Chavez Shuts Down 34 “Bourgeoisie” Radio Stations

200px-Hugo_Chavez_in_Brazil-1861250px-The_PVRVenezuelan President Hugo Chavez continues his authoritarian crackdown in Venezuela with the closure of 34 radio stations for alleged violations of government regulations. Despite the reluctance of some liberals to denounce an obvious dictator in the making, Chavez continues to consolidate power and punish critics — particularly in attacks on the free press.

Media groups have denounced the move by the government as an obvious crackdown on critics of the Chavez, who has previously threatened to shutdown television, radio, and print operations that do not adhere to government dictates.

Chavez offered a curious defense: “We haven’t closed any radio stations, we’ve applied the law. We’ve recovered a bunch of stations that were outside the law, that now belong to the people and not the bourgeoisie.”

For the next attack on the free press, Chavez may find this clip of “You, Me and the Bourgeoisie” to show the other side of the issue:

For the full story, click here.

61 thoughts on “Chavez Shuts Down 34 “Bourgeoisie” Radio Stations”

  1. Kristie,
    My links are on the way but the post is “awaiting moderation”
    due to the number of links within it.


    Kristie Mansfield,
    Here are 5 links from different sources, some pro, others con, make your own judgments.

    “Mike, Cuba would be so much better off it we didn’t harbor and train terrorists, and then impose such horrible embargoes. Fidel has nothing on the ability of US policies to inflict pain. He is at least helping the socialist movements take hold in SA against the most entrenched neoliberal undemocratic policies we foster around the world. Funny these fascists have no fear of Nazi like totalitarian genocidal governments, but left leaning governments that want to raise the minimum wage to 60 cents per hour (Honduras) are viewed as a existential threat.”

    Kristie, to me here’s the problem from a 60’s radical, who keeps the faith 40 years later. I’ve actually known people from the entire spectrum of socialism, marxism and communism.
    I was involved with them from 1967 through 1976 in arguably the most radical labor union in the country. As a good looking (back in the day), fiery orator I was being recruited by all factions and I rejected them all, though with better opinion of some than others. The problem wasn’t the dogma, because that just represented a strategy, the problem was the leadership, who were little different from the right wingers and the fascists I despised. As I previously said about the Russian Revolution it was a good thing co opted by a crazy
    psychotic, Stalin.

    Castro, holding power for 50 years is indicative of an egotist rather than a hero reformer. To me Chavez appears to be an egotist of the same mold. The sad thing is that the people of Venezuela need relief from the oppression they have experienced. I’m not sure that Chavez is the type of person to let his ego be subsumed to the needs of the people.

    As someone who I believe is still a radical my beliefs are easy to sum up:

    All people have the right to more than adequate food, shelter,
    health care and free education. They also need to have the rights to personal freedom and to the ability to choose and un-choose their leaders. The inequality of wealth should be greatly moderated, but personal ownership of property should be protected. How this is accomplished socio-economically to me is open to pragmatic decision making. My sense is that the evil and oppression in this world reflects the actions of individuals with lust for power and those who would slavishly follow them to their own detriment.

  3. Buddha Is Laughing 1, August 6, 2009 at 8:06 am

    Here’s a little professional advice for you too, Patty . . .

    You’d best be served moving forward by steering clear of me. Every time you mention me, I will make you look like more of an ass than you do by yourself, Princess.

    Are you threatening me????????

    I hadn’t seen these posts before…


    I get it! You are obsessed with me. I’m the woman you can never have.

    You’re like a second-grader pulling my pig tails and dipping them in ‘ink wells'(before my time, btw)…

    You are absolutely pathetic! ;p

    Grow UP!

  4. Mike, please provide some links to back up your claims that Chavez wants to rule for life. .. please..

  5. Sorry Budda, I don’t know the history, and don’t want to know. It’s not an attack on you, but an zttack on the lack of civility. It’s soooo childish.

  6. Buddha Is Laughing..
    Blah Blah Blah,
    I am not interested in the slightest in your ridiculous ego driven pot shots at each other on this blog.

    These arguments hijack Professor Turley’s Blog and you all are essentially are ruining it. You ought to apologize to him for your childish attacks on one another. It annoys me to have to scroll past the garbage in order to read the comments that pertain to the original post.

    Mike, Cuba would be so much better off it we didn’t harbor and train terrorists, and then impose such horrible embargoes. Fidel has nothing on the ability of US policies to inflict pain. He is at least helping the socialist movements take hold in SA against the most entrenched neoliberal undemocratic policies we foster around the world. Funny these fascists have no fear of Nazi like totalitarian genocidal governments, but left leaning governments that want to raise the minimum wage to 60 cents per hour (Honduras) are viewed as a existential threat.
    Check out the situation in Oaxaca Mexico on

  7. You may find the book “Havana Nocturne” by T.J. English to be of interest on the subject of Castro. A good read.

  8. Kristie Mansfield,
    There is much that you say about Venezuela and the situation there that I agree with. The history of that country has been the poor people getting screwed by an oligarchy financed by American Corporatists. It was formerly the private reservation of the Rockefeller Family’s Standard Oil Corporation. Besides that US intervention in the form of coups was a continual happening through the years as reformers tried to redistribute the wealth. I was thrilled initially by Chavez coming into power and I was happy with the reforms he began instituting to make life for all the people better.

