Hugo Chavez just said the following, "Georige W. Bush. You are a donkey Mr. Bush." Amazing how far poker has come...

lol

He's probably friends with twincaracas....that or they use the word donkey like we do in Mexico anyone dumb = Burro.

Proably more the south american usage, that he's stubborn, rather than he's a sucker at poker.

lol, really - you think so?

Richard Nixon had trouble in Venezuela, but he wasn't a donkey:

"While he was in the US Navy in World War II, Nixon won $6000 in his first two months playing poker. He used his winnings to fund his first campaign for congress, which he won. "

"A devoted player, Nixon turned down a chance to have dinner with Charles Lindbergh when it conflicted with a regular poker session. Nixon said years later, "Today it seems incredible to me that I passed up an opportunity to have dinner with Charles Lindbergh because of a card game. But in the intense loneliness and boredom of the South Pacific, our poker games were more than idle pastimes, and the etiquette surrounding them was taken very seriously."

Day 1, Tape 3 00:37:46
[Frank Gannon] What was your technique?

[Richard Nixon] Well, the technique was -- in my case was to play it very close to the vest. I didn't -- I knew when to get out of a pot. I didn't stick around when I didn't have the cards. I didn't bluff very often. I just bluffed enough so that, when I really had the cards, people stayed in. Whenever I bluffed, in other words, I let it be known that I had bluffed and lost so that I could stay in. And, of course, my most vivid experience -- and this is something that I -- I imagine very few people, certainly any of our listeners have -- have probably never had this experience -- I'll never forget. In a stud poker game one night, I drew a hand -- I understand it's -- would be at the odds of six hundred and fifty thousand to one that this could happen. I drew the ace of diamonds down, and then, in order, exact order, came the king of diamonds, the queen of diamonds, the jack of diamonds, the ten of diamonds. A royal flush. Four of them showing. Well, I played it pretty well. There were pairs -- a couple of the other fellows had pairs, and instead of raising, I just sort of checked, you know, or stayed in or called and so forth and so on, till finally there was a pretty fair pot. But at the end -- this was one of those times, you know, when the -- after -- at the end I, of course, placed a big bet, and most everybody checked out. They thought maybe I had it. But this is one of the times you don't have to show it when you're not called. But I had to show it. And I turned over the ace and everybody just -- nobody'd ever seen it before. And they'll never see it again.

hahahaha can't you just hear him: "SHIP IT!!"

So Hugo has more in common with the democrat's party than we thought.





P.S. I also hear that Saddam didn't like Bush either

Fixed His Speech.

It's not a very exclusive club.

practically no one likes bush.

G Dub over-playin the A-K.

Huga Chavez has sex with Donkeys?

Something about George w tells me he is the type that chases inside straight draws because he "just had a feeling".

I know lots of men and several lesbians who like bush.

It's Venezuela.... not venezuALA
Anyways chavez is a bigger donkey than anyone else including bush.

<--- Venezuelan poker player

fyp

It's for sure true that the 'Hate Bush' crowd has many interesting members, from genocidical dicatators, to communist puppets to power hungry politicians.

Maybe there should be more effort putting the normal people to the frontlines and try to keep the wacos in the back.


When Clinton was president and our side was the haters, we tried to keep the Mena Arkansaw people and the like restricted to the internet and the 12 midnight to 5: 00 radio channels. Worked too, we won the next two presidential elections AND got to fill some seats in the Supreme Court with some right minded judges this time.

Come from an oil family?

What kind of racist BS is that? You think just because a hispanic is educated and smart enough to see beyond socialist and communist BS that he must have been born into money? Typical liberal democrat racism. If someone that isn't white doesn't agree with your BS then there must be a reason, because that non-white person couldn't possibly be smart enough to form their own opinion so you must do it for them.

First of all, I don't know what race has a thing to do with any of this. "Hispanic" is a term that people in the united states use to white wash people from south of here, but it' hardly the way people from those regions use to classify race. I went to college with several people from central and south america, from Columbia, from costa rica, from puerto rico, ect. All of them came from wealthy backgrounds, and talking to them about race and racial issues was fascinating. A) Every one of them considered themselves white and their attitudes towards the poorer, darker skinned "hispanics" from their country and the rest of central and south america ranged from condescension to open bigotry. I don't know the situation in Venezuela specifically, perhaps Ciderx could shed some light on the issue, however if it's like the countries I am familiar with, it has a rich white ruling class and a impoverished mixed ethnic lower class. (from wikipedia..Some 60% of the estimated 27,483,200 Venezuelans are mestizo (mixed white, African, and Amerindian ancestry); another 29% are white, mostly of Spanish, Italian, German, and Portuguese stock. Other important minority groups include Afro-Venezuelans (8%), who are mostly the descendents of imported slaves, and Asians (2%), who are of predominantly Arab and Chinese descent. )

Now, I would consider my comment to be "typically Marxist" in the fact that I was judging his distain of Hugo Chavez was based on class, as he's immensely popular with the lower classes in Venezuela, but intensely unpopular with the rich elites, and a great deal of Venezuela's wealth comes from oil, but certainly not all of it. Mostly it was a joke.


