May he continues to push for the liberation of Venezuela and all of Latin America from foriegn corporate parasites.

So it's not like Democrats don't show up down there.

gave an invocation.

Diosdado should have been sworn in as acting President until the elections.

(Reuters) - Venezuela's new acting President Nicolas Maduro is pushing for a quick election, hoping to benefit from an emotional outpouring at the death of his charismatic mentor, Hugo Chavez, and step into his shoes.

Venezuela's election commission could announce as early as Saturday a date for the election, which two recent polls have forecast Maduro would win comfortably.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/03/09/uk-venezuela-chavez-idUKBRE92405620130309

too risky to allow them to campaign and give voters something to think about.

What makes this unfair is that Maduro is unconstitutionally given powers which he is not allowed, which will allow him to run a much more robust campaign, perhaps with far more money needed with how Maduro isn't as well liked as Chavez was.

Most here who would want snap elections would prefer the elections be canceled for 6 years, I'd reckon.

Mar 9, 4:06 AM EST
Maduro leans on Chavez's charisma for popularity
By FABIOLA SANCHEZ and FRANK BAJAK
Associated Press

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Nicolas Maduro so far has led by imitation, seeking to fill the shoes of a president whose uncanny vigor, mischievous humor and political wiles sowed a revolution and transformed a nation.

As Hugo Chavez did during his 14-year presidency, Maduro has stoked confrontation, and shed tears.

While steering Venezuela through the trauma of Chavez's death, Maduro has pinned his move to the top on his beloved predecessor.

Yet there are serious doubts, even among die-hard Chavistas, about his ability to lead the nation.

More:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/L/LT_VENEZUELA_MADURO_?SECTION=HOME&SITE=AP&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Can anyone believe the whiplash that follows when AP calls Chavez "a president whose uncanny vigor, mischievous humor and political wiles sowed a revolution and transformed a nation"?

WTF hath God wrought?

He's been calling out the "imperialists," he's been making up conspiracy theories (that Chavez was "inoculated" with cancer by "special agents," which he ousted). The biggest irony is how opposition members were considered necrophiliacs by trying to get information about Chavez' (clearly declining) health, and yet here we have Maduro swearing loyalty to a dead man.

Fabiola Sanchez is a good writer and a good Venezuelan reporter.

Lol! Pretty soon we'll have people pretending to belong to leftist solidarity and human rights organizations, or with girlfriends in Venezuela, telling us that Maduro too amassed a huge billion dollar fortune when he was serving under Chavez.

When the writing was on the wall, they got to work right away, sneering him for having worked as a bus driver earlier in his life.

It's good they didn't discover he was a heavy whorehouse patron who had a fetish for dressing in diapers during his visits, like U.S. Senator David Vitter. You can just imagine how that would set him back in his future. Look what it did to Senator Vitter!

Yep, it won't be long until they start claiming that Chavez palmed a BILLION dollars for himself, then handed off another BILLION to his side-kick to keep him quiet. They don't seem to feel it's necessary to explain why it is that Venezuela impeached Carlos Andres Perez for stuffing mere MILLIONS of Venezuelan tax dollars into his pockets but looked the other way for the leftist.

Sick F###s.

with Capriles on this one. The Venezuelan constitution specifies that the Speaker of the National Assembly takes over when the President dies.

Maduro may well be elected as President, but he shouldn't have been sworn in as President on Chavez's death; that's not kosher.

Except the Venezuelan constitution specifies that the Vice President takes over when the President died.

Which is what happened.

You have not read the Venezuelan constitution, have you?

"When the President of the Republic becomes
permanently unavailable to serve during the first four years of this constitutional term of
office, a new election by universal suffrage and direct ballot shall be held within 30
consecutive days. Pending election and inauguration of the new President*, the Executive
Vice-President shall take charge of the Presidency of the Republic."

http://www.venezuelaemb.or.kr/english/ConstitutionoftheBolivarianingles.pdf

He never took over power.

They didn't even try to inaugurate him.

The supreme court just decided the homophobic bigot Maduro should have power.

Serán faltas absolutas del Presidente o Presidenta de la República: la muerte, su renuncia, la destitución decretada por sentencia del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia, la incapacidad física. o mental permanente certificada por una junta médica designada por el Tribunal Supremo de Justicia y con aprobación de la Asamblea Nacional, el abandono del cargo, declarado éste por la Asamblea Nacional, así como la revocatoria popular de su mandato. Candour se produzca la falta absoluta del Presidente electo o Presidenta electa antes de tomar posesión, se procederá a una nueva elección universal, directa y secreta dentro de los treinta. días consecutivos siguientes. Mientras se elige y toma posesión el nuevo Presidente o Presidenta, se encargará de la Presidencia de la República el Presidente o Presidenta de la Asamblea Nacional.