    However, I also wept when Fidel marched into Havana, knowing that a vicious dictator Batista had been overthrown. It is now fifty years later and Fidel and Raul retain power. While Cuba is undoubtedly better off under the Castro’s fifty years is far too long for any person to remain in power and reflects a leader’s egotism that is just as destructive from the left as well as from the right. My disenchantment with Chavez began directly after he wanted himself installed for life. That is the tip off, that despite his good intentions, it is all about him and he uses the “people” as a guiding rationalization for his own will to power.

    A great leader not only ensures a humane caring society, but also erects governmental structures that contemplate their
    no longer being in power. A leader can be an egotist and/or sociopath and still hold beliefs I agree with. The fact is that her/his egotism and/or sociopathy will destroy any good accomplished and in fact make it easier for the forces of repression to return, rather than instituting true progressive reform.

    The Russian Revolution was a necessary reaction to the disgusting reign of the Czars and Aristocracy. However, it became just as oppressive when Stalin, a psychopath came to power. The Chinese Revolution also was needed, but Mao’s egotism caused it to go off track and today we have the ridiculous notion of a country supposedly led by a Communist
    Party, that is probably the most Fascist on earth. Sadly for Venezuela I suspect Chavez is yet another sociopath, coming from the left rather than the right and in the end the people will still be screwed.

  9. Kristie,

    Aside from injecting yourself into something that’s none of your business, not a bad comment. The lesson so many fail to learn is that the best way to avoid trouble is not to be there when it starts. You don’t know the history. You don’t know the players. The only person making editorial rules around here is the Prof and I do as he says. If he has a problem with how I defend myself (or attack for that matter), the Prof historically has had no problem telling me about it. He has done so before (more than once) and I comply with his wishes (always). This is HIS playground. Not mine. Not Patty’s. And not yours. JT makes the rules. End of line. As a courtesy, I do as most of the other regulars ask much of the time as well. That courtesy, however, is earned.

    The general rule is if you don’t like any of the posts here (by anyone), you are free not to read them. It’s well established in these parts that the unwritten corollary to the First Amendment is the the Right to Ignore. You are also free to jump right in. That is not always the best plan of action though.

    This is a running feud you want no part of. I’m neither offended nor on the attack because of your comment. I tell you this for everyone’s mutual benefit. There is no ulterior motive other than avoidance of escalation.

    If the feud bothers you, skip right on by those posts but you have as much chance of stopping it as I do of figuring out how to secrete gold from my pores. Detente has been attempted more than once but one party is really really bad about breaking said detente. I tell you this not to sway you or anything like that, but perhaps to give you insight as to why JT has not taken a more direct intervention in the feud. I don’t think I’m speaking out of turn when I say I think he’d prefer we as regulars work this out amongst ourselves, but I don’t think he expects me to sit idly by and be perpetually attacked without giving response either. One, because that’s fair, and two, because he knows me better than that by now. All the more reason to not jump on this bandwagon.

    Other than that? The bulk of your post shows thoughtfulness and good logic. Qualities always appreciated around here even when you find disagreement. Good show. Seriously. Keep posting.

  10. Sorry the most recent US backed coup took place in Honduras against President Zelaya, not in Nicaragua.. Not that we haven’t overthrown their government before.

  11. Aside from these petty distractions and narcissistic egos on display and back to the topic, The State Dept. does it’s best to put a bad spin on Chavez in support of the monied class, just as they have chosen to support the 8 oligarch’s who have completed a coup in Nicaragua.
    Usually the posts on this blog are more thoughtful but in this case you have bought into the propaganda hook, line, and sinker. Just as our own elites, the insurance companies are paying to spread the crazy rumors about “death panels”, exterminating old people, etc.. the same kind of ads are bombarding the citizens of these countries and it’s the captured media companies that Chavez is throttling. It’s certainly not free media that he’s shutting down.
    take a look…

    These poverty stricken people finally have medical care from cuban trained doctors and basic food kits are available for a small stipend for those that can’t afford better and those that have gone hungry in the past. His constituency loves him and for good reason. It’s about time that we stopped medelling and overthrowing democratically elected leaders that don’t cowtow to washington or multinational corporations.
    Long live Chavez, democracy and the bolivian revolution!!!

