El Cabillito to Jorge:"You no-good fascist child killer, how do you like me now?"

“Every one of us has brought a shovel, because Mar del Plata is going to be the tomb of F.T.A.A.,” Mr. Chavez told a crowd carrying banners calling Bush a “fascist,” “child-killer” and “genocidal-beast,” the New York Times reported.

“F.T.A.A. is dead, and we, the people of the Americans, are the ones who buried it.”


Chavez appears to have taught Bush who is Boss of the Bolivarians, and it is not Jorge.

(The spirit of Che hovers over his continent, in it’s people’s time of need…)

it appears that the remainder of the hemisphere not yet blessed with having a F(ucked) T(hru) A(ss) posture vis-a-vis the US.(a posture most recently assumed by central america) will by saved .

On the substance of El 'Cabillito’s graveside speech,:

I would submit that Bush is certainly a child killer (there are tens of thousands of children dead through his direct orders a commander in chief.)

Bush is without doubt genocidal–his reluctance to incinerate children is more or less inversely proportional to their melanin burden.

As for “fascist:”, well, to cavil at fascist is preposterous. If Bush weren’t dedicaticed to fascist principles, he would have none at all. He is the very model of the figurehead that the oligarchy grooms and props up.

Whatever you think of the substance, it is certainly what we in the ghetto would call, some serious “shit talking”.

I offer for the debate:

Given the fact that there was no question Chavez was going to call Bush out, consider the idiocy of sending that chimpanzee to any kind of international conference where the stage managing is beyond the creation of a few blue screen visual effects with multiple iterations of a catchy phrase.

Did they think he could pull it out of the fire by virtue of his commanding intellect?

What moron on Bush’s staff thought he had the international standing to pull off any kind of summit after he has trashed the rest of the world like he was Keith Richards at the Plaza after shooting up a few speedballs.

(or, say, like George Bush on coke…)

I hear the sound of chickens flying home and looking for roosts.

What other people think of you may sometimes count.

Does no one in the State Department ever think it might be a good idea to do a pulbic opinion poll or two and if the shit has irrevocably hit the fan, call off the damn meeting?!!

The question, (drum roll)

(with clarity, mirabele dictu)


I’m going to let this thread go, because you tacked on a sort-of debate issue in the final sentence.

However, the next rant you post on U.S./Venezuelan realtions is going directly to the Pit.

This is Great Debates, not Great-Mouth-Foaming-Rants. If you are incapable of laying out a discussion without getting spittle on your monitor, then you probably do not have the control needed to conduct an actual discussion.

[ /Moderator Mode ]

point taken. I was perhaps over enthusiastic in my appreciation of Bush’s discomfiture…

In the interests of economy I’ll just ask this now:

Are you OK?

Tomndebb, that was one of the most succint, deliberate, and peircing mod smackdowns I have ever seen. We of the dope are now that much smarter for merely having read something on the same board which contains it.

As to the OP, I am somewhat confused as to what, exactly, the issue is beyond the fact that you dislike Bush?

Latin America, while it has had “help” (read: hurt) in that department, has done a very good job of obliterating its own economic gowth over the years. Generally speaking, the most successful individuals were foreigners willing to work and succeed on their own terms, and the Latin Americans always begrudged them that. I will not say that all such foreigners were nice, but that’s somewhat irrelevant: The Latins Americans weren’t nice, either. In fact, the leadership of South America (and Central America, sometimes) has basically been a history of feudalistic sturctures, strong-arms tactics, theft, economic idiocy, flat-out everyday idiocy, and occaisionally an awful blend of socialism and theft.

South Americans often like to blame their economic woes on foreigners. Some foreigners did exploit them (in the perjerative sense). However, they were able to do this primarily because they fit into existing class and social roles well. The “alternative,” Castro’s socialism, managed to obtain slow growth with a ridicu,ously god potential export market, at a distinct cost in freedom.

It’s not their meeting to call off. And even if the FTAA was the major topic, there were other issues brought up to be discussed. Everyone already knew the FTAA was on the ropes, both in South America and in the US itself. CAFTA barely passed, I don’t think the FTAA would have made it through Congress, frankly.

What does it matter what the President of Venezuela says? Isn’t this sort of like being denounced by (I dummo, maybe) the Prime Minister of New Zealand?

It will make the headlines on websites frequented by people who frequently hate Bush, but that is about it really.

[QUOTE=smiling bandit]
Tomndebb, that was one of the most succint, deliberate, and peircing mod smackdowns I have ever seen. We of the dope are now that much smarter for merely having read something on the same board which contains it.

As to the OP, I am somewhat confused as to what, exactly, the issue is beyond the fact that you dislike Bush?

state department incompetence.

summits are supposed to be wired for success in advance. or they are called off.

loss of street cred…

you can always have an emergency…

btw-if cafta could be rammed thru by holding the vote open till the cows come home, why not ftaa?

ok, I didn’t REALLY see Che’s spirit…


Summits happen all the time. Sometimes agreements get worked out, sometimes they just agree to have another summit sometime later.

you are not supposed to go home from Latin Ameica with egg on your suit, like dick nixon…

coincidentally, (or maybe not…) that little triumph of american foreign policy occurred in Caracas

So, you seem pretty impressed with the Horsisito, eh? This is like the second or third nearly incomprehensible OP you’ve started to give him an electronic blowjob. Wasted effort on my part, but could you give a bullshit free, clear text version, and perhaps talk about why you think free trade agreements are so bad and how this is such a great victory for the forces of freedom and in the region?

I await your pearls of wisdom with baited breath…


So then everyone else in the hemisphere would get together and meet and the US would just stay home. An entirely futile gesture. Besides, it’s not like anyone outside of Venezuela cares that much about what Chavez says. Chavez is only marginally more popular than Bush in Latin America. Lula holds the popular favor.

Because the only reason that CAFTA was held open was that the House leadership was fairly certain they could squeeze the votes. Not only that, but Bush had political capital to spend at the time. Now, he doesn’t and there’s no way he could keep the party in line anymore on something that controversial.

Bush went there to negotiate a trade treaty with the South American states, and Chavez leads one of them.

(A) cite?
(B)making his partiipation even more wrong-headed

If bush stayed home, the goal of preventing an egg-encrusted descent from AF1 would have been accomplished. How then, futile, for the stated objective?

A: I fear you may have let the warm glow suffusing your forebrain upon the use of a picaresque turn of phrase (and I would be the last to be heard condemning any doper for florid language…) cloud your understanding of the OP. For your convenience, I repeat


B The relevance, thereto, of your remarks vis-a-vis the utility or lack thereof of free trade agreements?(had I wished to open such a thead, I would have–why don’t you?)

C. Unless your breath smells like pussy, I will assume that you meant “bated”, as in “abated, or held, breath”.

What? They need the spirit of a murderous thug hanging over South America these days?