Funny to listen to Oliver Stone talk about what a good guy Hugo Chavez is, and go "Negotiate" for the release of FARC hostages in Columbia. Then Columbia raids a FARC encampment which found safe haven 1.9 miles inside the border of Ecuador and recovers a laptop holding data linking both Chavez and Ecuador to supporting FARC, an organization that wages war on the civilized portion of Columbia financed by sales of Cocaine and payoffs from kidnappings(I guess we can add financed by Hugo Chavez to that list).

This is Oliver Stone's "Good guy who the U.S. has given a bad wrap". I suppose he has a hard time seeing the truth because his head is shoved so far up his *ss. It certainly prevented him from hearing good old Hugo promoting tactics to raise the price of oil high enough to bankrupt the U.S. in collusion with his buddy Amindinijhad. Worthless turds.

Originally Posted by cbwm

It certainly prevented him from hearing good old Hugo promoting tactics to raise the price of oil high enough to bankrupt the U.S. in collusion with his buddy Amindinijhad. Worthless turds.

Those evil people who do capitalism good - we hate them! How can they raise the price of a product we're hopelessly addicted to just because we'll pay more to get it? That's anti communism (sorry, you'd call it Kommunist) - we hate them! Everyone in the world should be more Kummunist like Keith so that we can burn cheap gas while driving to WalMart to buy Windows Vista.

Let me guess? You're hoping Bush invades preemptively to restore Kommunism. Invading a national and violating their territorial integrity, then killing 1/30 their population, dragging people off to secret prisons in Poland and Cuba to be tortured - that kind of stuff is called "freedom" when GWB does it but "terrorism" when the FARC does. Sure is a great way to win hearts and minds, though, as evidenced by those people throwing flowers in Falluja.

Speaking of the FARC and idiotic Bush policy failures, that Frenchie is a hero. Euro style negotiation saved the day and has been a lot more effective in dealing with narco terrorism than cowboy style blazin six shooters. Gotta hand it to Sarkozy.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Let me guess? You're hoping Bush invades preemptively to restore Kommunism. Invading a national and violating their territorial integrity, then killing 1/30 their population, dragging people off to secret prisons in Poland and Cuba to be tortured

While all that sounds terrific, I think it won't be necessary. His own people are on the verge of turning on him. Inflation is out of control in his country and, believe it or not, the Venezuelan people are not big on endorsing terrorism. He got a taste of it with his last referendum vote. I'm sure like Putin, he will continue to work diligently and establishing himself as permanent leader. There is no sane comparison between Bush and Chavez. My post was really about pointing out the absurdity of the logic that can justify supporting people who kidnap innocents at random to promote a regime which would try to oppress the majority. Look how well it all worked out for Cuba.

Absurd logic from Hollywood directors and armchair conservatives is nothing new.

Hating a company or country for being successful at capitalism doesn't make any sense, though. Venezuela isn't holding a gun to anybody's head making us buy their gas. Kidnappings and cutting off fingers in the jungle need to stop (and those Frogs are doing wonderful) but setting any price they'd like to sell their natural resources at does not need to stop. That's how a free market works. I'm the one who supports some form of socialism - you're supposed to be an unabashed capitalist and congratulate anyone who's able to sell the same product for a higher price and extract more $$$ from their customers for the same labor. That's how it works.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Absurd logic from Hollywood directors and armchair conservatives is nothing new.

Hating a company or country for being successful at capitalism doesn't make any sense, though. Venezuela isn't holding a gun to anybody's head making us buy their gas. Kidnappings and cutting off fingers in the jungle need to stop (and those Frogs are doing wonderful) but setting any price they'd like to sell their natural resources at does not need to stop. That's how a free market works. I'm the one who supports some form of socialism - you're supposed to be an unabashed capitalist and congratulate anyone who's able to sell the same product for a higher price and extract more $$$ from their customers for the same labor. That's how it works.

Armchair conservative. I think I like that title. You've once again confused my support for free markets with my support for Monopolies and price fixing, which is exactly what Chavez proposes. Not only that, he proposes to do it specifically to damage your, and every other American's financial situation. Your saying that is something you support?

Read carefully, because this could easily be misconstrued. That said, this sounds a great deal like antiSematism. Those nasty people are beating us at our own game. I'm not accusing you of irrationally hating the Jewish People, but the reasoning you're advancing against Chavez is remarkably similar.

