What To Do But Wait?

The counting has ended but the wait continues. A partial recount of votes from nearly 12,000 polling places in Mexico's July 2 presidential contest concluded Sunday evening, but the seven judges who ordered the exercise had little to say Monday.

So for now, it's status quo in Mexico, which means thousands of soggy protesters clogging vast stretches of downtown, Felipe Calderón behaving as if he's the president-elect and much of the country getting a little bit peeved at Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

Because many of the polling places were closed to the public, Campaign Conexión cannot say with certainty what the final tally will show. But reports from the two camps and other overseers suggest that while López Obrador picked up a few thousand votes, it was not enough to erase Calderón's 240,000-vote margin.

"López Obrador's aides contended Sunday that evidence had surfaced during the partial recount that ballots were missing in some polling places while extra ballots had turned up in others. They cited the irregularities as evidence that ballot boxes had been stuffed in some precincts and that marked ballots had been disposed of in others," according to the New York Times.

"On Sunday, López Obrador made it clear the protests would continue if the court designates Calderón president-elect. He announced plans to disrupt Fox's annual state of the union message to Congress on Sept. 1 and to try to stop the court from giving Calderón the official document naming him president on Sept. 6. He also threatened to hijack the traditional independence day celebration on Sept. 15 and said he would convoke a 'national democratic convention' the next day to decide 'the role of civil disobedience in Mexico's public life over the next years.'"

Protest Fatigue

Hotel managers, restauranteurs and cab drivers -- even those sympathetic to López Obrador's call for a full recount -- are grumbling that the leftist leader's blockades are hurting business in Mexico City. Some visitors to the Zocalo, the public square where AMLO and his followers have been living, report that trash is beginning to pile up and city workers must contend with a growing rodent problem.

On Monday, things got tense in front of several Banamex banking centers and Mexican legislative buildings. Police used tear gas to try to subdue protesters, including some prominent members of the PRD who were blocking entrances to Congress. Several of the PRD lawmakers who say they were injured in the scuffle are threatening to sue.

A solid majority of Mexico City residents agree with their former mayor that some type of fraud took place in the election, according to a new poll in El Universal. But even they appear to be losing patience with his tent cities. In an Aug. 9 survey of 600 people, 65 percent of Mexico City residents said they disagree with his encampment strategy and 68 percent said the demonstrations should not continue.

It's worth noting however that Mexicans appear quite able to adapt to adversity. In casual encounters over the past few weeks, many locals essentially shrug their shoulders, roll their eyes and say they'll find a way to cope. Taking a different route, sitting in traffic and even the uncertainty of who is going to run the country does not seem to discombobulate Mexicans the way it might Americans.

"While the two weeks of sit-ins have severely affected many downtown businesses, most of the capital's harried motorists and commuters seem to have adjusted," writes Houston Chronicle bureau chief Dudley Althaus. "That might change next week, when schools reopen. The tradition of mothers driving children to school and picking them up adds two more rush hours to the Mexican capital."

What About the Party?

Calderón, who ran his campaign on promises to continue the work of President Vicente Fox, has laid low during much of this strange post-election period, occasionally addressing business or civic groups. On Monday, he urged his rival to call an end to the demonstrations, especially the ones timed for national holidays, such as the Sept. 15 grito celebrating the Mexican revolution.

For those of you who have not experienced the annual independence festivities, it is a BIG DEAL. As many of 100,000 people generally fill the Zocalo for an evening of revelry and full-throated patriotism. Fellow blogger Ana Maria Salazar explains why the demonstrations planned for Sept. 15 and 16 could be the most serious -- and the most politically dicey for Fox and Mexico City mayor Alejandro Encinas.

Diez y Seiz "is when the traditional military parade takes place, starting off from the Zocalo where they present the flag and military honors to the President. Encinas insist [sic] that this parade can take place even thought the Zocalo is taken over. Unless the parade takes place somewhere else, Encinas is hallucinating. And it is extremely dangerous to have a large contingency of soldiers marching among protesters. It is a recipe for disaster."

For the record, the tribunal met Monday to consider challenges in two congressional races. In addition to the recount, the tribunal is evaluating more than 170 separate legal complaints. It has until Aug. 31 to release the recount results and must certify a new president by Sept. 6.

Shifty, Shifty

As it became clear over the weekend that the partial recount would not overturn Calderón's apparent lead, his rival began shifting tactics.

"López Obrador and his top aides have said that the results should be annulled from 7,442 polling places, or 5.7 percent of the 130,000 polling stations -- mostly in places where Calderón won -- because of alleged voter fraud. They say that would tip the election in López Obrador's favor.

"Local media reported that variations of only a few thousand votes have been found, far short of what López Obrador would need to overcome a 244,000-vote deficit. Horacio Duarte, who heads López Obrador's legal team, said his figures showed Calderón had lost at least 13,679 votes in the partial recount."

An insightful piece in the Los Angeles Times highlights the inconsistencies in López Obrador's case over the past six weeks.

"But the candidate's street campaign for a full recount has made his lawyers' job tougher. He's simultaneously called for a recount and declared that the election was tainted by fraud. The contradictory positions - why recount a fraudulent election? - have weakened his legal argument."

The issue may be less about legality and more about legitimacy, top López Obrador adviser Manuel Camacho Solis writes in El Universal. Unless the competing political factions can reach some consensus and resolve any lingering doubts in the minds of the public, the country will be "ungovernable," he argues, and the political crisis will be "profound and prolonged."

Humpty-Dumpty Nation

Well-respected analyst Denise Dresser worries that Mexico is a nation broken into many, many pieces. How, she wonders in an article published in Reforma, will it put itself back together again.

Like Dresser, the editorial writers at the Dallas Morning News are very down on the leftist.

"There's a striking irony at play here: The candidate who's trying to make himself look like Mexico's new democratic savior, Andrés Manuel López Obrador of the Party of the Democratic Revolution, personifies the old power-man way of doing things.

"The second-place finisher in Mexico's July 2 election, Mr. López Obrador is using the cult of personality to get the results overturned. He is getting closer to the Fidel Castro/Hugo Chávez model that feeds upon an image of a man of the people - except that, in reality, he sums the law up in himself."

A special thanks to columnist Kenneth Emmond who has found an optimistic note in this election saga. Noting that it's highly unlikely López Obrador will disappear any time soon, Emmond, suggests the two politicians may be falling into their proper roles. And that could be a good thing all around.

"Working the crowds to force institutional change is a role López Obrador is uniquely suited for. He has the right blend of paranoia, stubbornness, chutzpah, and the good politician's love of being the center of attention together with an unerring instinct for what his crowd likes to see.

"That combination of traits could be dangerous in a president for a society that aspires to operate under the rule of law, because it tends to set the will of 'the people' above the law. But it's ideal for a watchdog role in a country like Mexico, where rule of law is shot through with so many imperfections.

"Indeed, a political victory for Felipe Calderón and a loss for López Obrador might be the best possible formula for making a better Mexico - a kind of political division of labor. He's better suited to addressing crowds of ordinary Mexicans than negotiating the finer points of proposed legislation with congressional leaders."

Campaign Conexión apologizes for not spotting this sooner, but Sara Miller Llana's takeout on the corn component of the NAFTA trade agreement is worth reading -- even belatedly.

"The politics of corn continue to escalate, as a 2008 NAFTA deadline looms for Mexico to scrap its corn and bean import tariffs. And the disputed July 2 election has only heightened those tensions. On the campaign trail, runner-up Andrés Manuel López Obrador said he would renegotiate NAFTA provisions to protect the nation's corn and bean farmers.

"'[Corn in Mexico] is one of the areas that has the potential to become extremely explosive,' says Jon Huenemann, a former assistant US trade representative who helped negotiate many agricultural provisions under NAFTA. 'US-Mexican trade is huge and getting bigger and more significant to producers and consumers. And yet for the same reason the sensitivities are getting potentially more complicated. ... It's a bit of a tinderbox.'"

By washingtonpost.com |  August 15, 2006; 10:43 AM ET  | Category:  Campaign Conexión
Previous: From The Post: Years of Protest? | Next: Vicente Fox for 'Peace and Harmony'

Blogs That Reference This Entry

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Despite all the talk about the post-electoral conflict the country remains united thanks too AMLO himself. Eversince he started his protests Felipe Calderon has become more popular than ever.

Denise Dresser is an AMLO apologist, in the article you mention she parallels what AMLO is doing vs what Calderon in a very simplistical way because she tries to justify AMLO's errors at all costs.

What these mediocre leftist analysts will never speak about is who won and who lost in these elections and they don't like to talk about it precisely because the Mexican people voted for giving the right a greater presence in both houses.

PAN has now 206 congressmen and in the Senate they also have the largest presence there.

Felipe Calderon will have a de facto mayority in both houses of Congress. All he will need to reach a mayority will be some 30 or 40 congressmen, in congress he will have 206 plus PANAL 8, that makes 214, and we must remember that Felipe Calderon was careful enough to build great alliances with most PRI Governors, who have greater control over their federal senators and congressmen. Calderon will only need a small fraction of the PRI to reach mayority to make constitutional changes, but it is likely that the whole PRI will support his presidency.
In the elections, the PRI will receive the needed support to revive and make a come back. Two elections will be key for PRI and PRD, Chiapas and Tabasco, Veracruz will be a fight with all parties involved but it is likely that PAN will win the state, they have have a large presence there.

So the future for Calderon looks shiny. And AMLO and PRD know that but their actions are only strengtening Felipe Calderon and President Fox.

As we speak, many people in Mexico would like to Federal government to intervene and get rid of the blockades.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 11:12 AM

I was talking with a friend of mine who works about a block from one of the camps. He's asking me wether he can find work in my city because he's "up to the mother" (you know what I mean). 1 hour commute now takes 3 hours, all public transportation is saturated, he tells me he arrives at work every day looking like "a donkey chewed his suit" and that to get it the subway he practically needs a wedge. Yeah, the capitalinos have adapted all right.

Posted by: | August 15, 2006 11:20 AM

Everybody in our country has had enough of this. AMLO lost. But maybe the problem is not him being such a capricious and irresponsible fellow, maybe the problem is our society as a whole, we have become too forgiving with undemocratical people like him. We tolerate Manuel Barlett and Murat and Camacho Solis and characters of the like.
And then we have some irresponsible and mediocre leftist intellectuals like Denise Dresser, Lorenzo Meyer, Ciro Gomez Leyva, Carmen Aristegui and a whole bunch of them who instead of demanding AMLO to give up his street fight techniques (not his legal plea at the TRIFE, to which he is perfectly entitled to) instead of demanding him to be responsible, they have actually encouraged him by apologizing and explaning his actions to the public. Like this last article from Denise where she actually compares the actions from PRD and PAN and puts them at an equal level, How can somebody like Denise Dresser do such a thing? How can you compare the actions of the PAN to what AMLO and PRD have done? While AMLO has been on tv and in newspapers with all kinds of public actions and incendiary statements, PAN and Felipe Calderon have remained calm and have berely come out in public forums and when they do they call for everybody to be calm and to have a reconciliation. But biased pseudo-intellectuals like Denise want to interpret these statements as provocations. What does Denise want Felipe Calderon to do? To give in to AMLO's demands? To say that he did not win while AMLO calls the election a fraud? Totally nonsense. Denise Dresser finds violence when Felipe Calderon calls the pacifics to be pacient but she does not find any violence when AMLO speaks about the rich and priviledged versus the poor and miserable as though the rich were rich because of an act of god or something like that and not because of their hardwork and good administration of their wealth.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 11:39 AM

Emptyboxes, Dresser is hardly a leftist or AMLO apologist. Meyer, while clearly left leaning cannot be dismissed as a "mediocre intellectual", I respect his knowledge of history. Finally, Gomez Leyva, while no Edgar R. Murrow, at least tries to be balanced. If I had to pick the best newscaster (not columnist) I'd probably go with Trujillo. He shares a characteristic with Demetrio Sodi that I appreciate very much: he manages to piss everybody off. You gotta be doing something right if you manage that feat.

BTW, the second comment was mine, forgot to sign it.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 15, 2006 12:14 PM


You say in your article that AS MANY AS 100,000 people gather at El Zocalo for the September 15 celebration. I've been there and the place is packed.

Last I heard, that place holds 1,000,000 people, if you believe the PRD Police Department propaganda machine. On a good day even 2,000,000 and when Lopez says so 3,000,000.

Shouldn't you check your numbers before you publish them? The magician head-counters at the mayor's office will enlighten you with their numbers.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 12:17 PM

Denise Dresser is worse than a leftist. She is a liberal. You know where Batres,Bejarano,Padierna, stand.

Liberals are elusive nitpickers whining left and right. Their arguments are woolly and comfy, punctillious and generalizing. They will take a stand but not really. Their political correctness is insufferable, mushy bland nothingness. They allow their inner Quijote be. Denisse Dresser, she's a liberal. Enough said.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 12:41 PM

An article yesterday said only 20K or so showed up at AMLO's last "informative rally". Is this true? If so, the protests must be running out of gas.

Posted by: RC | August 15, 2006 12:42 PM

Ariel R. Orellana:
What I have read from these people is nothing but apoligies of AMLO. Trujillo got together this Mesa De Periodistas with Denise Dresser, Raymundo Riva Palacio from El Universal, Julio Hernandez from La Jornada, and Marcela Gomez from Milenio, and occassionally they had Sergio Aguayo, Lorenzo Meyer, Ciro Gomez Leyva, Carlos Marin.
Did you ever see Jesus Silva-Herzog, Federico Reyes Heroles there? No, and the reason is simple, because they are not leftist, because they think different.
La Mesa de Periodistas was never a debating group but rather a bunch of biased leftists analysts who would usually agree to whatever one of them said, granted, most of the times Raymundo did not agree with the cocaine conspiracy theories of Julio Hernandez, but nobody there ever gave any credit to President Fox, PAN and Felipe Calderon for anything.
The Results of the election proved them so wrong they could not speak about the following Monday, they were shocked. So far from reality were they.
How could Felipe Calderon, who they described as a gray and mediocre and boring candidate, how could he ever gotten so many votes?

Of course now we see a more balanced Raymundo, finally critizing AMLO, something he never, absolutely never did before the elections, and we can see the same from Denise Dresser, who berely attempted to critize AMLO once or twice in a whole year of campaign before the elections, but continually attacked Felipe Calderon portraying him as an intolerant and traditionalist and dogmatically catholic panista, When she, Denise Dresser, perfectly knows that Felipe Calderon is far from being like that, his good relations with Fidel Castro and his contacts with Venezuela to neutralize any support for AMLO from these nations contradic Denise's stupid assumptions about him. Raymundo, Julio Hernandez and La Jornada entirely, Denise Dresser, Ciro Gomez Leyva, Carlos Marin, Victor Trujillo, Sergio Aguayo, Marcela Gomez, Lorenzo Meyer and many others with them now look like imbeciles who talked so much about the virtues and qualities, and democratic values, and principles and political skills and intelligence about a man, AMLO, who is now in the Zocalo mounting a ridiculous protests and publicly attacking everybody, the press, the TRIFE, the Supreme Court, the President, The IFE, PAN, Felipe Calderon, Betty la fea, etc. When this same same man, AMLO, who all these mediocre and leftist intellectuals described as a smart politician who in their same words no doubt was going to be the next president of Mexico, was just six months ago, more than 10 points ahead in all the voting intention polls in the country.
AMLO has let these intellectuals down so bad, they cannot admit that Felipe Calderon won because he was smart enough to listen to his campaign advisors and to develop polical alliances with Elba Esther Gordillo (whose offer of alliance was turned down by the PRD before) and Felipe also developed ties with most PRI Governors and even with some PRD governors, he met at least one time with Cardenas Batel, and many groups interested in the future of the country, the business community, the church, the jewish community, among others.
Felipe Calderon won because of all these alliances he was able to build, and not only he won but in the process he helped his party recover their presence in congress and senate, to the point of going from being the third political force in congress to being the fist one now.
His Political skills have been more than demonstrated. By the way, he has just sent his respects to Fidel Castro, hoping for his quick recovery, does that describe him as a traditional ultra-right wing Panista?

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 12:44 PM

why don't you wait until the judges speak?

from www.narconews.com

Mexico's Partial Vote Recount Confirms Massive and Systematic Election Fraud
With Less than 9 Percent of Precincts Recounted, More than 126,000 Votes Are Found to Have Been Disappeared or Illegally Fabricated

By Al Giordano
Part V of a Special Series for The Narco News Bulletin
August 14, 2006

Finally, the hard numbers are starting to come in. In the "partial recount" of paper ballots from the July 2 presidential election in Mexico, ordered by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (known as the Trife), the recount has been completed in 10,679 precincts of the 11,839 ordered by the court (about 9 percent of Mexico's 130,000 precincts). From these precincts, Narco News has obtained the following preliminary numbers that confirm the massive and systematic electoral fraud inflicted on the Mexican people:

In 3,074 precincts (29 percent of those recounted), 45,890 illegal votes, above the number of voters who cast ballots in each polling place, were found stuffed inside the ballot boxes (an average of 15 for each of these precincts, primarily in strongholds of the National Action Party, known as the PAN, of President Vicente Fox and his candidate, Felipe Calderón).
In 4,368 precincts (41 percent of those recounted), 80,392 ballots of citizens who did vote are missing (an average of 18 votes in each of these precincts).
Together, these 7,442 precincts contain about 70 percent of the ballots recounted. The total amount of ballots either stolen or forged adds up to 126,282 votes altered.
If the recount results of these 10,679 precincts (8.2 percent of the nation's 130,000 polling places) are projected nationwide, it would mean that more than 1.5 million votes were either stolen or stuffed in an election that the first official count claimed was won by Calderon by only 243,000 votes.
Among the findings of this very limited partial recount are that in 3,079 precincts where the PAN party is strong and where, in many cases, the Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) of candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador did not count with election night poll watchers, one or more of three things occurred: Either the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE, in its Spanish initials) illegally provided more ballots than there are voters in those precincts, or the PAN party stole those extra ballots, or ballots were forged.

"Taqueo and Saqueo"

These preliminary recounts demonstrate mainly two kinds of fraud: "taqueo," or the stuffing of ballot boxes with false votes as if putting extra beans inside a taco, and "saqueo," or "looting," that is, the disappearance of legitimate ballots cast.

A significant problem, now, for Mexican democracy (for those who claim that the election was fair, and also for those who view this evidence as proof of electoral fraud) is that there is no way to tell, inside each ballot box, which of the ballots were legal and which were not; nor which ballots were stolen and which were not.

In some past post-electoral disputes for state and local offices, the Trife electoral court has opted, based on this kind of evidence, to annul the results from those precincts where stuffing or looting occurred.

If the Trife follows the law and its own established precedents, and annuls the results in these 7,442 precincts where the fraud took place, it would reverse the official results and López Obrador would emerge the victor by more than 425,000 votes nationwide.

Specifically, Calderón would lose 1,225,326 votes from his tally, while López Obrador would lose just 556,600; a difference of 668,726. When factoring in IFE's claim that Calderón has a more than 243,000 vote advantage, López Obrador would still win the election by those 425,000 votes plus some.

In other words, if the Supreme Electoral Court determines that only half of the problematic precincts are to be annulled, López Obrador would still be declared the presidential victor. To continue to impose Calderón, at this point, would require the court's endorsement of results from at least 4,000 precincts that the recount has demonstrated were scenes of the electoral crimes of ballot-stuffing and ballot-theft. By failing to annul those precincts, the court would, in effect, annul the legitimacy of the Mexican State, lighting the fuse on a social conflict much larger than anything that has yet occurred in the wake of the fraudulent election.

The Clock Is Ticking

The Trife court has a constitutional deadline of August 31 to complete its computations and of September 6 to either declare the presidential winner or, alternately, to annul the elections. The court has very broad and absolute power to annul up to 20 percent of the precincts without annulling the entire election (annulment would mean that Congress would choose an interim president and new elections would be called within two years). If the Trife annuls more than 20 percent of the precincts, the entire election would have to be annulled.

López Obrador and his supporters have demanded a full recount of all precincts: "Vote by vote, precinct by precinct." And, indeed, the results of the partial recount strongly suggest that a full recount would demonstrate that they won the election. As the tension has risen, and the deadlines approach, López Obrador supporters maintain a 12-mile encampment in downtown Mexico City, have symbolically closed government office buildings, held mass marches with millions of protesters, maintained encampments outside of IFE offices throughout the country, and this past week began "takings" of toll booths on federal highways, allowing motorists to pass through without paying.

López Obrador has already announced that if the Trife tries to impose Calderón, there will be "civil resistance" at the halls of Congress on September 1, when President Vicente Fox must give his annual State of the Union address, and that on Mexico's national Independence Day, September 15, when the president traditionally leads the "cry of pain" from the Mexico City Zocalo, the opponents to the electoral fraud will displace Fox with a cry of their own.

Many observers viewed the Trife court's initial rejection of a full recount as a reflection of the court's own bias and willingness to impose Calderón as president at any cost. Others believe that the electoral court's own established precedent of annulling precincts where ballot stuffing or theft occurred puts it in a position of having to annul those 7,442 precincts (almost six percent of all precincts nationwide), reversing the results of the election. Also, recently, one of the justices of the nation's Supreme Court suggested in public that if the Trife doesn't or can't establish certainty over the result, the highest court may then intervene. In other words, September 6 might not be the final date of the legal conflict over this very tarnished election.

Presence of Malice

Photo: D.R. 2006 El Universal
The partial recount has also revealed more evidence of a pattern of malice on the part of IFE officials. The existence of more ballots than there are voters in PAN stronghold precincts indicates that either the IFE illegally sent more ballots than allowed to those precincts, or somehow the party in power obtained them by other illegal means. The recount has also revealed a massive number of precincts where the seals on the ballot boxes had been broken since Election Day, opening the possibility that ballots were inserted or removed after July 2nd.

Mexico's television duopoly - Televisa and TV Azteca - have declined to report the irregularities that have surfaced as a result of the partial recount. The same goes for much - but not all - of the corporate media. The facts have instead broken the media blockade via Internet and organization, as well as the detailed reporting of the daily La Jornada in Mexico City, the daily Por Esto! in Yucatán (two of the nation's four largest newspapers) and some other media. Add to this mediatic schizophrenia the factor that those who support Calderón and insist the election was clean are passive, lacking conviction, whereas those millions who believe an electoral fraud was committed are active, and in the streets, and it is evident that just as the Mexican State has lost legitimacy, the corporate (especially television) media have lost credibility and power to spin public opinion.

Photo: D.R. 2006 Reforma
This morning, part of the protest encampment in downtown Mexico City, along Madero Street, was dismantled by its participants and thousands moved, en masse, to the entrance to the halls of the Federal Congress. Riot police blocked them from reaching the doors. There was some pushing and shoving, as the accompanying photos show, but demonstrators - who outnumbered police by a factor of thousands - by and large remained peaceful, still holding out a cubic-centimeter of hope that the Trife electoral tribunal will do the right thing and fix the fraud. But that patience is as thin as a razor, and as the clock counts down to the decision that the Trife must make by September 6, the electoral court and its seven judges now have the facts in hand, the evidence of systematic fraud that changed the results, which the partial recount has furnished.

The anti-fraud protestors have maintained a peaceful round-the-clock vigil outside the halls of Congress in the Mexico City neighborhood of San Lazaro for various weeks, in which many of the current senators and congress members from the PRD party have participated. At 2:15 this afternoon, elements of the Federal Preventive Police (PFP, in its Spanish initials, the same agency that invaded San Salvador Atenco in May) attacked the vigil encampment, according to this wire report from La Jornada. (The report states that six congressmen and women were wounded in the attack; El Universal reports the number of legislators wounded by police at 11.) When police forces attack and prevent duly elected senators and congress members from entering their own governing hall, the term for that is coup d'etat. It is an invitation to social revolution. The events of recent weeks and months in Mexico suggest that Vicente Fox and his attack troops would be wrong to presume that there are enough police in the country to hold back the turn of history that he is provoking from above.

Photo: D.R. 2006 El Universal
Today marks two months since June 14, when 15,000 citizens of Oaxaca beat back and chased 3,000 riot cops from that city's historic center, revealing the "new math" of Mexican protest movements. They have since taken the state TV station and more than 30 city halls, as well as having shut down the state government in their demand that repressive Governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz resign. Yet their numbers are a fraction of the masses that, in Mexico City and elsewhere, are resisting the electoral fraud. And added to the post-electoral conflict, more related to that in Oaxaca, is the unsettled account of 30 political prisoners arrested May 3 and 4 in San Salvador Atenco, the pending arrival there of indigenous comandantes from the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN, in its Spanish initials), and the quiet organizing being done from Mexico City and in other states by its Subcomandante Marcos and thousands of organizations and adherents to the Zapatista Other Campaign, which, outside the glare of the media and the electoral spectacle, organizes toward a national rebellion more ambitious than saving the vote of a single election, but, rather, seeking to topple an economic system. The Trife, if it imposes the fraud, will accelerate the Zapatista calendar as perhaps the greatest consequence.

If the seven electoral justices believed that holding a partial recount would calm passions, the facts unleashed by that partial recount have served, instead, to flame them. What the judges do with those facts will determine whether the institutions will correct the fraud, or whether the institutions will risk, as in Oaxaca, falling from power because of trying to impose an indefensible crime against Mexican society and democracy. What seven judges decide in the next three weeks will mark a crossroads in Mexican history... and that of all América.

Posted by: scott coleman | August 15, 2006 12:51 PM

Scott Coleman, the PFP did not invade Atenco in May, as your article says. They backed up the Policia Estatal of EDOMEX who were brutally repressing poor people with machetes and gasoline bombs by trying to keep a highway open. (Pasilla will I am sure point out that art. 11 does not mention highways)

If this is your idea of democracy, please keep it in the United States, or wherever you happen to be. We have enough homegrown violence here, we do not need outside agitators egging it on. If and when the dieing starts, you will be far away from it all and safe, a privilege we do not have. Maybe you and Maya can keep each other company, comparing Pell Grants at some American university while peasants die in Mexico.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 01:18 PM

scott celeman,

If you can post the Illiad and your local yellow pages and the white pages
and while you're at it Library of Congress' full catalog transcripts archives and what nots, I'd thank you the favor. Your post above is lovely, we want more. We're masochists.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 01:22 PM

Scott: Narconews? Duuuuuude...

c'mon now, somebody post Fox News so we can complete the unfair and biased section of the comments. Oh, if you're going to just cut and paste why not just post links?

Emptyboxes: Don't be hatin'. Dresser has always been balanced, lets ask pasilla or someone else if she thinks Dresser is a leftist. Rodolfo correctly points out she's middle of the road, he says liberal (like its a bad word) I say balanced. I sure would like to be called liberal any day. Maybe "convenenciera" would be a better label, but I don't believe she is.

Now, Hernandez is clearly out there, he's just gone, call search and rescue. As to why we don't see more conservative columnists on Trujillo's round table I can't say, but he does not exclude one side or the other. Let's put it this way: AMLO's supporters say he should boycotted for being biased. You say the same thing. Coincidence?

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 15, 2006 01:24 PM

En unos dias el tribunal federal "limpiara" la eleccion, al tomar nota de los cambios cuantitativos expresados en las actas de los jueces responsables del recuento.
Entonces podra declarar la validez de la eleccion y declarara presidente electo a Calderon.
Entonces Andres Manuel Lopez Santa Anna se vera en la necesidad de escalar sus ridiculeces o generar una asonada reaccionaria. Con violencia. Y, por supuesto, perdera.
tic,tac;tic,tac;tic,tac. Solo unos dias mas.

Posted by: Eduardo Valle. | August 15, 2006 01:55 PM


I agree. Denise Dresser is middle of the road convenenciera wich is exactly what I said. Liberals are like that. On the radio she is perfectly reasonable. With Trujillo she is infuriating to watch, how she accomodates her arguments so the nut from La Jornada isn't offended.

People, left and right should be discussing what works, not their political agenda. Problems require solutions that work, not blue, yellow or tricolor polarizing sloganeering. We want Mexican democracy to work, not sado-masochist plantones.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 01:57 PM

Apparently, AMLO supporters are now blockading the Spanish embassy in the DF. If Zapatero, of all people, is not pure enough for them, who exactly is? The only heads of government I can think of who are to the left of Zapatero are Fidel and Hugito Chavez.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 02:48 PM

More exciting information is coming out. Excelsior is now reporting that, the recount over, Calderon lost 7,254 votes and AMLO lost 324 votes, with 9,000 votes left to be validated. This means that Calderon's margin of victory is now .567%, slightly down from .584%.

This, I think, is it. Calderon is president elect.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 03:03 PM


Don't you miss the good old days when a soda cost several thousand pesos. A few years ago I asked a petate vendor in a country market for the price of a petate and he said 35,000 pesos. I asked this older man, who has sold petates all his life, how much the same petate cost when he started selling them and he said 50 cents.

The populist regimes that Lopez waxes nostalgic about turned a humble petate anyone could afford into an unaffordable Magic Carpet that was still a petate. Don't you miss those good old days.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 11:42 AM

Rodolfo, I remember walking around with a million pesos in my pocket at times (It was about $300US at the time) and feeling so cool. I remember being able to us one American penny to make a local call on a pay phone, because the phone company had given up trying to keep up with inflation, and just set the phones to accept anything round. And, I remember the pleasure of winning $764,000 pesos at a dog race in Tijuana.

A case of Coke cost $15,600.
A six pack of beer was $7,500
Tacos were $1,200 each.

Oh for the good old days. Maybe AMLO will bring all this back.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 11:55 AM

Does anyone remember the good old echeverrismo Lopez is such a fan of?

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 03:14 PM

It is quite obvious that the election was, to say the least, somewhat fraudulent. After all, the fact that some of the numbers of votes coming from the different election districts do not agree with the expected number is a clear sign that the results, regardless of the winner, need to be thrown out in many precincts. The right and fair choice for Mexico would be a so called run off election between Lopez Obrador and Calderon. Yes, it would cost money and time but the price would be negligible if this process leads to a LEGITIMATE winner in that election. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to realize that when the vote difference between the two candidates is so small (less than 1%), particularly in a process where there will always be "irregularities" in the voting (Mexico is a country where fraud and corruption are a modus vivendi), it is IMPOSSIBLE to declare a legitimate winner. You probably need at a minimum a 5-6% difference in the final count between the top candidates to declare a true winner.
Calderon is aware of this problem but he has chosen to ignore it. What is he afraid of? It is sad that Calderon has turned out to be another politician willing to do anything to gain power at the expense of the well being of his own country. Calderon has not tried to reach to Lopez Obrador to find the best option for a country in dire need: few people would deny that it is a DISGRACE that so many millions of mexicans have to go to the US to barely provide for their families. Calderon has the unique opportunity to show that he is a leader who cares about his country. Mexico does not need yet another demagogue politician trying to do what is best for him and his followers (PAN).

Posted by: drgecc | August 15, 2006 03:17 PM

kind bloggers:
it almost looks like few people writing here care about the actual electoral mandate. but, those persistent campesions don't know what's best for them anyway.

thank you for the link- pasting advice--and my sincere apologies for that behavior.

Would you be willing to expand on your seemingly prescient comment "Narconews? Duuuuuude...". I mean, their black and red website is a bit foreboding but so is the truth. When I was in Bolivia working on a headlice problem at the time of Evil Evo's election, narconews reporting matched my sight, unlike washingtonpost and Faux News. So, besides being there, what are your sources for facts? educate me. tell me where to go for the truth.

thanks for the warm welcome. i didn't realise i was typing (and pasting--sorry) amongst oligarchs

jerry b: there aren't any safe places this side of the styx.

Posted by: scott coleman | August 15, 2006 03:25 PM


Lopez made a cocession speech on Sunday. Everybody missed it. He said before his adoring plantonistas that he would be present at the TEPJF premises when Calderon is given certification as "spurious president-elect".

Who said defeat doesn't sit well with this INDESTRUCTIBLE-RayOfHope-PURYFIER cackling rooster.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 03:27 PM

It is clear that AMLO and all of his supporters have absolutely no legitimacy and no cause worth fighting for.