" If someone that isn't white doesn't agree with your BS then there must be a reason, because that non-white person couldn't possibly be smart enough to form their own opinion so you must do it for them."


I don't know what this really means, it's a bit of an ambiguous rant. First off, I'm not a socialist or a communist, I'm not a particular supporter of Chavez, so I don't really know what BS the poster should or shouldn't be agreeing with. All I was doing was making an educated guess that he wasn't a poor Venezuelan. Second off, I have no idea if he is white or isn't, I would wager the poster would consider himself white, but you'd have to ask him.


Your post is almost frothing at the mouth, shows a deep ignorance of the way people in south america view race, and in general makes very little sense. Try better next time.

When politics force us to pull out of Iraq, we need to send the troops to get Chavez out of whatever hole he'll be hiding in by that time.

Why? What business is it of ours who the freely elected president of another country is? Chavez doesn't support terrorism. In fact, we tried to have him assassinated, and it failed. That's much more of a terroristic act. The only reason I can see for going to war with Chavez is that he's critical of the US Government. For this we should get into another foreign war?

Hey, the troops gotta go somewhere...

...and by then I am sure Chavez will have done something overt.

...and when exactly did WE try "to have him assassinated"? Just because Pat Robertson said he should be assassinated doesn't mean WE tried to have him assassinated. ...and just because the honorable Mr Chavez and perhaps Harry Belafonte want to believe that he had "survived hundreds of the empire’s assassination plans.” doesn't mean that it is true.


He comes up with a completely unsubstantiated accusation every year or so, never backing it up with ANY facts. Like Castro it is in his best interests to keep a wedge between the World's Superpowers and continue to paint himself to his people not as the regional Dictator he aspires to become, but as some sort of benighted populist anti-imperialist, fighting the good fight for the people, standing up to American oppression in the cross hairs of constant American assassin rifles.

Sounds like you've been snacking on his rhetoric of leftist propaganda.

Try sticking to the facts next time.

Or if he hasn't done something overt, we can just make something up. posts like this literally sicken me. There is no absolutely no justification for a war against Venezuela. None. None what so ever, other than you don't like him and his politics.

Also, if you think the US had nothing to do with the 2002 coup attempt, provided no illicit support for it, then you're either very naive about US foreign policy, or you are retarded.

See what you started Daniel?


Good times

How's the view from the Ultra Left?

Give it time.

True but there is a new cold war in Latin America and the USA is geting beat.

Bush is the worst prez ever and well so is Chevez, we are screwed.

Man, does Canada rule. (especially Quebec but let's not get into that )

Why do you Americans have to turn everything in a race issue?
That comment asking if i came from an oil company was also ignorant since you have no real information about the situation here other than the one you read on wikipedia, although you are correct on some points, since most of the rich to medium class people either work on PDVSA or work at a oil products/services related company. Chavez has complete and absolute power of all the institutions and by laws he has aproved through a fraudelent voting system (same way he has gained the elections), he can basicly do whatever he want, he recently just took over the biggest telecommunications company in the country (CANTV) owned in its majorty by Verizon, and also took over the Electricity of Caracas the same way, just because he felt like it.
Politics are BS specially on this country, for example in 2002 this high ranked military officer appeared on national TV announcing the presidents signed resignation, he later on took it all back and was then put on charge as Minister of Defense... Also the president of the CNE (Consejo Nacional Electoral) The National Electoral Council, who was running it while Chavez was being reelected, is now Vice President of the country, and thats just a couple of examples of the BS situation going on here, and its not that white rich elite minorty thats against Chavez, its the whole majorty, its everywhere you go, mostly anyone you meet or know is Anti-chavez, its the voting system thats fraudulent.

To answer your question yes i do come from an oil family my mother worked for PDVSA for about 15-20 years and got fired by Chavez along with thousends more over the newspaper were a list was posted everyday with the names of the people being fired, because she was exerting her constitutional right to go on strike, my father also worked for pdvsa but resigned years before that to start his own company to sell products and services to PDVSA and other oil related business, he also had to pay some high profile people in PDVSA A LOT of money can't really say how much, so that he could get any deals with his company and PDVSA, since he was banned from them because he signed a national petition to do a revocatory vote against Chavez.

ROFLMAO In other words you are pissed cause he was right.

PS. Quebec sucks. I am originally from Vermont and the only good thing I ever found about Quebec was the fact I could drink at 18 there.