  12. Here’s a little professional advice for you too, Patty . . .

    You’d best be served moving forward by steering clear of me. Every time you mention me, I will make you look like more of an ass than you do by yourself, Princess.

    Is that plain enough language to get through your booze addled brain?

  13. I know you ‘don’t care what I think’, but a little professional advice -give it up, Buddha, that stuff will kill ya!

  14. Yeah, you are a cow, but what’s your point other than Scotch isn’t just for breakfast any more?

  15. Patty, it’s fortunate I don’t care what you think then, isn’t it?

    You’re the one who invoked me.

    You should have figured out by now my problem by now. I most certainly do have a problem. It isn’t with women. It’s with jackasses of either sex. But apparently that is just beyond your grasp, Queen Bee. Bring me up and I’ll be glad to call you out on your bullshit, dearie.

    But let’s be perfectly clear.

    I have no problem with women in general.

    I converse with, disagree with, agree with and interact with all the other female posters here on a regular basis and we have no problems.

    Your nemesis and I disagreed strongly just recently and yet we are still civil to one another.

    The only time I have a problem is when you open your pie hole to bring me up in some negative context because I apparently wasn’t quick enough to kiss up to Your Highness when you went nuclear on Jill.

    I repeat, I have not one standing irrational conflict with any female poster other than you, Patty.

    Just you.

    One can be a funny number statistically speaking. It can be insignificant or it can tell you everything. But I look around to see if I am being attacked and set upon by all the women I have wronged and I count only . . . one.

    Just you.

    The math is pointing to the error being on your side of the equation as being the causal root. And it’s not because of your reproductive hardware either, honey. Unless you count as faulty hardware a brain that would pick me of all people to flame on and now as a wise time to execute such a maneuver. You cannot possibly hope to win. Yeah, yeah, we all know YOU think you can. History predicts a different result. Out of respect for JT’s wishes, I’m not going to put on the war face just for a repeat lesson or to satisfy your masochism.

    But I will call bullshit when you want to make statements like that, Patty. Since you have nothing nice to say, you should accord me the same respect I do you and simply not mention my name. I have not mentioned you once since our falling out. You brought ME up. You are the provocateur here. Plain and simple. Here is your chance, once again, to learn the lesson that the best way to avoid trouble is not to be there when it starts.

    In summary,

    Women = No Problem; Men = No Problem; Jackasses = Huge Problem; Being a member of sets W & M are mutually exclusive; Being a member of either W or M & J are not mutually exclusive. Draw a Venn if you need clarification.

  16. AY,
    There was nothing directed at you at all. Sociopaths by the way are consistently ingratiating as people, that’s why they are so dangerous and I don’t know enough about you to say your are “Borderline,” but I highly doubt it. As for your driving proclivities with reading while you drive, I can only hope that is one straight, lonely stretch of road you’re driving on.

  17. Mike Spindell 1, August 4, 2009 at 11:31 am

    . . . . “I pride myself on keeping my mind open and ready to evolve based on further data. In your case I didn’t and that was my loss.”

    A(bjectly) Y(ours)


    Not a problem. What is nice is that I read most of the things on my cell. When I see it is a birther issue, skip, skip and a lot of skipping lately. I probably should not admit it but I do this when I am driving. When I a going to town it is about 20 miles before I see anything. I will go one further and say that I used to read the Newspaper or work cross word puzzles, while driving. When i would go to town at that time it was about 70 miles of nothing but road and nothing else.

    I generally hold no grudges and nor do I try and intentionally inflame (anymore) unless I am cornered.

    I was reading with amusement and interest yours and Buddhas dialogue about AS, BPD and the other one. If I was paranoid I might have though you were directing this at me. Since I am a social person walking on a narrower path. I just knew you all were stating that I was a sociopath. Oh well better me than them.

    An Interesting number I was given was the number to the Psychiatry Hotline. I think you need to call this, you will see my brand of humor first hand. Please acknowledge that it is long distance and at the end they try and get you to purchase ring tones. Ok here it is: (413) 497 0025. I would like your comments on this.

  18. Mind that Bird is a name I used for Political Statements. Computer rebooted and I guess I outed myself. Oops or is that Opps which started the starlet of the Turlee Blawg to come out and shine so well yesterday.

  19. Patty C 1, August 4, 2009 at 1:48 pm

    Patty C say: Thanks Mike S and mespo, I appreciate your support.

    I say: Thank you as well.

    Patty C. says: “AND I know that AY despises medical doctors from his comments, as well.”

    I say: This is not true unless they are all of your kind. Then it would be a true statement and therefore it is real easy to see why.

    That is all. Go insult the Inuits, they may speak your language, then again, you may have already burned your bridges there as well. And where they live it is hard to burn bridges, but I am sure with your unequivocal kindness and good manners you would figure out a way.

Comments are closed.