After all the elections as officially counted gave Felipe Calderon a huge, huge majority, a vast, giant, enormous popular majority, I think it was a victory of tens of millions of votes over AMLO, whom is universally hated among all the people of Mexico, except for some foolish chilangos and cocaine scientists in southern Mexico. More than a victory, it is a vast, overwhelming, gigantic statement that the hated PRD party is now resigned to the dustbin of history, and finally nothing will remain but modern, forward thinking political parties based on experts and professionals who know how to dress well and received correct educations.

Thankfully Calderon upon assuming office based in his unchallengeable and enormous mandate can not only continue but improve upon the stunningly successful record of the Fox presidency, including the unprecedented GDP growth, the additions of many more millions of jobs through careful privatization of public industries, and perhaps with luck entertain all the daring souls who would love to see harsh spankings delivered to those stinky children and Stalinists wasting space and time in the Zocalo and even the crazy ladies who shout rudely in cathedrals.

Did I get that about right?

Posted by: El Cid | August 15, 2006 03:37 PM

scott coleman,

The only imperialist invader in this blog is your unfortunate first posting. It took more than two hours for you to explain? What are you smoking over there.

Here, we're up to our necks shooing away totalitarian wanna-be's with the largest stick we can find!

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 03:39 PM

drgecc: I agree with you, I think a runoff would be the best possible solution. Regardless of who won, the winner has no more than 36% of the vote, and is going to be a minority president. I also think, that, having had a month and more to get to know Mr. AMLO really well, the voters would hand Calderon the presidency in a landslide.

That being said, there are two minor problems. One is that elections, in Mexico and the world, are conducted according to law, and Mexican law has no provisions for runoffs. It should. Hopefully it will in 2012. Right now it does not. Maybe the TEPJF could order one anyway, as its decisions are not able to be appealed. I personally would love it if it did. But I doubt it. Furthermore, minor details like laws have never really worried AMLO, yet he is not making any types of calls for a runoff. Why? Because he knows he would lose, and lose big.

If a runoff was held, does anyone here doubt that AMLO would just start screaming fraud and eleccion de estado again when he lost?

Scott. I hope you did not get any headlice in Bolivia. You say "narconews reporting matched my sight" in Bolivia. I think you mean that narconews matched your preconcieved opinions. You are obviously not in one of the 16 Mexican states that supported Calderon, because if you were you would know how ridiculous the idea of our 10 or 20% of PRDistas doing something stupid is. Like the chilangos, I think that everyone YOU see loves AMLO, so you assume that the whole country loves him. It does not, or he would have won a lot more than the 35% he got, or even the 38% or so he would have got if all his fraud claims were true.

Posted by: | August 15, 2006 03:45 PM

Scott, nice to know you're not just watching from afar.

I don't own the truth, I can't tell you were to find it, that is for each to determine, but in this case you've gone to one end of the spectrum so I jokingly asked for another extremist news source, just one on the other end of said spectrum. Let it be noted that I despise Fox News, BTW. Now, as to how to determine what the "truth" is, I fear if you've never been at a polling station to see what transpires there then the arguments presented by the PRD and just repeated by narconews and La Jornada, among others, will sway you quite easily. In one of the previous posts of this blog I posted a rather lengthy explanation as to exact process a casillas goes through. I'd ask you to take a few minutes to read it and then come back and I'll answer specific questions as to how the "fraud" could have happened. I personally find it quite difficult, although not completely impossible. I mean sure, 4 to 14 people per station can sell out and change the results in their casilla, but to claim that this is systematic and planned is like claiming that the WTC was brought down by a huge conspiracy concocted from inside the Bush administration. Conceivable, sure, why not? Possible? C'mon...

Look, you want to know how difficult it is to commit fraud under this system? Ask the UN. When elections were organized in Irak, the UN searched for the best possible polling system to take over there. Did it take the US system? Of course not. Did it take an European system? Nope. It took the Mexican system and took IFE officials to implement it. Did you ever hear of fraud allegations in Irak?

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 15, 2006 03:58 PM

The above unamed post is mine.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 03:59 PM

El Cid,

If I remember correctly the original El Cid was defeated by an overwhelming Moslem superiority, not for a lack of trying. I also remember Rosita Elvirez recieved 7 shots but was lucky, only one was fatal.

Lopez is the Rosita Elvirez of our day. He was not voted-for by more than 27 million voters. In an election you loose by one vote. Did I get that right?

If Lopez wants to continue his People's Cause, he can. Does he have a right to make new rules as he goes. No. He won't succeed. Authoritarians have no place in today's Mexico. You better get that right.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 04:06 PM


The key phrase in your post says Calderon has chosen to ignore a weakness there is in Electoral Law. Calderon is not the King of Mexico, he is a presidential contender like the other 4 contenders and he has no power to make the rules as he goes. That's Lopez' game. Calderon didn't make the law, he has to follow the law.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 04:24 PM


Lopez coined "complo" to explain away his political blunders and for years it was the word du' jour. The new concoction from this same democrat is "fraud".

This man's carreer has been built on fabrication after fabrication. Won't we ever learn?

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 04:51 PM

The original El Cid was a military leader among the minor nobility who hired Muslims himself, and for nearly a decade actually worked for a Muslim leader, but mostly worked for his own profit and power, angering King Alphonso by invading the Alphonso-protected Moorish city-state of Toledo. And supposedly he died of natural causes in his own kingdom in Valencia. I don't find him to be any sort of historical role model, but he did inspire a very, very cool poem -- "el que en buen ora cinxo su espada..."

"In an election you loose by one vote. Did I get that right?"

Indeed you did. That is why electoral institutions in both the U.S. and Mexico should be more than willing to consider careful general recounts when such close results merit. But they are not generally so willing, and such is the system, and so shut up all of you who worry about such things, you must simply be crazy and paranoid. The Supreme Court of the United States told the Florida State Supreme Court to stop recounting the votes in 2000, so I guess we here too know of this reluctance.

But then, what I read here in these comments suggests that the election was not won by one vote, nor by a few votes, but that AMLO was not only hated since the protests began but that AMLO has always been hated, that Calderon did not just win but vanquished a dangerous and beastly foe.

If I had to guess the future, I would guess that AMLO has been denied the presidency (whether he won it or not), but has now been promoted to organizer, a position which has been sorely lacking in most countries including Mexico.

Posted by: El Cid | August 15, 2006 04:54 PM

El Cid, I think you may be reading the tea leaves wrong. The PRD is more than just AMLO, and I think that players like the Cardenas, Amalia Garcia, Ebrard, and a number of others may now start to take a more active role in running the party. AMLO's future is now, and he knows it; if he loses here his political career is over, that is why he is fighting so hard. As it looks more and more like he did lose here, do not be surprised if he fades away into the Atenco/CGH/EZLN cult of personality world over the next few months, and ceases to have any relevance in serious Mexican politics.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 05:04 PM

In their miopic view of the world, rodolfo and Co. conveniently concentrate on election numbers, not procedures, and repeat plattitudes such as that stating that in democracy one wins or loses per one vote; never mind the margin of error unavoidable in a very complex enterprise such as a national election. The convenience of a andate is summarily disregarded: if 27 million Mexicans didn't vote for AMLO, also 27 million Mexicans abstained from voting altogether or voted for other than Calderon.

Ariel Orellana certainly has made his best effort to convince us of the impossibility of fraud, by describing with excruciating detail how voting happened. However, I cannot imagine a system designed by humans that is totally immune to fraud commited also by humans (e.g. one person introduccing more than one ballot in a ballot box). Personally, I'm not optimistic that the court will do the right thing. But the law and the evidence are there. For the benefit of those holding by their nails to quantitative differences, here it goes:


1. La votación recibida en una casilla será nula cuando se acredite cualesquiera de las siguientes causales:

...Existir irregularidades graves, plenamente acreditadas y no reparables
durante la jornada electoral o en las actas de escrutinio y cómputo que, en forma evidente, pongan en duda la certeza de la votación y sean determinantes para el resultado de la misma..."

I would be absolutely shocked if none of the polling stations are annuled. The number will depend on the way the judges interpret "serious irregularities."

The rest is amazingly fanatical diatribe. I have to confess that I'm a little startled by the acidity of the vitriol. rodolfo's ranting about what a liberal is deserve a prominent place in the museum of infamy.

My guess is that, for these Calderon's corybants, attempting to live one's live on the basis of evidence, showing intellectual flexibility in front of reality, is anathema: some of these strange human specimens seem to condone, even endorse a despicable act, if so doing advances their reactionary agenda: the end justifies all means...

Posted by: pasilla | August 15, 2006 05:12 PM

The real reasons AMLO lost:

1. He ignored the northern states, Nuevo Leon in particular

2. He insulted many of the upper middle class (parasites) who might otherwise have supported him.

3. "Vicente Fox is not my president"

4. He never convinced voters that he was not a puppet of Hugo Chavez. For that matter he did not even try.

5. The first debate, stupid.

6. He surrounded himself with noxious dinosaurs from the PRI.

7. He managed to simultanously irritate the church, businessmen, the middle class and the entrepeneur class.

8. He made no real effort to get the votes of Mexicans in the United States, so the foriegn vote went for Calderon.

Now, the reasons AMLO says he lost.

1. Vast conspiracy involving the vatican, Fox, el Junque, the media, big business and who knows who else.

2. Everybody hates him.

3. The election was unfair. No, wait, the votes were counted wrong. No, wait, there was cyber fraud. No, wait, the election was unfair. No, wait, it is the PAN's fault that the PRD did not place poll watchers at all polling places. No, wait, the PAN was able to corrupt the PRD poll watchers. No, wait, AMLO has videos. Oops. No, wait, Coca Cola, Sabritas, Televisa and a number of other business (but NOT Telmex) stole the election. Or something like that.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 05:13 PM

Pasilla, what is the "right thing" you want the court to do? Serious question. Anull? Full recount? Only anull enough votes so AMLO wins? Call for a runoff (I wish they would...)?

And, until any fanitical diatribes, vitriol, or ranting from Calderon supporters approaches the personal threats and anti-semitism (not to mention mispellings) of cerain PRD supporters, it is hard to feel much sympathy.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 05:19 PM

Jerry B:

The right thing to do, in my humble opinion, would be to clean the election, whatever it takes. Simple enough, I think.

And I challenge you to find slander as baseless as some of the one used by some PAN sympathizers in this blog, in ANY posting by an AMLO supporter...

Posted by: pasilla | August 15, 2006 05:32 PM

When it is impossible to reduce the error in an election to less than 1%, then this is not just a weakness in the law, it is a total lack of common sense (stupidity one could say).It is plain crazy (loco). Would you launch a space shuttle if you couldn't reduce errors to as little as possible? And here you have the case where congress did not forsee the possibility of such a close election..CRAZY (just like Floriduh! 2000).Do these congressmen read the papers?

Calderon following the law? Give me a break. It is EASY to follow the law when the law favors your position (Did not Salinas follow the laws that favor him?). Obrador would do exactly the same that Calderon is doing if their positions were reversed. FC has shown to be no better than AMLO.

What we are talking here is REAL LEADERSHIP: the willigness to take risks for the wellness of a country that has not had a decent president in more than 70 years. To the best of my knowledge, the tribunal has the power to order a new election and, if Calderon is NOT AFRAID of the result of that election, he should favor, lobby and support such a decision. He is (as some one pointed out) in an advantegeous position: Obrador's popularity is likely to be down because of the state of affairs in Mexico city; Calderon could then win a stronger and more viable position if he wins a run off. Right now, to the eyes of many people, FC will not be a legitimate president regardless of what the tribunal says.

Obrador can do all he wants but he would gather little or no support if he loses an election for more than 5-6%. Most Mexicans can be very poor, cynical but they are not stupid (unlike the congressmen who wrote the electoral law).

Posted by: | August 15, 2006 05:35 PM


Want slander? How bout "jewnited States of America?" Of course, I guess it's not slander if you agree with it.

"Clean the election, whatever it takes". OK, but what is "whatever it takes"? And, since margin of victory is within a statistical margin of error, NO ONE will ever be 100% sure it was right. So, what is your suggestion?

For No Name, why should Calderon lobby for anullment? He won. And, in case you are not up to snuff on the electoral law, in case of anullment, congress, by a two thirds vote, elects an interim president. That two thirds requirement means we hand our future for the next 18 months to nobody else but the PRI, as they will be the controlling bloc in congress. Since AMLO is an ex PRIista himself, and hews exactly to the PRI party line from about 1975, this, to him, may not be a bad thing. To the rest of us, giving ANY kind of power back to the PRI rats would be a disgrace.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 05:43 PM

Seems to me like this Scott Coleman is with the guys who support United Colors of Benetton-Subcomandante Marcos and The Otra Campaña Circus traveling movement.
These people are like a cancer, they belong to anti-globalization groups and radical organizations from around the world who support the most fundamentalist groups including terrorist organizations.
Here in Mexico these people have come in support of the child molester Subcomandante Marcos who sleeps with indian girls from Chiapas.
These imbecile supporters of Marcos United Colors of Bennetton have the slightest idea of what is really happening in Mexico. They get some money from dictators like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and other corrupted dictatorships. They are the same ones who cheer Hugo Chavez and Castro wherever they go.
Scott Coleman has written other interesting articles where he expresses his hatred of democracy and America, he loves Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and Osama Bin Laden and he has written some interesting stuff in defense of the terrorists who killed thousands of americans on September 11.
Please just dismiss his comments here.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 05:44 PM

El Cid,

My point about El Cid is that in the face of assured defeat he had the will to face his fate with no illusions of success. I was obviously using the Hollywood version of his life. He accepted imminent failure standing. He went into his demise like a man. In the face of terrible defeat he went down and saved his honor. He didn't ask for an enemy recount and complain at the unfairness of it all. He was admired.

What is revolting to me is that you have a race and all contenders accepted the rules. There was a winner and four losers. Three losers accepted the election results and one decides to make a racket.

If Calderon had lost and started bringing up "fraud" charges and doing all the antics I would be directing my rants at him and his cadre of weaseling liars.

What is at stake is the future of Mexican democracy. We have to have laws that apply equally to any and all. There are a lot of us that hate patronizing authoritarians that know what's good for us. Their word is the new law, to hell with "spurious" laws. They couldn't care about laws. They are the new and only law.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 05:45 PM

Emptyboxes, maybe Marcos and Daniel Ortega can get together and kind of have an orgy with 14 year old girls. Seems like they have the same tastes. O well, at least they like girls.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 05:52 PM


Have you been reading the newspapers recently? How about the big push given to your candidate by the illustrious former PRI member Elba Gordillo? How about the gracious adhesion of PAN to the PRI candidate in Chiapas? Who is making "wise" alliances (emptyboxes dixit)?

On the other hand, you are creating a big storm in a tea cup with the infamous "jewnited States of America." The slanderous content of the frase is in your head, really. In itself it doesn't mean a thing...

If the cleanning of the election passes by the road of annulment, so be it. Your hysteria leads you to see things that are unlikely. How do you know that a member of the PRI will be appointed as interim president? Besides, you use every opportunity to remind us that PAN has a relative majority in both houses of congress. The mandate of an interim president is limited almost strictly to organizing the election. That will be an opportunity to introduce the runoff that you seem to favor to death; by the way, don't speculate: the TEPJF cannot write electoral law. I personally am doubtful about the conveninence of a runoff, but it's the congress' job to decide about it.

It's a lot simpler to repeat ad nauseum the same themes: the PRI is evil, AMLO is a former member of PRI, AMLO is evil, irrelevant, crazy... (fill the blank).

The country is in deep trouble, and we need people who doesn't shy away from their responsibilities.

Posted by: pasilla | August 15, 2006 06:04 PM

From the practical point of view,
18 months of an interim president (even if it is from the sobpri, which I DOUBT IT would happen given that only 24% voted for the PRI) is way better than a "selected" president for 6 years.The only way to have an elected president is when the margin of the winner is larger than the error. By that measure,FC did not win the election.

So far FC has shown to be a politician in the bad sense of the world.FC IS NO better than AMLO or any other PRI guy. FC so far is more interested in scoring political points than in real progress.A real statesman would be willing to take a risk or to reach out to his adversary to find the best choice for Mexico. (where is a Morelos or a Lincoln?).

On the other hand, is it possible to find out if the policies of 1975 by LEA could be more effective than the ones implemented by Fox? If you can find an and the answer happen to be Yes: LEA policies are better for Mexico; then by all means, mexicans go ahead and find some one (amlo or fc may do) who can implement them. Pragmatism above ideology that is what is needed!!

Posted by: drgecc | August 15, 2006 06:27 PM


I have to say I admire your stoicism. There are four or five of us ganging up on you and you just won't be silenced! I apologize to you for the barrage, it's not personal.

As you rightly say Calderon was also not elected by more than 55 million registered voters but the rules say you win by one vote, not by raising complete falsehoods such as "fraud" "cochinero" "ballot stuffing" "taqueo" and countless more colorful fabrications. They're conveniently ad hoc but baseless and proofless.

I don't think the July 2 election was perfect and error free. No election in the WORLD is. What is disgusting is that the PRD losers taint this effort with their unseemly fabrications. Calderon got the most votes, period.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 06:32 PM

what's with your ad hominem attacks? do you know what that is? That's when you attack someone's character instead of the substance of their debate. It's kind of like saying "Scott Coleman tried to buy Hitler's underwear on eBay so please just ignore his comments" I hate to school you like this-- it's so off topic.

no... no money from castro here. or bin laden. in fact, i've even helped cuban political refugees resettle in the EEUU. Quien diablos es Scott? Not who you think. I've posted exactly 3 "articles" in my life. And this is the 3rd. Ciao!

but this isn't about me or you. it's about having a real democracy in mexico. can we get back to the topic now that you've convinced all that Scott Coleman loves Osama?

btw, can you post some link to some of those articles you think I wrote? This Scott Coleman sounds interesting.

Posted by: scott coleman | August 15, 2006 06:46 PM


"Calderon got the most votes, period."

Your opinion is as good as mine. But Calderon has not been declared president elect, and if he is under the present circumstances, he (for whom I don't care much) and Mexico (for which I do care deeply) should unfortunately be prepared for a wild ride. All frivolous banter about the sexual preferences of Marcos and Daniel Ortega aside...

Posted by: pasilla | August 15, 2006 06:50 PM


You have no idea what the economic debacle we had in 1970-1988 was like. In the U.S. double digit inflation shortened Carter's tenure to one term. Even the New York Times published an editorial endorsing Reagan, if you can beleive it.

LEA started an inflation spiral that took until the 21 first century to contain. Prices changed monthly or weekly. A quart of milk would double in price from one day to the next. In your country if your economy reached triple digit inflation like we did, the sitting president would have been summarily impeached and sent directly to jail. Don't preach here that LEA was any good. He was a failure.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 06:56 PM


Jorge Castaneda wrote an article for Newsweek after the Mexican election and said whoever wins will be getting the toughest job in the world.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 07:05 PM


Wasn't Fox's presidency a failure too? See the nice electoral mess that he dragged the country into, due to his political tone-deafness. The presidency of "nothing happened." Why should anybody believe that things will be different under the "President of continuity"?

Posted by: pasilla | August 15, 2006 07:09 PM

Jorge Castaneda has written so many self-serving things (granted, in a sharp, clean English). It's interesting that he failed to find a party that backed him up in his failed presidential venture. Too exquiste for the "masses," I guess.

Posted by: pasilla | August 15, 2006 07:16 PM

Scott: Nobody believes what you said about helping Cubans resettled anywhere.
Fact is you support this totalitarian regimes and their lies and you support that child molester called Marcos. You and that hypocrite of John Ross are going around spreading all kinds of cocaine stories.
You and him and Al Giordano and other people who participate in pro-socialist and pro-communist campaigns are anti-americans, anti-semitic and anti-democracy. But we already know you and your stupid cocaine bolivarian dreams. Go and lick Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro's feet.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 07:20 PM

scott coleman

When you posted inadvertently the gigantic screed from narconews, it was like you were dragging Donald Rumsfeld into Osama's tent. Mexicans see as patronizing condescention when an American feels he has a duty to enlighten us about our unjust society.

As I see it, this blog is about Mexico's post-election maelstrom. Join the party!

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 07:31 PM


I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories of any kind. Mexico is in a transition and cotinuity succeeded over change because I beleive the change Lopez advocates is back to centralized authoritarian presidentialism. Remember Salinas?

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 07:38 PM

pasilla said:
"However, I cannot imagine a system designed by humans that is totally immune to fraud commited also by humans (e.g. one person introduccing more than one ballot in a ballot box)."

Serial Numbers + station id + watermarks on ballots. Just like the current system.

I've actually said that yes, its conceivable for fraud to occur under extreme conditions: all officials and representatives colluded, but not likely to work on even a small scale, say, more than 10 stations.

Oh, and even though I do not agree with rodolfo and emptyboxes on several things, AMLO's supporters talking about the end justifying the means sounds a lot like the pot calling the kettle black.

Finally, pasilla said:
"On the other hand, you are creating a big storm in a tea cup with the infamous "jewnited States of America." The slanderous content of the frase is in your head, really. In itself it doesn't mean a thing..."

Again, even if I were to agree that that hatefull phrase means nothing by itself (which I don't), the fact of the matter is maya used it in a VERY, VERY hatefull post. How is it you can stand by on this issue but express that you "disapprove" of my use of the phrase "don't feed the troll" because its using "cute language"? You didn't think that one got by me, did you?

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 15, 2006 07:38 PM

Here is an email from an a PRD Follower who has been unemployed for 7 years already, this fellow is at the planton in Reforma right now, we sometime exchange some communication:


You are an asjole moderfaked, me hate yu verry munch, me luv AMLO, vote by vote, me luv nacha guevara and Saddam husein, and me luv Osama very much. Me happy americans tower falling down, me happy americans crushed by arab terrorists, me luv arab terrorist.

emptyboxes: me very poor, me need job but PRD culos no give me much mony, prd pay 500 pesitos week, me sleep bad, me smell bad. me need work.

Fuk yu emptyboxes, yu dog, me hate yu. yu and yu mommy are bad piple.

viva AMLO! Viva Osama! vote by vote! viva rigo tovar!

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 07:39 PM


You are gettin very close to overt bigotry
and away from satire.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 07:55 PM

thanks for the fyi and welcome. I'll be more careful.

but just not yet. Aren't we all Americans? i'm pretty sick
of USA residents (oops, I should say 'citizens') thinking
that an 'American' is someone who lives North of the Bravo
and South of Niagra.

i don't expect you to believe me, so verify my Cuban claim.
Call Refugee Services of North Texas. I worked for them in '97.
Ask about Juan Munoz if my name doesn't ring a bell immediately.
See if Pat still works there, or Chip, or Hamid.

i don't support AMLO per se-- I just support a recount.

Why is that so hard to stomach?

Recount the votes, annul the whole election if you have to
and start over. Just let the people vote and let each vote

Just b/c someone supports a full recount doesn't mean they are
a communist, a terrorist, or a facist, or a sore loser.

Let the chips fall where they may.

Posted by: scott coleman | August 15, 2006 08:12 PM

LEA was a terrible president but my understanding is that he did not start the triple digit inflation. It started, as you know Rodolfo, with the next President (lopez portillo). To say that the policies of LEA lead to the debacle of the 80's, well that is a bit of a huge stretch. Also, my understanding is that the hyper-inflation in Mexico never never reach what happened in Argentina or Brazil where, in fact, a liter of milk would go up twice as much EVERY day for a month or so. In Mexico, it was the day after the currency devaluation (and not every day) when you saw the rise of prices. This triple digit inflation, in fact, only happened for about three years (not in a row) and that was a decade after LEA ended his term. Indeed, after Salinas left, there was a year of triple digit inflation, was this inflation the result of policies implemented 20 years before (1973-74)? I think that it is unlikely.

Regarding the 1975 policies, it is interesting to note that since the 70's, the number of illegal aliens from Mexico has increased ten fold whereas the mexican population as a whole has increased at most threefold (a conservative estimate from US Congress). By this measure one can conclude that the policies of the 70's (presumably amlo/pri policies) seem to have been more effective for creating decent job opportunities for Mexicans than the policies of the Fox administration.I hope that whoever is the winner realize that this is a DISGRACE and decides to take responsibility for the problem. Unfortunately, just like the US is addicted to oil, the Mexican government is addicted to the remittances of illegal immigrants. Since Fox is president, according to El Banco de Mexico (see the webpage), the amount of remittances (as a percentage of the GDP) has increased every year during his administration. Even Zedillo seemed to have done better than Fox in this area. Is Fox a failure? Well, in this area he seems to be. Is Felipe Calderon going to CONTINUE such a shameful record if he is declared president?

Posted by: drgecc | August 15, 2006 08:14 PM

"i don't support AMLO per se-- I just support a recount.
Why is that so hard to stomach?
Recount the votes, annul the whole election if you have to
and start over. Just let the people vote and let each vote
Why is so hard to stomach the fact that Felipe Calderon won?
Why should the people vote again? Says who? How many are behind AMLO and his claims?
There are 5 political parties in our country and only one is saying there was fraud?
Why there wasn't any fraud in the Senator and congressmen Elections? They were counted by the same hands.
Why there wasn't any fraud in the DF Government election? They occured at the same place and time and the same citizens voted there and they were counted with the same representatives standing there.
Why only in the Presidential Elections?
How many fraud allegations is AMLO going to denounce? First they said it was cyberfraud, then "a la antiguita", then with the Actas, later the packages were opened afterwards.
The Actas were signed by all prd representatives, that is the fact they cannot explain or deny.
What guarantees do we have that AMLO and PRD will respect another election, or even another recount?

And Scott, you fool nobody, we know what the narconews site is all about, they even have banners of the La Otra Campaña there.
They are the same ones who go to Venezuela to Hugo Chavez socialist cocaine conventions all the time. You are puppets of Dictators like him and if tomorrow he indicates you to support Bush you will do it automatically.
And if you do not wish to be labeled like them then don´t used them as sources of information.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 08:49 PM

scott coleman,

You are welcome. I agree completely that all borders should be erased. We're all humans living a very short time in this world. There was a time when you could move from one country to another and with a simple notice to the local post office you declared your new residence and you were set, no questions asked. Passports had not yet been invented. Go tell that to the Homeland Security Department, or Mexico's Foreign Office.

On the issue of a recount, it's not up to me, Calderon or a rising choir of protest. The rules are that the Electoral Tribunal gets to decide that. The Tribunal (TEPJF)
has started their proceedings and all discussion about about the votes and whatever is merely shooting blanks in the air. The seven good people of the TEPJF are going to tell us no later than 9/6 who the winner is. The rest is idle speculation and I love the fun. Election junkies like me don't get to witness a mess like this that often.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 08:54 PM

"Regarding the 1975 policies, it is interesting to note that since the 70's, the number of illegal aliens from Mexico has increased ten fold whereas the mexican population as a whole has increased at most threefold (a conservative estimate from US Congress). By this measure one can conclude that the policies of the 70's (presumably amlo/pri policies) seem to have been more effective for creating decent job opportunities for Mexicans than the policies of the Fox administration.I hope that whoever is the winner realize that this is a DISGRACE and decides to take responsibility for the problem."

drgecc: you seem to ignore the demographics of the seventies and eighties. Your post also assumes that President Fox governed under similar conditions when all these presidents enjoyed complete PRI dominated congresses. You also imply that policies implemented by a president take effect inmediately when it is not completely so, Reagan and Bush the Father deregulated the US Economy but it was Clinton who enjoyed the results of these measures.
According to you President Fox has implemented all his policies when it has been exactly the oppossite. Congress has modified and limited everyone of his budgets and the PRD and PRI completely blocked all his reforms, they dedicated their precious time to pass stupid laws about how to promote the use of condons and tatoos, they basically legislated for protection of punks.
President Fox is not the only responsible for those people going to the USA in search of better jobs. Our government has three branches and congress needs to learn to co-govern and to share and take responsibility of the economical and social situation.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 08:57 PM

Apparently, Humpty-Dumpty is calling for an insurrection already.
He is calling to an end to the "Republica Simulada" as he put it. He says he won and Period!.
This cookie is definitely crazy.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 09:14 PM


You had to be here to experience the beauty of it all. I'm sure you can imagine paying 2000 DOLLARS for a hot dog and feel it's not really that bad. Mexico's problem is that it happened, REALLY. And it would happen year in year out, for thirty years in a row. LEA TRIPLED the minimum wage in six years. If you think thats really not that bad, you should run for president. Would a campaign promise like that get you elected?
The sole idea is preposterous. You would be laughed away at the Iowa caucus. Mexico's problem is that it happened for three decades in a row, really.

The reason for this nightmare was Mexico was run by an authoritarian presidential figure that ran the country as an absolute monarch. Lopez ran Mexico City like that, let's not forget he learned all his tricks as a PRI political insider. He left because he was not given Tabasco's governorship. Yes, governorships were given like fiefdoms to political Favorites. The PRI was unstoppable for more than 70 years. You had to be here for the beauty of it.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 09:35 PM

"Here is an email from an a PRD Follower who has been unemployed for 7 years already, this fellow is at the planton in Reforma right now, we sometime exchange some communication...

...me very poor, me need job but PRD culos no give me much mony, prd pay 500 pesitos week, me sleep bad, me smell bad. me need work.

Fuk yu emptyboxes, yu dog, me hate yu. yu and yu mommy are bad piple...

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 07:39 PM

Are you sure you're not corresponding with Tarzan? Ask your pen pal his opinions of Jane, Cheetah, and what drums say.

Posted by: El Cid | August 15, 2006 09:43 PM


I don't know Scott but in the U.S. social work is a paid profession. He is probably a social worker and not an idle leftist busybody with nothing better to do. I believe he does work to help people and is not just blowing hot air.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 09:48 PM

May I submit for everyone's amusement the news: EL CID IS LECTURING EMPTYBOXES ABOUT TARZAN, CHEETAH and DRUMS SPEAKING.

I like this place...

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 10:00 PM


First, a side comment, the logic that the Clinton economy was after all a result of the bush and reagan policies, it is a fallacy (rewriting history some one would say)propagated by the Reaganites. To attribute the economic boom of the Clinton era (1997 second term) to tax cuts implemente by Reagan in 1982-83 is a HUGE STRETCH to say the least. Also let us remember that during the reagan era unemployment was noticeably higher than during the clinton's second term and Reagan himself had to raise taxes later in his administration.

Yes, Reagan was a good president and a great leader. This can be clearly seen from the fact that even with ALL congress against him (dominated by dems then), he was able to persuade enough people to pass through congress his economic package. A remarkable achievement. Obviously Fox is not Reagan by any stretch of the imagination. Bottom line, Fox failed to deliver. Is his protege Calderon going to implement such policies if he becomes president? Let us hope not, we might as well open the borders.

Or are you going to attribute
the success of Reagan economic policies to a democratic congress (shared governance) since after all they were the ones that decided to approve the economic package of Reagan? (As you know Bush senior had to deal with a dem congress too). I do not think so. The executive is the ultimate responsible for economic policy here, mexico, china, every where. Consecuently,
Fox did not deliver what he promised and Mexico is in really serious trouble now!

Posted by: | August 15, 2006 10:20 PM

I could not care less who he or anyone else in this forum is.
The fact is we live in an information world but it is your responsibility to get informed well, and to find those sources of information that tell the facts as they happen, and to distiguish among those who edit and ommit and accomodate those same facts to fit their political, economical or social agenda.
All the last week Reforma, El Universal, Excelsior, Milenio, all the noticieros televisa, TV Azteca, Multimedios, Radio Formula, Imagen Informativa, and many others, all of them reported the progress of the reocount of the 11 thousand Casillas as normal and without any big incidents, little errors and very little irregularities with absolutely no influence on the election results. On the same days, La Jornada reported massive fraud, ballot stuffing and else, how did they do that without lying? Simple, in their Front Page they published something like this: "Massive Fraud Found in the Recount"
Then, in the second page where the complete story was told, in the small print you could read: "According to PRD Officials"
This are difamatory tactics and offend people who voted like me. These people from La Jornada are the same as Scott sources of information, they are anti-american, anti-semitic, is simple to find out, just go to their site, find the Search box and type something like "Septiembre 11" and you will find hundreds of articles that cover the September 11 attacks and all of them, absolutely all of them, in the light of the reasons why those poor terrorists carried out the attacks, they cover the attacks in the light of the USA interventions and they blame the Americans for that, and apologize and sometimes openly support those terrorists. One of the most important contributor of this communist newspaper is Rosario Ibarra de Piedra, she is now a PRD Congresswoman, she laughed and cry of happiness when those people were falling from the towers and getting killed, she said the americans had it coming. Anti-Americanism is one of the foundations of the Mexican Left. Anti-Semitism is the other, if you type in the Search Box, Israel, you will find many articles about the israel-palestinian issue, and all of them, again, absolutely all of them, cover the issue in the light of the poor and indefense palestinian victims, every day they publish a photo of Palestinian or arab victims of the Israel soldiers, but I have yet to see in their pages one single, only one single photo of a jewish victim of a suicide palestinian attack in Jerusalem.

