Comments about ‘Chavez widely mourned, but some hope change on way’

I would have liked it if we had sent him a get well card saying, "Get well soon so you can get back to being an immense pain for us." Who knows, it may have actually lead to some sort of a detente between us and them.

I guess that I don't have a clue about the complicated world of international diplomacy.

I find it hard to come up with much emotion for a man praised by Sean Penn and Michael Moore as a great leader.

The mourning is mandated.

If they want hope and change, they can have Obama. He can go play Authoritarian Dictator over there.

Wow. Only four posts to pivot from Chavez' death to chronic whining about Obama. Is that a record?

@Anti Bush-Obama--at least they won't see their taxes go up a dime, and he won't pass any legislation that adds a single dime to the debt.

Since the Vice leader is part of his regime, I bet the people won't be driving around the District of Silencio honking their horns for days until the Chavez era is gone.

It is ironic that so many people are praising Chavez. He spit on the United States of America in everything he did. We may have problems in our free society that we have at this point.

I read about the issue with drones and the filibuster for more truth, honesty and what the policies on drones really is and think how Venezuela fell into the non-liberty state. I still remember them stopping a bus that we were riding and the only people that the Army wanted to take off the bus was Americans. I can still feel the soldiers put the pressure on stopping us on the streets as they switched from autocratic to elected officials. The Army like their power and authority from the head. This head, Chavez, was an Army general so I am sure they have had 14 years plus of real ruling in the country.

We have a Commander-in-Chief that is elected and not military. Venezuela had a General elected.

Just like our country---the mourners would be the Obama voters, and the cheerers conservatives.

As you read the article and reflect on all the comments that praised Chavez, a lot of that praise comes from leaders and countries that scorn the United States of America. In some of those cases, the praise came only that Chavez always had a controversial relationship with the United States of America.

The United States of America wanted the Venezuelan oil and especially the east coast of the United States of America. However, in the 1960s the city and state of New York told Venezuela that they didn't want their oil anymore as it had too much sulfur and produced bad gas. Almost instantly, the 7-day happened in the mid-east and oil from those countries was not available for the east coast of the United States of America. President Johnson sent an emissary to Venezuela to apologize for the people that said Venezuelan oil wasn't good enough for the United States of America. Gas in Venezuela at the pump was 10 - 15 cents a gallon.

The United States of America hasn't had good relations as we come across as high-and-mighty to countries and leaders. We don't always show kindness but Chavez was not kind.

So the Vice President ousted all American Diplomats. Say what you will but Chavez stood up the the Central Bankers - who will soon get us into World War III over Iran , as they lust for Iran's banking system , natural resources and of course the control of the country - for once control of the money system is brought about - the country is now under full control of the Bankers - Most people have not a clue of who starts wars and why. Most think we went to war in Iraq , Afghanistan because of terrorism - Lol - I'd write more but it wouldn't get posted so I will dumb the facts down

The article notes the widespread global opinion that for 14 years Chavez cast himself as a bulwark against U.S. domination. Judging by the majority of comments on offer here, including the missionary reminiscences from decades past, the DN should consider a series on the history of US diplomatic, business, banking, military and CIA relations with the nations of the south.

Pres, Chavez wasn't a leader of all his people. He used propaganda and demagoguery to bitterly divided his people. It was for his own political purposes. Envy, hate and anger unites his followers. It is the same tired old lie of Marxism. Promise them the sky but use a strong arm to leave them in misery, oppression and poverty. Sorry if Obama supporters don't like the comparisons, but Mr.Obama isn't exactly a bipartisan president. He is using the same politics of division allthough not yet the level of a Chavez.