Conservative Publication's "Spin" On Hugo Chavez

Each month, a copy of Reader's Digest arrives at our house. It wasn't our idea. It was a Christmas gift from a family member. This little publication does hold some endearing memories for me from childhood though. As a little girl, I used to love staying up late at my grandparents house, reading the joke sections in RD. I hadn't picked up a copy since then until last December. Wow. Talk about slant "journalism".

The latest edition has an article on the most dangerous leaders for the United States. I'll let you take some time to think up that list and then you can compare it to RD's list.................. (Hint: George Bush isn't on there. Neither is Cheney.)



Finished? Ok. Good.

RD's opinion is that the following dudes post the greatest threat to you and me:
1) Kim Jong-Il (North Korea)
2) Bashar Al-Assad (Syria)
3) Mahmoud Admadinejad (Iran)
4) Hugo Chavez (Venezuela)

Ok, first I'll give credit where credit's due. Kim Jong-Il is likely the most dangerous half-baked little fuck on the planet, if only because he shows clear signs of serious mental psychosis on top of his addiction to power and control.

Not surprising are the leaders of Syria and Iran on this list. Our government hates these folks. They pose a huge threat against our desire to take over the middle east. They also support Hezbollah and Palestine.

The most laughable part of this piece was the information on Hugo Chavez. The entire article was written about him--focused on him, with 3 sidebars that highlighted the remaining three. So, according to this article, apparently Mr. Chavez is the greatest threat.

Laughable piece number one:
You know how articles take quotes from pieces and enlarge their size, placing them in the middle of a page. RD chose to use the following quote to blow up: "Chavez spreads cash and discounted oil around in a bid to undermine America's influence." I had to read that a few times to make sure I read correctly. About all I could think of was "and your point is??" So what? Isn't that how market competition is in this global marketplace? God forbid someone try to dominate, much less weaken, the US of A in the marketplace. Think anywhere in the article did RD mention the fact that Venezuela provided energy assistance to low income americans this past year? Hell no. While Hugo's motivations may have been in part to undermine GW, the fact that another leader from another nation stepped in to help OUR OWN FRIGGING CITIZENS because our own government is too busy playing world police and thus spending OUR money that needs to be used here at home for social programs is, indeed, pitiful.

Laughable piece number two:
Chavez charged Israel with committed genocide while saying they criticize Hitler but have done something far worse. Another US publication that supports Israel. When Israel uses violence against the Palestinian's, it's always justified. When Palestine uses violence, they're labeled terrorists. I'd love for this reporter to come to my neighborhood and interview my neighbors down the street, a young family who moved here last summer from Palestine. Let them talk about the land that they and their family have been forced from. Let them talk about having to dodge bullets as they went to work in the morning or walked their children to school. Let them talk about hearing bombs going off on a regular basis. And these beautiful people spoke as though it were just an ordinary part of life.

Laughable piece number three:
Chavez wants to build a pipeline on the Pacific Coast to increase sales to China and India. RD says it's to shake dependency from America, given over 50% of it's oil is sold to the states. Again, so what? And I say "so what" only because America has an equal desire to be the world's best at everything and has been aggressive and at times violent in pursuing such interests. A little taste of humble pie and we can't take it? Please.

Laughable piece number four:
Chavez is building up his military in order to protect themselves from a potential US invasion. Another "and your point is?" Don't they have the right to do this??? When oh WHEN will the US stop thinking WE HOLD THE TRUTH ON HOW THINGS NEED TO BE for the world?! Honest to god, am I the ONLY one who knows that this sort of thinking and resulting behavior only serves to create enemies?? Anyone but me remember the playground bully?

Laughable piece number five:
He's labeled a Socialist and criticized as such, in particular for sharing oil wealth with his citizens. Another fucking individualistic American organization who thinks sharing the wealth is taboo. Why, if we follow that lead, the Oil Companies would have to share some of their billions with little 'ole you and me american citizen. God forbid! God forbid we all ride in the same boat and share in the wealth as generated by OUR country.

Need I remind folks that this is OUR country. When in the FUCK did it become Uncle Sam's country and Corporate America's country? Hasn't this country always supposed to belong first and foremost to the private citizen? The people? The interests OF said people? This country is NOT Shell or Mobile or Exxon's. It isn't IBM's country. It isn't Microsoft's. It isn't Walmart's country either. And it sure as hell is not GW Bush and company's country. It is OUR country. It belongs to us ALL. And it's about fucking time Uncle Sam and Corporate America incorporate that mantra into their psyches before ordinary American's begin to not only accept but ask for help from the "evil" Socialists such as Chavez. (And btw, I've said it before and I'll say it again. TRUE Socialism has yet to exist on this planet.. At least not in our lifetimes. If you study Socialism, you will see that it is a system of fairness. In order to lead a Socialist system, one has to be fair, just and honest. It is a pretty enlightened system and thus requires a level of maturity that we have yet to find amongst our political leaders, here at home and around the globe. We have yet to have a truly enlightened leader in these supposed "Socialist" nations. So attack the leaders and not the philosophy. And also remember that Bush isn't a true Republican just as Clinton wasn't a true Democrat.)

Ok, all that being said I frankly don't trust any of these leaders. All have shown signs of being hugely discriminatory towards women. They're the typical political leader--hungry for power and control. No different than the majority of leaders. (A term, btw, which has become grossly mis-used. It's long past time to redefine what a leader is than we shall see no true leader really exists today in the political arena.) The little squat out of North Korea simply needs to be removed from power and placed in a psychiatric ward. Even Chavez needs some enlightenment--with his announcement that he would rule by decree. He knew what he was doing by consolidating power to garner support. However, given this article was focused on leaders who are a threat to you and I, I'd say it was a blantantly exagerrated and grossly slanted article, especially the information about Israel and Palestine. Again, by a threat to "America", do they mean to joe and jane citizen or is it more about a threat to America's interest in the global marketplace? Funny, isn't it, how Uncle Sam and spouse Corporate America promote a global marketplace--until some country wants to increase their power and undermine ours. Isn't that what America has been doing globally for decades?

Maybe Chavez needs to add the terms "spoiled tyrant" and "whiney baby" when referring to some of our leaders here at home.