Trying to pick out any one bit of Chávez’s 2010 Paquete Navideño (a.k.a. the current storm of lame-duck session laws) as the most unconstitutional of the bunch is a little like arguing about which player was the worst out of France’s 2010 World Cup squad: you could make a strong case for every single one of them, rendering the whole exercise pointless and macabre somehow.

So, fully aware that it’s a mug’s game, I’ll go ahead and nominate the “Anti-Talanquera” Law which threatens elected members of the National Assembly with suspension and a ban on holding elected office if they buck the party line on the floor of the A.N., despite this never well pondered bit of constitutional detritus:

Artículo 201. Los diputados o diputadas son representantes del pueblo y de los Estados en su conjunto, no sujetos a mandatos ni instrucciones, sino sólo a su conciencia. Su voto en la Asamblea Nacional es personal.

Article 201. Members of the National Assembly are representatives of the people and the states as a whole, not subject to orders nor instructions other than those given by their conscience. Their vote in the National Assembly is personal.

I’m with Vinz on this one: the very act of going through the dozens of reasons why this idea is both idiotic and virulently undemocratic tends to give the entire disparate an unwarranted aura of legitimacy. Critical scrutiny is something you reserve ideas with a minimum level of coherence, which means engaging in it lends an patina of sense to any thought that receives it. The anti-talanquera law just doesn’t rise to that level.

The one bit of good news to come out of this whole, sorry, sordid, seedy mess is a bit of clarity. The 72.78% of Venezuelans who voted on December 15th, 1999 to approve the current constitution have been outrageously scammed.

Under these circumstances, invoking articles 333 and 350 is no longer a hobby for the disociado fringe. It’s just common sense now.

Caracas Chronicles is 100% reader-supported. Support independent Venezuelan journalism by making a donation.


  1. The University Law may also pull down the curtain on universities’ independence. Or, am I elitist to think that it’s not appropriate for gardeners, painters and construction workers to vote on university academic policy.


    • Sure, if the gardener was a teacher at gardening 101 he could get a vote on that one, but, as they say, “zapatero a tus zapatos”, gardeners, painters, janitors, anyone that isnt a) teacher b) student should have ZERO saying on decisions other than their contracts and direct working conditions just because it isnt their area of expertise, nor is their area of occupation (in the academic sense)

      In that twisted logic of our beloved leader, the biencuidao at the hospital’s parking has as much saying as the doctor (the guy who actually studied the human body for 6+ years) on how should he perform a surgery :p

  2. I completely agree with this post. The Chavez government has been dancing very carefully around the line of democratic legitimacy for some time. With this there is no doubt in my mind that they have finally crossed that line in a major way. When members of the AN can effectively vote out other members of the AN that they don’t like the country is at best a psuedo democracy along the lines of Iran.

    This strips the government of legitimacy, doubly so once they actually use this law. I think in a lot of people’s eyes this will legitimize a much broader range of action on the part of those who oppose the government.

    Having said that though, just because they may have the legitimate political right to do something doesn’t mean the opposition should necessarily do it (ie, invoke 350 right away). They really need to think carefully and strategize. In my mind it still might make sense to wait and see what happens with the presidential elections. That the people reading this and like minded blogs see the government as losing legitimacy is one thing but what counts for a lot more is has the government lost its democratic legitimacy in the eyes of most Venezuelans? I am not at all sure that it has.

    BTW, for someone such as myself who supports the left and at least some of the ideals that Chavez professes to hold that this is happening at this moment is very ironic. Half a continent away a leftist president who helped an awful lot of people in his country is leaving office even though he is at the height of his popularity and is way more popular than Chavez is. That clearly shows that the apologists for Chavez have it completely wrong in thinking that leftist movements are best led by one messianic meglomaniac. In my opinion Venezuela doesn’t need Chavez and his fake political party, the PSUV. It needs something like the Workers Party.

    • Although I agree with you in general. I don’t think to ‘wait and see’ what happens in the next elections is a good strategy. I’m not going to argue that dictators are not ousted with elections. In strictu sensu that may be true but that doesn’t mean we should forfeit elections or that they are useless. They’re very important events and can change – or not – dramatically the situation. They can tip the balance in any direction.

      We need to understand that you don’t defeat the dictator with an election, you first defeat the dictator and then you can finish him off with an election.

