... that the clandestine hand of American corporatists and most of the US government will do all it can to insert Capriles into power.

What is sure though is that Chavistas have no problem utilizing force and violence to prevent Capriles from campaigning.

If so, how much? I could use some extra cash.

I think it's a "who you know" kind of thing...I don't suppose it's the kind of thing that a temp agency would cover.

I for one hope to God he gets paid. I would hate to think that someone spreads right wing propaganda for free.

Nor is what I posted remotely "right wing."

It's right wing to defend disruptor's and police states.

We see how that worked out.

on how many message boards say otherwise.

must be a right wing troll.

But someone who posts right wing propaganda is most DEFINITELY a troll.

Pretty much sums up the belief of members of the cult of St. Hugo of Assissy.

Such a way with words you have. As a Catholic who reveres St. Francis, I find your asinine little play offensive, not that you give a shit.

Right wing "facts" = right wing propaganda

Supporter of right-wing candidate on a left-wing message board = TOOL

He's left like Alan Colmes is left - that is, NOT AT ALL. Only the obtuse would think otherwise.

Yet Santos, immediately after being elected, normalized relations with Venezuela, opened up dialog with FARC, started prosecuting Uribe's paramilitary groups, started on universal health care, implemented free housing programs.

Capriles, when he is elected, will do that and so much more, and you'll see, and I won't expect an apology from the dishonest people who have been smearing me for so long.

Capriles is not right-wing, no matter how much you furiously hiss and spit at his candidacy and at anyone who dares challenge the Chavez gospel.

However, the venerable St. Hugo repeatedly demonstrates authoritarian tendencies, a right-wing hallmark. And his recent remarks regarding Capriles only reinforces the perception that Chavez will not hesitate at spreading FUD to smear his political rival. Just like Romney.

That's where he began his career. And his family owns the Capriles media group, for Christ's sake.

He personally participated in the 2002 coup, vandalizing the Cuban embassy and kidnapping Minister Ramón Rodríguez Chacín. He represents everything wrong with society in general. He represents the right wing. As do YOU by trying to push him on us as some kind of new liberal. Spare me. Save it for the idiots at FreeRepublic or wherever the hell the knuckledraggers hang now.

You can spout fascist propaganda but it doesn't make it true.

That's one of the tea party's favorite insults. Problem is, they never seem to even know what the word means.

What do you mean, in this context? How is Chavez a fascist? Do tell - and try to make yourself clear. I'm interested in the thought process that came up with that conclusion.

And Casey Anthony was acquitted of murder. What's your point?

...is 100% fascist.

real communication among real progressives who come here to learn and to share.

We do finally get the truth, regardless of their frantic, hostile efforts.
[center]~~~~~[/center]

Of course, as we saw, the anti-Semitic crap was very real: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1108&pid=1073

The homophobic stuff was very real: http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1108&pid=2269

And, of course, the failure of that blogger to find where Chavez called Capriles a "low life pig" doesn't mean it didn't happen, it did in fact happen: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/feb/17/hugo-chavez-capriles-pig-video Listen carefully, he does in fact call Capriles "cochino." Even a non-Spanish speaker can hear him say it clearly and unambiguously.

I am horrified that anyone would try to justify chavista vileness, but it is very common here with poorly thinking supporters of chavezimo. And the make sure to come out in force when they defend the vile totally non-progressive chavistas.

And they will be wrong about Capriles.

At Tue Jul 10, 2012, 09:30 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I've wondered the same thing.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=161254

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

I'm sick to death of every third DUer being accused of being a paid shill because they don't support whatever pet cause another poster embraces.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Jul 10, 2012, 09:46 AM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The post is a tongue in cheek comment. Leave it.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: Personal attack. Taken on its own may not have earned a "Hide It" from me, but in context it's apparent that the accused went to lengths to make sure this attack hurtful and rude.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Thanks for keeping me up to date. Which Juror are you, or is that a top secret kind of doohickey?

Stay classy, though. Did I say anything untrue? I have the facts on my side.

"Chavistas have no problem utilizing force and violence to prevent Capriles from campaigning."

I don't have a side other than the truth. What is your side?

Are you simply ignorant that a well known Chavista attempted to assassinate Capriles? This current event shows police violence against freely marching supporters of Capriles.

For that matter, where is Chavez's birth certificate? I'm pretty sure he was born in the USSR.

...so you would have to show how my evidence is untrue for your claim that what I have said is untrue to be ... true.

Instigating political upheaval was part of PSUV's freaking campaign strategy...

You fail time and again to provide evidence, apart from the words and opinions of those you side with. It's no great shock that politicians are interested in political upheaval - that's part of what drives many of us to DU every day.

Police involvement isn't violence.

Amusing, to say the least. It's like that time the national police shot that girl. DUers were calling it a simple accident.

When it comes to Venezuela up is down and black is white, I swear.

If a group of Democrats blocked the road for Romney's bus they'd be arrested.

That's why they need populist leaders. The right won't stop letting the blacks know that they're not the ones in power, just like they loved to do here.

...no words.

Just a confirmation that you know shit about Venezuela's ethnic and racial background. Just stereotypes upon stereotypes and caricatures to justify your position in support of cronyism. I can't believe you'd use such a racist metaphor. I hope it stems from pure ignorance, otherwise I am simply appalled.

Populism is far less effective at bringing the poor out of impoverishment than social democracy. In fact, if you actually cared about the poor and downtrodden you'd completely distance yourself from populism.