Damn, it sucks to be right all the fcking time.

I wasn't trying to offend you by my post by the way, and I perhaps shouldn't have been so flippant with my post to you, I apologize.
It's situations like this that I am not an socialist/communist. Because aside from a few scandanavian countries it's only viable through intense executive power and at a cost to freedom.

However, the situation in Venezuela is not one that calls for direct US intervention.

Okay, brain master, try this on. The US hates Venezuela, it is costing many rich people in the country lots of money, and in general is a huge thorn in the US's homogenegogic goals. Going to war with them would be unpopular and expensive. Conversely, supporting a coup attempt by local anti-Chavez factions would be cheap, plausibly deniable, and achieve the same goals.


So do they choose A or B? You support an invasion of Venezuela, but a coup makes much more sense, would be cheaper, would cost no US lives, and wouldn't destabilize the region. Use your brain once in a while.


This isn't an "ultra-left" view, it's coming fuking sense. The us has shown no squeamishness in intervening illicitly in the past in central and south america, I don't know why this would be any different.

Hahahahaha. Vermont.

so typical of these political threads...lumping everyone who thinks a certain way ABOUT ONE SUBJECT together, as if it's the only thing that would define a person.

very shallow thinking.

it makes it easier for u to believe in bush when u try to dismiss a MAJORITY opinion with labels like, 'bush haters'. pretty funny actually.

again with the labels....

Sometimes Labels are accurate.

Sorry, but for you (or him for that matter) to make the FACTUAL sounding statement that WE tried to have him ASSASSINATED... I'm going to need a little more than Conspiracy Theory speculation based on High School level knowledge of Public Policy.

Otherwise the Ultra Left Label sticks.

So the 2002 coup didn't happen? I give a sht less what you label me, btw.

Typical leftist. I wont waste time looking but Im fairly sure that somewhere you've argued the opposite of the above bolded statement in regards to Iraq. "Its too expensive! Americans are being killed! Why are we still there if Saddam's dead?!" Blah blah blah. But now that the opposite fits your little "the whole world is a big right wing conspiracy" theory, it must follow that the gov't is going for the cheap, safe, and obvious method.
Your type always want it everyway. (slight pun intended)

Yes, the Coup Happened... Sorry, but for you (or him for that matter) to make the FACTUAL sounding statement that WE tried to have him ASSASSINATED... I'm going to need a little more than Conspiracy Theory speculation based on High School level knowledge of Public Policy.

LOL Your post doesn't make sense. I wasn't arguing in favor of a coup, just saying that it would be cheap, cost no us lives, and wouldn't destablize the region. I also think if the United States had tried to support a Coup in Iraq, it would have been cheaper, cost no US lives, and would have been less likely to destablize the region.

I don't particularly care for either method of US foreign policy, but given a choice, I'd much prefer a behind the scenes orchestration type intervention than an expensive drawn out war.

The problem with a coup is, w/r/t achieving US goals is that they are often unsuccessful (case in point, the Venezuelan coup). Not that direct intervention wars are more successful, but they do achieve goals like getting rid of a specific dictator.

Do you really think the US is above orchestrating coups is central and south america? If not, then I encourage you to do some research on the issue. Perhaps you've heard of the "Monroe Doctrine" Perhaps not..

As opposed to sophisticated knowledge of foreign policy illustrated by this..




I'll be willing to wager that the US was behind the coup. wanna shut up and put your money where your mouth is?

I'm also pretty sure the US tried to pull a Pinochet, again.

Lol...

...you must have been one of those guys in High School who always said: "Oh yeah? Wanna bet? Huh? Do ya? Wanna Bet?"

Even on things that are clearly not able to be documented (somehow I think that if Chavez cannot prove that WE tried to assassinate him, then you surely cannot) and then acted like you "won" when your opponent refused to "bet"

This really makes me laugh.

I think you mean Allende, the freely elected leftist president of chile that the CIA assassinated to establish pinochet's rule.

Amazing how an innocent joke turned into such a retarded political debate so quickly.
To add another rather superficial statement: I don't specially like Chavez, but he seems to be less of a dictator than many other lunatic politicians the US supported or even established in other american nations. And the whole US foreign policy concerning that region in the last 100 years was a complete fuck-up from start to finish - invading Venezuela because Chavez doesn't like Bush would be very consistent with that.

Leftist huh?

First of all why do some people immaturely insist on finding little work arounds to get profanity past the Forums filters? Not that I am a prude, but that is just childish. - sort of like overusing the word "retarded".

...and news flash, I really did not think anybody would be simple minded enough to have turned my flippant comments about invading a Third World South American country into a long debate - I do think Chavez is a danger to the region and American interests, but I was just sort of having fun...


...for now.