Cuando se produzca la falta absoluta del Presidente o Presidenta de la República durante los primeros cuatro años del período constitucional, se procederá a una nueva elección universal y directa. dentro de los treinta días consecutivos siguientes. Mientras se elige y toma posesión el nuevo Presidente o Presidenta, se encargará de la Presidencia de la República el Vicepresidente Ejecutivo o Vicepresidenta Ejecutiva.

En los casos anteriores, el nuevo Presidente o Presidenta completará el período constitucional correspondiente. Si la falta absoluta se produce durante los últimos dos años del período constitucional, el Vicepresidente Ejecutivo o Vicepresidenta Ejecutiva asumirá la Presidencia de la República hasta completar el mismo.

Well, in any event, there will be a new election soon, and that's that. As to whether Maduro will win, I say he has a very good chance. But you never know.

Yes, anyone can read the Venezuelan constitution. I reccomend you do so.

http://www.venezuelaemb.or.kr/english/ConstitutionoftheBolivarianingles.pdf

"When the President* of the Republic becomes
permanently unavailable to serve during the first four years of this constitutional term of
office, a new election by universal suffrage and direct ballot shall be held within 30
consecutive days. Pending election and inauguration of the new President*, the Executive
Vice-President* shall take charge of the Presidency of the Republic."

Chávez was elected, but he was never actually sworn-in for this particular term of office. He was to have been sworn-in on January 10th, 2013 but he was too ill, so it was postponed. In this case, permanently.

Simply put, he was only President-Elect when he died.

And thus irrelevant. But if you're going to have a constitution it would be wise to follow it. It was akin to the SCOTUS throwing the election to Bush.

Outrageous and extremely far-fetched, not to mention silly, as it was to begin with, the idea that the Vice-President would act as stand-in for an indefinite amount of time ("forever!&quot while Chavez would be kept hidden and "his true state" undisclosed at least had the benefit of following some kind of logic. Accompanied by disinformation published in the Spanish press (the lies spread by the far right ABC and the "centrist" El Pais) it created enough noise to get noticed and send echoes through the world press.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1108&pid=8014
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1108&pid=8034

Now, what are we to make of the opposition's blather of a "constitutional coup"?

Chavez appointed Maduro as Vice-President AFTER his re-election and made clear that he wanted him to stand in while he was unavailable, he even appealed to the people to vote for Maduro as his successor, should the operation turn out as it unfortunately has.

So, regarding the legitimacy of Maduro as stand-in President there can be no question. Following Chavez' departure to Cuba, he already acted in this function, in line with article 234 of the Venezuelan constitution. This article provides a time limit, the stand-in could not have lasted longer than 180 days (which the above mentioned conspiracy theorists conveniently forgot).

If Chavez had died before the end of 2012, Maduro would have legitimately served the rest of the term according to article 233. Since Chavez died within the first four years of the current term, Maduro cannot serve more than 30 days without new elections being called. Guess what, they already set the date.

The provision in Article 233 regarding the stand-in for a President permanently unavailable before his inauguration is obviously meant to define a stand-in when other arrangements such as the appointment of a Vice-President are not yet in place. The Constitutional Court was asked to clarify, they did, case closed. You don't get to make your own private interpretation. Even the Venezuelan opposition cannot overrule the Constitutional Court. But they can clamour, and see what will come off it ...

But that doesn't matter to you or Chavez supporters.

The court decided that "Chavez is absent when Chavez says he's absent" (yes that was an actual quote by one of the terribly inept judges).

I know this is hard for you, but oh well, go ahead and support the homophobic bigot Maduro. I don't expect Capriles to win since the conference he's having at this very moment is only allowed to be aired on one TV station in all of Venezuela and he'll not be allowed the same media presence as the chavistas.

What I do look forward to is Maduro showing his true colors over the stint of his bigotted tenure and maybe the rose colored glasses will come off as to the revolutionary nature of the corrupt chavismo.

edit: BTW, when I said "Yep" I wasn't agreeing with that poster that they'd keep Chavez "away" forever, but I was saying it wouldn't surprise me if that happened, I was not advocating any conspiracy theory at all. The whole macabre nature of how Chavez was treated is enough for me to be terribly cynical.

Permanently unavailable means dead or "permanent physical or mental disability certified by a medical board designated by the Supreme Tribunal of Justice with the approval of the National Assembly".

