• Mark Penn: Could the US end up like liberal disaster Venezuela? It migh

    From Felcher Adam Schiff@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 20 09:20:23 2020
    XPost: alt.gossip.celebrities, sac.general, alt.politics.democrats.d
    XPost: talk.politics.guns

    Every American should get behind the Trump administration’s
    efforts to free Venezuela and its 30 million people. Venezuelans
    have waited too long to be liberated from Nicolás Maduro – an
    illegitimate despot who has bankrupted and corrupted the nation.

    Venezuela was once an oil-rich nation that could have lifted its
    people out of poverty and become a shining example of progress
    and development in Latin America. It was a vibrant democracy
    that had everything going for it.

    I know because several decades ago I worked with two of
    Venezuela’s presidents, helping them understand the aspirations
    of their people through polls. The country enjoyed universal
    voting, a free press, and oftentimes a million people would turn
    out for a political rally.

    It was1958 when Venezuelans last overthrew a dictatorship and
    took control of their destiny. After that experience with
    military rule, the country, like many in Latin America, passed
    safeguards including no consecutive re-election, and abolished
    the death penalty.

    The idea was to prevent those who crept into power through
    democracy from entrenching themselves and replacing democracy
    with caudillos – military strongmen who often had their
    opponents not just arrested but executed.

    Democracy flourished with two major parties, AD and COPEI,
    dominating (much like Democrats and Republicans dominate in
    American government). In 1978, Luis Herrera Campins won the
    presidency with the slogan “Ya Basta,” which translated means
    “enough.” The intractable problems of crime, poverty and lack of
    education had mounted up, and the Copeyanos (Campins’ party)
    were swept into office.

    But it was not long before Carlos Andres Perez from AD would
    return to office as “el president,” promising a glass of milk
    every day to every school child.

    While the presidency rotated among these two major parties,
    conditions for the poor did not improve, and allegations of
    corruption swirled around the parties. I was there to brief the
    administration when Hugo Chavez, then in the military, tried to
    overthrow Perez in 1992. The president showed me the bullet
    holes above his desk. He had barely escaped the coup attempt,
    hiding in a safe room.

    Chavez was jailed but not executed for attempting to kill the
    president. He was released a few years later as part of a
    program of national reconciliation.

    Chavez then entered politics, capitalizing on the discontent
    with the major parties. In 2002 he won the presidency, running
    as a third-way alternative.

    Once elected, he wasted no time undermining all of the
    institutional safeguards so that he would be able to rule even
    after his support had evaporated. Human rights were curtailed,
    political opponents had their businesses nationalized, and he
    aligned with Cuba and Castro, declaring a socialist revolution.

    Despite continued economic decline and dwindling support,
    Chavez’s hand-picked successor, Nicolas Maduro, won a term in
    the wake of Chavez’s death. During his term, the country became
    even more crime-ridden, lost 3 million people, faced widespread
    shortages of food and medicine, and some in the military turned
    to drug smuggling on a massive scale.

    Given these conditions, the recent legislative elections
    produced a legislature with super majorities of the long-
    suppressed opposition. Maduro’s response was to hold an
    unscheduled fake national election, jam the Supreme Court, and
    try to defrock the legislature.

    Facing death, the head of the National Assembly, Juan Guado,
    stood up last week and used what was left of the constitution to
    declare himself interim president until fair elections can be
    held.

    [The crisis in Venezuela] demonstrates that both of our major
    political parties need to beware of gridlock and failure to
    solve the people’s problems. That is what spawns evermore
    radical choices by dissatisfied voters. People everywhere want
    results, not resistance.

    It was a brave stance against corruption and oppression, and the
    U.S. is not alone in supporting him. Brazil and Colombia quickly
    recognized Guado as the legitimate leader; Europe is offering
    support.

    The state actors backing Maduro include Russia, Syria, Iran,
    Turkey, China and Cuba. Some of them have invested billions in
    the regime.

    Helping Venezuela recover its self-determination is squarely in
    our national interest and the right thing to do. For one thing,
    it’s a country in our own hemisphere, and Maduro has let
    Venezuela become a client-state for most of America’s global
    enemies, creating a source of regional instability. In addition,
    the economic collapse is creating millions of refugees, and the
    basic human and economic rights of an entire nation have been
    suppressed.

    Venezuelans did not choose this outcome – their system that was
    designed to prevent the return of self-perpetuating strongmen
    was systematically destroyed.

    Few Americans will likely be interested in what’s going on in
    this small country the size of New York state, and yet it offers
    major political lessons for our country. First, it demonstrates
    that both of our major political parties need to beware of
    gridlock and failure to solve the people’s problems. That is
    what spawns evermore radical choices by dissatisfied voters.
    People everywhere want results, not resistance.

    Second, it shows how our policy toward Latin America needs
    fundamental rethinking. Our problems at the border are the
    result of the tremendous economic disparity between the U.S. and
    the deteriorating countries in Central America. Today, we spend
    billions of dollars in Europe, yet we neglect our own backyard
    and fail to find constructive policies to lift these countries
    up. We have all but abandoned them since President Reagan
    focused on Nicaragua and President Bill Clinton sent aid to
    Colombia.

    And third, it underscores that socialism is not the way forward
    for us or for Latin America, especially when accompanied by the
    politics of self-perpetuating strongmen.

    This is a chance for all Americans to put aside their political
    differences and unite with Latin America behind a just cause to
    restore freedom, democracy, food and medicine to a neighbor that
    has suffered for too long. It is a good fight. We can’t fix all
    the wrongs of the world, but there are brave Venezuelans
    standing up for their people today and we must help them.

