Venezuelan official chastises U.S. media ahead of referendum; embassy offers insight

The big surprise from official releases is that more than 25,000 Venezuelans in the U.S. can vote on that referendum. The non-surprise is that the Venezuelan government has a low opinion of the U.S.

Image of flag of Venezuela from CIA Fact Book online.(Washington, D.C.)— The government of Venezuela is angry at American media, mounting an effort to communicate information about the Feb. 15 referendum to amend that country’s constitution. The referendum if successful will enable elected officials to serve beyond the terms currently set. The official release from the embassy in Washington offers complete instructions for voting and the embassy issued a release explaining all aspects of the voting procedure. “On February 15th every Venezuelan citizen inscribed into the electoral registry can exercise his or her right to vote; in the United States, 25, 318 Venezuelans will be able to exercise this right. The referendum is about a proposal, introduced by the National Assembly of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, to amend the Constitution. The proposal would modify 5 articles of the Constitution to allow every popularly elected official to run for that same office again.” There’s a fact sheet available at the embassy website.

There will, as in the U.S., be poll watchers. Perhaps as an answer to media critics, the release said, “As of Thursday, February 12th, 98 representatives from international organizations and electoral bodies, as well as other figures, are in the country to accompany the referendum on February 15th. American citizens are among these representatives. According to the Venezuelan National Electoral Council (CNE), on Sunday at 5:00 a.m. the international representatives will walk through voting centers and will be present at voting stations.”

So why is the Venezuelan government so angry at American media?

Minister of Foreign Relations condemns U.S. editorials

In response to criticism from American media—perhaps because the referendum if approved will enable President Hugo Chavez to continue serving as president—Nicolás Maduro, the minister of foreign relations, penned an editorial specifically criticizing The Washington Post and The Washington Times. Maduro wrote, “Editorials published in the Washington Post and the Washington Times on February 12th and 13th respectively show deep disdain for the Venezuelan people. Both editorials belittle Venezuelan citizens by portraying them as sheep unable to act unless motivated by bribery or punishment, incapable of judging whether or not it is in their interest to approve an amendment that would allow public officials to run for reelection for consecutive terms.”

Maduro pointed to an incident involving vandalism to a Caracas synagogue. He asserts the government is investigating and will prosecute those responsible. “The Post ignores the reality that this unfortunate incident has served to bring closer the Venezuelan government and the Jewish community.”

No scapegoat now that the Democrats control all levels of U.S. government

With President George W. Bush no longer in the White House, Maduro’s editorial shines a light on the impact of American media coverage and how that coverage shapes the image of the U.S. for the rest of the world. During Bush’s tenure, Venezuela’s president called Bush a variety of derogatory names. Chavez also roundly criticized U.S. government policies. Bush was criticized by American media from the moment he took office, so the fact that others in the world followed suit comes as no surprise. American media routinely overlooks Democratic politicos’ gaffes, instead targeting Republicans with criticism ranging from their children (Gov. Sarah Palin) to fictionalizing accounts of Sen. John McCain’s love life.

Apparently the Venezuelan government plans to communicate more directly with American media and bloggers. The two communications in this morning’s inbox are the first The US Report has received directly from Venezuelan officials.

Venezuela still critical of U.S.

Venezuela is still no fan of the U.S. however. Maduro concluded with harsh words about the U.S. marketplace and system of government as he wound up his criticism of the newspapers for their anti-Venezuelan editorials. “This, however, is nothing more than the continuation of a very real campaign propagated against a government that represents an alternative to the backwardness brought about by the savage capitalism that is beginning to show its true rottenness. It is a campaign designed to discredit the good example of the achievements made by the Bolivarian Revolution in the last ten years, in a peaceful and democratic manner.”

A New York Times editorial published on Friday said Venezuelans, “[j]ust more than a year ago rejected his bid to eliminate the term limits that are blocking his continued rule.” The editorial also said of Chavez, “He has since turned into a standard-issue autocrat — hoarding power, stifling dissent, spending the nation’s oil wealth on political support.” The paper took a ‘no’ position on the referendum.

Those last words in the NYT editorial can also be applied to the current U.S. Congress. Simply substitute the words “taxpayers’ wealth” for “oil wealth.” This begs the question of whether there is any substantial difference at all in the Reid-Pelosi chokehold here in America and Chavez in Venezuela. I doubt you’ll ever see an editorial in pro-Democratic media like the NYT and The Washington Post criticizing our current Congress. After all, tax dodgers are high profile in both Congress and in the new cabinet and establishment U.S. media gave them a complete pass.

Therein may lie the frustration for other countries as well as for American taxpayers when it comes to establishment media. Hypocrisy is a hard cross to bear even if you were a great American newspaper brand in the past.
____________________________

Note: The US Report welcomes news and opinion from other countries. You must include full contact information and state the text is for publication.

Update on Monday, February 16, 2009 at 10:56AM by Kay B. Day, Editor

Apparently the referendum passed by a wide majority. Yahoo News has a story about the results.