Calderón Prepares to Govern

A partial recount of the presidential ballots begins Wednesday with the two rivals as entrenched as ever in their positions, though the announcement Friday by Mexico's election tribunal that a little less than 10 percent of the ballots will be reexamined appears to be an encouraging development for Calderón.

Felipe Calderon
Felipe Calderon of the National Action Party is planning how he'll govern Mexico. Above, Calderson delivers a speech on August 6 to a gathering of Mexican legislators in Queretaro. (AP Photo),

Felipe Calderón, the conservative technocrat and unofficial winner in Mexico's July 2 election, is predicting he'll be declared the official victor within a couple weeks.

In a weekend session with leaders of his National Action Party, or PAN, Calderón was already outlining plans for his presidency.

Among the first actions Calderón is considering is legislation to redefine the duties and authority of Mexico's electoral commission and the seven-judge tribunal that ordered the partial recount Friday. "Calderón called for 'profound' electoral reform, saying the current system showed signs of 'exhaustion.' He has called for changes including a reduction of the campaign period, less federal funding for the candidates and smaller federal legislative bodies," according to the Miami Herald's Mexico edition.

"'It's vital that we begin a deep revision of Mexico's democratic system,'" Calderón said. "'The strength of our institutions has been overcome and is threatened by a rise in anti-democratic, anarchistic and intolerant viewpoints.'"

The Wall Street Journal apparently shares Calderón's confidence, declaring in Monday's edition that the Harvard-educated Calderón is "on the verge of winning the presidency." The story praises him for savvy post-election maneuvering, including assembling a cadre of 1,000 largely volunteer lawyers -- "Following the July 2 election, Mr. Calderón has been a more adept politician and leader than many expected. He has shown legal smarts and has skillfully exploited many Mexicans' fear of [leftist candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador], the 52-year-old former mayor of Mexico City."

But not everything has gone perfectly for Calderón in the month-plus interregnum.

"Mr. Calderón has not yet demonstrated an ability to persuade Mr. López Obrador's supporters among the poor that, as president, he would be sympathetic to their plight," the Journal notes. "He denies being out of touch with the needs of the poor and has pledged to make social welfare programs more effective. Nevertheless, he could take office in a weakened position -- facing the enmity of a large portion of the Mexican population and fighting a continuing battle with Mr. López Obrador, as the chief opposition figure."

Neither Rain Nor Hail

A heat wave may be baking most of the United States, but Mexicans, at least those supporters of López Obrador who are camped in the downtown Zócalo in Mexico City, are enduring chilly rain, punctuated by hail and some snow (Campaign Conexión is not kidding).

Even so, spirits have been high at the makeshift campgrounds erected more than a week ago by supporters of the charismatic leftist. Thousands have answered his call to stage sit-ins (or would these be called sleep-ins?) to protest what he says was widespread fraud during and after the vote counting.

In Sunday's address at the Zócalo, López Obrador insisted he and his supporters will not tire. A partial recount is unsatisfactory, he said, arguing that Mexicans want and deserve "100 percent democracy."

The next step is to expand the civil disobedience, though AMLO was not terribly specific about his plans: "After a week of living on the street and enduring nightly rainstorms, many protesters waiting for López Obrador to appear at Sunday's rally were angry over the tribunal's decision. Some chanted, 'Airport! Airport!' calling for a blockade of streets surrounding Mexico City's international airport. Others yelled for a takeover of the congressional building or of the National Palace, the official seat of the executive branch. Some suggested a boycott of businesses allegedly in league against López Obrador."

So far, none of that has occurred. And although the leader known by his initials AMLO did urge followers to get up close and personal with the tribunal members, he continues to advocate non-violent actions.

"López Obrador, who lost by 244,000 votes of more than 41 million cast, called on supporters to gather in front of the tribunal's offices in southern Mexico City on Monday. His 'assemblies' have previously been held only in the Zócalo, the city's main square," reports Laurence Liff. "'We have taken the decision to hold this assembly in front of the tribunal,'" he said. "'I say once and for all to our adversaries that there is no need ... to put the military there because we are going to protest peacefully.'"

The New York Times, noted that López Obrador's backers intend to form human chains along some major thoroughfares and reported that at least one incident of a local reporter being roughed up by AMLO bodyguards.

Strategy Backfiring?

The chorus against López Obrador seems to be growing louder, as even some former allies have started sounding cranky about the delays and blockades. Even some cabbies have been grumbling that the demonstrators are causing problems.

"In recent weeks he has denounced citizen poll workers for fraud, called Mexico's president a traitor to democracy, declared that he is president and, this week, shut down much of Mexico City. The damage is mounting," say Houston Chronicle editorial writers. "Loyal supporters among Mexico's intellectuals have deserted or chided him. 'We find no sense,' author Carlos Monsivais wrote in an open letter to La Jornada newspaper, 'in this deliberate aggression against the rights of workers, motorists, passengers and drivers of autobuses and taxis.' For the sake of the followers who need his leadership so badly, López Obrador needs to unblock those streets."

López Obrador has voiced some sympathy for the thousands inconvenienced by the mass demonstrations. "The militants have seized control of the Zócalo, key streets in the city center and several miles of the Paseo de la Reforma, one of the Mexican capital's key thoroughfares." Give the guy a little credit, he's been living in a tent himself.

Some officials in Mexico City are suggesting the disruptions are hurting tourism -- and the myriad related businesses operating downtown. According to Jesus Marin Rocha, head of the tourism association, visits to the city have fallen 60 percent over the past week.

Mark Stevenson, a knowledgeable writer for the Associated Press, says the political upheaval is one of many factors contributing to the dip in tourism:

"Growing political unrest and drug violence are making foreigners think twice about visiting Mexico, where the $11.8 billion (U.S.) tourism industry is the country's third-largest legal source of income, after oil and remittances from migrants in the United States. Mexico has been struggling since last fall, when Hurricane Wilma hit the country's biggest tourism money-maker, Cancun.

"In Mexico City alone, hotels, restaurants and stores are losing $23 million a day, according to the city's Commerce, Services and Tourism Chamber. Some businesses have threatened to stop paying taxes unless the government cracks down on the demonstrations."

For anyone planning a visit south of the border, I can report first-hand that the airport is operating at its normal, slow pace, traffic too is at its standard crawl, but the fabulous restaurants, museums, mercados and parks that have always drawn millions are as inviting as ever. And by week's end, the city's "turibus" will be taking a new route to dodge those pesky protesters, says tourism director Carlos Mackinlay.

"According to information released by the secretariat, Turibus operators had lost between 70,000 to 100,000 pesos a day (US$7,777 to US$11,000) since the blockades began on Reforma Avenue. In reference to the affect the blockades were having on the luxury hotels along Reforma, Mackinlay denied any substantial negative affect. 'What we've seen is some hotels having lower occupancy rates while others say they've had more business than usual,' he added."

You Mean It Could Have Ended Weeks Ago?

The election tribunal, explaining its decision to recount just under 12,000 ballot boxes, said there were obvious errors in the majority of cases that could have been spotted July 2 by local overseers. All it would have taken was a simple mathematical calculation to have forced local officials to have opened the questionable boxes at the time. Then López Obrador wouldn't have had reason to file his massive 900-page legal challenge and we'd probably be on vacation in Havana right now. Oy!

Since Friday's announcement by the tribunal, the conventional wisdom has held that recounting just 9 percent of the total votes cast is a boon for Calderón and a setback for López Obrador. But no matter what Calderón, the Wall Street Journal and the punditocracy says, it's not a done deal.

"Some experts say there's an outside chance the tribunal could order a full recount if it finds major discrepancies in the partial recount scheduled to begin Wednesday and which is expected to take about five days. López Obrador lost an initial count to conservative candidate Felipe Calderón by 244,000 votes, or 0.57 percentage points."

Closer to Home

Without editorial comment and purely in the name of full disclosure, Campaign Conexión offers this column by Fred Rosen taking Washington Post editorial writers to task for "empty name-calling."
"Whatever we think of blocking traffic in the city's financial center, what demand could be more moderate than a demand for a full recount? What demand could be more democratic than 'voto por voto; casilla por casilla' - 'vote by vote; polling place by polling place'"?

Read The Post's editorial here to get the other side.

Please join us Wednesday at noon eastern standard time for a live chat with John Ackerman, a legal scholar at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, or UNAM. Ackerman has written a book on the Mexican elections that is scheduled for release in February 2007.

-- Ceci Connolly

By Editors |  August 8, 2006; 11:12 AM ET  | Category:  Campaign Conexión
Previous: From The Post: AMLO's Determined Defiance | Next: Antojitos: Zocalo Life

Blogs That Reference This Entry

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Reforma reports AMLO supporters take down some tents blocking arteries in DF. See for more.

Posted by: Mexicans and Americans | August 8, 2006 11:46 AM

This "jewel" from the Nuevo Excelsior on the pristine environment on which the elections were held:

IFE negó apertura pese a "evidencias"

Por Érica Mora


A la luz de los "evidentes errores aritméticos" que el Tribunal Electoral identificó en dos mil 705 casillas, en Jalisco, el IFE sólo permitió la apertura de 130 durante los cómputos distritales.

De manera paralela, Excélsior verificó que en la entidad gobernada por el panista Francisco Ramírez Acuña el IFE sustituyó a 15 mil 852 funcionarios de casilla el día de la jornada electoral, es decir, a 27.99% de los ciudadanos que contaron los votos.

Así, en Jalisco, entidad clave en el recuento de los votos, en función de que representa 22.84% de las casillas que el Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación (TEPJF) ordenó abrir, el IFE pasó por alto que la votación registrada en las actas de escrutinio y cómputo fuera mayor al número de ciudadanos que acudieron a sufragar.

Y de acuerdo con información del IFE, en una de cada tres de las casillas instaladas en Jalisco, el organismo electoral sustituyó a los funcionarios de casilla de último momento, con personas que se encontraban en la fila para votar.

Los distritos de Guadalajara, Tepatitlán, Jocotepec, Tonalá, La Barca, Puerto Vallarta y Zapopan son los más representativos en cuanto al porcentaje de deserciones de los funcionarios de casilla y los errores de cómputo.

Por otra parte, el mayor número de "evidentes errores aritméticos" que detectaron los magistrados en Jalisco se concentraron en seis distritos: el 3 de Tonalá, 5 de Puerto Vallarta, 6 de Zapopan, 7 de Tonalá, 8 de Guadalajara y 17 de Jocotepec. En éstos, Calderón sumó 471 mil 284 votos, lo que representa 310 mil 584 más que los obtenidos por López Obrador, a quien se computaron 161 mil 700.

Proporcionalmente, los distritos 3 de Tonalá, con 61%; 6 de Zapopan, con 60%, y 17 de Jocotepec, con 58%, son los que registrarán la mayor apertura de paquetes.

La segunda entidad donde mayor número de paquetes se abrirá es Baja California, con mil 138 de un total de 3 mil 543, es decir, en uno de cada tres deberá volverse a efectuar el conteo. Cabe destacar que en ese estado el IFE ordenó la revisión de 183 al momento de realizar el cómputo.

La proporción de paquetes que se abrirán por instrucciones del TEPJF se dispara en dos distritos: el 7 con cabecera en Mexicali, donde serán revisados 219 de 432, es decir, 50.6% del total; algo similar ocurrirá en el 8, en Tijuana, donde la orden es abrir 195,44% del total.

Tamaulipas es un estado bajo control priista, donde se ordenó el recuento de mayor número de casillas: 942 de 3 mil cuatro, equivalente a 31.3% del total.

En ese estado sobresale el distrito 3, donde se abrirán 212 de los 588 paquetes, destacando el hecho de que ya en los cómputos distritales el IFE había aceptado la apertura de otros 58.

"No era conveniente recontar los votos"

Los consejos distritales consideraron que "no era relevante ni conveniente" abrir los paquetes electorales que presentaron "evidentes errores aritméticos" durante el conteo final, señaló el Instituto Federal Electoral (IFE).

Asimismo, aseguró que la tarea del IFE ante la decisión asumida por el Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación (TEPJF) será la de otorgar todas las facilidades para que los recuentos se lleven a cabo "de manera eficaz y en paz".

Luego de una reunión privada que sostuvieron los consejeros electorales, Virgilio Andrade, presidente de la Comisión de Reglamentos del IFE, defendió la actuación de las juntas distritales.

Planteó que en su oportunidad los consejeros distritales no abrieron los 11 mil 839 paquetes, que a partir de mañana serán objeto de un recuento por orden del Tribunal Electoral, porque no lo consideraron "ni conveniente ni relevante", para determinar al ganador de la contienda presidencial.

Entrevistado en el Instituto Federal Electoral, Andrade también dijo que otra de las razones por las cuales esas casillas no fueron objeto de una revisión durante las sesiones de cómputo distrital fue que en algunos casos esa petición no fue expresamente formulada.

"Posteriormente, una de las partes consideró que era necesario solicitarle al Tribunal que lo hiciera", señaló el también presidente de la Comisión de Reglamentos del organismo electoral.

El consejero electoral descartó que exista algún tipo de preocupación porque en estados como Jalisco se deba hacer el recuento sobre 33% de las casillas instaladas para la jornada del 2 de julio.

"Si el tribunal ha ordenado el recuento se tiene como objetivo verificar cómo quedaron los resultados y, en ese sentido, todo lo que abone a la certeza de la elección es lo más importante, independientemente de los juicios que nosotros podamos hacer", expresó.

Reconoció que el recuento ordenado por el Tribunal constituye un hecho inédito, pero señaló que "las condiciones que deben prevalecer en estos recuentos son exactamente las mismas que en los cómputos distritales".

Posted by: Goyito | August 8, 2006 12:18 PM

It takes a special kind of person to back oneself into a no-win situation... if AMLO backs down, the blowhards in his movement will never forgive him, and he is done for as their leader; if he goes on disrputing the daily life of the capital, he antagonizes his electoral base, the chilangos that nearly put him in power. AMLO has cornered himself in a way no medium-caliber politician would have done. A comment to Ceci, who has otherwise been very good on her coverage, take short trips outside the capital and see just how increasingly inconsequential is the would-be tropical messiah to the rest of the country, who just wants to get on with life. If AMLO is loosing support in Mexico City, imagine in other more modern and hard-working parts of the country...

Posted by: Gabriel | August 8, 2006 12:46 PM

For those who quote something in "Reforma:"

Would you please be so kind to provide at least the gist of what you're attempting to show? I'm not a "Reforma" subscriber and don't anticipate ever becoming one; therefore, I don't have access to the paper and pretty much don't have a clue of what you are pointing to. On the other hand, full transcription of articles in Spanish appears to me as a lazy use of space. Thanks.

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 12:52 PM


The article that they are referring to is about the protesters that were blocking the toll roads into the DF. They are related to the planton in the Zocalo. Calm down. There is no need to get mad, yet.

Posted by: TG | August 8, 2006 01:20 PM

I'm once again annoyed by the contention that AMLO did "almost" reached the Presidency supported by the "chilangos." To begin with, despite the stupid decision of the Academy of the Spanish Language to include the term in its dictionary, I, born in Mexico City, resent the use of the term "chilango" to refer to natives or inhabitants of that city, due to its semantical emptiness and its pejorative history. But semantics aside... What about the millions of votes cast for AMLO in the rest of the country? How about the heavy recount in PAN-leaning states, such as Jalisco? How about the intense support for AMLO in his native state of Tabasco? This idea that "only or mostly chilangos" support AMLO has, in my opinion, seriously bigotted undertones (read, for example, that of the "modern, hard-working part of the country"). People who make this type of comments fail to understand the diversity of the biggest city in the country...

On the other hand, we are so used to politicians with no or very little spine, that when somebody showing a healthy dose of backbone comes along, many of the defenders of the "peace and order" (as AMLO said: what peace are they talking about, the peace of Don Porfirio, the peace of the graveyards?) lack the words to define reality and recur to all sort of psycobabble and offensive epithets to refer to that person...

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 01:23 PM

It now looks the Brits are also becoming "radicals"

From today's FT editorial:

Mexico's poll dispute A full recount is still needed to restore faith in government.
473 words
8 August 2006
Financial Times
London Ed1
Page 12
(c) 2006 The Financial Times Limited. All rights reserved
Mexico's political establishment runs the risk of damaging faith in the country's nascent democracy. By opting on Saturday for a partial rather than a full recount of the 41m votes cast in last month's disputed presidential election, the electoral authorities have missed a good opportunity to dispel doubts about the fairness of a contest won narrowly by Felipe Calderon, the candidate for the centre-right National Action Party.

To say that is not to endorse the claims of Andres Manuel LopezObrador, the candidate who came a close second.

The leftwing former mayor of Mexico City has shown a worrying propensity to resort to the streets and ignore legal process. The occupation by his supporters of large areas of the centre of Mexico City violates laws guaranteeing free movement introduced by his own municipal administration.

It is an approach that risks alienating supporters and even members of his Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), which did exceptionally well in the congressional poll and is now the second biggest political force in Mexico. Party members who won seats will feel increasingly uneasy about sacrificing those gains by supporting an ever more radical movement.

All of this makes any decision by the electoral authorities more difficult. Even so, a full recount still offers the best way forward. Many Mexicans continue to believe there was foul play.

The country may have moved on from the days of outright theft of elections but for many voters the memory is relatively recent and accusations carry weight. According to recent opinion polls, almost 50 per cent were in favour of a full recount.

Whether perceptions of fraud are well founded or not, opposition anger could well fuel discontent, adding to instability in poor states and aggravating social polarisation. Last month's poll revealed a sharp regional divide, with Mr Calderon winning the better-off north and Mr Lopez Obrador dominant in the less developed and more isolated south of the country.

In the partial recount that begins tomorrow electoral authorities will review votes from about 9 per cent of polling stations. If they find significant discrepancies between the initial and revised counts, the recount could be extended. A full recount is not risk- free. Not only would it be lengthy and laborious, if poorly handled it could offer opportunities for further vote tampering. But the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages.

Properly supervised and conducted transparently - possibly including live video feeds of the count - it offers the best way to ease political tensions, ensuring that whoever emerges as Mexico's new president is not only legal but is also seen to be legitimate.

Mexico's democracy has made impressive strides in recent years. It must now avoid self-inflicted wounds.


Document FTFT000020060808e28800020

Posted by: Goyito | August 8, 2006 01:31 PM

Why, TG, my attempts of expressing clearly and forcefully my opinion has to be made equal to me being angry? I guess that some here prefer convoluted speech...

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 01:34 PM


I think that the person that used the term that you take offense to only wanted to point out that Mexico is not only the DF. Although, the rest of us think that most "capitalinos" think that it is. I do not contest the fact that it is the largest and most diverse city in our country. But, it is not the only important city in Mexico. It is not unusual that most of the protests are focused there. That is because it happens to be the seat of power of our federal government.

We have seen only minor incidents in the north. Based on the type of protests that we have seen like rotating 24 hour "hunger strikes", we don't think that the allegations that this will cause nationwide ungovernability are a little exaggerated. The DF is not the country.

Posted by: TG | August 8, 2006 01:48 PM

Thank you TG, it is amazing how a little regiional criticism seems to rile those grasping at straws... The reason I DESPISE some (certainly not all) capitalinos is because the lesser ones seem to indeed see themselves as the saviors of the rest of the country. Mexico City is the reason Mexico is not a third world country... nor a first world one.

Posted by: Gabriel | August 8, 2006 02:05 PM

"many of the defenders of the "peace and order" (as AMLO said: what peace are they talking about, the peace of Don Porfirio, the peace of the graveyards?) lack the words to define reality and recur to all sort of psycobabble and offensive epithets to refer to that person..."

Am I the only one that finds the last quote Orwellian? Attacking another point of view as "psychobabble" and "offensive epithets" while doing exactly so in the same paragraph is a master example of Rovian bait and switch. Who would have thought Pasilla was a Bush voter?

Posted by: Gabriel | August 8, 2006 02:21 PM

"other more modern and hard-working parts of the country..."

I didn't write that. Besides, what the heck are you talking about, Gabriel? What does "doing exactly so" mean? "Psychobabble" and "epithet" are nouns... Can you explain to me how can they be themselves epithets? Why don't you rather go read Animal Farm? Obviously not all animals are equal...

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 02:50 PM

I couldn't help but laugh at the picture of Felipe Calderón in Ceci's post today... what an unflattering picture!

Yesterday I heard one very interesting opinion on the TEPJF decision. In the show "Entre Tres", (oh yes, I forgot to mention Reyes Heroles and Silva Herzog are all psycho, fascits, AMLO bashers - how dare they criticise El Peje!)they mentioned that the ruling of the TRIFE is actually a juridical victory for AMLO's camp. The whole vote by vote recount was a hoax from the begining since they did not complaint on the 130 000 casillas. They only did on 20 000 on the basis of "error y dolo" meaning, fraud. The other ones were filled with other types of complaints, minor ones. The TEPJF decided to open more that 11 000 which is about 54% of what AMLO's camp were asking. Experts say that is quite a large number of casillas since they represent nearly 3 million votes. And they even express that those were the only casillas in the whole country with mayor errors so, in case that there had been a fraud on the making some "cochinero", those were the places where it occured. It is importat to say that the PAN has always been against a recount of any kind and this ruling is actually a punch against Calderón's strategy.

What is most interesting is that AMLO's camp are so obtuse (for not using another adjective) to notice they actually have won something. They are installed in an all or nothing attitude that is making them lose what they have already gained. Why are they acting like this? The answer seems to be pretty simple. Even with the recount of the 11 000 casillas they still have nothing going on to revert the result.

