of those rights a communist just can't understand.

1/25/2007 10:43:58 AM

Quote :

"He is revoking their license for personal reasons, which makes this an arbitrary abuse of power."

He is within his constitutional bounds to not renew their contract, he could even nationalize them with proper legislation.

Quote :

"They are being punished by the government yet have not been convicted of any crime, do you not see why we might find that scary?"

They're not being punished. You don't have a god given right to broadcast on everyone's airwaves.

Quote :

"I guess due process is another one of those rights a communist just can't understand."

They have due process, but they can't expect to be given domain over the airwaves without government consent.

1/25/2007 1:26:42 PM

I guess that's why Clinton first act upon election was to shut down all the broadcasters in the country that carried Rush Limbaugh's TV program. Hey, they should have known better than to support the opposition. Am I right that you would have supported such behavior?

Either way, I must confess, what a wonderful country Venezuela is becoming. The only people allowed to broadcast are government stooges and the only civil rights safe are those of government supporters. Sure, it sounds a aweful lot like a nightmare to me, but you seem to like it, so be it.

Quote :

"they can't expect to be given domain over the airwaves without government consent."

The airwaves belong to the people, if you insist, not Hugo Chavez.

1/25/2007 2:23:07 PM

Quote :

"I guess that's why Clinton first act upon election was to shut down all the broadcasters in the country that carried Rush Limbaugh's TV program. Hey, they should have known better than to support the opposition. Am I right that you would have supported such behavior?"

You are comparing two very different situations. Rush Limbauge didn't have people on suggesting clinton be assinated, he also never encouraged people to overthrow the constitutionally provided government in order to install a dictatorship. Rush also never stifled the US economy be supporting illegal strikes.

Quote :

"The airwaves belong to the people, if you insist, not Hugo Chavez."

They belong to the government that represents the people, as most other common goods do, and this government can do what their law allows them to.

1/25/2007 4:22:08 PM

Quote :

"Rush Limbauge didn't have people on suggesting clinton be assinated, he also never encouraged people to overthrow the constitutionally provided government in order to install a dictatorship."

You don't watch the late night cable access channel, do you?

Quote :

"Rush also never stifled the US economy be supporting illegal strikes."

Only because he hates unions. I'm sure plenty of Democrats have supported illegal strikes. Besides, I could stand up tomorrow and proclaim my support for murders and rapists, wouldn't grant the Government a moral right to persecute me.

Quote :

"They belong to the government that represents the people, as most other common goods do, and this government can do what their law allows them to."

Once again, the defense Kris uses to defend immoral acts is to point out there was a law. Great. Why would not this argument have defended Clinton persecuting Rush Limbaugh in 1992? Democrats controlled Congress, if all it required was a law then Congress could crap one out.

[Edited on January 25, 2007 at 4:56 PM. Reason : .,.]

1/25/2007 4:54:32 PM

Once agian, you're comparing two very different situations. Our government has existed in a state of stability, this isn't the same for Venezuela. Extremist democrats and republicans could ever hope to take down the government and kidnap the president. In the venezuelean political climate, the people support these measures, thus their congress is able to pass these laws.

1/26/2007 1:18:10 AM

I respect his candor... and I'm not being facecious.

1/26/2007 1:25:15 AM