I am sorry if scott or whatever his name is reads and believes the kind of cocaine conspiracy theories published by La Jornada and repeated by these silly and difamatory websites, without giving the benefit of the doubt to the great mayority of free and non-partisan newspapers where thounsands of honest journalists work and if does not take care of reading about the opinion of people like Jose Woldemberg or Federico Reyes Heroles or any other serious and respected and unbiased writer or intellectual in our country. If however he is knowingly and irresponsibly following the agenda of these PRD Bastards and that is why he comes here to participate in the difamation attempts of the PRD to destroy the credibility of our institutions then he shouldn't expect a warm welcoming. At least not by me. But who cares?

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 10:24 PM

"Or are you going to attribute
the success of Reagan economic policies to a democratic congress (shared governance) since after all they were the ones that decided to approve the economic package of Reagan? (As you know Bush senior had to deal with a dem congress too). I do not think so."

I certainly recognize congress did cooperateed with Reagan. But that has always happened, cooperation is normal in well established democracies.
Mexico is not a well established democracy.
Zedillo and Fox went through a congress that did not cooperate at all. That is not the entire responsibility of Fox, rather of the ideological dogmatism of the parties, everyone to their own project. I will expect Mexico as a whole to make progress on that.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 10:33 PM

drgecc: If you do not think triple digit inflation is a bad thing, you did not live in Latin American in the '80s or early '90s. Trust me, it sucks. I had the privilege of (because I am a filthy rich fascist) studying in Brazil in 1989 for a month, 1990 for a year, and then returning in 1993 for another month. In 1989, the exchange rate was BR2.50 to US$1
In 1990, when I got there, it was 77.50 to 1. When I left, it was 200 to one. In 1993, when I got there in early January, it was 13,000 to one, and 14,500 to one at the end of the month. With this kind of wackiness, if you want to borrow 20 bucks from a friend over a weekend, you have to negotiate an interest rate first. The rich are absolutely not bothered by this, as they simply keep their money in bank accounts in Miami. The middle class keep their money in inflation indexed local currency accounts, and are somewhat protected. The poor, who AMLO loves, are screwed, and without vaseline. They cannot save, they cannot buy ANYTHING on credit, and they cannot accumulate capital. But, then again, they remain poor, ripe fodder for any loudmouth populist who comes along.

It never got that bad here in Mexico, but, for example, I remember the '87 Liga Mexicana del Pacifico season when they had to play without foreign players because they could not pay them. I remember many friends of mine losing houses, cars and livelyhoods because they could no longer pay debts. I remember how NOBODY could buy a house on credit. And, I remember how the rich, in Mexico, deposited their money in the US, and were not affected at all. As Claudia Shienbaum, Carlos Monsivais, and Murat et al will not be affected if inflation ever returns.

So, Yes, some of us do have a paranoia about inflation. In my case, it is not personal, inflation would be the best thing in the world for me because I earn dollars. Give me a couple years of Brazilian style inflation, and I will own half of Tijuana. But God help the poor. And, since, unlike many AMLO backers, I think about the greater good, I really do not want to see a return to those inflatonary days of the past.

Also, ANYONE who think LEA, the arquitect of Tlatelolco in '68, was not a disaster, they need their heads examined. It is like saying Chavez is not a disaster in Venezuela because the price of oil has not dropped yet. But it will, and Venezuela will pay dearly, as we paid dearly for LEA and Lopez Portillo (bark bark!!!)

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 10:38 PM

May I submit for everyone's amusement the news: EL CID IS LECTURING EMPTYBOXES ABOUT TARZAN, CHEETAH and DRUMS SPEAKING.

I like this place...

Posted by: rodolfo | August 15, 2006 10:00 PM

I was not lecturing. I was only asking. I could lecture, at glorious length about Tarzan and the Edgar Rice Burroughs novels he comes from and the colonial heritage in which it was situated, but then just as I would be getting started rodolfo would carefully remind me that we are only to discuss Mexico's 2006 elections here.

I don't know if you ever saw the classic Tarzan black & white movies starring athlete turned actors such as Johnny Weismuller, but in these movies Tarzan never mastered the use of pronouns and subjects.

Take "I". Tarzan never says, "I like Jane," but "Me like Jane."

Auxiliary verbs are also a problem, such as as "Jane, do not go there," instead something like "Jane no go there," or "Cheetah no like guns."

Compare this with emptyboxes' sardonic quotation of his stereotypical PRD member, who, of course, has no job, stinks, and likes Osama bin Laden:

"...me very poor, me need job but PRD culos no give me much mony, prd pay 500 pesitos week, me sleep bad, me smell bad. me need work."

Now, just assuming that emptyboxes and his PRD friend are both corresponding in Spanish, what was the original?

Did our poor, lazy, evil friend say "I am very poor," or "Me very poor?" Did he say "Soy pobre"? or did he say something like "Pobre es yo?"

Hence the question: was his PRD friend actually Tarzan? Or a close relative of Tarzan who speaks in the same unique style?

Or was he the product of cocaine scientist education?

Posted by: | August 15, 2006 10:40 PM

drgecc: If you do not think triple digit inflation is a bad thing, you did not live in Latin American in the '80s or early '90s. Trust me, it sucks. I had the privilege of (because I am a filthy rich fascist) studying in Brazil in 1989 for a month, 1990 for a year, and then returning in 1993 for another month. In 1989, the exchange rate was BR2.50 to US$1
In 1990, when I got there, it was 77.50 to 1. When I left, it was 200 to one. In 1993, when I got there in early January, it was 13,000 to one, and 14,500 to one at the end of the month. With this kind of wackiness, if you want to borrow 20 bucks from a friend over a weekend, you have to negotiate an interest rate first. The rich are absolutely not bothered by this, as they simply keep their money in bank accounts in Miami. The middle class keep their money in inflation indexed local currency accounts, and are somewhat protected. The poor, who AMLO loves, are screwed, and without vaseline. They cannot save, they cannot buy ANYTHING on credit, and they cannot accumulate capital. But, then again, they remain poor, ripe fodder for any loudmouth populist who comes along.

It never got that bad here in Mexico, but, for example, I remember the '87 Liga Mexicana del Pacifico season when they had to play without foreign players because they could not pay them. I remember many friends of mine losing houses, cars and livelyhoods because they could no longer pay debts. I remember how NOBODY could buy a house on credit. And, I remember how the rich, in Mexico, deposited their money in the US, and were not affected at all. As Claudia Shienbaum, Carlos Monsivais, and Murat et al will not be affected if inflation ever returns.

So, Yes, some of us do have a paranoia about inflation. In my case, it is not personal, inflation would be the best thing in the world for me because I earn dollars. Give me a couple years of Brazilian style inflation, and I will own half of Tijuana. But God help the poor. And, since, unlike many AMLO backers, I think about the greater good, I really do not want to see a return to those inflatonary days of the past.

Also, ANYONE who thinks LEA, the arquitect of Tlatelolco in '68, was not a disaster, they need their heads examined. It is like saying Chavez is not a disaster in Venezuela because the price of oil has not dropped yet. But it will, and Venezuela will pay dearly, as we paid dearly for LEA and Lopez Portillo (bark bark!!!)

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 10:42 PM

Anybody heard of MayaO recently? Maybe he´s got lost a couple of blogs back! Should I go and find him? We need a bit of (accidental) humour here.

Posted by: PeterN | August 15, 2006 10:43 PM

No name who posted above, the Clinton era economy was a typical post war (post cold war in this case) economy. The cold war ended in 1989. For three years the US economy went into the tank (housing prices declined by HALF in California) and Bush Sr. got blamed for it. But, the same thing happened in 1918 to 1921 and 1945 to 48. Then, just like after WWI and II, the economy came roaring back due to reduced military spending and the country went on a roll. Clinton could have really screwed things up, but didn't, but to claim that he somehow "caused" the boom of the 90s is facetous. Donald Duck could have managed that economy.

Someone above pointed out that illegal immigration to the US has increased. Of course it has. The US is booming, if anyone has not noticed. In 2005, they recorded a record number if illegals from the following countries:

El Salvador
Dom. Rep.
Brazil (2004, in 2005 Mexico made Brazilians get visas which kind of crimped their style)
Uruguay and Argentina (both thrown out of the visa waiver program in 2002, due to too many overstays.)

Is this ALL Fox's fault?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 10:45 PM


The numbers do not lie. There was less illegal immigration in the 70's than in the Fox years. And the hyperinflation that you are talking about, you make it sound that it happened for twenty or thirty years in a row. That is A BUNCH OF BALONEY. If I take your statement of double digit inflation (lets be conservative and assume 1 dollar hotdog) for 30 years in a row and I use a simple formula from algebra to calculate the increase of that hot dog you are talking about, I come up with about 190000 dollars for 30 years or about 25000 dollars after 24 years and not 2000 as you pointed out.

AS you probably know, the huge (double digit inflation) came for the most part at regular intervals of SIX years, the president cycle, when the currency was devaluated by the new president or by the old president in his last year.

Let us say that going to the PRI years would be a lot worst for Mexico but the Fox years (when compared to previous administrations) have not been as rosy as Calderon supporters claim. What is the unemployment rate these days? (without the
under-the-table economy) 30-40%? The country is in real trouble, and it will be in a lot more trouble unless drastic changes are made.

Posted by: | August 15, 2006 10:51 PM

Peter N, the Jews got Maya O and committed genocide on her.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 10:52 PM

DUDE!!!! There is a space above the comment box marked "name". You are allowed to use it.

This is your last sentence:

"The country is in real trouble, and it will be in a lot more trouble unless drastic changes are made."

Actually, I agree with you. I think, and correct me if I am wrong, that the following drastic changes need to be made:
1. Reform or abolish the "ley federal de trabajo". This KILLS job creation by making it so hard to fire workers that employers do not hire them in the first place.

2. Reform, privatize or at least take away the monopoly from the CFE (Luz y Fuerza for you chilangos). It is hard to create jobs, pay taxes and generate economic activity if you cannot get electricity on a somewhat regular basis.

3. Reform, privatize, or remove the monopoly from PEMEX. As things stand now, our children are going to live in a country that imports oil, not one that exports it.

4. Reform foreclosure and bankruptcy laws. It is VERY hard to get credit, because if you DO get credit and then do not pay, the banks do not have much recourse. This needs to change. It sounds cruel to throw out poor people who have lost a job etc., and el Barzon gets a lot of mileage out of this, but it is even crueler to maintain a system that shuts the majority of Mexicans out of credit.

ALL OF THESE are changes that need to be made for Mexico to be competitive and at least semi-prosperous. NONE of them are supported by AMLO. So, what exactly is the "change" you are expecting from AMLO?

Posted by: Jery B | August 15, 2006 10:56 PM

Oh, another thing. Lets all have the COFETEL break up TELMEX's monopoly, a la AT&T in the US in the '80s. Think that will happen if AMLO is president??????

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 10:59 PM

OK, so I guess now this post is going to move into the great Clinton economic era fallacy of some leftists who want to compare AMLO to Clinton.
Let us first set the record straight here. Clinton was very good at economic growth because of his leftists policies, and bla,bla, bla.
That is all good fingering matter.
The fact is, Clinto came to enjoy the benefits of deregulation and good economic and social policies of previous presidents of the USA. The economic growth that USA enjoyed during the Clinton era was achieved not by the growth of traditional American industries like Ford and GM in Auto industry or Boeing or other industries, on the contrary, Boeing saw the rise of Airbus during the Clinton era, and Ford and GM took a good beating and are still taking it from Toyota and other Japanese car makers, the same happened in many other industries.
What created the incredible growth economic growth of the Clinton era was the rise of many American companies that today are global players: Microsoft, Dell, Compac, HP, Ebay, Amazon, Intel, AMD, ATI, Cisco and thousands of software and hardware manufactures and the service industries that were born with all of them, all these industries created millions of jobs, many going overseas today, but during the Clinton era the whole computer and internet revolution and their incredible contributions to human productivity impulsed the USA Economy to grow continually for years and years. I still remember when those economic analysts were even trying to predict when the economic boom was going to finally stop. This internet and computer revolution occured only in USA first, so they ripped the benefits all together, you can hardly find a European company in the software and hardware industry in those days, there were a few like SAP and other german companies, and israelii too. But they were mostly American companies. Many other industries suffered greatly because of competition from China and other countries, but the software industries of the USA continue to thrive today.
Now there is a question here: Were Microsoft, Compaq, Cisco, Intel, HP, Dell, Amazon, Ebay, and all the hundreds of thousands of software and hardware companies created because of desicions taken by Clinton? Absolutely not. He managed the process very well, but the process was independently creating the growth and the jobs because the conditions existed way before.
Why it did not happen in Europe or Japan? Because, among many factors, of their monopolies in the telecomm and other industries that promoted regulatory conditions to avoid or discourage new competitors or initiatives in their industries, killing development of new technologies.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 11:02 PM

Emptyboxes, one reason Europe is falling behind the US is interesting. I had never thought about this until I heard it, but it is true. Walk down the street in the US in summer, and you will, sooner or later, stumble across kids selling Kool Aide or Lemonade. Young businessmen. You will NEVER find kids doing that in Europe. It starts young, being a member of a competitive society.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 11:05 PM

Posted by: | August 15, 2006 10:51 PM

Please add your name, otherwise your comments may be removed. Apparently.

"If I take your statement of double digit inflation (lets be conservative and assume 1 dollar hotdog) for 30 years in a row and I use a simple formula from algebra to calculate the increase of that hot dog you are talking about, I come up with about 190000 dollars for 30 years or about 25000 dollars after 24 years and not 2000 as you pointed out."

Which formula did you use? What inflation rate? Did you calculate daily, weekly, monthly or yearly?

We have a good history on these blogs of analysing figures thrown out like that.

As I always like to point out, 62.48% of all statistics are made up on the spot!

Posted by: PeterN | August 15, 2006 11:08 PM

As a teenager in DC, I made mega money in winter shovelling snow off lazy people's sidewalks. I was by no means the only kid doing this. Another thing that never happens in Europe.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 11:08 PM

Jerry B:
"Reform or abolish the "ley federal de trabajo". This KILLS job creation by making it so hard to fire workers that employers do not hire them in the first place."

You can say that again. Our company would rather outsource jobs like some accounting areas that are not key for the corporation and even some production areas too. Hiring new employess is always a tricky business.

Simply put, there was a time when even the office cleaner was an employee and was part of the company, part of the team, today all these people are outsourced and they end up working for some smart asses who exploit them and make good money with the companies. But they don't give them the benefits that our company could give them. Part of the security staff belongs to the company and they can clearly see the difference in pay, benefits and retirement plans. Of course you cannot blame all outsourcing on the Labor Law but it will certainly help these people also.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 11:12 PM

Jerry B

To correct the record. I said that LEA was a terrible president and have never said that inflation is ok. I think that inflation hurts every one, particularly the poor. And the illegal immigration estimates correspond to Mexico, I need to research the illegal immigration numbers for other countries. Obviously, Fox cannot do anything about that but he at a minimum should take some of the responsability for providing decent jobs for their citizens. And he has not. Is his protege going to ask the US to open the borders or is he finally going to take responsability?

Clinton's years (second term) were a great economic period in the US. Low unemployment, more people out of poverty, the stock market going through the roof, no deficits,etc.Man, I would vote for donald duck every single time if I had a chance.

What happened in the massacre of tlatelolco has no excuse. But by allowing mexicans to die in the Arizona dessert every single year looking for a better life that his country cannot provide, isn't that a bit of a massacre itself?

Posted by: | August 15, 2006 11:16 PM

Emptyboxes, it is funny that this law was meant to "protect" workers. It is hard to be a protected worker though, if you do not have a job. In the US, and most English speaking countries, there is NO job security, and you can be fired for any reason at any time. Yet the workers live far better there. No one seems to ask why this is.

Instead of saying "workers" let me rephrase that to "working age population". I would love to be a "worker" in the public sector in France. But it would suck to be me if I was part of the 40% of the under 30 age group who is unemployed.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 11:16 PM

Noname, I agree with you, Fox should have done more. But we do live in a democracy where the constitution gives congress the power to pass laws. And congress, or the PRD/PRI majority at least, refused to pass any of Fox's reforms. So, blaming him is a bit like the PRDistas outside of San Lazaro throwing rocks at the cops, and then blaming the cops for gassing them, or the poor Arabs who launch missiles from hospitals and then blame the Jews for rocketing the hospitals.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 11:19 PM

Jerry B
I haven't been much to Europe, I was there once but it was a short visit. However I have never seen more vibrant societies like the USA. For all their contradictions, and they are legion, there are many things I personally thank them, I would start with Henry Ford, whose visionary dream of making each American a car owner gave birth to the first production line in series, he was also emulated by steve jobs, who alse dreamed of making it possible for everyone to have what he called "A personal computer", and the list goes on. Of course, I must thank first and foremost Adam Smith, although he was Scottish, for his "Wealth of Nations".
But today as we seat and enjoy these freedoms and priviledges that regular people today enjoy, like buying a little car, or having a phone in your house, or having a PC, and an internet connection, and that's it, you have more information at your hands than all the information Stalin ever had and tried to control in the heydays of the Soviet Union. And you can also express yourself in a manner that would have got you killed anytime during in the Soviet Regime of those days.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 11:26 PM

The one time I went to Europe convinced me that girls with underarm hair who do not bathe regularly are definitely not my thing. There is nothing quite like the Paris metro on a hot summer day. Ewww. Give me America, South, Central, or North any day.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 11:31 PM


Formula I used was the basic (no present value or anything fancy)
interest compounded per year formula at about 50% (double digit inflation)

(1.5)^30 = 191751.059 30 years for 1 dollar
(1.5)^24 = 25251.168 24 years for 1 dollar

Assuming that the double digit inflation continues each successive year.

The figures of the remittances are in the web page of the banco de mexico (google that) and the figures for illegal immigration are from one of those reports to congress (google that and you will find quite a few reports, I took the lower number)

Posted by: drgecc | August 15, 2006 11:33 PM

no name: I also agree with you that Fox should have done more for our people. Actually I would ask, what did he do for the people? Certainly he did a couple of things. The Oportunidades Program benefited many people in poor states, states where AMLO won mayority of votes by the way, so we cannot say he manipulated those social programs or if he did then he was not very effective at promoting the PAN votes there. But I must also recognize that President Fox strengthened the institutions in our country like SCHP, National Bank and others that today work very independenty and are very far from politics, Fox legacy will survive the electoral smokes. After the water settles we will see how those who blame him for so many things today, will recognize his achievements tomorrow, be them as many or as little as they may be.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 11:37 PM

Jerry B: I had a French instructor who used to take showers every week or so, although she was beautiful, as soon as a bit closer to her desk I was reminded of my Aunt's stinky menudo. I guess it was then during those early and masturbating days of my life when somehow I decided French socialism and their social engineering was not my calling.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 15, 2006 11:54 PM

Yeah, the problem is how do you tell a hot chick "Hey, you stink!"? I took one semester of French in college, learned nothing, and then kicked myself when I went to St. Cathering Street in Montreal a few years ago and had trouble chatting up the strippers because we couldn't understand each other. (Until I found the Dominican Republic "refugee" strippers, that is...)

Posted by: Jerry B | August 15, 2006 11:56 PM

I think we had this discussion as to what if anything Fox has accomoplished once already. I point to four things:

FREEDOM! Very important. Had someone called LEA or Lopez Portillo a "traitor" very bad things would have happened. Some of the cartoons attacking Fox are practically libelous. And nothing happens to the authors or the newspapers that print them. This is fantastic, it is something Americans do not even think about because they are used to it, and it DID NOT EXIST in Mexico 12 years ago.

INFLATION. Or lack thereof. Last year, the USA had a higher inflation rate than Mexico. That has never happened before in my lifetime, and I am older than I wish I was.

Homeownership. Under Fox (And thanks to low inflation which makes mortgage loans available) more Mexicans than ever in history own their own houses. Many of these houses are small, I would not want to live in them, nor would I want the neighbors, but they beat the heck out of a cardboard shack on land for which there is no title. Furthermore (and AMLO and the left HATE this) ownership of property makes people inherantly more conservative. It is one thing to shout down with property if you have none, it is another thing entirely if you own something.

Finally, a presidential election where no one knew who would win before the vote. What a strange concept...

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 12:04 AM

I guess I will be back on this post tomorrow early. Around 5 am with a cup of coffee before my shower and before getting ready to go to the company where I will be exploited for another day in paradise for my boss.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 12:07 AM

As the American bumper sticker says, Emptyboxes "Work harder, millions on welfare depend on your tax payments!"

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 12:08 AM

You're right about the welfare bums, Jerry, how many congressmen are there in all the country?

The racists are out and about, heard on Pepe Cárdenas that his guest, Leo Zuckermann, had received some very threatening e-mails from the anti-Semitic slime. His comments on the show were mostly what he says in his column in Excelsior here:


Doesn't sound so hopeful, get out Talking Heads, be ready to play 'Burnin' Down the House'.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 16, 2006 01:33 AM

I am very disappointed with the Post's biased and subjective coverage of the Mexican elections. You are making a caricature of something you clearly do not even attempt to understand. Case in point: your last editorial "Moment of Truth". It follows very closely Accion Nacional's line. I think that phonecall of Calderon's to the Post was very productive, maybe they even sent the guidelines for the editorials to the Post? Funny. Ever since election day your coverage has been more and more partial. A clear example: the piece of fearmongering propaganda when you compared Stalin to Lopez Obrador. You will never see any evidence of fraud clearly because you don't want to see it. Neither do Caleron's voters because they would not like to admit they are backing a fraudulent win. If you care to know, the information from the partial recount is there even if the media monopolies in Mexico don't want to expose it: more votes than voters at a large number of polling stations, an evidence that polls were overstuffed with ballots that do not represent popular will. This is called FRAUD. Here, in Ukraine, in Lebanon, in Georgia and anywhere in the world. The Post shows its lack of commitment to democracy with its one sided editorial line. It is a poor service you are doing to Mexican Americans that get their information from you and are being manipulated by your negative campaign to promote one side. It is a shame to read that a British newspaper, The Guardian, has been covering Mexico with far more objectivity than the Post.
I expect that you will follow up your editorial with some good articles from such objective voices as that of George Grayson, Enrique Krauze and the rest of the Krauze family. Another lecture on the dangers of "messianism" is all we need right now to believe that Calderon really, really won the election.

Posted by: Worried about the Post's biased editorial line | August 16, 2006 02:20 AM

Jerry B:

The record of Fox is in the poor side.

Freedom B
Important advances only for a few, but, granted, advances. Ask those poor indians in Oaxaca and Chiapas if they have much more freedom now. Of course now you have more help/fredom to emigrate illegally to the US.

Homeownership C+
Yes more people get home loans but could it be that for each family that gets a loan, there are other 2 that cannot? More homeowners but not a real gain as a percentage of the population.

Inflation C
Thanks to the reforms of Zedillo, El banco de Mexico (just like the Fed here in the US) is the one in charge of controlling the inflation. So, strictly speaking, the inflation of about 3.5% is an accomplishment of the monetary policy of the Banco de Mexico (source BofM).
More important numbers would be the employment numbers, wage growth, productivity, the ability of people to save money and of course the consumer confidence. And those numbers are still low for an economy of the size of Mexico.
The GDP of Mexico is just about 3% (source IMF)

Election C+
In 2000 (I think that Zedillo was the president then) during the election where Fox was the clear winner, nobody was sure of who was going to be the next president of Mexico. So, this is not the first time that something like that happens. But now the protege of the president (the annointed by Fox) can be declared president...Hey PRI, does that sound familiar? Also, it has happened before.

Sadly,the only hope of Mexico is that Fox's successor is way better than Fox has
been. Policies need to change.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 03:03 AM

Correction to Fox grades.

Election C-/D
Having a law that does not forsee the stuffing of ballots (we are talking Mexico for god's sake) or a way to have a runoff election when the error is cleary larger than the difference between the top candidates, it is not only plain stupid but to some degree fraudulent.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 03:09 AM

I just saw an interview in channel 40 with Rosario Robles (former major of the DF). Carlos Alazraki made the interview where she said some interesting things about our Man of the Year, Mr. AMLO. I must say that I'm no big fan of hers. Au contraire, the whole Ahumadagate was such a disgrace. I'm just posting this because I found it interesting.

She first started talking about her youth blah blah, no one cares about it, but she did say something nice about Mr. Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas. Cárdenas went to give a speech in the UNAM, while she was still studying there, and said to all the hardcore marxist-leninist kids in the auditorium to forget about Marx, Lenin, the Soviet Union and Cuba. They are not examples to follow since the true left in Mexico has to build itself taking Mexico as their depature point and stop trying to emulate the people and places mentioned before. She said that speech changed her life and opened her eyes. Quite nice actually.

But the best part was when Alazraki asked her about what happened with her "voluntarily"(yet forced) departure from the PRD. She spilled the beans by claiming she was betrayed by AMLO back in the year 2000 when he won the DF elections. Robles and Cárdenas supported him to get there in the first place. (illegaly, I must say, since he didn't fullfil the necessary time of residence in the DF) But then, she says, early in AMLO's administration, polls showed she was far more popular than him and he got scared that she might actually have a shot for the "big one" in 2006. So, he decided to take her down. She says he planned a complot that finally payed off with the Ahumadagate that eventually led her to quit the PRD. (Now I get why AMLO likes the idea of the complot so much... he is an expert planning them - that is if what Mrs. Robles says is true).

She also said that AMLO doesn't care about "llevarse entre las patas" (the term they used) his supporters. He has a very specific goal and he would do anything in his power to get there, even backstabbing the people who made him who he is now, like her and Mr. Cárdenas. Alazraki refered to that as the "kleenex technique": use your supporters, wipe your mess with them and then throw them away.

Then he asked her about Alejandro Encinas and the problem he is in. Alazraki asked Robles if in the hypothetical case that Cárdenas, who she worships, would go crazy (just quoting) like AMLO and blocked Reforma, what would she decide? to do nothing like Encinas or to inforce the law? She said that she would inforce the law since it is either supporting Cárdenas and killing her political career or obey the law and save face with the population. (And I do believe that since back in 1999 the Consejo General de Huelga, group that she supported, tried to block the main lanes of the Periférico. She didn't allow that and only let them march in the sidewalk)

I repeat, I don't know whether this whole gossip is true or not. You can interpret it as Mr. Robles being sore and bitter. But then again, she's politically burnt so she has nothing to lose by telling the truth.

Posted by: bunburina | August 16, 2006 03:16 AM

I kind of liked the posts by Jerry B and drgecc. Here are my grades:

Freedom B+ - Are you kidding? It is a completely different country we are living in than 15 years ago! Do you remeber, in the time of Salinas, the political killings, the threats to journalist, sutting down magazines? Now they call the president chachalaca and is fine. You can fill a lawsuit against Marthita Sahagún's sons and it would porceed. The towelgate of Los Pinos was something unthinkable 10 years ago and now it is a reality. The IFAI (yes I know it can be improved) is a reality. It isn't perfect though and we need to work more.

Homeownership B- - This is probably the only thing that our poor president can actually show off. Do not underestimate this, it was a great accomplishment. Let's say 2 million houses or so were delivered and every family living there has four members. That's 8 million people who kicked the cardboard hut to move in to a house of their own. It is a big deal. We have to admit it.

Inflation B- - Yes, it is mostly because of the Banco the México, but president Fox was smart enough to let them work. I remember AMLO saying that his government would get a hand on the decisions of the BM if necessary. What a scary thought!

Election B- - Despite what some people say it was generally clean, (9% of the casillas with errors is hardly a massive fraud as some people might claim) and well organized (1 million people participated as voluntaries). But it is sort of the same thing than with the BM, IFE is independent anf that's why it is succesful. The whole mess we are witnessing isn't fault of the IFE or the TRIFE. It is fault of the immaturity of the political actors, FCH, PAN, PRD and AMLO.

I'll add my own categories:

Employment D - This is the really nasty side. We are not growing enough, not enough investment and therefore no more employment. The congress didn't help at all to make this any better, but then again the president didn't do anything with the legal attributions the federal executive has to solve this problem.

Foreign relations D - Bad, bad, bad! Tragic! The only good decision I can think of is not supporting the war on Irak. Aside from that, it was tragedy after tragedy. (Derbez running for the OEA, the Summit of the Americas, the conflicts with Cuba and Venezuela, the debacle in the relations with the US, more isolation than ever etc etc etc)

Drug Dealing C- - The army is busting thier butts off to stop it and it has actually paid off (I know this fist hand). Some big shots have fallen down, lot of drugs confiscated etc. Some good news (bad for the peruvians) is that the mexican cartels are moving to Perú. Tha bad news is that the PGR in completely incompetent and just can't control the violence of the cartels in Mexico. Plus, we have increased our local consumption.

Plurality and Equality C- - Minorities are still being discriminated, racism is still being a problem, women are still being treated badly in jobs where they are paid less than men, more violence among families, hate crimes against homosexuals are still happening. Just not enough worh from the government. And I don't see the will to solve it in any of the main candidates either.

Sexual Education and family planning B+ - Good stuff happening in this department. Everyone knows our Presichente is a devout catholic and yet his administration promoted the emergency pill and family planning. The birth rates per woman are still droping and we still keep a very low percentage of population with AIDS. (just about 100 000 cases, less than 1% of the population)

Posted by: bunburina | August 16, 2006 03:56 AM

Mental Masturbation Exercises A+
I guess this is the best area of where Mr. Fox can legitimate claim the first place, and it all started out with his stupid political solution of the desafuero thing, which caused that instead of having this criminal AMLO sent to jail where he belongs, he is now wrecking havoc at the Zocalo.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 06:08 AM

The Academic level of the UNAM

It seems the scientific community of the UNAM, our greatest public university, is still trying to figure out the ecuation or algorythm used to "manipulate the PREP". Of course this is all completely irrelevant today but go tell that to those dumb scientific at the UNAM who apparently have nothing better to do with our taxes.
The imbeciles are still trying so hard to find the cybernetic manipulation of the PREP, they still don't know what is it, even though they and a bunch of other equally imbecile engineers have been working on this for more than a month, they still don't know what it is but they do know something happened with the PREP. So we are to believe that either the alledged manipulation of the PREP was carried out by the best engineers in the world, or that the whole academic level of the UNAM is real, real bad that they cannot find an algorythm in the PREP.
Here is a link to the last product of these imbeciles.


Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 06:26 AM

I am so sorry for Robles and Cardenas but the party they created does not have the proper institutional structures and designs to survive democratic life without the political cannibalism found so commonly there. Mr. Cardenas created a party based on "Caudillismo" instead of creating a party with a board of national advisor or councelors elected from their state representations.
Normally, in a democratic party, like PAN, the state representations that contribute the most to the party structure are the ones who get the most powerful positions in the party organization. In PAN for example, there are several groups of power, El Bajio has a large representation, but so does Nuevo Leon, and Jalisco or Chihuahua. In PAN there are many voices that do not agree with each other and we hear them all the time.
In the PRD, it is a chaotical organization lead by the desicions taken by one single man, AMLO. It looks like one single block of people who think the same, but internally we know there are many groups, as it is natural, what is not natural or democratic is that these internal party movements remain silent for fear of being destroyed by AMLO.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 06:35 AM


I am also waiting for MayaO to return. I think he is a she. She/he is what Hollywood called a Mexican spitfire. Maybe when you drew a line in the sand and had this Mexican stand off two days ago with mayaO was too much. You will be searched and you will be found!!!

