Thread: Chavez urges Africa to unite against US

Is it possible that one of the reasons President Bush has been so open arms to illegals and has allowed the open borders because he is trying to get as many of these people here and on our side ?

I don't know if I've expressed this question right, but I've thought about this before. In other words, has he had it in mind to get as many of the people from these countries as possible "in our backyard" so to speak or "on our side" ?

What do you guys think. If it is so, I think it is a dangerous risk to take. He could be letting MANY anti-American people into our country in the process.

don't know if I've expressed this question right, but I've thought about this before. In other words, has he had it in mind to get as many of the people from these countries as possible "in our backyard" so to speak or "on our side" ?

No...don't think your off base at all. Majority rules! And they are making sure they do. Unfortunatly they don't realize they are a pawn in a very bad game..........

Originally Posted by Charlesoakisland

Chavez is going to be bad news for us in the not to distant future.

Second that. He's trying to gather forces to pull us down. How many of us will remember this time in our lives, should we one day be shaking our heads in defeat, wondering when the other hyenas heard his yelping laugh and moved in?

Americans, in general, tend to be an arrogant, soft people, and as a result we think that no one would ever want to hurt us, nevermind actually try. That is why 9/11 happened. Mexicans and other Latin ethnicities use stealth and duplicity to great effect. While Islam was -- is -- used to justify the actions of just about every acute act of terrorism committed on the globe, please notice that a number of Catholic churches are openly giving aid and comfort to illegal aliens, funding that chronic insidious act of terrorism, and to American soldiers who refuse to report for duty.

At this point we have a choice between Chavez & Obrador or the NORTH AMERICAN UNION.

Isn't it amazing how the American monopolies & Government have put our country in this position while we, the American shlubs were working our fingers off raising & educating our families for a "better future?!"

Not to forget that China & Chavez have made deals also.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...e30martin.html

The Chávez effect in Latin American politics

By Jeremy M. Martin
June 30, 2006

An interesting thing happened in Latin America on its way to ideological domination by anti-market leftist leaders – it failed in some key places. Two recent electoral defeats – along with the prospect for two more – of candidates running against free markets and with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez have opened a new chapter in the struggle for the ideological upper hand across the region.

Indeed, no factor has been as fundamentally important in these contests, and the apparent split in the region, as “The Chávez effect” – the force Chávez has had on politics, elections and regional diplomacy. His impact, however, now seems to be more hindrance than help.

True, Chávez has developed a particularly strong bond with Bolivia's Evo Morales, consummated in large measure by Morales' nationalization of the oil and gas industry on May 1. And Ecuador's physician president, Alfredo Palacio, wasted little time after booting U.S. oil company Occidental from Ecuador in welcoming Chávez to Quito to sign energy cooperation agreements. But these are becoming the exception rather than the rule.

Exhibit A of “The Chávez effect” is Venezuela's Andean neighbor Peru. The just-completed presidential election there saw Alan García edge out the populist former colonel and Chávez protégé, Ollanta Humala. No figure or issue played as heavily or importantly throughout the election as Ch 7/8avez. Beginning with candidate Humala's Chávez-embraced visit to Caracas in January, followed by recalling ambassadors and severing of diplomatic relations between the countries in the last two months, and finally, not long after García's victory speech not so subtly called his win a defeat of Chávez, the Venezuelan has continued the feud by demanding an apology from the president-elect and intimating that he would not have diplomatic relations with a García government.

As made clear by the final tally, the Peruvian people did not wish for their country to be ruled by a Chávez adherent. With García's nearly 10-point victory, Peru loudly rejected the “invitation” to the resource nationalist club.

On May 28, Colombia, another Andean neighbor of Venezuela, sent President lvaro Uribe to a second term with 62 percent of the vote. Uribe, a U.S. ally, ran on a pro-market, tough-on-narcoterrorism platform. Most notable, he ran away from a central tenet of the Bolivarian Revolution by expressing a sincere interest in attracting private investors from abroad to the country, particularly for its oil sector.

Meanwhile in Mexico, the Chávez effect has made Sunday's presidential election a much more interesting affair. For the better part of two years, former Mexico City Mayor Andrés Manuel López Obrador, known as “AMLO,” representing the leftist Democratic Revolution Party or PRD, had a sizable lead in the race to succeed President Vicente Fox.

Enter Hugo Chávez. After last November's contentious Summit of the Americas in Argentina, Chávez dubbed Fox a Yankee lap dog, causing both countries to withdraw their ambassadors. The rift and turmoil was quickly subsumed into the electoral process as charges emerged linking Chávez and the López Obrador campaign. A subsequent aggressive advertising campaign launched by National Action Party candidate Felipe Calderón portraying Lopéz Obrador as another Chávez disciple set off Chávez – perhaps more so than Lopéz Orbador himself, though Lopéz Orbador desperately tries to avoid any association with the Venezuelan – and led Chávez to attack the PAN and ridicule the election in Mexico on his weekly television program. Since these episodes, Calderón has pulled even with Lopéz Orbador and made the race a dead heat.

Small but historically important Nicaragua has also witnessed the Chávez effect. With his fevered intentions to distribute cheap oil to cities controlled by Sandinista leaders, and strident support of the Reagan-era relic and presidential candidate for life Daniel Ortega, Chávez has sparked the Nicaraguan government to formally ask that he stay out of its domestic politics and electoral process. Joining Chávez on his weekly television program in late April has afforded Ortega no better than second place in the latest polling for this November's presidential election, trailing pro-market candidate Eduardo Montealegre.

