Scott Stantis by Scott Stantis

?fh=02a2d6931b9f0647a61b0c1014e56116

Comments (21) Jump to Comments Form

  1. dtroutma

    dtroutma said, 4 months ago

    So where was Cheney’s hand during the Bush administration?

  2. Gladius

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    This is actually pretty balanced for Stantis. I know I’m waiting for more details.

  3. lalas

    lalas said, 4 months ago

    Speaking of relief (and impending outrage)… the MNSC voted 5-0 for Franken.
    http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/49520987.html

    But hey wingnuts choke on that whopping 5-0! It would have been 7-0 but the 2 recused themselves for having been on the canvasing board.

  4. oldlegodad

    oldlegodadGenius_badge said, 4 months ago

    I must have forgot to click POST COMMENT a couple of hours ago.

    To see Obama’s take(on Honduras) see Ramirez<<<

  5. Corosive Frog

    Corosive Frog said, 4 months ago

    Why is everyone so afraid of Chavez anyway? What harm can he do? Do you really think he’ll invade america? He doesn’t have the guts, the needs or the means.

    He’s more of what we call up here a ‘baveux’. He will srceam and shake his fist in the air but will never do anything because he knows he’s better at big speeches than war.

  6. oldlegodad

    oldlegodadGenius_badge said, 4 months ago

    We get more oil from him than from any other country than yours.. We don’t want your health care though. At least I don’t.

    http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=331254362316405

    Comments, Ms Frog and Dr Canuk??

  7. NoFearPup

    NoFearPupGenius_badge said, 4 months ago

    ^^Toon: Just relieve yourself…

    Obama’s Foreign Policy: Israel - strike 1, Iran - strike two, Honduras - strike 3. Yoooouu’re OUT!

  8. wittyvegan

    wittyvegan said, 4 months ago

    Democratically elected former conservative president a puppet? Check your facts!

    Just because he is supported by Chavez doesn’t mean he is a puppet.

  9. TrickyPickle

    TrickyPickle said, 4 months ago

    CF - I’m not an American, but I can tell you the US has much to fear from Chavez. Not militarily of course, but most certainly economically and idealogically. My posts have been long of late but I can expand on this if you wish.

  10. Gladius

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    Economically,
    He needs someone to buy his sludge. V. oil is low quality. He can’t afford to be picky. Despite a lot of flack to the contrary V’s economy lives or dies by the price of oil.

    I’ll leave his ideology to the assessment of the future.

  11. oldlegodad

    oldlegodadGenius_badge said, 4 months ago

    Gladius, correct. Only one US refinery set up to handle V heavy sour crude. Valero. But the are doing real well. Expanding all over the US. Of course Coneco is owned by Venezuel, all corporate profits prop up a commie.

  12. TrickyPickle

    TrickyPickle said, 4 months ago

    Economically Venezuela is tied to the price of oil, yes. But Chavez has been actively and somewhat successfully been building a South American trading bloc to compete directly against the US. Plus, he’s the fellow spearheading the drive to get Russian and Chinese investment and business into South America while discouraging such efforts from North America. If he can successfully entrench the eastern countries the US may find itself out in the cold when the emerging South American markets come to full bloom. The US is not currently doing much to hold the attention of South America despite the risks involved.

  13. Gladius

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    China is capable of doing its own hard sell. Quite of few of Mr. Chavez”s fellow leaders don’t trust him either. The real heavyweight in South American Economics is Brazil. The lack of trust Latin Americans have for the U.S. has little to do with Chavez. Our past actions are sufficient indictment.

    Also, with his great love of nationalization, Chavez has successfully discouraged foreign investment in his own nation.

  14. TrickyPickle

    TrickyPickle said, 4 months ago

    Absolutely Gladius, the US has done nothing to endear itself to S.A., but when you add Chavez to the mix with his almost constant rhetoric you’ve got a problem. Brazil is the heavyweight, but if all of it’s neighbors and markets go one way, they will lean that way as well. Yes, capitalist countris want nothing to do with nationalist Venezuela, but communist ones like China? Or dicatatorial ones like Iran? These are already building factories over there. It isn’t the man alone who is the threat. It’s the perfect storm of:

    1) Low South American regard for the US and its policies.
    2) Interest of China and the Middle East in South America.
    3) Chavez-led trading bloc can possibly become quite powerful.
    4) Weak American economy.
    5) Growing popularity of nationalism and leftist dictators in S.A.