Venezuela has a tremendous amount of natural wealth. They sell their energy fuel on a global market. They aren't required to sell to any particular customer, or at a price the customer would like to pay. That's how capitalism works. The producer sets the price, the consumer chooses to buy it or not. If you don't like Chavez's price or the look on his face, don't buy gas from his country. But then the addicted consumer somehow gets the (Angry White Man?) that he's a victim entitled to special treatment and being able to set his own terms.

Maybe you can help me understand where this "I need big government to come in and rescue me" attitude comes for, and the rules for when it applies and when it doesn't? Because the best clue I can see is that Hugo Chavez has gas, he wants more than you're willing or able to pay, and you want to invade his country to get the gas cheaper.

Your saying that is something you support?

You bet your donkey I support freedom applying equally to all people and nations. Apparently you only support the "free" market in fair weather?

I can agree that it is theirs to sell, and therefore can set any price they decide. Coordinating with Iran and several other oil producing nations to drive the price up for the stated purpose (Yes he said this) of putting the U.S. out of business would never fly under U.S. law. Fortunately for them, they operate outside the auspices of U.S. law and therefore what he desires to do is legal by the letter of international law, if not counterproductive. That doesn't mean I have to think it is ok, or that it would be ok if it were done in the U.S..

That said, OPEC has always been smart enough not to hike the prices so high as to kill off the source of the cash that pays for the product they have. What Chavez proposes is actually counter productive to the world economy, but I doubt he really cares, despite the lip service he pays the the common man. Regardless, the wheels are seriously rolling and OPEC sees the writing on the wall. U.S. is now passing legislation to reduce imports of Oil by 20% within 10 years by use of non-fossil fuel based technology. It may take 15 -20 years, but soon enough, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Iran will be begging to join the ranks of Sane Society for lack of cash and lack of other natural resources. I suppose the FARC and Taliban will still be rolling fairly fat, as I don't see the demand for Cocaine and Heroine going down anytime soon.

Edit: Again, are you OK with the idea of Walmart rolling into a city and setting all the prices below cost for a year just to put every mom and pop business out of business? That is just good Free Market U.S. style business to you? Would the small companies that would be put out of business comparable to Nazi Germany if they complained about the success of Walmart? How about if every business in the south hung a sign up that said "Black People need not apply"? It is their business after all, they can hire who they want? Would the blacks then be comparable to Hitler?

Originally Posted by cbwm

is legal by the letter of international law, if not counterproductive. That doesn't mean I have to think it is ok, or that it would be ok if it were done in the U.S..

Sort of like owning guns and praying for God to deliver unto you a person to shoot. What was that you had written in another thread about you agree it's a bad idea to kill a person when you don't have to, but you're waiting for your turn because the law allows you to? What's good for the goose isn't good for the gander, huh? You conservatives love holding yourselves to a much lower standard than you hold terrorists and dictators to?

Originally Posted by cbwm

How about if every business in the south hung a sign up that said "Black People need not apply"? It is their business after all, they can hire who they want? Would the blacks then be comparable to Hitler?

Y'all konservatives are obsessed with Hitler!

Unlike the situation with Chavez and his gas, there are applicable laws against what you describe.

You are the one who brought up Hitler when you alleged that complaining about Chavez proposing to strong arm the market to bring down the U.S. is comparable to Hitler complaining about the success of the Jews.

I also noticed you didn't answer the questions. Truth is, you didn't have to. I already know you don't think price fixing by Walmart would be OK. Yet you give Hugo a pass because..... I know for d*mn sure you don't think it would be OK to deny service or price fix with a stated goal of putting a group of people into poverty.

So why are we debating? I'll answer that question for you too. We are debating because the extreme left likes to think it is possible to equate the actions of someone like Chavez, or worse yet Hitler, to those of Bush. Therefore, I can mention any unspeakable atrocity committed by practically anyone, and it will be summarily dismissed and the topic changed to what a pr*ck Bush is, or maybe how screwed up the Republican agenda is.

Thankfully, no matter how wrong or right you think the actions may be, the U.S. government is taking action to keep Hugo Chavez from putting you in the poor house. No thanks are necessary.

Its off topic, but killing someone who enters your home to keep your family from being slaughtered or being sued is a situation the law of the land forces me into. Using lack of existing law to purposefully attack a group of people unprovoked is obviously quite a different matter. How is it you can equate those things?