If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Chavez bans The Simpsons
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080409/tod-uk-venezuela-simpsons-d987f7f.html
This man is becoming more and more deluded by the day.
This man is becoming more and more deluded by the day.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
Its the fact that he gives 8 hour speeches which is the main issue.
Which means more kids and less men can attend his speeches
A lot of women like both too so even less people.
It's the fact there the most popular thing on television which worries me - fuck I'm interested in politics but I don't think I could sit through eight hours by any politician (or anybody else)
Thats what worries me. You see this stuff posted all over the net: a minor (perhaps silly) decision made by somebody in Venezuela, and its attributed to Chavez without any evidence or even suggestion of a connection in the original story. No one questions it, either because they don't care or don't like Chavez, and its another notch for "Chavez is a Hitler-Clown" for whoever is reading...then, next time they see a similar story, they are willing to accept it at face value because it reinforces their preconception, *repeat until discredited and overthrown.*
I'm not a particular fan of Chavez (although I do admire much of what he has done), but the amount of grey and black propaganda spouted against him is enough for me to look at any story or opinion piece about him with extreme skepticism...
true - but then the same is often true for Bush has done this or Brown has done that, when you look at the story it turns out that they have done no such thing and it's been done by an Government official (and probably the first Bush or Brown knew was when they read it in the morning paper).
(and to be fair the Yahoo and the BBC don't suggest it was Chavez - in the fact the person who does is probably one of the most left-wing on the board so I'm not sure we're starting to see a media conspiracy)
Agree, and I apply the same standard to most media reporting of top politicians' supposed decisions/actions. I think the difference here is that there isn't really any (sensible) suggestion that Brown is some kind of omnipotent dictator of the UK, although sensible people do sometimes suggest as much about Bush in the US. The difference with Chavez is that he does appear to be a leader with authoritarian tendencies, he is on a continent with a recent history of such leaders, and is usually protrayed as such. As you say, even lefties like Aladdin hold the view. For me, thats all the more reason to actually look at these stories/attacks/slurs with skepticism and objectivity rather than just assume the worst every time.
Constant stories like this in the media may not represent a "conspiracy" but they do indicate a clear agenda. I mean, is this one even newsworthy? A broadcasting regulator in a far off country decides to move a TV show from the morning to the evening because it deems it unsuitable for kids. But by giving an insignifcant decision like this such prominence the suggestion is clear; and lo and behold people all over the internet are posting it as further evidence that Chavez is off his rocker and on a personal political crusade known only to himself.
I think I agree, to an extent, though the agenda seems to me along the lines of Clive James et al 'Aren't foreigners funny?' type reporting.
Ignore the fact its in Venuezla and the Chavez connection and there is something inheriently amusing about taking off a satire because it's not suitable for children and replacing it with a programme full of skantily clad lovelies pouting over swimsuited hunks
As for Chavez, he's a moron, and a dangerous one at that.
That was unexpected and gave me a warm ...:) thankyou!
But he's all mouth and no trousers, and everyone knows it (including Bush, who's probably has no more intent of invading Venuezla than he has off bombing the Isle of Wight). He's not a threat to any other country and despite big talk he knows he more dependent on the US paying for his oil than they are on buying it. if he stopped Venuezla would be bankrupt in a few days, the US would have to put a few cents on the price of petrol.
I suspect he'll do a Mugabe in later years, and keep the appearances of a democratic state whilst imprisoning and attacking the opposition. but he hasn't yet and so he should be treated as a democratic leader - probably not one of the nicer one's, but he's no Castro or Pinochet
(Though personally I think he should still be doing hard labour for trying to overthrow a democratic government by force, but he isn't and so we have to live with the vagaries of the Venuzelean judicial system).
You think that plays well with the South/Central/Latin Americans Flashman?
Or why country after country in that continent have consistently elected leftist leaders when permitted, despite coups, death squads, assassinations, etc?
Chavez isn't a single renegade over there, he is a symptom of a much larger and more sophisticated movement. That Chavez is a bumbling fool adds to the publicity that fuels his ego and motivation.
I'm watching a repeat of Baywatch on UKTV Gold at the moment, I'd forgotten how blatently it was just for staring at flesh.
I think all world leaders should give massive rambling ranting speeches.
I bet Bush couldn't think up enough material for 10 minutes, and Gordon would just waffle about slippers and smoking jackets or something.