Obama wrecks Venezuelan dialogue, Trump will not revive it

{UPDATED}
So here we are, at the famous November 11 deadline where supposedly we should evaluate the advances made by the "dialogue" started on October 30th. Listen carefully for the results, you may hear the crickets.

As a matter of fact, the half a dozen released political prisoners concession from the regime have been amply compensated through new arrests and further limitations to the National Assembly role. And as I said, the mere acceptance of a two weeks "truce" was enough to kill any hope for a recall election before January 10 and the High Court TSJ made sure of that today.

In short, the initial results of the truce seem to indicate that a disappointed opposition following is becoming indifferent as their need to deal with Christmas scarcities start to become more crucial, exactly what the regime wanted. Never mind that the appearance of some obvious divisions have not helped.

This is not to say that the regime benefited greatly. Its own internal divisions have also become more apparent, and the relentless crisis awaits for a mere incident to revive massive protests. Let's just say that the regime got some time for some propaganda that allowed a provisional stop to its own follower hemorrhage, multiplied by a minimum wage inducing inflation and the promise of some cheap toys in a CLAP food distribution subsidized bag.

The regime did get a hand from the US by the way- As soon as the dialogue was open Thomas Shannon from state flew in to Caracas. He met quickly with Maduro and then with the opposition, and left fast. For the life of me I cannot recall an involvement of Shannon with Venezuela that benefited the Venezuelan opposition, or at the very least that benefited it more, slightly more than the regime. Please, correct me if I am wrong. Whatever his reasons to come were, he got at least one thing, no Venezuela blow up until election day. Not that it helped much Hillary but that is another story. At least this Liberal can take small comfort in the loss of Hillary that Shannon will be out of office soon.

The fact of the matter is that this latest Shannon outing is in perfect following of 8 years of Obama basic do nothing on Venezuela, in the grand tradition of George Bush, already hinted at by Bill Clinton. And, I am willing to bet on it, a proud tradition that will be followed by Trump. As soon as he is sworn in he will realize that the US has more serious problems to deal with than the consequences of an idiotic electorate that voted back their country into Banana Republicorama. In addition, Trump enterprises will quickly look at possible hotel development in Venezuela and will realize that the beaches are contaminated, are not private enough, that there is no water nor food nor electricity, and that the personnel has been hopelessly damaged by 17 years of chavismo beggarization. Not even sending now available sheriff Arpaio to solve insecurity could motivate the Trump organization.

George Bush did not touch Chavez because he needed Venezuela oil for his Iraq adventure. That was that- Condi could be deeply insulted by Chavez and barely an eye would bat. Obama did not need oil that much anymore and, well, his interests were in Asia more than anywhere else. Venezuela only came into play when he got into the hubris that he would solve the transition away from the Castro and that he needed Venezuela to pay for it. What he thought to be his crowning legacy not only did not help him to have Hillary elected but will probably come back to haunt him in the ridicule field of fortune. The more so if Venezuela ends in a tragedy.

As for Trump, he did the true and tested Republican Cuban move in Florida. Late in the campaign he went to promise a stern hand against the Castro/Maduro regimes and voila, he got Florida. Probably this time around there were enough Venezuelans that could vote and did it so for him, falling for the GOP cause like Cubans have basically done since the 60ies, for nothing. What does Trump know about Venezuela besides it being a source for competitive ass when he was involved in beauty pageants? Still, it would not be hard for him to do better than Bush or Obama. Hillary on the other hand would have done better because she knew more about Venezuela. She tried to bring Obama around in his first term. And she expressed her opinion during the primaries using against the Bern his inability to condemn authoritarian leftist regimes. Am I the only one to remember that she gave an interview to Globovision when this one was under fire?  Siiiiggghhhhh.......

So there we go, the dialogue as expected will fail because you cannot dialogue with the people that hold you in jail, the more so if they are themselves the felons. And nobody around cares much. From the Vatican to Argentina, they are kind of OK if you beat your wife as long as you do not make much noise.

