Baseball Crank
Covering the Front and Back Pages of the Newspaper
February 11, 2008
POLITCS: Texas Communists For Obama

obama-che.jpg

Yup: that's Cuban Communist executioner Che Guevara hanging on the wall at an Obama campaign HQ in Texas. Apparently they were out of Himmler posters. Video here, with a hat tip to Allahpundit, who suggests some perspective.

John McCain, for one, is not taking any guff from Communists, dismissing criticism from Fidel Castro over McCain's comments about Cuban agents torturing American POWs in Vietnam:

"For me to respond to Fidel Castro, who has oppressed and repressed his people and who is one of the most brutal dictators on Earth, for me to dignify any comments he might make is certainly beneath me," he said at a press conference.

"It's a matter of record and you can ask several of the POWs who had direct contact with some, some thug that came to Hanoi with an underling assistant."

Meanwhile, Sen. Obama himself is reiterating his offer to meet with Hugo Chavez, the next-generation heir to the Che tradition of violent socialist thuggery:

Obama, in a question-and-answer with supporters, said the U.S. had neglected Latin America under George W. Bush and he said he would meet Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

He said Chavez was consolidating power, had "despotic tendencies" and was using oil money to fan anti-Americanism, "but it is not enough to say 'I oppose (Cuba's Fidel) Castro and I oppose Chavez and that's the end of it."

He said Latin America will no longer be a junior partner in its relationship with Washington, and he will travel the region to talk to leaders about human rights, political prisoners in Cuba and hemispheric trade ties.

19 years after the end of the Cold War, Obama is still playing reruns from the 1970s. But then, everything about his campaign is a rerun from the 1970s.

Posted by Baseball Crank at 6:24 PM | Politics 2008 • | War 2007-12 | Comments (34) | TrackBack (0)
Comments

Classic right wing desperation play; call the Democrat a commie. You're at least 20 years too late for this sort of nonsense. While youre at it, why dont you blog about the Keating 5 or how McCain cheated on his first wife while 'dating" his second, or about his floodgate immigration policies. I know, I know, GMOB. Rolls eyes.

Posted by: dante at February 11, 2008 7:05 PM

Classic right wing desperation play; call the Democrat a commie. You're at least 20 years too late for this sort of nonsense. While youre at it, why dont you blog about the Keating 5 or how McCain cheated on his first wife while 'dating" his second, or about his floodgate immigration policies. I know, I know, GMOB. Rolls eyes.

Posted by: billie at February 11, 2008 7:06 PM

I would have said about the same thing as "dante" (or is that "billie"?).

You know the conservatives are running scared with no place to turn when they pull out the "communist" charge.

Look, you've done a GREAT job of covering this election so far... and from a damn Mets fan no less. :-)

This post? A freaking shame - for YOU. Says alot about where you're at right now I guess.

Peace.


Posted by: Dave at February 11, 2008 7:11 PM

Wow. Touched a nerve with the lefties here, Crank.

Posted by: paul zummo at February 11, 2008 7:49 PM

Give us a break, Crank. Republican presidents have endorsed and apologized for people who make Che look like Mary Poppins. Same old right wing Republican bull-crap. Red-baiting never really goes out of style, I guess.

Posted by: steve at February 11, 2008 8:16 PM

Baseball McCarthy, umm, I mean Crank. Please, don't stoop to the ignorant adominem arguments. McCain wants to continue the worst foreign policy disaster in our history. That alone is reason enough not to vote for him.

Obama is willing to speak to others. Would you rather have another Bush in an echo chamber where no one has the stones to tell him something he doesn't want to hear?

McCain was a bit player in the Keating 5. His actions there, for anyone who takes the time to learn the facts, cannot be used against him.

Posted by: Magrooder at February 11, 2008 9:33 PM

Steve-- Thank God Maverick McCain takes this communist threat seriously, unlike the Demoncrats. They're everywhere. Without eternal vigilance, all is lost!

Actually, it's really touching to note the air of desperation cloaking the right-wingers this political season. Things are looking genuinely bleak for them, and it's easy to catch the whiff of sour defeat off the Fox airwaves and the pages of the National Review.