Since the Supreme Tribunal of Justice did not designate a medical board to certify a "permanent disability" nor the National Assembly approved, there was no such certification. So, absent his death he was only "temporarily unavailable". Following the constitution by the letter, he asked for authorization from the National Assembly of his temporary absence. Here he hands over the request in written form to the president of the National Assembly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=yD1KZCVoLaQ#t=696s

Simple.

It doesn't even matter why they didn't designate it, the constitution only provides who has the authority, not that they have an obligation to do it.

but I think the main reason may just have been a proper sense of decorum and human decency.

It's just that who gives a fuck about the constitution, right?

I've never known of a western President's condition to be kept secret for a "proper sense of decorum and human decency."

If a relative of yours has an illness that is most likely terminal and the prognosis is bad, do you say: okay, let's open the testament and see who gets what, it's over now anyhow?

As to why presidents keep their true conditions secret, I'm sure there is often or perhaps always a PR aspect involved, apart from human decency and privacy issues. Americans should know, didn't I point you to this site previously?

Because Maduro, an unelected, selected, VP, got anointed.

This is the information age, close cabals of info sharing are not particularly looked upon favorably. Back then they could get away with it a lot easier. In Chavez' case he had to go to Cuba to keep people from leaking information and from the media constantly asking questions (which would've persuaded doctors to make requests to come forward since such ardent questioning and a camp-out of journalists can impact the normal operations of a hospital).

From all indications Chavez was not running the country for the past three months, but believe what you will from the homophobic bigot Maduro.

as you know very well, Maduro is up for election within a few weeks of the President's death. If the people don't wan't him, they can vote for the opposition. Until last week he was Executive Vice President standing in for the temporarily unavailable President, as the constitution proscribes. Now he is standing in for the permanently unavailable President, as the constitution proscribes.

That he is up for election is a remarkable feature of this constitution. In Germany, if the Chancellor dies or steps down, it doesn't automatically require a new election. On the contrary, some other leading figure from the same party takes over, all they need is a majority in parliament. In the US, according to the Twenty-fifth Amendment, the Vice-President, not necessarily the one who got elected as the running mate of the President, automatically takes over, whatever his reputation and following may be among the electorate.

Obviously, the constitution of Venezuela is more democratic in this respect than those of the US and Germany (and many others, I'm sure).

There is a weird scenario where the Vice President could be selected by an electoral college tie, but it's never happened.

Maduro was not appointed for this term, as Capriles pointed out, since Chavez was not sworn in.

and no Vice-President gets actually elected by the people, anyway, as you are very well aware. The electoral college is the most undemocratic institution in the American electoral process and should be immediately abolished.

And who appointed Hillary Clinton in Obama's second term? I read her last day as Secretary of State was February 1, 2013. Did he appoint her on January 20 for another 10 days?

It was and is utterly tasteless, indecent and gross to point out that a gravely ill person did not stand up in public to swear an oath (that he has already sworn several times over). But given your consistent parroting of opposition talking points here over the years, I don't really expect you to admit that you can see that.

Of course, the homophobic bigot Maduro got the supreme court fix (who gives a shit about the constitution fix). The very idea that a person ignores the constitutionally required inauguration date is clearly lost on you.

Edith Wilson
Edith Bolling Wilson, Woodrow Wilson's second wife, is sometimes described as America's first woman President because of the role she played after the President's massive stroke in October 1919. Choosing to admit or turn away visitors and deciding what papers Wilson did or did not see, she was a controversial figure at the time and has remained so ever since. For her part, Edith Wilson described her role as that of a steward. She wrote in her 1939 memoirs that as First Lady, she "never made a single decision regarding the disposition of public affairs." In fact, she claimed powers over only "what was important and what was not" and "when to present matters to my husband."
http://millercenter.org/president/wilson/essays/firstlady

If he was "permanently unavailable" three months ago, then Maduro would still have taken over.

What happens if president of republic is permanently unavailable in the last year of his constitutional term? Who takes over?

What happens if president of republic is permanently unavailable in the first year of his constitution? Who takes over?

The answer in both cases is the Vice President.

You preclude that scenario from ever happening.

The scenario obviously applies when there is no continuity in government. Had your candidate won the last election, as you erroneously predicted, and for some reason become permanently unavailable before his inauguration, the president of the national assembly would have had to take over for thirty days, obviously.

and was unquestionably President when he dies.

If there is an argument, it is of a highly technically precise parsing of law of a "gotcha" type nature that seems to be approaching absurdity in the face of incumbency and the results of the recent election, indicating hanging on a pretty damn persnickety interpretation of transition law that should supersede the clear will of the people because you can come up with a fairly creative view of reality that probably would at least require a court to support to be operative and an argument that should have been made and settled once the swearing in didn't happen as dictated by law.