-------------------

Update: as if this were to restore confidence. UNASUR head, totally discredited, untrustworthy, regime supporter Ernesto Samper was the one in charge to announce that they are all fine and dandy but that the results will be announced tomorrow morning.  What is wrong with that?

First, new people joined in tonight. Tonight?
Second, the delays can only mean that they are not in agreement AND that each side itself is not in agreement. Consultations need to be held. We all know that these consultations mean that acceptance is far from certain.
Third, Samper was the spokes person?  Nobody else could risk his good/bad name in front of a mic?

Forgive me if I go to bed without holding my breath. But then again, I could be proven wrong. Hopefully dead wrong.

Me and Hillary

Around US election time I allow myself a post where I express my opinion. I am of those who think that foreigners should have a say in the US election since we will all pay the consequences of that vote. But of course, there goes another utopia. Also, I get a lot of flack from such posts, mostly from right wingers that understand any critical view of Republican candidates as pure and simple communism making Chavez too good for me, and... (more follows from puffed red faces that I can easily imagine from the comments).

Not for me at this point in life to be deterred by such comments, the more so that blogging has become an occasional hobby for me. So there I go.


FIRST! Caveat! I was a Hillary fan in 2008 so do not expect me to have changed over these last 8 years. Search my blog or blog comments if you wish, it is all there, somewhere.

Yes, I know where Hillary does come from and I NEVER liked Bill. But she is not Bill and already in 2008 I thought she was one of the best prepared and more thoughtful candidate for the US presidency. Preparation matters unless you are like Reagan and are willing and able to surround yourself with people that know more than you do without taking umbrage.  Since politicians willing and able to run for the presidency are prime donne then I shall privilege preparation over character. They are all flawed anyway, and Reagans are rare, the US having had only two of those in the XX century. I suppose perhaps that coming from Venezuela the little pecadillos of Hillary do not mean much for me, or that my French half has learned long ago that dubious private life does not mean bad governance.

It may come as a surprise to you that at first I was looking with interest at Trump as a candidate. After all, he was a businessman, of dubious qualities perhaps but more businessman than any president in recent memory besides Bush senior. In a country with such a division or power and entrenched instituions Trump did not scare me. Then again, I was coming from the Venezuelan experience.

It was thus with a great surprise that I heard the vehement condemnation of my US friends who I visited days before the Iowa caucus. To the point that I did not even dare to express my surprise and preferred to remain silent, playing the ignorance card.  But they have been proven right and as far as I am concerned Trump would be an unmitigated disaster for the US presidency. People would miss Nixon and Carter after a Trump presidency.

I can say that because I have been following this primary cycle closer than the usual. Enough to be scared about what is going on in the US.

Bernie Sanders is a geriatric socialist that has appealed to a new me generation who think that everything is their due. Plus the assorted white guilty left of the Democratic Party. Fortunately the real left, the one that needs to mark time clocks at work and knows how hard things are did not follow Sanders and stayed with Clinton. Yes, Latinos and African American are the real social left in the US, not the Joe Kennedy type that happily deals with Venezuela or the intellectual fraud like Sanders who refuses to condemn the Cuban regime.

And then there is Trump.

I do not want to take the easy way and put Trump in the same bag as Chavez. Trump is more dangerous than Chavez but he would be less detrimental to the US than what Chavez was. What Trump and Chavez have in common is a deep narcissistic disorder. But each one is affected by it in a different manner.  Trump just wants to be president and have is face and hair carved into some mountain. Chavez wanted to change the world for his glory. I have no doubt that if by mistake Trump were to be elected, within 6 months enough in the GOP would unite with the Democrats to impeach him. Yes, I trust that much American Institutions.

The danger in Trump lies elsewhere, and I am not even thinking about the nuclear red button.  Trump is a demagogue who gets power form dividing society. He preys on the insecurity of people and he is dangerously gathering around him all the social resentment that exists in the US. If he were less tone deaf about latinos and blacks he would be already unstoppable the way Chavez was.  That is what they truly have in common, the capacity to unify behind their banner all the alienated sectors of society, all of those who want revenge rather than reform. Once this is achieved the damage is done, the society is fractured and healing takes decades. I know what I am talking about, I am living the consequences of it in Venezuela where the embers of chavismo are everyday more outspoken about the need to silence people like me.

