Antojitos: Mexico's Moore?


What do you get when you cross Michael Moore and Al Gore? Possibly Luis Mandoki.

By washingtonpost.com |  July 25, 2006; 4:45 PM ET  | Category:  Antojitos
Previous: Keeping It Interesting (and Keeping the Peace) | Next: Down (But Not Out) in Mexico City

Blogs That Reference This Entry

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/cgi-bin/mt/mtb.cgi/8988

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



What a bunch of drivel! This guy sounds like yet another Hollywood lefty, this time by way of Churubusco, perhaps. The comparison to Michael Moore may be apt, however, in that he is a big-mouthed idiot who makes entertaining little polemics and calls them documentaries. Propagandist would be a better title for him.

You can also see the bias in describing Calderon as the "rightwing" candidate. I didn't notice them describing "Obrador" (sic) as the "leftwing, populist, messianic Stalinist candidate." Then again, this is the Guardian where such a description would be seen as a compliment.

Posted by: Goyo | July 27, 2006 09:02 PM

AMLO is the legitimate President of Mexico.
No matter how much the media in Mexico, aznd internationally wishes AMLO would lay down and go away, hes only gaining more and more attention. Why?, Because his cause is just. He won, fraud was commited, and as the days go on, more and more steam is being bought to a boil a little over a month to go for the TRIFE to deciede what to do, about the july 2nd election, and AMLO has the whole world watching. One can only imagine how all this is making FOX and FE lipe CAL deron squirm. How about that image of Elba Ester rasing FECALs hand as you would the winner of some cheap contest. The status quoa, is being thearted to the core by the honesty, and impeciblity of AMLO. Sure, around him, their have been corrpt people, however, AMLO has kept his nose clean, and in a country with a deep dark history of political corruption, up to its highest echons(Carlos Salinas)is a taunting task. The man is the message, and AMLO message, as it was during the desafuero, is to challage the elite of Mexico, that the times of nada pasa, are over. Mexico needs to have this recount, VOTO X VOTO CASASILLA X CASASILLA, not because AMLO calls for their to be one, but because its the right thing to do. Enuough evidence has been presented to the TRIFE. For the sake of democracy, a recount should be called for, and whatever its outcome, will be respected. Let him, who casts himself winner, prove beyound a shadow of a doubt that he won. This is not the case for FECAL and the PAN, they prefer the oscurito, to manuver things in their favor, using all at their disposible means. But its not working, FECAL sees this slipping out of his hands. Thats why the stunt with Elba Esther shows his desperation, the need to be reconized. Now the lights have been turn on, Cams where everywhere that day. Hey, this is Mexico, why are some people so navie they think that nobody would dare do anything as fraudulent as stealing a election, but its been done, and now with the whole world being notified, its hard to put AMLO and his genie back into the bottle.
VOTO X VOTO CASILLA X CASILLA
Con AMLO TODO, Con FECAL NADA

Posted by: maya0 | July 28, 2006 12:22 AM

Maya0-- Although I prefer Calderon and his plan to AMLO, I do not rant and rave and call AMLO names. This is about choosing a course for the nation and good leadership, not cheering on some thug in a street fight.

If there is good evidence of fraud, the TRIFE will rule on it. If not, then Calderon will be declared winner and, for the good of the country, you and AMLO and all the rest of you should accept it and move on. The PRD and its allied parties will have a voice in the Congress and in the states they won. They should use that base to build a loyal opposition. That is the way modern democracies work.

Posted by: Goyo | July 28, 2006 04:10 PM

Maya0-- Although I prefer Calderon and his plan to AMLO, I do not rant and rave and call AMLO names. This is about choosing a course for the nation and good leadership, not cheering on some thug in a street fight.

If there is good evidence of fraud, the TRIFE will rule on it. If not, then Calderon will be declared winner and, for the good of the country, you and AMLO and all the rest of you should accept it and move on. The PRD and its allied parties will have a voice in the Congress and in the states they won. They should use that base to build a loyal opposition. That is the way modern democracies work.

Posted by: Goyo | July 28, 2006 04:11 PM

The majority of Mexicans voted for neither PAN or PRD. Why?

In essence there is not much difference between both presidential candidates:

Calderon is said to promote free trade, but Obrador is surrounded by the polititians who were in top positions when NAFTA was agreed upon and signed.

Obrador is said to favor the poor, but while mayor of Mexico City his main accomplishment has been the double and triple layer freeways that benefit the rich.

The difference between the PAN and PRD is about as large as the difference between Republicans and Democrats, except that Republicans and Democrats hopefully do not recur to electoral fraud and take turns in the oval office.

The two party system has provided a great deal of political stability in the US. In Mexico the refusal for a recount will only confirm to a sceptic population that an electoral fraud was committed. An electoral fraud would deny a clean two-party system and force the radicalization of the left.

There will be no recount. There was no need for a recount in 1910, so there should be no need now. Unfortunately this outcome will be good neither for PAN nor PRD and the real winner will be the EZLN and the EPR.

Posted by: Napuseno | July 31, 2006 12:21 PM

Napuseno-- You have a point in that this could empower some of the wilder leftist groups. But they were pretty dismissive of the whole electoral process-- and democracy itself-- anyway.

I do not think the PRD and PAN are as close as the Democrats and Republicans in the United States, but it is a point well taken. You make a good observation about AMLO's infrastructure projects.

But I think there is a difference in terms of PAN being more open to change and to making Mexico more competitive, while the PRD does not even seem to understand that Mexico cannot exist alone, that it is, whether we like it or not, part of a bigger world. Some leftist groups argue against globalization as if there were some alternative. With 100+ million people Mexico cannot afford to be like North Korea and isolate itself from the world. If the population had remained smaller, maybe it could have managed things, but now it is too late.

Arguing against globalization now is like expressing disagreement with the weather. You may not like the weather, but it is coming anyway and you had better prepare for it.

Posted by: Goyo | July 31, 2006 01:06 PM

Just read this blog. Napuseno, you say "a majority of Mexicans voted for neither PAN nor PRD." Actually, between the two of them they gathered 70% of the vote, if anything Mexicans voted agaist PRI overwhelmingly (dropping it all the way from 1st to 3rd in Congress, Madrazo didn't win a single state). And if you consider that PAN rose to #1 in Congress, it can easily be argued that a majority of Mexicans voted against AMLO. And at least Calderon's rhetoric has indicated he will listen to the Left's arguments, while AMLO - well, where does he stand on listening to the Right (ie., financial community, conservatives as far as gov't. is concerned, etc.)? He has gone out of his way to villify and alienate this community. And h8is call to follow Fox wherever he goes and demonstrate, to pressure him to get the TRIFE to change its ruling, demonstrates AMLO is living in the past where the President was all-powerful and got whatever he wanted - in other words, old-style PRI gov't., where he grew up. That type of mentality is not what Mexico needs.

Posted by: JDMB | August 7, 2006 01:25 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




 
 

© 2006 The Washington Post Company