Obama returned to Washington early Sunday evening. But even before he got back, Obama was facing condemnation from some Republicans about how he dealt with Chavez. "I think it was irresponsible for the president to be seen kind of laughing and joking with Hugo Chavez," said Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican.

But "Obama dismissed such concerns," the Los Angeles Times reports. "He said the 2008 presidential campaign proved that American voters want the president to engage with his counterparts, whether or not they are avowed friends of the U.S. ... The U.S. has nothing to fear from Venezuela, a large supplier of crude oil to the country, Obama said. ... That said, Obama aides were not so charitable toward Chavez. In a background briefing earlier, one senior official accused Chavez of performing for the cameras."

And what about the gift of the book? BBC News now reports Eduardo Galeano's Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent has risen from 54,295 to number two on the Amazon.com bestseller list.

Many of the most recent customer reviews on Amazon reflect the book's new life, with titles such as: "Delusional lefty propoganda," "Obama Should Read It," "It's About time we had an educated president," and "utter rubbish."

Americans are getting educated - de programmed! de Nazified! Thanks Chevez - brilliant move there!
S.

ABC, if you admire Chavez so much, you may want to learn how to spell his name.



Chávez To World: "I Am A Communist"
Written by Clavos
Published January 11, 2007

Venezuela's President Hugo Chávez surprised no one with this announcement on Monday during the swearing-in ceremony for his new cabinet.

During his speech, Chávez also confirmed the "nationalization" of Venezuelan telecomm company, CANTV, which was one-third owned by American telephone giant Verizon, and of the American-owned Caracas electric utility.

Originally owned by the Venezuelan government, CANTV was privatized in 1991 because of inefficiency and its unwieldy, bloated organizational bureaucracy. At that time, Verizon paid $1.8 billion for its stake. According to Gerver Torres, the former Venezuelan cabinet minister who handled the transaction for the government, Verizon's share was worth an estimated $3.5 billion on Monday, just before the Chávez announcement plunged its stock price 40% on the NYSE, when the Exchange halted trading.

According to Reuters, "[IBC], the [Venezuelan] stock market, lost almost a fifth of its value on Tuesday, debt prices tumbled to a six-week low and the currency changed hands at nearly twice the official rate."

Reaction from the White House was relatively muted as Administration officials continue to work behind the scenes to initiate a dialogue with Chávez. "Nationalization has a long and inglorious history of failure around the world," said Press Secretary Tony Snow. "We support the Venezuelan people and think this is an unhappy day for them."
With these actions, Chávez continues his impersonation of his mentor, Fidel Castro, whose reign in Cuba has transformed that island nation from one of the most vibrant and prosperous countries in the Americas to one of the poorest, with its people among the most oppressed in the region.

As he continues to build his already considerable power, Chávez also outlined a plan to consolidate his supporter base into a single political party, as well as plans to bring the autonomous Central Bank directly under his control. He is also seeking an end to constitutional term limits as part of his plan to drag Venezuela into his version of "21st Century Socialism."

At his own inauguration yesterday, Chávez symbolically wore the presidential sash over his left shoulder, rather than the traditional right. According to BBC News, Chávez affirmed in his oath of office, "I swear on Christ, the greatest socialist in history; I swear on all this; I swear on all grief; I swear on all love; I swear on all hopes."

Ever the dutiful student of his hero, Fidel Castro, Chávez recently closed a speech with the tired old Castro slogan, "¡Patria ó Muerte, Venceremos!." "Fatherland or Death, we will triumph!"

Let us hope the death to which he was referring isn't that of Venezuela, its economy, and the democratic freedom of its people!

by Luis Berrizbeitia



As the setting sun disappeared over the horizon, the farmer wiped the sweat from his brow looking at the irrigation system he built to water his oranges. He smiled with a note of satisfaction. He had worked hard, for he wanted the best. The oranges were growing well, the house was in good shape, and the land was very fertile. A perfect inheritance to leave his children, he thought.

Someone had other plans. A communist mob invaded his property in the middle of the night. They chopped down the orange grove and burned the trees. They then burned his ranch house. In one night, they destroyed his whole life's work and what possessions he was going to leave his children.

Where did this story take place? Was it some tragic tale from Cold War era? No, this is a true story like many that are now happening in Hugo Chavez's Venezuela.

President Hugo Chavez Frias is a former army lieutenant colonel that rose to fame by staging a failed coup in 1992. Later he ran for president and after only three years in office, he has succeeded in uprooting the foundations of South America's oldest democracy.

His reforms are called "Bolivarian," in honor of Simon Bolivar, the 19th century revolutionary who took Venezuela from Spanish rule. Under this banner, he has targeted every traditional institutions and centralized all power. His first victims were Congress and the Supreme Court, which he labeled "corrupt" and "oligarchic." They were swiftly dismantled and rebuilt according to his decrees and under his control. President Chavez has also reformed educations and even questioned the very republican form of government that put him in office. He insists Venezuela must give "birth to a new political system, because representative democracy is not really good for us."1

His "Bolivarian" reform might more aptly be called Marxist.


