Cindy Sheehan releases trailer for documentary on Venezuala, ‘Revolution: A Love Story’

From an email to Cindy Sheehan’s supporters:

A funny thing happened while we have been working away at the documentary of our trip to Venezuela to interview President Hugo Chavez and to bring the truth about him and the Bolivarian Revolution to light–We were so inspired by what we witnessed and our research for the project–that we want our movie to arouse a similar Peaceful grassroots Revolution here to the US.

This is not so far from the original intent of Todos Somos Americanos, (working title), but the project has grown into a love affair with true, vibrant, and relevant change.

If you have already pre-ordered your copy of Todos Somos Americanos–no worries–you will still get your movie as soon as it is finished, just with a different title.

The trailer is below (it has a brief appearance of Cynthia McKinney, the 2008 Green Party candidate for president):

23 thoughts on “Cindy Sheehan releases trailer for documentary on Venezuala, ‘Revolution: A Love Story’

  1. Trent Hill

    ….wow.

    Yea, you gotta love those dictatorships–they’re the best! Sheehan is off the deep end.

  2. Danny S

    Wow. I think a more fruitful endeavor would be to point out how good ideals can be corrupted for power. True, the US government hates Chavez. But that doesn’t mean Chavez is a hero. If anything, he has betrayed any real liberal movement.

  3. Ross Levin Post author

    I don’t know, Trent. Personally, I have no real reason to think of Chavez badly other than people like George Bush (and others in politics and the MSM who I have no reason to trust) condemning him. I have no reason to like him, either, but that’s only because I’ve never read or seen anything else about him, and I feel like there are plenty of people like me. I’m interested to see this documentary.

  4. NewFederalist

    I think I’m gonna puke! C’mon, Ross… is Hitler okay, too?

  5. Ross Levin Post author

    Hitler? I don’t think you can even compare the two. Chavez isn’t responsible for the deaths of well over 10 million people, to start with.

  6. Ross Levin Post author

    But NewFederalist, why is he like those people? I don’t know why people believe it, other than the media yelling at us about how bad Chavez is.

  7. Cody Quirk

    Hitler? I don’t think you can even compare the two. Chavez isn’t responsible for the deaths of well over 10 million people, to start with.

    = …Not yet he hasn’t.

  8. Willie

    Sure, a dictator who has been elected in free elections by over 85% of the population – not a minority who has been the most backward, genocidal, and represive 4th Republic- for about 12 re-elections. A dictator that gives free: Healthcare, Dental care, Eye care, free ducation from Kindergarten to University levels, housing-food to the needy, creating a infrastructure to a nation who had it not set since the Independence of Venezuela, anticorruption fighter. It is not Chavez, it is a nation, a majority – over 95% of the whole population of Venezuela who decided to be free and have a free nation. Educate/inform yourselves before jumping to conclusions and giving opinionated media oriented lies against a nation. Leave Venezuela in peace for Pete’s sake !

  9. Hayden

    Chavez is a tyrant plain and simple. He may give some of his people “free” services but what about the elimination of democracy? What about the opposition candidates knocked off the ballot solely because of opposition to Chavez? What about Chavez losing the first referendum on changing the Constitution and then ramming it through the second time? What about his closure of opposition television stations and radio stations? If Chavez was right wing instead of left wing people like Sheehan would be calling for his ouster.

    If Cindy Sheehan is in love with the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and it’s Caudillo, Hugo Chavez, I suggest she get on the first aeroplane to Caracas… I’m sure we can pass the hat round to raise the money for it.

  10. Trent Hill

    “Sure, a dictator who has been elected in free elections by over 85% of the population ”

    Um, that isn’t fishy to you? Everyone doubts the veracity of these elections.

  11. Trent Hill

    What about freedom of speech? Chavez has basically destroyed it in Venezuela.

  12. NewFederalist

    Hayden’s point is well made. Substitute Pinochet for Chavez and see how this equation changes. Both are/were tyrants and neither deserving of a “Love Story”.

  13. Ross Levin Post author

    But no one has really said WHY he is bad, other than Trent, and again, I have no reason to believe that he’s repressed free speech other than stories on like TV news, which is hardly trustworthy when there’s an opportunity to fearmonger.

  14. JT

    Willie: “Sure, a dictator who has been elected in free elections by over 85% of the population…”

    Bullshit.

    “A dictator that gives free: Healthcare, Dental care, Eye care, free ducation from Kindergarten to University levels, housing-food to the needy, creating a infrastructure to a nation who had it not set since the Independence of Venezuela, anticorruption fighter.”

    There’s no such thing as “free” any of those things, sorry.

  15. Alexander S. Peak

    Chavez doesn’t believe in true equality.

    I believe in true equality.

    Chavez believes it is legitimate for him to have greater authority than his subjects. Chavez believes in coercive hierarchy.

    I recommend that people read “Equality: The Unknown Ideal” by Roderick T. Long.

  16. Pblllllt

    Wow, what a lot of uneducated people here. Believe your right-wing media till the cows come home. Or pluck up the courage and click this link:

    http://www.venezuelanalysis.com

    Yeah, a “dictatorship” with more elections than the US. All of them free, fair, and certified as such by international observers. Who’d of thunk?

    Jackasses.

  17. Carol Knapp

    To Ross Levin and Pblllllt:
    You have fallen prey to the “left-right paradigm” aka Hegelian Dialectic. Just because the U.S. govt. has turned into a Fascist Police State, that doesn’t mean that Communist Police States are “good”!

    The SYSTEM of collectivism…of any stripe…is BAD, BAD, BAD TO THE BONE. Why? Because in “collectivism” those who “collect”, collect everything.

    It’s painful to see how ignorant the masses are to the concept of Federalism and Free Market Capitalism (NOT what we have today) distributes power (Federalism) and money (Capitalism) based on merit so as to prevent the COLLECTION OF MONEY AND POWER INTO JUST A FEW HANDS!!

    If the majority are as ignorant and brainwashed as Ross and Pblllllt, we are doomed.
    Carol

  18. Evan Rowe

    It is ridiculous to call Chavez any more a dictator than say Andrew Jackson was. He’s rough around the edges, but his approach is primarily populist in nature… and as noted above, he is winning election after election.

    What you have to love about the right wing in the U.S. is that they lived and were raised by their mamas and papas to be able to bold faced lie because of the old media TV model. But so much has come out about the U.S. so many coup de tats, so they just repeat the same thing over and over and hope it sticks. And it DOES stick, and they ARE winning, but their grip on the mental real of the nation estate is slipping with time.

  19. Alexander S. Peak

    Dear Pblllllt,

    The state apparatus does not become a legitimate institution simply because the ruling class allows the subjects to choose who gets to be the agents of institutionalized aggression. A government could have a billion elections, but that would not change the fact that the rulers are in a position of inequality with, a position of nonvoluntary hierachy over, their subjects.

    In my above post, I write that “Chavez believes it is legitimate for him to have greater authority than his subjects.” Do you disagree with this claim, and if so, on what grounds?

    Mr. Rowe,

    Adam Jackson violated the natural rights of innocent native Americans. An initiation of force or fraud does not become legitimate simply because the some agent of the state claims it to be legitimate, or “passes a law.” Infringements upon natural rights are illegitimate regardless of the “laws” passed, or the means by which the political class acquires its unequal station.

    Sincerely,
    Alex Peak

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.