2006-09-21 23:59:36 · 8 answers · asked by White Man 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
They would say, "we voted for you because you promised us more food for our children--you lied!"
2006-09-22 01:35:18 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Venezulians have free speech. But the problem with the crook Americans is they always believe that they only have freedom whereas they don't evenhave the right to elect their own ruler of the country directly. A small state has no role to play in the election of their president as the reprentative of a small state has no much count in their electoral college. The political decisions in America are taken under the influence of few hand full of people who can influence the presidents with their money.
But in Venuzela or for that matter any democratic country in the world, people have right to elect their leaders. For example India. Just because the Americans don't hear from the Venuzelians what they want to hear they believe that the people of Venuzelia have no freedom of speech.
2006-09-22 07:16:15 · answer #2 · answered by madurainagpur 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The people would critize Chavez as much as we critize Bush. And with free speech that is our right. The funny thing is Chavez has actually united us more with his stupid remarks. The world knows he owes his power to oil and drugs, if he gets a big head and tries to take control of either of those things I can only guess the seconds he will last....
2006-09-22 08:23:48 · answer #3 · answered by Mark S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That Venezuelans don't have the right of free speech is MISINFORMATION perpetrated by right-wing propagandists (such as the Washington Post) in the United States who are trying everything they can to discredit Chavez.
Quoting: {The law referred to by the Washington Post is the Law on the Responsibility of Radio and Television passed by the National Assembly in November. It does not allow for the silencing of dissent, but merely introduces the same type of regulation of content that exists in most countries in the world. The law regulates when sexual and violent content can be shown, prevents slander against public officials and private citizens and seeks to guarantee space in the media market for independent media. The law does provide for fines and the suspension of broadcasting for 48 hours for repeated violations, but the law is not administered by the government, but by an independent body.
...Freedom of speech has been a formal right in Venezuela for decades. But while the media is so monopolised, it cannot become a reality. Golinger points out that for “several decades, commercial television in Venezuela has belonged to an oligopoly of two families, the Cisneros, who own Venevision, and the Bottome & Granier Group, which owns Radio Caracas Television (RCTV) and Radio Caracas Radio.”
The Cisneros family also own more than 70 media outlets in 39 countries, as well as Coca Cola bottling, Regional beer and Pizza Hut inside Venezuela.
...The Bolivarian process is helping to break this media domination down and start to spread freedom of speech around. Faced with a hostile private media, supporters of Chavez in the poor neighbourhoods have begun to organise their own media. As the working people have begun organising themselves to win political power, there has been an accompanying explosion in media run by and for the poor communities. This has involved newspapers, TV programs and especially radio stations.}
Remember folks, conservatives always lie to you about what's really happening when their narrow, selfish interests are threatened by liberty and justice for all.
2006-09-22 08:34:16 · answer #4 · answered by ideogenetic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The US citizens know the answer too well, because they claim to have a free speech and free press and are too free to express impolite remarks about a President elected with their votes. Freely unbridled.
2006-09-22 07:07:41 · answer #5 · answered by hasanmuizudin 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What makes you think they don't have the right to free speech and a free press.
Its definitely more free than US or British press.
He is a democratically elected leader, with a much more clear idea of morality and peace than either Bush or Bliar
2006-09-22 09:43:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
They probably are genuinely praising him now. He's been applauded on the world stage, and he criticized Bush as if Bush were a guest on his talk show in Venezuela.
2006-09-22 07:01:35 · answer #7 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
"leave my mom alone you pervert"
2006-09-22 07:21:19 · answer #8 · answered by not coming back 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