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 06:49 AM


I have bad news for you. Rosario Ibarra is a SENATOR. It's going to be a beautiful six years.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 06:53 AM


I must say that foreigners posting patronizing irony such as "we are talking Mexico for god's sake" is seen down here by many, if not all of us in Mexico as unseemly, condescending and culturally racist, to put it mildly.

We abolished slavery 50 years before the U.S.

Benito Juarez was a full blooded Zapotec indian shepherd that became governor of Oaxaca, attorney general, secretary of state and president of Mexico and an historic figure few can match ANYWHERE. He even had Maximilian shot by a firing squad and Mexico was never again molested by European imperialists who were "talking Mexico, here".

As I have stated before, Mexico is working hard to become a democracy. There is real progress. The PRI is no longer our master and the July elections gave ALL contenders wins of all kinds.

Mexico's biggest problem is we've been under a central authoritarian ruler for centuries on end. Lopez stands for that type of authoritarian fascism you seem to so much to like in LEA.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 07:29 AM


I also watched part of the Alazraki interview but fell asleep. The reason she left PRD is because she was man enough to stand up to Lopez and his crew of thugs. Hers was a stalinist purge.

Is anyone surprised this same maffia cooked up the Zocalo hijacking and the "fraud" allegations?

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 07:44 AM

Worried about the Post, etc...

There is a growing concensus that lopistas have cried wolf to a deaf public. Only like-minded sore losers are joining your failing efforts. Lopez lost, don't hate reality because of it.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 08:00 AM

Mexico does not need yet another demagogue politician trying to do what is best for him and his followers (PAN).

Posted by: drgecc | August 15, 2006 03:17 PM

Demagogue: a person who tries to stir up the people by appeals to emotion, prejudice, etc. in order to become a leader and achieve selfish ends.

Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary.

I doubt Calderon could stir up emotion under any circumstances and for any reason. However, the description seems to fit another of the candidates rather well.

Posted by: Furnifold | August 16, 2006 09:36 AM

Mexico's rich build dynasties

Chris Hawley
Republic Mexico City Bureau
Aug. 16, 2006 12:00 AM

MEXICO CITY - Carlos Slim is rich. Insanely rich. Astronomically rich. If you took his $37.6 billion and laid the dollar bills end to end, they would stretch to the moon and back seven times, that's how rich he is.

That the world's third-wealthiest man is from Mexico, a country still plagued by poverty, is remarkable. But what's more remarkable is this: He's not the only ultrarich Mexican out there.

Mexico is quickly becoming a land of business dynasties, families that have grown fabulously wealthy through a combination of government favoritism and the privatization of hundreds of state-run enterprises in the 1990s.

"We have a huge concentration of capital in this country," said Celso Garrido, an economist at Mexico City's Autonomous Metropolitan University. "They're the superrich, the fantasticos."

These are the Mexicans who drive Porsches and live in mansions in Lomas de Chapultepec, the Beverly Hills of Mexico City. The kind of people who have no trouble getting U.S. visas and who fly into Scottsdale Municipal Airport on private jets for weekend shopping trips.

Other Mexicans refer to these people as "the 100 families" and know them from the social pages of the Reforma newspaper, where their sons and daughters appear playing polo, skydiving and sailing yachts.

Posted by: the OLYGARCHY protected by CALDERON | August 16, 2006 09:48 AM

"The one time I went to Europe convinced me that girls with underarm hair who do not bathe regularly are definitely not my thing..." JerryB dixit.

How do you like this piece of macho xenophobia? Is this bigotry enough for you all?


How do you reconcile the work practices of Henry Ford with his anti-semitism? Besides, as I told you before, it's good that you don't need to make a living from comedy, because your humor stinks...

I thought we were discussing the Mexican post-election. I guess there is no much of substance to discuss at this respect.

"Benito Juarez was a full blooded Zapotec indian shepherd that became governor of Oaxaca, attorney general, secretary of state and president of Mexico and an historic figure few can match ANYWHERE..." rodolfo dixit.

Benito Juarez is the author, with a number of patriots, of the "Leyes de Reforma," which, among other things, establish the strict separation of church and state. Has anybody read recently PAN's platform...?


Don't doubt. It suffices to recall the "peligro para Mexico" campaign. That was pure demagogy...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 10:40 AM

the OLYGARCHY protected by CALDERON: You are so right. Did you see the splendor and luxury shown at the Wedding of Marcelo "Chucky" Ebrard? It was held at a museum, very nice and the parking lot was full or porsches, mercedez benz, and many other top luxurious brands, except of course, for Nico's Nissan, but his son arrived on a brand new BMW and he traveled all the way from Massachussets where he studies at an Ivy league University only to show up at the wedding, Alexandro Enginas, Guadalupe "licking" Loaeza, Ricky "Rocky" Monreal, Camacho "Corpses" Solis and many other great imbeciles from the left like that respectable and famous mediocre kindergarden and first grade history books writer Lorenzo Meyer, and of course seated at a table was also none other than the great Julio Hernandez, famous for his cocaine conspiracy theories.
All the PRD bosses and the same ones who are at the planton of the zocalo where there. Inspiring.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 10:42 AM


Well said! Also funny.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 10:46 AM


The issue I raised has to do with the kind of country Mexico is. For once cut out the policy-wonk mumbo jumbo and celebrate that Mexico has a unique greatness all its own.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 10:53 AM


Wealthy countries that have large social welfare systems did so after TWO centuries of INTENSIVE capitalism.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 10:54 AM


You forgot the $8,000 dollar wedding gift, and other amazing presents. Carnal Marcelo is TOTALMENTE PALACIO, the plantonistas be damned.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 11:00 AM

I see; bunburina's theory all over again. You have to live in misery to care about the plight of the poor; otherwise, you are a fake...

"like that respectable and famous mediocre kindergarden and first grade history books writer Lorenzo Meyer..."

I said it before. It's beyond me what kind of education, of distorted social environment, poisons the mind of somebody to the extremes displayed by emptyboxes. I wonder what history books (if any) he read. Perhaps not many, in light of his hateful disdain for the "non-productive" professions like engineering.

Certainly, rodolfo, we are talking about Mexico; unfortunately there are Mexicans who have been schooled, so to say, in the disdain, or worse, hate of their less fortunate or different fellow Mexicans. Forgive me, but I refuse to celebrate this "greatness..."

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 12:12 PM

"Election C-/D
Having a law that does not forsee the stuffing of ballots (we are talking Mexico for god's sake) or a way to have a runoff election when the error is cleary larger than the difference between the top candidates, it is not only plain stupid but to some degree fraudulent.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 03:09 AM"

DRGECC, you are forgetting that Fox does not make laws by decree. The IFE is a result of a number of laws passed in the '90s, before Fox was president, and its actions today are governed by those laws. As we all know, Fox had a REAL GOOD track record getting congress to pass the reforms he proposed, so not getting a runoff provision is not all his fault. Plus, until it happened, no one anticipated a .5% election. As to ballot stuffing, that is why the urnas have clear plastic windows in them, to prevent this.

Bunburina, I agree with almost all you post, with the following exceptions
Foreign relations. Derbez ought to be put on a plane with a one way ticket to North Korea. He is a disaster, and getting rid of Castaneda was one of Fox's worst errors. You DO NOT dictate to the United States, as Derbez has tried to due on the immigration issue ("they will never build that wall.") Every time he opens his mouth, he moves another american congressman into the anti-immigration camp.
I thought Castenada's push for democracy in Cuba was great; if it is good enough for us, surely democracy would be good for Cubans too. Chavez is not Fox's fault, the man needs new enemies on a somewhat regular basis to survive, and what was Fox supposed to do once Chavez opened his mouth. Those are minor problems, but the relations with the United States have been a disaster; the only silver lining of this is that the coming shutoff of the immigration safety vaulve may force some otherwise impossible changes (labor, unions, oil) upon us.

And, Pasilla, have you been to Europe? Stinky, hairy underarmed girls really are the norm. Since when is the truth bigotry?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 12:16 PM

Oh, the Iraq war, what would it have cost Mexico to simply abstain from that debate? The Americans were not asking for troops, or money. A lot of the tightened immigration dates from early 2003, and it is not a coincidence. And, on the contrary, deportations of salvadorenos have almost completely stopped. That is not a coincidence either.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 12:20 PM

There is an interesting article by Jorge Fernandez Menendez about what AMLO is doing:


It seems to me some voices are now rising the alarm.
Jorge Fernandez points out that AMLO's real intention is to get power by violent means, even if that means splitting the country. The article finds a relation in Oaxaca and Chiapas with what is happening with AMLO.

Manuel Espino, PAN national leader, said yesterday that the intervention of AMLO in Chiapas is already considered a national security issue. He says that they are seeing some obscure groups acting behind the PRD in Chiapas and that they will be watching closely.
PRD has sent a dream team to Chiapas, reports Milenio today, to try to secure a PRD victory there.
Already PRI is preparing to get and defend a potential victory also. But we can see PAN with Manuel Espino and PANAL with Elba Esther Gordillo are very much into the Chiapas election. No doubt the Federal Government is paying attention to Chiapas also.

The problem is basically that a group of radicals have infiltrated the PRD and got too close to AMLO and they see his popularity an ambition of power as an opportunity to advance their violent agenda. Even the ERP, APPO from Oaxaca and other violent groups are now openly supporting AMLO.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 12:37 PM


"Since when is the truth bigotry?"

Since the moment a bigot gets into play:

"big•ot n. One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ"

And regarding the dismal foreign policy of the Fox government, it's not hard to find blunders by Castaneda and by Derbez (the "you eat and leave" fiasco is proof of abject submission); besides, I know that some people dislikes to confront the facts. Nevertheless, here it is, in black an white, an excerpt of the Mexican Constitution:

"Artículo 89.- Las facultades y obligaciones del Presidente son las siguientes:

...X. Dirigir la política exterior y celebrar tratados internacionales, sometiéndolos a la aprobación del Senado. En la conducción de tal política, el titular del Poder Ejecutivo observará los siguientes principios normativos: la autodeterminación de los pueblos; la no intervención..."

You may be all against dictators, from the righ or from the left. But the President has sworn to respect the Constitution. A dignified position in the past was to cut diplomatic ties with governments Mexico disapproved of (Spain, Chile). Interventionism, a la Castaneda, is borderline unconstitutional...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 12:51 PM



Mexico's Moment of Truth
Will a fair vote stand?
Wednesday, August 16, 2006

IN THE 6 1/2 weeks since he narrowly lost Mexico's presidential election, Andrés Manuel López Obrador has turned the nation's politics into a public spectacle. A fiery populist with a messianic streak, Mr. López Obrador has led thousands of his supporters to pitch tent cities in downtown Mexico City, occupying the Zocalo, its main square, and a two-mile stretch of the Paseo De La Reforma, one of its major boulevards. He has denounced the election as a fraud and the product of a vast conspiracy, without furnishing even remotely convincing proof. Now, after a partial recount has apparently failed to yield any significant shift in his favor, he threatens to paralyze Mexico with a campaign of civil disobedience "for years, if that is what circumstances warrant."

His goal, Mr. López Obrador nobly insists, is to "save" Mexico's fragile democracy. In fact, by daily demonstrating his disdain for the country's electoral institutions while showing no actual failure on their part, Mr. López Obrador threatens to subvert the democracy he claims to champion.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company

This was published today in the WPOST Editorial Page. I couldn't have said it better.

Posted by: | August 16, 2006 01:01 PM

The atom bomb postin was by me.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 01:03 PM

Funny what some people find as bigotry. Some say that posting "jewnited States" is ok but to say that girls with armit hair is wrong. If I say that some guy has bad breath, does that make me a bigot too?

Annd about being a bigot, read this (specially dedicated to maya0):

Antisemitismo de izquierda

De antemano me disculpo por las groserías que a continuación transcribo de un correo electrónico que recibí ayer, el cual quisiera compartir con ustedes: "Pinche judío de mierda. Regrésate a tu país para seguir asesinando libaneses, que es lo único que saben hacer los judíos. México sólo les sirve a ustedes para exprimirlo, para robarlo, para explotarlo. Fuera de México todos los judíos y descendientes de Judas Iscariote. Ojalá y en el viaje te acompañen Santiago Levi, Esdra Schabot (sic), Castañeda, Denise Maerker, Denise Dresser, todos judíos detestables. Ojalá y no tarde en aparecer otro Hitler para terminar de hacer su tarea. Según ustedes, fueron las víctimas del exterminio y ahora son los terroristas del mundo, sobre todo los judíos yunquistas y lamesuelas de Fox y Calderón".

Vaya muestra de intolerancia y antisemitismo. De la frase final entreveo que la rabia de este señor tiene que ver con los análisis críticos que he hecho de López Obrador y me han convertido, según él, en un lacayo del Presidente y del candidato panistas. Ya sabemos que en esta difícil coyuntura existen fanáticos que nos exigen que no toquemos ni con el pétalo de una rosa al líder de la izquierda, quien promete purificar la vida política nacional. A lo mejor este señor pretende que la purificación comience con la expulsión del país de quienes tienen apellidos que suenan judíos y que han osado cuestionar a su adalid.

Este antisemita llega al ridículo de considerar que existen "judíos yunquistas", siendo El Yunque, si bien entiendo, una organización de ultraderecha cristiana, la cual no es muy afecta que digamos a la comunidad judía. Que yo sepa, y prometo preguntárselo a Álvaro Delgado, experto en la materia, hasta ahora no se ha identificado a ningún judío de El Yunque.

Sin embargo, lo más importante de este correo es que demuestra cómo la intolerancia y el antisemitismo no son propiedades exclusivas de la ultraderecha, sino también caracterizan a la ultraizquierda. Recordemos que Stalin purgó, y en muchos casos asesinó, a todos los judíos que participaron en la Revolución Rusa. Luego, las autoridades de la Unión Soviética se dedicaron a montar campañas antisemitas regulares donde los judíos eran cesados de sus cargos, detenidos, acusados de traición e incluso ejecutados.

En los países occidentales, el antisemitismo de izquierda floreció en los años 70 con la crítica al Estado de Israel y su alianza estratégica con Estados Unidos. El antisemitismo izquierdista fue disfrazado de antisionismo, donde se considera que el país de los judíos, y por extensión el judaísmo en todos los rincones de la Tierra, se ha convertido en un demonio colonialista, imperialista y racista. Esta visión simplista y maniquea se desprende del antiamericanismo que tradicionalmente ha tenido la izquierda en todo el mundo. No sorprende, entonces, que el señor del correo, quien cobardemente se esconde en el anonimato, proponga que los judíos de México se vayan a su "verdadero" país (supongo que se refiere a Israel) a asesinar a libaneses.

La salud política y social del país requiere que siempre combatamos la intolerancia y el antisemitismo, venga de donde venga, sea de derecha o de izquierda. Yo, por lo pronto, reitero que no me amedrentarán con diatribas groseras.

pasilla, the principle of no intervention in on revision. It is one of the big contradictions of the international relations. From the moment you sign on to the UN you have to be aware that you may intervene, one way or another, in another State. That is in the case of peace keeping operations or humanaitarian issues as it is in Lebanon and Sudan right now. Also in the human rights aspect no intervention does not proceed. With globalazation and the participation of numerous international organizations it is impossible no to intervene in another State unless you want to be completeley isolated from the international community.

Posted by: bunburina | August 16, 2006 01:07 PM

Let me see if I understand, rodolfo. Calderon should be declared President Elect because an anonymous writer says so in the Washington Post editorial page. So, the TEPJF should stop waisting time...

Contrary to that, a reporter IN THE FIELD, who, by the way, is hosting this exchange, wrote:

"Because many of the polling places were closed to the public, Campaign Conexión cannot say with certainty what the final tally will show..."

There are plenty atomic bombs in storage, or even being dismantled...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 01:12 PM


Because you don't care what I think, this may be a waste of my time. But I will write that, revision or not, Article 89 of the Mexican Constitution is still valid to this day...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 01:16 PM


Who wrote the article in spanish you posted about bigotry? I like it.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 01:16 PM

Ahhh. And bigotry is bigotry, whether it comes from the right or from the left. It is extremely pervasive. Regarding the bad breath issue, it becomes bigotry if you say that ONLY MEN suffer from it, or even that ALL men suffer from it. Wasting my time, though...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 01:20 PM


You have to admit democrats in Mexico are dealing with The INDESTRUCTIBLE-RayOfHope-PURYFIER. We need all the help we can get.
This Gallito is one tough Hombre.

I say, pasilla, wake up and smell the coffee.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 01:24 PM


The article by Fernandez Menendez is scary.
The election in Chiapas is too close to call, according to today's poll.

Another bad news: The Oaxaca mess is run by atencos and panchovillistas, not elbistas.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 01:28 PM

I admit that the Mexicans (some of them democrats, some imperialist, some anarquists, some, many utterly indifferent) are dealing with democracy in a country that has become extremely polarized by the failed economic policies put in place by the PRI and dutiffuly continued by PAN. I admit that much.

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 01:32 PM


"Campaign Connection reporter in the field"
is your shorthand for "Ceci"?

Skip the barroque pomposity, it seems that when you do that you don't have a lot to say.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 01:38 PM

Ahh Pasilla, I get it. I am sorry, I mentioned that the French girls had hairy armpits and smelled nasty. I should have added that the French men did too, but, since I have zero interest in laying French men, I did not think it worth including. So Sorry. So, how are things up there in the capital of the Jewnited States?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 01:55 PM

This just showed up on frontera.info. The U S captured Javier Arellano Felix, details are sketchy. I would assume he failed to pay his customary bribe to the DEA on time.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 02:00 PM

That article was written by Leo Zuckermann. It is published today in Excélsior. Here's the link:


Posted by: bunburina | August 16, 2006 02:00 PM

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 02:07 PM


In a previous post you adamantly asked me not to missquote you. This is what I wrote, in reality:

"Contrary to that, a reporter IN THE FIELD..."

Is this baroque language?; well, I guess for some people it is...


As we say in Spanish: "No hay peor ciego que el que no quiere ver..."

I care less about your sexual preferences. But I will continue fighting bigotry anywhere I find it.

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 02:09 PM


Thanks, the Fernandez Menendez article is also very much worth reading. Plase read my "Atomic Bomb" comment posted above. Thank you, again.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 02:11 PM

That Cronica article is interesting, if true. The PRD would seem to be following the Arab plan, the Arabs use a kindergarden or hospital to launch rockets, thinking they are immune from reprisal, and the PRD uses the fuero of legislators to cover a takeover of congress, thinking that they too will be untouchable. I think they got a rather nast surprise on Monday...

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 02:13 PM

Pasilla, if you catch me sticking up for someone's virulent anti-semitism, please criticize me. Until then, really, your hipocrasy is deplorable, but, sadly, not unsurprising from a PRD supporter.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 02:15 PM


I hope that Arellano Felix was captured by the US in the US or by Mexican law enforcement in Mexico. However, the violation of Mexican sovereignty by the US is not unheard of...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 02:17 PM

Now they are saying that he was "captured at sea". Whatever that means. They also got the bastard who shot one of the editors of Zeta here in Tijuana, which pleases me immensely.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 02:21 PM


I humbly submit to you that "a reporter IN THE FIELD, who, by the way, is hosting this exchange" is a clunker if you can just write "Ceci".

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 02:24 PM


Regarding what you call anti-semitism, I stand by my words. I cannot do more than that. You are entitled to your opinions, even if on ocassion they are but wild distortions of the truth...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 02:27 PM

The following is "por el bien de todos":

Cerraron ya 60 empresas; despidieron a 809 trabajadores y 900 restaurantes están a punto de quebrar por el plantón en Reforma


What is a little detail like 809 jobs? As Chairman Mao said, you cannot make an ommelette without breaking some eggs.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 02:29 PM

As far as I'm concerned, rodolfo, I dont enjoy, like you, beating up a dead horse...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 02:29 PM

----------------NEWS FLASH---------------

News for PRD haters: TEPJF has taken away the win in Tenancingo by PRD candidate for congress Jose Edmundo Cancino and has given
it to the PRI candidate, by a margin of 65 votes.

You win or lose by one vote, Mr. Lopez, so you said.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 02:35 PM


A big number of eggs need to be broken for the Zocalo impasse to end. Question is:whose eggs.

Another topic: The army says they're marching on sep. 16 and Lopez says he's not moving. Does Lopez think he has a fan club in the armed forces? The army has kept a very low profile. Is Lopez taunting
the military? If so what's the purpose. Does Lopez think the army is going to vote him Mr. Congeniality and hand him the chairmanship of the armed forces in a platter!

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 02:51 PM

Uhmm... things aren't going well in the tribunals for the PRD.

Revoca TEPJF diputación a coalición en el Edomex


Jerry B, I was listening to a PRDista (didn't catch his name) saying how brutal was the PFP since they didn't allow the PRDIstas to settle down in San Lázaro even when the federal diputies came to the scene saying "we are deputies, we are deputies! Move away!". So what if they are deputies? Are they above the law? The best thing of all was when he said that the operative of the PFP to guard the Congress is stoping the cars from circulating in the area. So it is ok for the PRD to close down Reforma but it is wrong for the PFP to close down the streets nearby the Congress... isn't that interesting?

Posted by: bunburia | August 16, 2006 02:56 PM

Bunburia (?) you forgot the N. jaja. Yes, the PRD is above the law. You haven't figured that out by now? Laws are only met to be applied when "the people" want them to be applied. No other time.

With regards to the "fuero", here is a great place to borrow from the United States, where federal lawmakers have no immunity for past crimes, and are not immune while in office for "felony or breach of the peace". Breach of the peace being a polite word for inciting riots.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 02:57 PM


There you go again. A crook is a crook. This is the 21 first century. Crooks are getting cared of mucho rapido, amigo. The Mexican Supreme Court has allowed a new law that expedites police matters. It was passed by Mexico's congress and stopped for years by some rabid congress nuts hell-bent on protecting criminals.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 03:05 PM

pasilla, first off, I'll agree that emptyboxes has posted bigoted statements, but hair in armpits is a stereotype, not bigotry. There's a very fine line there but it wasn't crossed with the armpit thing. On the rest, yeah, I've separated myself from those, someting you seem unable or unwilling to do. Until you post a statement distancing yourself from the "jewnited states" issue, you have no leg to stand on to call out others.

Now, I find it quite funny that you invoke the constitution when it suits your side, but try to avoid it when it doesn't:
- Bando 13 was declared unconstitutional, you remind us, why should the DF enforce it? Uhhhh why the hell does the DF still have it then? Aren't they blatantly disregarding the constitution and the supreme court's ruling then?
- But, oh my, lets not comment on what goes on in other countries, its unconstitutional. I guess you would have invoked that article to keep us out of WWII, genocide be damned. Yeah, its an extreme example, but that's the danger of that article.
- Elections were not clean (by the PRD's account), the constitution demands this be cleared up.
- The PRD blocks people from freely circulating in Reforma, but nooooo, that's not against the constitution because it doesn't mention cars.
- When laws are unjust we should disregard them, many AMLO supporters tell us (can't remember whether you personally have, pasilla). Well, let's ignore article 89, in that case.

So which is it?

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 16, 2006 03:11 PM

pasilla said: "But I will continue fighting bigotry anywhere I find it."

Maybe you should have added. "Except when I say it isn't."

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 16, 2006 03:17 PM

Cool site to visit:


You can spout your wisdom, but it takes time to be published. Ana Maria has to approve it first.

Ana Maria, a Mexican citizen, used to be a PENTAGON honcho in the Clinton years.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 03:31 PM

Ariel Orellana:

Your post is so confusing that I'm not sure "which is it..." If you care to clarify, I will attempt to respond. With one exception: my "anti-semitism." What I replied to rodolfo above, regarding the whipping of dead horses, applies also to maya0's "jewnited states of america." He clarified what he meant, I stated my position, if you care to read. Full stop.


Does the "new, 21st century law" allow foreign law enforcement agencies to make arrests in Mexican teritory? I doubt it, although it wouldn't totally surprise me coming from the PAN. I'm curious to read about the "invasion of Mexican sovereignty" law, if you so kindly point me in the right direction.

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 03:32 PM

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 03:43 PM


The news came through Mexican radio. "El Tigrillo" Arellano was taken prisoner in American territorial waters. I just hope it's the right Tigrillo, because the Tigrillo we're talking about has a 5 million dollar reward hanging over his groovy head.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 03:53 PM

ME ME ME!!! I fingered him! Where do I go to get my $5 mil?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 03:56 PM


Your 2:00 PM post is funny. I have always wondered how these narcos are able to pass tons of drugs year in, year out. Do they know something about the U.S. border we poor schmucks don't?

I guess el tigrillo wasn't told the price on his head was raised a couple million and had bribes in his wallet for DEA's old mordida.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 04:19 PM

I'm still looking for a leftist with ideas not with ideology!

I've just finished reading the pseudo-scientific trash written by UNAM's scholars about the cibernetic fraud, and all I can say is: they are trying hard to turn the 'maxima casa de estudios' into the 'minima casa de estudios' and De la Fuente and his 'doctors' are doing a hell of a job to acomplish this goal.

Mochan and Icaza shouldn't be allowed to teach basic statistics at the high school level!

pasilla, don´t bother to comment on my comment because, as I told you, I get bored very easily with your rethoric remarks.

Posted by: spoiler | August 16, 2006 04:30 PM

pasilla stop read your posts stop you have no leg to stand on repeat no leg to stand on full stop.

As to sovereignity, I did not even address that issue, but again, you seem to be quite comfortable with constitutional articles that fit your arguments as in this case. Either invoke the consitution and demand the PRD abide by it too by, say, lifting its camps on Reforma or stop invoking it, can't have your cake and eat it. Same goes for the dead horse thing. If you keep pounding at it you're just clarifying, apparently, but if we do we're beating the dead horse.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 16, 2006 04:36 PM

Pasilla, the US could stop the drug trade anytime they wanted to. Having a "war on drugs" is a great way to get Americans used to an exploding prison population, zero bank privacy, and a host of other intrusive and useless laws. Nothing more. Unfortunately here in Mexico we get to pay the price for all of this.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 04:50 PM

Gerardo Fernandez Norona "Acusó al Gobierno federal de suprimir los derechos de manifestación y de libre tránsito en los alrededores de la Cámara de Diputados."

I guess it is OK to shut down Reforma?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 04:56 PM

Here is another piece of interesting news. Alfredo Stroesner died in Brasilia. He was 93. Anyone remember him?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 05:01 PM



Don't doubt. It suffices to recall the "peligro para Mexico" campaign. That was pure demagogy...

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 10:40 AM

I guess if the Panistas had said "If AMLO doesn't win, he'll take over the Zocalo, disrupt the lives of millions of ordinary citizens, try to storm the legislature, seize tollbooths, etc" that would have been demagogy as well. With every new antic this guy pulls, he outdistances the worst things anybody has said aout him. Mexico dodged a major bullet by not electing hhim.

It amuses me greatly that Mexican leftists lionize the likes of Castro and Chavez, then whine like babies when their hero, AMLO, is compared to these champions of liberty. Pasillas, please explain this; it defies logic.

Posted by: Furnifold | August 16, 2006 05:13 PM


This morning on the radio a journalist was saying that the "Interim president" option began spreding after Lopez and de la Fuente had their well publicized cofee klatch. Apparently de la Fuente saw himself at Gobernacion while Lopez ruled in Palacio Nacional. Aw shucks, nice try. Maybe in six years, par de sonzos.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 05:17 PM

Thanks, spoiler: you are very kind. However, to complete the favor, what do I need to do to avoid the boredom that produces in me your own meaningless, baseless comments?

Ariel Orellana:

I'm not sure why you reference sovereignty. My comment was related to the piece of news provided by rodolfo, regarding the capture of the youngest Arrellano brother, details of which are still sketchy. But you are free to discuss whatever you want (as I am, too).

Posted by: pasilla | August 16, 2006 05:18 PM

Here is another piece of interesting news. Alfredo Stroesner died in Brasilia. He was 93. Anyone remember him?

I do! He was a Porfirio Diaz classmate. They graduated together Magna cum Laude and jointly published their dissertation "How Nice Dictators Live a Long Life" and went on to rule their countries with an iron fist for many many years, like Castro and not like Lopez.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 05:35 PM

I visited Ciudad del Este for a day once. It used to be called "Puerto Presidente Stroesner" until the unfortunate events of 1989. That place was positively spooky.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 05:51 PM

Stroesner actually had the dubious distinction of being only one of two 20th century Latin American military dictators who had actually fought in a war. (The other was Castelo Branco, in Brazil.) Apparently, Stroesner was even something of a hero. Too bad he was a corrupt thug as president...

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 05:54 PM

Edmundo Cancino, the only candidate for congress whose win was reverted by TEPJF has been going on and on in the radio about how he was robbed. The station interviwer asked him what was he going to do about it. He answered he would abide by the ruling.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 06:01 PM

Stroessner also had the world record for "Longest Ruling Dictator" until Castro recently beat his record.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 06:05 PM


I´am a long time lurker in this page. I have to say that I tend to agree to most of your views about the mexican election process. I hate AMLO, I was so happy watching the PFP beating Dolores Padierna (she was also happy BTW), and if I see Marti Batres or Fernandez Noroña on the street I would probably spit on their faces (I mean it, they are doing a terrible damage to the mexican institutions).

Said that, I see no point of bringing the antisemitic rethoric here. Franky, despite Zuckerman´s article, antisemitisim is not really an issue in Mexico (I mean, not in the degree you would find in other countries), and has no bearing whatsoever in the mexican electoral results.

So, please try to center the discussion in the topic. Mr. Lopez, TRIFE, "purificacion de la vida publica", stuff like that.


Posted by: Milos Artisian | August 16, 2006 07:55 PM

In his last message, Andrés Manuel López Obrador said:

"Tenemos también que prepararnos para no permitir la imposición, tenemos que esperar la decisión del tribunal electoral, pero al mismo tiempo prepararnos para no permitir la imposición ni un presidente espurio, ilegal e ilegítimo. Precisamente por eso es que el día de hoy voy a dar a conocer a ustedes y al pueblo de México la convocatoria para la Convención Nacional Democrática que vamos a celebrar aquí, en el Zócalo, el 16 de septiembre."


"Queremos que a partir de esta convocatoria, en todos los pueblos de México se empiece a analizar las alternativas, las acciones que más convengan a nuestro movimiento en caso de que se consume la imposición. Queremos que en todos los rincones del país, en las comunidades, en las colonias, en los barrios se empiece a reflexionar sobre qué tenemos que hacer para enfrentar la imposición en el caso, insisto, de que el tribunal convalide el fraude. Por eso yo voy a dar lectura a ustedes a esta convocatoria y la vamos a firmar el día de hoy, todos los que quieran hacerlo, para que se difunda y se empiece a trabajar en la organización para que el día 16 nos volvamos a congregar aquí muchos mexicanos, mujeres, hombres de todo el país, de todas las regiones de México".


"llamamos, en el marco de este artículo 39, a todos los mexicanos, mujeres y hombres libres, conscientes y preocupados en el destino de la nación a poner fin a la República simulada, a poner las bases de un verdadero Estado social y democrático de derecho, de llevar a cabo las transformaciones profundas que el país necesita. Esto significa combatir la pobreza y la monstruosa desigualdad imperante, defender el patrimonio de la nación; impedir la enajenación de los bienes nacionales y la privatización del petróleo, la electricidad, la educación pública, la seguridad social y los recursos naturales, implica hacer valer la democracia y los derechos ciudadanos, defender el derecho público a la información, acabar con la corrupción e impunidad de unos cuantos y de los poderosos y renovar a fondo todas las instituciones para ponerlas al servicio del pueblo y sujetarlas genuinamente a los principios constitucionales".

--- end of quote

Answering this call, we dedicate the following quote from the Federal Penal Code to Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Alejandro Encinas, Manuel Camacho, Gerardo Fernández Noroña, Jesús Ortega, Leonel Cota, Martí Batres, and all those who are on the verge of commiting one of the following crimes:




Delitos Contra la Seguridad de la Nación"



Artículo 130.- Se aplicará la pena de seis meses a ocho años de prisión y multa hasta de diez mil pesos, a los que en forma tumultuaria sin uso de armas, resistan o ataquen a la autoridad para impedir el libre ejercicio de sus funciones con alguna de las finalidades a que se refiere el artículo 132.