    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mark-penn-could-the-us-end-up- like-venezuela-it-might-if-we-dont-learn-these-three-critical-
    lessons
     

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Felcher Adam Schiff@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jan 20 18:21:46 2020
    XPost: alt.gossip.celebrities, sac.general, alt.politics.democrats.d
    XPost: talk.politics.guns

    Every American should get behind the Trump administration’s
    efforts to free Venezuela and its 30 million people. Venezuelans
    have waited too long to be liberated from Nicolás Maduro – an
    illegitimate despot who has bankrupted and corrupted the nation.

    Venezuela was once an oil-rich nation that could have lifted its
    people out of poverty and become a shining example of progress
    and development in Latin America. It was a vibrant democracy
    that had everything going for it.

    I know because several decades ago I worked with two of
    Venezuela’s presidents, helping them understand the aspirations
    of their people through polls. The country enjoyed universal
    voting, a free press, and oftentimes a million people would turn
    out for a political rally.

    It was1958 when Venezuelans last overthrew a dictatorship and
    took control of their destiny. After that experience with
    military rule, the country, like many in Latin America, passed
    safeguards including no consecutive re-election, and abolished
    the death penalty.

    The idea was to prevent those who crept into power through
    democracy from entrenching themselves and replacing democracy
    with caudillos – military strongmen who often had their
    opponents not just arrested but executed.

    Democracy flourished with two major parties, AD and COPEI,
    dominating (much like Democrats and Republicans dominate in
    American government). In 1978, Luis Herrera Campins won the
    presidency with the slogan “Ya Basta,” which translated means
    “enough.” The intractable problems of crime, poverty and lack of
    education had mounted up, and the Copeyanos (Campins’ party)
    were swept into office.

    But it was not long before Carlos Andres Perez from AD would
    return to office as “el president,” promising a glass of milk
    every day to every school child.

    While the presidency rotated among these two major parties,
    conditions for the poor did not improve, and allegations of
    corruption swirled around the parties. I was there to brief the
    administration when Hugo Chavez, then in the military, tried to
    overthrow Perez in 1992. The president showed me the bullet
    holes above his desk. He had barely escaped the coup attempt,
    hiding in a safe room.

    Chavez was jailed but not executed for attempting to kill the
    president. He was released a few years later as part of a
    program of national reconciliation.

    Chavez then entered politics, capitalizing on the discontent
    with the major parties. In 2002 he won the presidency, running
    as a third-way alternative.

    Once elected, he wasted no time undermining all of the
    institutional safeguards so that he would be able to rule even
    after his support had evaporated. Human rights were curtailed,
    political opponents had their businesses nationalized, and he
    aligned with Cuba and Castro, declaring a socialist revolution.

    Despite continued economic decline and dwindling support,
    Chavez’s hand-picked successor, Nicolas Maduro, won a term in
    the wake of Chavez’s death. During his term, the country became
    even more crime-ridden, lost 3 million people, faced widespread
    shortages of food and medicine, and some in the military turned
    to drug smuggling on a massive scale.

    Given these conditions, the recent legislative elections
    produced a legislature with super majorities of the long-
    suppressed opposition. Maduro’s response was to hold an
    unscheduled fake national election, jam the Supreme Court, and
    try to defrock the legislature.

    Facing death, the head of the National Assembly, Juan Guado,
    stood up last week and used what was left of the constitution to
    declare himself interim president until fair elections can be
    held.

    [The crisis in Venezuela] demonstrates that both of our major
    political parties need to beware of gridlock and failure to
    solve the people’s problems. That is what spawns evermore
    radical choices by dissatisfied voters. People everywhere want
    results, not resistance.

    It was a brave stance against corruption and oppression, and the
    U.S. is not alone in supporting him. Brazil and Colombia quickly
    recognized Guado as the legitimate leader; Europe is offering
    support.

    The state actors backing Maduro include Russia, Syria, Iran,
    Turkey, China and Cuba. Some of them have invested billions in
    the regime.

    Helping Venezuela recover its self-determination is squarely in
    our national interest and the right thing to do. For one thing,
    it’s a country in our own hemisphere, and Maduro has let
    Venezuela become a client-state for most of America’s global
    enemies, creating a source of regional instability. In addition,
    the economic collapse is creating millions of refugees, and the
    basic human and economic rights of an entire nation have been
    suppressed.

    Venezuelans did not choose this outcome – their system that was
    designed to prevent the return of self-perpetuating strongmen
    was systematically destroyed.

    Few Americans will likely be interested in what’s going on in
    this small country the size of New York state, and yet it offers
    major political lessons for our country. First, it demonstrates
    that both of our major political parties need to beware of
    gridlock and failure to solve the people’s problems. That is
    what spawns evermore radical choices by dissatisfied voters.
    People everywhere want results, not resistance.

    Second, it shows how our policy toward Latin America needs
    fundamental rethinking. Our problems at the border are the
    result of the tremendous economic disparity between the U.S. and
    the deteriorating countries in Central America. Today, we spend
    billions of dollars in Europe, yet we neglect our own backyard
    and fail to find constructive policies to lift these countries
    up. We have all but abandoned them since President Reagan
    focused on Nicaragua and President Bill Clinton sent aid to
    Colombia.

    And third, it underscores that socialism is not the way forward
    for us or for Latin America, especially when accompanied by the
    politics of self-perpetuating strongmen.

    This is a chance for all Americans to put aside their political
    differences and unite with Latin America behind a just cause to
    restore freedom, democracy, food and medicine to a neighbor that
    has suffered for too long. It is a good fight. We can’t fix all
    the wrongs of the world, but there are brave Venezuelans
    standing up for their people today and we must help them.

    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mark-penn-could-the-us-end-up- like-venezuela-it-might-if-we-dont-learn-these-three-critical-
    lessons
     

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)