Obama and Chavez: the handshake
There’s been something of a tempest in a teapot (to use the American equivalent of the dreaded-by-Harry’s-Place-readers “storm in a teacup”) over photos of President Obama greeting and shaking hands with Hugo Chavez at the Americas Summit in Port of Spain, Trinidad.
Chavez said he also shook George Bush’s hand eight years ago– which is entirely possible, although I can find no photographic evidence.
Even though I was a little startled to see it, I can’t claim to be terribly upset. In fact it continues the process– which began with Obama’s election– of depriving Chavez of his favorite all-purpose punching bag; i.e., Yankee imperialism. The Bush administration’s tacit approval of the 2002 coup which briefly removed him from office gave Chavez a powerful tool with which rally his supporters. That’s clearly yesterday’s news now. As Chavez struggles with a sharp drop in the oil income which has helped him maintain power, he will find Obama to be a less convenient scapegoat than Bush was.
In fact it’s rather amusing to observe how disoriented Chavez seems to be now that El Diablo himself, George Bush, is no longer in the picture.
Chávez appears to be groping for the right approach to Obama, oscillating in recent weeks between acerbic criticism and conciliatory praise. When Obama said that Chávez aids Colombia’s Marxist guerrilla violence (which Chávez in fact has renounced), the Venezuelan President shot back that Obama had “the same stench” as Bush. But when the U.S. Coast Guard called Venezuelan authorities last week for permission to board a Venezuelan boat involved in a cocaine bust, Chávez called it a “positive signal that never would have happened” under Bush.
As long as Obama doesn’t back off from his sharp criticism of Chavez’s autocratic rule, I can tolerate a few photos of smiles and handshakes– in fact a little easier than I could Bush’s hand-holding and sword-dancing with, or even Obama’s bowing to, the Saudi rulers.
Comments
| 18 April 2009, 5:35 pm |
I remember when Donald Rumsfeld deprived Saddam of the punchbag of Yankee imperialism. Good times, good times…
| 18 April 2009, 5:38 pm |
All kidding aside, it was poor silly Jimmy Carter’s well-meant trying-to-be-nice-to-everyone foreign policy that made the Carter administration a laughing stock internationally.
Which led inexorably to Reagan and – er – a resolute foreign policy which paved the way to the end of the Cold War [or so we thought at the time.]
Time will tell.
| 18 April 2009, 5:41 pm |
Even though I was a little startled to see it, I can’t claim to be terribly upset.
Then the reams of photos of the Obamacon partying in the pews at the racist Trinity Church must have perturbed you somewhat?
| 18 April 2009, 5:41 pm |
- Makes a grand gesture to the Iranians and the Ayatollah kicks him the balls.
- Says he wants a nuclear free world and the North Korean’s decide to shoot off a missile.
- Gives Cuba tangible policy changes on the so-called ‘embargo’.
Fidel kicks him in the balls anyway.
Tomorrow Hugo will be telling us he met the black devil and his hand spells of sulphur.
Why is Obama so intent on being the next Jimmy Carter?
| 18 April 2009, 5:45 pm |
There goes Gene with the sword dancing again. I’m sure when the Saudi King visits Washington, he is greeted with a display of guys in 18th-century military garb shooting muskets into the air, and in Jeddah a Saudi Gene suffers the Vapors.
| 18 April 2009, 5:47 pm |
he’s like jimmy carter!
this is so like dejavu all over again.
| 18 April 2009, 5:49 pm |
I thought the Jimmy Cater comparisons had been blown out of the water (so to speak!) by the successful end to the recent pirate hostage crisis?
| 18 April 2009, 5:56 pm |
Isn’t that the Freemasons’ handshake?
| 18 April 2009, 6:07 pm |
Sue R. I suppose the clue that you are not a freemason is your feminine name. The handshake is a black one. And don’t they both look cool.
| 18 April 2009, 6:09 pm |
I always wondered why people were excited about Obama. That seemed to be the tone of this site, with Obama’s picture up at the header.
In action he’s taking 90% the same policies in international affairs as Bush. But the difference is the apologetic, conciliatory tone.
This attitude that every difference can be split is really weak and harmless.
I didn’t vote for him because the Democrat taking points you hear all the time are stupid. It’s not true, for example, that US international relations are bad at this time. Obama is currently trying to remedy that perception by sucking up to our, very few, remaining enemies.
| 18 April 2009, 6:19 pm |
There goes Gene with the sword dancing again. I’m sure when the Saudi King visits Washington, he is greeted with a display of guys in 18th-century military garb shooting muskets into the air, and in Jeddah a Saudi Gene suffers the Vapors.
mesquito, I’ll admit the sword-dancing troubled me because of what swords are still used for in the Kingdom.
| 18 April 2009, 6:43 pm |
Gene:
I only ever went to one execution – of a Filipino, for murder – and I was much too far from the sword to see if there was a manufacturer’s name on it BUT there was a persistent rumour going the rounds in expatriate circles in the Kingdom a quarter of a century ago that all executioners’ swords were made by Wilkinsons of England.