A quienes dirijan, organicen, inciten, compelan o patrocinen económicamente a otros para cometer el delito de sedición, se les aplicará la pena de cinco a quince años de prisión y multa hasta de veinte mil pesos.


Artículo 131.- Se aplicará la pena de seis meses a siete años de prisión y multa hasta de cinco mil pesos, a quienes para hacer uso de un derecho o pretextando su ejercicio o para evitar el cumplimiento de una ley, se reúnan tumultuariamente y perturben el orden público con empleo de violencia en las personas o sobre las cosas, o amenacen a la autoridad para intimidarla u obligarla a tomar alguna determinación.

A quienes dirijan, organicen, inciten, compelan o patrocinen económicamente a otros para cometer el delito de motín, se les aplicará la pena de dos a diez años de prisión y multa hasta de quince mil pesos.


Artículo 132.- Se aplicará la pena de dos a veinte años de prisión y multa de cinco mil a cincuenta mil pesos a los que, no siendo militares en ejercicio, con violencia y uso de armas traten de:

I.- Abolir o reformar la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos;

II.- Reformar, destruir o impedir la integración de las instituciones constitucionales de la Federación, o su libre ejercicio; y

III.- Separar o impedir el desempeño de su cargo a alguno de los altos funcionarios de la Federación mencionados en el artículo 2o. de la Ley de Responsabilidades de los Funcionarios y Empleados de la Federación, del Distrito Federal y de los Altos Funcionarios de los Estados."



Artículo 140.- Se impondrá pena de dos a veinte años de prisión y multa de mil a cincuenta mil pesos, al que dañe, destruya o ilícitamente entorpezca vías de comunicación, servicios públicos, funciones de las dependencias del Estado, organismos públicos descentralizados, empresas de participación estatal o sus instalaciones; plantas siderúrgicas, eléctricas o de las industrias básicas; centros de producción o distribución de artículos de consumo necesarios de armas, municiones o implementos bélicos, con el fin de trastornar la vida económica del país o afectar su capacidad de defensa.

Se aplicará pena de seis meses a cinco años de prisión y multa hasta de cinco mil pesos, al que teniendo conocimiento de las actividades de un saboteador y de su identidad, no lo haga saber a las autoridades.


Artículo 141.- Se impondrá pena de uno a nueve años de prisión y multa hasta de diez mil pesos a quienes resuelvan de concierto cometer uno o varios de los delitos del presente Título y acuerden los medios de llevar a cabo su determinación."

--- end of quote

Sorry about the extension of this comment, but I guess it is useful to know what they can expect if they keep pushing their demands to the limits established by law, even if some consider it inappropiate or inconvenient.

Posted by: spoiler | August 16, 2006 08:03 PM

Rodolfo, Jerry B and EmptyBoxes:

Respect to being patronizing, I am only stating the fact that Mexico has a record of corruption and stealing elections. Traditions do not die in 10 or 15 years. For that reason, a law that does not include the reality of the situation is stupid. An of course, an executive that is supposed to implement such a law should be smart enough to realize the stupidity of the situation. Did any one learn anything from Florida 2000? Fox should have been proactive, after all, was not he successful the first year to introduce reforms?
Calderon (he is no better than the other candidate) knows that there was enough fraud to make his winning meaningless, but he has chosen, like the real demagogue (this blogs shows that he stirs emotion believe it or not) politician he is, to ignore it inorder to gain power for him and his followers regardless of the cost. And then he will try to impose his ideology ("harvard" ideas to the economy, tried by Salinas before with disastrous results). Mexico is in a situation where all the choices are not so good; the last three weeks have shown us that the selection of PAN is no good at all, Calderon is far from being the statesman that a country like Mexico needs at this point in time. Remember the 1800's civil wars in Mexico?

A side note: apparently venezuela, argentina, brazil, peru, etc.. have had an average growth in GDP larger than Mexico in the last few years (source IMF). And Brazil has passed Mexico as the largest economy in Latinoamerica. There you have some of the legacy of Fox(is Mexico going to go for the "continuity" of Calderon?)

Mexico eliminated slavery in the first constitution in 1814 (I think that Morelos y Pavon, one of the "founding founders" of Mexico, prompted the first congress; he was apparently black). But, as you know, that constitution did not become the law of the land. It was not until Vicente Guerrero (a black descendant apparently) when slavery was finally abolished, that was approximately 35 or so years before the US and not 50 as you pointed out. In fact, the catholic church "eliminated" slavery in all the spain colonies (for Indians) way before that. The fact of the matter is that intentions and ideas have always been good in Mexico, but the OLIGARCHY and their followers always find a way to destroy or to avoid the creation of strong institutions that can make a country great. For example, the only indian president died in 1872, almost 130 years ago, since then, nobody of that race (100% pure) has come close to be a leader in Mexico (Zapata was murdered). What happened with all that inertia that Mexico had? Social progress and greatness have a way to being stopped in Mexico. This election seems again a reflection of how a few can take away what many want (or what is best for the country) without a fair discussion of the issues (just sound bites). In fact, it appears that the separation of church and state established in 1857 is about to be taken away by the new platform of the PAN...Is this a real priority for the country? Come on!!! let us hope not, but there is no surprise here! Did any one mention Poverty as the main issue?

Spoiler, Empty Boxes, Jerry B.

Respect to the research done by the UNAM, I find it quite interesting. Just because the study hints to the fraud in this election (Mochan a physics professor seems to have done a study that is along the same lines, I have not read it yet), one should not disregard it as flawed. It is typical of partisans and ideologues to ignore anything that goes against their beliefs. People who will say anything to discredit the other side. And one thought that the trial of Galileo had taught a lesson to all of us....

The UNAM ("la maxima casa de estudios") according to a survey (quoted by the Economist) is in the top 200 universities of the world. There is NO OTHER UNIVERSITY FROM MEXICO in the top 500. It used to be that the UNAM was in the top 50 universities of the world (20 years ago), so it has gone down in ranking unfortunately. Given that, to say that the UNAM is 'la minima casa de estudios" is a bunch of baloney written by some one that does not like the university. No other university in Mexico seems to come close to match the quality of the researchers (see the survey). So one cannot disregard any scientific work from an institution with that unmatched tradition as rubbish right from the start. Only an ignorant ideologue (remember the Galileo trial) could do such a thing. One has to take a closer and hard look at the studies by people who truly know the subject.


Your postings are interesting, well thought out and sensible. Do not let those ideologues to get on your nerves.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 08:10 PM

Drgecc, it is about time that Brazil passes Mexico in terms of the size of its economy. Mexico has 100 million inhabitants, Brazil has about 175 million. Normally, larger countries tend to have bigger economies. As to venezuela, please. The country is basically one big oil well, of course they are doing good. And they will continue to do good as long as oil is at $75 a barrel. Since everyone and his brother is searching for oil right now (Chavez ought to study the "oil sands" project in Alberta, and be very afraid.) that is not going to last. And when oil comes down, so will Venezuela.

As to demogaguery, if you can find any veiled hints of violence, threats to the families of political opponents, calls to illegally block public passageways, or attempts to divide Mexico by race or class in the public pronouncements of Calderon or the PAN, please post them here. We would all love to see them.

With regard to whether a runoff should have been included, you do not have to convince me. Again, why does not AMLO demand one? Easy, he knows he will lose. The PRD had the opportunity to participate in the selection of the present IFE councellors. They chose not to. So blame them as much as Fox. Also, even a runoff doesnot solve things if it ended up 50.25% to 49.75%, which would have been a distinct possibility before AMLO started acting like the proto-fascist he is.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 08:31 PM

Does that mean that Mexico is no better than the US when it comes to civil rights?

drgecc, have you heard of "minim Pinguin"? we are o so progressive here it is not even funny. We also treat illegal immigrants from central america far better than the Americans treat Mexicans, so good in fact that they usually voluntarily give away all their money and possessions to the nice policemen who are protecting them.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 08:38 PM


Incidentally, I remember from my history class that most of the rebel army in the mexican independence was comprised of descendant of "afromexicans", including the leadership. In my trips to Mexico and the history books I have seen, I see little or no reference to this antecedent. Not even statues honoring this great effort by the afromexican community. Does that mean that Mexico is no better than the US when it comes to civil rights?

Too bad for Mexico that Guerrero lasted one year in office before being executed by the oligarchy. Apparently few periods in the story of Mexico have been as progressive as the time when Vicente Guerrero was president (among many things, he introduced social reforms)

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 08:39 PM


Since you seem to have read the paper published by the UNAM and appear to be knowledgable about the subject. Can you explain why the researchers did not use a
non-parametric method for sample comparison? Seriously, it would save me time. (thanks)

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 08:44 PM


That does not explain why Argentina is growing faster than Mexico (at least in the last few years). Argentina as you very well know has less population than Mexico and argentina has no oil to speak of. What is the difference?

Mexico has oil too. Granted, not as many reserves as Venezuela. How is that Mexico is doing so much poorly than Venezuela (economically speaking?) They have the same leverage (high oil prices). What is the difference? Can you explain that? Furthermore, oil prices won't go down any time soon. Mexico should be grateful for that since Mexico seems to have a lack for taking advantage of its resources and its people..
So Mexico has to depend on external factors and not on the strength of their citizens (they prefer to go to the US) and resources to grow..shame!

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 08:55 PM

drgecc, Argentina is growing fast right now because they well and truly went into a depression in late 2001. They are now climbing out of that, mostly on Brazil's coatails. I spent a month and a half last November and December riding my bicycle around (mostly) Uruguay, but also the provincias of BsAs and Entre Rios. Trust me, Argentina is no economic paradise. I wish it were...Argentina is VERY CHEAP to visit right now, if you have dollars. They are growing from a temporaly low base, and have the benefit of a decently educated populace, something Mexico does not have, courtesy of Gordillo's SNTE. (and please do not blame illiterate adults who dropped out of school in the second grade on Fox or the PAN.) Argentina also has a huge emmigration problem, they were thrown out of the US visa waiver program a few years ago, and now Spain and Italy are filling up with Argentines.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 08:57 PM

Jerry B:

Yes I have heard of Memin Pinguin. Have you? Either you have not read the comic or you are falling asleep at the keyboard. You clearly mispelled the name of the character ("minim"). Do you remember the names of some members of "la pandilla".
I forgot but I do remember Memin. As I hope you know, his real name is Guillermo (Memo) but every one calls him Memin. Are you really from Mexico? Memin
(not minim) penguin happens to be one of the most popular comics in Mexico, every one has read quite a few of the stories.
I am surprised that some one from Mexico can actually forget about Memin.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 08:58 PM


Welcome back. Last night around 10:52 PM I assume it was you that posted that a 2000 dollar hot dog wasn't so bad, that it could have been worse. Let me put it in other simple terms.

From 1954 to 1976 Mexico's exchange rate went unchanged 12.50 to the dollar. Today the rate is 11,000 to the dollar. You might think that with your calculator and bean-counting abilities you can convince us Mexicans that it's not that bad. We should be grateful we're not Haiti and shut up. Keynesian alchemists like you ruined Mexico's economy and the worst off were the poor of this country. You can whip up as many numbers as you wish.

You'll never convince the fool that is writing this, that 11,000 pesos for one dollar is not that bad. By the way, could you spare $2,000 dollars for a hot dog? You can whip out your calculator and agree with yourself it's really not that much.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 08:58 PM

drgecc, where are you getting your statistics from regarding Venezuela. Tell me you are not a narconews reader. According to the statistics I have seen, absolute poverty has decreased in the last six years in Mexico, but has increased in Venezuela, as has inflation. Someone please verify the venezuela stats for me, but I am rather sure of them.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 09:00 PM

memin. oops. In 2006, I find it hard to believe that a politically correct AMLO supporter like drgecc would find anything funny in a cartoon that potrays every kind of offensive stereotype about blacks that there is. What is next? left wing anti-semitism? Calling Cardenas a traitor? Please just make it all go away!

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 09:04 PM

here we go. According to the Economist, in 2005, when oil cost four times as much as when Chavez took office, Venezuelan poverty finally came back down to where it was in 1998, when Chavez took power. Which means that six years after Chavez took over poverty was worse. Six years after Fox took over, poverty is better. And, Mexico is free....

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 09:13 PM


The speed of your typing is amazing. You have swamped this blog with unnecessary reactionary arguments. American obsession with skin color and race is the polarizing strategy Lopez is using to gain followers. The RACE card as an issue!

Race in Mexico is a nonissue. You'll have to change your approach, I'm not getting into a race discussion. Down here, it's a nonissue.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 09:19 PM

This is a piece of news the Washington Post wants to ignore... and so do all these Panistas with a LOT of time on their hands... get to work guys! I mean, you candidate was the JOBS candidate... just like that inept clown and traitor to democracy Vicente Fox... we all just want to be GARDENERS and MAIDS in the US right? it's all about the economies complementing each other, the US needs servants that accept low wages and no job security... and Mexico has plenty of people... swell... it is just too bad some of them had to end up dead in the dessert when they try to cross from hell to paradise..
It is quite funny to read the conservative media and this blog when they state that "people are getting tired of Obrador" is that wishful thinking? get real!

Here is what a pack of wild looneys think about the election: 60% say there was FRAUD... 60% of these messianic, crazy, mentally challenged inhabitants of Mexico City... right Washington Post? Right


Mexico City Majority Sees Vote Fraud, Universal Survey Shows
Aug. 14 (Bloomberg) -- A majority of Mexico City voters said they believed there was fraud in the July 2 presidential election, a door-to-door survey by daily newspaper El Universal shows.

Of the 600 registered voters polled by El Universal on Aug. 9, 59 percent said there was fraud while 39 percent said the election was clean. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points, El Universal said today.

Hey you Ferriz de Con fans, here is what a real newspaper has to say about the hipocrisy of right wing press (and yet some people complain about the Post... hey guys, the post is an echo of that serious and respected paper La Cronica de Hoy which is the most fascist paper in Mexico, you should be proud of it)

'People power' is a global brand owned by America

The US and the western media back protests over controversial elections when it suits them, but are silent over those in Mexico

Mark Almond
Tuesday August 15, 2006
The Guardian

A couple of years ago television, radio and print media in the west just couldn't get enough of "people power". In quick succession, from Georgia's rose revolution in November 2003, via Ukraine's orange revolution a year later, to the tulip revolution in Kyrgyzstan and the cedar revolution in Lebanon, 24-hour news channels kept us up to date with democracy on a roll.

Triggered by allegations of election fraud, the dominoes toppled. The US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, was happy with the trend: "They're doing it in many different corners of the world, places as varied as Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan and, on the other hand, Lebanon ... And so this is a hopeful time."

But when a million Mexicans try to jump on the people-power bandwagon, crying foul about the July 2 presidential elections, when protesters stage a vigil in the centre of the capital that continues to this day, they meet a deafening silence in the global media. Despite Mexico's long tradition of electoral fraud and polls suggesting that Andrés Manuel López Obrador - a critic of the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) - was ahead, the media accepted the wafer-thin majority gained by the ruling party nominee, Harvard graduate Felipe Calderón.

Although Mexico's election authorities rejected López Obrador's demand for all 42m ballots to be recounted, the partial recount of 9% indicated numerous irregularities. But no echo of indignation has wafted to the streets of Mexico City from western capitals.

Maybe Israel's intervention in Lebanon grabbed all the attention and required every hack and videophone. Back in 2004 CNN and the BBC were perfectly able to cover the battle for Falluja and the orange revolution in the same bulletins. Today, however, even a news junkie like me cannot remember a mainstream BBC bulletin live from among the massive crowds in Mexico City. Faced by CNN's indifference to the growing crisis in Mexico, only a retread of an old saying will do: "Pity poor Mexico, so far from Israel, so close to the United States."

Castro's failing health gets more airtime than the constitutional crisis gripping America's southern neighbour, which is one of its major oil suppliers. Apparently, crowds of protesters squatting in Mexico City for weeks protesting against alleged vote-rigging don't make a good news story. Occasionally commentators who celebrated Ukrainians blocking the main thoroughfares of Kiev condescend to jeer at Mexico's sore losers and complain that businessmen are missing deadlines because dead-enders with nothing better to do are holding up the traffic. Ukraine's Viktor Yushchenko was decisive when he declared himself president, but isn't López Obrador a demagogue for doing the same?

The colour-coded revolutionaries of the former Soviet Union had a pro-western agenda - such as bringing Georgia and Ukraine into Nato and the EU - but in Latin America radicals question the wisdom of membership of US-led bodies such as Nafta and the WTO. The crude truth is that Washington cannot afford to let Mexico's vast oil reserves fall into hands of a president even half as radical as Venezuela's Hugo Chávez.

But didn't the western observers certify the Mexican polls as "fair", while they condemned the Ukrainian elections? True, but election observers are not objective scientists. The EU relies on politicians, not automatons, to evaluate polls. Take the head of its observer mission, the MEP José Ignacio Salafranca: as a Spanish speaker in Mexico, Salafranca had a huge advantage over many of the MEPs in Ukraine who draped themselves in orange even while en mission - but he is hardly neutral. His rightwing Popular party is an ally of Calderón's Pan party, which is in power in Mexico. Calderón was immediately congratulated by Salafranca's colleague Antonio López-Istúriz on the "great news".

The days of leftwing fraternalism may be over, but the globalist right has its own network, linking the Spanish conservatives, American Republicans and Calderón's Pan party - and they provided the key observer. To paraphrase Stalin: "It doesn't matter who votes, it matters who observes the vote."

Salafranca has a track record as an election observer. In Lebanon's general elections in 2005 he had no problem with the pro-western faction sweeping the board around Beirut with fewer than a quarter of voters taking part and nine of its seats gained without even a token alternative candidate. "It is a feast of democracy," he declared. His mood changed when the democratic banquet moved to areas dominated by Hizbullah or the Christian maverick General Aoun. Suddenly, "vote-buying" and the need for "fundamental reform" popped up in the EU observation reports.

Unanimity on the scale seen across Lebanon suggests that the cedar revolution - despite the hype - did nothing to promote real democratic pluralism. Hizbullah's hold on the south is the most controversial aspect of the sectarian segmentation of Lebanese society, but everywhere local bosses dominate their fiefdoms as before. Similarly, more scepticism about Ukraine's revolution would have left people better informed than the orange boosterism that passed for commentary 18 months ago.

But Mexico is different because it is so under-reported. The cruel reality is that "people power" has become a global brand. But like so many global brands it is owned by Americans. Mexicans and any other "populists" who try to copy it should beware that they're infringing a copyright. No matter how many protesters swarm through Mexico City or how long they protest, it is George Bush and co who decide which people truly represent The People. People power turns out to be about politics, not arithmetic.

Posted by: 60% of Mexico City think this election was FRAUDULENT | August 16, 2006 09:22 PM

The study I posted about the so called manipulation of the PREP here only comes to show how partisan and imbeciles these UNAM pseudo-engineers are. They are looking for fraud and are having a hard time to find it. Instead of trying to explain the behaviour of the PREP in order to arrive at a scientific explanation which in turn should expose a fraud if it ever existed.
To none is a secret in Mexico that this university, our national university, has been kidnapped by radical communists, stalinists, marxists and trotskistas professors who have prostituted the UNAM to become another branch of the Mexican communist party and the International socialist organization that supports dictators like Fidel Castro and that other imbecile from venezuela.
Maybe some Engineers from Harvard or the MIT came and helped Felipe Calderon manipulate the PREP or if you have any other cocaine conspiracy theory, be my guest.
But my point is that the whole study is irrelevant, as irrelevants are those poor mediocre engineers, as irrelevan the UNAM is and will continue to be if they pursue political agendas instead of academic level. The rankings you posted don't help the regular UNAM graduate much when he goes in search of a job.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 09:33 PM

Today's editorial is a caricature by the Post and very offensive to Mexicans, millions voted for Lopez Obrador, and millions have every right to demand credibility of the results after a bitter campaign with government intervention that reminded us of how unfinished our quest towards democracy is.

What shows the lack of ethics of this newspaper is that they acknowledged to have received a phonecall from right wing candidate Calderon in which he instructed them not to talk about how clean elections were. This is not important. Calderon told them "just say I won" and the Post followed his command. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400991_2.html It is absurd. A week later they were calling Lopez Obrador the Mexican Stalin. I do now understand how this newspaper still mantains crediblity. This editorial piece follows line by line what was the negative campaign of the conservative party here in Mexico. They spent millions on fearmongering TV spots: Lopez Obrador is messianic, a populist, a danger to Mexico, does not respect anything, you will lose everything, he is friends with Hugo Chavez, he is a lier, he is wild. Is this a serious newspaper that follows line by line an agressive smear campaign?

Posted by: Today's editorial | August 16, 2006 09:35 PM


Guerrero was shot by a firing squad by orders from congress. He was told to leave the country and if he ever came back he would be executed.

Guerrero lost the election when he ran for president. He then gathered up a mob and took away the presidency from the elected winner. He was incompetent enough to be impeached by congress and exiled from Mexico for life. This happenned in 1820s.

Lopez is trying to pull a stunt like that in this election. His eyes water at the the thought of running his presidency from Palacio Nacional. He won't have any presidency to grab by mob rule. He'd have to have the votes to do that. We're 200 years wiser for a stunt like that.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 09:37 PM


I can buy that. Sure. The WPost is a hellhole of right wing reactionaries. Yeah, complo all the way to the bank!

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 09:45 PM


Is there a part of your screed that you actually wrote yourself. I can cut and paste as well as you, amigo, but it's too easy.

What is your point. In your own words, please.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 09:48 PM

I wonder what the almost 2,730,00 inhabitants of Mexico City, who voted in favor of AMLO for president are thinking now. Thanks to your "hero" many people are losing their jobs and the city is a complete chaos....ooops, maybe that is because you also elected PRD for Mayor of your City. The popular saying is "You got what you deserve".

Posted by: rightisright | August 16, 2006 09:49 PM

Jerry B:

As a matter of fact, I tried so hard to get one of those commemorative stamps of MEMIN PINGUIN(remember the spelling jerry! ALL the MEXICAN kids for the last 40 or so years recognize the spelling, unless you are too wealthy to bother with those lowly weekly comics) but it was impossible to get even one single stamp.

By the way Jerry, another very well known piece of mexican popular culture is the name of the parents of MEMIN. I do remember. Do you remember the name(s)? Perhaps spoiler, emptyboxes, rodolfo can help you with this one..

Or perhaps if you are a supporter of Calderon, knowledge of Popular Culture of "la plebe" is not necessary.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 09:52 PM

Felipe Calderon had some meetings with some PRI Governors today. Something I like very much about him is how he continues building alliances for the great coalition in congress that will crush the perredistas like miserable worms and just for fun, pass some reforms over their decomposing bodies in both cameras.
He has the PRI and PANAL eating from his hand and the PVEM is little by little jumping into the bandwagon of Felipe too.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 10:02 PM

Check this out! ha ha ha

Wannabes fecales
Parece ya un lugar común decir que, a raíz de las más recientes elecciones presidenciales, México se ha polarizado. Como nunca, el encono entre los bandos contendientes ha alcanzado niveles alarmantes, debido principalmente a una estrategia implementada por el Partido Acción Nacional y su candidato, Fecal. La "campaña del miedo", el odio inducido, el desprecio al oponente, etcétera, son la causa del clima de tensión que, a casi dos meses de celebrados los comicios, todavía se respira en el país, y que por lo visto seguirá respirándose por mucho tiempo más.

Sin embargo, no es acertada la visión según la cual, la polarización se da a partir de las diferencias socioeconómicas o "de clase". La teoría de que a López Obrador lo apoyan los pobres, y a Fecal los ricos, es demasiado simplista. La realidad es más complicada que eso. Hay mucha gente de clase media e incluso alta que votó por AMLO, como también hubo gente de estratos sociales que de lo que menos pueden presumir es de ser privilegiados, que sufragó por Fecal. En ambos casos, sin embargo, por razones muy diferentes. A ese último segmento pertenecen los llamados fecalistas wannabes (FW).

¿Qué es un FW? Una definición coloquial del término "wannabe" es: "el que pretende aparentar lo que no es, a partir de la afirmación grotesca, o la negación, de aquello que sí es". El wannabe es el clásico quiero y no puedo, el look at me, el que está dispuesto a sacrificar todo, principalmente sus ideas, en aras de estar "in" y de verse "cool".

Un FW, por lo tanto, es aquella persona que, aun cuando nunca en su vida ha pertenecido (ni, probablemente, pertenecerá) al grupo de familias privilegiadas por el poder económico y político de este país, defiende hasta con los dientes la "ideología" panista-fecalista. Una ideología de la cual el pobre no puede, es obvio, obtener ningún provecho (pues por definición ésta ha sido diseñada para beneficiar a la cúpula dominante), como no sea el que le vendieron durante meses de bombardeo propagandístico en el sentido de que votando por Fecal evitaría la catástrofe que de otro modo se cerniría sobre los mexicanos. Tampoco tiene claro en su mente el FW los perjuicios que más de lo mismo en materia económica y política le pueden acarrear. En última instancia eso es lo que a él menos le importa: si defiende al fecalismo no es por ideología o principios, sino porque piensa que es lo que está de moda, y muy en el fondo de su cerebro tiene la convicción de que de esa manera puede "rozar" el mundo de la "gente bien"; que su apoyo a Fecal lo hermana con los poderosos; que por fin puede ser "gente como ellos"; que apoyar a Fecal es lo que hace la gente bonita, educada, decente, estudiada, que sí sabe gastar, que sí sabe viajar, etc. Poco importa que, en los hechos, ese "mundo VIP" le esté vedado. Para este tipo de mexicano, que quizá se avergüenza de su piel cetrina, o del vocho destartalado que maneja, la esperanza es lo último que muere. Con la ventaja enorme de que no necesita seguir jugando Melate cada semana para acariciar el sueño de convertirse en gente bonita: basta mutar en fecalista convencido para automáticamente sentirse parte de los winners, de los que "la han hecho" en este país; de los que no necesitan pensar, ni reflexionar, ni luchar, sino simplemente ser.

Un FW se declarará fervoroso partidario de la "legalidad" y el "Estado de derecho", y hasta hará muecas de desprecio ante "esos alborotadores del pe-erre-dé" que "no saben perder" y que "ya ni la chingan (sic) con sus bloqueos", y luego tranquilamente relatará entre risotadas que anoche "me apañó la tira" por conducir en estado inconveniente, percance que pudo librar a cambio de una jugosa mordida: "pinche poli me bajó 200 varos". Obviamente sus amigos le festejan su gracia entre palmadas en la espalda y brindis donde le mientan la madre al "gobierno corrupto".

El FW tiene como referente cultural, y casi como única fuente de información, el canal de cable MTV. Conocen de memoria los títulos e intérpretes de las canciones de moda, y piensa que con eso está "informado" y que podrá apantallar a "sus cuates". No conoce (y tampoco le importa) qué está sucediendo en Oaxaca (algunos, ni siquiera tienen claro dónde queda ese estado), pero es capaz de recordar correctamente el horario del programa Enchúlame la maquina. Convenientemente prefiere ignorar el hecho de que la versión de MTV que ve en su pantalla es la latina, muy diferente a la original en inglés, idioma que ni de lejos domina. No importa, él es parte de la aldea global por el simple hecho de observar como idiota todo el día videos musicales y programas insulsos.

Los FW cuyos padres trabajan en el gobierno, o en alguna empresa paraestatal, léase PEMEX, CFE, etc., defienden a Fecal porque dicen que gracias al PAN "mi jefe tiene chamba". Esto mismo lo decían hace apenas 6 años pero respecto al PRI, para justificar en aquel entonces su apoyo a Labastida. Cabe mencionar que los FW por lo general manifiestan sus preferencias políticas a posteriori, es decir, siempre apoyan a quien ya se encuentra en el poder, y jamás de los jamases a quien aun no lo conquista. Por eso en el 2000 apostaban por la continuidad del PRI y en 2006 por la del PAN. Esto pueden hacerlo sin ningún conflicto interno porque, como ya vimos, no existe una real ideología, sino pragmatismo puro.

Es común ver a los FW jóvenes hacer largas filas a la entrada de los antros de moda, esperando a que el cadenero de dichos lugares les autorice el acceso. En ese sentido no hay dignidad que valga: es perfectamente bien visto que un FW se desgañite gritando: "¡Aquí, aquí, somos dos parejas wey!!" con tal de entrar al lugar, donde, con un poco de suerte, conocerá unos forros, beberá del mejor chupe, y se la pasará ¡de pelos!, rodeado de gente bonita, en un ambiente very cool. Sobra decir que los auténticos niños bien sonríen con desprecio ante estos FW que piden a gritos al dj canciones de reggaetón, que ordenan al mesero un pomo de Terry (cuando no de Bacacho) y que casi siempre se van sin dejar propina, digo si la neta es que el sueldo de papi no da pa' tanto, no? Cuando salen del antro (generalmente hasta atrás), les gusta arrancar a toda velocidad "pa' impresionar a las nenorras" el vehículo que esa noche le fue prestado por papi, pero al que orgullosamente se refieren ante sus cuates como MI troka o MI nave.

El FW vive para los demás, para la apariencia, para el qué dirán. Lo importante es estar "in", ser "cool", ¡para nada! ser "naco". Es im-per-do-na-ble que un FW dé visos de alguna originalidad: es inmediatamente tachado de "weird" de "psycho", de "nerd". La regla aquí es la masa, la uniformidad, el ser el perfecto zombie que encaja dentro de un patrón prestablecido. Ser fecalista es la expresión "política" de semejante castración de la personalidad. El fecalista es winner, todos los demás unos losers. Ser fecalista le permite al individuo común y corriente, mediocre, creerse parte de la gente que él admira. Y lo mejor de todo es que se le exige mínimo esfuerzo, no sólo físico, sino mental ¿Qué importa la cultura? ¿Qué son la inteligencia, el sentido crítico, la solidaridad con el prójimo, la conciencia social, la capacidad de análisis, y todos los demás atributos de la gente pensante? En pleno siglo XXI, para ser parte de la nice people no se requiere cerebro, energía, un objetivo en la vida, y ni siquiera dinero. Basta abrazar la moda imperante, basta gritar desde lo más profundo del corazón (que no del alma): look at me!

Posted by: So funny! | August 16, 2006 10:07 PM


My understanding is that Guerrero was the president of Mexico around 1829
(after Guadalupe Victoria and emperor Iturbide) And he was executed by those oligarchs from congress lead by the conservative Bustamante after barely a year in the presidency (and he was afromexican). Congress did not like at all some of the decisions he made. He was not a political guy.

Do you know that he opposed the sale of texas to the united states? Does that sound incompetent to you? He was the one who officially abolished slavery. Was that incompetence? Was not he the one that form an alliance with iturbide to end the war of independence? Is that incompetence?
"La patria es primero"

Perhaps you shoud reread your history books. Borrow history books from a mexican.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 10:11 PM

Isn't Calderon a hero? I mean this guy should be admired by everyone. People just love him here in Mexico. He is such a darling, so cute, so polished, so handsome! Mexican women swoon on the sight of him. And right now he is working hard for a winning Mexico, all he wants is peace and these perderistas should get it. I mean who cares if he did not win. This is a "patriotic fraud" so save Mexico from the worst of fates: having as President the candidate who's backed by the popular will. Nevermind, Calderon will be legitimised in office like Carlos Salinas, in 1991 no one remembered he did not win. The same will happen here. And he is already building bridges to all these democratic forces like Elba Esther Gordillo! How wonderful!

