Venezuelian Aggressor Only Changes 10% Of The Constitution!

[Arrian]

I don't hold your predictions in high regard.

Likewise.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Only his political enemies made those claims.

Or people concerned about Democracy. There is a big reason why his court packing scheme didn't work. His own party was appauled at the behavior.

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Chavez is making drastic changes. It's his plan. Why would you want someone else to take over?

Because that would actually be democratic and in keeping with their constitution? If Chavez is so great and doing so many things that so many people love, surely someone molded in his image (one of his top ministers, perhaps?) would have no trouble winning an election after his term is up.

Though I realize this is all a pointless argument with you. You've made it pretty clear that you favor forced communism that everyone will eventually learn to love - or be killed, whichever is more expedient for communists.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious

Only his political enemies made those claims.

Wrong. His attempt at court packing was opposed by his own party.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious

2 reasons

1) Great Depression
2) WWII

Ah, so as long as there is some sort of crisis, one can justify staying in power forever. Think about that for a little bit!

The USA's direct involvement in WWII didn't start for us until FDR's 3rd term. He could have served two, having brought about the New Deal, and left WWII for the next guy.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
the present ven constitution will Chavez to stay till 2012, which would give him a longer time in office than FDR had. So can we leave FDR out of it? Do you think FDR should have stayed in office for 20 years?

I don't think putting a limit on how long a leader should hold office in a crisis is a smart thing. FDR served the proper time in my opinion. Whether or not Chavez should serve more time depends on the situation in 2012.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


Wrong. His attempt at court packing was opposed by his own party.

-Arrian

Some in his own party.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Arrian
Ah, so as long as there is some sort of crisis, one can justify staying in power forever. Think about that for a little bit!

War on Terror

Bush should be able to run again!

[Arrian]

I don't think putting a limit on how long a leader should hold office in a crisis is a smart thing.

What crisis, exactly, is Venezuela going through right now?

Are they at war? No.
Are they in the midst of a terrible depression? No - they're not a rich country, to be sure, but according to you, because of Chavez, things are going great!

The trouble with the concept of sticking with a leader through a crisis is that depending on how you define a crisis, countries are always facing them. Or they can be cooked up pretty easily.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Some in his own party.

Most of his own party... including his own Vice President.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Kidicious
2 reasons

1) Great Depression
2) WWII

1) 9/11
2) changed everything.

GWB FTW!!!

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


War on Terror

Bush should be able to run again!

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


So why this?


"The removal of term limits for Chavez -- the heart of his proposal -- is to be accompanied by measures preventing elected governors and mayors from staying in power indefinitely, according to versions of the project leaked in recent weeks."

What is the quote from?

[Arrian]

The newspaper article in the first post of this thread.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


Ah, so as long as there is some sort of crisis, one can justify staying in power forever. Think about that for a little bit!

The USA's direct involvement in WWII didn't start for us until FDR's 3rd term. He could have served two, having brought about the New Deal, and left WWII for the next guy.

-Arrian

Excuss me mister history but WWII started in FDRs second term.

And it's not enough just to bring the new deal. A new president would have and did make changes. In 1939 it was not appearant at all that we were not in crisis any longer.