What Trump is doing is try to unite behind himself the red necks, white trash, bible thumpers, creationists, chronic jobless, the envious and the frustrated, those that cannot associate their failure with their very own character flaws. For this last group Trump is particularly effective because he forgives their sins since all their troubles come from Muslims, Latinos, immigrants, etc, but never for their own errors. True, some of their problems are chronic to the US society, but not all. We need to be thankful that the US is a multiracial society and that no politician can truly unite behind himself all these groups of deep social resentment. Chavez was able to do it because Venezuela was a deeply mixed country that Chavez tried to turn into one of whites versus non white. He succeeded, until hunger came.

The Republican party had it coming. This is not anymore the party of Lincoln. Not remotely. The Jesse Helms and Southern Republicans have preached the me or you gospel and now the chicken Trump has come home to roost.  We are seeing under our own eyes how the Republican party is unraveling, how ethics are trampled everyday for the sake of expediency and a tidbit of supposed power. How easy it is to speak Benghazi instead of Wall Building!

But this post is long enough already. My only sorrow is that the US of A has been able to produce such a mediocre crop of presidential candidates. And do not let me start on people that I consider worse than Trump, like Cruz. I do like Clinton but this time I would vote for her because there is no other option. She is not free to set an agenda like she was in 2008: now she has to secure Obama inheritance whether she likes it being irrelevant. And Trump and Sanders certainly have saddled her with chains that will be heavy on her administration. At least I am certain that she is is going to be better for Venezuela and Latin America than Trump. By far since Trump at best only knows where the Miss comes from.

I did hear the Libertarian ticket formed by two ex republican governors, which indicates to me that Libertarians are trying to go mainstream now. Whatever. I liked them enough if truth be told. If I were voting I would vote for them once I am sure that Trump will not be elected. But as long as there is a chance for Trump to make it, I will be rooting for Hillary Clinton.

Meanwhile I do hope that there are enough Republicans that will do the decent thing and at least cross their straight down ballots with Hillary or the Libertarians. Guys, you screwed up with your hysterical opposition to Obama, You even helped into creating a situation where Hillary had to go more to the left than what she would naturally be. Now it is time to pay the Piper and save what can be saved of your party, enduring for penance at least 4 more years of Obama and a Supreme Court locked in Liberal mode for at least a decade and a half. But heck guys, you have only yourself to blame for that. Try at least to retain the House and then learn to negotiate for everybody's sake. You can negotiate with Hillary more than you could ever negotiate with Trump, trust me on that one. I am coming out of 17 years of Chavez, I know a Chavez when I see one, even with a red wig. Narcissistic personalities never negotiate, they just gain time so they can screw you later, and better.

Chiming on US primaries

Every 4 years I write something about the US election for which I get a lot of flack, in particular from the right (you know who you are). But since I am used to it and since US election does affect Venezuela, I will go ahead any way (disclaimer: already in 2008 I was with Hillary, so there; keep reading at your own risk).

To say that the primary season this time around is dismal is not saying it all. Populism of the cheapest form is assailing both parties, and in one case, for now, winning. One could make the case that the slow recovery of the 2008 crisis, the wave of economic refugees everywhere, tribal politics, etc, should not have spared the US, albeit a nation of immigrants. But in the US, at least in the case of the Republican party, they had it coming.

I lived in the US when Clinton was president, and I never liked him; though I like Hillary, being well aware of her faults. But she is a policy wonk and she understand that one cannot get everything. That Clinton cheated on her certainly helped her realize that. There is no absolute for her and that is perhaps why people perceive this as sleaze (which does not mean she is exempt from sleaze too).