      To defeat him is necessary to get the message to every venezuelan, specially those that still support him (48% apparently). When a big enough percentage of the population gets the message (75%), the dictator will be doomed. This may happen before the election or after, if it happens after then it’s going to be harder to oust him but it will still happen. Now, what message?

      – Chavez is the worst president in Venezuelan history
      – He is not only a lousy president, but he is destroying the country
      – He will oppress the people to stay in power forever
      – He is in fact a dictator already

      There is a second part to the message:
      – There is no need for violence to oust him
      – Just pass this message to everyone

      When enough people get the message, pressure from everywhere will be too much and he will have to leave.

    • Amieres, You say :

      “He will oppress the people to stay in power forever”

      And then you say we should vote.This is contradictory.Even a rat knows that if he goes up the same alley without getting the cheese over and over again, that he must find an alternative route.

      Every time we vote we say that we believe there is a good possibility that elections will be fair, even though most of us know by now how untrue this is.At this point, to me, voting is a form of backing up Chavez’s veneer of legitimacy and nothing more.Just like in Belarus, only Europe is more bothered by the Belorussian dictatorship than by the Venezuelan one as evidenced by their sneakily slanted reporting and journalistic views.

      Most people who vote for Chavez are just followers and not leaders. Many are mentally lazy, or fearful people who are desiring to keep a job ,and/ or their precious contacts.Some are completely ignorant. If there were a massive movement of resistance ,as these psychological types tend to be blind followers,most will join in through inertia and peer pressure,and not until.

      Voting does not have the emotional impact to move these people who stubbornly and ignorantly maintain the status quo.For the masses of stubborn people who are maintaining the status quo to move it takes quite en emotional (and not intellectual) impact.

    • Firepigette, please, understand: not voting is not an option in Venezuela. We did that in 2005 and that was a disaster.
      And don’t come over again with “well, you have to mentally abstain from participating/supporting the government as Rand says in her best-seller”

      Venezuela is Venezuela. Most people will go on living, there is oil and sun and with the oil they buy rice and meat from the Chinese or the Argentines for centuries.

      Yes, elections are not only not fair but there is cheating. And yet: they still have not 1%, not 20% but they manage, one way or the other, to get up to 40-48% to vote for them. Our mission now is to move as much as we can from that part and from the 36% who did not go to vote to do so.

      And we are not doing the work as we should.

      See: 43% of Venezuelans did not go to vote. You cannot compare abstension with the US or EU as the systems are different.

      It would be just lazy if WE don’t vote. It would be lazy if we just vote and expect things will change “because the others will have to come to the conclusion themselves”.

      We do have a mission to show people.
      And by the way: most Venezuelans do not have cars. It’s a pain in the ass to move around the day of elections unless someone else helps you. We need more people to help with the transportation. I know, I know several people who courageously do that during election time: take the poor to the booths.

      Sure, Chavismo will cheat as much as it can. If we get 60%> of the vote, there is no way they can stay in power even if they try to delete 15% of the votes. No way.

    • Sorry, I meant 36% again where I wrote 43%.
      Let’s get half of that 36%. Let’s get 5% of the 48% Chavista “got” in 2010 (probably less but without actas we have no right to say it).
      Then we have 52+18+5.
      How do we do it?
      Do we expect Corina and Leopoldo to visit all the towns of Venezuela whereas no other person with “national” visibility wants to do it because they won’t move their asses more than 4 kilometers unless they become president or governor? No.
      Do we do that by just going to vote in an A or B class area and being a witness there and expecting the poorer to go to vote in some mysterious vehicle? No.
      Do we expect to do it if we do not speak more loudly about the thefts of the boliburgueses to the poor, about how they are only getting the crumbles of the biggest oil boom in Venezuela’s history? No.

    • I want to commend you, OW, for your coherence. I know it means squat coming from someone on the “opposite side” like myself, but you have my respect.

    • “the apologists for Chavez have it completely wrong in thinking that leftist movements are best led by one messianic meglomaniac”

      Ummm, yeah. Exactly when did the scales fall off your eyes? Forgive me if I don’t applaud your change of heart, since clapping could be considered treasonous.

    • OW, what a creep. You’ve demonstrated that to reach your ends you are willing to justify even the most ridiculous of means, and, now, after your ends of supporting chavez is so obviously failing, you’re jumping ship with all the smarter rats, so you’re working at regaining respect to fool others once again, with a new end that you will use to justify any means you consider useful. What is it this time Worker’s what? Yeah, whatever. Will you ever apologize or are you going to go back to claiming it wasn’t you counting wrong, and trying to divert with regarding zeroes. Luckily, there’s evidence of your lack of honesty saved, however “coherent” you’re sounding now. Smiles from crocodiles is all you bring to mind.

