quote:

I believe there is no doubt that there is good reason for the Venezuelan people to distrust America and American business but times have changed and we could form a partnership that would benefit both countries based on mutual respect if only given the chance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG

Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG

Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

quote:

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Just imagine the possibilities for prosperity in Venezuela if they were led by a President that put the well-being of the people ahead of personal grudges and fanatical political stances that have often isolated them on the world stage.

I hope when he dies there is an orderly democratic transfer of government.

I believe there is no doubt that there is good reason for the Venezuelan people to distrust America and American business but times have changed and we could form a partnership that would benefit both countries based on mutual respect if only given the chance.

It can be the time for forgiveness and cautious optimism about our future rather than the bitterness of the past.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG

Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG
Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

This is what???the umpteenth time you have been told he was appointed and not elected?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG

Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

This is what???the umpteenth time you have been told he was appointed and not elected?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG
Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

This is what???the umpteenth time you have been told he was appointed and not elected?

He wasn't merely appointed as if randomly or by magic. He was appointed because the Nazi party got (by a very considerable margin) the largest number of votes 44% in fact - quite close to required 50% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_March_1933#Results

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG

Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

This is what???the umpteenth time you have been told he was appointed and not elected?

Actually, it's the first time Ive ever mentioned him, much less gotten a reply.

Sheesh, if I've told you once, I've told you a Million times not to exaggerate.[8D]

quote:

Did you forget Bush?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG

Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

This is what???the umpteenth time you have been told he was appointed and not elected?

Actually, it's the first time Ive ever mentioned him, much less gotten a reply.

Sheesh, if I've told you once, I've told you a Million times not to exaggerate.[8D]

Actually I believe it is one million five hundred ten thousand and 50th. time...
my bad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG
Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

This is what???the umpteenth time you have been told he was appointed and not elected?

He wasn't merely appointed as if randomly or by magic. He was appointed because the Nazi party got (by a very considerable margin) the largest number of votes 44% in fact - quite close to required 50% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_March_1933#Results

Your cite says 2/3 majority not 50 percent...
More half truths to support whole lies?

quote:

Despite achieving a much better result than in the disappointing November 1932 election, the Nazis did not do as well as Hitler had hoped. Despite massive violence and intimidation, the Nazis won 43.9% of the vote, rather than the majority that he had expected. Therefore, he was forced to maintain his coalition with the national conservative German National People's Party (DNVP) to control a majority of seats. The Communists forfeited about a fourth of their votes, while the Social Democrats suffered only moderate losses.

In addition to this, Hitler needed a two-thirds majority to pass the Enabling Act (a constitutional amendment which allowed him to pass laws without consulting the Reichstag parliament), which he gained by persuading the Catholic Centre Party to vote with him with regard to the Reichskonkordat.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: YSG
Chavez, a dictator? You do realize he is democratically elected, yes? In elections certified as free by the Carter Center, no less. No, what you're all mad about is that social democracy is actually working. During Chavez's administration, the unemployment rate has been cut in half, literacy and education among the people have skyrocketed, and living standards have improved greatly. Doesnt sound so horrible to me.

Actually, democratically elected dictators aren't unheard of. A certain Austrian guy with a cheesy 'stache comes to mind.

This is what???the umpteenth time you have been told he was appointed and not elected?

He wasn't merely appointed as if randomly or by magic. He was appointed because the Nazi party got (by a very considerable margin) the largest number of votes 44% in fact - quite close to required 50% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_March_1933#Results

Your cite says 2/3 majority not 50 percent...
More half truths to support whole lies?

quote:

I provided an accessible source to back up the assertion so as usual it is absurd to then claim I am lying. In actual fact it is you who is being wilfully dishonest in this case:

quote:

Despite achieving a much better result than in the disappointing November 1932 election, the Nazis did not do as well as Hitler had hoped. Despite massive violence and intimidation, the Nazis won 43.9% of the vote, rather than the majority that he had expected. Therefore, he was forced to maintain his coalition with the national conservative German National People's Party (DNVP) to control a majority of seats.