Now AMLO has said that he wants to "purify" the country and clean up evry single institution. Really? Like Chávez cleaned up every single institution in Venezula in his favor? No, thanx, I'll pass on that one.

Meanwhile, AMLO keeps saying that the poor come firts while sipping a Mocha Latte Venti from Starbucks in his platón in the Zocalo. (One good friend of mine went to the Zocalo to try to talk out her 85 yr. old mother from living on the streets and saw that happening). Marcelo Ebrard is also going to be there to show some support as soon as he finishes opening up his wedding gifts from El Palacio de Hierro and doing photoshoots for the high society magazine Quién.

So they all seem to stand for the old-school left wing, the poor ones first, statism, no imperialism, nationalism, blah, blah. And what do they do to show they are serious? Shop in Starbucks and El Palacio de Hierro. That's some moral leadership! Are they "fresas" in diguise?

Posted by: bunburina | August 8, 2006 02:53 PM

So, bunburina, are all of us who believe that the poor deserve better condemn to poverty, lest we are called by you what, "fresas" in disguise? Did you come up with that bright logic all by yourself, or you picked it up from Patty Mercado speeches?

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 03:08 PM

It is obvious all animals are not equals. Go and read Orwell's "Homage to Catalonia" and see how a leftist such as him (and me) still places "decency" and respect for third parties above party loyalty or ideological purity.

Pasilla forgets he quotes his hero as accusing all who are against him as closet Porfirians who would rather have full graveyards instead of voting for him. That is engaging in the act of reading an opponents motivations, which is another word for psychobabble. And you accuse others of doing it while engaging in it yourself. No comprende?

Posted by: Gabriel | August 8, 2006 03:14 PM

pasilla, this might help:

Controlling Anger Before it Controls You
The goal of anger management is to reduce both your emotional feelings and the ... 750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242 Telephone: 800-374-2721

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 8, 2006 03:17 PM

As a very casual observer of the Mexican election, I feel we as citizens are missing something important. This is really quite similar to the Bush/Gore thing a couple of elections back. Now think, a quarter percentage point or so either way makes a huge difference, think of what it would have been like if Gore had actually become president for a moment. Better, worse, certainly different, right? Same thing for Mexico now. Okay, my real beef with all of this, well, a couple of bevos. First, I wonder how many people thought they were voting for George senior? I bet enough to have changed the outcome. And if the third party vote that was not messed up in Florida, Gore would have won. Who was it, Buchanan, Nadar, I have already forgotten. Should history turn on such as this? So anyway, for one thing, we have some very uninformed people voting who are putting these things over the top to begin with. Not sure what the answer on this is, to me, it would be fine if we had to prove a basic knowledge of civil affairs (kinda like the test to become a citizen) before we could vote. However, even more radical than that, I do not agree with the all or nothing aspect of a presidential election. Why can I not choose a conservative economic philosopy and a liberal social viewpoint? Why do I not have the choice to really choose based on the individual issues? It seems to me that our system really does not represent us to the extent it should. I say we push for a system where we can vote for or against the important issues of our day, without having to be stuck with all of the party line viewpoints that come along with a major party candidate. If our votes really meant something on the major issues, I think it would encourage us all to be more informed on what is really going on out there. Perhaps this system was the best that could be come up with 200 some odd years ago, but now, we have the technology to directly participate. If we are a modern people, let's show it. I don't see how the direct decisions of the people could be any worse than the ones made by our leaders. Y tu, amigos?

Posted by: mark fishel | August 8, 2006 03:23 PM

Have you ever listened to Patricia's Mercado's speeches? Of course not because you obviously have no idea what she stands for.

What I'm asking from them is coherance. Let's see, among many other things AMLO has called entrepreneurs parasites, he has said that the best foreign policy is the domestic policy, he had marked his distance with EEUU, he has said that the State is going to provide the much needed jobs, he has called people from the middle and upper class "pirruris" and implied that the rich ones have earned their wealth by exploiting the poor. He's repeatedly said that he understands them, the underdogs, the chusma, the nacos, the second class mexicans. And then goes out and shops in Starbucks, one big american, global franchise. And Marcelo Ebrard gets married and outstanding memebers of the high society, oh excuse me, "pirruris", are invited and asks for some super expensive designer cristal wear from El Palacio de Hierro. That's called hypocrisy. At least the Comandante Cero lives in the jungle. I bet AMLO would be delighted to be on the cover of Caras and Quién.

One of the characteristics of the modern day left wing is the good relations with the entrepreneurial class without leaving aside the welfare state. The modern left doesn't question the capitalist economical system, like the one we have. They don't question globalization. They embrace it and use it on their favor because globalization, well channeled, benefits the people; foreign investment, a strong entrepreneurial class brings wealth to the poor ones. The State has a small, if not unexistant role on the economy and it does what it should do: look out for the people, make for social unequalities, defend the basic human rights of the minorities.

Nationalism, statism, like AMLO supports is an outdated idea. Look up for the left-wing economic and social models that have been succesful. They aren't Cuba, North Corea, Venezuela. They are Scandinavia, Spain, Germany, the entire European Union, even China. Multilateral, globalized, open economies.

You once said that you don't understand our modern left view and the K. Vronna and I sound almost PANista. In the economical aspect we might have coincidences since anyone with two neurons understand that globalization and free trade is something we must live with and take advantage of, not run away from. But the difference with the modern left and the PAN is that the first ones are liberalon the social aspect while the PAN is conservative. The modern day left is pro-choice, pro-gay rights, strong welfare state. Stuff that AMLO has completely ignored and that the PAN will hardly support. AMLO on the other side sounds like a moderate, mini version of Castro in his early days, Allende if we are optimistic. Are we living in the 60's or 70's? NO! The Cold War was a tough time for the left wing, leftist were presecuted and murdered. But we are far from those times and AMLO and his people need to get over the romantic idea of a people's revolution simply because we now have the mechanisms to make the social reforms we need in peace. No one wants a revolution. No one.

Posted by: bunburina | August 8, 2006 03:40 PM


Do you really need the spanglish ("No comprende?")? I'm sorry, but no, I don't understand your "creative" associations between pieces of my writing: who did call you (or anybody else, for that matter) "porfiriano de closet"? What's the deal with the "full graveyards"? Aren't you "engaging in the act of reading an opponents motivations" by calling AMLO "my hero"? Can you try a little harder to see if what you attempt to say becomes clear?; that, obviously, if you care to communicate...

K. Vronna:

You are repeating your "joke." What, in my opinion, would really help would be if you refrain from using Televisa-style humor...


I confess: My two neurons are full. What I can grasp of your ranting is that you are a modern leftist if you are pro-choice, but an ancient one one if you drink Starbucks coffee... Or it may be the reverse; who knows? I'm just trying to make sense of your delirant speech. Has AMLO ignored the strong welfare state? Well, go tell that to PAN followers...

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 04:11 PM

Here's a link to a "distilled" conversation between the Mayor Mexico City - A PRD member - and journalist/writers Elena Poniatowska at my blog highwayscribery.

Posted by: the highway scribe | August 8, 2006 04:21 PM

"I confess: My two neurons are full."

You said it not I!

You're an acient leftist if you have a problem with being rich, if you see it as inmoral or as a sin. If someone has made his or her money honestly and likes to spend it in designer, expensive stuff, fine. Just don't go around calling them parasites, pirruris, exploiters and then do the exact same things they do. Is that so hard to understand? Do you want me to draw it or explain it with apples?

And opening universities with doubtful academic elevl and giving the elderly cheques and coercing them to go and sit in Reforma is hardly a strong welfare state.

Posted by: bunburina | August 8, 2006 04:23 PM

I think Lic. Felipe Calderon Hinojosa, hereto be called "The Elected President" has maintained a clever and intelligent attitude towards the who post-electoral process. What I mean is, while Humpty Dumpty sails over new and unexplored lands leading his followers somewhere already too far from Mexico and too late too make a come back, The Elected President has been cool. He has been making alliances with Labor Unions and organizations and talking to the PRI, Partido Verde, Nueva Alianza, Alternativa and other political organizations as well. The Elected President is preparing the grounds to have a great coalition that will help him get his reforms passed on congress.
Humpty Dumpty is helping also, because many people who voted for him are now disgruntled by Humpty Dumpty and his fiascos and they are seeing a calm, intelligent, clever and patience man in The Elected President of Mexico Lic. Felipe Calderon Hinojosa.
Humpty Dumpty is helping make sure the PRD never, ever wins in any presidential election.

A good time for Mexico is coming. PEMEX will be sold to those firms offering more money, usually North Americans, but it's OK, we all love their tasty and flamboyant burgers and their movies. Catholicism will be established as the only and official religion in the country. CFE and Luz y Fuerza will be also privatized, there would be many national companies interested: Hildebrando Energy, Banamex Energy, Sabritas Energy, etc. We will save the gringos the shame of building a wall at the border, we will just extend the border down to Guatemala, it is easier to build a wall down there.
Meantime the country will continue with the progressive advancement of Shopping malls and Golf courses in idle lands of beautiful south Mexico that previously occuppied by impoverished and disenfrancised farmers who kindly donated their lands and of course in exchange for their priceless contributions they will enfranchise all of them: they will give them the opportunity to work at American franchises like Mcdonalds, Whataburger, Carl's Juniors and the like. There they will have the opportunity to adquire knowledge and know-how of the new technologies of the milennia: automated dish-washers, microwave ovens and squeegees.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 8, 2006 04:34 PM

the highway scribe:

Looks to me like you have a dogmatic, brain-washed, misinformed and one-sided web log allright.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 8, 2006 05:13 PM

So, if I'm filthy rich, but happy, and don't use expressions like "parasites, pirruris, exploiters..." I'm a new leftist...

On the other hand, if I'm very poor, and very unhappy, and never, ever say: "parasites! pirruris! exploiters!" what am I, a new or an old leftist?

This dialog reminds me of that old quotation that says that if Kafka had been a Mexican, he would be a writer of realist novels...

That emptyboxes look-alike almost fooled my two neurons...

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 06:24 PM

There are no modern welfare states that I know of, they are all a falacy in my opinion and modern Social Democrats like Zapatero and others in Europe know that very well and ever more they are all adapting the social and economical institutions the United States has created and the same ones that have maintained that country as the most important economical, technological, commercial and military power in the world for the last one hundred years or so.
In the United States, the Democrats developed what they called Affirmative Action Programs, but the forces of the free market and globalization did much more than that by doing away with racism in the most effective way in the workplace and the marketplace in the United States, where already no business can afford to close the door to any customer with some money in his or her pocket and regardless of their color or nationality or religion and in the workplace competition is so hard at all levels and in all industries and markets, that no company can afford to reject new talented and prepared and very fit young professionals regardless of the color of their skin, their regilion, nationality or gender. We see this everyday in all competitive and world class companies where the most talented and prepared people are the ones who get the best positions. Open any business magazine today and you will likely find successful executives of all ages, races, genders and all kinds, african-americans, latinos, asian-americans, etc.
Globalization has brought the end of racism because the last thing a company cares for today is the color of your skin. We see this everywhere. Japanese executives in charge of American companies and viceversa, there is a French executive in charge of Nissan, a great Japanese car company, the Japanese were famous for their close society and racism. And the same happens in the United States where Mexicans are already directing movies and american corporations the same.

Communism did exactly the oppossite, it exacerbated nationalism, regionalism and ethnicity. Today Bolivians associate socialism with the rise of native americans, not poor sons and daughters of bolivia regardless of their color. Here in Mexico, United Colors of Benetton-Subcomandante Marcos have also brain-washed the Mayan population they control. I see pure racism in Marcos's cocaine poems about the color of the corn and the color of the earth, that is pure racism and a call to end with a plural Mexico. Our constitution is suppose to make us equal. Crazy and retrograde ideologies are trying to separate us.
Now these frustrated intolerant and totalitarian stalinists are mixing and changing the color of their dialectical materialism to fit the poor indigenous peoples of latin america and they are selling some in the poorest and most uneducated regions of our nations, but they will not succed.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 8, 2006 07:09 PM

As I was driving through TJ on my way home this afternoon, I found myself behind a car with several AMLO stickers on the bumper. And I was struck by what was happening to this car in Tijuana, a PANista stronghold if ever there was one (Hank Rhon excepted). What was happening? Not a thing. The bumper stickers were being ignored. Which raises the question, if a car with PAN stickers drives around the Zocalo in Mexico, will it also be left in peace? I doubt it.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 8, 2006 07:19 PM

I had really hoped that the race/class card was obsolete and would be forever discarded as a false political concept. What a shame that this HATE tactic has become fashionable in Mexico. Whether it's "Screw the rich!" or "Screw the nacos!" you're barking up the wrong tree. Our interdependence will force us to overcome mutual prejudices or we will see our nation fall into irreconcilable divisions.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 8, 2006 07:52 PM

Jerry B:

Not if it's driven through PRD encampments in Reforma...

That, over there, sounds like the old and real emptyboxes: one-sided, twisting the facts to fit his preconceptions (or I should say, prejudices?)... But this time more "colorful" than his usual self: a true rainbow in the land of Fox, I mean, Oz...

His message? In medical terms: wild capitalism is a cure all, although a strong medicine of prolonged release, with serious adverse effects for a few million low-lifes, due to its social-darwinist mode of action... Nothing ridiculous as "Por el bien de todos, primero los pobres," but rather "Por el bien de los chic@s (bien), hasta abajo los pobres (sobre todo si ademas son "nacos...")"

Now I go to read my copy of "The Anacostia CEO." It publishes an interesting article on a Palestinian fellow who directs an Israeli weapons company...

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 07:56 PM

Pasilla: It seems to me your ideology is based on hatred and nothing else. You seem to blame everyone for the poor people.

Poor people will always exist everywhere because such is the nature of the human being. In rich capitalist countries there will always be poor people, in germany and france and also in the communist countries, they also had poor people in their heyday.

Here in Mexico I have seen many poor people. I have seen many of them work hard day and night and open their own business and get out of poverty one day, others gone to the USA to work hard and return and buid a house and live better. I see them and I take my hat off, I look them in the eyes, they are complete people.
But I also see others, the kind of people I seem to see in those meetings of AMLO, the ones that extend their hand to receive, they beg and ask and demand. These are the underachievers, the ones who do not want to work hard, look at them, they are willing to stay with AMLO at the camps, I guess they have figuered if AMLO wins the government will take care of their lives. They are poor because they want to be.

Independent, hard working people who value their belongings that are the product of hard work, do not throw everything for a messianic leader. Responsible, hardworking people obey the law because the law protects their economic achievements. They struggle to live better and know very well that no government will ever make you or anyone else live better than yourself.

I am sorry for those poor people but their poverty is in their minds. The world is there for the taking. I have seen mayans opening new businesses in Los Angeles. The best medical centers and hospitals of houston are full of Mexican doctors from Yucatan, and when you see their faces and talk to them and see where they came from, you cannot but take your hat off and recognize the greatness of our people.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 8, 2006 08:32 PM

Now it seems some financial institutions in Mexico and Overseas are begining to cast doubts on our economic strenght due to AMLO protests.

But the first and most affected by an economical crisis will be the poorest people in our country. The one that demagoge claims to care for. They will be the ones to lose their jobs first as the internal market shrinks and when inflation rises they will be the first to be hit.

But this thug does not care. There will be a moment very soon when the Federal Government will have to intervene and kick them the hell out of Reforma and the Zocalo. There is no way our country is going to have a crisis for this thug's ambitions.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 8, 2006 08:42 PM

Living here in Mexico and reading some of these comments are both enlightening as well as interesting. PASILLA: Find one CHILANGO that does not liked to be called that, if anything it has become a term of endearement. I think it is important to highlight that the radicalism taking place in Mexico CIty is not a thermometer for the rest of the country, although it may appear to be. Here, in Guadalajara, people are accepting the elections and moving on. AMLO, as emptyboxes has said, has recruited lazy people with mixed up ideologies. I have many friends and coworkers in Mexico City, many of them voted for AMLO and truly disillusioned with him and as most unfounded political protests in Mexico, AMLO will be sitting alone at the Zocalo 10 yrs from now. Mexico City and the rest of Mexico is still a great place to visit. Despite AMLO.

Posted by: robles | August 8, 2006 08:45 PM

No, it's not a joke, pasilla; it's for your own good that you control your anger and resentment. I say this from experience; I wasted many irreplaceable years of my life cryin' & moanin' about politics and how unfair life was until I decided to live it and DO SOMETHING TO REALLY HELP THE POOR. The poor want jobs, businesses and equal opportunity and to be left alone by the metiche pols that are always looking out for #1.

This is not personal. It's just that your sarcasm doesn't come off as genuine debate; you belittle your blogmates and try to come off as Mr. Intellectual From On High. Try to be a little more engaging, less condescending, and prove to Bunburina & me that you're not some bitter misogynist. I'm sure that most of us participants will be more than happy to debate your ideas if you would be more diplomatic in your posts.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 8, 2006 09:07 PM

Totally agree with you emptyboxes.

I have a small business and employ 5 local people here. I´m not Mexican, but my wife is. We could have stayed in the UK, worked anywhere in Europe, or even further afield, but we decided to return to Mexico and try to make a go of it here. So far, I haven´t made a single peso profit, but I pay my staff well and on time. I foresee that after these first three years of hard work, I should hopefully turn a profit in the next 12 months. Have I done something wrong Passila? Have I stolen from the poor, or have I made sacrifices for an eventual (I hope) better future, which will reward me, and my staff, along with allowing me to expand and employ more people?

Maybe, according to AMLO, I should just give it all to the sourthern poor and P@@s of back to where I came from. Well, if AMLO starts to play up with the many small entrepreneurs in Mexico, I´ll leave anyway.

That will be 5 families without an income.

Real jobs, and real wealth come from the private sector, not makework government schemes. You only have to look over the Northern border to see that in effect. California on it´s own would be the seventh richest country in the world. Why can´t Mexico, which has some of the most hard working and ingenious people I have ever met, do one half as good as that?

Posted by: PeterN | August 8, 2006 09:10 PM

Peter N, you sound like a class oppressor. You should be liquidated, or at the least, sent off for re-education. Pasilla, no, I suppose if the carload of PRDistas drove through a PAN encampment (oops, there aren't any, we express our anger through the ballot boxes) there would have been problems too. You seem to have a wierd sense of moral equivalency. Anything AMLO does is OK, because the PAN does it to. So, a whole platoon of PRIistas who back AMLO, including many who were directly involved in the fraud of '88 is offset by the worm Gordillo. Violent personal attacks on Fox (traitor!) Calderon, and Calderon's family are OK because an add compared AMLO to Chavez. (Incidentally, the spot was a lie, AMLO is not like Chavez, he is far crazier.) La Jornada is so one sided in this discussion it makes the UK Guardian or Ivzestia look open minded. That is OK in your world, because Reforma actually tries to present both sides. And, finally, agression against PANistas in chilangolandia is OK because a drunk driver took out a PRD tent.

You live in an interesting universe.

You also said, sarcastically, that "Wild Capitalism is a cure-all". As I mentioned once, from your posts you make me think you live in or near the District of Columbia. If true, you live in the capital of the country of wild capitalism. Seen anyone starving lately?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 8, 2006 09:26 PM

Checking on Alternativa's website

I found and interesting website, much better that PAN or PRD's in design and very interesting in the way they appeal to their potential voters and members, those who are beyond the typical televisa and tv azteca clientele. Those who think and want a more socially and collectively oriented society but understanding and respecting the right of the individual to pursue its hapiness as he or she sees fit. They do not suffer from prejudices against the individual and in favor of the collective, they respect both.

And I find it very interesting how, the two new parties in our young democracy represent the best and the worst of our politics. The Past and The Future.

Nueva Alianza, represents the corporativism and corrupted leaders like Elba Ester Gordillo. They got their votes because, sadly for us, corporativism still exists in our country. They represent the past.

Alternativa, represents a new trend in advanced democracies and it is clear Patricia Mercado and her people looked at the European model and brought some new fresh ideas to Mexico. They appealed to the most sofisticated voters in our society. I guess that is why they did not get many votes from Monterrey, because we are a bunch of panista morons here, but Alternativa indeed got their votes from the thinking people of this country and not through corporativism or clientele groups. It amazes me that so many free thinking people voted for them and gave them a vote of confidence.

It was also interesting to hear of Patricia Mercado when she came to the ITESM and gave a talk. Everybody welcomed her with huge enthusiasm.

I have some neighbours who happened to be a big fan of this new party. They are a portrait of the impression we get from this party and its leaders, they are open minded, courteous, open to questioning, ready to criticize and to recognize the good or bad things in the other parties. A real modern and free thinking Mexican left.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 8, 2006 11:15 PM

You know, if AMLO would have deigned to visit ITESM, as I believe he was invited, he probably would have won the election.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 8, 2006 11:20 PM

Wow! It would take me forever to address each and every one of the stements that I judge false. Therefore, I'll limit myself to one or two per person...


As usual, yours are the wildest ones, and obviously the most abundant:

"I am sorry for those poor people but their poverty is in their minds..."

I invite you to leave your plush existence to go tell somebody who earns minimum wage that he or she is not poor, but that they only think that they are poor...


I, a native of Mexico City, dislike the term "chilango" as I explained before. You have found one: me.

K. Vronna:

"pasilla; it's for your own good that you control your anger and resentment..."

Thanks for your motherly advice, but I dare to say that psychologists have a great term for this type of statements out of the blue; they call them "projections..." I'm sorry, but I don't believe that I have to prove anything to anybody. I say what I think; as far as I know, I have not insulted anybody. So be it...


