Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, July 17, 2017

Millions of Venezuelans signaled their disapproval of President Nicolás Maduro's plan to hold a constituent assembly by casting ballots on Sunday in a vote unlike any other in this nation's history. More than 98 percent of voters sided with the opposition in answering three yes-or-no questions drafted with the aim of weakening Maduro's legitimacy days before his constituent assembly is expected to convene. Opponents see the assembly as a power grab by an increasingly unpopular leader and fear he may use it to do away with democratic elections. Sunday's exercise, known as a popular consultation, was organized by a slate of opposition parties that dominate Venezuela's National Assembly.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

While Mr. Maduro is widely expected to ignore the outcome, organizers hope that it invigorates a protest movement that has gained momentum over the past couple of months. Tensions have soared across Venezuela amid widespread food and medicine shortages and spiraling inflation that the government routinely plays down. - FTA

Its what socialist do once in power ..... ignore the people .....

Talk about income inequality.... and there is no turn over ... once you are in you and your family are in for every.

#1 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-07-17 09:07 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

98 percent? Now there is a goal for Sideshow Don.

#2 | Posted by 726 at 2017-07-17 09:08 AM | Reply

Chavez did it right and eliminated any internal force that could stand against Bolivarian Socialism. In the end, it's going to be up to the people to fight it. And that will mean fighting the army and the police.

#3 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-07-17 09:23 AM | Reply

I thought Bernie said Venezuela was the model Utopia. What gives?

#4 | Posted by bogey1355 at 2017-07-17 12:56 PM | Reply

If 98% oppose Maduro's plan, then that means the vast majority of police and military also oppose the plan. If the numbers are correct, the plan DOA.

#5 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-07-17 07:04 PM | Reply

Good thing they dont have an electoral college or he could still win the election.

#6 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-07-17 07:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Its what socialist do once in power ..... ignore the people .....

#1 | Posted by AndreaMackris

Yeah that explains all the riots in new zealand, australia, germany, france, switzerland, england, ireland, scotland, finland, norway, canada....

You know... all those horrible socialist countries with more income mobility than the USA.

#7 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-07-17 07:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Good thing they dont have an electoral college or he could still win the election.

Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-07-17 07:11 PM | Reply

You sound like an Andrew Jackson supporter.

www.washingtonpost.com

#8 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-07-17 07:17 PM | Reply

You sound like an Andrew Jackson supporter.

#8 | Posted by LauraMohr

I'm a democracy supporter. Most votes should win the election and the power of your vote shouldn't be related to where you live in the country.

#9 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-07-17 07:30 PM | Reply

----------Its what socialist do once in power ..... ignore the people .....
----------Talk about income inequality.... and there is no turn over ... once you are in you and your family are in for every.
----------#1 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2017-07-17 09:07 AM

I flagged that as "funny" because a statement that stupid must be in jest.

#10 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-07-17 07:31 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Its what socialist do once in power ..... ignore the people .....
Talk about income inequality.... and there is no turn over ... once you are in you and your family are in for every.
#1 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2017-07-17 09:07 AM | FLAG:

You're talking about the GOP in America.

#11 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-07-17 07:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I'm a democracy supporter. Most votes should win the election and the power of your vote shouldn't be related to where you live in the country.

#9 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

What about representation?

If we took out illegal immigrants from census, california would lose 5 reps in the house.

I am sure you are against that.

#12 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-07-17 07:34 PM | Reply

#10 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES

It's ain't stupid if you live under socialism.

#13 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-07-17 07:39 PM | Reply

And how many would Tejas lose? Unless all those "brown people" know their place.

#14 | Posted by zelkova at 2017-07-17 08:23 PM | Reply

What about representation?

If we took out illegal immigrants from census, california would lose 5 reps in the house.

I am sure you are against that.

#12 | Posted by AndreaMackris

I'd love to see the breitbart link that fed you that "info".

#15 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-07-17 08:33 PM | Reply

#12

According to the Constitution, apportionment is based on the numbers of persons (unless they were slaves, in which case they each count for 3/5 of a person) residing in each of the 435 Districts. It didn't say "citizens" (the vast majority of blacks weren't citizens at the time, after all). There has been no subsequent Amendment or SCOTUS ruling that says otherwise. The States may control who is qualified to vote (subject to valid voting laws), but apportionment is based on people, not on voters.