  3. Let’s all face it and quit being so naive:
    The facts are overwhelming telling us “there is NOT an electoral way out of this”. We know that. Those who has an acceptable knowledge about the mentality and the records of the people ruling our country, clearly knows that is our sad reality.
    As Rocio San Miguel clearly twited days ago, quote “El mundo mira con lupa a la oposición venezolana. Se le exige respeto total a normas democráticas para ganar a quien no las tiene en cuenta”
    Then, which would be the way out ? Well, that would depend on information and classified data that perhaps is only available to very few people (unfortunately not me). Only one thing has been recurrently piercing my mind since I read it, what was twited by Diego Arria few days ago, quote “el poder solo puede ser enfrentado con poder”.

  4. Well, I am going to come up with a little idea that is not special at all but that politicians seem to ignore:

    They have to go a lot, an awful lot, to all Venezuela. And no, the ones who have to do that are not just the ones who want to become president. If we want to overcome the Middle Ages in which we are stuck for centuries, we need our “national leaders” to be now permanent on the move. You don’t do that by spending much time with CNN or BBC, as the “leaders” of failed Belarus democracy movement are doing. You do that as the Germans and the Czechs were doing. Admitedly, the German Democratic Republic and Czechoslovakia were smaller, but if I were to put a GPS locator on the ankles of the 100 top opposition politicians in Venezuela (no, I don’t believe in Caudillos but in movements, even if we do need one single leader for the presidency) you will see dots just going around single municipalities and moving to Maiquetía or Morrocoy during vacation time.

    But for some special cases (Delta, for instance) absention is higher in areas of classes C, D and E. We need to mobilize there creating groups that very clearly talk about PLURALISM and how to take Venezuela on the road to sustainable development after Chávez is out of power.

    • I once read a book by Edward Luttwak on military coups that stated that in order to be successful, a coup had to secure its objectives in the country it was attempting to seize. Likewise, a successful democratic movement has to seize the objectives in its home country in order to achieve an electoral victory. Although the opposition has succeeded in convincing most rational people abroad that Hugo Chavez is not a democrat, about half of Venezuela still votes for him and his legislators. I suspect this is because, as Kepler pointed out, the opposition politicians confine themselves to small areas. I don’t know any Chavista voters (I’m not even in Venezuela) but I suspect they vote the way they do because a.) they either hate the opposition b.) they don’t quite grasp the entirety of the disaster Chavez is creating or c.) life isn’t all that bad for them under Chavez…yet. In order to even make a dent in Chavez by 2012, the oppo is going to have to travel all over the country and exploit any amount of dissatisfaction that is present, no matter how small. That way, they may stand a chance in the coming presidential elections.

  5. JAU,

    Con todo el cariño, you’re really far out of line here. If that’s what you think, you owe it to yourself to be true to your beliefs: stop talking so much straw, throw your laptop out the window, and go get yourself some face paint. No hay nada más fácil que hacer guerrilla por internet. As it stands, it’s not your own life you’re pledging…

  6. Quico- Isn’t it ironic that citing article 350 from the constitution may now get you arrested, at least according to the new laws! I agree with you that it’s difficult to chose just one law that stands out but in a sense it seems Chavez has succeeded in making it illegal to cite the constitution (article 350) as it is against the ruling powers.

    • Overlooked as it often is, I think Art. 333 is the more significant one, actually.

      Artículo 333. Esta Constitución no perderá su vigencia si dejare de observarse por acto de fuerza o porque fuere derogada por cualquier otro medio distinto al previsto en ella.

      En tal eventualidad, todo ciudadano investido o ciudadana investida o no de autoridad, tendrá el deber de colaborar en el restablecimiento de su efectiva vigencia.

  7. Quico, siempre con todo el cariño!! you are right, I am writing confortably from outside Vzla.

    But in your post, you are citing article 333 and 350. That is almost the same thing I am saying.

    Yep, I went “a little” too far, but come on, tell me how are you going to effectively implement the 333 and the 350 without some face paint?

