...well-known attack journalist Ed Klein. I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned in the article.

When Klein's book on Hillary came out, I wrote to the editorial board of "Parade" and to all its major advertisers, advising them that I would no longer read their publication when it arrived with my sunday paper, citing Klein's opus as the reason.

I have to say that putting "Parade" directly into the recycling bin has not reduced my quality of life one bit; I recommend it (especially if you write letters to their various big cheeses and advertisers!).

Warren

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Right-wing claptrap in Parade is nothing new, really. What also isn't new is the US Gov't's hatred for and overthrow of any democratic gov'ts that dare to not toe their line.

Is Chavez the next Mossadegh of Iran or Allende of Chile? Given that the Bush regime is even more morally bankrupt than his 50s and 70s predecessors, it sure seems likely.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Funny how Parade "tut tut tuts" over Chavez's alleged funding of alleged "terrorists", yet what did the ink-stained wretches have to say but "Go Team!" when the US Gov't actually funded actual terrorists (including a chap named bin Laden) all through the 80s?

Could 9/11 have ever happened without the expertise handed over to al-Qaeda by the CIA back in the day? But that can't be discussed because *horrors* that would mean actual *accountability* for the Reaganites who (thanks to SCOTUS) are all back in power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Omg! I just saw it. In Bush's speech the other day he was trying to turn our interest away from the scandels and other crazy things coming out of his administration. He chose to direct us back into the "War on Terror". Now everyone is sneaking in these little lies about Chavez. I am looking for the next terrorist action in our country (powered by the CIA) to push us into conflict with Chavez.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Call to action. Stop the Republican Party.

http://tinyurl.com/8ghl8

http://tinyurl.com/b97vk

Where Republicans tread, innocent people end up dead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It appeared in the Winston Salem Parade last Sunday, and when I saw it I thought, "Damn!" Thanks for bringing this up, because it was one of the most ridiculous answers I've ever read. I don't know much about Castro, but I know propaganda when I see it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not too long ago Scott took a swipe at Chelsea Clinton's character by insinuating she had the same moral flaws as her father. He gave no example other then to say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. I found that pretty interesting given her sterling reputation particularly compared to the Bush twins. Say what you want about Bill and Hillary. They seem to have reared a fine daughter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This happens in many "trash" magazines and newspapers, all the time.

But you can't blame just the Republicans, because the democratic propaganda machine use it too when they get the chance.

Unfortunately, the people who read the trash believe everything they read! They're unable to think for themselves, and therefore they're where the blame should lie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I never read Parade unless I'm desparate. Someone did direct my attention to a surprising claim in Parade a few years ago. Was it before 9/11? can't remember. They listed the top 10 human rights violating governments. #1 on the hit parade was...Saudi Arabia. Iraq was #2. Kuwait was in there somewhere, too. Nice to be friends with #1, isn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The difference being that the Bush twins have a background of breaking the law, whereas the same cannot be said for Chelsea Clinton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Though probably laden with lies, 'Guerrilla Nation' (weeklystandard.com article by Thor Halvorssen, 1-26-05) says in part:

"In February 2001, months after the Chavez government denied supporting FARC, the capture of a Colombian terrorist revived the debate. Jose Maria Ballestas, a leader of Colombia's other left-wing terrorist organization, the National Liberation Army (ELN), was captured in Venezuela's capital by Interpol operatives working in conjunction with the Colombian police. Although Ballestas was wanted for a 1999 commercial airliner hijacking, he was immediately released from custody by order of the Chavez government. As the Colombian media cried foul, Chavez officials denied that Ballestas had ever been arrested and claimed that "news" of his arrest was actually a story concocted by enemies of the Chavez government. When Colombian officials responded by releasing a video of the arrest, the Chavez government tried to claim that Ballestas was seeking asylum from political persecution in Colombia. As diplomatic tension reached a fever-pitch, Venezuela re-arrested Ballestas and grudgingly extradited him to Colombia.

The extradition of Ballestas to Colombia seems a highly-unlikely thing for a government with the reputation of Venezuela to do, especially given that Venezeulan Interior Minister Luis Miquilena describes Ballestas as a man facing 'politcal persecution' in Colombia. I wonder what prompted Venezuela to do that?

"Three months after diplomatic tension over the Serna incident died down, the Chavez-FARC connection surfaced again when Venezuela's intelligence chief, Jesus Urdaneta, publicly denounced Chavez for supporting FARC. A lifelong friend and military colleague of President Chavez, Urdaneta publicized documents showing that the Chavez government offered fuel, money, and other support to the terrorists. The documents included signed letters from a Chavez aide detailing an agreement to provide support for FARC. That aide later became Chavez's minister of justice, a position which gave him oversight of the entire Venezuelan security apparatus."

We can't rely on the words of the neocon Halvorssen, Venezuelan Government anti-drug czar with the rank of ambassador (1989-1994). This was during the administration of Chavez' predecessor, so independent verification is advisable. Can anyone dispute the allegations Halvorssen makes about Ballestas or Urdaneta?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You wrote:

"Scott took a question about the international globe-trotting jet-set superstar Fidel Castro -- well within his purview as a glitzy dirt-slinger -- and deftly turned it into a lie-filled tirade about the democratically elected leader of another country."

How do you know the things Scott wrote are lies? Or do you just assume that they are?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]