#16 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-07-17 09:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I'd love to see the breitbart link that fed you that "info".
#15 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Simple math problem I worked out a long time ago, updated with newer numbers,
~3 million undocumented immigrants, ~39 million population = ~8%
53 Representatives = 4.24 round up given time.

But you don't have a problem with it........

#16 | POSTED BY WHODAMAN

Read more would you understand you are not keeping up, its ok... ....

The reality is socialism creates incredible income inequality, the government officials aren't suffering, the people are, 2% of the population is doing GREAT. The rest are losing weight.

You think government officials are shopping where the hoi poloi shop? LOL think again.

I am going with the average weight loss by the 98% is greater than the 2%, by about 20lbs.

Here is a protip - inequality is about power, and today DC has the power to make or break companies via rent seeking, the greater the power in Washington, the worse the inequality will become. If you watch any animation of how we have become more and more unequal, and it animates more unequal as DC grows.

Its not a correlation, its causation.

Some of the richest counties in the US are around WashingtonDC,

What does WashingtonDC produce that people make more than the President?

#17 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-07-17 10:50 PM | Reply

"What does WashingtonDC produce that people make more than the President?"

Mixing the Halcion and the Ambien again?

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-07-17 10:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Simple math problem I worked out a long time ago, updated with newer numbers,
~3 million undocumented immigrants, ~39 million population = ~8%
53 Representatives = 4.24 round up given time."

So your underlying assumption is all undocumented immigrants fill out their census forms?

#19 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-07-17 11:09 PM | Reply

- socialism creates incredible income inequality

As if the Trust Fund Toddler cares about income inequality. She's been laughing about it all year.

Socialism in the US would have to take steroids to create as much income inequality as we have here now.

www.youtube.com

#20 | Posted by Corky at 2017-07-17 11:37 PM | Reply

Socialism brought us ALL: clean water once at least until Republicans took over management of Michigan and poisoned Americans in order to save money for themselves; a national defense; medicare and a social security system for the disabled and elderly; a superhighway system; a decent education for everyone until deliberate unequal distribution of public funding of schools by Republicans put many minorities at a disadvantage, so common in the fifties and sixties. Class warfare is alive and well. Democrats are also a big part of it.

It is morally outrageous to: bailout criminal bankers that destroyed the global economy to the tune of $17 trillion; waste $5-6 trillion warmongering in Africa, the Middle East and Afghanistan and then pretend there is no money to take care of our own. All that money belongs to the American people and some of it should be provided to the millions of innocent people that we have maimed and displaced with our warmongering.

#21 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-07-17 11:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Sorry but I need to address the Morons in the room about all the freaking Socialist cracks. Maduro is a DICTATOR. Just like other famous dictators. You know Stalin and the like. All DICTATORS are not Socialist nor are all Socialists Dictators. Trump is an example of someone who THOUGHT he could be a DICTATOR once elected.

As Bayviking pointed out Socialism has brought many great things. Something left out was the Middle Class in general. Most European countries are more Socialist than the USA. I don't see any Dictators there - except what is happening in Turkey with a Right Wing Religious Dictatorship forming.

Also and most importantly - Socialism and Capitalism are NOT mutually exclusive nor should they be.

#22 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-07-18 11:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I swear to God I don't know when it happened but socialism is NOT the same thing as Communism and never has been. Beyond that Socialism in itself is not evil. Even when I held strongly conservative viewpoints I understood that. Somehow the brainwashing machine created an equivalency that does not exist in the fear filled mind of the right.

#23 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-07-18 11:47 AM | Reply

People with an ideological agenda to mock socialism don't care in the slightest that the truth is, going all the way back to the early days of Chavez, many (most?) liberal Americans had considered Chavez little more than a dictator and a liar who only spoke about socialism as a way of securing his own power. Rightwingers mostly want to re-write history to make it seem as if most mainstream liberals in America supported the dictator. When in fact that is not true.

#24 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-07-18 11:52 AM | Reply

Its what socialist do once in power ..... ignore the people .....
Talk about income inequality.... and there is no turn over ... once you are in you and your family are in for every.
#1 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Trump is a socialist?! Who knew?

