So I have been reading a lot about Hugo Chavez giving Obama a book as a gift. But it seems there was a much more valuable gift Chavez gave Obama: an island in New Jersey:

(map from the South Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance)

From BBC News:

Petty Island, an uninhabited island some 528 acres (214 ha) in size, is situated in the Delaware River in the state of New Jersey.

It was bought by Venezuela's state-run energy company, PDVS, in 1990...

At the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago, President Chavez presented Barack Obama with a gift of a book: The Open Veins of Latin America by Eduardo Galeano.

The book is widely considered the bible of the Latin American left.

But the BBC's Will Grant, in Caracas, says Mr Chavez also gave Mr Obama something much bigger: Petty Island.

The Venezuelan government has used it for fuel storage and refinement since 1990...

Mr Chavez announced that the island would return to the US for environmental conservation projects.
 more this way»

The Reagan doctrine for US-Latin American relations has died.

With the democratic electoral win for the FMLN in El Salvador, the Latin American left dominates politics throughout Central and South America. The FMLN in El Salvador. The Sandinistas in Nicaragua. The South American left wing governments in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay and other nations.

Back in the 1980's, a dominant part of Reagan's foreign policy was to support right wing dictators and right wing death squads in Latin America to topple existing left wing governments (e.g. Nicaragua) or to prevent a left wing take over (e.g. El Salvador). The atrocities Reagan was willing to accept from his proxies were disgusting. The rape and murder of nuns. The destruction of entire villages. Torture and terrorism worse than anything Saddam Hussein ever perpetrated. And remember that Reagan was even willing to deal with Iran in order to keep weapons flowing to his brutal anti-communist proxy armies.
 more this way»

Most of what Americans hear about Venezuela these days is all negative, trying to portray its president, Hugo Chavez, as some kind of dictator. The truth is, Hugo Chavez is pretty nutso, clearly something of a demagogue, but he also is a.) the fairly elected President of Venezuela, b.) very popular in Venezuela and much of Latin America, c.) has given in when he lost electoral battles (unlike a dictator), and d.) is probably better for the average Venezuelan than any other Venezuelan President, though that may not be such high praise.
 more this way»

View Larger Map

Geezus.

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo found out about this gaffe via El País, Spain's "paper of record".

John McCain, is being interviewed by a journalist with an obvious Castillian accent. She asks him a series of questions about his future policies towards Latin America (which was the focus of the press conference).

Then in the last 30-40 seconds of the clip she asks him if he's looking forward to meeting with Jorge Zapatero, the prime minister of Spain. This is a somewhat tricky diplomatic question. Since winning the elections more than a year ago, Zapatero has not had a chance to visit the White House, nor has George Bush gone to Spain for an official meeting.

What does McCain do? Give his standard talking point about meeting with friendly countries only and standing tough against rogue and hostile countries.

The reporter re-frases the question 3 more times, with the last one being, "what about Europe? Spain is in Europe". McCain sticks to the talking about as if Spain were a Latin American threat to the United States.

Here's the audio clip :

 more this way»

Hugo Chavez has become one of those controversial figures that brings out strong reactions in many. Personally I have considered him a good thing for Venezuela but have been concerned by his choice of friends, some of his rhetoric, and what could be interpreted as an excessive hunger for power.

First of all, no one has been able to convince me that he is a dictator. Every election in Venezuela under Hugo Chavez has been democratic and fair according to all impartial observers. What ever the controversy over Chavez and his policies, it has all been done within the law and within a democratic system. This alone belies the claims that he is a dictator.

Second, there is no question that Venezuela, like much of South and Central America, needs to address the poverty and sharp economic divisions it suffers. Hugo Chavez is doing that. Needless to say, this pisses off many wealthy people around the world who hate to see poor people get uppity. But many of his programs are simply the right thing to do, the fair thing to do and the smart thing to do for the stability of his nation. Sharp economic divisions and high poverty lead to instability.

Simply put, Hugo Chavez is the democratically elected leader of Venezuela and has been overall good for Venezuela.

But...

As with Ecuador and Bolivia, my overall sympathy for left wing leaders who are helping correct economic disparities is a bit hindered by two things. First, I am not fundamentally a socialist and I know that if the socialist reforms of these leaders go too far, the economies of their nations could be ruined. Second, some of their rhetoric DOES make me wonder if their desire for power could lead to dictatorship. Understand that on this second front I worry about the USA under Bush as well. Excessive concentration of power in the hands of one person is not good.
 more this way»

Location

Venezuela is one of Bush's favorite bugbears. I am surprised we haven't heard some form of domino theory focused on Venezuela and Bolivia as the new Vietnam and Laos in the war against Communism.

Hugo Chavez is quite intentionally riding a wave of anti-Bush/anti-American sentiment to achieve political power. He may well fit the definition of Demagogue as the Greeks originally envisioned it. I have heard mixed things about him regarding Jews and don't know where the truth lies. Certainly his tendency to favor anyone who is anti-American, Iran's theocracy included, seems as misguided as the Republican policy of supporting Afghan extremists, including people who became part of al-Qaeda, against the Soviets, Saddam Hussein against Iran, and any petty dictator who gives us lip service against anyone we don't like.

But there are things we don't hear about Venezuela that tell a different story from what Bush tells us.

Venezuela has had several elections, including a no-confidence vote against Chavez, in Venezuela since Chavez won the presidency. Chavez and his supporters have been gaining in support as time goes by and each and every election has been declared fair by every respectable international agency that has monitored them. I have heard no credible claims of election fraud.

I have heard some accusations of censorship and met a man who seems to feel he is a victim of such censorship. I cannot judge that. But it is clear that Venezuela does have an active opposition that seems to operate without the kind of oppression we see in places like Colombia or in Chile under Pinochet or Peru under Fujimori, people we LIKED and supported. Venezuela seems at least as democratic and free as the majority of nations that America has actively supported.
 more this way»