"Maybe, according to AMLO, I should just give it all to the sourthern poor..."

Maybe you should get more information. AMLO has been very clear about what entepreneurs he doesn't favor: those who profit from political connections, in detriment of the people; those who can afford accountants to find loopholes to get away paying far less than their fair share in taxes...

Jerry B:

When I mention facts, I don't make a value judgment: you do. Perhaps I'm trying to do what your beloved Reforma does: be the check among AMLO haters. Cannot you come up with a fresh argument against AMLO? I have forgotten the number of times that you have used his association with former PRI members against him. This is a game played often by PAN and his followers: if you cannot find dirt on him, attack his associates. Old trick. That was the intention of the famous videos.

"As I mentioned once, from your posts you make me think you live in or near the District of Columbia. If true, you live in the capital of the country of wild capitalism..."

Never mind Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, unemployment insurance, student loans, etc., etc. Of course, progressives should remain watchful of American politicians who inspire extremism like emptyboxe's... Why would be odd if I live in the DC area? We participate in a blog sponsored by the Washington Post, dont we?

Well, guys and gals, keep going. I'm gonna bed. Sweet "Calderon President" dreams...

Posted by: pasilla | August 8, 2006 11:23 PM

Jerry B.: I think you are right.
And that is what I never understood. AMLO never came and he never did anything to appeal to the traditional voters in this region, or even a short visit to the TEC or even to our UANL would have given him a few more votes. It was as though he has a profound dislike for us. Because he was here in Montemorelos for a very short time and he also was in Nuevo Laredo and the closest he got to Monterrey was a very short visit to Guadalupe.
He would have won had he shown more interest for other regions of the country where Felipe Calderon got more votes.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 8, 2006 11:42 PM

Pasilla, it is not odd that you live in the DC area. But, if you have open eyes, and compare DC or anywhere in the "wildly capitalist" United States with Mexico, you ought to be able to see where people, even poor people paying student loans that they never would have gotten in the first place in Mexico, live better. And it is no accident. Capitalism when mixed with democracy works. Period. AMLO's corporative socialism does not.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 12:04 AM

Read about this:

Expresa coalición dudas sobre jueces y magistrados que apoyarán recuento

Enrique Méndez

08/08/2006 20:54


Posted by: K. Vronna | August 9, 2006 12:05 AM

Empty Boxes, I think AMLO assumed he would win by acclamation, since "the people" all love him. Error.

I actually watched the TV news last night, something I rarely do, and got a look at one of AMLO's discurses. As he would say something (Nos quedamos o nos vamos?, Estan de acuerdo?) the crowd would howl back SI or NO. It vaguely reminded me of old newsreal clips of rallies in Munich or Berlin presided over by Herr Hitler.
It also poses the question. Suppose the recount favors him, and he wins. Is this how he is going to govern? When the PAN plurality in congress shoots down all his bold plans, will he convoke a crowd to "tomar" congress?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 12:08 AM

K. Vronna, I have been saying from Day 1 that if a recount does not favor AMLO, he will just say that the recounters have been corrupted and continue his games.

I really hope all the chilangos who voted for AMLO are enjoying their commutes along Reforma. Mine is rather quick, but then I live in the north where we do not have to put up with this stupidity...

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 12:14 AM


You pretty much summed up why Bunburina, myself and more than a million more free-thinking souls voted for PASC. Thanks.

Nice and tranquil where I live, like Doña Florinda, my neighborhood reporter likes to say, "Pecamos de tranquilos en esta colonia".

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 9, 2006 12:51 AM

Study Recommends More Transparency for Wider Recount That Begins This Week
Mark Weisbrot, 202-746-7264
Dan Beeton, 202-293-5380 x 104; 202-256-6116 (cell)

Washington, D.C.: An analysis of the first partial recount of Mexico's presidential election raises a number of questions about the electoral process, most importantly about its transparency. The study, conducted by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), also found a number of unexplained anomalies in the data.
"Mexico's electoral authorities should be conducting a impartial inquiry into what happened in this election, and making the results known to the public as accurately and quickly as possible," said Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director of CEPR and co-author of this report. "It is clear that they did not fulfill this responsibility for the first partial recount."
Among the problems with the transparency of the first recount, which encompassed about 2.2 percent of the ballot boxes, are:
It has taken a month since the recount for the results to be posted on the web site of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), as opposed to the original count, which was posted immediately. The information from the first recount should have been immediately available because it is very relevant to the Federal Electoral Tribunal's decision regarding the larger recount, which begins tomorrow.
The results posted still do not sufficiently explain what happened in the recounted areas. For example, some 116 ballot boxes apparently lost an average of 63 percent of their votes in the recount. The IFE has still not explained to the public how this happened or where these votes went.
An analysis of the recounted ballots also shows a number of anomalies. For example:
Most of the difference between the recounted and the original totals is due to 116 ballot boxes that lost an average of 63 percent of their votes during the recount. These were largely ballot boxes that contained more than the proscribed limit of 750 votes.
Not all of the ballot boxes that had more than 750 votes were re-opened. The ones that were opened had a significantly higher percentage of votes for Lopez Obrador than the ones that were not opened. This raises the possibility that the recount gave Lopez Obrador a net loss of votes because of the way in which these "over voted" ballot boxes, which lost most of their votes during the recount, were selected to be opened.
The majority of the null votes (17,129 or about 2 percent of the total votes) in the recounted ballot boxes were removed in the recount. The IFE did not explain whether any of these null votes became valid votes in the recount. If so, this is potentially important because the total number of null votes in the presidential race is more than three times the margin of difference between the two top candidates.
The authors note that it is possible that these and other anomalies found in the recounted data, described in the paper, have reasonable explanations. However, what is most difficult to explain is the lack of transparency in the process and the inordinate amount of time that the IFE has taken to publicize information - still very incomplete - on the recount that has taken place.
"It is unfortunate that the Federal Electoral Tribunal made a decision about which ballot boxes to recount before the results of this first partial recount were explained to the public," said Weisbrot. "Furthermore, if this new recount is not conducted very differently than the last one, it is difficult to see how it will be of much use in obtaining a credible result."
The full paper is available at
The Center for Economic and Policy Research is an independent, nonpartisan think tank that was established to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. CEPR's Advisory Board of Economists includes Nobel Laureate economists Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz, and Richard Freeman, Professor of Economics at Harvard University.

Posted by: Goyito | August 9, 2006 12:52 AM

I partly agree with emptyboxes that hard work and education are the main answers to come out of poverty. I have one good example at home. My father comes from a very poor family from Tlaxcala and moved, when he was very young, to Mexico city looking for a chance to improve their living standard. Turns out my grandfather, who was a shoemaker's assistant, died some years later and my dad and my uncle had to take care for the family. My dad had been working two jobs since he was 13 years old. He went to public shools all his life and graduated from UNAM while handling another three jobs, one of them as a message boy in a big multinational firm. Turns out that thanks to his hard work the company started promoting him even paying him a masters degree in Canada. He retired from the company with some killer job and earning a very good salary. My uncle? He dropped out from secundaria and took some job in a factory as an unskilled worker. He's 80 years old and he's still being poor. He lives from a monthly allowance my dad gives him.

Of course, it is also true that it is nearly impossible for some people to even go to school or eat decently. I know you can't learn something when you don't have shoes and are malnourished or need to work 10 hours a day. That's where the governmet needs to make up for social unequalities. All people should have free basic medical assitance so they can go on with their lifes without worrying about losing their few belongings to buy some medicine. There is no bigger tragedy than being poor and sick. We need an IMSS that is not putting a kidney instead of a heart or that doesn't have enough medicines to attend the people.

All people should have at least some basic nutritional level. The free breakfasts in schools are definetely a good idea. We need a competitive public education, take care of our teachers. Economical incentives to keep people sending their kids to school. Economical incentives for family planning. Unemployment insurance to keep people from falling into poverty again. A good, decent, retirement system, no some nonsense of a charity. And jobs, jobs, jobs, and more jobs. Fiscal incentives and less paper-work for new business. Stronger sanctions for tax evasion. And less informal economy.

What I definetely don't agree is higher education for all. Free, yes. But for everyone, no. No admission exam, no thesis, no tests are simply stupid. The Universidad del Distrito Federal is such a joke. The best education should go for the best students. Survival of the fittest. I believe you do have to work your butt off to earn your title not just warm up the chair and graduate 16 years later like my beloved AMLO (who by the way wants to change the economical system while failing the same subject in college). The last thing the country needs is more mediocre lawyers or doctors. That's why the UNAM lost so much of its name. There was a time when rich and poor all went to the UNAM because it was THE university. Nowadays, if someone has the means to send their kids somewhere else they'll do it without thinking it twice. The UNAM has to have a real academic level to compete with private universities.

Posted by: bunburina | August 9, 2006 12:56 AM

Wow! Thanx emptyboxes! Finally someone reads a little more about the PASC and knows that it is a lot more than a small party led by the cute woman with the blueish-greenish jacket that spoke nice in the debate.

The key phrases of your post:

"...brought some new fresh ideas to Mexico." and "A real modern and free thinking Mexican left."

Posted by: bunburina | August 9, 2006 12:57 AM

Bunburina, why should higher education be "free"? Because, of course, it is not free, it is paid for by your and my tax money. Free higher education, with admissions standards, gives us something like Brazil today, where the various levels of government spend as much on university education as they do on primary and secondary. What is the result? Those who cannot afford private schools learn very little in public elementary schools. They then fail the entrance exams to university. Who gets in, for free? The children of the rich, who can afford private schools, and cramming classes for the admissions tests. Taking, once again, the American example would be a better idea, I think. Basically anyone who wants to can go to university. They just have to pay for it. (Or join the army and let the army pay...) Which is why, statistically, more members of the lower middle class and lower class in America attend university than any other country in the world.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 01:14 AM


I always thought Patricia Mercado's campaign was a lot more than giving a few condons away in the corner of the street like many in PAN and PRD wished people to believe.
I actually read about her and heard her with attention.
She and her party is a real break away from the marxism, lenininsm, stalinism, and castrism that has characterized PRD, PT and Convergencia. The very reason why many people who had been normally be more inclined to support candidates from PRD, PT or Convergencia because of their social agendas but that at the same time get scared off by their radicalism and their proximity to totalitarian models.

Some people say that Patricia Mercado took votes away from AMLO. I say it was the oppossite, AMLO took many voter that would have gladly voted for Alternativa and who are probably regretting having voted for AMLO today. But the imperative of having a Leftists, it did not matter what kind of leftist, in Office forced many voters to decide for AMLO.
But those voters are still there and they will come back in the next elections and reward Alternativa for its moderation and modernity.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 9, 2006 07:10 AM


Are you still on cocaine conspiracy theories?
This dumb people from these institution made an analysis from 2.2 Polling packages that were marked as irregular by IFE precisely because the representatives of the parties found irregularities in the first place, but they were the only ones protested in July 2.
If they want to be objective about their conclusion they should pick a sample of actas from IFE and then run their cocaine statistical analysis.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 9, 2006 07:14 AM

¡Hablan de obedecer la ley, de acatar la ley, pero FOX y el PAN fueron los primeros en violarlo! ¡Ya estubo cabrones!
¡Solucion O Revolution!

Posted by: maya0 | August 9, 2006 10:04 AM

Today it starts, and the world will be a witness; the recount (el recuento de los votos) of those 12thousand cassillas, will show that que reflejara inconsistencias.
Van a ver como se despeja any doubt que AMLO is the legitimate Presidente of Mexico
Of 133,000, only 12mil? Nimodo, but it will dejar ver, that hay que revisar every casilla. ¡Voto X Voto Casilla X Casilla!
¡Con AMLO Todo Con FECAL Nada!
¡Solucion O Revolution!

Posted by: maya0 | August 9, 2006 10:46 AM


Just move to Cuba or Venezuela and let us build a better Mexico... you give leftist a bad name... read today's column by Castaneda, and see what a true, patriotic, progressive Mexican is really like. Ponte a trabajar, tu y todos los holgazanes acampados en la via publica de TODOS los mexicanos. You are so pathetic.

Posted by: Gabriel | August 9, 2006 11:11 AM

Top 10 reasons why Calderon is the best choice for Mexico:

1. First and foremost, Calderon will make sure that Mexico continues the trend set out by Echeverria, Lopez Portillo, De la Madrid, Salinas and Fox. What trend is that? The trend of a long list of accomplishments occurred in the last 30 yrs. of PRI-PAN government.

2. Calderon will make sure that 50% of Mexicans remain with an income of less than $1 dollar a day.

3. Calderon will make sure that the exodus of millions of unemployed Mexicans continue going to the USA.

4. Calderon will make sure that the lack of gains in science and technology occurred during the Echeverria, Lopez Portillo, De La Madrid, Salinas and Fox continue.

5. Calderon will make sure that Mexico remains a 3rd world country.

6. Calderon will make sure that none of the participants of the bank frauds committed every sexenio are brought to justice.

7. Calderon will make sure that the Durazos, Hank Gonzalez and Salinas are able to steal with absolute impunity.

8. Calderon will make sure that the income and social disparities between the Mexican north and south increase.

9. Calderon will make sure that millions of young Mexicans have limited access to quality education.

10. There has been absolutely no improvement in the living conditions in Mexico for the past 30 yrs. But thank God we have Calderon to maintain the status quo.

God bless you.

Posted by: Top 10 !!! | August 9, 2006 11:20 AM

Gabriel, your just a quiche eating blowhard, who wouldnt know true work, if it bit u on the nalga. We only wish that Mexico had the medical advances and literacy rates of that tiny island of Cuba.
And if u care to chk, the per capita growth in Venezuela under Chavez has been humming along at 7 percent for the last 5 years. How is that bad?
Your the type Gabriel who wants to see the paja en others eyes, and fails to see the big log of caca in their own.
Here in the Real North, where am from, and where i live, ppl work for a living battling with the lovely desert.
Your kind is a cancer in the heart of Mexico that must be cut out and tossed away. No sirve, and must be replaced. You dont build on faluire. Thats like buliding a house out of sand, u get rid of the faluires of the past that the Pri and the Pan represent and make anew.
So pls step aside Gabriel, emptyboxes, jerry b, etc. etc. Get your houses ready in the United States. Here comes the Mexican version of the Miami exiles los Cubanos gusanos, the birth of The Gusanos Mexicanos.
¡Voto X Voto Casilla X Casilla!
¡Con AMLO Todo Con FECAL Nada!
¡Solucion 0 Revolucion!

Posted by: maya0 | August 9, 2006 11:27 AM

Tambien soy norteno, babosa, y quiero un mejor pais... repito, si te gusta tanto Cuba y Venezuela, vete a vivir ahi, y dejanos al 65% que no votaron por AMLO construir un mejor pais.

Posted by: Gabriel | August 9, 2006 12:11 PM

It is interesting that a tribunal decision that really favored AMLO is portrayed as a blow against him. After all, the tribunal could have thrown out all the complaints and left the results stand as they were. By doing the partial recount and leaving open the possibility of doing more, the tribunal favored the PRD.

So how does the Stalinist camp react? They block off a few foreign banks and seize control of the highway tollbooths. The latter had to have been done with violence or at least the threat of violence. The tolerant federal government allowed this to happen so as not to create "martyrs" for AMLO to exploit.

Pasilla continues to go on about AMLO's promise to the poor. Jerry B and others have pointed out that countries where capitalism is well established tend to be more prosperous. There is also the fact that communism failed completely and the old Soviet Union disappeared.

Maybe Pasilla could take some time to explain just what plan AMLO had for alleviating poverty in Mexico. Maybe we have him all wrong. Maybe we should not be going by his speeches and his actions as jefe de gobierno en el distrito federal. Maybe pasilla knows of some plan or set of programs that really would reduce poverty and make Mexico something like Sweden, a socialist democracy where people live fairly well. I would like to hear about that from pasilla, because I have never heard it from AMLO.

Posted by: Goyo | August 9, 2006 12:37 PM

The very fact that the Casillas to be opened are from locations where Felipe Calderon won should serve to prove that the TRIFE's desicion really favored AMLO.

In my opinion this will serve to strongly show how clean the process was. I am optimistical and I firmly believe it will.

But in all fairness, the TRIFE should have ordered a partial recount of a true sample of all Casillas in the country and not only those impugned by PRD.

Anyway, PAN is not hands down here and they have impugnated a number of Casillas in the south that strongly favored AMLO, and here is the trick about their impugnations, they are impugnating them not to have them recount but to annul them, and that is because those particular Casillas were set on wrong locations or the people or the IFE representatives were not the originally designated. They are some 500 of them, The PAN people file those complains for these Casillas on July 2, so they have the protest sheets and all they need to get them annulled and they are sure they will and AMLO is sure going to take a blow there when PAN gets its turn at Court.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 9, 2006 12:47 PM


Please define where exactly "The Real North" is for me, you see I live in Chihuahua and know of very few people who "battle the beautiful dessert" Ánd while you´re about it, quit with the whole "Fecal" thing as well. And if you´ve can, while you´re about that, get a life. You express yourself like a 16 year old who has just come to believe communism in all its "fairness". It´s so fair in Cuba that Castro has his own entire private floor at the hospital there. Well, in fact he shares it with his brother, the crown prince Raul. Other Cubans have to pay (in the universal free health care system) for aspirin, and about 60 dollars for "extras" such as x'rays.

7% growth in Venezeula in 5 years? So thats about 40% altogether (compounded year on year). Since the price of oil has doubled in the same period, I don´t think he´s doing that good at all. And why does he need to spend 3 billion dollars on Russian arms? Does he really think it would make a difference? If he built a couple of refineries instead, then he might end up with some international power, but at the moment he has oil (largest customer: USA) but no means to refine it. He is dependent on other countries refining it for him.

As for your cries for a revolution, maybe if you start one the North will simply secede from the south. Than Adolfo Obrador can be president for life down there.

Posted by: PeterN | August 9, 2006 12:48 PM


What are you on? Where in heavens name is the REAL NORTH? The last time I looked, most of Mexico's North is a desert. Not just your little part of it. That fact did not stop our ancestors from trying to carve out a living in this God forsaken land and most of them didn't wait for the government to give them anything. If anyone in this country knows what hard work is, it is those who have tried to farm anywhere in the North. For most of us those were our grandparents or great grandparents. They were the ones that thought us our work ethics. So don't preach to us.

As for your opinion that medical advances and literacy make Cuba a great place to live. I guess that your idea of freedom is being a very healthy and well read, official books only, poor person. The fact that if you even think of doing what AMLO and his followers are doing would surely get you jailed or worse is of course of little importance.

Venezuela's economy is doing great because of oil prices and Chavez's hate for the gringos doesn't stop him from selling them 80% of Venezuela's oil. By the way, how are his poor people doing? How much has their income changed?

Posted by: TG | August 9, 2006 01:20 PM

Jerry B, I'm not saying all higher education should be free but we most give even more support to those institutions of free higher education - with the condition of course that the educational level is competitive and the students in there are taking real advantage of it.

Let's see, for example, the son or daughter (who is intelligent and capable enough of a decent college title) of someone who's making $7 000 every two weeks, $14 000 per month. How much a private university costs in Mexico? $45 000 to $50 000 per semester? It is nearly impossible for someone earning $14 000 per month to pay it, even with some scholarship or financial aid. That's the kind of people who really will benefit from public higher education. And there is a lot of people, I'll say the majority, in thay situation.

I've been looking for the tuition fees of a semester in an Ivy League university in the USA and they are quite expensive. It is nearly $100 000 pesos per semester. I doubt that some kid, whose parents earn a little more than the minimum wage, can afford that even with some kind of financial aid. And it is pretty hard to get some since either you are a super genius or some kind of super athlete to actually get one. I think the german educational system is quite interesting. Not everyone graduates with a college title but everyone has some kind of higher education. They give a lot of importance to technical careers (what in Mexico would be the Conalep) and even if you're not smart enough to make it to college you can be sure you can at least aspire to some kind of decent job as a high skilled labor hand. I've know german carpenters or plumbers who live a lot better that many lawyers. And all that is for free.

Posted by: bunburina | August 9, 2006 02:23 PM

Read this tiny piece of news. You never know who is going to benefit the recount:

Posted by: bunburina | August 9, 2006 02:32 PM

Gabriel, chinga tu madre. Dont even know what maya mean, what a sap. Cuba and Venezuela, arent paradises, Mexico for my taste, is much better, however, u cannot take from Castro what hes done in his country, given the fact that the usa has been at war with him for almost 50years. And Chavez, well Gabriel, u have caca for brains, because its 7percent yearly, u tarado. And its not just oil, Venezuela has always had oil, but no growth for its people before, whats the diffrence now? Diffrent leadership from the same old crowd, which people like u represent, so step aside, please step aside. Because Mexico is a changing, if u like it or not, for real democratic change, not window dressing u joto.
Oh and when i say el norte de verdad, its deep in the northern states, not them cities stuck on a chian link fence to tio sam. And really now, its only one Mexico, its not divisiable by 2, no matter how much u ppl long 2b a add on of the jewnited states.
¡Voto X Voto Casilla X Casilla!
¡Con AMLO Todo, con FECAL Nada!
¡Solucion O Revolucion!

Posted by: maya0 | August 9, 2006 02:41 PM

It seems that so far the difference in the recount had been minimal, of just one or two votes. Hardly a big elaborated fraud like AMLO claims.

