Associated Press photo
Newt Gingrich, photographed above at one of last week’s beyond-pathetic “tea party” rallies organized by right-wing organizations, wants Americans to believe that individuals like democratically elected Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez are threats to the United States of America when, in fact, it was stupid white men like Gingrich and his Repugnican allies who ran the nation into the ground during the eight long, nightmarish years of the unelected Bush regime’s rule. Oh, yeah, these traitors desperately don’t want Americans to identify and go after the real enemy…
Repugnican fossil Newt Gingrich, hoping for a political comeback, among other stupid white men unsurprisingly is lambasting President Barack Obama for actually being diplomatic.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tore into President Barack Obama [today] for his friendly greeting of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, saying Obama is bolstering the “enemies of America.”
Gingrich appeared on a number of morning talk shows comparing Obama to President Jimmy Carter for the smiling, hearty handshake he offered Chavez, one of the harshest critics of the United States, during the Summit of the Americas.
“Frankly, this does look a lot like Jimmy Carter. Carter tried weakness, and the world got tougher and tougher, because the predators, the aggressors, the anti-Americans, the dictators — when they sense weakness, they all start pushing ahead,” Gingrich said on “Fox & Friends.”
Two Republican senators, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire and John Ensign of Nevada, joined in the criticism [today], with Ensign calling Obama’s greeting of Chavez “irresponsible.”
Obama addressed such criticism before he left the summit in Trinidad and Tobago [yesterday], noting his “great differences” with Chavez and expressing concern for the Venezuelan president’s “inflammatory” rhetoric toward the United States and interference in neighboring Latin American countries.
“It’s unlikely that as a consequence of me shaking hands or having a polite conversation with Mr. Chavez that we are endangering the strategic interests of the United States,” Obama told reporters at a news conference.
“I don’t think anybody can find any evidence that that would do so. Even within this imaginative crowd, I think you would be hard-pressed to paint a scenario in which U.S. interests would be damaged as a consequence of us having a more constructive relationship with Venezuela.”
While the White House felt Obama’s first foray into Latin America went well, officials seemed concerned that so-called “picture seen ’round the world” of Obama greeting Chavez at the summit would generate such criticism back home.
The criticism is déjà vu for the Obama team. It is along the same line of what Obama’s opponents — Hillary Clinton, now secretary of state, and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz), said of him during the campaign, that he was too willing to talk to U.S. adversaries.
Obama defended that, too, [yesterday] before returning from a four-day trip to Latin America.
“We had this debate throughout the campaign, and the whole notion was … that somehow if we showed courtesy or opened up dialogue with governments that had previously been hostile to us, that that somehow would be a sign of weakness. The American people didn’t buy it,” Obama said. “And there’s a good reason the American people didn’t buy it: because it doesn’t make sense.”
By Saturday afternoon, Chavez had gifted Obama a book critical of U.S. involvement in Latin America, the images were being replayed on television, and the White House had a new talking point: that handshakes and smiles are not enough, that actions speak louder than words.
“The smiles and handshakes and the desire of one leader to say to the president that he wants to be his friend, again is a wonderful opportunity to match actions with words,” said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.
But Gregg told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” [today] that while Chavez is “not a strategic threat,” Obama’s greeting of him is “not a good way to start your presidency.”
Gingrich on NBC’s “Today Show” [said] that Obama’s warm greeting of Chavez was “proof that Chavez is now legitimate, is acceptable.”
And Ensign called Chavez “one of the most anti-American leaders in the entire world. He is a brutal dictator and human rights violations are very, very prevalent in Venezuela. And you have to be careful.”
Gingrich first raised the issue on Friday, the night Obama and Chavez first met at a reception.
“I think it sends a terrible signal to all of Latin America, and a terrible signal about how the new administration regards dictators,” Gingrich said on Fox, also citing Obama’s willingness to talk to Iran, his handling of North Korea and overtures to the Castro government in Cuba.