Posted by: Lash at February 11, 2008 9:33 PM

Baseball McCarthy, umm, I mean Crank. Please, don't stoop to the ignorant adominem arguments. McCain wants to continue the worst foreign policy disaster in our history. That alone is reason enough not to vote for him.

Obama is willing to speak to others. Would you rather have another Bush in an echo chamber where no one has the stones to tell him something he doesn't want to hear?

McCain was a bit player in the Keating 5. His actions there, for anyone who takes the time to learn the facts, cannot be used against him.

Posted by: Magrooder at February 11, 2008 9:33 PM

Thanks to the comments on this post, I am once again reminded why I loathe Democrats more than Yankees fans. Dear Dante, et al - methinks the lady doth protest too much!

Posted by: Greg Schreiber at February 11, 2008 10:20 PM

McCain took a lot of money from Keating and pressured authorities to give him a free pass. He was reprimanded for doing so. He was a bit player only if you compare him to Keating himself. And to complete the ironic circle here, McCain's hero , Reagan, supported Saddam with a ton of finances and intelligence in the early 80's as he fought Iran. "The enemy of one's enemy...."

Posted by: frank at February 11, 2008 11:01 PM

For the first time, I realize how scared of Obama the rightwingers are. Wow.

Hell, I'm not impressed by him. But Crank apparently is.

Posted by: Mike at February 12, 2008 6:22 AM

Fair amount of nonsensical sockpuppetry here, always a good sign.
Can we put the politic on hold and enjoy Clemens for a moment? If Easy Andy is backing McNamee would anyone care to handicap the odds of Rog doing time? He did this to himself. Hardin looking like one awful lawyer, has he done anything right?

Posted by: abe at February 12, 2008 7:40 AM

I suppose I should take it from here on that any and all criticisms of McCain and anyone associated with his or any other GOP campaign is a sign of stark, bed-wetting terror on the part of the Democrats? Puh-leeze. You folks are missing the point, which is how much *fun* this is.

abe - Sorry, I just....I just can't force myself to be interested in that story. I mean, I follow baseball because I like, well, baseball.

Posted by: The Crank at February 12, 2008 8:15 AM

As if we'd want "Latin America" to be anything more than a junior partner. Whatta maroon.

Posted by: mikeski at February 12, 2008 9:53 AM

Crank, let's see now.

Cheney spends lots of time with his buddy Saddam because they sent us a lot of oil. And that was OK with you.

Obama is willing to spend time with a head of state who sends us a lot of oil, but that is not OK with you.

I grant you Chavez hasn't killed or tortured as many people as Saddam did because he hasn't been around long enough. And if we had diplomatic relations with Fidel, we would have ended this stupidity, and saved thousands of lives in Cuba, who live in misery under that gangster.

Just wanted to make sure.

Posted by: Daryl Rosenblatt at February 12, 2008 11:35 AM

Please offer some examples of the "violent socialist thuggery" of Hugo Chavez(for example,his non-existent crackdown on dissent after the (US supported) attempted coup in 2002) comparable to,say,35 years of (US supported) right wing political murders in Guatemala following the (US supported) coup in 1954,or the violence and suppression of dissent by the (US supported) Pinochet in Chile after the (US supported) coup in 1973,or the organized campaign of political violence by the (US supported) Operation Condor ( conducted by a half-dozen (US supported) right wing military governments spanning the South American continent),or the political violence of (US supported) Battalion 316 in Guatemala and the (US supported) D'Aubuisson government in El Salvador in the 1980's,or the violence practiced against the Patriotic Union in Columbia in the 90's by death squads politically allied with the (US supported) right wing government.

Posted by: AnonE.Mouse at February 12, 2008 12:02 PM

that should read 'Battalion 316 in Honduras'

Posted by: AnonE.Mouse at February 12, 2008 12:05 PM

So do any of you who called Crank desperate and so forth want to actually condemn the folks here for venerating a cold-blooded murderer? Or is it more effective to just equivocate? I'm sure that Obama would have a problem with this, it's amazing that so many of you apparently don't.