Please explain.

People saying that you can just throw out constitutional language so easily are truly bastions of corruption.

The constitution provides that the Vice-President takes over if the President dies. It also provides that new elections have to be held within 30 days if the take-over happens in the first four years of the term.

These provisions are more democratic than those in other countries such as e.g. the US, where the Vice-President doesn't need approval by the electorate. And the government of Venezuela abides by them.

I have no idea what purpose it would serve to replace the Vice-President with the president of the parliament for 30 days. This provision is clearly meant to be applied in such cases where no Vice-President is available because he hasn't been appointed yet. As the Constitutional Court has clarified.

So there's a pretty big distinction here.

The reason the VP is supposed to be replaced by the parliament if the President becomes incapacitated before his inauguration is simple. The VP is not elected and the official term of the President does not take place until they are inaugurated.

Here's a scenario for you; President gets elected. VP threatens duly elected President's family and friends if he's not selected as VP (he may be a general or something, with military might). VP has said President killed before his inauguration (no proof it was the VP). Selected (not elected) VP then gets power? Yeah, OK. That's the scenario you support. But what can I say.

The US electorate has no say whatsoever in who the President selects for his "ticket". Truman was not approved by the electorate within 30 days of his takeover.

When Chavez had won the election last year he appointed his Vice-President. When he took a temporary leave of absence, Maduro was his legitimate stand-in for up to 90 days.

How does Chavez suddenly become un-elected and his appointment of a stand-in invalid when he is too sick to attend a public ceremony?

Now that Chavez has died, the electorate is asked to approve of his appointment. Everyone is free to choose the candidate you prefer but I doubt they will. As to your fantasy scenario, the fantasy general would have to seek electoral approval within 30 days in Venezuela. It doesn't make any difference if he kills the President before or after the inauguration. In the US, however, your scenario kind of works and, who know, maybe it has.

He can use public funds to run for the candidacy. Like Maduro will do and like Chavez has done.

a sitting president/party in power always has an advantage, due to having been elected before.

Nothing would change in this respect if Maduro were Vice-President instead of acting president during the next few weeks.

Since I doubt Capriles has a chance in hell of winning (yes I thought he would win last time).

It only changes the political landscape and makes it easier and with less drama.

So who do you think was officially President of Venezuela two weeks ago?

It's obviously absurd on it face. Their Supreme Court was obviously correct in ruling that it was a continuation of power. If Obama had postponed his re-inauguration for a month he would not have stopped being the President for that month.

The articles are clear:

The articles are very clear.

If the president of the republic dies, the vice president takes over. No matter what. Doesnt matter if it was the last four years or first few. There is no clause in the Venezuelan constitution where that is not the case. None.

Who was the official president of Venezuela two weeks ago? If your answer is Chavez, then Maduro is constitutionally next in line. If your answer is not Chavez, you expose your argument as ridiculous.

If Chavez died Jan 9th, Maduro would have taken over. Because he was president of the republic. And if the president of the republic dies, the vice president takes over. Always. Even if it was just until the end of the term. Power always goes to the vice president when the president dies. It doesnt matter if its first two or last four. That only matters for when the elections must be held,not for who gets power.

Anyway, Cabello is himself a Chavez supporter. You are assuming he would somehow not materially support Maduro if he were interim president.

If he is unable to show up to the inauguration he is to be sworn in by the supreme court.

If that is not possible the supreme court should convene a medical board.

This never happened.

The President's capacity to be President is now in doubt.

I do not "assume that Cabello would not materially support Maduro."

It's simply not assured and it allows Cabello elbow room to have more say.

Maduro cannot have any questioning of his position of power. There can be no division.

Medical board is only necessary to certify that the president is permanently unavailable.
If the president is considered temporarily unavailable there is no need for any medical board.

If you want to get technical, Chavez was sworn in by the supreme court. In 2006. Nothing requires him to be sworn in again for a new term to start.

The obvious problem is that the constitution was not written with re-elections in mind.

Really? You're saying that?

Why should there be any division? Because you would like to see it? LOL!

Chavistas have murdered opposition members and there have been attempts on Capriles without arrest. I would rather not see more of that.

Oh, you mean division within the chavistas? That's only a matter of time.

Oh, you don't know about the opposition members murdered at a Capriles rally?

Or that Capriles himself was shot at at a rally?

Danilo Anderson who was pursuing an investigation after the leaders of the coup when he was assassinated.

WTF?

Although you have apparently already conceded on behalf of the opposition.

I was in the bubble last go around and thought they were doing good.