New Kid on the Block
October 15th, 2006
With all the talk of which country is good, which is bad, and which is evil, it’s getting tougher and tougher for a good American to know which people we are permitted to like, and those we are compelled to fear. Of course we already know that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea are bad bad bad, but what about some of those less overtly evil regimes?
Recently, we have heard with more urgency of Venezuela’s flirtation with the Dark Side. Their democratically elected official, Hugo Chavez, has become a lightning rod for American critics, wary of his bravado and his democratic socialist rallying cries. However, most Americans don’t know of (at least not yet) Equadorian leader Rafael Correa. An outspoken critic of American foreign policy, Mr. Correa has promised that if elected, he plans to nationalize oil production and will remain committed to “popular revolution”.
In a recent TV interview, when asked to comment on Chavez’s comparison of Mr. Bush to “el diablo”, Mr. Correa replied that it was an unfair comparison. “The devil is bad, but at least he’s smart. Bush is a tremendously clumsy president who has done damage to his country and to the world.” Ouch.
While it’s not yet a fate complete, most pollsters expect Correa to emerge victorious in the elections. At which point, Americans can expect an onslaught of Correa smearing and Equadorian fear mongering. By the end of Q1 2007, it will be like we hated Equador since the dawn of the nation. All in a day’s work for the propaganda machine…
October 18th, 2006 at 10:38 am
I came here from seeing your post at Michelle Malkin’s, given that you wrote precisely what I was going to: namely, what could O’Reilly mean by “winning in Iraq”?
Is that permanent bases? Is that control of Iraqi oil, or at least a veto on how it is produced, sold, etc.? Is that control over the government? Is that a veto over the operations of security forces? Is that the right to reject candidates an “Iraqi democracy” elects? Is that the end of terrorism?
Malkin’s comment that O’Donnell’s response meant what it did was silly: no one can answer that question beyond pointing out that it commits a fallacy of the complex question, which has been recognized as such for only a thousand years or so. Even O’Reilly should be that up-to-date.
I enjoyed reading your blog.
November 26th, 2006 at 11:12 am
Are you a democrat? I was just wondering because I noticed alot of negative information on bush. I’m a new reader to the blog and I’m just trying to figure out your political stance. Personally I’m a Libertarian (anarcho-capitalist) so I’m fine with bush bashing.
November 27th, 2006 at 8:31 am
I wouldn’t consider myself a Democrat - actually I have almost as much contempt for the Democratic Party as I do for the Republicans. I haven’t really found anywhere to hang my hat.
Thanks for asking though - most people just assume.
November 28th, 2006 at 1:40 am
bad, bad, bad?
I’ve come to think of the United States as bad bad bad. I think of us as the new Nazis.
If we don’t indict and convict Bush and his henchmen on our own, I pray to the spirits that something akin to the Nuremberg Trials is organized to do it for us.