Posted by: Joel B. at February 12, 2008 12:25 PM

Also, anyone who acts as though Hugo Chavez is a responsible player on the world scene (or even his own domestic scene) has serious judgement problems. The "crimes" of Bush and past presidents notwithstanding, the man is a menace to the free world, and it's dangerous to treat him otherwise.

Whaddya say we stick to the argument at hand, instead of saying "well, your guys aren't so good either." Bush isn't going to be president next year, no matter who wins this election.

Posted by: Joel B. at February 12, 2008 12:33 PM

Joel B:

Anyone who questions whether Bush committed any crimes has serious judgment problems as well. That would include yourself, since you placed "crimes" in quotations. Bush is more of a menace than Chavez will ever be. For one thing, Bush has caused the deaths of more people (in Iraq) than Chavez could ever dream possible. Bush is also squandering billions of dollars in this ridiculous war. Think about that when you pay your taxes this April.

Posted by: steve at February 12, 2008 2:11 PM

So once again, you won't address the actual issue, you'll just try to deflect it to George Bush. Seriously, what will you guys do when he's gone?

I'm not going to defend George Bush, but he's the legitimately elected president of the United States, and the US Congress has signed off on this apparently criminal war. They have the defund it, and they haven't. Guess that makes them complicit.

Here's a big difference between George Bush and Hugo Chavez: Bush will be out of power in January of next year. If Hugo gets his way, he'll be out of power once he's breathed his last breath, and not a moment sooner. The catharsis that you and so many other Americans are preparing for next year is a much, much longer way off for the Venezuelan people.

Posted by: Joel B. at February 12, 2008 3:12 PM

That is, they have the "power to" defund it.

Posted by: Joel B. at February 12, 2008 3:13 PM

People throw out this accusation of Bush's crimes all the time. So, tell us what those are.

Your task:
Tell us what crimes Bush has committed that weren't either: a) as Joel has stated "signed off" by Congress; b) deemed constitutional by the courts; or c) were not reasonably necessary to protect the country and its people.

Remember, the President is an executive. His job is not to decide whether a law is constitutional. His job is not to pass laws. His job is to execute the laws in a way that most protects the country.

But, really, Bush isn't the issue here. But you all keep wanting to make him the issue. I do wonder what you will blame your problems on once he is no longer President.

Posted by: Board at February 12, 2008 3:56 PM

Joel B. is correct.Chavez is a "menace" by American standards-he's the leader of a third world country(in the case of Venezuela,a veritable economic and social paradise before Chavez) who feels entitled to use the profits from resource extraction in his country to benefit the people of his country rather than oil company shareholders.
Hey abe,is Massengill and Coke still your drink?

Posted by: AnonE.Mouse at February 12, 2008 4:30 PM

He also feels entitled to use the profits from resource extraction in his country to support a ruthless paramilitary terrorist narco-trafficking organization that is destabilizing a neighboring legitimate democracy. That's an incredibly noble goal, as well.

How are the Venezuelan people benefiting from product shortages and rampant inflation? I lived two years in post-Soviet Russia - I saw first-hand what lies down that path. So do most other people, which is why Chavez could never achieve his goals in a truly functioning democracy.

Posted by: Joel B. at February 12, 2008 4:39 PM

Please. I expect better from this blog than fear mongering.

Posted by: Lenny Paduzka at February 12, 2008 5:40 PM

Chavez is now a devout follower of Mugabenomics, that should work well.

Posted by: abe at February 12, 2008 8:58 PM

The Board,

Actually, as President of the United States of America, his primary job is to protect the Constitution of the United States.
Do you want to debate whether he's done a good job of that?

Posted by: Robert in BA at February 12, 2008 9:42 PM

I have no problem condemning Che Guevara or Hugo Chavez. I think it's strange and sad that college kids lionize violent revolutionaries like Che, Ulrike Meinhof, etc. without any historical context.

I also think it's strange that rightwingers can't acknowledge the gross hypocrisy in throwing such a silly stone in the Cheney/Rumsfeld/Reagan glass house. Are you really that willfully ignorant?