Posted by: bunburina | August 9, 2006 02:44 PM

Maya0, please calm down! Stop the name calling. You'll have a much better rsponse if you express calmly your arguments. Same for everyone else, calm down! Help us raise the level of debate in here.

Venezuela may have a growth of 7% due to oil or the way it is being managed right now, but we still have to see if it is really on the benefit of the common people. Of all people, not just the poor ones or those on Chávez side.

I think that saying "solución o revolución" is a bit dangerous to say. There will be a solution, but what if that solution doesn't satisfy AMLO? Is there going to be a revolution? I hope not since no one really wants violence and bloodshed in our country. I'm pretty sure 90% of mexicans will definetely agree that we need to keep peace alive and playing with the idea of a revolution is like playing with fire and you might get burned.

We need to understand that some people are on AMLO's side and some people are against him but at the end we are all mexicans and out future president, whoever might be, needs to govern for us all and satisfy our basic demans. For both, rich and poor, pro-american and anti-american. We have the right to have our voice heard. All of us.

Posted by: bunburina | August 9, 2006 02:52 PM


"User reviews and comments that include PROFANITY or PERSONAL ATTACKS or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site."

Do you understand what this means or do want a translation? Don't know what the other participants think, but one more "mentada" and I'm reporting your rule breaking.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 9, 2006 03:15 PM

typical leftist answer when logic and reason is against him take what he can by force and damned be the rest.

Posted by: gus | August 9, 2006 03:34 PM


Actually, getting an education at one of the top USA universities is possible for everyone with a high enough talent. This was written by a Harvard professor in an english newspaper 28th May this year:

"Ah, I hear you object, but what about those enormous fees? And it's true that tuition and fees at Harvard currently total $32,097, so putting your pride and joy through a four-year degree course could set you back roughly £70,000. But - and here's the key point - not if you cannot afford it. Because Harvard is rich, it can follow a "needs blind" admissions policy, based purely on academic criteria. If you get in and your family turns out to be poor, it is free."

Incidently, Harvard does not give free schorlarships to super athletes or super geniuses what it does do is provide grants, loans and on campus jobs.

All financial aid at Harvard is based on need, and almost 50 percent of students get direct grants averaging $14,500 a year, just under half the tuition bill. All grant recipients also receive loans, as do another 20 percent of the stuents. The average loan is $4,600.

You see, because it is private, most of the alumni thank their alma mater by giving very generously back to it, trusting that the instituition will wisely use the money for the benefit of students whatever their background. State controlled universities tend to have other motives in awarding aid and schorlarships, usually related to social engineering.

Of course, you still have to be smart enough to get in!

Having said all that, I do agree that education is probably the greatest means forward in lifting people out of poverty, but the standards have to remain high so that "a degree is a degree". In England, Blair has been trying to get 50% of school leavers into university, and many of them are just not suited to it. As a result degrees have been watered down to allow more people to pass, and we now have such high level studies as a BA in "Golf course management" - wouldn´t it be better to spend the three years actually working on a golf course to get experience? As a result of this watering down of first degrees, to get on you now need to have a second, further degree, because employers regard all first degrees as something almost anyone can get. This then leads to the fact that only people with supportive parents, or private income, can stay on to get one, which means the people they opened up the universities for in the first place are almost back where they started, if everyone can get a degree, what does it proove? A balance in increasing openings without diluting content is required.

Your point about the technical vocations I really agree with, in the UK as well, carpenters, electricians etc are paid vastly more than many lawyers, London even has a millionaire plumber, who now only works for the like of Madonna, Paul McCartney etc!!! I would encourage Mexico to really push forward on the technical vocations. These will help the country grow, and, if you have to emmigrate, Canada, Australia and other countries are crying out for people with these skills.

Maya0 What language are you writing? Apart from the childish insults you don´t really make much sense. I think you should get ready to be banned.

Posted by: PeterN | August 9, 2006 03:50 PM

*** Looks to me like you have a dogmatic, brain-washed, misinformed and one-sided web log allright.

wow! looks who's talking here. Mr. Televisa-Reforma News (all good and balanced).

Posted by: Get Real | August 9, 2006 03:57 PM

Hey everyone! Wonderful debates going on here.

I read that story about the one vote being added to AMLO from one of those casillas that is being recounted. As small as this lone vote plays into the scheme of things, already the Coalicion's legal team is saying how this is bona fide proof of massive fraud.

Its sadly obvious that these guys will do anything to make sure that everyone's hardwork in this election amounts to nothing all for the ambitions of AMLO. Irregularities of this size are more likely than not due to human error - I think the fraud charges should wait until we see real evidence of fraud like hundreds of votes being given to the wrong person or what have you. I personally believe - as voter last July 2nd - that this was a fair and clean election. I remember how excited everyone was that day to vote and how optimistic everyone was; now there's so much hatred and anger.

I seriously considered voting for AMLO and i stayed up the entire night before the voting trying to decide between him and Calderon because I liked how he wanted to help the poor. In the end i felt more jobs would be better than cross country bullet trains paid from non-existant funds from the government. I am so disillusioned with AMLO as I see now who he really is, and im glad I ultimately voted for so-called "Fecal".

Posted by: Beco | August 9, 2006 05:26 PM

"Actually, getting an education at one of the top USA universities is possible for everyone with a high enough talent..."

What, PeterN, is your idea of "high enough talent"? What is a "top USA university"?

Two little facts: a) You quote only tuition at Harvard; if you add room, board, books and other fees, the cost per year becomes above $40,000 USD per year; b) acceptance rate at institutions like Harvard and other Ivy League schools has remained at or below 20%; of course, if your daddy went to Yale... And if he was US President, it helps... As a matter of fact, this very paper, the Post, published an interesting piece in its weekend magazine under the provocative title "Is it worth it?" discussing the trade offs of a big post-graduation debt and an education in a prestigious (but very expensive) private school. People outside the US may be unfamiliar with the existence in the US of splendid public universities, which, by the way, we subsidize with out taxes. Student loans are not needed in Mexico, because education in public universities is almost free of charge. So tax money is involved in education on both sides of the border...

Now, regarding "technical" education... My fear is that the proponents of "wild capitalism" may want to follow a model in which the education of technicians is favored over that of profesionals. I have heard the argument before: "don't fund research (done by Alfa scientists in the Metropolis) or 'non-productive' careers like History or Philosophy. Is the ONLY purpose of an education to prepare specialized hands with no brains? I would be very sad if my country becomes a big maquiladora...

Finally, come on, people! Are your chaste, innocent ears hurt by a little profanity? Not mine. I'm more concerned about bad thoughts, like bigotry, than startledby a few bad words, whatever that means...

Posted by: pasilla | August 9, 2006 05:41 PM

I deal with profanity every day, who doesn't? What's important is that we respect the rules of the Post, the people that so graciously host our discussions. Also the "mentada" was a direct personal aggression that is also prohibited in the rules. Maybe I should have realized that maya0 had probably been instructed by the PRD to use the "mentada" tactic and is not responsible for his acts; remember all the "mentadas" sent out to José Cárdenas from "El Tata" & others in the zócalo.

Amen on the technical vocations, we've got to start putting food on the table and then work on the more intellectual aspects of education, which are no less important, but are not for everyone. A bunch of political science majors just doesn't seem to cut it when it comes to the everyday running of a household, a neighborhood, a community, a city or a nation.

Gus, substitute "ideologue" for "leftist" and I'll agree with your statement.

Beco, what one should look for in fraud finding is, as I'm sure any statistician will agree, is a TREND, not random outliers. If it's there, it'll show up. (Beco? In valley Zapotec that means "dog", we called my weaving teacher in Teotitlán, "Tío Beco", and he was a real hound dog, God rest his soul.)

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 9, 2006 05:57 PM

From "Reforma:"

"Encuentran casillas con errores en Jalisco

Tras ocho paquetes electorales abiertos, en la Comisión Distrital Número 8 de Jalisco se han encontrado errores en el conteo de votos.

La mayoría de éstos perjudican a la coalición Por el Bien de Todos, sobre todo en la casilla 677 donde se le quitaron 80 sufragios.

Los votos de la coalición se le contabilizaron el 2 de julio al Partido Nueva Alianza, el cual el día de la elección obtuvo 88 votos.

Sin embargo, de éstos, sólo cuatro eran de ellos, el resto eran de la coalición y del PRI..."

Does this sound like an "innocent mistake" to you?

Posted by: pasilla | August 9, 2006 06:21 PM

Lets not kid ourselves, American elite universities offer more opportunities that Mexican elite universities... I myself got my higher eduacation through a Fulbright in a top-3 American university without being an American citizen, and when I taught at Monterrey Tech the student body was not nearly as diverse as it is an American elite university. The gringo system is not perfect, and it may not be all applicable to Mexico, but it sure is better than the decrepit UNAM, stuck as it is in the 1960's Dependency Theory model.

Posted by: Gabriel | August 9, 2006 06:27 PM

Money quote from a modern Mexican leftist, (not a jurassic one)

"Cuentan que hace unos años, al término de una larga conversación que sacó muy a flote los desacuerdos que los separan, López Obrador le espetó a Felipe González: "El problema contigo es que eres un socialdemócrata, un reformista". A lo que el ex presidente de España dijo: "Pues sí, pero no creo que sea un problema, y además al término de mis 13 años de gobierno en España, es bastante evidente". Palabras más o menos, el diálogo ilustra el problema de fondo que vive México hoy. La izquierda mexicana, representada principal mas no sólo por el PRD y AMLO, sigue presa de la vieja división entre reformistas y revolucionarios: reforma o revolución...Mientras la totalidad de la izquierda mexicana no abdique de la revolución y se vuelva reformista, no ganará elecciones; mientras no se deshaga de la idea mítica del paraíso terrenal ("soberano, educado y saludable") representado por la Revolución Cubana, no se volverá reformista. Son decisiones desgarradoras, sobre todo cuando no se entienden."

Jorge Castaneda, in today's "El Norte" (which may be center-right in its editorial, but at least gives a fair shot at the other side, unlike the joke that is "Jornada" that chilango nest of unrecostructed dependency theory addicts.

Posted by: Gabriel | August 9, 2006 06:30 PM

bunburina, Pasilla:
If you plan on going to an American University the last thing you look at is the tuition fees, but you'd better worry about your school averages.
I guess that is what PeterN meant. Let me explain.
A typical young man or woman who wants to go to University in the United States will normally file an application at several Universities, specially if the student wants to join an Ivy League University. Why, because money it's not enough for most of them but the quality and talent of the applicants, and they are most demanding with them.
These universities usually have some incredibly difficult tests and also several interviews with a board of professors that may include a psicologist proffesor sometimes, to see whether you fit the profile. And normally they require you to have the best grades, always and they also like to know about your personal habits and the kind of person you are, they also ask you for letters of reccomendation and all kinds of stuff. During the application process, they never talk to you about money, that is not important for Harvard or any of those great schools, because if you get admitted to that school, they will give you a letter of acceptance and with this letter you can walk to any bank, and believe me, any bank in the United States will be more than happy to finance your education at Harvard. The fees of these schools are ridicuolus for what you will earn when you graduate and start working, and there will be plenty of corporations waiting for you to give you a good job.
The bank's business is not to finance your education for the most part, that is only about 40 or 50 thousand dollars a year, and when you graduate from harvard you will be expected to make more than 160 thousand a year to begin with and also to work for a huge company, so the banks really looks for the opportunity to work with you and build some brand loyalty in order to go with you wherever you go. They want you to bank with them for the rest of your life because they know you will have many chances of being successful. You are already successful the very moment you got accepted by Harvard or any of these Schools.
The business for Schools like Harvard, Chicago University, Stanford and others is not the tuition fees paid by their students, that is the last thing they could care about, but the name and recognition they get from their graduates, many of whom become nobel prizes, scientist researchers, Company leaders, etc. Actually in some of these universities like Chicago University, when the graduates start working, it is a tradition to donate a small percentage of your salary to your Alma Mater. I have read that Google and Intel for example, donate part of their profits to Stanford University, and so does IBM to the MIT.
The business of many great American universities is not the students but rather the graduates and their contributions to society and to their own institutions.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 9, 2006 06:50 PM


That is MASSIVE FRAUD! I am totally impressed.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 9, 2006 06:52 PM

Here is another piece of news from Jalisco

Favorecen votos al PAN en Tlaquepaque

En dos casillas, las últimas recontadas en el distrito 16, se encontró que hay más votos para el PAN y de 169 aumentarían a 171

Mariana Jaime

Guadalajara, México (9 agosto 2006).- Las dos últimas casillas recontadas hasta las 11:50 horas arrojaron más votos que en el primer conteo para Acción Nacional.

En la casilla 2476 básica, el PAN tenía 120 votos y en el recuento surgieron 143.

Mientras que en la 2478 también básica, de 169 aumentaron a 171.

Para la Coalición no hubo modificaciones manteniendo 53 y 72 sufragios respectivamente.

Tres votos serán enviados a revisión, dos de ellos para tratar de sumarlos al PAN y el tercero a la Coalición.

That is another evidence of the Massive fraud.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 9, 2006 07:11 PM

Ok Pasilla, Here goes

"High enough talent" should be pretty obvious to you, as you certainly have a higher talent for arguing your case than the like of MayaZero. Most people are aware of the fact that we are not all born intellectually equivalent, some are better than others, and a rare few are outstandingly better. That's life. We´re not all born great baseball players, violin maestros or adept political commentators either. If you fit into the band of excellence the college is asking for, you have "high enough talent"

What is a top USA University. Actually I think in all nations with universities the generally educated people know which are the top universities. In England, Oxford and Cambridge, in USA the so called Ivy league, and here in Mexico, I haven´t really been around long enough, or paid much attention to the Universities, suffice to say that many job adverts at a professional level state they prefer a candidate educated at the Tec de Monterrey, so I guess that is considered one of the superior here. One can also look at the applications per place, and see how over subscribed a subject is, which is another way of regarding the value placed upon the particular course by the students who are actually going to spend the money/time doing it.

I only quoted Harvard because I happened to be able to get those figures quickly. As it turns out, Yale Stamford and Princetown are more generous in their financial aid packages, according to the same article I ripped the Harvard info from. You said I didn´t add room, board etc. Are you implying that if one doesn´t go to university, some one should also fund your accommodation and food? Or are students so special that everything must be given to them free of cost. Remember, most students who achieve a degree will end up with a far greater salary than those who have not, and maybe some people would see that as an investment in themselves. Of course if they choose to do a Mickey Mouse degree with no possible chance of getting employment in the outside world that's their own business, but I don´t see why thay should expect the government or anyone to fund research into "the marginal effects of 4th century latin writing on 14th century italian poetry". I´m not saying that this should not be studied, because all knowledge is in some way enriching to the human race, but in a world of finite resources, some things should be paid for by the individual who wishes to pursue them.

Acceptance rate of below 20%. So one in five applicants gets in. See my point about what makes a top university. Should they accept anyone who applies? Pasilla, have you ever been stuck in a class where 90% of the students are able to keep up, but the teacher has to labour excessively with the 10% who either can´t or won´t? This deprives the rest of their education. Don´t deny this 10% (or 80% in the case of Harvard) their education, allow them to study in a class or manner more suited to their requirements.

A lot of people bandy the word "elitist" around like it´s some sort of social crime. What´s wrong with an institution taking on the very best and brightest they can, so long as it is blind to race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age etc? Intellectually, these are the people who will work out how to make cures through use of the human genome project, how to cut back on pollution by getting rid of the need for oil products (sorry PEMEX) and using cold fusion or other clean energy sources. They will develop the new software ideas that make our lives so much more productive, (such as contributing to this comment page!).It is ultimately by fostering the talents of these people that advantages will come to all the rest of us.

As for if your father was the president it helps, how many presidents has the USA had? 45 is it? I think they might want to recruit from a slightly wider base than the children of the few ex presidents who are still alive. Rather a puerile comment.

"Is it worth it" If people are prepared to pay, then it is. That's a free market at work. I believe Americans are about the least likely people on earth to pay for any service or product that is sub standard, and being such a litigious country, I´m sure these colleges would have been sued out of existence if that was the case.

Yes I´m aware of US public universities and the situation here. Just to be clear, do US and Mexican students who go to public universities get all their food, lodging books, transport paid for as well, which would make it an additional cost only at the private universities as you stated above.

"My fear is that the proponents of "wild capitalism" may want to follow a model in which the education of technicians is favored over that of profesionals."

Would you like to tell a civil engineer, electronics engineer, maritime architect and others that they are not professionals, that they have "specialized hands and no brains". All education has its merits, I´m trying to suggest how the country can start an upward improvement in its standard of living, since we can´t all be political philosophers making our money by selling our books to one another, and paying to go to each others lectures. A very good way is to increase the skills of a larger base of the country, precisely so that your country (which you don´t deign to live in) won´t become a big maquiladora. It may one day become much more high tech arena for foreign, and hopefully one day, home grown investment.

Finally, the profanity reveals more about the person saying it that the one he chooses to say it too, or about. I would like to continue this discussion in a polite way between adults acting as such. Come on, admit it you all, we may have differences in opinion, but it´s been fun continuing this debate over these past few weeks. I´ll admit I´m learning more stuff than I thought I ever would, and have had some beliefs challenged. What will we do when it´s all over? Someone will have to suggest a comments page we can all meet up again on.

Posted by: PeterN | August 9, 2006 07:57 PM

If this blog is any indication, things are not going well for the Stalinist candidate and his little mob down in the Zocalo. It is interesting to read comments from people who actually considered voting for him and who are now happy they did not.

The Castaneda column was also enlightening. AMLO hasn't a clue about forming a modern leftist alternative and that is really sad, because Mexico might benefit from responsible leftist views and some well-run programs.

As for the big massive vote fraud that has been uncovered so far-- wait until they start annulling casillas in AMLO strongholds based on PAN complaints. Oh how the little latte-sipping Stalinist will squeal then.

Posted by: Goyo | August 9, 2006 08:00 PM

We seem to be getting off topic about and discussing universities. If my kids wanted to go to university in the States, they would not be going to an Ivy League school, unless they rob a bank first. I do not think the so called "top tier" American Universities are so much better than "second tier" as to be worth the price. Living in Tijuana, my kid would go off to San Diego State U, for about $2,000 a year, or UC San Diego for maybe double that. And live at home, ergo no room and board. And, 20 years from now, where that diploma came from would not really matter. (confession, I am a San Diego State product, six year plan, majors in alcohol analysis and female anatomy) All Americans have that option, as the State Universities are usually quite good. Poor Pasilla is the exception, haha, he has to send his kids to UDC (ugh). That is what we do not have here in Mexico. We have some decent state universities (UABC is quite good), and then some horrendously expensive private schools (ITESM) which in terms of quality rank with anything in the US, but also, sadly, in terms of price.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 08:28 PM

Thanks, that was probably better explained than my attempt at education in USA.

Posted by: PeterN | August 9, 2006 08:31 PM

Peter N
"wait until they start annulling casillas in AMLO strongholds based on PAN complaints. Oh how the little latte-sipping Stalinist will squeal then."

The PRD was VERY VERY careful not to impugn any casillas in places like Tabasco. I wonder why.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 08:33 PM


Cold fusion? Do you know what you are talking about? I invite you to do some reading and come back to change your argument for academic excellence, leaving out cold fusion...

And no, I have not enjoyed the chat as mucha as you have. I already said that I hope that people like emptyboxes, or Jerry B or Goyo are in the minority among Mexicans; otherwise my country is doomed...

"As for if your father was the president it helps, how many presidents has the USA had? 45 is it? I think they might want to recruit from a slightly wider base than the children of the few ex presidents who are still alive. Rather a puerile comment..."

Rather an obtuse reply. I was using a quip, a very specific one concerning a rather dull Yale graduate that happens to be President, to point towards the negative effect of the so called "legacy" as a criterion for admission, on true meritocracy...

Sometimes you write a little funny:

" US and Mexican students who go to public universities get all their food, lodging books, transport paid for as well, which would make it an additional cost only at the private universities as you stated above..."

"Are you implying that if one doesn´t go to university, some one should also fund your accommodation and food?"

Sorry, but I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

"It (Mexico) may one day become much more high tech arena for foreign, and hopefully one day, home grown investment..."

When the Winter Olympic Games are held in Hell?

Anyway: enjoy.

Posted by: pasilla | August 9, 2006 08:33 PM


"160 thousand a year to begin..."

A college graduate? Wow! Tell me please where they get those salaries?

Jerry B:

"Poor Pasilla is the exception, haha, he has to send his kids to UDC (ugh)..."

Ha, ha: One more of your stupid, baseless comments... I thought that living in the DC area you might know better; but I see that when the people is hopeless... is.

Posted by: pasilla | August 9, 2006 08:47 PM

Pasilla, you have now proven that you are truly brain dead. If you had any inkling of DC life, you would know a joke when you saw one. But, then, you probably live in Montgomery Co., not DC, and are just one more of many rich liberals.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 08:58 PM

Jerry B:

I may well be brain dead; however I was able to think while my brain was alive; but based on your comments (and your "jokes"), I'm quite sure that you are, and always have been brainless...

Posted by: pasilla | August 9, 2006 09:08 PM


Sure cold fusion is not available now, and may never be, I don´t know for certain, do you? The point is that the vast majority of advances in our knowledge are made by a tiny intellectual elite of the population, which is why I, and I´m going to stick my neck out here, and assume you as well, don´t have a Noble prize.

Sorry I missed the quip about George W Bush, my ignorance of his education was showing, so I´m guilty as charged.

I apologise about my funny writing, since you added on the cost of board, lodging etc to the cost of a private education to come up with figure of 40,000 dollars, I was pointing out that you have to pay these anyway, whether you´re at college or not, private or public.