Posted by: Emptyboxes has an empty skull | August 16, 2006 10:17 PM


About your August 16, 8:10 PM entry:
You say Calderon is not up to your standards in statemanship credentials. So maybe he should concede to Lopez because Lopez is real Hombre. I do remember Mexican 1800's history and we are definitely not going that route ever again. You, Marcos and Lopez might think it's a fun gamble worth trying. Marcos is already a laughable non entity, Lopez is well on his way to become his best amigo.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 10:17 PM

To the moron above, no kidding, 60% of Mexico City voted for AMLO. You may be surprised to know that 80% of Mexicans DO NOT live in that paradise, and I was not aware that somehow whatever the Chilangos want is what Mexico gets.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 10:25 PM

drgecc, maybe you and Maya0 can have a contest as to who is the "true Mexican". You are disqualified, however, if you live on the border, have travelled outside the country (except on a beca to study at an American school, hating the gringos all the while), have American or foreign friends, or are now or have ever been a PANista. The first test will be to diagram M. Pinguin's family tree. After that you will compose an original "narcocorrido". Remaining contestents will then come up with a slogan along the lines of "Los hijos de maiz no queremos al PAN."

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 10:32 PM


I'll get back to to as soon as I consult my wikipedia. Before I do, Guerrero was illiterate, literally. The man did not know how to read and write. Please stop mentioning afros, whites, browns or ethnics. In Mexico we NEVER use racial descriptions in normal exchanges. That type of language was used by an Eurocentric 19th century society. We never discuss about somebody's skin color. The news here is what an person does, not their color. Mexicans couldn't care less about ethnics.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 10:33 PM

It's amazing how some biz groups in Mexico are still spending millions of pesos in negative campaign. These guys also paid for the spots that promoted fear among voters, warning them of Chavez.

Because people have reasonable doubts regarding the election and that's a reality these guys are paying brainwashing spots on primetime (or are they given out for free by Televisa?) to convince people that all votes were counted.

Mexicans are just PLAIN TIRED of their manipulation efforts. They are not convincing anyone. People know this electoral results are fraudulent.

Posted by: Brenda | August 16, 2006 10:34 PM

And, as a matter of fact I spent my childhood reading Conan the Barbarian comic books. Because, I was rich. Sorry.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 10:35 PM

Brenda, pleeease, tell us how we know the election results are fraudelent? A million citizens were poll workers, have you asked any of them? I have. Many more were poll watchers for the parties, PRD included. Have you asked them? Have they been bribed? The IFE found no fraud. The TEPJF seems to have found no fraud. The EU observors found no fraud. All they all a bunch of crooks?
No one outside of Make sicko City is complaining about fraud, because, sorry, it did not happen. Try asking one of the 80 million or so that do not live in your beautiful metropolis if there was fraud.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 16, 2006 10:39 PM


The UNAM is in the top 200 PUBLIC universities in the world. You might want to ask Mexican companies which universitie's graduates they prefer. I'm certain UNAM will NOT come in first.

Brazil has surpassed Mexico as the biggest economy, and as Jerry has already pointed out, they have almost twice the population, come on. You might want to check on GDP per capita. BTW, in a previous post, I compared GDP growth from 2000 to 2005, World Bank figures, growth was essentially the same, with Mexico a decimal point or so ahead. We might want to find out why figures differ between the World Bank and IMF.

Same goes for Venezuela, from 2000 through 2002, their growth was basically zero (being generous) and again, Jerry correctly points out that Venezuela is a huge oil platform with some people living on top. As to why we don't do so great, there are a couple of reasons: our outdated laws have caused PEMEX to fall way behind in infrastructure, to the point where we can't refine enough gasoline to cover our own needs and because oil does not have the same specific weight in our economy.

As to Argentina, I was in Uruguay last month and can corroborate Jerry's observations. As a point of comparison, Uruguay has a population of about 3.5 million with an estimated number or .5 million Uruguayans living abroad (almost 15%), most of them university graduates (public universities are free to everyone, including foreigners). Every single Uruguayan under 35 that I met was just itching to go somewhere else.

As for blacks not being recognized as afro-mexicans, this is basically because the true melting pot of the world is not the US, its Mexico, race is basically a non-issue because everybody is of mixed decent. This does not excuse the fact that we do discriminate against indigenous groups and have stereotypes against blacks, but by and large nobody goes around strutting their heritage because nobody cares. Oh, and you spelled Memin Pinguin wrong in your post too. Finally, the fact that somebody did not read a particular comic means nothing. I didn't read it either (I found the stereotypes offensive), didn't read Kaliman or La Familia Burron, didn't watch "El chavo del 8" or any of the novelas, thankfully. I don't like our national anthem, I'll take Huapango any time, yet there I was 18 years of age as an electoral official in my casilla in the first election citizens were selected and, most importantly, having had the option of leaving, several times, I have not.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 16, 2006 10:50 PM

Maybe I ought to change my name here to emptyskulls. I am having second thoughts about the emptyboxes thing...

Brenda: What Mexicans are you talking about? What people are you talking about? Do you call people to those pirates, prostitutes, punks, CGH Radicals, UNAM mediocre communists and other meaningless groups?

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 16, 2006 10:50 PM


If you type vicente guerrero in wikipedia.com you'll find the dates and concise information about him. He took the pesidency in a coup and was overthrown likewise the same year (1829). He was hardly a democrat.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 10:56 PM


Adding to Orellana's remarks about the Mexican indian population, they are at the bottom of the social scale. Not all are equally down but as a group they are as far back as can be in Mexico's society. This is a disgrace. Mexican society has to find a way to alleviate this.

We have a colorful woman named Xochitl Galvez in charge of Indian Affairs and recently she said that more care should be take of the poor but more than that, care should be taken of the poorest of the poor. I agree.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 11:04 PM


Finally you wrote something that makes a lot of sense. Mexicans never discuss race. However, the last thing that I would do to check your mexican history is wikipedia. Try the books published by El colegio de mexico. They are excellent!
Also, I wish you were right about ethnics do not play a role in Mexico. Unfortunately, they do. How many indians are in positions of the leadership? Is not that they do not want to work hard, they do not have any opportunities...

And Jerry B.

You did not answer the question. You went into a rant that did not have anything to do with the initial question. Not a surprise for your pathetic method of disputation. You remind me of Dr. Kingsley in his fight with Cardinal Newman (Apologia pro vita sua). If you are going to be working blogging for a candidate (Calderon could have done so much better) I would strongly recommend you to read the book.

So again

Are you mexican or not?
Have you ever read Memin Pinguin?

And by the way, it should be "Los hijos del Maiz" and not "Los hijos de Maiz".
Google "Gramatica Espanola" so you can review the use of articles to improve your spanish.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 11:06 PM

Keep dreaming Jessy... keep repeating spots like a robot... I am sure you will improve your intelligence and your Spanish in that way. NONE of the parties had representatives in all of the polls. I was an observer in my home state which is a Panista stronghold and I saw a lot of acts that were not signed by the Panista representative. So quit lying. Acts were falsified and with this partial recount we have confirmed that in many polling stations there are more votes than voters... how can you explain that Jessy? Perhaps the PRD wanted to be a victim? they like it so much right? The TRIFE has to ask for a full recount so MANY doubts are resolved. Mexico is not owned by Panistas. We all deserve to have credible and undbouted results and the only way to have this is with a full recount. Funny how Panistas have invested millions of pesos in advertising campaigns trying to prevent this.

Posted by: Brenda | August 16, 2006 11:16 PM

And Jessy... I have noticed that you have been blogging all day long... really darling follow someone's kind advice and get a job... I am sure someone will hire you to tend to their garden... also I believe Calderon said something about Mexican's wanting to be waiters... I am sure you can get a gig in some Chilis

Posted by: Brenda | August 16, 2006 11:18 PM


Are you saying that your source for Mexican history is better than mine? I will never pretend to tell you what's good for you, information-wise. That you can count on. My favorite Mexican history book is "Mexico Land of Volcanoes", its author is an American historian.

On the subject of indians, they have to hide the fact that they come from that background. Indian mothers are no longer teaching their children their ancestral language, so as not to be made fun of in non indian Mexico. It is painful to know we
Mexicans through sheer ignorance and cultural prejudice are gradually killing our ties to a millenary past we can only be proud of. Not many countries are left to have this kind of treasure to behold.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 11:33 PM


I cannot help it... your reply is hilarious!

Enjoy yourselves!

Posted by: Brenda | August 16, 2006 11:39 PM


Do you know what an election junkie is?
This blog is for loonies who love to hate politics and having done that, write as much as possible about it. Some people have a life , we have Ceci Connolly's blog to make us completely happy. We know no better.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 11:41 PM


Before you say anything about the study by the academics of the UNAM, study and find the errors in the work and I will pay attention to what you claim about the engineers in the UNAM: that they are partisans amlo supporters,etc.Perhaps the study is incomplete but to arrive to such a conclusion one needs to read it carefully by some one that knows. It seems to me that they just point out some interesting discrepancies without really pointing finger to any one.

ON the other hand,
last time I checked, Mochan, who apparently pioneered that line of study, is not an engineer. He does not even teach in engineering. Again, you need to get your facts straight.


did I mispelled Memin? I doubt it but I will check.

Regarding the UNAM, the study was carried out by an institution in China and is quoted by the Economist and accepted by institutions in Europe and the States. Why is the UNAM ranked and no other mexican institution is? Could it be the quality of the researchers? I am not quite sure. But it is remarkable that the UNAM is the only one from Mexico with that international recognition. This is a great achievement. A public university that is at the top of the rankings; Not even the US (the world superpower) matches that.

I find interesting that companies do not hire more people from the UNAM given this record...May be that could explain the lack of creativity and productivity of the mexican economy?
Mexico needs the best and the brightest and according to that study the best academic institution is the UNAM.

Respect to the Mexican Economy is really sad that they have underperformed compared to other economies (your point about the Brazil economy is a good one) like venezuela, argentina and even peru (IMF data). That is not acceptable by any stretch of the imagination.

Is Calderon going to be able to do anything about it? Well, if the policies continue, it is unlikely.

The main reason why the economy might not be as bad is because our economy (US) is doing better. Yes the oil economy does not have a big impact in the Mexican economy compared to Venezuela; however, you depend so much from our economy (and the remittances of the illegal aliens) that is ridiculous. It is incredible that Mexico has not tried to weaken this dependence. In fact, under Fox this dependence has expanded.

Respect to the election, Ariel. errors and tricks in a national process are unavoidable. A difference of less than 1%
is way too small, that is why the purported victory of Calderon is meaningless. So mexico will have a
"declared" president as opposed to an elected president.

I do not support Calderon or Lopez Obrador. I tend to think that the best for Mexico is a mix of Calderon and Lopez Obrador. One is pragmatic and the other has more carisma. That is why, it would be good if the two of them discuss the issues keeping in mind the best for Mexico.

Posted by: drgecc | August 16, 2006 11:53 PM

Have you heard a about AMLO having a secret weapon?

Apparently he wants to use it if and when the police take on his throngs:

St. AMLO's fire


Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 16, 2006 11:54 PM


you posted this at 10:02PM :

"He has the PRI and PANAL eating from his hand and the PVEM is little by little jumping into the bandwagon of Felipe too."

Is this plan "A" for total world domination by Felipe?

Posted by: rodolfo | August 16, 2006 11:55 PM

i'm almost too scared to post anything. afraid drgecc will scold me about my spanish. I mean, Spanish.

emptyboxes et al, thank you for not accusing me of posting that full text trash from the guardian. i've reformed.

but i have a request. can someone tell me where to go to get the facts on what's really happening in mexico and for world news in general?

my 2 cents: www.csmonitor.com and, don't hate me, www.truthout.org

Posted by: scott coleman | August 16, 2006 11:58 PM


Go to the library and check some of the volumes on Mexican History by El Colegio De Mexico. You won't be disappointed. Perhaps you know this but El Colegio de Mexico is the equivalent of the National Academy of Science here in the states. I doubt that an institution like el colegio would publish baloney.

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 12:08 AM

Hey, Empty,

What's your beef with "las chicas del tacón dorado"? A lot of Mexican women, due to various causes (runaways from abusive homes, abandon wives with kids, etc.), have little opportunity to do anything else that will give them enough money to live independently. Unfortunately, in almost all of Mexico the pimps and the cops take the lion's share of the earnings.

And Brenda,

Welcome to the fray, you're the 3rd female, I guess, except we'll probably need a gender x gender recount due to a dispute over maya0's status. But what's your problem with waiters? My younger brother paid his schooling by waiting in a posh restaurant-bar. He made some interesting contacts there that later helped him get a business going.

Scott, I like csmonitor myself and also I proudly admit to being an NPR junkie.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 17, 2006 12:09 AM

Scott, go to Yahoo news. Really, they have a pretty wide selection (the Guardian all the way to Fox news) or news and views.

Posted by: Jerry B | August 17, 2006 12:11 AM


if i take your idea

"You might want to check on GDP per capita"

and apply it to argentina ..gosh
the ecoonomy of argentina was a heck of a lot better than the mexican economy....

once again that is not acceptable

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 12:21 AM

drgecc "Respect to the election, Ariel. errors and tricks in a national process are unavoidable. A difference of less than 1%
is way too small, that is why the purported victory of Calderon is meaningless. So mexico will have a
"declared" president as opposed to an elected president."

But what is your point? You do not seem to be crying fraud, just that this was a close election. Almost all of us agree that this was a close election. I and several others (you?) think a runoff would be a great idea. It should have been provided for in election law, which is drawn up by congress, not the executive But, sadly, it was not. A voto por voto recount would not change anything; all the most likely stations that would have benefitted AMLO have already been recounted, and if it did, we would still have this insane small margin.

What do you propose Mexico should do to solve this problem right now? It does not matter what Fox, the IFE, congress or whoever should have done in the 1990's when IFE was created, what should be done now? Do you have any suggestions.

And, regarding UNAM, do you have any personal experience with it? How about ITESM, ITAM, UDLA, or any of the State public universities? If you worked in the private sector, would you prefer to hire someone with a degree from ITESM, where you can at least be sure he actually studied all 8 semesters, or a UNAM philosophy major, who may have lost a semester or two courtesy of the CGH, but got the degree anyway?

Posted by: Jerry B | August 17, 2006 12:23 AM


i am not that bad...


experience with the institutions? not really, I am pointing out the fact that a ranking (a chinese university did the study) quoted by "The Economist" and other institutions ranks the UNAM and no other mexican institution. A possible inference is that the others are just not goog enough to be considered in the study.

hiring based on a degree is counterproductive. A written and oral test of critical thinking and a thorough interview is way better.

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 12:42 AM


Nice holding of the fort. However, a clarification. The history books that you are talking about are "The General History of Mexico," a multi-volume work originally coordinated by Don Daniel Cossio Villegas (who, in my opinion, would have dissapproved of some of the "intellectual" antics of his disciple, Enrique Krauze). But it is "El Colegio Nacional" the Mexican institution somehow akin The National Academy of Sciences, although it includes some non-scientists, like philosophers and writers too. The institution publishing "La Historia" (and its condensed version, "Historia Minima de Mexico," translated into English) is "El Colegio de Mexico," originally founded as "La Casa de España en Mexico" by Spanish intellectuals escaping Franco's regime. However, some of the many reactionary posters in this blog would dismiss off hand this wonderful work, because it includes a contribution by no other than Carlos Monsivais, who has committed the mortal "naco" sin of supporting AMLO.

By the way, I hate speculation, but today's Post editorial looks too "Mexican" to me... Does anybody else notices some loose beard hairs on it?

And hereby I declare that an important part of my early reading was the adventures (and missadventures) of Dona Eufrosina's son, and Carlangas, Ernestillo, Ricardo y hasta Trifon Godinez...

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 12:47 AM

I think the Washington Post is the real sore loser in this scenario.

The Washington Post has maintained a biased and partial editorial line against Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. It hasn't hesitated in accusing him of being "messianic", "wild", a "populist" , "Stalin-like" and repeatedly a "sore loser". But who is really the sore loser? From a marketing perspective, the AMLO brand is a strong brand, to put it bluntly, the AMLO brand sells. On the other hand the Calderon brand, lacks luster and attractiveness. The short little technocrat, bald and with glasses, with the silly Harvard one-year-degree and conservative cristero background, is simply not marketable.

The New York Times was pretty clear from the start on its position regarding the post-electoral crisis: it supported a recount to give credibility to a close election that was doubted by millions of Mexicans of being fair.

This put the Calderon camp in alert and they started to lobby NYT competing newspapers to promote their position. The sore loser, the Washington Post, ended up having to sell the lackluster product and it quickly followed Calderon's negative campaign lines against Lopez Obrador: he is a danger to Mexico, he should concede, he is wild, no one likes him, he will end up alone.

I bet it was a hard pill for the Post to take when AMLO decided to publish an op-ed in the New York Times. The Post responded with a vengeance, it would continue its smear campaign to extend Calderon's negative campaign to US soil, thus preventing Americans from making an informed decision on whether their country should support the full recount that 72% of Mexicans were demanding (Parametria).

The sore loser in this story is the Washington Post and its reporters. They ended up with the bad product and they sure don't like it. They have turned to an aggressive smear campaign against Lopez Obrador to keep on selling papers. Because AMLO, even bad mouthing AMLO, sells- while mediocre little Calderon is meant to remain on the shelves.

Posted by: Brenda | August 17, 2006 12:56 AM


I just went to the section of the library to look at the volumes. you are absolutely right. Thanks for the correction.


can you please provide a sound quantitative argument to disregard the work by the researchers of the unam?

do you even know by any chance what analysis of variance is?
Please stop commenting about things that you apparently have little or no clue.

BTW emptyskulls seems to suit you better

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 12:57 AM


To hold the UNAM, I have to point out again, that the study, if I recall correctly only included public universities. I'm not trying to demean our own university, but at the same time I have to question a straight comparison by a university where the whole country pays for everything versus private universities that have to get their own resources. I also cannot agree that creativity is missing in Mexican companies, this would be a very, very long topic so I'll leave it at that.

As to our economy, let me put it this way: in Uruguay, Tata, the huge Indian conglomerate recently created a software factory and it needed Java programmers. This one center managed to hire basically every single programmer available in Uruguay. That same company has installed another software company in Monterrey and available programmers are still easy to find. Given this rather simplistic example, wouldn't you agree that growth percentage points are much more easy to come by in a smaller economy? I haven't taken the time to look at per capita output for all these countries, but I'd be willing to bet that our output growth would be on par with that of those other countries you mention, except Chile.

On Memin Pinguin at one point you wrote Penguin, it is not important, but if you're going to be hard on someone for those mistakes...

Finally, I do not know why you're telling me about the <1% difference, it was not something I've said in the flow of our conversation. However, I will come back by turning the figures around, mentioning that, from the point of view of the Coalicion, they've failed to prove fraud in 91% of the stations according to the rulings issued. From what limited and biased reports we have, an additional 2.25% of the total have been completely clean AND without mistakes (that is about a fourth of the ones involved in the recount) . If I were a betting man, I would put my money on an additional 2.25 percentage points being accounted by small mistakes, which will thankfully be corrected. This would mean 96 percent of the stations being deemed fair by the judicial system. Can we justify a complete recount based on THIS figure, even with those remaining stations, which can turn the election,? Having said this I'll support whatever the tribunal decides, even a complete recount and I even support those initiaves made by several news media, but first heard by me from Proceso, of a civilian recount, even if it has no legal bearing.

Finally, as I'm feeling a little lazy tonight in regards to looking up figures, could you post those GDP per capita growth figures? I wasn't being sarcastic, BTW, I was just suggesting ways to look at the data. I still think that we're looking at reference numbers that make small absolute gains look much bigger in smaller economies.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 01:04 AM

Sorry about the poor grammar and missing word, my first paragraph should have read "To hold he UNAM above all other Mexican universities is unfair on several fronts, I have to point out again... etc"

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 01:13 AM

Ariel Orellana:

There are some statements in your recent post that are incomprehensible to me:

a) What were you trying to show with your statement about the superior availability of programers in Monterrey than in Uruguay?

b) You keep talking about GDP per capita; I believe that you are refering to per capita income, which results from dividing the GDP by the number of inhabitants. You probably realize that those figures can be very missleading: the per capita income of Carlos Slim is the same than the per capita income of a huichol indian... So? What is your point?

c) What do you mean when you say that the Coalition failed to prove fraud in 91% of polling stations? I have not read the full challenge document, neither the court opinion, but I believe that what the court said was that no protest documents were available for all challenged polling stations; even so, the court ordered a recount of 9% of the polling stations. In a previous post you said that allegation of fraud is not equivalent to fraud; I agree, but... Is not the recount the procedure through which fraud (let's better call this "irregularities") is proved? How do you establish certainty in the tallies if more ballots than voters were present in a polling station? Or less ballots than voters? When a "small" error becomes a critical error? Once again, you are concentrating in numbers, not in irregularities. You have not even mentioned the possibility of annulment of results of some polling stations. Why?

d) What do you mean by the civilian recount not having "legal bearing"? It certainly doesn't have the power of the law, but it's a legal procedure that can shed light on the results, assuming that the court doesn't order a total recount (very unlikely in my mind, unfortunately).

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 02:22 AM

Haven´t put my two pence in for a while (gosh, not cents, does that give me away?)

Jerry B, I´ll forgive you for the comments on European women, mainly because I don´t consider Great Britain part of Europe.... but if you´re ever in Rome, I could let you kn.....oops

Some of the commentators here are shortly going to start down the "you´re a fascist.." route, so beloved of my fellow students when I was a child! Leave it out please, I would much rather read either facts, or informed opinion not directly ripped out of another newspaper.

And all this comparison of only the last 6 years under Fox with Venezuela, Argentina etc. I believe that if Mexico gets it right, and it will involve a little pain, it will become a stable growing economy for the foreseable future. It is not entirely dependent on oil (or remittences from USA, by the way), and can diversify far more than just "tourism is the next market". It will not happen overnight though. No more boom and bust, as a certain GB MP likes to say.

I just worked out how my father in law did so well. He must have put most of that money he earned into dollars during the inflation period between 10 and 25 years ago.

On racism, especially towards the indians, I only know the Tarahumara (or to be more correct, Rarumari) up here in Chihuahuas Sierra Madre (if you´ve never been there, go. Go tommorow, the Copper Canyon is five times longer, and one and a half times as deep as the Grand Canyon of the Colorado). These people are trying to combine their traditional ways with the incursion of modern world changes. They need support financially.

Futher point on rascism: Because I look like a "gringo" I suffer my own sort of racism here. If my wife is not with me, I get ripped off by every taxi driver, corner shop, and restaurant I go to. The attitude is obviously "even a poor gringo can afford to be ripped off". I just found out I could have rented the same house opposite mine for half the price, had I looked "Mexican" whatever that may mean. All countries have their prejudices, and some are more two faced than others.

And one other thing, if people are going to paste essays from Spanish newspapers etc in here, could they at least try to explain the "gist" of whats being said in English. I believe this is an English newspaper and comment site....

It´s taken since the election night to now for me to finally work out how to get my totally legal version of Starfleet Commander III to work on this machine, so I´m off to play Calderone Picard Vs AMLO Borg. Hope I can stop the assimilation!

Posted by: PeterN | August 17, 2006 02:34 AM

pasilla, your questions are incomprehensible to me too! Nah... just kidding, I know you relish your role, you don't really need this explanation, but I'll indulge you.

A) What do you think the impact on the GDP of Uruguay will be for the one center vs the impact of the same center in Mexico? Come now, you don't really need to answer, I know you know.

B) Probably the same as yours, but I'll play along: those statistics are misleading. Like I showed with the growth stats for Venezuela in previous posts, growth of 10% of 100 dollars is not the same as 10% of 1 million dollars. If you factor in population, a rather important figure as long as we're being extra obvious, then GDP per capita (I know you know its the same thing as income per capita, you just love being difficult, but I'll post links: https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/mx.html#Econ and http://www.latinbusinesschronicle.com/statistics/gdp/percapita.htm
you will want to look for the phrase "GDP Per Capita", you might be able to see it there.) then you'll find that Mexico is still tops in LA. Is the GDP, even per capita, the same in Mexico City the same as, say, Nayarit? Of course not, but we're measuring countries. Is the income of Bill Gates the same of an Alabama 7-eleven store clerk? A banker in Sao Paulo vs an amazon indian? I can play too...

C) Now, let me see... I though voto x voto, casilla por casilla meant 100% of the stations because the whole election is suspect, am I wrong? In the Mexico City district 15 challenge, that claim was made, it was immediately struck down, this basically translates into "you have absolutely no evidence to claim fraud in over 50% of the stations, thus no full recount". Furthermore, in the remaining stations, the rulings came down that the Coalicion again could not show any evidence that indicates the need for a recount. So we end up with a 91% failure rate for their legal challenges, measured in stations. And nope, I don't agree with the term "irregularities" because it is not the language that the Coalicion is using, they're claiming evidence of fraud is rampant. Fine then, they've failed to produce evidence of fraud in 91% of the stations. You and I might agree on the term but we'd be alone. BTW, the hardening of the PRD rhetoric is looking like a mistake when it comes to public perception: when manipulation of facts was centered around reasonable doubt, they sounded reasonable, now they just sound like the kid who can't have the desired toy and throws a tantrum. As to certainty, this is precisely what the magistrates were aiming at with this partial recount, would you not agree? Or does the PRD also doubt all those stations that it won handily too? AMLO has already stated, in essence, that nothing but his victory will provide certainty, at best he'll give up the fight (riiiiiight) if the hostage agrees to a full recount. Finally, I didn't outright mention anullment, but if I say that those 4% of stations can turn the election, what does that imply? I mean, you're smart, you don't need the picture, do you?

D) Doesn't have leagal bearing on who'll be named president elect, specific enough for this game? A civic recount would not change the legal ruling by the court and would thus not change the result, thence the phrase "no legal bearing".

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 03:06 AM

Ariel Orellana:

Apparently you might have looked at a very different study or your are recalling a different one. The one study I mentioned has stanford and harvard among the top universities. I also see MIT, Columbia, Caltech, Chicago University and Yale university. Probably you know that these very good schools are private schools and they are here. Also, some of the japanese universities in the study are also private.

Although gdp per capita (if i understand what you are proposing: growth of annual gdp by annual population) may sound like a good idea, it will make countries like belize or uruguay to look good. I do not have the time to go through this exercise but I found interesting things for a few countries (based on data from the department of energy up to 2004)

honduras 1.015
switzerland 1.022
japan 1.055
sweden 1.129
mexico 1.178
guatemala 1.202
uk 1.203
usa 1.219
uruguay 1.25
spain 1.26
el salvador 1.310
belize 1.445
dominican republic 1.49
vietnam 1.767
china 2.37

By this measure, the centroamerican countries seem to be in a better shape than mexico. And mexico is better than japan and sweden. Interesting way of looking at things but not that useful..(i think)

It is good that Tata is setting up a software venture in Mexico. Unfortunately, it does not appear so promising. Hiring java programmers sounds like Tata wants code monkeys (java is computer science 101 and data structures is the next level). Are they hiring project managers or software architects? Positions of that sort require code design and other higher level skills. It is probably a software fab that can be closed down pretty quickly if labor is cheaper somewhere else. At least it is a start.


I like the comments about a stable economy for the forseeable future. However, you know that it is going to take more than a little pain. And, unfortunately, I am convinced that it can go either way since mexico depends sooo much from the us economy. It is hard for me to believe that a country like Mexico cannot do better (underperform in many areas, energy is one)

May be you should play final fantasy, it used to be really easy to install on suse (before novell bought suse) Linux..There is one thing about the Borg that never understood...were they a race modeled after the china of Mao? if amlo is like the borg, I think that calderon is more like Quark, the ferengi bar tender from deep space nine...
Carry on number one......Picard? yeah right.

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 04:09 AM

Ariel Orellana:

In that study of the top universities (and here is the link

there is only one usa public university in the top 10: UC Berkeley (GO BEARS!) and most of the others are private which contradicts to some extent your statement that

"I have to question a straight comparison by a university where the whole country pays for everything versus private universities that have to get their own resources."

Well, it does happen that private schools can compete with public universities.

Also, the growth in the GDP per capita is per year. Apparently Dominican Republic is way better than Mexico (could it be all those baseball players?) Argentina?
I think that Argentina also beats mexico because of the small population. I think that it is somewhat obvious. However, can you do this exercise? Find the growth of gdp per capita for argentina.

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 04:42 AM


Looking at the challenges of the Coalicion and deciding which one is legal or not and how the final result changes based on the tribunal's decisions is NOT AN EQUIVALENT problem to figuring out what to do about a result <1% , which could be larger than the total error in the whole electoral process. In principle, you should find in advance an error estimate for your experiment and then if the result is within the error, then you have no choice but to design a new experiment. All these decisions of the tribunal system are, at the end, an exercise in futility. The challenges can be illegal or legal, but the original problem still remains: How do you guarantee that the process is reliable enough to produce a result that every one can trust?. The tribunal should hire a group of statisticians, get enough RANDOM samples of the different districts (not just the ones being challenged), go through all the samples in detail. Compare the samples and find the error in the whole experiment (election). If the error is larger than 1%, you name a temporary president (Fox has not been very effective but he looks like a honest man) and run another election among the top candidates
after fixing the flaws of this election. It will cost money and time but you avoid all the lawyers and politicians, save many trees and ink. And the final result will be much more trusted by all sides. Mathematics when done right is blind and reliable. All this discussion of what is legal or illegal should be a discussion of what is the next step based on the problem at hand. And that has not happened yet by any of the two sides.

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 05:56 AM


Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 07:11 AM

drgecc: I don't know if it is too much to ask you to post the GDP of Sierra Leone and the Democratic Public of Congo?

UNAM is our National University but it has turned into a house of radicals. To compare it with Berkeley or other USA Universities is simply ridiculous. How many Nobel Prizes have come out of UNAM?
Most universities in USA like Stanford, Berkely, Harvard, Texas A&M, and others produce nobel prize winners and worldwide renown investigators, many graduates alse excel in athletism and have won many medals in olimpic games.
I don't see them participating in politics too much. I have never heard of radical communist organizations spreading their hatred there.

Sad fact is that UNAM produces much of the Anti-Americanism and Anti-Semitism present in the left and population of Mexico today, specially in DF and south.
Most of these leftist journalists, analysts ,writers and think tanks who support AMLO come from UNAM.
Just walk into this institution and the first thing you will see will be the communist symbols hanging on the wall, stupid pictures of Che guevara and other cocaine stuff from the 60's.
UNAM also hosts La Jornada, a radical stalinist and communist newspaper that spreads hatred towards America and Israel alike.
Try to find an article there about Fidel Castro and all the articles you will find ,absolutely all of them, will talk about Castro in a most positive light, his virtues, his revolution, the victim of an embargo, bla, bla, but not one single article will criticize or even mention the fact that he has been in power more than any other dictator in the history of the world.
La Jornada, Proceso and other newspapers and magazines published by entire generations of grauated and brainwashed people from UNAM are producing more anti-americanism and anti=semitism in our population.
Walk into any restaurant or street in Mexico city and ask anybody there how they feel about the palestinian israel conflict or about the september 11 terrorist attack.
The sad fact is that putrefact institutions like UNAM that are suppose to educate are spreading hatred in their students, radical professors there brain wash the students everyday.
Once when I was in ITESM we had a visit from a group of UNAM students, we were showing them the Campus and facilities. Their comments were all about Mexico's classes, about the labor classes, about the rich and the poor, about socialism. Even though they were suppose to be Engineering students, only a couple of them really managed to talk engineering stuff with us.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 07:18 AM


You got that right. UNAM and other public universities are hotbeds of "My way or the highway" radicals. Lopez started his "Our Mexico Project" there. That is fine and dandy undergraduate bombast. In the real world you have to have Bejarano-style thugs as your allies.

The Zocalo takeover is a typical CGH stunt. Having said that, most students try to get a degree and then labor productively
in society. They couldn't care less about
ideologues, left or right.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 09:18 AM

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 09:52 AM

Typical non-answer from emptyboxes. He doesn't know what it's being talked about, therefore he comes up with his irrelevant and stale rethoric. Nothing new here. Just a minute piece of information. Nobel awardees from the UNAM. It depends on how you count. But they can be three or four... I leave it to you for homework, if you care for the facts; but I'm almost convinced that you don't. Can you explain to me what "hosting" La Jornada means? What is that baloney that US universities don't participate in politics? You love doing useless searches using La Jornada search engine, don't you? In a previous post emptyboxes confessed that he has been in Mexico City a few times in his lifetime, but he pontificates about it and its inhabitants as if he were born and still lived there. This is the stature of his speech. Anyway. I'm wasting my time.