McCain really brought the house down tonight, BTW. He literally and figuratively looks like a dead man walking. You guys have to be psyched -- reminds me of how I felt in 2004.

Posted by: Lash at February 13, 2008 1:09 AM

Robert:

He's appointed two justices who respect the actual constitution, instead of viewing it as a draft of a term paper that they're free to interpret according to their ideological fancies. I'd say that's a pretty strong statement on protecting the constitution. While I know you'll vehemently disagree, that's because we have differing views on what "protecting the constitution means."

He hasn't attempted to rewrite it to grant him indefinite rule, like your pal Hugo.

Posted by: Joel B. at February 13, 2008 11:50 AM

Joel B, I don't know if you're a lawyer, but what you wrote is typical of conservatives who don't realize that conservative justices are also guilty of deciding cases based on ideology. The Constitution is too bare-boned to rely on "strict construction" in every case.

Posted by: steve at February 13, 2008 1:50 PM

As per the link you provide to the video "The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign.".

NOT AN OFFICIAL as in Obama i no way supports Che. As in don't attack without merit. As in way to be a bullshit artist.

Posted by: V R at February 13, 2008 2:39 PM

Joel B.,

These "strict constructionists" believe money is free speech, and don't believe corporations should have their free-speech rights infringed upon.
They do, however, believe a kid with a "Bong hits for Jesus" t-shirt should have his free speech rights infringed upon (because no money is involved, perhaps?).

Strict constructionists, my ass!

BTW, Chavez didn't try to rewrite his country's constitution. He put it to a vote by the citizenship of his country. When it lost, he accepted the decision. (The ruthless bastard!)

Posted by: Robert in BA at February 13, 2008 3:05 PM

The American glass house roofs more players than Cheney/Rumsfeld/Reagan.Interference by the US in Latin America and the Caribbean extends back two centuries and is a primary reason why our neighbors to the south were collectively the least sympathetic of all the world's citizens to the attacks of 9/11.
FARC has existed for 50 years and is not reliant on Chavez for material support.While the drug business in South and Central America is not the exclusive domain of any political ideology,it has historically been facilitated by right wing governments and militaries allied with and in many instances trained and financed by the US.While it's convenient to propagandize FARC as narco-traffickers,their primary connection to the drug trade is through the taxes they levy to operate in areas under their influence,similar to the Taliban in Afghanistan(as opposed to our allies,the Northern Alliance,who play a more active role in the business,as did our allies the contras in Nicaragua, as did our allies in Southeast Asia's Golden Triangle during the Vietnam War and as did our allies the Sicilian and Corsican mobs during and after WWII-much of the history of the CIA can be understood by familiarizing oneself with the heroin and cocaine business).
While technically true that Columbia is a democracy,most democracies don't function by murdering tens of thousands of the political opposition,as occurred in Columbia in the 1990's when right-wing paramilitaries closely allied with the government and military(which,of course,receives generous amounts of American assistance)essentially exterminated the Patriotic Union.
Coincidentally,Joel,I spent some time in Venezuela,pre-Chavez.I can attest that the poor there (which means most Venezuelans) suffered every bit as much as the post-Soviet Russians.Health care and education were virtually non-existent for the lower classes,a condition Chavez is attempting to rectify(not only in Venezuela,but throughout the continent) using the nationalization of oil revenue.The villainization of Chavez in North America(as exemplified by deep-thinkers like abe who offer soundbites like "Mugabenomics"-btw,abe,something smells like fish) is primarily due to the fact that he offers an alternative to the neo-liberal economic policies that has left much of South America in debt and ruin.
Like Robert wrote,the changes Chavez attempted to make to the Venezuelan constitution were put to a popular referendum,unlike in this country where an end-run is made around the Consitution to create a 'unitary executive' with the use of signing statements.Like all of the national elections during Chavez' tenure (and unlike elections in this country),international observers were present,foreign money (mostly American) supported the opposition,and the winner actually received the most votes.

Posted by: AnonE.Mouse at February 13, 2008 7:42 PM
Site Meter 250wde_2004WeblogAwards_BestSports.jpg