#25 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-07-18 11:53 AM | Reply

Mod8. The left fawned over Chavez. He was a hero in the MSM as well as on this site. When he appropriated all of the privately held oil refineries he was hailed as an angel.

#26 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-07-18 12:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Danni made a point of telling us that she was getting all of her gas at Citgo because Chavez.

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-07-18 12:28 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

JeffJ, respectfully, that's just not true. I remember denouncing Chavez from the very beginning. And I vividly remember most other mainstream liberals also denouncing him. There were naïve or idealistic posters such as Danni who failed to recognize Chavez for what he was, but such posters were not the majority of liberals.

#28 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-07-18 12:35 PM | Reply

On a side note, I lived for many years in South America. I still go down every couple of years for extended visits. I have learned time and again that within the context of South American politics the term 'socialism' is usually interpreted as 'populism', and while it may start out well seems to inevitably lead to dictatorship and the undermining of democratic institutions.

Context is important. For those of you who do not know South American history, let me assure you that what Europeans or Americans think of when think of 'socialism' is not the same thing as what South Americans do. Really you have to think of it in terms of 'populism' a la Juan Peron or Hugo Chavez. Policies that initially confiscate from the rich and give to the poor, nationalizing industry, and allowing the social infrastructure to degrade. The reason that such populism will always remain a truly powerful force in the regions is that the gulf between the well-to-do and the poor is mind blowing. It is like separate universes. We have nothing like it here in the US, despite the best effort of the American right wing.

#29 | Posted by moder8 at 2017-07-18 12:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

= The left fawned over Chavez.

That's just crap. Most liberals weren't fawning over Chavez, he was just not his opponents.

#30 | Posted by Corky at 2017-07-18 12:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Mod8

I remember it differently. My recollection is that he was viewed with the same adoration as Che.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about this.

#31 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-07-18 02:55 PM | Reply

----------#10 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES
----------It's ain't stupid if you live under socialism.

----------#13 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

It is well established that you are willfully ignorant, but the US is still much closer economically to pure socialism than pure capitalism.

#32 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-07-18 06:06 PM | Reply

. Most liberals weren't fawning over Chavez, he was just not his opponents.

#30 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2017-07-18 12:45 PM

Like dynamiting fish in a barrel:

Sean Penn: (Chávez) is a fascinating guy. He's done ... incredible things for the 80% of the people that are very poor there.

Penn: Venezuela and its revolution will endure under the proven leadership of vice president Maduro

Oliver Stone: Look at the positive changes that have happened economically [in Venezuela], that have happened in all of South America because of Chávez, Kirchner ... [Chavez] should be welcome to stay in power.

Jesse Jackson: Chávez [should be praised] for his focus on foreign debt, debt relief, and free and fair trade to overcome years of structural disorder, unnecessary military spending, [and] land reform.

Naomi Campbell: Whatever the future holds, for me [Chavez'] role will always be that of a rebel angel.

Michael Moore: Hugo Chavez declared the oil belonged 2 the ppl. He used the oil $ 2 eliminate 75% of extreme poverty, provide free health & education 4 all

Don King: To see what is happening here [in Venezuela] makes me feel good all over.

Noam Chomsky: To claim Chavez suppressed the press is kind of a joke...There's a strong opposition press bitterly attacking him all the time. There's much more of an opposition press than there is in most of Latin America ... There is some repression of the press, but it's mostly, you know, verbal intimidation ...

Chomsky: Chavez (carried forward) this historic liberation of Latin America ... . (He was certainly) destructive to the rich oligarchy, to the US power ... Over the past ten years, I've seen a change of absolutely historic significance. Now, it's pretty much free.

Mark Weisbrot: Chavez is a savior...remember that the catastrophic view of Venezuela's economy has been promoted by the Venezuelan government's opponents – including most of the international and Venezuelan media – for 14 years. Economic disaster was always just around the corner, but it never quite happened.

Jeremy Corbin: Venezuela is seriously conquering poverty by emphatically rejecting the Neo Liberal policies of the world's financial institutions.

Danny Glover: He was not only my friend, he was my brother. It's difficult for a leader like him to exist in these times. His vision for humanity and the world can only be compared to that of leaders like Nelson Mandela. He was a great man and I cried when he died.

Glover: Praise goes to Maduro for (continuing) to realize (Chavez's) vision of a participatory democracy, one involving all citizens.