Ariel Orellana:

A little bit clearer; but that thing in "A" about "centers" (?) is still a mystery to me. Never mind.

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 10:52 AM


To think you told Jerry that he typed way too quickly, looks like you manage the same thing! :-)

Universities: yes, private universities compete with UNAM, like I mentioned, graduates of other Mexican universities are hired more readily than an UNAM one. Sad situation unfortunately. But again, most of (if not all) UNAM's budget is paid for by Mexican taxpayers. Let me put it this way, if the US funded a National Autonomus University of the USA and gave it the same proportion of GDP in budget as Mexico does, wouldn't it be reasonable to expect the best university in the country, never mind, the world?

As for economies, then I think we are arriving at a concensus. If we're going to compare economic growth, lets start by grouping countries by population size (this should not be the only factor to group by, obviously) since you agree that small economies will outperform large ones when they achieve even the tiniest absolute gain (when compared to absolute gains from a large economy). I say its fair to compare against Brazil, but not against Venezuela, would you agree? BTW, I wasn't celebrating Tata opening a software factory in Mexico, it just served as a convenient comparison point between Uruguay and Mexico.

As to your proposal of the statistic study of our election, while I agree with most of what you say, we have, unfortunately for the Coalicion, put the decision in the hands of the TEPJF and it has ruled that that is not possible. You (and the Coalicion) propose something that has been ruled either not justified by evidence or outside the rules. Should we dismiss those rules (laws) because of doubt? Why just those rules? Why stop there? Finally, I agree that rules need to change, but not while we're in the middle of the process, that is something to be addressed by the next legislature.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 11:15 AM

Rodolfo: I don't want the UNAM to be all these sad things I say. And of course I apology to those who studied there and today work and contribute to our society.
But the irresponsible leaders of that institution starting with Juan Manuel de la Fuente who has identified and militates strongly in the most radical Mexican left. and who is suppose to be a leader and the UNAM is suppose to be a universe of ideas, representative of the plurality of our country. Radio UNAM dedicates time to promote, sometimes openly sometimes not so openly, the agenda of the PRD and the left in general. Their workshops and forums are full of leftists and radical communists, and all of these with our taxes. I guess that's what hurts most, the fact that they do all these stupid things and with our taxes.
How come more than a third of the people who voted last July 2 did so for PAN, yet no candidate or representative of the PAN would ever dare to offer a conference in any of the faculties of the UNAM without the risk of being insulted, vituperated, attacked, blocked and else by the violent groups housed there? Why, we pay taxes and support this institution too.
That is why I and many people in the PAN take issue with UNAM and we will continue doing so until those bastard radicals get out of this beloved institution.
Their latest investigation of the Alledged manipulations of the PREP is nothing but a slap on the face of the people who partcipated in the elections.
They forget, in their plea for certainty in the electoral process, that certainty is a two way street, there must be certainty in the process, but there must also be certainty in any allegations of fraud in the process. When all these allegations come from the political party and its acolytes because they lost the election, the UNAM should take a non partisan stance.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 11:20 AM

Pasilla: UNAM hosts La Jornada, easy, just click on this link.


We pay for the hosting and the bandwith of La Jornada with our taxes. Or is the UNAM in the Web Hosting business too?

But this is perfectly natural, what can you expect from these Free-Lunch-Ideology People.

Here is a link I found on Nobel Prizes and their universities

There are only three for the UNAM.

Some Universities in USA do participate in the political debate and house left political analysts, but they do not do that in a militant spirit as the UNAM. And they do it with their own money! And they are non-partisans for the most part, although Berkely really stinks from the french socialism so popular there.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 11:42 AM

To all the respectable Free-Samdwich Idelogy in this forums:

Let us stay focus on the topic of these article by Ceci.

The PREP is over. Nobody gives a damn thing about it or the nuts and bolts of how it works anymore. The result was the important thing and in the results of the PREP Felipe Calderon won. Period. Next thing please.

The District Counting of the Actas is over too. Nobody gives a damn about it anymore. What is important is the results, and in the results of the Distric Counting Felipe Calderon won again. Period. Next thing please.

The Impugnation of the Vote by Vote thingy is over and the TRIFE send the PRD to cook Rabanos and only authorized 11 thousand casillas. Period.

There was a recount of the 11 thousand casillas. PAN lost 0.000000000004 % of their votes and PRD won 0.00000000000002 % of the votes. Felipe Calderon remains the winner. Period. Next Thing.

The rest of the 800 papers from the Impugnation file as good bathroom tissue. The quality of the paper is not as good but it will help the country recover a little of the money invested in the campaigns.

What´s next?

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 12:31 PM


For the first time, I think, you post something that deserves a detailed reply.

a) Minor thing, the name is Juan Ramon de la Fuente (not Juan Manuel); I would let UNAM students or alumni address your perceptions; however, it's funny that you suggest that PAN politicians may receive the same love treatment than Echeverria did when he dared to visit the main UNAM campus... I'm just comparing and contrasting; for once I agree with you, that ideas should be freely expressed anywhere. But hate beggets hate, unfortunately.

b) You probably don't recall, but when I started reading La Jornada on line, they had a mirror in Swarthmore College's server... Is that a "mediocre, stalinist, anti-american, anti-semite" institution too? Are you 100% sure that La Jornada doesn't pay UNAM for the use of the server? I'm not. When one accusses, one has to be sure of the facts. By the way, I'm glad that you checked the facts about Nobel prizes and UNAM; hopefully you will remember them before you claim ever again that UNAM has not produced any Nobel prize winners (as if "The Prize" were absolute proof of human divinity; among the Nobel prize winners in the sciences that I know one was a sadist, one a child molester, one or two dropped acid; good scientists, though).

c) I'm not sure what "militant spirit means;" and I'm not certain whose money you are talking about: University's money, activist professor's/student's money? Universities sponsor political events all the time, as they should. As far as I know, there is no policy preventing PAN members to study, teach or speak in UNAM. Funny. Do you recall that PAN founder once had... Juan Ramon de la Fuente's job?

d) No political activism in US university campus, and you chose to mention UC Berkeley? Joking, right?

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 12:48 PM

What I said before: I don't claim any psychiatry/psychology credentials, but I like to call emptyboxes behavior "bipolar" (if he feels free to write all sort of wild statements, why not give myself that chance for once?)

I guess people like himself doesn't feel that they have to substantiate any allegations or contentions. The truth comes to them from god, and that's enough. I need some time off. I'll take it.

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 12:53 PM

Rodolfo and emptyboxes(skull) :

Have you lost your mind? US universities do participate in the political process. Let us not go further and pick the best public institution in the world (UC Berkeley, GO BEARS!). Perhaps you remember that the national guard gas the students in the 60's. And the Vietnam protests in ohio, Kansas university,etc... Even Stanford with students paying 20K tuition (more at this point) have the bad (good) habit of complaining to the administration and to the city of Palo Alto about many things. Do you know that students of Stanford were the ones that pressure Stanford governors and then California to divest from southafrica during the apartheid area (was that wrong?). And respect to Texas A&M, it is still a minor university here in the states. If you look at the ranking, you will realize that is pretty low. Texas Austin is better. Respect to nobel prize winners...Caltech or the University of Chicago have produced many more nobel laureates than any of the Universitites that you mention. Most of the nobel prize winners of Stanford, Harvard,etc. got their degrees somewhere else. And UCLA, which is in the top 20, is the school with the best tradition in sports (Stanford comes a close second)...ask J Wooden (GO BRUINS!)
You people have no clue...

Respect to the comment
"Their latest investigation of the Alleged manipulations of the PREP is nothing but a slap on the face of the people who partcipated in the elections."

When you get interested in problems, you loose ideology and do the research for the sake of it. This statement above [...slap in the face..] is a typical sound bite that sounds good but it is just ideology and gross innuendo. Would not be great that Mexican researchers would actually discover something interesting out of this work? Think about the international recognition for Mexico, the institution. This is a win/win situation for Mexico. Do you actually prefer that "foreigners" carry out the discovery? Instead of criticizing those "bastard radicals" as you call them, encourage them. Just because you do not agree with their political ideas, that does not mean that you do not want them to succeed...do you? Or does your hate for all that comes from the UNAM (a beloved institution as you said) has made you blind to the obvious? Have you gone nuts? Once again,are you MEXICAN or just an ideologue paid by the calderon campaign?

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 02:05 PM

For all the people who love bashing the UNAM, have some news for you: in the last list of best of universities all over the world the ONLY university from Latinoamerica on that list it was UNAM. This was published back around Februry 2006.

Yep, no ITESM, no ITAM, no Ibero, no other of those ELITE universities made that list.

I get tired of these KNOW ALL who dare to make such comments without having a class over there in their lifetime. I'm a graduate from there (Facultad de Ingenieria) and I'm proud to be able to work in the US and be able to compete with all those engineers coming from very expensive US colleges/universities.

Some of the most talented people I've worked over the last 15 years many of them are from UNAM. No matter how hard you and your KIND try to put a bad name on students/graduates from that great university (which represents a lifetime opportunity for many mexicans), you'll keep failing. That's the way it was 20 years ago when I was there and all the outside loosers trying to make it difficult for the rest of us. I bet you any day that many of those great teachers you have at your expensive colleges are UNAM graduates.

I'm tired of all your stupid posts by know. So farewell to you. Pasilla, I'd suggest stop wasting your time with these people.

Si al VOTO x VOTO, toda esta eleccion presidencial fue un FRAUDE. Bola de mochos hipocritas!

Posted by: Get Real | August 17, 2006 02:11 PM

Rodolfo, Emptyboxes:

The comment about the budget and funding is not well thought-out, no surprise there coming from you.
Let us use California (one of the top ten economies of the world)

The budget of the University of California is about 3 billion dollars per year. That is approximately 15000 dollars per student (approx 200K college students at the UC's). Is the budget of the UNAM comparable? I think that before you write anything, you need to check some figures. My understanding is that the budget of the unam is about 18000 million pesos (I google that) and now assuming that the number of students in the UNAM is about 300000 students, I come up with 60000 pesos for student (did not include "bachillerato" students, what is that?) which is about 5600 dollars...(nice rounded number) Conclusion, California happens to spend approximately 2.7 times as much per student than the UNAM. No wonder why UC Berkeley and UCLA and UCSD are international recognized institutions. Yes, there is room for improvement, but that you can be internationally ranked even though you are spending approx 3 times less per student than the 6th-7th economy of the world (California) is an important achievement and any Mexican should be proud of it. Of course there is room for improvement in cost effectiveness and other areas. But it is not that bad at all. Or do you hate the school (unam) and you love your ideology so much that you do not see how great is for Mexico?

A side note:
If the environment of an institution (let us take Berkeley) help to generate that much quality work. Are you going to try to fix the environment to suit your political needs? That would be a disservice to the taxpayers, don't you think. Or perhaps you do not really think after all, your ideology appears to have shortsighted you.

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 02:23 PM

it is becoming more and more taxing and frustating to hear lopez obrador's circular diatribe. he accepted the rules of the game and yet when he loses he screams fraud. he is not protecting the democratic principles (and resources) this country deserves...and seems very much a traitor to the nation as the weeks go by...

Posted by: nicanor | August 17, 2006 02:57 PM


We all miss MayaO, so I dragged this jewel for your perusal although you may have already seen it. I say VIVA MayaO!!! I envy and applaud this author. I might even start liking Lopez because of MayaO.

"With Francisco Madero, democracy was born, and with him it died, for over 70 years it laid dead. Puro dedazo. With Fox, like a phoenix, democracy reflourished. But in its infancy, democracy had been hijacked by FOX, the PAN, and of course FECAL.
U ppl complain about the secuestro de la Reforma, just one street, no matter how busy it is, its just a street. But what about the secuestro de la Democracia Mexicana! I think that true democracy is much more important than just some avenue. But it shows where their prioritys are. Dont mess with my hotel shopping, who cares if democracy is sitting blindfolded, with a bag over her head, i wanna shop.
True Mexicans will not stand idle, and will act against this treason, and all those who wish to see democracy die. ¡AMLO, by any means necesary!
¡Solucion O Revolucion!" [sic.]

About your aug.17 2:34 AM entry, you are entirely right. All societies have a bias, including Mexico. I lived for a year in a Mexican small coastal village and I was always treated like a gringo because of my skin. This place was so isolated that they could not believe I was Mexican like them. To them I was a "extranjero" or foreigner. This went on for a full year, although the locals I made friends with treated me like an equal and those friendships were real. I discovered a Mexico I never knew existed and probably I was equally surprising to them. If all, left and right, got together and realized we can actually make things work there would be no need for all this post-election clowning and we'd get busy solving Mexico's many difficult problems.

Today I live near Mexico City but far away enough to feel in a small town. To my horror I realized a few months ago I am in a silent class war with my neighbors just because of the way I look. I look the way I look, ergo I must be a rich white boy.



Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 03:02 PM

ariel arellana:

Coming to a consensus... yeah right! I do not think so. First, your original proposal of gdp per capita growth turn out to be nonsense for many purposes. It only showed (by that measure) that centroamerican countries are doing better than Mexico (good for them!) and that Mexico looks good when compared to Japan and Sweden (would not that be wonderful!) which is nonsense to say the least. Second, your original statement about private universities not being able to compete with public universities was, oh surprise, rubbish! Harvard is private and is (for now) ahead of UC Berkeley. And finally, your proposal of looking at just challenged districts is NOT AT ALL EQUIVALENT to finding a true measure of the error involved in the electoral process. Now (as a bad politician) you are trying to say that you did not quite make those statements., typical Dr. Kingsley method of disputation (from apologia pro vita sua, cardinal Newman) Perhaps you need to go back to the UNAM to get another degree so you can improve your critical thinking skills. BTW, I went to the bookstore (semester is about to start)to get a reference in statistics
Mathematical Statistiscs by John Rice (Thompson/cole)
For rethoric, try to get Classical Rethoric by Edward Corbett (oxford univ press)

A review does not hurt any one and you definitely need one.

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 03:19 PM

Get Real,



Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 03:26 PM

ariel arellana:

(I apologize to empty boxes and Rodolfo because the posting below was intended for Ariel.you found the reading interesting and informative)

your comment about the budget and funding of the unam is not quite valid...(AGAIN??).

let us use California (one of the top economies of the world). many people consider california a part of mexico,whatever.

The budget of the University of California is about 3 billion dollars per year. That is approximately 15000 dollars per student (about 200K college students at the UC's). Is the budget of the UNAM comparable? I think that before you write anything, you need to check some figures. My understanding is that the budget of the unam is about 18000 million pesos (I google that) and now assuming that the number of students in the UNAM is about 300000 students, I come up with 60000 pesos for student (did not include "bachillerato" students, what is that?) which is about 5500 dollars...Conclusion, California happens to spend approximately three times as much per student than the UNAM. No wonder why UC Berkeley and UCLA and UCSD are international recognized institutions. Yes, there must be room for improvement, but that you can be internationally ranked even though you are spending 3 times less per student than the 6th-7th economy of the world (California) is an important achievement and any Mexican should be proud of it. Of course there is room for improvement in cost effectiveness and other areas. But it is not that bad. Or do you hate the school (unam) and you love your ideology so much that you do not see how great is for Mexico?

A side note:
A possible inference of these rough numbers is that if you are paying, say, 10000 dollars of tuition per year at a private institution in mexico, you are probably getting a bad deal as far as international recognition. Why would you pay more than what the unam appears to be spending per student to get a degree from a place that is not even known outside of Mexico (according to the study above)?

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 03:47 PM

Goodie!... international observers support a full recount... and yet Fox lies to the New York Times and says international observers "saw nothing"... oops I think he meant Aznar's apprentice Jose Ignacio Salafranca from the Franco party in Spain... or The Washington Post... they also think this was a democratic fiesta with no ugly details to expose... only wild accusations that should be quieted down for the sake of US interests in Mexico... and so men in ties aren't late for their appointments, all in Reforma street,


Global Exchange has a long history of organizing elections observations in more than a dozen countries since 1994. In the last twelve years we have organized ten observations of Mexican presidential, mid-term, state and municipal elections. All of our observation efforts in Mexico are carried out in a spirit of democratic solidarity and with the humble understanding that we are guests of the Mexican people who are the final arbiters of their sovereignty and national life.
During the 2006 presidential election cycle, we sent two delegations of international observers to Mexico -- for a pre-election delegation from June 3-11 (see sidebar to download our report on the pre-electoral conditions in Mexico) and again from June 26 to July 5. The second observer delegation visited areas considered to be at risk for voting irregularities in the states of Mexico, Oaxaca and San Luis Potosí.

Mexico's presidential election on July 2nd was a very tight contest between Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador and Felipe Calderón. According to The Federal Electoral Institute's (IFE) tally, Mr. Calderón has a lead of 243, 934 votes (0.58 per cent of the total cast) over Mr. Obrador.

Because of the close result and the multiple inconsistencies alleged by political parties, domestic observers, and the public, we think it necessary to take the unusual step of opening the ballot boxes and recounting the votes. A publically supervised count can help to calm the uncertainties and concerns that have arisen since July 2.

We believe a public recount is in the interest of all parties in Mexico. No matter which candidate emerges as the benificiary of a recount, Mexico will benefit in terms of greater certainty about the election result and the stature of its next leader.

For now, the work of the IFE is complete and decisions about certifying the count are in the hands of the Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación (TRIFE). The TRIFE, whose decisions can overrule the IFE, is empowered to review and clarify the election as it sees fit and has until the 6th of September to do so.

We encourage the TRIFE to engage in a thorough and deliberate review of the legal challenges that have been raised regarding the election. This review should include a recount of all ballots nationwide.

Posted by: Brenda | August 17, 2006 04:10 PM

Rodolfo and emptyskull:

I see that you have found the reading of the postings interesting, informative and enjoyable. Who would have thought that you could learn something here? Cardinal Newman was a protestant minister from oxford (forgot the college..oberlin?) for
30 years. Dr. Kingsley was a protestant minister all his life I think. Fantastic reading. It beats anything you find in wikipedia...you actually need to think

To understand where i am coming from read
People of Plenty by David Potter

Unfortunately, semester is about to start and i am way behind in my work. You will have to find someone else to help you learn. Here you have a posting regarding private universities in mexico that perhaps you did not read. Take a look

A side note:
A possible inference of these rough numbers is that if you are paying, say, 10000 dollars of tuition at a private institution in mexico, you are probably getting a bad deal as far as international recognition. Why would you pay more than what the unam appears to be spending per student to get a degree from a place that is not even known outside of Mexico (according to the mentioned study)?


Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 04:16 PM

AMLO a traitor? Darling you have been spending too much time reading Panista SPAM mails and watching Televisa.

Fox is the traitor. He is responsible for all that is happening right now. Might I remind you it all started with his failed effort to impose his wife as the next President? Now he is desperately trying to impose Calderon by any means even if that means betraying popular will and resorting to reppresion. Fox is the traitor a traitor to all of us who voted for him and believed his campaign promises. He kept none and he betrayed democracy.

Posted by: Brenda | August 17, 2006 04:25 PM


I sincerely have no clue what you are talking about. I do have a question for you: Is an all knowing lecturing humorless
pedant any different from an ignorant fool?

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 04:52 PM


Thank you for the posting. aZNAR? Tempting but I am not going to get started with Aznar.Work has piled up!

Posted by: drgecc | August 17, 2006 04:57 PM

rODOlfo (i could not resist):

some people (my students) have called worst than an arrogant know-it all. That is ok. That leaves you as the ignorant fool. That is the difference!!

tschuss (truly this time)

Posted by: | August 17, 2006 05:08 PM


Cardinal Newman was at Oriel College Oxford. I was married in the chapel he was chaplain of in Oriel, and used to listen to my music in the study where he and assorted others first discussed the Oxford Movement.

Posted by: PeterN | August 17, 2006 05:16 PM


Your amigos up at globalexchange haven't heard of due process?

They have joined the ranks of the naive by ignoring Mexican Electoral Law. The election is all in the hands of the TEPJF.
Has been since IFE announced the results of the vote count. The rest is nervous chatter among interested parties. Until the Gang of Seven reach their verdict
this baby still has no name. If they name it Felipe or Andre Manue, is of no import to them, the certified baby gets all the marbles.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 05:27 PM

How easy is to get a rise of conservative wackos! Any opinion contrary to your emotions and you start with the Castro, Chavez song... how predictable.

Keep dreaming, I have EVERY RIGHT as a citizen to question my country's institutions including the Tribunal. Mexico certainly does not have a tradition of judicial impartiality. More so, people think that judges are sell outs.

Posted by: Brenda | August 17, 2006 05:54 PM

Following in the new vogue set by AMLO and company now we imbeciles everywhere telling our Courts what to do and how to decide about the elections.
The bunch of liers at global exchange say they sent 2 delegations (of 1 person each delegation) of observers to check on the elections but they never registered at the IFE or any other institutions. So now we are suppose to believe that these imbeciles from globalexchange really sent observers
to watch the elections and can now give a better perspective than the European Union who sent more than 200 observers and they were all registered.
Fact is that simply by checking at their wesite www.globalexchange.org, you can see how these imbeciles are in the business of anti-globalization and anti-free trade and they clearly support a communist agenda.
These websites are all biased and onsided. Many of them are supported by Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro to fight democracy.
Brenda, why don't you tell us about the international socialist convention held at Caracas where all the staff from global exchange went with all their expenses paid by hugo chavez. I heard from a friend that the boys at global exchange really enjoyed the venezuela prostitutes in downtown Caracas.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 05:55 PM

I do hope we can get some international observers (not Aznar's apprentices please) to follow this process. It is obvious this election has been marked by an uneven playing field. The government apparatus has been used to favor one candidate and attack another. I would not mind international and impartial observers taking a greater role. I do hope they come for the citizen recount which will confirm national irregularities and fraud. I am afraid little baldy won't stand a chance once it is proved that he did not win, even if the TRIFE decided to back him. It would not be the first time a President unable to govern would be forced to step down by popular criticism. I am thinking of Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada and Fernando de la Rua as examples in Latin America. Also Collor de Melo in Brasil.

Posted by: Brenda | August 17, 2006 05:59 PM

Check out what these imbeciles at Global Exchange have to say about Hugo Chavez, I particularly loved the part where it says that Venezuela is one of the most advanced democracies in the world:

In the past, Venezuela's oil wealth benefited a few.

Today, it benefits a few million.

Something remarkable is happening in Venezuela. The lives of millions of Venezuelans are improving as historic wrongs are being righted. The world's fifth-largest oil producer, Venezuela has long been a country of contrasts: despite its great wealth, 80% of Venezuelans live in poverty. Now, for the first time, millions of Venezuelans have access to education, job training, housing, land, clean water, health care, and something maybe even more precious: dignity.

The August 15, 2004 referendum on Hugo Chávez's presidential mandate reaffirmed the support of the Venezuelan people for the government's social justice agenda. With a strong social base and a commitment to participatory democracy, the government, working together with social movements, is launching a wide range of innovative programs to fulfill the strong human rights agenda of the new popularly-approved Constitution.

Community-based preventative health care missions are making health care a tangible human right, causing infant mortality to plummet. Educational missions are putting millions more children into thousands of new schools, while high school and college scholarship programs keep kids reaching for new horizons. At the same time, Venezuelan elders are imbuing their citizenship with new meaning as over one million of them learn to read and write for the first time in the Literacy campaign. Women, Indigenous peoples, and Afro-Venezuelans are gaining power and rights, while a high-profile land reform campaign is sweeping the nation, giving poor farmers access to land and opportunities.

Venezuela is fast becoming a leader in regional integration in the hemisphere, particularly in the promotion of viable alternatives to corporate globalization and the "free trade" model. The proposed Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) would prioritize endogenous development, bilateral trade, and regional cooperation as a way to strengthen national economies. Venezuela is also working to create the first Latin American news channel, TeleSur, to offer an alternative to foreign corporate media, and the establish of PetroAmérica-- the first fully integrated, Latin American oil company.

These ambitious programs have distinguished Venezuela as one of the most progressive democracies in the world. Nonetheless, the Bush Administration -- which endorsed the coup d'etat against Venezuelan democracy in 2002 - continues in its efforts to discredit the government's legitimacy both at home and abroad. Likewise, political polarization has racked the country for years. What are the opposition's complaints, and what is their agenda in the post-Referendum period?

We invite you to travel to Venezuela with Global Exchange to dig past the headlines and explore the changes occurring in Venezuela, Latin America and the hemisphere as a whole. Meet with human rights activists, rural agricultural workers, labor unions, community activists, journalists, and government as well as opposition figures, and see for yourself the unprecedented social change that is occurring at this historic time in Venezuela and the region. At the crossroads of the Andean mountains, the Caribbean coast, the Amazon rainforest, and the Amacuro River Delta, Venezuela's wondrous natural diversity and beauty combined with its visionary social justice agenda guarantee an exciting -- and unforgettable

What say you Brenda?

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 05:59 PM


I asked you a question and you go off talking about yourself. You say you teach. So teachers don't answer, they talk about themselves. Interesting answer to a simple question.

You only had to answer that the answer was in the question, which is a riddle that answers itself.

What is better: to be learned or to be smart?

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 06:00 PM

drgecc, don't be a hater, to think that we were having a civilized conversation, something quite hard to come by in this blog.

Look, you expressed some views regarding economic performance measurements that were close to the ones I had put forward, if you don't like the idea any more that's another story. As to what does measurements you took mean, I do not know which figures you used, your not quite clear explanation does not explain what is so wrong about them. Just that some country with a bigger economy did not grow in absolute terms per capita the same as Mexico? If this is the case, then obviously, you might want to adjust to purchasing power, I did not say it would be an end-all be-all statistic. Does this mean that that measurement is nonsensical? I don't know, but screw it, I'm bored with the topic, everyone wants to present a view of stats that favors their own little pet theory, apparently.

Universities: Are we talking Mexico or US any way? If we reference Mexico when talking about UNAM vs ITESM (for example) its one thing, but then you bring up UCLA, Harvard and a bunch of other institutions that well, are not here and so it turns into a completely different matter. You know perfectly well that economic environments for UNAM and US universities are completely different. And you're talking California for Pete's sake, you point out that its bigger in economic terms than most of the countries in the world. Yeah, that's a fair comparison. Besides, I wasn't even disrespectiong UNAM, I was merely pointing out that to compare that behemoth's performace (and budget) against other Mexican (MEXICAN just in case you don't read closely AGAIN) universities is not fair.

Districts and statistics: "And finally, your proposal of looking at just challenged districts is NOT AT ALL EQUIVALENT to finding a true measure of the error involved in the electoral process." What the hell? Seriously, what the hell? I never even dreamed of saying they are equivalent, I was pointing out that all those statistics will mean NOTHING in a judicial setting (and gave the measure of what the rulings mean in numbers of stations). Besides, rules are rules, want to bet your statistical analysis proposal will not even smell the TEPJF?

Oh, and please get the name right: ORELLANA, (come on, lets hear that argument about "reading" again). At least I use my real name.

P.S. If you're going to come at me on the critical reading and thinking you might want to practice it yourself in the first place. Twisting and bending my words does you no good in terms of credibility. "A review does not hurt any one and you definitely need one." right back at you. Maybe the one who needs a trip to UNAM is you.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 06:02 PM

Even if you do not like Chavez he is a democratically elected leader. In fact, he has won election after election. You can also check the reports by the Carter Center or is Jimmy Carter also a Castro friend, Hugo Chavez amigo you distrust? I bet he is uh? I think it is quite offensive to the people of Venezuela that you decide their country is not democratic simply because you don't like Chavez.

Posted by: Brenda | August 17, 2006 06:03 PM

Hey, I think I know who drgecc is: Joe Theisman.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 06:03 PM

Here is another beauty from Global Exchange, this one is about Fidel Castro, they love him very much at this organization:
Critics Assail Fidel Castro's 'Sickening' Grip on Hollywood Celebs

December 17, 2002
Marc Morano
Despite decades of criticism by exiled Cubans and human rights activists, Cuba's dictator, Fidel Castro, has been labeled a "genius" and a "source of inspiration to the world" by Hollywood celebrities.

Media critic Michael Medved labels the movie-star attention to Castro, "sickening." Dennis Hays, head of the anti-Castro Cuban American National Foundation, says Castro maintains a "cult"-like following, similar to the devotion for past figures like "Jim Jones or David Koresh."

But Saul Landau, an Emmy award-winning filmmaker who produced documentaries on Castro's Cuba, says Hollywood celebrities are realizing that a lot of the negative portrayals of Castro are inaccurate. Landau praised many of the dictator's policies, noting that Castro "has brought a greater equality in terms of wealth distribution than I guess any country in the world today."

Filmmaker Steven Spielberg visited Cuba and met with Castro in November and dined with the dictator until the early morning hours. Spielberg announced that his dinner with Castro "was the eight most important hours of my life."

Actor Jack Nicholson told Daily Variety, following his three-hour 1998 meeting in Cuba that, "He [Castro] is a genius. We spoke about everything."

Model Naomi Campbell declared that Castro was "a source of inspiration to the world."

"I'm so nervous and flustered because I can't believe I have met him. He said that seeing us in person was very spiritual," Campbell recounted of her 1999 visit to Cuba with fellow model Kate Moss, according to the Toronto Star.

The stars have also praised Castro's economic system. Comedian Chevy Chase, at Earth Day 2000 in Washington D.C., said he believes "socialism works" and explained that "Cuba might prove that." Chase added, "I think it's conclusive that there have been areas where socialism has helped to keep people at least stabilized at a certain level."

American media moguls, including the president of CBS TV, the head of MTV and the editor of Vanity Fair, visited Cuba in 2001 and had nothing but praise for the Caribbean Island. One member of the entourage described Cuba as "the most romantic, soulful and sexy country I've ever been to in my life," according to the New York Post.

'Experience of a Lifetime'

Other Hollywood celebrities who have visited Cuba and Castro include Robert Redford, Spike Lee, Sidney Pollack, Oliver Stone, Woody Harrelson, Danny Glover, Ed Asner, Shirley MacLaine, Alanis Morissette, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Kevin Costner.

Costner visited Cuba in 2001 for the premiere of his film on the Cuban Missile Crisis, Thirteen Days, and attended a private screening with Castro. The film depicts the Kennedy administration behind the scenes during the October 1962 crisis.

Costner was clearly impressed with Castro, stating at a Havana press conference, "It was an experience of a lifetime to sit only a few feet away from him and watch him relive an experience he lived as a very young man."

Movie portrayals have also reflected Hollywood's enthusiasm for Castro's Cuba, even while infuriating cultural critics like David Horowitz, who called the 1990 film Havana, starring Robert Redford and directed by Sydney Pollack, "grotesque," for its pro-Castro sentiment.

Another film currently showing in the U.S. is called Fidel. The 2002 movie is being billed as a biographical documentary of Castro, featuring the Cuban dictator as well as Harry Belafonte and Ted Turner.

The movie presents such a favorable view of Castro that New York Times movie critic A.O. Scott said of the film: "This is an exercise not in biography but in hero worship."

Last week, one of the stars of Fidel, Belafonte, was back in Cuba for a film festival and told reporters that "every day, more and more Americans are opposed to the war machine being driven by George W. Bush," according to a report from Cuba's state-run Radio Havana.

Belafonte accused Bush of using the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to further his desire "to control the world militarily, politically, economically and culturally."

Among their key political causes, Hollywood activists are calling for the U.S. government to end the trade embargo imposed on Cuba in 1961. However, Bush has said he will not lift the embargo until Castro's government honors human rights, releases political prisoners and holds free and fair elections.

'Lovesick Rock Groupies'

Hays, executive vice president of the Cuban American National Foundation, an organization dedicated to fighting for democracy and human rights in Cuba, believes Castro's personal mystique may be blinding the celebrities to the harsh realities of life in Cuba.

"You have to remember that Fidel Castro is a cult leader, much along the same lines as Jim Jones or David Koresh. He's a megalomaniac with a messiah complex and people go and fall into his orbit," Hays told CNSNews.com.

He believes otherwise rational individuals can "lose all context of reality" in Castro's presence.

"People turn into lovesick rock groupies when they get into his presence. This is the impact that cult leaders have on people," Hays added.