Please note the bolded parts. Because he did not get a 2/3 majority he was forced to maintain his coalition so that he would have a 2/3 majority so that he could change the constitution.
There is no part of your cite that implies that he needed a simple majority to do anything. His party acquired seats through force and intimidation, as your cite points out,but this did not get him the chanclorship. He was appointed to that office and it has nothing to do with his having almost a simple majority of anything.
Perhaps you might avail yourself of the shirer book it goes into this in some detail.

quote:

The Communists forfeited about a fourth of their votes, while the Social Democrats suffered only moderate losses.

In addition to this, Hitler needed a two-thirds majority to pass the Enabling Act (a constitutional amendment which allowed him to pass laws without consulting the Reichstag parliament), which he gained by persuading the Catholic Centre Party to vote with him with regard to the Reichskonkordat.

quote:

Thus your claim that a two-thirds majority was required is completely wrong but whats new? 2/3 is only required to amend the constitution. He only required 50% to get in as I said.

50% of what to get into where?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
I suspect it's true and hope that there's not a bloodbath upon his passing.

Hopefully Chavez's passing will herald in a new sustainable era of democracy in Venezuela

Are you sugesting that what he replaced was better?

Where exactly in my post is such a thing even inferred, much less suggested?

quote:

It may be bordering on rudeness to suggest you make more effort to read the posts you are replying to but its still worth saying.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
I provided an accessible source to back up the assertion so as usual it is absurd to then claim I am lying. In actual fact it is you who is being wilfully dishonest in this case:

quote:

Despite achieving a much better result than in the disappointing November 1932 election, the Nazis did not do as well as Hitler had hoped. Despite massive violence and intimidation, the Nazis won 43.9% of the vote, rather than the majority that he had expected. Therefore, he was forced to maintain his coalition with the national conservative German National People's Party (DNVP) to control a majority of seats.

Please note the bolded parts. Because he did not get a 2/3 majority he was forced to maintain his coalition so that he would have a 2/3 majority so that he could change the constitution.
There is no part of your cite that implies that he needed a simple majority to do anything. His party acquired seats through force and intimidation, as your cite points out,but this did not get him the chanclorship. He was appointed to that office and it has nothing to do with his having almost a simple majority of anything.
Perhaps you might avail yourself of the shirer book it goes into this in some detail.

quote:

quote:

The Communists forfeited about a fourth of their votes, while the Social Democrats suffered only moderate losses.

In addition to this, Hitler needed a two-thirds majority to pass the Enabling Act (a constitutional amendment which allowed him to pass laws without consulting the Reichstag parliament), which he gained by persuading the Catholic Centre Party to vote with him with regard to the Reichskonkordat.

quote:

Thus your claim that a two-thirds majority was required is completely wrong but whats new? 2/3 is only required to amend the constitution. He only required 50% to get in as I said.

50% of what to get into where?

quote:

Despite massive violence and intimidation, the Nazis won 43.9% of the vote, rather than the majority that he had expected. Therefore, he was forced to maintain his coalition with the national conservative German National People's Party (DNVP) to control a majority of seats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
I suspect it's true and hope that there's not a bloodbath upon his passing.

Hopefully Chavez's passing will herald in a new sustainable era of democracy in Venezuela

Are you sugesting that what he replaced was better?

Where exactly in my post is such a thing even inferred, much less suggested?

Perhaps the part where it says "new and sustainable".
If it does not mean that he replaced good with bad then what exactly are you trying to say?

quote:

quote:

It may be bordering on rudeness to suggest you make more effort to read the posts you are replying to but its still worth saying.

Perhaps it would be bordering on an effort to comport a meaningful discussion to suggest you make more of an effort to be clear in the meaning of your posts.

quote:

Are you not familiar with the common democratic process?

quote:

Many countries like South Africa require a 2/3 majority in a given parliament to change their respective constitutions. That was the case in Germany too.

quote:

He needed 50% to take power.

quote:

No country requires more than that to go into government AFAIK but 2/3 is oft needed to change constitutions.

He appointment to chancellor was due to one thing alone, he lead the party that almost got into power on votes. All the other parties were far far far behind.