So, you are saying that Edwards would have voted AGAINST that resolution if he were a member of the Senate?  How do you know?  You may want to find out how Edwards feels about the resolution before assuming that he would have voted differently than the others.  

Oh god. Can't we ever just wake up to the fact that Venezuela is a young and active democracy and awhile Hugo has done some dictatorial like things he's still not really that much of a radial. Just because he has the guts to say what most of the world thinks about bush and just because he doesn't embrace neoliberalism doesn't mean he's evil.

But how do you know Wes Clark and John Edwards wouldn't support this bill in the Senate? I bet they would. It's sad.

But how do you know Wes Clark and John Edwards wouldn't support this bill in the Senate? I bet they would. It's sad. -- Populista.

The inconvenient truth is that this is a very good point. It's just that the fact that the others positively did support this dirty blank check forces me to keep the good old barf bag at the ready (and it's already done far too many tours of duty).

By the way, if Al Gore enters the room, I just might turn my back on this whole pool table!

ALL of our idiotic non-choice problems stem directly from our fundamentally flawed two party system. We could easily have a freedom giving n-party system if we had the sense to adopt the one voting method that neutralized the manipulations engendered by the Black Hat effect. Here is part of a comment I made recently at Portland Indymedia:

There are easy solutions! Just give every citizen over 16 vouchers to buy political news and information (validated by LOCAL independent randomly selected juries) (cut out the SPONSORS!). Just give every citizen over 16 vouchers to donate to political campaigns (validated by LOCAL independent randomly selected juries).

Then mandate LOCALLY CONTROLLED (by LOCAL independent randomly selected juries) Consecutive Runoff Approval Voting. It is the only simple voting system that works. (NOT like IRV, which requires centralized control, since every bit of ballot information must be gathered into one central location for the method to work. (with all reasonably practical forms of IRV) With Consecutive Runoff Approval Voting, the votes can be tallied independently at each polling place.) See:

Electorama -- Consecutive Runoff Approval Voting

I agree with the title of the diary but not the substance.

I think what those "other" dems did was STUPID but... What would you say about a TV station here in the USA that spoke out against gdub? What if gdub follows through with his "dictitorial" powers that he thinks he can give himself?

Read here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/ 2007/05/20070509-12.html

And here:
http://progressive.org/mag_wx051807.html

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/052107 T.shtml

So now when you really think about it in this context, then how do you feel?

Also chavez... he just wants to be a new castro, lenin or whatever. Giving chavez any benefit of the doubt is as dangerous as giving gdub any benefit of the doubt.

Progressive Blue

What about those TV, radio and newspapers that speak out against the Iraqi government and the USA?

Progressive Blue

ron paul is a fucking LIBERTARIAN! Learn what they stand for before you give this person any support! Geeeez! Why are so many people blinded by the new mcain that is ron paul!?

Progressive Blue

This has to be one of the most idiotic diaries i have seen posted here.

forget the fact the diarist is pledging support to candidates on an isue he or she has no idea where they stand on, but Senators Dodd, Obama, etc. are actually doing the right thing.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews /idUSN2621739620070526?feedType=RSS& rpc=22

The fact the poster approves of supressing speech is incredible and frankly ironic given that I'm certain he has opnely critcized president bush on this site, the very site he now uses to advocated against freedom of speech.

Ever hear of Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes and his justification for suppressing communist protest i.e yelling fire in a crowded theatre? (making this post even more ironic given Venezuela's policies)

Holmes used that idea to suppress speech in the 20's only to change his mind, realize the folly of his ways on the issue, and promote free speech vigourously. Our country is better for it.

Well, well. Here I am, the "OP" himself. The reality is that I support free speech to the extent that I would gleefully abolish all copyright and patent laws! Everyone must be able to say whatever the want, everywhere, all the time (unless it directly harms someone physically). I have no interest in child pornography, and it's very wrong, but I would never want anyone who sold it to be arrested.

The thing that some folks on this thread must be harping on is that I can see no reason whatsoever that ANY government (including, obviously, Venezuela) should be expected to re-license any TV station that has promoted a coup de ta against it. THAT POLICY FALLS WAY BELOW ANY RATIONAL STANDARD REGARDING FREE SPEECH. And while you and I may not like all that Chavez has done, he was, after all, ELECTED in a free and fair and open election. Such was not the case with George W. Bush, by the way, and we all know it!