Though - as you did here - I take the time to reply, because I would hope that reason could prevail.

I see ignorant racist metaphors.

Hint: the majority of Venezuelans are "mestizo."

They need to leave their fighting to the voting booth. And I think the police blockading Capriles from campaigning is an affront to the Democratic process. I hope that Venezuelans select the candidate who they see fit.

You can read an article here, though you will have to hand translate part of it: http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/110264/briquet-denuncia-presuntas-estrategias-contra-la-campana-del-comando-venezuela/

Note: "provocar situaciones de agitacion politica"

Basically: "Provoke situations that agitate politically."

edit: that translation is 'direct' so even a non-Spanish speaker or reader can understand it...

That's precisely what happened here because PSUV could not handle Capriles going into La Vega, a poorer area of Caracas. Capriles was being welcomed so they had to engineer a conflict. I expect they won't ever let him into the Caracas poor areas because they're afraid he'll pull in a lot of new supporters.

Noticias 24 is part of Cadena Capriles, the media group.

Stop spreading right wing propaganda, would you? EVERYONE sees what you are doing. EVERYONE recognizes that it is right-wing propaganda. But still you persist - that's why people wonder if you're getting paid for this.

The report was reported in all of the papers in Venezuela: http://www.eluniversal.com/nacional-y-politica/120531/briquet-denuncia-plan-de-sabotaje-a-campana-de-capriles

http://www.el-nacional.com/noticia/37090/16/Briquet-denuncio-que-oficialismo-prepara-acciones-de-agitacion-contra-Capriles.html

http://www.globovision.com/news.php?nid=232966

N24 has nothing to do with Cadena Capriles. Why you persist in patent falsehoods, I don't know.

It's funny, I chose N24 because it is the least liked site within opposition circles (they find it far too liberal). I specifically chose it as a source because I expected someone to trash my source as is often the case. It is amusing to say the least. I didn't expect someone completely ignorant of Venezuela media to come in, trash my source, spout falsehoods, and make a complete fool of themselves.

But I can hardly be blamed for the error. It certainly wouldn't be the first time you used a right wing source to back up your argument.

There is no story, in any newspaper, internet, cable or broadcast outlet that can make me, or any reasonable person, believe that Capriles is not right wing.

I used to lurk in Latin America on the old DU2 boards but I didn't have a star so I couldn't post there. Once someone donated me a star I started posting there and from the very beginning I used original sources, original research, or (unquestionably) left leaning sources.

Why? Because even if a right wing or perceived right wing source was used to quote something (totally accurate translations, totally accurate observations of events) the events would be summarily dismissed as right wing sources.

When Maduro called Capriles and his supporters a gay epithet ("mariconcitos&quot I waited. I waited for the video of him saying it. While other DUers were bickering on whether it was said (though I had no reason to disbelieve El Universal which is universally condemned on those forums). Some DUers dismissing it out right wanting to "look in to it" when it was just undeniable that it was said.

Good luck finding me using a right wing source. If it's not a direct source it's damn near direct.

As far as convincing you that Capriles is left wing, I've already resigned myself at that. You basically admitted that your head was buried in the sand anyway.

Just like Capriles, actually!

No wonder you're so fond of him.

Last edited Wed Jul 11, 2012, 07:12 AM - Edit history (1)

Just patience. I learned it well when rebutting global warming deniers. I would post some data, they would complain that the sources were from X climate scientist or Y climate scientist, I would laugh at them, got a direct account to the NCDC, showed direct readings from temperature records, etc.

Chavistas are the same way as deniers in that vein. You post objective fact like "X called Y a really vile thing," and they try to either put it into question (see the horrific homophobia that was "being looked in to&quot , or actually deny it completely (just see the recent comment in this very thread where it was denied that Chavez called Capriles a "pig" despite that it actually, factually, happened).

Then you attack someone, falsely call them propagandists for posting factual information, smear them, and just repeat it ad nasueum. Eventually it becomes "truth." I mean, really, how many climate scientists have been thrown under the bus over false allegations of "getting paid to post their data"? I'm really familiar with these kinds of attacks and illogical arguments.

Anyway, I almost always use direct sources (or sources with direct quotes) when it comes to almost everything I cite here on DU. It's better that way, anyway, because you can get past the journalistic bias that often exists.

The Reuters line is that the police were there to stop violence between two groups, not to stop one group. It sounds to me like they were doing their job and protecting people in both camps from violence.

Instead they allowed the Chavista presence to remain and blockaded the march.

edit: LOL, apparently the Chavistas left but the police kept the blockade in place, and Capriles gave a speech at the roadblock amongst his supporters.

Fucking rich...

The Chavistas left, Capriles wanted to go march into their neighborhood. Almost like Tea Party marching into Harlem to campaign with their racist ignorant signs. Riot would break out. It was a cheap Capriles stunt to get publicity. He never intended to march into slum demand that Chaves do away with their free clinics.

Have you seen the video?

The police should've never got involved except to open the road up and let them pass, instead the police inflamed a confrontation by putting themselves between the chavistas and blocking the road completely.

Capriles has gone to many a slum without "riots breaking out" and I find your caricature of the Venezuelan poor as well as a caricature of Harlem to be utterly shameful.

edit: wait! Capriles wants to take away their free clinics? Bullshit. He wants to staff them! And that's what the Chavistas are afraid of. Capriles wants to tell the poor that he wants to actually get things done, and it scares the fuck out of the Chavistas.