While the elections in Peru and Colombia, and impact to date on those in Mexico and Nicaragua, have signaled to Chávez that his dream for a region-wide Bolivarian Revolution has not been fully embraced, it would be erroneous to interpret the results as a vote to return to the heady neoliberal days of the recent past or even an embrace of the United States or Bush administration.

Rather it is a reminder that Latin America is a region of very unique and distinctive countries with varied histories, social and cultural mores, and political institutions where national sovereignty is paramount and outside influence is often unwelcome regardless of whether it comes from next door or further north.

Martin is director of the Energy Program at UCSD's Institute of the Americas.

Rather it is a reminder that Latin America is a region of very unique and distinctive countries with varied histories, social and cultural mores, and political institutions where national sovereignty is paramount and outside influence is often unwelcome regardless of whether it comes from next door or further north.

As are Canada and the United States. Its unfortunate that the current administrations of these two nations are more interested in providing benefit to corporations than respecting the cultural intrigity of their own nations they were elected to preserve.

Originally Posted by Iig

Americans, in general, tend to be an arrogant, soft people, and as a result we think that no one would ever want to hurt us, nevermind actually try.

Liberalism, political correctness, socialism-whatever you want to call it-has successfully suppressed, feminized and softened a large portion of the American male population.
Family law courts throughout the country have successfully demonized fatherhood.
The sense of entitlement ingrained in American children and young adults is a direct result of the seeds of liberalism that were planted in the 1960's.
American history is a subject that 50% of high school and college students know nothing about. God and Country is an ideal that has become taboo in todays young American culture.
The rest of the world sees us as vulnerable as we continue to abandon Americanism in favor of globalism. As they continue to unite against us, our weaknesses from within will become more and more exposed.
Our military is the most technologically advanced in the history of mankind. But our ground forces are the weakest they have been since before WWII.
We live in very dangerous times. Our political leadership is gutless. Much of the moral consciousness of our counrty rivals paganism. Corporate greed has de-industrialized our society. Government waste burdens every working American on the local, state and federal levels. Massive illegal immigration threatens the sovereignty of our nation.
The big event that looms on the future horizon will make 9/11 seem like Christmass Eve. How and where it will materialize, God only knows. Americans who fall into the "soft" category will be the most effected. Whether or not we survive as a nation, will depend on people such as those active at this site.

The rest of the world sees us as vulnerable as we continue to abandon Americanism in favor of globalism.

Whoa! hold up there NO one that I have read in this group supports globalism, nor do others who are not in this group that I have spoken with. I would say that perhaps the rest of the world sees Americans as ignorant of the facts and totally unaware of what is occuring at the higher levels of government. I would venture to say there are some clowns in congress who share that same opinion.

MOST people are uninformed and not for lack of desire but for the simple fact they trust the mainstream media as a reliable source of information, the "Fourth Estate" monitoring the government on behalf of the citizens. When in truth the trusted news sources of the past have been at best negligent and at worst complicit in the nearly complete black out on events and issues of critical importance to American citizens.

I don't think American Citizens are for globalization but American businesses are and I don't think there's alot of people in those other countries that are happy about American businesses taking over. It seems rather pushy to me too. Like we're getting a foothold in their country.

Originally Posted by crazybird

I don't think American Citizens are for globalization but American businesses are and I don't think there's alot of people in those other countries that are happy about American businesses taking over. It seems rather pushy to me too. Like we're getting a foothold in their country.

Wep561, I agree with you quite a bit, not entirely, but mostly.

For a while there, we had definitely stopped expecting our men to be, well, masculine in its original form. I think we are beginning to see men swing back to being rough and ready, but hopefully will not regress back to the men-don't-cry era. Oddly enough, because men have been allowed by society to show their nurturing side, courts are more willing to grant them custody. But family court law is the most dangerous judicial duty, as the Darren Mack case shows. I like manly men, lots, but they are a challenge to live with on a boring, daily basis. Somewhere between Jeff Foxworthy and Keifer Sutherland. I hope this doesn't offend anyone, because I mean it as a compliment, but I've always thought of serious military men to be studly metros. Trulies.

I think the moment in time when the wheels fell off, to me, was when illegal drugs got a really firm hold of us during the 60's, because of a cosmic confligration of events (even though drug misuse was already well under way for decades). It exacerbated, and was exacerbated by, less discipline of children, more tolerance of younger, non-contracepted, extra-marital sex, and the glamorizing of it all via the still new fangled technology called TV, in spite of the Cleavers. Drug users were becoming parents and raising their babies in the lifestyle. Remembering how horrid it was to be beaten with a belt (some parents over-did it), they went too far the other way, and just didn't correct them at all. Highly simplistic, full of generalizations and many notable Alex P. Keaton-types came from the same time period. But, you get what I mean.

Crazybird, I agree. Thing is, American employers are considered dreamy in comparison. We all want a piece of the American dream, no matter where you physically are. If you think an American business can help you pull yourself out of your piece of hell, then you'll motion us over as fast as possible. Sure, lots of people resent it, but they aren't keeping us out, either.

Corporate greed is America's terrorism. Always has been, always will be. But a lot of us really want to be millionaires. Most of us would rather just get it by winning the lottery, but entrepreneurs really want to do it their way. In America, you get a real shot at it, with much better odds.

In America, the relationship between employers and employees is still a bizarre mix of dictator-compliant follower/ father-child/ boss-servant; and the employer is always in the power position. And the Laughing Amnesty Seven is keen on not only keeping it that way, they want employers to get even more leeway to keep the unfair advantage over employees. The LA7 remain accomplices everyday they don't call on all employers to come forward and come into compliance by verifying SSNs of current employees right now.

Happy Independence Day?

No, no, of course, it is happy, but we got so much work to do this time around.