In reading Christopher Whalen's recent screed against Venezuela's Chavez government, I was astounded by how poorly the author supports his case.  Whalen's article is not only more hysterically anti-Chavez than most what we read in the mainstream U.S. press; it's also chock full of disinformation.  For example, Whalen fallaciously asserts that Chavez's policies have recently led to a "rapid deterioration in living standards among his country's poor - once his most powerful and reliable base of political support." Whalen provides no evidence to support the claim.  If Whalen were even remotely interested in conveying accurate information, he would have looked up Venezuela's socio-economic indicators and found that, since the Chavez government defeated the opposition's campaign of economic sabotage (in early 2003) and implemented a series of poverty-fighting measures, Venezuela's poverty rate has declined by more than 20 percentage points (from 62.1 percent in the second semester of 2003 to 39.7 percent in the first semester of 2006).  Over the same period, Venezuela's rate of extreme poverty declined by nearly 17 percentage points (from 29.8 percent in the second semester of 2003 to 12.9 percent in the first semester of 2006).  Contrary to Whalen's erroneous claims, even anti-Chavez Venezuelan economists (such as Francisco Rodriguez) have acknowledged that Venezuela's poverty rate has declined markedly in recent years.

What is even more laughable is Whalen's suggestion that the poor no longer support Chavez.  Has Whalen forgotten that, just three months ago, Chavez won reelection by his largest margin of victory yet (63 percent to the opposition candidate's 37 percent)?

Thankfully, other Narcosphere contributors approach this topic with greater seriousness.