    When the time comes, if ever, lets meet in ccs and I will give you some face paint so you could come along too…. 😉

  8. There you go. Citing article 330 is fomenting public disorder against the current regime. Are you asking to be put on Interpols list? jajaja

  9. I have begun monitoring comments on this board due to the new Internet Censorship Law in Venezuela.

    Not doing so implies the real risk that Caracas Chronicles could be banned in Venezuela, and I will do my best to prevent that from happening.

    So any direct calls for violence will be edited. Obviously there is some leeway here, but short of monitoring and making calls on what is or isn’t acceptable, I don’t see an alternative.

    My apologies in advance. The Devil made me do it.

    • So the chavista is telling you ” jump!” and you are complying? my friend, it is naive that your attempts at complying with that law is gonna keep you out of the government’s sights…if you have a pair, let it be and at least use the fact that you are banned to your advantage, be the first, now that would be an achievement a la Jesus Melean wouldn’t you say…

      somehow that post about you regulating comments have me see that not even being out of the country allows to escape from the chavistas’ grip…how do you expect then anyone on the inside to even attempt to do anything to get rid of the “current situation”?

    • Um… I don’t see how allowing comments advocating violence and getting our asses banned in Caracas is in any way helping the cause.

    • Amigo the problem is that in the chavista lexicon the word “Violence” has been greatly expanded to infinite levels of “no me gusta” however, I did not mean to imply you should allow the terroristic type of violence seen elsewhere with bombs, guns, anarchy and what have you.

      I am trying to distinguish if you are censoring real violence or the violence as described in the chavista laws, if the latter then it is an exercise in futility, as you obviously know for the government needs no reason to shut you out. so in the end, the question remains what exactly are you editing out? I can not fathom, the mental wear and tear of having to figure out, if what everybody is writing, actually complies with the law or just common sense…

      my two lincolns in that regard…no need to be “violent” in your reply 🙂

    • one las word, getting banned, might be the ticket to a bigger audience for your blog. Simple capitalistic rules indicate that once supply is exhausted, demands soars, thus the news of you getting banned in caracas might as well drive up readership, from here and elsewhere, to see what the hoopla is all about…then you can show the world what this blog is about…

      As the saying goes, the show must go on….I doubt you getting banned will be the end of the world and perhaps you will get a fresh perspective on the suffering of millions of venezuelans who have been expropiated, jailed, inhabilitated, exiled and generally tormented by this government and experiencing that and how you deal with that might garner more admiration that any sentences written here before.


  10. Good post! Of course it is unconstitutional! And of course “they” have to argue otherwise! Party discipline from PSUV requires continual lying on demand. That is the whole point of the law.

    Can anyone point me to the actual text of the talanquera law? I share this info with a judges’ list here in Canada–after translation of course. .They need the details

    • Here’s a story that breaks down several of the provisions, but doesn’t provide the full text (the direct quotes might help you in a search for the text, however):

      By the way, small world – I remember you back when you posted at . . . before the gang of crypto-communists and apologists for authoritarianism forced you out. I always admired the stance you took on these issues, and am pleased to see that you’re working on circulating information about Venezuela in Canada and the legal profession (as of next February, I’ll be a lawyer myself).

    • So many people’s voices were ignored..people whose insight and foresight meant something while OW prattled nonsense for years, and he is not even Venezuelan.This spelled and spells trouble in my book.

      Is OW on board now? Fine….but it is the LEAST he can do, not to be considered something admirable.Admirable are those who never defended this criminal.

      It is not a matter of forgiving.That I always do.It is a matter of placing value in its proper place.

  11. just because you edit the new comments for whatever the law says, doesn’t mean all the previous posts and comments, regarding the government’s character are off limits my friend…they sit there in your website’s archives and database long forgotten, a tickinh legal time bomb…tick tick tick…

    • dcisfun,
      Are you serious? This blog is not going to change its tune. I know perfectly well that if they want to ban us, they will do so and won’t even need an excuse. But it’s perfectly reasonable to do my best to not give them a reason. That’s going to mean a little bit of subjective nudging the comments now and then.

  12. Kepler,

    Even if we get 60% of the vote, if Chavez steals 15 % we will get only 45 % and lose the elections.

    The people who vote for Chavez are not concerned with legitimacy.They are concerned with their own perceived benefits.Who among Chavistas will complain when he “wins”? We will keep on complaining and Chavez will keep on reigning.

    • Please, explain your plan. Don’t say “we”. Say who those “we” are.
      Don’t say you hate numbers. Show us, please, with some numbers, even if they are just supposition, what you really mean:
      “if we – the opposition-, X% of total population (more or less) do this and this, then…”

      Do you think you are better off if we don’t go to vote? OK, you get 40% who go to vote and the rest don’t. Then you have 2005 but worse.