As for your statement "when the Olympic games are held in hell", it would seem to show your completely negative regard for what you refer to as "my country". I think you should be ashamed, whilst you live in the USA, there are many of us here trying to build a real future, bit by bit for this country. Some of us aren´t even Mexicans, but at least we´re trying to put something constructive into the place.

Posted by: | August 9, 2006 09:18 PM

Maya O "ya estubo cabrones"???? "Estubo"????? Girl, I thought you were only illiterate in English. Spanish too? Seek help! Have mommy and daddy proofread your posts, you are only embarassing yourself and the other, literate and educated, perredistas here.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 09:19 PM

What's the matter Jerry? Maya0 was just advising all us "cabrones" that something was a pipe, he just forgot to put the space between "es" and "tubo".

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 9, 2006 09:28 PM

Those blind Europeans are sticking their noses in our elections again:

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 9, 2006 09:51 PM

If AMLO becomes president, things could get positively Fidel like. Below is a violent attack on the press (which hates him) by him. Combine his paranoia with his penchant for calling out mobs, and our democracy could go right down the drain. Congress wont go along? No problem, have an action of civil resistance where enraged citizens take over congress. Reforma wont toe the party line? No problem, again, Reforma's installations can be "tomadas" by rightous citizens. As we have seen, the PRD controlled DF police do nothing to stop this, what makes anyone think that a PRD controlled PFP would do anything either.

I have seen this before. Jesus Blancornelas, who publishes the weekly "Zeta" in Tijuana used to (before 1989) have to print it in San Diego, because "unions" who were "enraged" at the "lies" (stories of PRI wrongdoing) published in Zeta patriotically refused to publish it in Tijuana. The same kind of PRIistas behind that are now advising AMLO on how to be a democratic president. Heaven help us all.

Now, the story:

Arremete AMLO contra medios de comunicación

Llama el candidato a sus seguidores a repartir volantes con su carta de 10 razones para sus actos de resistencia civil, para contrarrestar lo que llamó una campaña de desinformación en su contra

Jorge Ramos
El Universal
Ciudad de México
Miércoles 9 de agosto de 2006
20:15 Andrés Manuel López Obrador arremetió en contra de los medios de comunicación, a los que acusó de "hacerle la barba" a la derecha.

Al encabezar su "asamblea informativa" en el Zócalo de la ciudad de México, López Obrador ratificó su rechazo al recuento parcial que inició este miércoles por orden del Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación en 26 estados y 149 distritos electorales.

Pidió a sus seguidores que repartan volantes con su carta de 10 puntos en la que justifica sus actos de resistencia civil, para contrarrestar lo que llamó una campaña de desinformación de los medios de comunicación.

Sostuvo que la prensa que le hace el juego a Felipe Calderón y a la derecha perderá credibilidad.

El perredista dijo que es víctima de un linchamiento, aunque hay excepciones honrosas, pero es muy claro cómo algunos medios se han subordinado y "han aceptado el papel de alcahuetes de la derecha".

Esta posición del candidato de la coalición Por el Bien de Todos se suma a la actitud agresiva contra los representantes de los medios de comunicación, por lo menos en las últimas tres semanas.

Esta misma tarde, la gente recogió las palabras de López Obrador y continuó gritando a la prensa: "alcahuetes, mandaderos, cobardes, vendidos".

El tabasqueño también dijo que esta elección presidencial fue fraudulenta y no va a permitir la imposición.

Insistió en que tiene las pruebas de lo que afirma y que, tras rechazar el recuento parcial de 11 mil 839 casillas, mantiene su exigencia de que se haga el conteo total de las más de 130 mil casillas instaladas el 2 de julio.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 9, 2006 10:52 PM

I wonder where are all the cocaine conspiracy theories and their advocates?
What is happening with all those allegations of massive fraud?
Take a look at this patetical statement from the PRD Coalition in Nuevo Leon

"Tenemos un reporte de que en el Distrito 12 nos refleja que la coalición Por el Bien de Todos se le están contando 56 votos de menos, más los datos que ya tenemos de un voto en el Distrito 9 y otros 3 en el Distrito 4; llevamos en los 60 votos que no están computados", explicó Ceseñas.

In one district, one whole district, they got some 56 votes more, of course they do not tell you the whole story, that in the same district PAN also got some 45 more votes.
And these patetical PRD fellows also put together ONE VOTE in District 9, and another 3 in District 4.

And all these, in a state that gave hundreds of thousands of votes to Felipe Calderon.
What is this insane people talking about?
What a patetical bunch of people.
Where is massive fraud?

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 9, 2006 10:59 PM

PeterN (I guess it was you):

I don't apologize for my residence. I did what I could for my country of birth while living in Mexico; I still do from here. No regrets. I don't question your right to live wherever you judge best...

Posted by: pasilla | August 9, 2006 11:05 PM

Pasilla, I agree with you on this point, sorry PeterN, but I feel this is an unfair criticism without knowing a person's situation and contribution to his home country from his new residence. My sister-in-law was transferred to Canada by the company she works for, but now makes a lot more money to help some of her relatives get started with some specialized and delicacy farm produce and fruit growing in Edomex.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 9, 2006 11:26 PM

I´m not criticising where anybody lives, we are fortunate enough in Mexico and the UK to be able to leave and return as we wish, just like Cuba.

What bothers me is that the the general world view of Mexico is of a country which can barely raise its head above that of a third world country. Now, I´m used to ignorant people in the UK and the USA smirking, barely able to suppress their laughter as they say "Why the hell did you move to Mexico?", but I would hope that it´s own people would be a bit more positive of it´s future chances of success, thats all.

Apologise for any offence to those who have gone away and are still "doing their bit".

One of the few things to really get to me is the people who are so ignorant of Mexico, they must believe the Holywood image of it. It´s got the 13th highest GDP in the world for goodness sake, surely we must have some future here?

Posted by: PeterN | August 10, 2006 12:14 AM

One last word on the education subject. Some of you guys said that the american system value hard work and good grades above all, even above the tuition fees. That's right and not at the same time, at least from what I have witnessed. It is true compared to the mexican system where they seem to give you a title by counting how many years you were warming up a chair. But there are also a lot more reasons that influence whether you get in or not into some universities that have nothing to do with your grades. Someone mentioned that american universities have a lot of diversity compared to Mexico, but what happens when there's not enough diversity? Example: a good friend of mine, a brilliant, exceptional student, actually earned some financial aid form Yale to make a masters on national security (nothing related to 9/11, it was way before that). He took advantage of it and did another one on weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. He thought that with a Yale title he'll end up paying the loan in no time, that's why he took it. Wrong. FBI, NSA, CIA wouldn't take him because he is not american. Universities turned him down as a teacher because he had no teaching experience. He came back to Mexico and worked for the CISEN for a while (CISEN sucks by the way) and got paid a misery. He ended up earning the double as a college teacher, but still not enough to pay up for the loan. He must be paying it for at least 15 years more. Anyhow, even then he still decided to give it a try an apply for Georgetown on a doctorate on National Security. He was turned down, because "there were too many hispanics enrolled in the course". Ouch! He then moved to Shanghai where he is paying $20 000 pesos the year for his doctorate, working there for the chinese and paying up his loan.

Well, back to Mexico and the man of the year, the allmighty Peje. Read this column by Yuriria Sierra published today in Excelsior. (I can almost here the bashing coming from all the AMLO supporters in here!)

Heil Pëjen!

Una mentira repetida mil veces se convierte en una verdad. Esta es la máxima más famosa de Joseph Goebbels, precursor de la propaganda política moderna y ministro (ministro imperial para el Esclarecimiento del Pueblo y Propaganda era su título oficial) durante el régimen nazi, presidido por Adolfo Hitler. El indudable genio de Goebbels fue, desafortunadamente, puesto al servicio de una causa y un líder nefastos que con propaganda lograron que un pueblo lo siguiera en su locura antisemita.

Purificados y morenitos. Esto lo traigo a colación porque, si bien los principios goebbelianos se aplican en toda propaganda política, resulta que, en los últimos dos días, López Obrador ha hecho dos declaraciones que remiten a dos deplorables ejes discursivos que utilizó Hitler en su metadiscurso: a) el eje de la "purificación" de la política y la sociedad para "salvar" a Alemania y, b), el eje del discurso racial como confrontador y movilizador de las masas (arios contra judíos). Ambos ejes ahora son utilizados por El Peje. El domingo usó el de la etnicidad, al acusar a sus adversarios de "racistas y discriminadores". Y el del "saneamiento" público lo utilizó en el TEPJF cuando se refirió a la necesidad de "purificar la vida pública" del país. Pero esas no son las únicas coincidencias con el método de proselitismo utilizado por los nazis. Ahí le van once principios de Goebbels, resumidos (a ver si le suenan):

1. Principio del enemigo único. Adoptar una única idea, un único símbolo (ejemplo, primero los pobres); individualizar al adversario en un único enemigo (ejemplo, los de arriba).

2. Principio del contagio. Reunir diversos adversarios en una sola categoría (ejemplo, la derecha) o individuo. Los adversarios han de constituirse en suma individualizada (ejemplo, Fox, El Innombrable, Azuela, el PRIAN, los medios, el IFE, etcétera).

3. Principio de transposición. Cargar sobre el adversario los propios errores o defectos, respondiendo el ataque con el ataque. "Si no puedes negar las malas noticias, inventa otras que las distraigan" (ejemplo, mala noticia: perdieron el 2 de julio; invento: fraude electoral).

4. Principio de exageración y desfiguración. Convertir cualquier anécdota, por pequeña que sea, en amenaza grave (ejemplo, los representantes del PRD en las casillas se vendieron a nuestros adversarios).

5. Principio de la vulgarización. Toda propaganda debe ser popular y elemental. Cuanto más grande sea la masa a convencer, más pequeño ha de ser el esfuerzo mental a realizar (ejemplo, yo les pregunto, ¿nos quedamos aquí, sí o no? ¡Síiiiiiii!!!). La capacidad receptiva de las masas es limitada y su comprensión, escasa; además, tienen gran facilidad para olvidar. (ejemplo, voy a respetar el resultado del IFE, así sea por un voto).

6. Principio de orquestación. La propaganda debe limitarse a un número pequeño de ideas y repetirlas incansablemente, presentadas una y otra vez sobre el mismo concepto. De aquí la famosa frase: "Si una mentira se repite suficientemente, acaba por convertirse en verdad" (ejemplos: es un compló; vamos 10 puntos arriba; ganamos el 2 de julio).

7. Principio de renovación. Hay que emitir constantemente informaciones y argumentos nuevos a un ritmo tal que las respuestas del adversario nunca han de poder contrarrestar el nivel creciente de acusaciones. (ejemplo, fraude cibernético contra fraude a la antigüita, contra fraude aritmético...).

8. Principio de la verosimilitud. Construir argumentos a partir de fuentes diversas, mediante los llamados globos sonda o de informaciones fragmentarias (ejemplo, las cajas vacías, Hildebrando, el "algoritmo" y el PREP, etcétera).

9. Principio de la silenciación. Acallar las cuestiones sobre las que no se tienen argumentos y disimular las noticias que favorecen al adversario, también contraprogramando con la ayuda de medios de comunicación afines (ejemplo, AMLO "no sabía" de Bejarano; falta de transparencia, etcétera).

10. Principio de la transfusión. La propaganda opera a partir de un sustrato preexistente, una mitología o un complejo de odios y prejuicios tradicionales; se trata de difundir argumentos que puedan arraigar en actitudes primitivas (ejemplo, arriba los de abajo; nos quieren destruir; no nos vamos a dejar...).

11. Principio de la unanimidad. Llegar a convencer a mucha gente que se piensa "como todo el mundo", creando una falsa impresión de unanimidad (ejemplo, ¡voto por voto, casilla por casilla!, ¡voto por voto, casilla por casilla..!).

Posted by: bunburina | August 10, 2006 12:29 AM

Termina conteo en distrito sede de "recurso madre"
Esta noche concluyó el recuento de votos en el distrito 15 de la ciudad de México. Se encontraron 11 votos de más para AMLO, pero también 11 para Calderón

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 10, 2006 01:49 AM

Me da un poco de hueva escribir ésto puesto que todos los argumentos que he subido a este blog pasan, casi siempre, desapercibidos; en el peor de los casos, los diátrabas de siempre se cuelgan de algún insignificante detalle o redundan en sofismas desgastados a fuerza de repetición para desacreditar mis enunciados.
No obstante, mi "empecinamiento" con la defensa de la causa, el movimiento y los fines en que creo, me obligan a arrojar esta neonata noticia a las fauces hambrientas de los carroñeros recurrentes.

Están saliendo a la luz un gran número de paquetes que muestran claras evidencias de apertura, con sobres de boletas también abiertos. Algunos sellos aparecen rotos mientras que los folios de algunas boletas no coinciden con las casillas mismas.

¡Ay San Luis Carlos Ugalde el chico!
¿A dónde fuiste a meter las manos en tu "proceso de cotejo de actas"?

Posted by: fco. | August 10, 2006 02:40 AM

Fco, about the open packages, from what I've had heard and listen of the partial recount so far is that some of the packages were under a pile of some more packages and they might have opened up since they are made of thin plastic and cannot hold that much weight on them. It is a pretty logical explanation. Besides, it is really easy to see if there had been a fraud or not. Even with an open package, if the tally sheet says 122 Calderón, 120 AMLO and after the recount is 121 for each then there was a minor mistake not a mayor subtraction of votes. Plus, this is just a recount not the final decision. In those packages that were semi opened the PRD is not signing the sheets and the Tribunal is going to decide whether they annul that package or not. It isn't over yet.

So, now, something we haven't talked about...

What is interesting to observe is that,so far, we haven't seen any PRIista posting in here. There have been PANistas, PRDistas, PASCistas (or how do we call ourselves?) but not a single PRIista. If someone had told me 10-12 yrs ago that the PRI was going to be the third political force in the country I wouldn't had bought it. And that's what we're seeing right now. And I'm quite happy about it.

Just a day after she was kicked out of the party, Elba Esther Gordillo (by the way, doesn't she look like Stitch, from Lilo & Stitch, the Disney movie? here's a link )said she was glad that Roberto Madrazo was never going to be president of Mexico. First and last time I agree with her.

Maybe from now on instead of saying pen..ejo we'll be saying PRIista... who knows? You have car crash and you say "PRIista". Someone spills coffee on your white shirt and you say "PRIista". It might happen. Someone steps on your little toe and you say "You're such a PRIista"

And have you guys ever met someone who actaully votes for Convergencia and the Partido del Trabajo? I've met voters of the Partido Verde and PANAL (yes, that kind of people exist, I'm amazed)but not a single militant of Convergencia and PT. Everyone who voted for AMLO this year is either a PRDista or an AMLO fan but not someone from Convergencia and PT. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't survive without the PRD.

Posted by: bunburina | August 10, 2006 03:44 AM

Bunburrina, the PT survived for years cortesy of the PRI. Its sole reason for being created was to take votes away from the left (Cardenas) in 1994. And, like many another PRI creation, the PT has now found its new natural home....the PRD. They were, in a sense, made for each other.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 10, 2006 10:39 AM

So now pasilla justifies maya's bigotry, who called the US the "Jewnited states". Nice. And they call the PANistas fascists. Intolerance has reared its ugly head on both sides, just as I deplore maya's choice of words, I must also condemn the attacks on people like Monsivais, Poniatowska and Loaeza. I do not share their opinions, I particularly think that Guadalupe Loaeza is delusional (I must be too, as every time her column comes out I keep reading it, as if somehow she would come to her senses), but I cannot in good conscience insult them.

As for Venezuela growing at "7% a year for the last 5 years", that is not quite true, if you look at 1999 (outside the 5 year range, admitedly) you'll see that economic growth for Venezuela was an amazing -7.2% and. Even more, in 2002 and 2003 GDP was -8.9% and -9.4% respectively. I guess maya doesn't want to include those 3 years, all of them under Chavez. 2004 was a bounce-back year, at over 17% growth. That didn't make up for the previous 2 years, so that's 3 years out of that 5 year range where growth was, to put it wildly generously, a *BIG-FAT-ZERO*. To achieve EVEN 5% a year over 5 years Venezuela would need something like, oh, I don't know... no wait, I DO know: 31.8% over 2 years. 7%? 44.8% over 2 years.

Oh, oil is 80% of Venezuela's exports. Hey *I* could manage 7% GDP growth under those conditions.

BTW, out of 1,888 poll stations recounted, Calderon has lost 296 votes, iAMLOser has picked up 489 (that's 785 votes net). That's less that half a vote per station. Given that these stations are the worst of the worst in terms of favorable results for Calderon plus irregularities, I cannot fathom that rate sustaining for the 130,000+ stations. Just for the heck of it, lets assume that iAMLOser manages to pick up 6,000 votes net in these stations. This would translate into about 65,000 votes for the whole universe of the stations. Amazing what this massive fraud has achieved huh?

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 10:59 AM

Top 10 reasons why Calderon is the best choice for Mexico:

1. First and foremost, Calderon will make sure that Mexico continues the trend set out by Echeverria, Lopez Portillo, De la Madrid, Salinas and Fox. What trend is that? The trend of a long list of accomplishments occurred in the last 30 yrs. of PRI-PAN government.

2. Calderon will make sure that 50% of Mexicans remain with an income of less than $1 dollar a day.

3. Calderon will make sure that the exodus of millions of unemployed Mexicans continue going to the USA.

4. Calderon will make sure that the lack of gains in science and technology occurred during the Echeverria, Lopez Portillo, De La Madrid, Salinas and Fox continue.

5. Calderon will make sure that Mexico remains a 3rd world country.

6. Calderon will make sure that none of the participants of the bank frauds committed every sexenio are brought to justice.

7. Calderon will make sure that the Durazos, Hank Gonzalez and Salinas are able to steal with absolute impunity.

8. Calderon will make sure that the income and social disparities between the Mexican north and south increase.

9. Calderon will make sure that millions of young Mexicans have limited access to quality education.

10. There has been absolutely no improvement in the living conditions in Mexico for the past 30 yrs. But thank God we have Calderon to maintain the status quo.

God bless you.

Posted by: Top 10 !!! | August 10, 2006 11:03 AM

Oh, BTW, the fraud evidence dited by Pasilla is, probably not in bad faith, out of context: the PRD had 88 votes, the PANAL 4, but the tally had those numbers transposed. The PRD representative signed for it. Sounds like an honest mistake to me. Good thing that it was corrected.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 11:08 AM

Top 10, why post the same idiocy twice? Maybe you're twice as dumb as we first though...

Sorry... couldn't resist.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 11:11 AM

Well its has been shown, deep in conservative Jalisco, in one casilla, 88 votes switched around, conviently away from AMLO, tampering with election boxes, caused by humans, not because of some fallacey of weight shifting but shifty humans. 88 votes here, 1 or 2 over there, it adds up. Keeping this pace in only one day of a estimated 5, allready it is shown that the slim lead of calderon is slowly chiping away, and the TRIFE will have no choice but to order more casillas open, not just 12thousand. So far the PRD has been proven right, remember, they just started and already theirs evidence of fraud. U want massive proof, then open all 131 thousand, not just a tirfle 12thou.
AMLO has already proven hes the legitamte president of Mexico, no matter what the reactionarys from the PAN and FECALs cohorts want.
oh and Jerry, um, so who appointed u the spell police? I know, I know, u where that nerdy kid who the teacher always called on to run the projector, or are U 2 young 2 remember what that is? Or maybe the dull one that helped people on how 2 make a email acct of their very own! and droned on and on about how cool the internet is.
What a exciting person u must be!

Posted by: maya0 | August 10, 2006 11:34 AM

Ariel R. Orellana:

"Calderon has lost 296 votes, iAMLOser has picked up 489 (that's 785 votes net)..."

But the votes had been already unambiguously counted, right? And everything was pristine, Ugalde and "contlapaches" trumpeted wasting taxpayers money. And how about the open boxes, the missing packages? And the missing acts, and the unsigned acts? I advise you to look into the definition of "fraud," let say, in the Academy of the Spanish Language Dictionary; better there than in English, because sometimes there are surprises, like the use of the term "populista..."

On the other hand, am I endorsing whose speech? I feel like a type of saint; bad readers among right wingers come here and pin all sort of tin "milagritos" on me...

By the way, can you give us the numbers of growth for Mexico during the Fox administration? That way we can see what to expect if "continuism" prevail. Of course cold numbers matter more for the reaction; never mind the 50 plus million warm blooded poor...

Posted by: pasilla | August 10, 2006 12:10 PM

Nice to have you back MayaO, it´s just not the same fun without you!

Posted by: PeterN | August 10, 2006 12:12 PM

Maya0-- Yes, you are right about Jerry-- People who use reason, facts and historical perspective to form their arguments, and who insist on accuracy and even good spelling- how boring they are! It is much more fun to rant and rave and call people names.

Posted by: Goyo | August 10, 2006 12:45 PM

If the whole 130 000 casillas were to be recounted the numbers would have probably stayed the same. I'd like to see if in Tabasco some "dark forces of the rich and powerful of this country" switched some votes from AMLO to Calderón. Oh! A massive fraud!(but on the inverse)I demand a recount vote by vote for Paty Mercado. Who knows? Maybe she was harmed by the "fraud" too. It's spreading like bird flu.

