Senator Chris Dodd makes protestations to the Washington Post about its Venezuela editorials, insisting he knows more about Venezuela than either real Venezuelans or the Post, because he went on a congressional package tour to hobnob with The Thug of Miraflores, 'in the second week of January.'
Dodd you schmuck.
It'll take nausea pills for the rest of us to get though Dodd's letter, but I post excerpts here:
Mr. Chavez's rule highlights a broader U.S. foreign policy challenge: how to respond to democratically elected leaders whose actions challenge established democratic institutions. I believe that the institutions of democracy must be nurtured and encouraged, regardless of who is in office. They should not be relegated to the shadows simply because we don't share the political views of an elected leader of the moment. That means we must keep the door open to dialogue.
In the case of Mr. Chavez, dialogue may serve as a restraint on his most controversial policies. We know that isolating him has not. Mr. Chavez had encouraging words to say to us about wanting to reengage with the United States. We welcomed those words but told him that the course of our relationship will be decided by whether he lives up to the principles of democracy.
Chris you gullible fool. First of all, your hero of La Revolucion is not democratically elected, he's in office after a recall referendum dripping with fraud. And that's something well known among Venezuela's people, but not you. You'll 'get it' when Chavez's regime is over and a real democracy takes root. Maybe it's your background that blinds you. You're a charter sandalista, so as usual, you'll be on the wrong side of history. Happens to you a lot, doesn't it?
Your disingenous statement about 'relegated to the shadows because we disagree with their politics' is an unusually large slice of baloney. The U.S. under rightwing George Bush gets along famously with leaders like Lucio Gutierrez of Ecuador, Tony Blair of the U.K., President Lula of Brasil, President Lagos of Chile - all socialists of different flavors, but every last one of them a democrat! Every single one of them is willing to leave office when his term expires, and all of them are respectful of dissent and their country's opposition. Your strongman Chavez does not have a thing in common with them.
Why don't you ask these particular left-leaning leaders what they think of El Supremo, hmmm? Instead of insultingly lumping Chavez in with them, like gold and fool's gold, to accuse the U.S. of not getting along with anyone who's not of the same ideological stripe! Chris you don't even understand democracy, and you're supposed to be the Big Boy here!
But let's get down to brass tacks, Chris: Would that 'door open to dialogue' be the same kind of dialogue we heard broadcast on 'Alo Presidente'? You know, that dialogue small children listening to Venezuelan radio heard about 'sacrifices' for the country? (Never mind the 'gag law' in this case.) If that's your idea of 'dialogue' you've spent too much time talking dirty with Bianca Jagger, party boy.
And would that 'reengagement' you pontificate about be the carnal kind, as Chavez's newspaper Diario VEA suggested? Perhaps you'd like to tell that to Dr. Rice directly, bucko.
Dodd, you're either a naive fool in Jimmy Carter 's league or else you have wallowed too deeply in communism, unable to distinguish democracy from tyranny. What is the problem here? Is it your past? Is it a byproduct of those heady days of your own sandalistadom, partying on down in Managua in someone's confiscated house. It's no good Chris, it rots the brain!
Given what's come out of the mouth of El Sucio, this sanctimonious senatorial dupe lecturing the Washington Post on Venezuela once again makes a fool of himself. It's nothing new for him.
I bet there was laughter in the newsroom when the idiot's screed arrived.