      If you have not 65% participation but over 80% and there is a big difference, the cheating will become very evident and they will be lost.

      Please, Firepigette, be concrete in your answer and don’t get into “numbers lie, we need to talk about the soul”

    • I mean “they” Chavistas. Right now we have won a bit, but we cannot say we are strong in very large areas of the country. We need to have people there who obviously know there are a lot of anti-Chavistas among themselves. We need everybody to know it. For that we need to convince many more people also in THOSE areas to vote for the democratic parties and be vocal about that.

      I repeat: you don’t vote and you have the same situation as 2005. Nothing will happen, just the better-off who are oppo will leave for Miami and the rest will just stay and decide nothing more can be done.

      Please, if you give a proposal go through it all, explain the whole working. Otherwise it is just pointless because it shows you haven’t thought things through.

    • Firepigette
      I’m replying to this post and your previous one here.
      About elections and the legitimacy that our vote supposedly gives them. What gives legitimacy to Chavez is the election itself, not how many people vote. In 2005 when opposition not only abstained but actually boycotted the whole election that hardly hurt Chavez legitimacy, it’s only an asterisk when the current AN composition is mentioned.

      You know what’s really bad, to have the majority but loose because of abstaining. If Chavez wins by cheating that really hurts his legitimacy, but if he wins it boosts his legitimacy and it doesn’t matter if he won because he really has the majority or because we abstained because we were afraid or mad or angry, what matters is who gets more votes. So not voting means helping Chavez.

      Gandhian movement is the solution but to get there we don’t need a Gandhi what we need is to have a large enough majority a circumstancial 52% against 48% is not enough. Venezuelans have done marches, demonstrations, protests all over but it’s always been a polarized and polarizing situation. The more opposition demonstrated the more Chavez supporters galvanized behind him. We need to grow even more before intiating a strong push, right now the duty is to get the message to everyone. Somehow, now it should be easier than before. Now all of Chavez’ failures and abuses and demagogery are more visible. People should be easier to convince. Unfortunately now is harder to reach them because Chavez controls the telecommunications, so many different methods should be used: direct contact, fliers, graffitys, etc. Time to get creative.

  13. Me chalequeaste el post Quico.

    I have been preparing for days a post exactly on that, saying exactly what you say and I come over here and see that the post was already written…

    Oh well.

  14. At this point I think you may invoke the whole Constitution and it does not matter. Chavez is not leaving elections or no elections in 2012, he is here to stay, executing his long term plan. He has never believed in democracy, he jumped into it when he saw that he could win, he has used it to stay in power, he is getting rid of it because he can read his numbers. Who knows? He may even win in 2012, with oil at $90 today and rising as world economies improve, some feeling of prosperity may be achieved before 2012. Oil is indeed the Devil Excrement, total mismanagement of the economy and Venezuela still functions.

  15. This is way beyond a rational discussion. The psuedo-anarquist I mentioned in my article actually tried to answer my concerns (as did commenters on PanfletoNegro bouncing off his blog) and all I got was (referring to RESORTEME): “you’re hysterical. Don’t worry about the law, it’ll never be applied! Don’t worry about NGOs, media watchdogs and liberty of speech fighters all over the world, we know Chávez is good, so the law is inconsequential. Take our word for it”.
    In this context, we’re supposed to take that as a “debate in the agora” that sparked consensus for “new venezuelan values”.
    We’re way beyond having a rational discussion here.
    It’s Camus versus Sartre time, and people either made their choice already or are stuck with their side per secula seculorum.
    Merry Xmas.

  16. Kepler, the numbers I used were your own:

    “If we get 60%> of the vote, there is no way they can stay in power even if they try to delete 15% of the votes. No way.”

    When I say we, I mean the same as you, the opposition.

    Just not voting is not enough.The only way is to start a Gandhian revolution of strong, relentless to the finish resistance together with a powerful international campaign to drown the voices of sneaky journalists, so that the international community will finally get the real picture.As of now this has not happened.There has been an improvement in some, but way NOT what it should be.

    If we don’t do these things then you are going to see Chavez grow more and more powerful with every coming year.

