Lookin' out my backdoor

So Condi has called the Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, "one of the biggest dangers facing Latin America."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4723902.stm

Why is Washington so pissed off at Chavez? It's fairly simple. He refuses to be their lapdog. The BBC story mentions only a few things in passing concerning Chavez's history with shrub & co., not the least of which is the last paragraph of the story:

"Mr Chavez accuses the Bush administration of trying to orchestrate his removal, a charge denied by Washington."

The story neglects to mention that Chavez was deposed for literally two days in 2002, by a U.S.-backed group.

It also neglects to mention that Venezuela is OPEC's fourth largest oil producer. It also neglects to mention that Chavez has openly criticized U.S. foreign policy, how he's a figurehead for Latin independence, how he railed against Bush's "free trade" plan for Latin America at the summit of the Americas last year, how the U.S. has tried to block Chavez from buying arms from Russia and making oil deals with China, how the U.S. takes serious issue with his close ties to Fidel Castro (for no good reason except that of ideological difference, apparently), and lastly, how in his last election he won a legitimate landslide victory. His social programs have brought doctors and schools to peasants that have never experienced such simple benefits before.

In short, the only reason the shrub administration is unhappy with Chavez is because he won't dance to ther tune. There's a substantial amount of money to be made from controlling Latin America (as we have for the past two centuries). The Monroe doctrine, for instance, was not a friendly extension of our protection to our Southern brothers. It was a move to protect economic interests. That's exactly what this is.

Mmmmm, huevos rancheros.... And don't forget the tabasco.