LA Times, AP, WaPo Call Defeated Chavez Power Grab 'Reforms'

Photo of Ken Shepherd.
By Ken Shepherd (Bio | Archive)
December 3, 2007 - 12:49 ET

The Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post are all referring to a package of recently-defeated Venezuelan constitutional amendments as "reforms." In reality, those so-called reforms were all bent on amassing more power and influence in the hands of Hugo Chavez.

Washington Post's Juan Forero gave readers early of the December 3 Home Edition article (published before the outcome of the December 2 referendum was finalized) an idea of what was at stake for everyday Venezuelans waking up this morning.:

Chavez would be granted extraordinary powers, including the right to stand for re-election indefinitely, appoint governors to provinces he would create and control bloated foreign reserves.

Unfortunately I could not find an online edition of that page A12 article, which appeared in my District & Maryland Home Edition. It was replaced by a story filed in the early morning of December 3. WashingtonPost.com notes that the later Forero story ran on page A1, presumably in the final printed edition of the December 3 paper.

Forero's page A1 article avoided the term "reforms" in the lede, but quickly shifted to the word as a shorthand for Chavez's 69 proposals to grasp unto himself more power to make the Venezuelan economy more socialistic. Forero also softened his language on the amendment that would have given Chavez control of Venezuela's banking system (emphasis mine):

Hours after the final ballots were cast, the National Electoral Council announced at 1:15 a.m. local time Monday that voters, by a margin of 51 to 49 percent, had rejected 69 reforms to the 1999 constitution. The modifications would have permitted the president to stand for reelection indefinitely, appoint governors to provinces he would create and control Venezuela's sizable foreign reserves.

[...]

Chávez had campaigned furiously in recent days after polls showed that Venezuelans would reject the reforms. But he faced an eclectic and widespread opposition that included university students, Roman Catholic leaders and human rights groups.

If George W. Bush even hinted at proposing constitutional amendments giving him Ben Bernanke's Federal Reserve job, letting him run again for the presidency, and creating out of thin air new states or cities governed by people he alone chose at his personal whim, the media would, and rightly so, denounce such proposals asabsolutely insane and hinting strongly of the foul stench of despotism.

Yet when it comes to Hugo Chavez, a tin-horned South American dictator cozy with Fidel Castro and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, his proposals are treated by American media as merely "reforms" to Venezuela's constitutional system.

 

—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Of course these are reforms

December 3, 2007 - 12:56 ET by Lame Cherry

Of course these communist power grabs are reforms, because this is the utopia which American liberal who are all communists want.

They would love to steal all oil company revenue and buy votes with it in keeping poor people poor so they need the tax hand out.

Venezuela is at the cusp in this. They are about to have a brain drain which plagued Zimbabwe........once the best are gone out of Venezuela then the literal rats remain who will pillage the state into a Cuba franchise of loons on top who have large bank accounts, are a depot for coke entering the United States and then those pesky auditors disappear from the banks and all that money comes flowing into American cartel banks.

That is why Chavez was installed in Venezuela people. It was the same reason the Czars were murdered in Russia. Communism is a monopoly where only a few elite control all and it makes it easier for Rothschilds and Rockefellers to glean the billions from these states.

THIS IS WHY THEY WERE SO IRATE over George Bush ousting Saddam........Saddam was choke point for stealing money from oil. Chavez is that chokepoint in Venezuela who is about to initiate a disaster for all the Americas.

How?

Those millions of Venezuelans are about to be migrating north to the United States.

 

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

I pointed this out in

December 3, 2007 - 13:11 ET by Killgrave

I pointed this out in another thread, but this vote only means that Chavez won't ask next time.

I also wonder if he pulled this stunt only to smoke out opposition leaders, who needed to come way out in the open since they didn't have access to the media.

Since Chavez now has a hit-list, mayhaps these enemies will start disappearing over the coming months/years.

Not that the liberals here will notice. They spent decades ignoring all of Castro's murders.

This is why I say the MSM is

December 3, 2007 - 13:28 ET by mattm

This is why I say the MSM is equally guilty with the terrorists and tyrants of the world. Their soft-ball coverage, look-the-other-way methodology and outright promotion of power-hungry dictators equates to aiding and abetting the most evil people in the world...which makes them part of that 'elite' group.

rchavez / reform -- to the dictionary..

December 3, 2007 - 13:46 ET by Gary Hall

 Let's visit the dictionary, may we?

reform (source: American Heritage Dictionary )

re·form       (rĭ-fôrm')
v.   re·formed, re·form·ing, re·forms

v.   tr.

To improve by alteration, correction of error, or removal of defects; put into a better form or condition.

To abolish abuse or malpractice in: reform the government.
To put an end to (a wrong). See Synonyms at correct.
To cause (a person) to give up harmful or immoral practices; persuade to adopt a better way of life.

v.   intr.
To change for the better.

n.  
A change for the better; an improvement.
Correction of evils, abuses, or errors.
Action to improve social or economic conditions without radical or revolutionary change.

 Back to the dictionary:

Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post

jib-er-ish (pronunciation)

n.

entities which believe that thugs embracing communism are reformists.

v.

to take away.

to remove rights

to crush freedoms

to dash hopes

to spew venom

Constitutions

December 3, 2007 - 14:08 ET by KC Mulville

It's worth a pause to compare this with the US Constitution, and marvel at how lucky we are to have what we have.

  • The ultimate authority of the law, in a constitutional society, is the consent of the governed. Like any other contract, if the parties don't agree to it, it has no authority. In Venezuela, the people didn't agree, and that alone popped Chavez's balloon.
  • It's also important to make the constitution very difficult to change. The "reforms" undermined a basic constitutional principle, which is to keep power from concentrating. Our separation of powers is something we take so much for granted that we usually forget how important it is. Chavez's attempt to concentrate power is a healthy reminder.

All in all, I take a lot of confidence from this election. Not to be too simplistic about it, but it's a really good thing.