    • Firepigette,

      I don’t think a Gandhi revolution is possible because you need people like Gandhi.
      But what you do need is what not just Gandhi but a lot of other people did: walk and walk and walk across Venezuela with a message (apart from get out of Chavez, which is fine)

      What Venezuelans don’t bloody grasp is we need not just A president candidate, but other HIGH LEVEL people who are ready to go to places.
      In case Venezuelans did not know it: Indians do praise a lot Gandhi, but if there is a name that signalled the change, it is Nehru…and there were other intellectuals and politicians there who were ready to walk and walk and talk to all people not just in bloody central Zulia or central Carabobo or Miranda-Caracas, but everywhere.

  17. According to the newly elected Diputado Torrealba, with this law the elected authorities “No van a ser tentados a cambiar de opinión”…Llévatelo! I rest my case….

  18. When the most recently elected leaders of the Venezuelan National Assembly, which represent the opposition, have provided no strategy after the events of the Assembly which basically castrated them (independent of sex) and their absence from Sur del Lago, it is hard for me imagine where that strategy is going to come from. I am really pessimistic that anything can be changed unless Chavismo crumbles from within and I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

    • Just campaigning, voting and hoping is nowhere near enough. Even in that, you have to build an organization, and a notion that ordinary people have to stay at the ballot boxes and demand hand counting everywhere. See if they have enough soldiers and/or thugs…

      We have to subvert. We have to willfully ignore these laws, whenever possible. To resist, civilly. To feign ignorance or stupidity regarding them. To cite the Constitution. We might have to be creative in our own defense.

      We have to educate and reduce their notions of State monopoly to the dustbin of history where they belong.

      And we need to be ready to finish this charade the moment they boldly resort to fraud.

      But by this course of events, Hugo will be done in by his own failures. And that will produce something much resembling national failure.

  19. Para que tanta molestia en pasar tantas leyes. Todas al fin hacen lo mismo. Vamos a arreglar la constitucion de una vez y que tenga un solo artículo:

    “Aquí se hace lo que diga el comandante-Presidente” y punto y se acabó

    • Sadly Juan, there were only two or three that said anything or showed up, maybe they are on vacation, Chavismo does not take vacations apparently, but the opposition does. The response of these recently elected Deputies has been dismal. They may have a plan, I don’t see it, you need all of them 24/7 if they want to defend what they obtained in the ballot box. So far, we wasted the vote.

    • I’m also disappointed (I had a twitter argument with Dinorah Figuera about this) – but it’s unfair to say they’re on vacation. They’re not, at least not the ones I see and follow.

      I think what is most frustrating about this is that we’re expecting results from these guys right off the bat.

      Let’s face it, in a dictatorship, results are hard to come by. We should be a bit more reasonable. And “wasting the vote” is really un-called for. What did you think you were voting for?

  20. JC says:

    “I think what is most frustrating about this is that we’re expecting results from these guys right off the bat.”

    But it is not a matter of what we expect or don’t expect, it is a matter of seeing realistic possibilities.

    In a dictatorship elections are rigged, and votes are stolen…it is as simple as that.

    • “In a dictatorship elections are rigged, and votes are stolen…it is as simple as that.”

      Pinochet. 1988. You’re wrong. It’s as simple as that.

    • Sorry JC. Maybe you did not notice, but,

      The election was quite rigged (gerrymandered really) in 26 September. Look at the results.

      Votes were stolen. The laws recently approved amount, more or less, to just that.

    • Actually, Juan: I heard they were told in Madrid that the plane to Frankfurt could not go, so they returned earlier because they did definitely want to be in Caracas downtown for 5.1. Esa blusa que se compró esta chama en Madrid le queeeda

    • It’s not sexist and if , it is much less sexist than other things some people say here.
      One can say similar stuff about blokes, or their whiskey or their cars. Is that sexist as well? Not in several continents.

  21. Let’s fast forward to January 5th. Newly configured AN. Now, what can the opposition do to prevent the march of socialist laws? So far there appears to be no strategy jusr media noise with the darling of the opposition media, MCM, out front. The law you all need to worry about is making foreign funding for NGO’s and political parties illegal. This will certainly have a negative effect on opposition clout. No one on this thread has really explained why the anti talanquera law is unconstitutional. It just stops deputies elected with say, opposition votes, going over to chavism, thus defrauding voters and vice versa. Call Chávez a dictator all you want – it’s just hot air.

    • Right. You read Article 201. And it’s clear to you why the Anti-Talanquera Law is Unconstitutional.

      Y’all don’t have an ideology, you have a learning disability.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here