(terrible what Chavez does to the people he is supposed ot help - commie bastard!)

AMERICA AND CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIAN SELF-GOVERNMENT

AND THE HAND OF GOD IN AMERICAN HISTORY



Address given in 1971 by Verna M. Hall

Reprinted from The Journal of the Foundation for American Christian Education Vol. VI



Two hundred years ago, in 1771, the American colonies were in the midst of the ten-year period immediately preceding the War for Independence, and were articulating, solidifying, and practicing the American Christian philosophy of government.

As a nation, we include the celebration of Washington’s Birthday on Presidents Day, primarily by closing some schools and businesses—a holiday. I'm sure some programs in schools honor Mr. Washington; ­perhaps even some communities observe it by having political banquets. But I rather doubt that the full significance of George Washington in the forming and establishing of this nation— America—is either fully known or appreciated today. True, we are still somewhat courteous and recognize him as the General of the Armies of the Revolution, and our first President; but as to the knowl­edge of his Christian character and faith, the providential raising and training of him for the particular and unique role he occupied in our history—I'm afraid this knowledge is pitifully lacking. It is one of the prices we have paid for allowing our national education to change from that which was Christian to that which is now secular.

Having completed the research for my next volume on The American Revolu­tion, I am particularly aware of the tragic omission in the education of this country for almost one hundred years; keeping from us the full, rich legacy which is ours—for example, the appreciation and understanding of George Washington, whose life is a testimony of Christian faith and conviction, and one of the most outstanding proofs of the Hand of God in our American History.

Yet, I have seen history books, philosophy books, in Christian schools and colleges, which indicate that George Washington was a deist, along with many others of his generation. I trust that you know that this is not true, but that erroneous imputation concerning the founders of this nation may have found lodging.

The lack of appreciation of our heritage as Christians, the almost willing acceptance of the suggestion that the founding fathers were influenced by deists, and the thinking that Christianity and America's form of government are not related, leads me to discuss with you, why we feel it is imperative for every Christian home, church, and school to begin to teach and learn America's Christian History.



I would like to approach the subject by addressing you as Christians, as Americans, and as teachers. This is the threefold classification of each one of us, for it matters not whether we hold an official position in a school; every one who can say he is a Christian and an American must also say that he is a teacher, for our lives are teaching others, young and old, whether we like it or not. It therefore behooves us to see that our lives show forth that which we would like to have others emulate as a testimony of our Christian commitment.



AMERICANS



First, let us consider our country from the standpoint of Americans. Do you like what you see, what you hear, what you read about our country? No! And neither do I. Are the American people comparable to the times of Washington? No—but why not? Look at us! We as a nation today have no purpose: we are aimless in our goals; we talk and act in platitudes; we are lawless, immoral, and unmoral; we are more interested in what other nations are doing or thinking than in having a determined and known goal; we are rushing around, with little time for serious study; we have casual home life, scant knowledge of our uniqueness as a nation in God's plan, and very little knowledge of America’s relation to the spreading of the Gospel of Jesus Christ! How tragic that we could have drifted to this level in less than two hundred years with the models of Christian character we had, to remind us what we should accomplish.



We forgot! Why? I will only say that I once thought socialism in this country began in 1930; but I have since learned that it began in 1830, and that what we termed the "New Deal" of 1930 was but the last step needed to complete a hundred years of preparation for socialism, instead of the initial step. Therefore we are dealing with over one hundred and thirty years of decline, instead of thirty some years. This makes the difference in endeavoring to understand why this nation is as it is today—with so little resistance—we are five generations removed from the philosophy of govern­ment understood by our founding fathers.

This philosophy of government was Christian and Bible based. They knew the distinction between internal government, meaning the character of the people, and external government, meaning man's government of man. They knew the meaning of sovereignty, that it referred to God in the lives of the individual, and that this was the power of government—not man. They knew what Christian self-government was; and they did not mistake it for human self-­government, or the false individualism we have today, which is unfortunately but the other side of the coin of collectivism, and just as ruthless. Christian self-­government means God rules our life through Christ; man's self-government or individuality means doing what one thinks is right regardless of others. In Christian self-government, the standard of reference is the Bible; in man’s self-government, the standard of reference is man's changing opinions.



PROPERTY



The founding fathers knew the distinction between internal property and external property. Do we today? No. “Internal property” as understood by our forefathers, meant “conscience,” as James Madison stated in 1792:



Property. . . . In the former sense, a man's land, or merchandise, or mon­ey, is called his property. In the latter sense, a man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of them. He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions, and in the profession and practice dictated by them. . . . He has an equal property in the free use of his faculties, and free choice of the objects on which to employ them. In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions. Where there is an excess of Liberty, the effect is the same. . . . Government is instituted to protect property of every sort. This being the end of government. Conscience is the most sacred of all property. [Christian History of the Constitution of the United States: Christian Self-government, Vol. I, p. 248A]

Well fried Freddie, welocme back from DR1 where you usually hide. Fellow posters, lets get this straight, you just joined (what was your last user name when you got kicked off this site) and your first two and only posts are personal attacks on me. Shame on you, but you have no shame!

