"Radical populism" means???

[Postman]

Apparently it doesn't mean "democracy" according to John Negroponte or the USG.

Was it "radical populism" that spurred the American Revolution?

They just don't like Chavez because he has taken the mask off their ugly imperial capitalist faces.

So what are you going to do about it? Not import his oil? I doubt it.

http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Chavez_a_threat_to_democracy_US_int_01302007.html

"John Negroponte, during hearings on his nomination to become deputy secretary of state, warned that frustration in Latin America about the lack of prosperity under democratic governments could further fuel the populism advocated by Chavez."
.......could the lack of prosperity under regimes you support be intentional as part of WTO policies and US support (militarily and fiscally)for corporate profits at the expense of working people?

"Washington has objected to Chavez's crackdown on free media and civil rights groups, and says democratic institutions under his rule have been marginalized. Chavez is expected to be granted powers this week to issue decrees without parliamentary approval - a move that has been criticized by Venezuelan opposition parties as a step towards totalitarianism."
......is "crackdown" a propaganda buzzword for "regulating"? A free media is useless to the people unless it tells the truth, not spread lies, as the US media is "free" to do to it's own people. Wasn't the Iraq war enabled in the US by the "free media" acting as the propaganda agents they are? Chavez being GRANTED powers sounds like he went through a process where the people approved his granted powers, unlike the dictator George W. Bush who grants HIMSELF powers with his signing statements. Tell me who is it that has their army and navy thousands of miles across the globe invading other countries? the US or Venezuela? Gimme a break.

[1932]

1. Historically speaking, I think it's supposed to evoke Huey Long.

However, Chavez is much more like FDR than Huey Long, no matter how hard people like Negroponte want to make him sound like Huey Long.

In fact, there are incredible parallels to the way Republicans and the media characterized Roosevelt in the 30s and 40s and the way Republicans and the media characterize Chavez today.

[OHdem10]

2. Republicans are smart enough to

attack Ideology. Socialism in any form is anathema.
Socialism is bad. Socialism will question their "Free
Market Fundamentalism". Just as one must not question
their Religious Fundamentalism --God help anything that
gets in the way of their "Free Market Fundamentalism"

Besides that, the next argument Socialism will become Communism and
they will have certain Americans running for the hills.
Does anyone remember "the Red Scare" in earlier times.
Chaves is a Communist. He is a danger to our Freedom.
Keep in mind when they decided to go after Democrats,
they went after Liberalism with a vengence.

Liberalism will lead to Socialism to Communism to Totalatarinism

We never pointed out much less fought back
with:
Conservatism(Free Market Fundamentalism) will lead to Fascism
to Totalinarism.

[Postman]

3. Capitalism would have been DEAD in 1930's without SOCIALISM to save it..

n/t