I read some comments from one of the judges counting the votes, who has been working on this since the 1994 election, and said that all this are perfectly normal mistakes that happen in every single election. There were people who voted for Superman and Cantiflas and were misplaced as Calderón's votes So what? they still aren't votes for AMLO. Or are you going to say to me that Cantinflas and Superman are involve in the fraud too? The Pope was... AMLO went furious when the insesitive Pope died the same day he was holding a popular meeting for the desafuero and stole the cameras away from him...

So AMLO is the legitimate president of Mexico... who says so? The majority of the people? No, because the majority of the people didn't vote for AMLO. That's one aspect that AMLO supporters like to overlook. 27 million mexicans didn't vote for him, don't agree with him, don't think there was a fraud and are tired of him blaming everyone but himself for losing the elections.

Posted by: bunburina | August 10, 2006 12:49 PM

The Times of London expressed an opinion today about our little Stalinist candidate and his rather unpleasant activities of the past few weeks.

They find it deplorable that AMLO has attacked democratic institutions and blocked streets in an effort to intimidate the tribunal. Here is the stinging last paragraph:

"The judges must not be intimidated. If the partial recount casts doubt on the result, it should be expanded. If not, they must stand their ground. This man has proved his willingness to put the nation's stability at risk. He has also proved that he is not qualified to be Mexico's leader."

Posted by: Goyo | August 10, 2006 12:52 PM

bunburina: You have a point about AMLO.
Maya O: 100 votes here, 100 votes there does not shift an election, its called human error. You also fail to awknowledge that the number of votes are increasing on both sides.

To add, I think AMLO did make a huge mistake not going to intellectual centers, but that may be because he tends to surround himself with people that agree with him, stadiums full. Intellectuals, and people in university tend to question, and as we have seen, he can't handle that.

Has anyone ever seen AMLO answer back to a critique without getting angry

How long ago since you lived in DF pasilla?

Posted by: robles | August 10, 2006 12:54 PM


did I actually say something non-factual?

You defended maya with these words: "Finally, come on, people! Are your chaste, innocent ears hurt by a little profanity? Not mine. I'm more concerned about bad thoughts, like bigotry, than startledby a few bad words, whatever that means...". I would think that the term "jewnited states" would qualify as bigotry. I would expect you to live up to your own statement of being more concerned about bigotry.

As far as the tally goes, I did NOT say the election was pristine, I said that at this rate, and given that this packages should have the biggest problems (because Calderon won and because they have actual problems in the paperwork) then we cannot reasonably conclude that there is fraud. The reason these packages are being open is because there ARE problems with their paperwork, this, of course, means that the election was not pristine. In the case of the 88 vs 4 votes package, I even applauded the fact that the problem was corrected, but pointed out that even the PRD representative signed off on it, which would give all indications that this was an honest mistake which was plainly not caught. I don't know if you've ever worked at a station or not, but I have, I can tell you that those numbers were being put into the acts around 9 p.m., after some 13 or more hours of work. Mistakes are bound to happen. Is a mistake fraud? As a final note on this, how many other mistakes/"frauds" like this one have emerged?

As you are so fond of critizing people that put words in your mouth, I would expect you to act in accordance to what you ask of those people.

As for Mexico's growth I can give you the numbers, yes:
2000 6.57%
2001 -0.12%
2002 0.73%
2003 1.4%
2004 4.2%
2005 3.0%

As I know you want these numbers to validate your own position, please look at the numbers for Brazil, an economy much more closer to ours than Venezuela, which is less than a 5th in size:
2000 4.4%
2001 1.3%
2002 1.9%
2003 0.5%
2004 4.9%
2005 2.3%

Simple calculation (not taking into account inflation, currency value, etc) of growth for both countries, 2000-2005:
Mexico: 16.70%
Brazil: 16.23%

Finally, you seem to be putting words into Ugalde's mouth as he has only stated that there was no fraud, not that the election was perfect. Had he said so he would join Loaeza in my private little hall of delusional people.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 01:48 PM

From the Library of Congress (USA) Federal Research Division: Country Profile: Mexico, July 2006 (excerpt)

Gross Domestic Product (GDP): GDP stood at US$699.5 billion dollars in 2005 (US$1.07 trillion in terms of purchasing power parity), representing a per capita GDP of approximately US$6,500 (US$10,500 in terms of purchasing power parity)--the highest in Latin America. In early 2006, Mexico was entering the third consecutive year of economic expansion with predicted annual GDP growth of approximately 3.5 percent.


Ok not astronomic figures, but other sources are forecasting a steady 3.5% growth ongoing. This maybe subject to how the world deals with an oil crisis, and economic situations in the USA. Both issues which no political party in Mexico can control.

Posted by: | August 10, 2006 02:28 PM

Sorry, the library of congress stuff was from me.

Posted by: PeterN | August 10, 2006 02:30 PM

Ariel R. Orellana:

Maya0 wrote:

"Gabriel, chinga tu madre..."

I wrote:

"Finally, come on, people! Are your chaste, innocent ears hurt by a little profanity? Not mine. I'm more concerned about bad thoughts, like bigotry, than startledby a few bad words, whatever that means..."

For your benefit, "profanity" is defined as: Abusive, vulgar, or irreverent language...

These are the facts and I stand by my words.

Do you want me to comment on "jewnited states"? If it's bigotry, it's a strange type of it. I, oppose zionism; I don't think that makes me an anti-semite. maya0 should speak by himself. If he also opposes zionisms, we're not alone in our view. Actually, some time ago Mexico voted for a UN resolution equating zionism to a form of racism...

"As far as the tally goes, I did NOT say the election was pristine..."

I wrote:

"And everything was pristine, Ugalde and "contlapaches" trumpeted wasting taxpayers money..."

Is your name, by any chance, Ugalde?

I insist... It's healthy to read carefully before commenting...

And I notice that the numbers of GDP growth in Mexico that you kindly provide are fairly distant from the 7% per year promised by President Fox...

"And how about the open boxes...?" I might be more clear here. I was referring to the numerous packages found open BEFORE the recount started. Packages shouldn't be open without a written order from the TEPJF, in the presence of representatives of all parties. Besides, a net gain of about 1,000 votes for AMLO in a few polling stations in Jalisco state, doesn't seem trivial to me...

Politics aside, this recount is proof that the platittude uttered by Calderon and others than in democracy one wins or looses by one vote is untenable. In a complex process like a national election, a margin of error is unavoidable, even if no fraud was involved. I hope that emtyboxes, in light of the findings, stop to reflect in the fact that 500,000 or 1,000,000 randomly selected (not true, but let's assume so for the sake of the argument) CAN MAKE MISTAKES. Maybe not in Monterrey, though...


Once again, macroeconomic indicators are not but a snapshot of a huge landscape. How to explain the 50 plus million Mexicans who live on $1 USD or less a day? Economic growth without good distribution of wealth creates social unrest, sooner or later...

Posted by: pasilla | August 10, 2006 03:57 PM

"27 million mexicans didn't vote for him (AMLO: true), don't agree with him, don't think there was a fraud and are tired of him blaming everyone but himself for losing the elections...." (if not false, baseless: how do you know?)

This is the type of unsubstantiated generalization that makes me criticize participants of this blog. For K. Vronna comfort: I'm not angry; rather, I belive that the sloppy thinking behind an opinion like that doesn't serve democracy well and shouldn't be tolerated.

Posted by: pasilla | August 10, 2006 04:07 PM

Can anyone provide an independent source stating 50 million plus Mexicans live on 1 USD a day or less? That would be about 11 pesos or less.

Posted by: PeterN | August 10, 2006 04:38 PM

Since when does "Jew" equal "Zionism"? Scratch a soviet era mindset and the true fascist/racist comes out. Shame on both you and maya0!

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 10, 2006 04:57 PM

Sigh... oh well, if you can't see what's wrong with the term "jewnited states" then there is no point to continue the conversation on this point. Regardless of one's position on Israel, the use of terms whose origins lie in the white-supremacist and other truly fascits group hardly paint a flattering picture of maya (and you, as you had a chance to distance yourself from this remark and chose not to.)

On the subject of wether I said "pristine" or not, you choose an easy exit. The way you write implies that I draw a conclusion that the election was pristine. Specifically your "right?" comment. Again, read your words carefully.

On the promise by Fox, if YOU believed that promise then you truly lack an understanding of economics. AMLO would keep all his promises, right? This is the type of statement you favor, so there, let's play the same way you do.

About the open packages, I do not have information as to the problems, I'm going to have to wait to voice an opinion on that. There is, however, a note on a newspaper from Torreon where, according to Monreal, they found one of the biggest problems because the back door didn't have a seal on the inside that says that the door is impossible to open because its sealed from the inside ("tiene una reja que impide el acceso", specifically). I will not generalize from this incident, BUT it SEEMS the PRD is, once again, manipulating or omitting specific facts to twist them into a picture that fits their theory. This is just speculation on my part. I'm tempted to add "Everyone is in a complot, right?"

About poverty, since it seems you like to bring cold numbers down to "hot-blooded reality", please take a look at these numbers (I trust you are smart enough to corroborate them yourself) from the World Bank:

Extreme poverty, rural areas
2000: 42.4%
2004: 27.9%

Extreme poverty in urban areas held steady at 11.3%, which, when weighted gave a reduction of 7% in total. Comments?

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 05:12 PM

"27 million mexicans didn't vote for him (AMLO: true), don't agree with him, don't think there was a fraud and are tired of him blaming everyone but himself for losing the elections...." (if not false, baseless: how do you know?)

Ok, that was baseless. I'll correct, 27 million mexicans didn't vote for AMLO and even some of those who voted for him no longer agree with him, don't think there was a fraud and are tired of him blaming everyone but himself for losing the elections. My basis? Of the 35% of the population that supported AMLO days before the election have changed their minds. Nowadays the support for AMLO has dropped to 22% or 25% depending on the different polls, but they all mark a drop of 10% in his support.

"Do you want me to comment on "jewnited states"? If it's bigotry, it's a strange type of it. I, oppose zionism; I don't think that makes me an anti-semite. maya0 should speak by himself. If he also opposes zionisms, we're not alone in our view. Actually, some time ago Mexico voted for a UN resolution equating zionism to a form of racism..."

I'm sorry to tell you, that is bigotry, to say "jewnited states". The State of Israel is that, a State. Being jewish is professing one religion. By saying "jewnited states" you're judging a country by it's large population of jews and that's bigotry.

Mexico did try to equalize zionism to a form of racism in the government of López Portilo (who else could do something that dumb?). And that was one of the worst mistakes ever made in our foreign policy. Zionism is not racism. Zionism is the political theory that sustain the hebrew population deserve, as a nation, to have their own land and their own soveirng government. Every nation (nation for the UN is a term for cultural entities) like the kurds, the basques, the hebrews etc, have the right, if they want it to, to group themselves in a State of their own.

There is no racism in Zionism. Actually the whole pro-zionist, anti-zionist discusion is dumb. I don't see a problem with the legitimacy of the State of Israel or the State of Palestine. The State of Israel is a fact and the entire international community, including Mexico, back in 1947, with the resolution 181, agreed on funding the State of Israel. Now, if what you don't agree is the way the State of Israel acts towards the palestines then now we are talking.

But please don't confuse Israel with being jew. Not all jews agree with the actions of Israel. Not all jews are pro-american. Many jews are actually great mexican citizens who have contributed to build the country that we have today.

Posted by: bunburina | August 10, 2006 05:41 PM

It's funny to see how some PRDistas feel embarassed by their supporters:

Desconoce PRD a simpatizantes que iban a aeropuerto

This is also interesting:

Amortizará México deuda externa por adelantado

It seems that the current government is trying to close up the sexenio the best way possible.

Posted by: bunburina | August 10, 2006 05:51 PM

BTW, I should clear up that Monreal was complaining about a lack of seal on the OUTSIDE, not inside.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 05:57 PM

Gracias Sr. Orellana!

Posted by: robles | August 10, 2006 06:02 PM

Maya 0, you should hang out more with the white supremists and neo nazis in the US. They have been complaining about the ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government) for years. They will undoubtably LOVE to have their views seconded by a Mexican. If they like Mexicans, that is...

Posted by: Jerry B | August 10, 2006 06:25 PM

Well, well; I think that you are going in every possible direction...

Regarding the question by PeterN, I could quickly find the following from the World Bank. I acknowledge my mistake; I wasn't distinguishing between extreme poverty and moderate poverty; I don't believe that things have changed substantially since the report; as a matter of fact I read similar recent figures somewhere, but I don't recall where:

Extreme poverty fell from 24.2 percent of the population in 2000 to 20.3 percent in 2002 (that's about 20 million), which meant that 3.1 million Mexicans had left the ranks of those living on less than US$1 per day. Those living in so-called "moderate" poverty, or on about US$10 a day, fell from 53.7 percent to 51.7 percent (that's about 50 million), according to the report, "Poverty in Mexico."

Ariel Orellana, I also trust that you are smart enough to understand that some people live in cities, and they also may be poor...


"The way you write implies that I draw a conclusion that the election was pristine..." I repeat, once again, that I stand by what I write, not by what you imply or assume...


Thanks for attempting to quench your hysterics. I notice that you ran to brush your Wikipedia. Your definition of zionism makes it look fairly inoccuous. But we should not forget that zionists claim that Jews have the right to possess all land between the Nile and the Euphrates because (they say) this land was granted to them by "YHWH," as claimed in the Old Testament. The base of the claim is quite illuminating. I cannot condone anybody who pretend rights or assume superiority based on race or religion. And Ariel Orellana, to this respect, you are again attempting to brand me using something that I didn't say. What I said was that maya0 can state his own position; I grant him the benefit of the doubt. And Bunburina:

"By saying "jewnited states" you're judging a country by it's large population of jews and that's bigotry..."

You are once again playing your favorite game of interpreting. If maya0 was talking about the proportion of jews in the US (I don't see why that should be a bigoted statement, in isolation), he would be wrong, because statistically the Jewish faith represents a minority in a predominantly Christian nation. Why don't you ask, instead of speculating? Two more factual corrections to your ranting:

The resolution I spoke about, equating zionism to racism, didn't come from Lopez Portillo for two reasons: 1) It was a UN resolution (granted, later on repudiated by Kofi Annan); and 2) Lopez Portillo was not President when the resolution was submitted to a vote (1975). Just a few words related to the repudiation. Did you read the criticism of the ambassador of Israel in Mexico to a letter by a group of intellectuals condemning the actions of the Israeli army in Lebanon? Mexico had to recant his vote for the UN resolution because of boycott treats. I refuse to accept religion and politics intermingling: it's an extremely volatile combination (if in doubt, just read the paper). The accession of PAN radicals to full power concerns me greatly because of the religious ideas of its platform. It sadden me, bunburina, that blinded by your visceral response to AMLO (which, by the way, I cannot fully comprehend), you are facilitating the job to the extreme right. But everybody is free to make mistakes.

Posted by: pasilla | August 10, 2006 07:45 PM

I would like you dear fellows from the these honorable forums to see the kind of coaine and silly stuff these radical PRD losers post everyday at

Jueves, agosto 10, 2006

Si creen que el boicot que se ha estado promoviendo contra las empresas que fueron parte del fraude electoral, vean esto que nos envía un lector:

les escribo para decirles que lo del boicot si esta pegando duro y les comento el por que? yo vivo aca en ecatepec y tengo varios amigos que trabajan en jumex y ayer me entere por ellos que les dieron una semana obligatoria de descanso claro sin paga; por que se les redujo sus ventas; que ojetes son esos podridos si gastaron millonadas para comprar spots que no le haya alcanzado para pagar miseros 1500 pesos por cada trabajador y tenerlos laborando aunque sea en la limpieza de la fabrica.

por eso hay que intensificar los plantones; claro los trabajadores no tienen la culpa pero sabran comprender mas vale unos dias de incertidumbre a 6 años mas de lo mismo.

otra nota que queria comentar es que no se si recuerden el mitote que hizo historia donde fox segun pago 7mmdls a la deuda pero me pregunto yo; o quizas miles de personas en realidad fue para la deuda del fmi o del banco mundial o es simplemente otra llana mentira mas, pues al comparar dos encabezados de diferentes diarios alcance a ver que el ipab (fobaproa) recibe del gobierno federal 72mmp sera esa su famosa deuda pagada?

ahora dice fox que pagara 30mmdls quisieramos saber a cual deuada sera destinada??

No sólo esoñ hay que intensificar el boicot. Hay que convencer a más gente de que no compre productos de Jumex y de Sabritas (y de Coca-Cola y de todas las marcas que estuvieron apoyando a fecal) para que entiendan de una buena vez que el pueblo no está dipuesto a tolerar esta marranada que hicieron.

Una razón más para apoyar al peje en el 2006.

posted by Victor Hernandez at 1:43 PM | 0 comments

I guess the post iteself says it all.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 10, 2006 07:51 PM

uuuhhh.. didn't I write "Extreme poverty in urban areas held steady at 11.3%"? Just asking... BTW, when I posted about "trusting you being smart enough", I was note being fascetious, you are smart, I just disagree with you. On the other hand, you sounded sarcastic.

You say stand by what you wrote pasilla, fair enough. I also stand by what I wrote, my opinion that you are being disingenious about putting words in other people's mouths and then complaining that you didn't. Let's continue to play your way: Mexicans who live in urban areas don't know the real Mexico, right? Mexicans who live in DC know Mexico better, right? See, statements like these ones are your M.O. No use denying it. You don't technically lead, put words into or actually draw out conclusions, but the implication is inequivocal. BTW, in case you didn't notice, I'm exagerating and those are not my actual opinions. At least, the way I wrote gives me plausible deniability (a favorite DC term, if I remember correctly), RIGHT?

I'll read your response but there's no point to continuing to drone on about this particular point, you deny it, yet you draw the same reaction from nearly everyone who cares to post.

Turning to more meaningfull subjects, if by any of the statistics we posted poverty has gone down, there has been growth and stability, why is Fox such a punching bag for leftists? Anyone heard of any more big vote swings? Nothing seems to have moved too much today, from what I've read and heard on the news.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 08:14 PM

Check out what Sara Sefchovich has to say about tolerance:

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 10, 2006 08:53 PM

I have not seen such intolerant and radical people in my life. These imbecile PRD thugs are associating themselves with the movement in Oaxaca and guerrilla groups in Guerrero, the Panchos Villas, radical communist groups and CGH and other radical losers from UNAM.

They are jumping and jumping trying to get the Federal Government to respond to their stupid provocations. But President Fox will not fall for it and that is why they are growing desperate day after day. Pretty soon we will have more radical groups joining AMLO and he will not disassociate himself and his group from them.

It is an irresponsible party of stupid dogmatical radicals. AMLO has lost any popularity he had and the Mexican people are growing tired of these thugs and their lies and intransinget positions.

Now there was another fraud because they claim the packages were opened and fixed, when they know very well those packages were opened only to get the papers required by the TRIFE and in response to the PRD impugnations. But the package is one thing and the seals on the envelopes with the Ballots is another different thing and those were not opened. But their propagandistical techinques makes them cry faul so that their imbecile followers keep believing them.

What a bunch of criminals these people are.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 10, 2006 08:59 PM

Dammit, why am I still in the National Guard. Now I am going to go stand around in the San Diego airport, pretending to "protect" everyone from terrorists with contact lense solution. You all may lose the pleasure of my posts for a while.

On to this subject, according to El Universal, the "fraude cibernetico" is back. Can the PRD make up its mind? What kind of fraud was there? Do they even know??
Here in BC, AMLO has picked up something less than 600 votes. Ho Hum...

Finally, Pasilla, "Jewnited States"?? Please, whether one is a Zionist or not that is simply beyond the pale. Period. Or are you one of those who think that the aborted canidacy of "Jorge Gutman" (Jorge Castaneda) for president was some kind of Jewish plot. Besides, what do Jews have to do with all this, I thought the Main Enemy was the very Catholic Vatican.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 10, 2006 09:28 PM

Oh, forgot to close out my take on the whole "jewnited states" controversy. First, maya used it in a hate-filled rant, insulting, among others, homosexuals, jews and Gabriel's mother. To pretend that that particular term is not bigotry but that perhaps he opposes Zionism is akin to saying that Hitler didn't hat Jews, he just disliked them.

Perhaps you should head over to the anti-defamation league and ask them what they think, I'm sure they'll be glad to explain things to you and perhaps invite you to join with Mel in a sensibility training session. Lastly, I'm not trying to brand you (you do a fine job all by yourself), the ONLY thing I've called you is smart, if that's branding weil... I still think you have a chance to say "yes, the use of that term is biggoted and I condemn its use". You may even qualify the statement by saying that you oppose everything Israel does. By not taking the multiple chances you've had to distance yourself from that particular statement you endorse maya by omission. PLEASE distance yourself from that statement, PLEASE.

As in the other post, I'll take the time to read your answer but feel that the subject has run out its course. Last chance for you to domenstrate you're a bigger man than Maya

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 09:46 PM

Jerry B.: People like Pasilla, fco and maya feed on hate towards anybody who thinks differently. The trend in the radical left in our dear latinamerican has long been to be Anti Semitic.
They will never recognize the fact that Israel is the only secular democracy in the region and for too long they were a lonely oasis of democracy.
They ignore the fact that there are many arabs and palestinians who live in peace in Israel and even participate in politics.
But what can you expect from regimes like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro who cast their lots with Iran, China, North Korea and all the worst regimes that ever existed.
The true nature of the PRD and its Coalition is anti democracy. They believe in IFE as long as they win. But if they lose the election then the IFE committed fraud.
The story of Lopez Obrador is the same story of corrupted and totalitarian leaders like Allende and Hugo Chavez, who used the democratic institutions to create totalitarian regimes.
Allende was nationalizing everything in Chile and destroying the economy and jobs and creating chaos all over the place, his end game was to emulate Fidel Castro, he got support from him, Castro actually visited Chile and Allende also went to Moscu trying to make Chile another soviet satellite in latin america. Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales are ready to do the same for their poor countries. They are willing to destroy all democratic institutions and private properties to remain in power. And they are willing to create war scenarios in order to inspire constant fear in their populations and have the ability to do whatever the can in the name of national security. We have seen how Chavez and Castro and Evito Morales accuse the genuine oppositions in their country of being agents of the North American enemies.