“I don’t think there’s any downside to talking to him. But I think being friends, taking a picture that clearly looks like they’re buddies hurts in all of Latin America.”
Where to begin?
There is the gratuitous Jimmy Carter-bashing that goes over so well with the wingnuts, who believe that diplomacy is for pussies and that real men risk nuclear war.
The Carter-bashing is just part and parcel of the Repugnicans’ and the wingnuts’ war on intelligence and wisdom and sanity. Ignorance and stupidity can only destroy a nation, but the Repugnicans and the wingnuts, who call themselves “patriots,” push nothing but ignorance and stupidity on the American people.
There is that Repugnican and wingnut lie, once again, that Hugo Chavez, whom the people of Venezuela democratically elected in 1998 and re-elected in 2000 and in 2006, is a “dictator.”
And Chavez himself has said many times that he has nothing against the American people — it was the members of the unelected Bush regime he opposed. Chavez, who is no dummy, understands that the unelected Bush regime did not represent the American people, but represented the American people’s plutocratic overlords.
Any national leader who refuses to cooperate with the stupid white men in Washington, D.C., who refuses to sell his nation’s resources and his nation’s people out to the corporations that fund the Repugnican Party, the Repugnicans and their fucktard followers brand an “anti-American” “dictator.” (Actual dictators are perfectly acceptable to this crowd of traitors as long as those right-wing dictators take their marching orders from the Repugnicans.)
Because the plutocratic overlords want the American people to believe, quite incorrectly, that the plutocrats’ interests are Americans’ interests, the plutocratic overlords also want Americans to believe, quite incorrectly, that the plutocrats’ enemies — such as Chavez — are Americans’ enemies. It’s what you call a Big Fucking Orwellian Lie. And the plutocrats have Fox “News” and other media giants with which to widely disperse such fucking lies that certainly benefit the plutocrats but that ultimately can only harm the American people.
And after the Bush regime’s record of torture and even homicide at the Abu Ghraib House of Horrors and elsewhere, the Repugnicans and the wingnuts have no grounds whatsofuckingever on which to preach to Chavez or any other national leader about human rights.
As far as Hugo Chavez’s human rights record is concerned, while the wingnuts call him a “dictator” and in order to defame him allege that he is guilty of such crimes as torture and even execution of political opponents, I have yet to see one credible, independent/non-right-wing report that Chavez ever did anything worse than what the Bush regime committed that is public record (such as torture and even homicide at the Abu Ghraib prison facility in Iraq and elsewhere). I invite anyone to leave, in a comment to this post, a link to credible information that Chavez is guilty of torture or execution or another serious human-rights violation. (No one will because no such link exists.)
Quick: Who put the United States of America in the fucking mess that it is in now?
Was it the members of the Bush regime and the Repugnican Party?
Or was it Hugo Chavez, all the way from Venezuela, who put the United States of America on the verge of collapse?
Other than delivering his well-deserved fiery rhetoric about how the United States historically has shit and pissed all over the other, weaker nations, and other than having refused to allow the corporate/capitalist interests to continue to rape, pillage and plunder his nation, what, exactly, has Chavez substantively done to the United States of America that he can be called an “enemy” of the United States of America?
No, Hugo Chavez is but a convenient whipping boy, a convenient devil, a convenient bogeyman and scapegoat for the stupid white men like Newt Fucking Gingrich, who want to divert Americans’ attention from our real enemy: the stupid white men whose selfish, treasonous actions (and inaction) got us to where we are today: an empire teetering on collapse.
These stupid white men are terrified of the actual freedom and democracy — not the “freedom” and “democracy” as Orwellianly defined by the Bush regime — that has been breaking out all over Latin America.
The brown-skinned peoples of Latin America won’t take it anymore from their lighter-skinned oppressors, and the right-wing fascists, the vast majority of whom are light-skinned, consequently are running scared.
I hope that Chavez’s revolution makes it to my nation — sooner rather than later.