Really? So why do you hate him so much?

Isnt that the same thing that the bushes and cheyney's do and did??

You should worship Saint Hugo!!!

Sadist! Fred!
S.

find me a farm in the USA that was trashed, burned and confiscated by the President and his friends... DUH, you guys are so dumb....there is no comparison...

ANNE WORTHAM

Anne Wortham is Associate Professor of Sociology at Illinois State University and continuing Visiting Scholar at Stanford University 's Hoover Institution. She is a member of the American Sociological Association and the American Philosophical Association.
She has been a John M. Olin Foundation Faculty Fellow, and honored as a Distinguished Alumni of the Year by the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education.
In fall 1988 she was one of a select group of intellectuals who were featured in Bill Moyer's television series, "A World of Ideas." The transcript of her conversation with Moyers has been published in his book, A World of Ideas.
Dr. Wortham is author of "The Other Side of Racism: A Philosophical Study of Black Race Consciousness" which analyzes how race consciousness is transformed into political strategies and policy issues.
She has published numerous articles on the implications of individual rights for civil rights policy, and is currently writing a book on theories of social and cultural marginality.

Recently, she has published articles on the significance of multiculturalism and Afrocentricism in education, the politics of victimization and the social and political impact of political correctness. Shortly after an interview in 2004, she was awarded tenure.
This article by her is very interesting



Fellow Americans,

Please know: I am Black; I grew up in the segregated South. I did not vote for Barack Obama; I wrote in Ron Paul's name as my choice for president. Most importantly, I am not race conscious. I do not require a Black president to know that I am a person of worth, and that life is worth living. I do not require a Black president to love the ideal of America .

I cannot join you in your celebration. I feel no elation. There is no smile on my face. I am not jumping with joy. There are no tears of triumph in my eyes. For such emotions and behavior to come from me, I would have to deny all that I know about the requirements of human flourishing and survival - all that I know about the history of the United States of America , all that I know about American race relations, and all that I know about Barack Obama as a politician. I would have to deny the nature of the "change" that Obama asserts has come to America .

Most importantly, I would have to abnegate my certain understanding that you have chosen to sprint down the road to serfdom that we have been on for over a century. I would have to pretend that individual liberty has no value for the success of a human life. I would have to evade your rejection of the slender reed of capitalism on which your success and mine depend. I would have to think it somehow rational that 94 percent of the 12 million Blacks in this country voted for a man because he looks like them (that Blacks are permitted to play the race card), and that they were joined by self-declared "progressive" whites who voted for him because he doesn't look like them.

I would have to wipe my mind clean of all that I know about the kind of people who have advised and taught Barack Obama and will fill posts in his administration - political intellectuals like my former colleagues at the Harvard University 's Kennedy School of Government.

I would have to believe that "fairness" is equivalent of justice. I would have to believe that man who asks me to "go forward in a new spirit of service, in a new service of sacrifice" is speaking in my interest.. I would have to accept the premise of a man that economic prosperity comes from the "bottom up," and who arrogantly believes that he can will it into existence by the use of government force. I would have to admire a man who thinks the standard of living of the masses can be improved by destroying the most productive and the generators of wealth.

Finally, Americans, I would have to erase from my consciousness the scene of 125,000 screaming, crying, cheering people in Grant Park, Chicago irrationally chanting "Yes We Can!" Finally, I would have to wipe all memory of all the times I have heard politicians, pundits, journalists, editorialists, bloggers and intellectuals declare that capitalism is dead - and no one, including especially Alan Greenspan, objected to their assumption that the particular version of the anti-capitalistic mentality that they want to replace with their own version of anti-capitalism is anything remotely equivalent to capitalism.

So you have made history, Americans. You and your children have elected a Black man to the office of the president of the United States , the wounded giant of the world. The battle between John Wayne and Jane Fonda is over - and that Fonda won. Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern must be very happy men. Jimmie Carter, too. And the Kennedys have at last gotten their Kennedy look-a-like. The self-righteous welfare statists in the suburbs can feel warm moments of satisfaction for having elected a Black person.

So, toast yourselves: 60s countercultural radicals, 80s yuppies and 90s bourgeois bohemians. Toast yourselves, Black America . Shout your glee Harvard, Princeton , Yale, Duke, Stanford, and Berkeley. You have elected not an individual who is qualified to be president, but a Black man who, like the pragmatist Franklin Roosevelt, promises to - Do Something! You now have someone who has picked up the baton of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. But you have also foolishly traded your freedom and mine - what little there is left - for the chance to feel good.
There is nothing in me that can share your happy obliviousness.