This is what Lopez Obrador was going to do. He and the imbecile radicals who follow him. But they lost and now we can see, in miniature the kind of dictatorship AMLO and his Party would have been: Reforma blocked and the whole DF Government apparattus, with Encinas and Joel Ortega all serving and obeying AMLO and doing whatever he wants. His party is a party of mediocre cowards and imbeciles who do not think, they have no voice, nobody shows disagreement, even slightly, everyone follows silently while AMLO decides everything.

Even the PRD people who post at this forum have no capacity for self criticism, they go to extreme lenghts to try to defend their arguments and recognize nothing. According to these people here Mr. Obrador has never, ever made one single mistake in the whole process.
I challenge you guys to tells here what you think about that stupid blockade, AMLO is not making any friends with it and he is losing lots of popularity. Even Monsivais has stated his oppossition to the blockade. Pasilla, your dear Monsi does not agree with the Reforma blockade. What say you?

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 10, 2006 10:07 PM

Despite PRD accusations to the contrary, I found very little hatefullness in the PAN campaign, and in Calderon's public comments now. As I find little hate here in the pro PAN posters. Someone correct me with citations if I am wrong, please. On the other hand, the left (at least the AMLO type of populist/clientist left) seems to thrive on hate; hate is what drives it, and without someone to hate, I wonder how long this type of left wing movement would last.

Watching AMLO or his supporters violently attack the "traitors", "racists", "fascists", "classists" and on and on, even their own people (the revolution eating its own...) is rather depressing. Listening to the comments from certain posters here about "jewnited states", "fecal", and people who are not "Mexican enough" is equally depressing.
I am reminded of a comment about the Arab Israeli conflict, which was basically that if Israel were tomorrow destroyed, it would be the worse thing for the Arabs, because they would lose the focal point of their hatred, and nothing would be left to them.

People like Chavez in Venezuela, and a lot (but not all) of the PRDistas in Mexico thrive on hating one or more "enemies". But, beyond hatred, what do they offer us? Not a thing.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 10, 2006 10:38 PM

When Mel Gibson, that glib mad max actor, drunkenly yelled out, "The Jews are the cause of all the wars in the world." Well, they say niños and borrachos tell the truth.
But to state facts does not make one anti-semetic or a bigot. When Mel yelled out that truth, about the state of war in the actual world, u cant help but lay the blame on their door. There not so under the water infulence on the USA, is what caused me to call it the jewnited states. Because the USA provides Isreal all it needs to play cowboys and indians with the arabs. Cept these indians got rockets and blow up tanks. And the USA, and Isreal cry foul. 911, was payback. No innocents that fine late summer day.
Does that make me a bigot? Of course not. And to make a point, that so many so called Mexicanos, would just die 2b a part of the USA, well, that means they must also hold up the USA supporting Isreal and all it does. So calling it Jewnited States, is not racist, its a fact.
Like that fact that AMLO won the presidency of Mexico, no matter what the mass media trys to dish out, he won, and if push comes to shove, well, we will see who has the real numbers now wont we?
¡Voto X Voto Casilla X Casilla!
¡Con AMLO Todo, con FECAL Nada!
¡Solucion O Revolucion!
Oh and a jerry b, well it dont suprise me that your in the national gaurd, wow, a real live baby killer on this blog. Its no wonder u say the things u say, you been trained, its not your fault what u say.
I forgive u. De nada.

Posted by: maya0 | August 10, 2006 11:12 PM

Ahh, Ms Maya, in the N G, we only kill babies one weekend a month, two weeks in the summer... Let us go over your rather interesting spelling:


Not bad for a short post. You can improve, just ask mommy and daddy to enroll you in a basic grammar class. Of course if you are drunk when you are writing this, that will not help...

Let me ask a quick question. You do not seem to like the United States. That is fine, it is a free country. I, on the other hand, do not like, on bit, North Korea. For that reason, I never went to any "Art Institute of North Korea" to study. Why, if the US is so evil, did you go study there, and have your parents inject a major quantity of money (The fart institute of Chicago is not cheap, I checked.) into the American economy? And, why do you seem so proud of the fact? Stockholm Syndrome, where you begin to identify with the "oppressor"? A latent inferiority complex" What is up with you, girl??

Posted by: Jerry B | August 10, 2006 11:28 PM

By the way, Ms Maya, keep up the anti-semitic stuff. You are doing a GREAT job of convincing people that AMLO supporters are rational, open minded and generally decent human beings.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 10, 2006 11:40 PM

I've changed my mind, Maya is not a biggot, he's just ummm... a "mentally challenged" troll. Jerry, don't fall for the bait. I'm sure he'll next say that the Iranian president was correct when he said the Holocaust didn't happen. The bait is too easy to be real.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 10, 2006 11:41 PM

Jerry, can't you see that this guy's a PAN plant trying to sabotage AMLO's campaign? How else can you explain what he says? He's also trying to discredit pasilla by getting him to defend even his "anti-semetic" rants.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 10, 2006 11:45 PM

A PAN troll is a real possibility. What better way to discredit PRD supporters; if they spew hatred like this one...

Posted by: Jerry B | August 10, 2006 11:49 PM

It is funny, the gym I belong to is across the street from Tijuana's Hebrew center. I always try to park my car right in front of their door, because then I do not have to worry about it being stolen or broken in to.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 10, 2006 11:55 PM

I say, emptyboxes, that I applaud Carlos Monsivais' independence, and I amuse myself with your wild rantings:

"Israel is the only SECULAR (my emphasis) democracy in the region..." What!?

"arabs and palestinians who live in peace in Israel and even participate in politics..." What?!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understandig is that you have to be a Jew to be a citizen of Israel. Participating in politics without being a citizen? Quite remarkable...

And, as I said before (probably Ariel Orellana didn't read it), I don't feel like having to prove anything to anybody. I express whay I think and that's it...

"Extreme poverty in urban areas held steady at 11.3%..." BUT "by any of the statistics we posted poverty has gone down..." Inagurating a new meaning of the word "steady," Ariel Orellana?

"His party is a party of mediocre cowards and imbeciles who do not think, they have no voice, nobody shows disagreement, even slightly, everyone follows silently while AMLO decides everything..." "Servido," JerryB; here you have your hateful speech...

And thanks, maya0: hereye all, that's what maya0 meant...

Posted by: pasilla | August 11, 2006 12:03 AM

From here:



"Israel discriminates against its Arab citizens."


Israel is one of the most open societies in the world. Out of a population of 6.7 million, about 1.3 million -- 20 percent of the population -- are non-Jews (approximately 1.1 million Muslims, 130,000 Christians and 100,000 Druze).1

Arabs in Israel have equal voting rights; in fact, it is one of the few places in the Middle East where Arab women may vote. Arabs currently hold 8 seats in the 120-seat Knesset. Israeli Arabs have also held various government posts, including one who served as Israel's ambassador to Finland and the current deputy mayor of Tel Aviv. Oscar Abu Razaq was appointed Director General of the Ministry of Interior, the first Arab citizen to become chief executive of a key government ministry. Ariel Sharon's original cabinet included the first Arab minister, Salah Tarif, a Druze who served as a minister without portfolio. An Arab is also a Supreme Court justice."

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 11, 2006 12:11 AM

Sorry, K. Vronna, but that doesn't answer the question. Arab is not a religious designation; Jew, is. Certainly a lot of Arabs (and natives of latinamerica, and african countries like ethiopia) live in Israel, but... are they Jews?

Posted by: pasilla | August 11, 2006 12:24 AM

See the double talk the Panistas have? Like jerry b when he drolls on and on as the spell police, yet he writes,"on bit", instead of one bit. I guess u dont have a proof reader either. Oh, and that crack about where u leave your car? Afraid that some non jewish Mexicans will bust into your car? And u call me a bigot?
Oh, and quit being so upset about how I paid for my school,(u should look up instead the word maya, instead of assuming its a name) I worked for a living while i paid for my education, pell grants etc etc. Now all the United States isnt all bad. Just them conservative Nazi types in both the republican and democratic parties. Who by word and action could be confused with your nearest Taliban or Wahibab. The USA was hijacked by the Bush imp. and co. Certainly you as a soldier are foaming at the mouth 2 do their bidding, but am sure, if u go 2 Iraq or Afgan, their is some bullet or grenade with your name written all over it. Hope it finds u soon! One less Anti Mexican Mexican in the world, would only do Mexico a world of good.

Posted by: maya0 | August 11, 2006 12:55 AM

Oy... your favorite sport is decontextualizing things, isn't it Pasilla? Please go back and READ. Rural extreme poverty, down almost 15 points to 27.9%, Urban extreme poverty steady at 11.3%. Weighed average: down 7%. Your own statistics point to diminishing poverty. Clear enough or should I draw you a picture? New meaning for the phrase "probably didn't read", Pasilla? Are you picking the stat that fits your theory?

"And, as I said before (probably Ariel Orellana didn't read it), I don't feel like having to prove anything to anybody. I express whay I think and that's it..." Fine. You choose to admit by not condemning biggotry. You certainly have proven something...

To answer your Arabs in Israel question Pasilla, yes, Arabs have full rights in Israel wether or not they are also Jews, something most of them are not. Wether they are discriminated in spite of their rights or not I cannot say.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 11, 2006 01:03 AM

Pasilla, you are wrong about Israel so I will correct you. You DO NOT have to be a Jew to be a citizen, in fact Israel has the curious distinction of being the only country in the middle east where Muslim Arabs (even female muslim arabs) are actually able to vote in democratic elections (the Arab countries sure do not let arabs vote, and Iraq is a work in progress, to say the least). The Israeli parliament has a number of Muslim Arab members, who usually try to tie the place in knots, as well as Christian ones. Non Jewish Israelis do not have to serve in the military, but many Druze do, voluntarily. Where you may be misunderstanding things is that any Jew can become a citizen of Israel. But if you are born there, Jew or not, you are a citizen.

As to hateful speech, I will take "mediocre cowards" spelled right over "traitors", "Jewnited" "The Jews are the cause of all the wars", and a bunch of words that end in -ist.

Ms Maya, what is the "Bush imp. and co."? Sounds like a Disney movie. What is a "wahibab"? Is it some kind of disease? If so, I do not want to catch it.
You paid for your education with Pell Grants? In other words, the U. S. Government paid for your education by giving you the Pell Grants. (And the only way you qualified for the Pell Grants is by being an American citizen or resident alien. Say it ain't so!!!! Ms Maya, an American?????) And, now, to pay back some murky recess of the US Government you are using all that education to post here, and make AMLO look bad. Trust me, he looks bad enough on his own, without your help, but I am sure Uncle Sam says "thank you" anyway. It is the least you can do, I suppose, as a loyal American.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 11, 2006 01:19 AM

Ariel, Supposedly Arabs in Israel are discriminated against. Especially, since many business contacts are made in your army reserve unit, and few Arabs are in the army, they loose out on these contacts. That being said, I think I would rather be an Arab in Israel than a Jew in Iran or Egypt (or Berlin or Paris, for that matter).

Posted by: Jerry B | August 11, 2006 01:25 AM

pasilla, really, you're the one who should read about zionism and Israel. My definition of zionism is what most scholars agree with. And no, zionism is not about placing the State of Israel in the Middle East. Did you know that some negotiations back in 1945-1947 thought of Baja California, Argentina and Australia as possible places for the State of Israel? The UN decided for the Middle East because of cultural ties and because Palestine, at that time, was no man's land, with any way of administration and decided that the creation of the State of Israel and the State of Palestine was the best choice to organize the area.

And no, zionism as a form a racism was never a UN resolution. Do you think that the same international organization that promoted the creation of the State of Israel is going to label zionism as racism? Of course not! Don't believe me? You can go to the UN website and look for it, they have every single resolution ever published. Really, go see for yourself on the General Assembly resolutions and convince yourself. It never hapenned. It was a mexican proposal and was ignored by the way. The UN has ruled many resolutions against Israel about leaving the territories won by the arab-israeli wars and they have been ignored but they have never condemned zionism as racism.

Israel is a secular democracy, yes, believe it or not. There are religious parties, but they really are small ones. The country and it is laws are secular. No, you don't have to be a jew to be an israeli citizen and even jews who were born in another countries, like Mexico, have to apply for citizenship like anyone else.

And yes there are arabs that are jews and live in Israel. They are arabs culturaly and racialy too. There are the ashkenazi jews who are of european ancestry and sepharadim of spanish and arab ancestry. Ashkenazis speak yiddish and sepharadims speak an arab dialect. You have egiptian, lebanese, jordan jews. Have you ever heard of the black ethiopian jews? I just have the impression pasilla that you have never met a jew in your entire life.

And maya0, really, you are quoting Mel Gibson! We went from quoting Monsiváis to quoting Mel Gibson. And yes, all jews are responsible for wars, and all mexicans are indians sleeping under a cactus' shadow, and all americans are white and blond, and all asians look the same, and scandinavias dress themselves only in some animal's fur. Maya0, darling, I'm really sorry to say, that was the stupidest comment so far posted.

Posted by: bunburina | August 11, 2006 01:25 AM

Bunburina I just the other day watched "Gallipoli", with Mel Gibson. Probably the premier anti-war movie of all time. He has sure taken himself down a few notches since then.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 11, 2006 01:34 AM

Jerry B... yes, definetely! I know. Actually I feel kind of bad for Mel... he seems to be a likeable guy but we are definetely witnessing his debacle... just like some little guy from Tabasco we all know.

But what is next? Quoting the wise words of Niurka Marcos? I mean, she's cuban...

Posted by: bunburina | August 11, 2006 01:39 AM

This is just too good to be true! I´ll apologise in advance for any spelling mistakes, because I´m P!%$ing myself laughing.

MayaZero (signs like a girl a, talks like a man o).

Do you really regard Mel Gibson as the height of informed intellectual reasoning? If you knew any history you might realise his film "Braveheart" distorted factual events in England so as to make it more acceptable to the Hollywood producers (and the small percentage of Americans who always have to hate the English, lets be honest, which country provides the majority of Hollywood baddies?). He moved people who weren´t even alive at the same time to have dialogs with each other to keep the "plot" going. Thats the way truth is to some people. His father denies the holocaust ever happened, and Mel has never said whether he disagrees or not.

Just out of interest, are the Jews sponsoring (to help you out that means aiding through either arms, money,advice, etc) the massive religious war between Sunni And Shi-ite Muslims?

And of course there are so many Jews in Somalia as well. And I remember so many of them in Bosnia too.

"Like that fact that AMLO won the presidency of Mexico, no matter what the mass media trys to dish out, he won, and if push comes to shove, well, we will see who has the real numbers now wont we?"

Yes, MayaZeroIQ I´m sure we will see who has the real numbers.

Will Mel paint himself blue this time as he leads you into battle, or will he revert to his Mad Max days and go for the leather look, does he still have the fast car, will Tina Turner be coming with him?

Will you be writing the instructions on where to assemble? God help the people of Monaco if you are!

Please inform me, I have to know who to look out for leading this enlightened revolution.

Please keep posting Maya0IQ, there´s nothing like informed debate is there?

As for your wish for a bullet or grenade to find another poster on this site, that really is crossing the Rubicon (ask someone else to explain). You showself to be what most of us guessed you were by your own "wruds".

And the USA is OK except for for the Nazi types!!! Maybe you have something in common with them, hypocrite.

Posted by: PeterN | August 11, 2006 01:43 AM

Let's not forget this maya0 jewel:

"911, was payback. No innocents that fine late summer day. Does that make me a bigot? Of course not."

Oh no, maya0 dear, you a bigot? No way. All those children & babies were all zionist fascists.

Posted by: | August 11, 2006 01:46 AM

I'll correct myself:

Mexico did propose zionism as a form of racism and it did pass. Resolution A/RES/30/3379. But guess what? It was rectified and annuled in 1991 with resolution A/RES/46/86. Since it was annuled I had the impression it didn't pass. My bad.

Summary: zionism is not a form of racism.

Posted by: bunburina | August 11, 2006 01:59 AM

Peter N, the way to avoid a "bullet with your name on it" is to take a bullet, write your name on it, and keep it in your pocket. That way, the "bullet with your name on it" has already found you, and you do not need to worry about any others. It really works, trust me.

And really, lets not knock Mad Max. I consider those movies the height of intellectual cinematography. Right up there with the "Conan" flicks by Gov. Arnold.

Bunburina, you said "Actually I feel kind of bad for Mel... he seems to be a likeable guy but we are definetely witnessing his debacle... just like some little guy from Tabasco we all know" You are half right, at least. I agree with you on the debacle part. The other part....I think Mel is a nice guy, but AMLO?

On a serious note, does anyone have recount totals? Here in BC, AMLO picked up 500 or so (big deal). I heard rumors that Calderon picked up 2000 in Jalisco. True? What about the DF? Numbers please!!

Posted by: Jerry B | August 11, 2006 02:13 AM

Hey Jerry B,

You have my total respect for doing your bit at the airport, checking out contact lens solution etc.

No doubt you´ve read about the attempt by the Islamists in England to try and blow up between 6 and 12 planes Thursday morning, (trans-atlantic planes may average 300+ people, so 1,800 to 3,600 people murdered min) These guys were trying to bring on explosives as components, inciendary in one bottle of pepsi, ignition in baby food tins. Mix them together, give them a shake and welcome to 56 virgins in paradise, and to hell with the rest.

No doubt Maya0IQ would say there were no innocents on that August day as well.

Most fanatics fall into this same type "If we don´t get want we want through democracy, we will get it through force"

Posted by: PeterN | August 11, 2006 02:16 AM

Peter N, that is what this airport stupidity is about. Right now, Arnold has only put the Guard at aiports where European bound flights originate, which is LA, SF and Oakland. So he grabbed guard units from there. Hopefully he will not decide to "protect" the SD airport too, I have better things to do with my time. As of now, I am "standing by". If I am still standing by tomorrow night, I am going out of town and not taking my phone with me...

Posted by: Jerry B | August 11, 2006 02:46 AM

56 virgins? I thought it was 72. Has rationing been instituted in paradise? Is there a shortage? Can virgins be traded for, shall we say, more worldly women?

Also, what do FEMALE suicide bombers get? 56 Chippendale strippers? How about gay bombers? (not sure I want that answer...)

Posted by: Jerry B | August 11, 2006 02:53 AM

Jerry, when I said "likeable" I was talking about Mel. Definetely not AMLO.

Mel is too likeable as AMLO is too ______.

You guys fill in the blank.

Posted by: bunburina | August 11, 2006 03:27 AM

Sorry, it should have been to instead of too... I'm kinda tired, I'm going to sleep...

Posted by: bunburina | August 11, 2006 03:28 AM


I guess the gay bombers get killed before they get the chance to bomb, if their Mullahs know their preference! Stoning I believe.

What you´ve got to watch out for is any Islamist guy trying to get on a plane dressed as a clown. You see the shoe bomber plainly missed a chance to increase his "payload", and research shows those big clown boots might be more effective in breaching the plane!

Posted by: PeterN | August 11, 2006 03:35 AM

Since the general discussion appears to have drifted far away from the main issue, I've decided to bring the main subject back to everyone's attention.
Below, I have posted a sample of numerous inconsistencies that have appeared after two days of recount of 11,800 or so "casillas". My sources are the new "impugnaciones" of the Coalition documented by the judges and magistrates in charge of the recount (I'm terribly sorry for not translating it for non-Spanish speakers):

Distrito 1
Casilla 79 básica:
Calderón -34
AMLO +34
dif. 68
estaba abierta; faltan 343 boletas
(faltan folios 74274 a 74601)

Casilla 83 contigua 3:
Calderón -1
Faltan 215 boletas (faltan folios
102000 a 102215)

Casilla 67 contigua 1
Faltan 179 boletas

Casilla 94 contigua 1
Faltan 17 boletas

Casilla 83 contigua 2
Faltan 4 boletas

Casilla 70 contigua 1
Falta 1 boleta

Casilla 99 contigua 1
Falta 1 boleta

Distrito 2
En cinco casillas hay excesos de votos.
Casilla 211 contigua 1
AMLO +37

Total del estado hasta ahora:
más de 1000 boletas desaparecidas

San Luis Potosí
Los magistrados no permitieron la apertura de los sobres con votos nulos

Distrito 5
Una casilla no especificada:
Calderón - 40

Distrito no especificado
13 casillas estaban abiertas

Distrito 3
Algunos paquetes estaban abiertos

Distrito 5
Algunos paquetes estaban abiertos

Distrito 6
483 básica:
Calderón - 50

Distrito 3
7 básica:
Madrazo -235
Calderón - 233
AMLO - 65
Campa -9
Mercado - 8
Nulos -28

Distrito 4
Casilla 2920 contigua 1
Sobran 111 boletas
Casilla especial mercado del mar
Sobran 13 boletas
Calderón -6

Distrito 5
El magistrado colegiado en materia
civil, Octavio Alcocer y el juez de
distrito en materia civil Francisco
Olmos Avilés han cerrado las puertas
del distrito a todos los asesores de
la coalición, medios de comunicación y
ciudadanos observadores.