I remember how the republican party vilified Clinton. Going as far as to impeach him over a peccadillo. Anyone would have lied about being found out receiving blow jobs from Monica, let's face it. He should have been impeached for bad taste rather than being a liar, which all politicians need to be. Well, with Obama it got worse, tinged with such racism and xenophobia that the mind shudders.  How can you not expect that the guy who lead the "birthing" movement and the bigot one of the fundamentalist branch would not become the "leaders" of the Republican party?

I have known long ago that Marco Rubio was not going to change anything. After all I did receive a lot of flack when I complained that Rubio decided to question evolution and grant at least equality to creationism. As a scientist this was unacceptable for me, that a well educated politician would say such thing just to court electorate was simply not acceptable. True, Rubio had been a strong advocate for freedom in Venezuela but you cannot question science, 2+2 will always give 4. If you question the most objective of discourse we have how can I trust you when you will have to discuss the mine fields of subjective policies? If you do not like science then do not mention it in your speeches. It was a sign that Rubio was a weather vane trying to please everyone. And last Tuesday he not only he failed to carry his home state, but he lost it abysmally, probably ruining his political future. Too bad, it was the type of Republican who on paper I could have voted for him, but I had given up on him before Iowa.

Trump reminds me of Chavez and Marine Le Pen in France, except that Le Pen is far more knowledgeable on polices than the first two clowns. But all are histrionic politicians and unfortunately in an age where media is ONLY seeking headlines, they have a tremendous advantage. Such politicians attract red necks, white trash, low life, uneducated, low self esteem folks. And the ones with education that tag along do so because they know that they will be cashing in big time if their man/woman makes it to the top. such leaders have a very low follow up talent, always looking toward the next show they can lead. And thus they can only be bad managers of the res publicae.

The problem here is that the last anti Trump alternative, Ted Cruz, actually scares me more than Trump. First, his way of speaking, the way he unfolds his arguments is supremely irritating for me, rings truly false. That holier than thou is just unacceptable in a politician and, believe it or not, also reminds me of Chavez if he had gone to the UCAB in Venezuela for his college degree instead of the barracks. Ted Cruz love of the constitution as his, as HIS interpretation, makes him a plain reactionary, not a conservative.

Fortunately for us I think that any one of Trump or Cruz would be defeated by Hillary because neither one is really able to go beyond the White Male electorate. The Republican party has not learnt from its 2008 and 2012 failures. And that is pathetically shown again in the looming Supreme Court battle. That the republican leader McConnell is so willing to trample the constitution just because Obama has only 10 more months to serve is not only a confession of his bigotry and personal hate towards Obama but also of his rigid stupidity and intolerance. After all, he has the mean to not only delay, and delay, the process of confirmation but after all in the end the Senate could vote no. There is a Republican majority last time I checked. No? If this is one of the main leader of the GOP, what can you expect from the rest?

Once upon a time there were Republican Senators I could have voted for like Monyham, or Weicker, or Sarbanes but today.........

Unfortunately Hillary Clinton is looking more and more like a lesser Evil, and it is not me that says it: even our friends at right wing conservative take no prisoners Babalublog are facing down the option of having to vote for Hillary. Her rival Sanders makes her even more electable. After all Sanders is dragging with him an independent populist base who wants all for free, chavista style. Never mind that he refuses to condemn Castro and that Venezuela human rights violations are inexistant. Well, to be fair, for these people Venezuela does not exist. Hillary had no problem dispatching Sanders at the Florida debate over a Castro question which I am sure was the reason not of her victory but of her lopsided victory. She got the Cuban voters, Rubio did not although he certainly deserved it more than Hillary. The unfairness of it all.

So there we are, as I type it is more than likely that Hillary Clinton will be elected US president even though her own personal messy affairs could play bad tricks on her once in office. But then again, even with that baggage she is the better option. She knows what the business government is all about; her tenure at State and on the Senate was not bad, and certainly better than her potential rivals; she can think and does not run her mouth like Trump who is always selling something, himself preferably.

The real problem in all of this comes from the degradation of the American Political system. How is it possible that last year the two front runners were relatives of two living ex-presidents? When the Republic starts indulging in dynastic politics you know that it is in trouble. And that is that.