(not quite Victor-y) Hugo

While some exteme people might call for a name change of Hugo Shove-azz (as in shove up his ass), he nonetheless has a brilliant speech writer. I read his Sept. 16th speech then the "devil" Sept 20th speech. While calling Bush the devil is, well, not politically correct, I think much of the speech was lost on those who expect "highlights" to be spoonfed to them.

He spent some of the main speech on declaring America (US) as imerialistic and truly that's what we exhibit. For decades the US has been viewd as the modern imperialists using economy rather than warfare to control, dominate, acquire. Appearances are important. Whereas Venezuela is less global though has a strong voice in oil prices. Some of the tangents were angst against the US.

Actually, his speech smacks of the speeches given by the US, declaring evil where "seen" and remarking countries as Axis of Evil ... truly no less inflamitory than "devil" spoken of Bush. Chavez merely chose the current President -- regardless of party or person. The US is a difficult country with whom to negotiate, Chavez made it difficult to understand the underlying point.

His domestic topics were more valuable, in that he noted still-present evil and those who escaped justice and tried to have him killed. Still others are holding him "caged" as it were. It naming them, while he is in power, shields himself more. He undoubtedly feels now safe from reprisal. In calling the biggest bully on the street a bad name, then shielding himself -- it's either a bluff or a dare. I would regard it as both.

The IN being moved somewhere else -- fine by me! Move it and the US can bow out of that bunch of money-grubbing persons calling for peace, war sanctions and troops, while denying graft and foulness within it self. There are still UN Peacekeepers extorting and buying sex from persons more especially underage children in exchange for the food that the areas are supposed to get for free.

The UN, as it is right now, can leave. Heck, put that thing in Iraq for all I care! If the UN would ever represent the values to which it calls, then -- Japan or the US would be the better choice as they've had stabler and more competent government; sorry Germany. I wouldn't push that on Britain as it would be regarded as a downgrade, like Howard Johnson's hotel instead of the Hilton Grand Resort. The UK has long been viewed as a puppet or shadow of the US, sad for them to be regarded as such -- lacking definition from the US, whereas the two nations are quite opposed on many things.

Chavez was right ... the US looks like a big bully and he wasn't the only one to call the US that. It's a darn shame that he is now going to gouge the US for oil prices because we demanded more oil ... no pay change, which we probably did. A better deal for the US is to get off the barstool and find a new energy source. We've had decades to do it!

The 70's oil embargo was a big hint to get out of oil, but we didn't do it. Kuwait again showed -- get out of oil, but we didn't do it. I say that the government make a play now and find a real energy source and we can stop trade with all of OPEC. That should be the lesson learned, not childishly banning Venuzuela, "he hurt my feelings". Just take the punch and move on. You just walk away, being not the bully, but the honorable (gaining respect through restraint).