    This is a scenario where if the cards fall right, the US stands a good chance of being cut out of South Americas markets in a meaningful way. It isn’t the case yet, but I’d think the US would want to head off that possibility. You stand little to no chance of swaying Chavez, but you can knock on the neighbors doors and make some better friends.

  15. Gladius

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    The problem with your analysis is your assumption that Chavez can form an effective trading bloc. His main influence is with countries that already have their share of economic problems. He has border disputes with his neighbors and Brazil, as the powerhouse, has no interest in allowing him to build a powerful coalition. None of the South American states are real good at playing with others over the long term. Take a look at the history of Mercosur. There was some great hopes for it at one point but it has mostly fizzled. Internationally, you might notice that it was BRIC not BRIVC.
    Also, I wouldn’t say dictators are becomming more popular. If you look at SA’s history they’re doing a heck of a lot better than they have in the past. The current governments in Chile and Peru have also been attempting to bring some justice for the crimes of past dictatorial governments. I’m not real concerned as to left or right as long as they address their countries problems.

  16. Gladius

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    When Europe makes changes to its CAP they may like it a lot more. Not that I’m defending U.S. ag policy either.
    BTW it is misleading to talk about Europe as a whole when you are talking about their popularity with other nations. I didn’t notice any other European countries being targeted by Iran, just England. There are a number of European countries that have a colonial legacy that still hasn’t been forgotten by many nations.

  17. Gladius

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    What you were talking about was how Europe is perceived. Alienation comes in many forms. Europe’s artificial barriers to agricultural goods from countries that rely on those sales is likely to be upsetting. I also notice you didn’t bother to address the colonial legacy issue.

  18. parkersinthehouse

    parkersinthehouse said, 4 months ago

    Gladius, is there anything you don’t know?

  19. Gladius

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    Quite a bit. However, you pick up a bit of everything when you teach. Depth, of course, varies from subject to subject. BTW I wasn’t avoiding the ENP issue either. I just wanted to do a bit of reading first. The following article offers a much more balanced look at the policy than the cheerful mention by sat. This is merely addressing EU policy I’m not involved in comparisons here. This is part one of three. You can find the other two easily if you remain interested.

    Sorry the link didn’t work.
    The author is Karstens and the title is “Challenges of the European Neighbourhood Policy.”

  20. TrickyPickle

    TrickyPickle said, 4 months ago

    Gladius: You perceive assumptions that I am not making. My statement said ‘possibly’. It is possible but not certain. He has border disputes with Colombia, as he supports the leftist FARC movement there, and opposes the pro-US government. Brazil will almost certainly join a trading bloc that is profitable and in its best interests, should one arise, as this is what responsible nations do. Especially if it gets to be the heavyweight at that table. I pointed out the upswing in leftist dictators because when socialists like Chavez get into power, in order to effect change quickly enough, dictatorial behaviors are often adopted. See Bolivia, and the nationalization that’s been happening there. Yes, I am aware of the region’s past history with dictators but they’d seemed to be stabilizing. Now there seems to be a resurgence of old school Bolivarian revolutionary thinking. And Chavez, who should be an irrelevant noisy airbag, instead is enjoying increasing popularity, regard and support in the region. I’m not saying he’s a clear and present danger, of course he isn’t, but I am saying you yanks need to keep an eye on him, and should probably start paying some attention to South America.

  21. Gladius

    Gladius said, 4 months ago

    Tricky,
    OK perhaps I exaggerated your possiblility. It can happen. I’m just not all that concerned about Chavez. I am interested and have been paying attention to events in the rest of SA. (BTW Chavez also has border disputes with poor Guyana.)
    The U.S. is not ignoring SA, however, I do admit Congress has not been real enthusiastic over several bilateral free trade deals. I believe that this is a mistake.
    Of course , the situation in Honduras is going to garner the most attention in Latin America for a while. It just gets worse.