Distrito 7
182 paquetes electorales estaban
Casilla no especificada:
AMLO +67
Calderón +6

Distrito 8
Casilla 677 básica
AMLO +80
Casilla 267
AMLO -100

Distrito 10
Algunos paquetes estaban abiertos

Distrito 3
Casilla 260 básica
Calderón -201
Casilla 270 básica
Calderón - 308

Distrito 1
Casilla 3253 básica
Calderón -162

Distrito 7
Casilla 21 contigua 1
26 votos de más, no hay lista

Distrito de Tuxpan
7 casillas presentan ruptura de sellos
Casilla no especificada
AMLO +56
Madrazo -56

Distrito 5
Casilla 365 básica
Calderón -158

Distrito 6
Casilla 266 contigua 1
Calderón - 157

Estado de México
Distrito 14
Casilla 266 básica
Extravío de una boleta
Casilla 266 contigua 1
Sobra una boleta
Casilla 267 básica
Sobran 3 boletas
Casilla 268 básica
Sobra una boleta
Casilla 280 contigua 2
Falta una boleta
Casilla 256 contigua 1
Falta una boleta
Casilla 260 básica
Faltan 2 boletas
Casilla 281 contigua 2
Sobra una boleta
Casilla 283 contigua 2
Faltan 3 boletas

Distrito 18
Casilla 2037 básica
Calderón - 108

Distrito de Hermosillo (no especifica
Casilla 341 extraordinaria contigua 3
Calderón - 220

Distrito 3
Casilla 1284 básica
Calderón - 208

Distrito 2
Casilla 164 contigua 2
Calderón -10
Casilla 240 básica
Calderón - 10
Casilla 335 básica
Calderón - 20

Distrito Federal
Distrito 8
Casilla no especificada
El paquete estaba abierto, no
había lista nominal, faltaban 4

Distrito 20
Casilla 2022 básica
21 boletas extraviadas
Casilla 2300 básica
9 boletas sobraban

Distrito 16
Casilla 3225 básica
Sobres estaban abiertos
Casilla 3225 contigua 1
Sobres estaban abiertos
Casilla 3353 contigua 1
Sobres estaban abiertos
Casilla 3360 contigua 2
Sobres estaban abiertos

Distrito 5
Casilla 3756 básica
Sellos de paquetes estaban abiertos
Casilla 3765 contigua 1
Sellos de paquetes estaban abiertos

Distrito 8
Algunos paquetes estaban abiertos
Casilla 542 básica
Desapareció el sobre con las
boletas de la elección presidencial

Casilla 439 básica
Sobres estaban abiertos, se
encontraron 80 boletas de más

Distrito 9
Algunos paquetes estaban abiertos

Distrito 6
Sobres estaban abiertos, boletas
desparramadas por el suelo al abrir la

Baja California
Distrito 4
Más de 50 paquetes estaban abiertos

Distrito 2
Bodega sin sellos, muchos paquetes
estaban abiertos. Presunción de
embarazo de urnas.
Casilla 440 contigua 1
Extravío de 59 votos

Distrito 7
Muchos paquetes estaban abiertos

Distrito 8
Muchos paquetes estaban abiertos

Distrito 5
Bodega sin sellos, muchos estaban
paquetes abiertos
Para que se den una idea, adjunto video
de la apertura de la bodega del
distrito 5:

Distrito 3
Muchos paquetes estaban abiertos

Hasta ahora en el Estado:
Calderón - 224
AMLO + 365
Diferencia 589

Distrito 1
Más de 170 paquetes carecen de sellos
y firmas de los funcionarios de

Magistrados bloquean acceso a asesores de la coalición

Nuevo León
Distritos 1, 7, 8 y 9
Magistrados impiden el acceso de
asesores de la coalición

Distrito 9
Casilla 2098 contigua 1
estaba abierta
Casilla 494 contigua 1
Tiene 17 votos de más

Distrito 2
12 casillas carecen de listas nominales
1 casilla se encontraba abierta
Casilla 99 básica
Actas no firmadas y sobres estaban

Distrito 5
Inconsistencias en más de 80
casillas, la mayoría de los paquetes
estaban abiertos

Distrito 12
Casilla 174 básica
AMLO +56

Presunción de votos "clonados"
Casilla 1502 básica
317 votos objetados
Casilla 1461 contigua 1
370 votos objetados
Casilla 1501 contigua 2
371 votos objetados
Casilla 1501 contigua 1
435 votos objetados
Casilla 1502 contigua 1
316 votos objetados
Casilla 1276 contigua 1
77 votos objetados
Casilla 1268 básica
56 votos objetados
Casilla 1269 contigua 1
73 votos objetados
Casilla 1269 contigua 2
69 votos objetados
Casilla 1269 contigua 3
96 votos objetados
Casilla 1282 contigua 2
80 votos objetados
Casilla 1291 básica
46 votos objetados

Distrito 8
Denuncia penal contra consejeros
distritales por no volver a sellar
debidamente los paquetes tras el
proceso del 5 de julio.

Distrito 2
Casi todos los paquetes estaban

Distrito 8
29 casillas impugnadas por

Distrito no especificado
Casilla 81 básica
Todas las boletas del PAN fueron
impugnadas por presunta clonación

Posted by: fco. | August 11, 2006 05:13 AM

The following is a link to the video of the opening of the Baja California district 5 ballot storage room.

Take special notice in the loose seals at the door, the unusual number of packages opened, the opened ballot envelopes, and the amount of ballots spread all over the floor.
Notice how ballot packages are not stacked one on top of the other. The same happened in district 23 of Coyoacán which I personally oversaw. I suppose it is standard procedure. Also, notice the large amounts of duct tape used to seal the packages (those which are closed, at least). Therefore, the assumption that packages open up because the lid cannot support the weight of the ballots is ridiculous.

Posted by: fco. | August 11, 2006 05:43 AM

fco: You forgot to mention the votes for AMLO they found in the garbage can.

The mayority of these reports that you have are meaningless, most of those votes are good votes for PAN and they are being impugnated by PRD but they will be accepted as good votes by the TRIFE. Apparently the PRD is impugnationg just about any vote in favor of PAN in an effort to create the impression that they were not. They even have discussion.

The rest of the situations that you mention are miserable little incidents.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 11, 2006 06:53 AM

Ariel Orellana:

"Urban extreme poverty STEADY(my emphasis) at 11.3%..." You quoted it...

K. Vronna:

Thanks for your correction.


Thanks for your correction (and contra-correction). It helps to relax and think before replying, to avoid the multiplication of feet in mouths. Just something I wrote (to refresh your memory):

"Certainly a lot of Arabs (and natives of latinamerica, and african countries like ETHIOPIA) live in Israel..." my emphasis.

You're right: I haven't met a Jew, but hundreds of them, even a good Jew girlfriend from Tampico (as exotic as Ethiopia...)

And recently, an example that some animals are more equal than others: Some Palestinian men (Arabs, themselves) are not welcome as Israeli Citizens, even if they marry Israeli women...

In a way, I'm glad of the discussion I stirred with my mistaken perception of the requirements for Israeli citizenship. Many of the complexities of the issue (historical, semantic) have been addressed by one or another of the people who cared to comment. But I fully agree with fco: we have veered way off track. I greatly appreciate its report of the voto x voto, casilla x casilla (in his version "light").

Posted by: pasilla | August 11, 2006 09:02 AM

Miserable little incidents?

Need I remind you emptyboxes that, seal opening, package opening, falsification of seals, envelope opening, excess of ballots, ballot shorfalling, ballot cloning (when the "folios" do not correspond), presence of unfolded ballots, lack of signatures, lack of act, lack of nominal list, amongst other irregularities, are direct causes of annulment of the "casillas"?

The TRIFE has demonstrated in its last transitorial ruling that it will follow a very strict interpretation of the electoral law. On what legal basis do you support that the TRIFE will overlook these serious irregularities?

Posted by: fco. | August 11, 2006 09:10 AM

Interesting how 2 sets of people will look at the same video and see 2 different things. Coalicion people look at it and say "Fraud!"

I would have to ask:

- Why would anybody go through the trouble of opening the packages to tamper them and then just leave the mess on the floor?

- If premeditated fraud happened, why not take the care to reseal the package and forge the signatures? They would have obviously taken the time to forge the votes by matching serial numbers and security measures. The thoroughness needed to forge the votes would not match the carelessness of leaving the mess lying around.

- I also have to point out that most of the missing ballots are consecutive. From having worked 5 elections from 1990 to 2000, I can tell you that this is a rather common mistake: either the box is sealed without the unused sheets (and then people go "oh crap! shall we open it and put them in?" with the obvious "no" answer) or they just don't read the instructions thoroughtly. If there isn't someone who knows all the ins and outs of the process, then these things will happen.

- Finally, I heard Claudia Sheinbaum de Imaz on the radio yesterday, complaining about unsigned votes. In case someone doesn't know: representatives have the right to sign each and every sheet, to make sure no fake votes are introduced (as a 4th level security barrier, the votes already have watermarks, serial numbers and the station's id). The signature is normally written over the sheet at the point where it separates from the block, so that you can match every vote to the block with all signatures lined up. It is entirely possible for the representatives to not excersice this right or remember they has the right once the voting has started. I saw this happen twice in those 5 elections.

Finally, pasilla, I quoted that part in response to your "Ariel Orellana, I also trust that you are smart enough to understand that some people live in cities, and they also may be poor..." quip. So that makes twice now that you neglected to read throughly the same set of stats. Regardless, the question still hangs in the air: if poverty has gone down, why not keep going with those programs? I'm not saying keep everything as is, many things have to change, starting with our Constitution, the tax code, freedom of expression vs. spending by non participants in elections, the size of congress, etc. BUT this is something that is working. Not as fast as we would ALL want, but it is working, contrary to the poverty programs, redistribution of wealth attempts, etc of the 1970s and 80s which seem to be preferred by AMLO.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 11, 2006 10:52 AM

Ariel Orellana:

I have better things to do than keep beating on a dead horse...


"if poverty has gone down, why not keep going with those programs?..."

Well, because at that pace, and using the moderate poverty numbers, it would take about... 50 years? to cut this kind of poverty in half... The poor have all the right to be a little impatient... Unless they are like the horse of the Spaniard, which died when it was getting used to not eating.

Posted by: pasilla | August 11, 2006 11:34 AM

Ariel Orellana:

Just curious:

"From having worked 5 elections from 1990 to 2000..."

Were you a party representative? Otherwise the random selection of polling station officers becomes a myth... unless you live in a very, very small town...

Posted by: pasilla | August 11, 2006 11:38 AM

Its funny how so many ppl, i kept up late till the wee hours of the morn. ha ha ha
What a bunch of Mexican hating Mo fos who are in love with Israel. Personally i dont dislike the jews, if only they went back 2 their UN mandated borders. But of course does things dont apply to them. And about 911, and those babies? Well war is hell. If the USA and Israel dont want war, then they should have not started one, because, no matter how much words are spent defending them, they are responsible for all the current wars in the world, and if some glib actor has the cojones 2 blurt out that truth, why does it upset so many ppl here? Because its true, and thats a fact. Like the fact that a bunch of Mexican wannabes are mostly posting here.
Mexico para los Mexicanos. Si quieren tanto a los EUA, o Israel, entonces vayan a vivir ahi...a perdon, pero ya estan ahi verdad. Pinche mama culos de los gringos bola de cabrones. Que nunca me los encuentro, porque me los quebro parados ahi donde estan culeros.
¡Viva Mexico Cabrones! ¡Viva AMLO! ¡Viva Fidel! ¡Viva Hugo! ¡Viva Evo! Democracia de verdad, no cocinado en Langley Virginia.

Posted by: maya0 | August 11, 2006 11:44 AM

My first election, at 18, I was an "escrutador", bean counter, if you will. The following election a friend, whose father is an elected official (and has been so in several capacities over the years) was a candidate back then, asked me to be a party representative. I agreed, even though I had no allegiance to any particular party back then. I was likelier to vote for the Verdes back then, before they showed their true mettle. After that I was in the DB of experienced representatives and I kept saying yes, not because of party allegiances, but because I still had suspicions about the cleanliness of the elections (1988 being so fresh in my mind, barely 2 years before my first election) and I wanted to be part of the solution. In 2000 I moved to another city and did not seek to be a representative any more, as the experience of those 5 elections showed me that the the chances of fraud being commited from the moment votes are slim-to-none. I regret not having done so this year, but at the time I had no motive to think the process would be so questioned. It was unfathomable to me that anyone would believe that things can be willfully manipulated there. It still is, actually, but that's another story.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 11, 2006 12:07 PM

Maya0-- You are becoming a parody of yourself. You show all the attributes we tend to associate with the radical left, although even that may be unfair because there are some people in that camp who are capable of expressing a logical argument without spewing mindless rhetoric, insults, profanity, and babble.

Now-- as for this debate about helping the poor-- Pasilla may be right-- the current programs are not enough. However, a major opening of the economy, reduction in regulations and taxes to spur small business growth, use of tax money from a reformed tax system to bolster education-- those kind of measures would have an impact within ten years, maybe sooner. If you look at models like Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and other nations where such programs were implemented, the effects were pretty dramatic.

But, of course, the Stalinists in the Zocalo might prefer the models offered by North Korea and Cuba.

Posted by: Goyo | August 11, 2006 12:10 PM

People, do not feed the troll.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 11, 2006 12:10 PM

About poverty, the way I look at the solution is: how many countries do we know of that solved their poverty problems with forced wealth redistribution and how many have solved it by growing their economies? True, the programs are not enoug pasilla, but to go back to the previous programs will accomplish nothing. The one AMLO program I would support is giving a better pension to retired or old people as they have no hope of bettering their income, the rest of the programs do not seem to help people get out of poverty.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 11, 2006 12:17 PM

I kind of agree with Ariel Orellana, notwithstanding the "cute" language that I disapprove of. We have to learn to respectfully (within reason) read the opinions of delirant participants from the left, like maya0, or the right, like emptyboxes, or of quite decent fearmonger anti-comunists, like the good goyo...

Now, back to work...

Posted by: pasilla | August 11, 2006 12:24 PM

I am a "chilango" living in exile (yes, I cast my vote by mail, and, no, I don't mind the term). While I do not particularly dislike AMLO, I do have to say that the manner in which he has attempted to get a recount is unfortunate, yet not surprising. As a presidential candidate, AMLO has an obligation to abide by the law and, equally important, to advocate in favor of stable political institution. His post-electoral actions has served no purpose but to weaken striving Mexican democratic institutions. There is no question that the election was a close call, but that was due primarily to AMLO's sense of entitlement, which were the basis for skipping the first presidential debate. Before that, there was no question in my mind that he would win by a significant margin. But many people felt disappointed by AMLO's failure to share the floor with other candidates. I guess, in sum, this kind of attitude should not surprise me from the politician who, upon refusing to abide by a court order, said that laws are created to serve man, and not vice versa.

Posted by: in exile | August 11, 2006 01:17 PM

People, FOCUS!

The issue at debate in this blog is the high number of irregularities in the recent recount; not the war in Lebannon and Gaza, or the differences between economic systems, your preference in newspapers, or baseless accusations against political antagonists.

I agree with Pasilla that Goyo's argument about S. Korea, Taiwan or Singapore liberalizing their economies is a tauthology. If ever there have been any economies were the state was the cornerstone of the development strategy it must have been these three (among with so, so many other cases that my mind recalls...)

Nevertheless, that is not the point of the discussion!

As for Mr. Orellana's comments on the video:
I don't recall having mentioned the word fraud in my past two interventions. Don't put words in my mouth (or keyboard).
I didn't qualify the evidence I presented, I merely stated facts. If there are, presumably, people responsible for the mess that appeared in the video of district 5, Baja California; if they made a sloppy work when they could've been more sophisticated in their craftsmanship; that is, at this moment, irrelevant. It's the duty of the Electoral Magistrates to investigate the matter exhaustively.

However, we, as citizens, cannot ignore that THE MESS IS THERE and that it raises very serious doubts on the activities of the "consejeros distritales", the soldiers in charge of guarding the storage rooms and the activities of the "Consejo General del IFE" between the 10th and the 14th of July, days on which the "proceso de cotejo de actas" took place.

As for the missing ballots.
Suppose that you state, as you have already done, that the ballots missing are the result of an innocent human error.

On the other hand, suppose that Pasilla states that he does not believe you and he thinks that all missing ballots are Coalition votes.

Suppose that a third party, like Goyo, comes along and says that you two are wrong: the missing ballots are PAN votes.

Then Bunburina comes along and says she found PASC votes in a nearby trash can.

They all ask the Electoral Tribunal: what is to be done with those VERY DETERMINANT missing votes? Naturally, the tribunal will consult existing law and jurisprudence and determine that in lieu of tangible evidence, it is necessary to annul the "casilla".

As for your third point:
You talk about unsigned ballot sheets. I am talking about packages with unsigned acts.

Posted by: fco. | August 11, 2006 01:21 PM

About the strenght of institutions:

In fairy tale terms... Isn't it better to know with facts which one of the Three Little Piggies houses is not going to be blown off by the Big Bad Wolf? We may wonder all we like, but until we don't test them, we cannot know for sure. If a weak house of hay is not solid enough, let's build another one, stronger.

By the way, the laws, the institutions, are constructs for the betterment of human life: they are as good or as bad as the humans who built the latter, crafted and approved the former. What's wrong with challenging laws or institutions? Times change. We are all aware of wretched institutions, unjust laws. Slavery was legal in several countries. Medical research was done in concentration camps during the Third Reich... I know, I know. I'm using wild hyperbole, but I think that it makes my point...

Posted by: pasilla | August 11, 2006 02:11 PM

amén, compa!

Posted by: fco. | August 11, 2006 03:00 PM

fco, the fraud comments where, in truth, not yours, they were in the YouTube comments section. Maybe you should have qualified the link with a note to clarify your position. I realize this is more my problem than yours, still, you're presenting evidence used by people crying "fraud". If you do not share the opinion maybe you should have said so to begin with. I don't know, I'm abivalent on wether or not to apologize for putting words in your mouth. I'll err on the side of caution and do so: I apologize.

For the third point fco, I'm free to add information I deem relevant.

Now, to the matter at hand, while your example has some valid points, you start from an shaky supposition: that the missing ballots were cast ballots. Lets look at one example:

Distrito 1
Casilla 79 básica:
Calderón -34
AMLO +34
dif. 68
estaba abierta; faltan 343 boletas
(faltan folios 74274 a 74601)

If those were indeed cast ballots then the text would say something along the lines of "less votes were found than electors voted". Most likely scenario: the unused ballots were left out, possibly left in the trash. Anomaly? Of course. Cause for anullment? I'm not sure but I wouldn't think so, as the will of the electors at that station was preserved, even if it took a challenge by the Coalicion.

This is precisely why I say than fraud is unfathomable to me, from the moment the vote is cast to the time an official winner is named, evertyhing is public and reviewable. Lets look at another example quoted several times here: "falsified acts". First a small review of the process: voting closes, votes are counted, the act is filled, COPIES ARE GIVEN TO EVERYONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES. This is done prior to sealing the package and before the package ever leaves the station. If anywhere down the line an act is falsified, vote counts modified by algorithm, black magic or what not, then everyone has a copy they can show and say "Hey, look! The act was falsified" or "Hey, votes published do not match the numbers in the act we were given!" Even more, since everyone gets a copy, the one entity (political party or IFE) that falsified the act can be readily identified. Can this anull the station? Posibly or even probably. Chances of nobody noticing the falsification? I think it's easier to win the lottery.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 11, 2006 04:03 PM

Pueblos indios, marginados por generaciones, admite Fox

El presidente de la República, Vicente Fox, ayer hoy que uno de los grandes retos que ha enfrentado su gobierno ha sido la situación de rezago y pobreza que han tenido que soportar los indígenas por generaciones, por eso hizo un llamado a agotar todos los frentes, en todos los niveles de gobierno y poderes del Estado, en la tarea de integrar a los pueblos y comunidades indígenas al desarrollo nacional.

Posted by: Mexico y el neoliberalismo | August 13, 2006 10:29 AM

Top 10 reasons why Calderon is the best choice for Mexico:

1. First and foremost, Calderon will make sure that Mexico continues the trend set out by Echeverria, Lopez Portillo, De la Madrid, Salinas and Fox. What trend is that? The trend of a long list of accomplishments occurred in the last 30 yrs. of PRI-PAN government.

2. Calderon will make sure that 50% of Mexicans remain with an income of less than $1 dollar a day.

3. Calderon will make sure that the exodus of millions of unemployed Mexicans continue going to the USA.

4. Calderon will make sure that the lack of gains in science and technology occurred during the Echeverria, Lopez Portillo, De La Madrid, Salinas and Fox continue.

5. Calderon will make sure that Mexico remains a 3rd world country.

6. Calderon will make sure that none of the participants of the bank frauds committed every sexenio are brought to justice.

7. Calderon will make sure that the Durazos, Hank Gonzalez and Salinas are able to steal with absolute impunity.

8. Calderon will make sure that the income and social disparities between the Mexican north and south increase.

9. Calderon will make sure that millions of young Mexicans have limited access to quality education.

10. There has been absolutely no improvement in the living conditions in Mexico for the past 30 yrs. But thank God we have Calderon to maintain the status quo.

God bless you.

Posted by: Top 10 !!! | August 13, 2006 11:00 AM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge'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