Not that it much matters where the swords are made; a machete would do the job just as well.
| 18 April 2009, 7:06 pm |
Bonus question: In what ways is Hugo Chavez not a fascist?
| 18 April 2009, 7:34 pm |
Love the pictures! Obama really is the coolest president and he makes Chavez look like his little bitch. To be honest, George W. Bush really did a lot to boost Chavez’s popularity. I’m a leftist critic of both Chavez and Obama, but Americans are proud that Obama is President. His natural charisma and ability to make pimps like Chavez shrink in deference is a nice change.
| 18 April 2009, 9:16 pm |
I think it was a strong move approaching Chavez instead of avoid a man that had been talking so tough to his own media. The smirk and condescending look on Obamas face coupled with Chavez’s dumbfounded smile make it seem as if Obama’s saying ” Yeah, that’s right, your gonna be my Bi$@%.”
| 18 April 2009, 9:19 pm |
“Isn’t that the Freemasons’ handshake?”
No.
| 19 April 2009, 2:55 am |
Bonus question: In what ways is Hugo Chavez not a fascist?
In his support of gay rights? In his support of the native peoples’ rights? In his allowing the ultra-rightwing El Universal to continue to be published?
No other leader has been as subject to Nazi and Fascist analogies made by people that matter as Hugo Chávez. Why this singling out, when Madagascar fares notoriously worse? That bias has a name, and the name for it is anti-Venezuelanism.
| 19 April 2009, 4:06 am |
HB is right, egad!
End Ant-Venezuelanism Now!
The one and only Latin American country to be named after a European city must not be defamed by Anti-Venezuelanists motivated by Anti-Venezuelan urges.
Who even knew that Anti-Venezuelanism even existed until now?
| 19 April 2009, 6:25 am |
I thought the Jimmy Cater comparisons had been blown out of the water (so to speak!) by the successful end to the recent pirate hostage crisis?
I don’t see how Obama can be given credit for the Navy SEALs’ success. It’s not hard to authorize military force to release hostages; if you recall, Carter did so with respect to the American hostages held in Iran. They weren’t successful, so Carter withdrew forces and looked even weaker. It’s possible that Obama’s image would suffer if the Navy operation was bungled, but that is a relations game more than a factual matter.
There’s a better argument to be made with respect to Afghanistan, and a much more measured tone on Iraq than he had in the past. The problem is he has yet to indicate how he expects to have the slightest success with Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, or Sudan by shaking hands and smiling.
| 19 April 2009, 7:56 am |
“In his allowing the ultra-rightwing El Universal to continue to be published?”
And that makes him NOT a fascist how, exactly?
| 19 April 2009, 9:03 am |
If comparisons of Obama and Carter are going to recur, now long before some calls themselves “Peanut Farms in Chicago”?
| 19 April 2009, 9:10 am |
Its seems Gene’s crush on Obama is even stronger than his dislike of Chavez.
| 19 April 2009, 9:14 am |
While they were shaking…Where was Cesar’s LEFT hand? Where was Barry’s?
The Spanish have a lovely saying, “No me toque las pelotas” —figurative meaning “Don’t mess with me!”—literal meaning “Don’t touch my balls!”.
Soul brothers giving each other complicated handshakes with the right hand while playing with the brother’s fly with the left…! Tch!Typical…!
So that’s what “the right doesn’t know what the left is doing” really means….Who knew?
| 19 April 2009, 9:49 am |
And that makes him NOT a fascist how, exactly?
By “ultra-rightwing” he means “often critical of Chavez”.
| 19 April 2009, 10:20 am |
In his support of the native peoples’ rights?
Well, his support in theory, even if it doesn’t translate into practice.
| 19 April 2009, 1:36 pm |
But in the meantime, Chavez evil midget mutant sidekick, Evo Morales says the US apparently has to take the blame for everything in the world and he’s vewy vewy angwy at Obama.
| 19 April 2009, 6:58 pm |
What is the deeper communication going on with the non standard handshake?
| 19 April 2009, 7:00 pm |
BTW, Lula said it best.
When I was a political activist, I blamed the government. When I became the political opposition, I blamed the government. When I became the government, I blamed the US and The West.
But why the ‘cool’ oriented-around-the-thumb handshake? Why not just a boring run-of-the-mill handshake? The right-wing nutjobs over with you in the States will undoubtedly label this the “socialist dictator’s handshake” just like they thought Mr. and Mrs. Obama had their “terrorist fist bumps”…