Joseph Stiglitz: (Chávez's "equitable" distribution of Venezuela's oil revenue) should be considered innovative rather than revolutionary, because it did not occur in the past.

There are literally dozens of more quotes and articles from Slate, Salon, the Atlantic, the Guardian, HuffPo, etc.

#33 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-07-18 06:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#33

I can do the same with idiots right of center that praise Putin.

You combined anecdotes and cherry-picking. The Right's favorite fallacies to use.

#34 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-07-18 07:13 PM | Reply

"Socialism in itself is not evil. Even when I held strongly conservative viewpoints I understood that. Somehow the brainwashing machine created an equivalency that does not exist in the fear filled mind of the right."

Socialism exists in almost every household in the world...I know it does in mine. It succeeds because I care more about the well being of my family than I do myself, and I am willing to do what it takes to make sure they are well taken care of. But as you drift further away from the immediate family, my concern for them wanes. Up to the point where there are people I would rather see living on the street than living off money I provided.

The Nazi's employed many left-wing economic policies. Why? because they viewed the Aryans as one big family that needed to take care of each other. And the other European countries aren't that far removed. In fact the biggest threat to the European welfare state is immigration. The Scandinavians pioneered the post-WWII welfare state, now they're pissed. Because they're seeming their tax dollars go not to help out their fellow Scandinavians, but instead being directed towards a gang of violent and ----- immigrants.

Socialism can work, when the people are behind it, and those who drive the system forward are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to do so. But more often than not, this isn't the case. And the alternative is either the failure of socialism, or using violent and coercive means to keep the system on track. But eventually even that fails.

#35 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-07-18 07:18 PM | Reply

"I can do the same with idiots right of center that praise Putin."

You should bring that up when Russia is starving to death as a result of Putin's policies.

#36 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-07-18 07:19 PM | Reply

There are literally dozens of more quotes and articles from Slate, Salon, the Atlantic, the Guardian, HuffPo, etc.
#33 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Not to mention the NYT....

#33
I can do the same with idiots right of center that praise Putin.
You combined anecdotes and cherry-picking. The Right's favorite fallacies to use.

#34 | POSTED BY INDIANAJONES

Then do it. And then let's compare the size of their megaphones and how they are regarded by "their side". You can quote Trump and that is certainly significant, but you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone of prominence on the right praising Putin in remotely the manner in which prominent lefties praised Chavez.

Pull out your bullwhip and begin substantiating your braggadocio.

#37 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-07-18 07:19 PM | Reply

Further, I'm going to pre-empt you when it comes Trump. I can cite words and actions by Obama and Hillary Clinton that likely dwarf the idiotic things Trump has said about Putin.

#38 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-07-18 07:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

if you're being honest Trump is probably the most hated Republican ever...even by other Republicans.

#39 | Posted by madbomber at 2017-07-18 07:29 PM | Reply

I can do the same with idiots right of center that praise Putin.

That's funny, Putin doesn't appear once in this thread or the article...until you deflected to him.

#40 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-07-18 07:43 PM | Reply

I don't remember any liberals fawning over Chavez. He was a failed communist guerilla. Granted people change and he decided the path to power was through actual politics. That said his true colors came out very quickly. He collected power through populist moves - sound like tRump at all? He stripped the wealthy and corporations of their factories and businesses. A couple of things I didn't necessarily disagree with but his execution of the nationalization of them I did. He was a communist and never a socialist. He pretended to be a socialist just long enough. He never gave a damn about the people only his own wealth and power. Again sound like tRump to anyone?

#41 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-07-18 08:51 PM | Reply

#33 | Posted by Rightocenter

So you pick quotes from a handful of the usual suspects and couple others. I will say it if you like. He did some good things toward the beginning. But they were done in a populist way for populist reasons to ensure his grasp on power. The nationalizing of the oil for example. It wasn't a bad thing and that money did a tremendous amount of good for the people of Venezuela. The problem was he pretty much just took it and didn't work with the people he was taking it from or honor agreements. Like I indicated in #41 he just took things. That is not only bad but very wrong. He crushed the economy in the end. Especially when oil prices collapsed. Maduro was always doomed to be even worse and has proven himself to be at every turn.

