Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
GET OVER THE CHAVEZ HANDSHAKE.
Just to get it out there: Newt Gingrich's criticism of President Barack Obama for shaking hands with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is silly and hypocritical, not to mention embarrassing for the GOP. Seriously, this is the guy who's taking the lead on the Republican foreign affairs message -- the long-retired former Speaker of the House? The ranking Republicans on the congressional foreign affairs committees, Dick Lugar and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, haven't made comments on this that I've seen yet. Perhaps they're too busy with their day jobs to try to score political points off a non-controversy.
In any case, a few basic things. Venezuela is a major trading partner, and they are classified by Freedom House as "partly free"; there are serious human-rights concerns but there are also some functioning democratic institutions. Then you have other major trading partners like Saudi Arabia and China, two countries that are, respectively, a theocratic monarchy and a communist state, both of which are not free and have even worse human rights problems. But have a presidential photo-op with leaders in those countries is fine; in the case of Russian leaders, it's acceptable to share five minutes of uninterrupted eye contact. If these Republicans are going to get worked up over a handshake with Chavez, they should probably explain why they didn't mind his public greetings, or those of George W. Bush, with even worse autocrats. (Yes, I've got some calls in ...)
A central difference, of course, has been Chavez' bombastic anti-American rhetoric. But it strikes me as funny that the Republicans calling for more "toughness" are basically arguing that we should get worked up because Chavez called us names -- come on, fellas, sticks and stones! As the president made clear during his trip to South America, U.S. foreign policy must be predicated on actions and interests. Nothing has changed about U.S.-Venezuelan relations in the last week except that Chavez, having shown this video on state TV, is going to have a much harder time acting the demagogue to convince his people that the U.S. is an evil force in the world. That seems like a net positive to me.
-- Tim Fernholz
Related Reading: Breakfast at Hugo's
COMMENTS (7)
> A central difference, of course, has been Chavez' bombastic
> anti-American rhetoric. But it strikes me as funny that the Republicans calling for more "toughness"
> are basically arguing that we should get worked up because Chavez called us names. . .
Actually, what they define as "toughness" is exactly the sort of bombastic name-calling that makes Chavez such a clown.
See, it's doesn't matter if you actually get bin Laden, so long as you say "dead or alive" enough.
Posted by: Andy | April 20, 2009 12:46 PM
The right wing and GOP are weak, fearful, and impotent.
They quiver at the thought of meeting face-to-face with bad guys, interrogating prisoners without torture, negotiating with unionized workers, sharing space with gay couples, dealing with people who speak something other than English, being married or raising children without the option of brute force.
They're overrated.
Posted by: Hobbes | April 20, 2009 1:15 PM
Then you have other major trading partners like China and Saudi Arabia, two countries that are, respectively, a theocratic monarchy and a communist state...
This is backwards, methinks.
Posted by: ts | April 20, 2009 2:16 PM
ts -- yes, you're right. Duly switched.
Posted by: Tim Fernholz | April 20, 2009 2:56 PM
Well, Newt is such a prolific thinker, he can't possibly be expected to think all of his ideas through for internal consistency.
And by the way, it doesn't matter either. While Tim is belatedly nitpicking some minor details, Newts target audience of true believers has already taken away the message that Obama is a wussie who coddles up to America's enemies.
If Newt wants to have a shot to be the Republican nominee in 2012, he desperately has to win over that group.
Posted by: SRW1 | April 20, 2009 5:28 PM
Follow-up:
After having taken a look at the comment section of the AP article there actually is no way to avoid the conclusion that Newts political calculation is spot on here. There definitely is an audience that loves to lick up the kind of spittle he delivered.
O tempora o mores.
Posted by: SRW1 | April 20, 2009 5:55 PM
What's best about Chavez is his insightful criticism of Zionist apartheid and his courageous stand with our opporessed brothers and sisters in Iran.
Long live the revolution against all forms of Zionist tyranny!
Posted by: Go Hugo | April 21, 2009 10:23 AM