Labor would only have to send the Red Guards to collect you and Piers.

Many things in life are counter-intuitive.  The leftist ideology on the surfact seems so compassionate, so liberating, so empowering.  But its results are the opposite.

Chavez was elected democraticaly. He was elected in 1998 and re-elected in 2000 and 2006.

He is the legitimate leader of Venezuela.

End of story.

A couple of questions:

a.) Is stupidity at this scale a crime?

b.) Do we have enough incarceration real estate to house this many imbeciles if it were?

Only a few months ago some of the lunar noodle brains living in denial gave spirited defences of Chavez saying all the Bolt think a likes were reading too much into Chavez activities. That he was not really a serious communist and had done many things to be admired.

I wonder how they read the shutting down of the only non state controlled Television station.

More denial maybe.

The Left and the Jill Singer’s, Philip Adam’s, Hugo Chavez’s of the world, love using the safety and convenience of our systems in order to make a name for themselves with anti government rhetoric, social dissent, Socialist ideology, spiteful personal attacks, etc.

But as soon as they reach ascendency, they suddenly grow tired of democracy. They suddenly see all these flaws with it that would allow people to argue and defeat the vastly superior ideas of Jill Singer, Philip Adam, Hugo Chavaz.

So in the interests of a harmonious and vibrant society of exquisite design.... They will stop all avenues of dissent..... For the good of society of course....

How nice of them to sacrifice their hereto sacrosanct ideal of freedom of speech… just for our benefit....

Posted by Barry Bones on Mon 28 May 07 at 03:41pm
Chavez was elected democraticaly. He was elected in 1998 and re-elected in 2000 and 2006.

End of story.

Sometimes Barry Bones seems childlike in his grasp on issues.... This would appear to be one of them…

... He will now attempt some equivalency between Chevez and Bush, or Howard, or Blair....

Hello Andrew,
please accept my apologies if this seems unfair to a colleague, but after reading Ms Singer’s article today I have to ask IS SHE FOR REAL? Admittedly she’s not the only one with the problem, but the Howard hate is so great in these people that it spills out in Bile. Besides that, I’m sure she is a lovely person.
Thanks Andrew.

Posted by Barry Bones on Mon 28 May 07 at 03:41pm

To quote Jennifer Aniston from the movie Friends with Money, “are you stupid”?

There is a very fine line between being a democratically elected leader and being a dictator.  And I’d say Chavez just crossed it.

"Posted by Barry Bones on Mon 28 May 07 at 03:41pm

Chavez was elected democraticaly. He was elected in 1998 and re-elected in 2000 and 2006.

He is the legitimate leader of Venezuela.

End of story.”

Barry why do you find it impossible to understand what AB has written? Who cares if a few lefties like you consider the electoral process in Venezuela democratic! 

The point is that Chavez the “democratically” elected President of Venezuela has “democratically” shut down a TV station that was critical of his “democratic” regime!!

“Venezuelan troops have seized an anti-government television channel’s broadcast equipment, the station said on Sunday, ahead of a controversial midnight EDT/0400 GMT takeover by President Hugo Chavez that will take the broadcaster off the air.”

In missing the point are you suggesting that the same would be acceptable over here? Should John Howard send in the troops to shut down the ABC?
What would you then be watching?

Whats this?  A socialist despot shutting down free speech and consolidating state power over, well, pretty much everything??!

/slaps head in feigned disbelief

Actually Barry, as I understand it, he did overturn the constitution to allow the extension of this presidency, so the legitimacy of his leadership is not entirely without question.  Even if it weren’t, active suppression of dissident views is never justifiable, as democracy cannot reasonably function if the public are not given the opportunity to inform themselves of and discuss the alternatives to the current form of government.  I personally consider myself to have a somewhat “centre-of-left” ideology, but it’s hard to find much to praise about Chavez’s actions, especially his apparent contentment with allowing the country’s economy to rely heavily on extracting a dwindling resource (oil) at considerable cost to the environment: economic development there strikes me as fundamentally unsustainable, and seems likely to falter long before it has an genuine impact on the huge poverty that many of its residents suffer under (which I’ve witnessed first hand).

Posted by Barry Bones on Mon 28 May 07 at 03:41pm

so by your logic you’re happy to let George W Bush do what he wants, and you won’t criticise him, because he is also the legitimate, democratically elected leader?

With the exceptiom of Warren Mundine, who one hopes simply drank way too much the night before, the ‘friends of Chavez’ are just a bunch of oven stokers.

***Chavez was elected democraticaly***

So was Adolf Hitler, Baz. In 1933.

To Barry Bones:

Mugabe was elected as well. Does that make up for the atrocities he has committed in his country?

Bonehead.

Leftists - including Phillip Adams, John Pilger, Labor Senator Gavin Marshall and then Labor president Warren Mundine could go over to Chavez and witness first hand his practices.

They will by very impressed with the results.

Perhaps Australian leftists could teach Chavez a few things too.

Oh, Barry Bones, Barry Bones.

Mugabe was elected democratically.
HItler was elected democratically.
And so was Chavez.

But you’d also know Chavez’s e-election was under dubious circumstances. And future elections, if there are any, will be even more dubious, with Chavez blatantly doing away with free press and anyone with differing opinions.

Socialst Governments always, always end up as dictatorships.

And that, my poor sad fellow correpondent, is the true End of Story.

Barry Bones, Andrew did not mention wether or not Chavez was legitimate, but whether or not it was sensible to invite him here. Obviously Freedom of the Press is not important to you or is it only Freedom of Press if the Press agrees with you?  You are being foolish, as usual!