Here's the thing the crushing poverty that existed in Venezuela prior to Chavez was the reason for him in the first place. The free reign capitalism was a complete fail for the vast majority of the country like in most Latin American countries and still does in many today. Even those doing reasonably well still have more than some issues.

#42 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-07-18 09:02 PM | Reply

I don't remember any liberals fawning over Chavez. He was a failed communist guerilla. Granted people change and he decided the path to power was through actual politics. That said his true colors came out very quickly. He collected power through populist moves - sound like tRump at all? He stripped the wealthy and corporations of their factories and businesses. A couple of things I didn't necessarily disagree with but his execution of the nationalization of them I did. He was a communist and never a socialist. He pretended to be a socialist just long enough. He never gave a damn about the people only his own wealth and power. Again sound like tRump to anyone?

Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-07-18 08:51 PM | Reply

I absolutely do. When heating oil prices were out of sight and Dubya wouldn't help out his country folk. Hugo made it a point to help many Americans and American cities with cheap or free heating oil as well as reduced prices at Citgo gas stations. He was praised by many in this country.

#43 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-07-18 09:10 PM | Reply

#43 | Posted by LauraMohr

Now that you mention it I do remember that but who was praising him? I mean maybe I am just forgetting all of the praise but the man always disgusted me and pretty much everyone I personally know. Matter of fact I still don't use Citgo and won't as long as Maduro is in but then again I like quality Gas. But with you saying that I am guessing a lot of right wingers were praising him and not just liberals. I remember a LOT of belly aching going on with pretty much everyone about the price of Gas and I actually don't know anyone still on fuel oil even then... I was the last one and I pulled that pig out of the basement in 2000. The little gas unit that replaced it was so tiny in comparison it was like a comedy.

#44 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-07-18 09:46 PM | Reply

I actually don't know anyone still on fuel oil even then... I was the last one and I pulled that pig out of the basement in 2000. The little gas unit that replaced it was so tiny in comparison it was like a comedy.

#44 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-07-18 09:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

Surprisingly a lot of the homes back east and in New England burn fuel oil to heat their homes. Very old school but it works.

#45 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-07-18 09:51 PM | Reply

www.washingtonpost.com

Former congressman Joe Kennedy (D-Mass.) is mourning the death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez today, praising Chavez as someone who made a difference for poor people.

Kennedy told the AP that Chavez helped 2 million Americans through a heating assistance program that the two men worked on together through Kennedy's Citizen's Energy charity. Kennedy said Chavez donated 200 million gallons of heating oil over eight years.

content.time.com

Four years ago, Hugo Chávez scored one of the more impressive p.r. coups of the new century when he started delivering free heating oil to low-income Americans. Even if it was political opportunism, as conservative critics insisted, it got home-heating fuel to hundreds of thousands of yanquis during the past four winters, when the price was often skyrocketing. On Monday, however, with world oil prices plunging, the Venezuelan President decided to suspend his large-scale, multistate U.S. program in order to tend to financial concerns at home. Then on Wednesday, at the urging of U.S. politicians whose constituents had come to rely on the oil, Chávez reversed himself and said the heating oil would keep flowing this winter.

All of which raises the question: If Chávez can keep donating fuel even as his oil revenues tumble, why can't any U.S. oil companies step up to do the same? (See pictures of the global financial crisis.)

The left-wing Chávez caught Washington by surprise in the fall of 2005 when he announced that Citgo -- the Houston-based subsidiary of Venezuela's state-run oil firm, Petróleos de Venezuela -- would give millions of gallons of heating oil at half price, and eventually free, to struggling households in the American Northeast and Midwest. By this year, the service has expanded to more than 200,000 families in 23 states. The partisan controversy around it has also grown. Republicans grouse that taking fuel from Chávez, America's chief antagonist in the hemisphere, is unpatriotic and simply aids his anti-U.S. foreign policy. Democrats and advocates for the poor disagree. In a website video for Boston-based Citizens Energy, which helps distribute the Citgo oil, director Joseph Kennedy, son of Senator Robert Kennedy, says, "Some people say it's bad politics to [accept the fuel]. I say it's a crime against humanity not to."

#46 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-07-18 09:58 PM | Reply

So 2% got him elected. Twice as good as the 1% doing it.

#47 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-07-19 11:47 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2017 World Readable

Drudge Retort