Furthermore, he insisted, celebrities should not be praising Castro when they don't understand the situation in Cuba.

"It's very sad, and I wish Steven Spielberg and Danny Glover or any of these other guys would spend a little time with some of the political prisoners in jail before they make broad stroke comments about Cuba and Cuban society," Hays said.

He said he hopes celebrities will "open their eyes" before they promote Castro's Cuba.

"Remember, this is a man who has killed tens of thousands of his own citizens. He's killed over 30 Americans, he harbors fugitives from U.S. justice, he has supported terrorism and narco-terrorism throughout the hemisphere, causing untold thousands of other citizens' deaths," Hays said.

He described Castro's rule as a "ruthless dictatorship that denies people the freedom of speech, the freedom of press, the freedom of association," and said he cannot understand how celebrities miss these points.

"What is the problem here? Short of Saddam Hussein, it's hard to find a figure in the world that has caused more human misery than Fidel Castro," Hays added.

He said he finds it ironic that Spielberg produced the film Schindler's List, about the German slaughter of Jews during World War II, yet cannot comprehend the reality of Cuba.

"[Spielberg is] totally blind to gulags in Cuba. [During his recent visit to Cuba] he made no mention of the thousands of people who are harassed and imprisoned on a daily basis," Hays added.


Michael Medved, entertainment critic and author of the book Hollywood vs. America, describes the celebrities' support of Castro as "sickening." He believes they are naturally drawn to Castro because "part of the Hollywood mindset is an almost childlike fantasy to escape to fantasy worlds."

"The one characteristic we connect most to really successful people in Hollywood is immaturity and that fits very well into utopian paradises of various kinds, like Cuba," Medved explained in an interview with CNSNews.com.

He maintains that most celebrities can't handle their wealth and become "animated by guilt," causing their political views to become skewed.

"One of the ways people deal with that guilt is they become revolutionaries, and Castro is perfect for them because he is an intellectual," Medved said.

"[Castro] is a rich guy, he's always been a rich guy, he's from the elite like most of Hollywood," he added.

Medved expressed surprise over Spielberg's comments, that his visit to Cuba had been the "eight most important hours" of his life.

"Not the hours when he met his wife, not the birth of his children, it was the eight hours he spent with Fidel," Medved said.

David Horowitz, co-founder of the Los Angeles-based Center for the Study of the Popular Culture and a former 1960s radical, said Spielberg's comments about Castro were revealing.

"It just shows that Spielberg may be a talented filmmaker, but he hasn't got any moral brains," Horowitz said.

Medved believes the left-leaning Hollywood celebrities are drawn to the meager existence of the Cuban people.

"They say, 'isn't it wonderful, [Cubans] are all driving these vintage cars and they keep them running. Well, it is not so wonderful because they are too poor to get anything else," he said.

Another key factor in Castro's appeal to Hollywood is his "machismo" or sex appeal, according to Medved.

"[Castro] has acknowledged that he personally slept with over 1,000 women...it would be fairly common for Castro to go through four or five women a day," he said.

"For people who have invested a great deal of life proudly trying to see how many beautiful women you can conquer, there is a natural tendency to identify with Bill Clinton or Fidel Castro," Medved added.

'Useless Idiots'

Horowitz called Hollywood's close relationship with Castro a "national disgrace," which he alleged has "been going on for years and years."

Castro is a "sadistic monster," Horowitz said and "the longest surviving dictator in the world." Celebrities gloss over these realities, he contended.

"[Hollywood] can't tell a dictator from a Democrat or a country deliberately and systemically impoverished by its leader. These people don't know anything," Horowitz said.

"It's just depressing to even talk about it. They are useless idiots, if I may turn [Vladimir] Lenin's comment around," he said, referring to the Russian leader's description of naive Western journalists as "useful idiots."

Robin Bronk, executive director of the Creative Coalition, a liberal celebrity-based activist group whose founders include Ron Silver, Christopher Reeve, and Susan Sarandon, believes many Hollywood celebrities are getting a bum rap when it comes to political activism.

"Celebrity activism is as old as [silent film actress] Gloria Swanson," she said.

"We live in a society here in the U.S. where celebrities are put out there as opinion leaders," Bronk explained. "Just as they have their agent and their manager and their publicists, they are expected to have their issue," she added.

Noting that the activism can be effective "if utilized the right way," Bronk conceded that "there are a lot of spokespeople who are speaking on behalf of issues that are not necessarily the best spokespeople."

She also said Hollywood is dominated by liberals because, "typically people in the arts tend to be more liberal and less conservative. I think it's the nature of that constituency."

'Cuba is King'

Filmmaker Saul Landau, an Emmy award-winning filmmaker who produced four separate documentaries on Castro's Cuba for PBS and CBS, including a 1974 CBS documentary with Dan Rather, thinks Hollywood's assessment of Cuba reflects reality.

Landau rejects the idea that Castro is duping celebrities.

"How the hell is he duping them? They've got two eyes, they've got two ears," he told CNSNews.com.

"Cuba is the king of all of Latin American countries," Landau said.

He believes Hollywood stars have seen the truth in Cuba.

"You don't have millions of homeless people in Cuba, you don't have 42million people who don't have access to medical care," Landau said, comparing Cuba to the United States.

Cuba outperforms the United States "when you talk about the right to food, the right to shelter, the right to a job, the right to a retirement," according to Landau. These issues are "less than rigorously enforced in the U.S." he added.

Landau also believes Castro's detractors have exaggerated his human rights abuses.

"I have not seen any evidence that he is a sadistic monster or a brutal dictator," he explained, adding that he has little regard for Cuban American refugees.

"People in Miami who are running their anti-Castro lobby, are, in my opinion, not representative of the Cubans in the country," Landau said.

"Cuban human rights violations take the form of procedural violations. They involve legal and political rights rather than economic and social rights," he added.

Landau did not deny that Castro's rule has included suppression of a free press and multi-party electoral process, but said like in any revolution, "they broke a lot of eggs" to achieve their goals.

He also made it clear that he is no fan of President George W. Bush.

"It's very difficult coming from the U.S., to imagine a political leader with whom you could have an intelligent conversation. Well, I guess you could with Bill Clinton, but you certainly can't with the moron that is in there today," Landau said.

Castro has a "religious aura" about him, according to Landau.

"When he comes into room, a wind follows him. He intimidates people by his very presence, he emanates, he vibrates power," he explained.

'Truth Needs to Come Out'

There are a few celebrities who make no attempt to hide their disdain for Castro. Actor Andy Garcia, a Cuban refugee, recently expressed his frustration over what he sees as the ignorance on the part of many in Hollywood and in America to Castro's Cuba.

"Sometimes, you feel like what's really going down in Cuba is protected in a way by the American media, and it's a shame, because the truth needs to come out. People need to be aware of what's really going on down there," he told Fort Lauderdale's City Link newspaper in October.

Garcia said he was proud of his 2000 HBO movie, "For Love or Country: The Arturo Sandoval Story." The film profiles a jazz musician who fled Cuba for America.

Garcia was blunt in his assessment of his native country. "For me, there's no substitute for liberty and freedom. People die for that," he said.

Singer Gloria Estefan is another Cuban refugee who feels frustrated that people don't understand the Castro government. Estefan fled the communist nation when she was two years old.

"People don't have a lot of information, and when they ask me about it, I tell them about the drama of exiles, the repression, the firing squads, the horror of communism," she told Exito Online in 1997.

"My whole family paid a heavy price for freedom. My father not only fought in the Bay of Pigs, he volunteered to fight in Vietnam. He fought for these same freedoms," Estefan said.

"How could I forget that Fidel Castro was the person who did me so much harm?" she asked.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 06:05 PM

Would love to stay around and laugh at robots repeating smear campaigns to support their arguments. Unfortunately I have to work.

So long Dick Morris fans!

Posted by: Brenda | August 17, 2006 06:05 PM

I'm not Brenda. But I care to read. This from the Global Exchange report:

"For the 2006 Mexican election cycle there were two electoral observation delegations: a pre-election team of nine members visited Mexico from June 3-12, and an election team of twenty-five members visited the country from June 27-July 7..."

"This report summarizes the findings of the Global Exchange group that was invited by Mexico's Alianza Cívica to observe the Mexican elections of July 2, 2006 in Mexico City and other selected locations. Our group received accreditation by the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) to aid in evaluation of the electoral process and to determine compliance with international standards of transparency, fairness, and accountability..."

Typical innuendo fare from emptyboxes...

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 06:20 PM

Dear Brenda: You leave because you don't like your cookies at global exchange being exposed for what they really are.

Fact is, they are a sack full of lies who dress up their website to attrack dumb and uninformed people like you to get you brain washed.
But it is all window dressing for supporting Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and of course, the Mexican left here in Mexico.
The liers on top of this organization collect their paychecks in Caracas.

Some dumb fellow came here with another one of these cocaine websites, narconews, and reacted in the same way as you are doing now Brenda. He just left because we exposed the website. You should not be embarrassed for reading such trash websites, but there are better sources of information.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 06:21 PM


Joe Theisman is a narcissistic know-it-all,
oops, just like... you know who.


Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 06:21 PM

I invite you, Ariel Orellana, to go tell the Supplement for Higher Education from The London Times that in your opinion it's unfair to situate UNAM amongst the best universities in the world...

And I'm sad that I got to go too; I enjoy the picture of emptyboxes foaming from the mouth, when he has nothing better (as usual) to do... Enjoy the gabfest.

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 06:33 PM


Click the site below and watch this jewel


Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 06:41 PM

Pasilla: I strongly recommend you the global exchange website. It fits into the kind of brain washing cocaine stuff you seem to be interested in.
And by the way, some of their people have been participating with the Otra Campaña of United Colors of Benetton-Marcos® and his EZLN® Circus.

Do you know that the imbeciles from La Otra Campaña actually give books from Marx, Lenin and Chomsky to the impoverish indigenous people they visit who can berely read? They actually try to teach them how to read with those books and tell them not to go to the regular state funded schools.

And of course Global Exchange is also helping with the brain washing there. They actually have people there "reporting" on the situation.

I wonder why these imbeciles don't come to Monterrey, maybe because we are not that ignorant to get so easily brain washed as those imbeciles at the UNAM and some areas of South Mexico.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 06:44 PM

Rodolfo: That is really cool. I could not stop laughing you should tell pasilla to check it out, I am sure he will enjoy it too and please do tell him the video is non partisan, it is just a neutral opinion just like the ones from La Jornada.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 06:54 PM

People in here are discussing about numbers between Mexico and Venezuela. Here's official information from the World Bank. They are the most reliable statistics out there.





About history books, I agree with whoever said that the El Colegio de Mèxico have the best Mexican history studies. In fact, they have the best regional history (Asia, Âfrica, Europe) and international relations books. Both Enrique Krauze and Lorenzo Meyer are reliable historians too.

About the UNAM. The UNAM always appears among the top universitites of the americas and also internationally because of the wide offer of studies they offer. The ITESM, Ibero, UDLA etc don't have careers that are only offered by UNAM. But the educational level is completely different. Private universities have a higher educational standard than the UNAM, that is without a question, although I have to say the UNAM has been improving a lot in the last years.

Posted by: bunburina | August 17, 2006 06:54 PM


The site below was recommended by an approving viewer


Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 06:59 PM

pasilla, come on, I expect more from you.

I did not say its unfair that UNAM is rated high in the world. I haven't outright said it but I will now: this is an excellent thing. However, the context of the discussion was that immediately following the statement of that fact it was mentioned that no other university in Mexico (or LA for the matter) made even the top 500. To that I replied that, to be succint, the scale of UNAM is not the same as the scale of other Mexican universities.

I could give other reasons, like the fact that ITESM, for example, does not have social science careers as to why other top Mexican universities didn't make it to that listing even though their academic level is outstanding. The UANL is also an excellent university and I'm sure we can come up with others. The real point is that to put down other universities because they didn't make the top 500 is fundamentally unfair because of many, many factors.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 07:02 PM

bunburina, you might not know this, but the pages you link to actually extract data from a DB. Try this:


You'll find a veritable cornucopia of data.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 07:13 PM


I am convinced the students, individually make a school look good or bad. Salinas and Lopez both had identical schooling until they both graduated from UNAM. One had straight A's and graduated top of his class in four years and the other took 13! years to graduate. He flunked economics several times. One got a Ph.D the other didn't. One rose in government and had a top Cabinet post, the other went on to write PRI's anthem. One became president in his 40's the other weasaled his way into D.F. mayor's post. One celebrated El Grito from Palacio Nacional the other lost the 2006 election. He never was much of a student. I don't blame UNAM.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 07:23 PM

As an example, I selected our favorite countries, GDP growth 2001-2004

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2001_ _ 2002_ _ _2003_ _ _2004
Mexico_ _ _ _ _-0.16_ _ 0.83_ _ _1.41_ _ _4.36
Venezuela, RB _ 3.39_ _-8.86_ _ -7.72_ _ _17.85
Argentina _ _ _ -4.41_ -10.89_ _ _ 8.84_ _ _8.98
Brazil _ _ _ _ _ _1.31_ _ _1.93 _ _ _0.54_ _ 4.90
Chile_ _ _ _ _ _ 3.38_ _ _ 2.18 _ _ _3.73_ _ 6.06

Sorry about all the dashes, they were necessary to make this sort of line up

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 07:40 PM

Simple test to try to force line up of columns

test test test
1 2 3

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 17, 2006 07:56 PM

Can somebody please explain to me why if communist countries are heaven on earth, they don´t allow their citizens, or comrades, to freely travel?

Surely if the USA, (uk as well, to a smaller degree) are so awful, any Cuban should be encouraged to go there for a couple of weeks. No doubt he will be on the first boat or plane back after having had just a few hours of experience.

But they don´t allow it! What are they so afraid their people might see?

About the 3 Nobel Prize winners from UNAM, from WIKI

Alfonso García Robles finished his education there as an undergraduate before 1939 and won a Nobel prize for peace in 1982. Don´t think UNAM is connected in that.

Mario J. Molina was an undergraduate there as well as having returned later to teach, but it would appear the work for which his prize was awarded was done at UC Irvine.

Octavio Paz finished his university education in 1937. He won his prize for poetry in 1990. Again, probably no connection.

One might even go as far to say they won their prizes despite, rather than because of UNAm. Note in the link to WIKI above, none of these appear in either of the columns titled "Attendee or Researcher" or "Faculty Before or at the Time of Award"

I don´t think you can honestly hitch these people to the "UNAM is wonderful" argument. It´s like United Kingdom claiming Stan Laurel (from Laurel and Hardy, obviously)as a home grown comedy talent...well he was born there.

Now, if I can get time, I´m going to do a search in OCC Mundial job listing pages with UNAM and other Mexican University names, just to see which are most requested.

I actually hope that UNAM comes out top, I wrote something a few comment pages back about education being so important, but it´s only ever any good in changing opportunities if it´s useful to someone who might want to employ you.

Posted by: PeterN | August 17, 2006 07:56 PM

This morning Lorenzo Meyer was with Victor Trujillo. The guy was patetical. He admitted: I believe there was fraud but I really don't know.
So he believes, he believes there was fraud but he really doesn't know. And all the time he did not really know he kept on accussing the IFE and Ugalde of fraud.
What a hypocrite, biased and dishonest historian.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 08:36 PM

So, the President says there is an ongoing dialogue with high ranking PRD officials, although they are being very careful and are not publicly admmitting it.

Manuel Espino and PAN are saying there is an ongoing dialogue with High-Ranking officials

And the Lopezobradoristas are saying those are lies.

So what do you guys think?

(the Free-sandwichers are also invited to participate. Everybody is invited, even if you are the dumbest of the PRD followers, I invite you to participate because I am so open minded and I am trying to build some bridges here between us, the pacifics, and the violents, the prd underachievers)
Thanks for the flowers in advance.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 08:44 PM

No I can´t do that search for universities which are more desired in OCC because my Spanish is still pretty poor.

Just putting the term UNAM in brought up more than Tec De Mont though, so maybe thats good for UNAM, problem was, most the job listings for Tec de Mont were for positions there, so that confused the search, and the search is not exclusive to only the UNAM or Tec. Maybe someone could find a way to see what jobs are offered, the salary, benefits etc between the different universities, just for fun.

It would be useful to see average starting salaries for graduates of all the universities, to see how this compares.

Having said that, from the people I have met here in Mexico, it probably doesn´t matter much, most the time, where you went to college, contacts through family seem to be the only way to ensure a decent employment here.

Posted by: PeterN | August 17, 2006 08:46 PM


You spend so much time reading philo-PANista diatribes, that you are starting to use similar rethorical tricks.

a) What do you call "communist countries"? There are not too many left. And travel requirements differ among them. But, most importantly, who in this blog has claimed that any of these countries is "heaven on earth"? I may have missed it, but I don't recall anybody using that language.

b)Have you met any Cubans travelling abroad? I have. In Switzerland, in France, in Italy, in Venezuela, in Brazil, in the UK, and you may not believe it, in the US. They do what they have to do and they go back to their country. Granted, some stay, but not all...

c) Is your contention that the undergraduate education that the Mexican Nobelists received in UNAM was detrimental for their success? Meaning... Instead of one, they should had won two awards? Come on!

d)Once again... Who did write that "UNAM is wonderful"? On the contrary, I have read, many times, the baseless trashing of UNAM that emptyboxes enjoys doing. That's right here, in black and white.

A little of intellectual honesty doesn't hurt anybody...

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 08:54 PM

This long article is enlightening because the author analyzes the core of this plantonista confrontation.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 08:54 PM


PeterN has it right, a word that drives you crazy, but Octavio Paz did his work on his own. Paz had his degree there but was who he was through his own effort. Had he studied at la Sorbonne he would be Paz, not
Sorbonne's Paz. Diego Rivera was Diego not San Carlo's Diego. He was Diego, despite San Carlos.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 09:10 PM

The ITESM is a good institution and probably the best of its kind (Private) in the country. But as an institution, they are quickly becoming one of the largest, if not the largest already)in Latin America.
ITESM has campuses all over Mexico, more than 30. And offices in several countries. ITESM also has another University TEC-MILENIO, a more economical response that the TEC itself but with the same infraestructure and professors and materials. TEC-MILENIO is growing incredibly that it now also has about 30 campuses too in many states. ITESM is a much bigger institution than UNAM in terms of facilities. But it is different because while UNAM specializes and excels and it is the best in most areas of sciencies and humanities alike, literature, political sciences, biology, technologies, genetic, medicine, psicology, etc. And while UNAM dedicates much of its budget to research and development, the ITESM and TEC MILENIO are more linked to the needs of the industries of the country. ITESM and TEC MILENIO and UDEM among other universities from Monterrey belong or are financed by corporations of the region like CEMEX, FEMSA, IMSA, ALFA, VITRO, METALSA, MASECA, BANORTE,XIGNUX, and many other powerful industrial groups and corporations that have invested heavily on those universities and actually own them. ITESM excels in new technologies, specially IT, the very fact that ITESM controls the domain names in Mexico and several other countries because they were the first to open a direct internet connection in the country and they also created the server infraestructure and had for a long time and I believe still today the only root server in latinamerica capable and authorized by ICANN to assign domain names for business, governments and institutions.
ITESM, TEC MILENIO and UDEM specialize in creating professionals competitive in management, engineering, and other areas much demanded by the industry and they continually cooperate with many companies all over the country.
ITESM is now investing more on research and development but I believe it still does not match the UNAM.

Whether a company hires you or not depends on you and the university you came from indeed has much influence but not more than the person. Here in the company I work several senior managers come from UANL and at least one of them comes from UNAM, the rest pick a dog fight between ITESM and UDEM, our two leading universities in Monterrey.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 09:26 PM

Santas December Surprise. And you thought you knew everything...


Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 09:33 PM


Do you know if UNAM is working directly with the private sector in solving real world problems like developing specific technologies, say, in computer sciences or is the relashionship still at arms lenghth because of ideology.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 09:39 PM


Was Carlos Salinas himself because of or despite Harvard?

By the way... What "word" does drive me crazy?

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 09:53 PM

"Have you met any Cubans travelling abroad? I have. In Switzerland, in France, in Italy, in Venezuela, in Brazil, in the UK, and you may not believe it, in the US. They do what they have to do and they go back to their country. Granted, some stay, but not all..."

What are you talking about Pasilla? These people are crossing the sea risking their very lives in little improvised boats to get to Florida. I was in Cuba myself as part of my work and I sincerely think you are being very dishonest here and are doing a terrible diservice to those people.
Julio Rodriguez and his trova cubana do not impress me, I have seen what they hide from us in their truthful and brainwashing lyrics. When the island gets rid of the Castro brothers, and freedom arrives, they will be judged by the real people.

I had the opportunity to witness the rally organized by Castro for the Cuban boy in Florida, Elian. It was all demagoguery and manipulation.
Their media does not enjoy the freedom ours enjoys here in Mexico.
There is virtually no oppossition there. No protests in the streets. Most oppossitors are in Jail. No other party, only the communist party. No choices. They have programs where they allegedly debate, and all analists in these tv programs agree on everything. There is no political debate. No freedom.
In order to communicate with our company back in Monterrey I had to use an internet connection authorized and supervised by the Cuban government. The Cuban employees were not allowed, they only had one computer for a bunch of them.
There are some nice hotels and restaurants with all ammenities and luxuries, and they are all for foreigners, Cubans are laughed at their doors and gates and are almost treated like dogs by the burocrats and inspectors there. As soon as you get out of one of these hotels, several young men approach you, they all offer you the same, fun, good places to dance and drink, women, etc., It is a sad spectacle.
You meet a woman and if she is young and single she will automatically want to marry you, she will do it, only to get out of the country. But if you want to marry a Cuban girl or man, it will cost you dearly, the Cuban government will charge you for the right to marry her or him, some 3 or 4 thousand dollars. It is an incredible dictatorship. A crazy human experiment of control and repression and summision and manipulation and simulation.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 09:55 PM


Salinas is Salinas all by himself. Nobody sued Harvard for his mistakes. Nobody is suing UNAM for the Reforma and Zocalo invasions.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 09:56 PM

I'm talking about Cubans travelling abroad. None of your ranting negates the fact that some Cubans travel, even live abroad for years... and come back to Cuba. Of course you don't hear about them in Mafia-controlled Univision or Telemundo... This very paper, the Post, published about a program to train American doctors; nice kids.

But say... didn't you have enough money to marry a Cuban girl? I'm sorry I was not even tempted when I visited the island. I'm too ugly, I guess...

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 10:06 PM

By the way, I have never heard of "Julio" Rodriguez... There may be several in Cuba, but... Somebody famous?

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 10:07 PM

rodolfo: I guess UNAM has many programs with private industries to develop new technologies and it is bigger than what many of us can see.
My only demand to UNAM is that it should act as a national university and be representative of our country, be a universe of ideas, be a place where right and left and greens and others come to debate, to discuss, to reach agreements, be a place where the plurality of our country gathers its strenght, maybe I am being to idealistical here. I know the ITESM cannot be that, nor UANL. No other institution can do that but the UNAM. But the leaders, and I would like to separate this, one thing is the UNAM and another the parasite and violent radical grouos that have found shelter there, I believe the leaders of the UNAM must be up to the challenge.
However the UNAM is, as I say, much larger than what we can see, it is definitely a great institution.
I hate to take issue with the UNAM. I confess I do it only to piss some people off.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 10:10 PM


You have to be joking. Cuba a totalitarian State. You gotta be joking. Their democratically elected president for life has been in office only since 1959. They got to elect him once, that should be enough. Look at all the bother here in Mexico. Who needs elections anyway those lucky Cubas have One Good Man. For life!

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 10:15 PM

Correction: it was silvio rodriguez. But the same is a Castro acolyte.
Your correction is purely rethorical.

And yes Pasilla, some Cubans travel, as you stated, some, only some.
Only those priviledged enough to have been born in the families that control the Country. Sons and daughters of generals and diplomats and party officials.

Those are the ones who travel. Isn't it sad?

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 10:18 PM


I read all, the comments, not just the Pan ones.

I don´t know what a "rethorical trick" is, do you mean rhetorical? You know, I have become multi-lingual illiterate since I came here, I really can't write or read in any language now.

a) Communist countries: China, North Korea, Cuba. Venezuela (effectively). You can try to call it by a different name, but that's what they are.

a i) "Heaven on Earth" my turn of phrase after I read how the Hollywood Stars were describing Cuba. Sorry.

b) How many of these travelling Cubans really came from Cuba? Or did they just say they were Cuban, as in origin. Were they with all their family travelling, so no threat was hanging over their non-return,? Or were they on business for Castro (I would have said government business, but in Cuba, it´s the same thing)? Are all those people who risk their lives trying to get to Miami on inner tire tubes and other non sea-going devices doing it for fun? "A little of intellectual honesty doesn't hurt anybody"

c) The point I made was that there is little (if any) connection between their place of study and the final award of the prize. They were not at UNAM when they were awarded their awards, otherwise that would have been listed. To claim that an education at UNAM that finished in 1939 (when were nuclear weapons first proved?) lead to winning a Nobel prize mainly for creating a (so far, watch Chavez and his frinds in Iran) nuclear free Central / South America in 1982 might be pushing it a bit.

Why don´t you read the details given on the three winners from the link provided?

I studied at Oxford (for free as well), we only managed 47 Nobel prizes, but 21 were awarded to people who worked there at the time.....

d) "UNAM is wonderful" in quotes, because I can´t be arsed to copy and paste hundreds of parts of different posts. You know what I was referring to, I guess most other people would get it too. If it needs defending that much something must be up.

Try to also recall that the Nobel prize has been diminished over the years by awarding it to politically correct causes, in particular, who could give a peace prize to Gerry Adams, effective boss of the IRA.....?

Lighter note Pasilla (and I´m not trying to cute or patronising or whatever), When I lived in Oxford we had one or two really good pubs one could go to and enjoy a good debate like this. Almost all attitudes were welcomed, and especially from whatever side of the political spectrum you came, the debates were polite, but at sometimes acidic, in a fair way though.And we were doing it while drinking, and only at arms reach (at most) away from each other! I think you would have enjoyed it there, I would certainly have enjoyed your company. No decent pubs in Chihuahua though.............so far......?

Posted by: PeterN | August 17, 2006 10:30 PM


Way out of subject but... Think again; not only sons and daughthers of Cuban generals (?) and diplomats travel abroad... Let's make a comparison. There is a Latin American country in which also only members of the elites travel abroad (intelectual, yes, but also quite a few members of privileged classes, using their own, plentiful means), while millions attempt to escape, risking their lives for a better future. Do you guess what country I'm talking about? Its name starts with the letter "M..."

And this is the end, at least for me; till other time...

Posted by: pasilla | August 17, 2006 10:31 PM


Pissed they are. My position is that the only European raising hell about Hitler was Churchill. Mexico is getting within a hair's breath of bringing down the house for one lunatic's megalomania. Voices have to be raised all over the place. This evening on his daily rant Lopez seemed at his most confrontational stance since election day, taunting the army and at the same time saying that he will not be led to a confrontation. This man is demented for power and there is a growing concensus that he has no case. He can't win and he's pissed as Zocalo's urinals are overflowing.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 10:33 PM


I know one famous Julio Rodriguez. He owns
"Famous Julios Rodrigueses International House of Pancakes". They're famous because they're all cake and no PAN. PAN was censored by the Political Correcteness Police and is seen as a subliminal codeword for "success". They will be international, pending review, next century.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 10:51 PM

What AMLO is desperate for power and will do whatever. The problem is not him or even those behind him like Camacho Solis and Ricardo Monreal and that imbecile of Noruña.

The problem in my opinion is the fact that the PRD as an institution does not have the power or structure to control its own internal forces from getting out of the constitutional life.

They will be held responsible by many people for allowing this kind of unconstitutional behaviour.

PAN had it right and identified the danger on time. They told us again and again that this fellow was a real danger and he has shown us the real AMLO.

If you notice, the Vote by Vote is not the issue anymore, he has stopped talking about it in the last days. He thinks he has build enough support and generated the impression that in reality he won and was stolen.

But the people doubt of him more than they doubt of the elections.

There is no support anymore. Little by little the voices from PRD that do not agree will begin to speak.

These days the government and PAN have insisted there is communication with sectors of the PRD Coalition.

PRD is denying it. But the fact is the PRD moderate are now in need of help and PAN and the federal government are willing to help but they have to take the innitiative.

I have not heard Camacho Solis or Ricardo Monreal much these days. Maybe they are the ones. They should be if any, no other officials have as much power as they do. Horacio Duarte is another one we don't hear much as well these days. But it might be I got the wrong impression. Maybe I am just wishful thinking.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 10:53 PM

Its obvious who the chicken caca ppl here. They get all insulted by names, but if it quacks, its a duck, u cant call it nothing else. Ripped down 2 its most basic, these ppl who consider themselves conservatives mexicans, or their supporters, are a tiny fraction of the population of Mexico. Oh, and theirs plenty of poor in the north, and not so poor who support AMLO. Theirs much more of us than u ppl think. Where getting ready, if push comes 2 shove, we will hunt u down like the dogs U all are, for destorying democracy, and wanting to keep Mexico, the same poor, ill educated, ill informed mass of humanity, being expolited by just a few hundred thousands of the populace. We have the millions. We will never allow a dictator from the right FECAL to be imposed on us. By any means necesary he will be stopped.
Voto X Voto, que esconden cabrones?
Casilla X Casilla, No sean mamones...
¡Solucion O Revolucion!

Posted by: maya0 | August 17, 2006 10:54 PM

FROM: PeterN

Well, looks I could have avoided typing half that previous post, as most of what I said has already been defended. Thanks for the assist.

My English keyboard has gone all Spanish on me so I have to try and check what I type, or keep my posts shorter.

I won´t ask for a vote on that.

I´ve already decided my course of action.

Posted by: PeterN | August 17, 2006 10:59 PM

Why doesn't everyone write their posts first in Word, for example, and then run spell check? This "rethoric" is driving me crazy.

Too many stats and copy and paste for a lot of us who have to work to keep up with. Can the stats also be relevant and in context? Some rates of growth have to be clarified to be put into perspective or you get those strange results like central-American countries looking better than 1st world countries. What about the immigration figures for Mexico not having the weighted demographics of the youth bubble from all those born during the 70's & 80's?

As I mentioned in a previous post, the UNAM is a world unto itself, large, complex, and home to some of the best and worst of Mexican academia. WHAT you do with your studies usually has a bigger impact than WHERE you studied, but here in today's Mexico, the companies will discriminate against you if you don't come from the "right" university.

Rodolfo, that Denise Maerker article was a repeat of her participation on "Tercer Grado" last night. (Good grief, I've admitted to watching Televisa, the AMLO's will be after me now.) Her point is well taken in that it does reflect the exaggerated and anachronistic response of AMLO to current realities. When you accuse Fox of being Huerta or Díaz Ordaz, you have definitely lost the time frame of events.

Why do so many Cubans try to come to Mexico if they can't get into the states? I have a lot of Cubanito friends that would rather die than go back to Fidelandia, and they're not a bunch of rightwing exiles, just people who want to be respected, be able to speak their mind and make their own life choices.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 17, 2006 11:01 PM

I guess it is time to go to bed for me. I missed Jerry B, K.Vrona, Bunburina.
Rodolfo, take care of Maya0, she is all right, we all love her here in these forums.

Good night to you all.

Posted by: emptyboxes | August 17, 2006 11:03 PM


You're back! I want to say You Rule! Say the word and your wishes are my command. We need to hear the voice of one tough cookie to set us right. Could you reveal if you are male or female, so as to adress you correctly, mi Jefa/Jefe.

The cabrones you mention are the Gang of Seven at TEPJF, I suppose. Direct your impetuosities in that direction, we are mere bystanders waiting for direction. Your, direction, General/Generala!

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 11:09 PM

K Vrona,

Want to see another whopper. Read La Esquina on the page's top right hand side.


Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 11:15 PM

maya0, like democracy with Fox has reflourished! Let's get out and eliminate all these quackers, we all know they're just a bunch of non-Mexican ducks! What are they hiding? Let my rooster loose and stand back!

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 17, 2006 11:19 PM

Rodolfo, or should i say, reputo? Why so worried that violence will be used? Because like u, those tiny percentages of Mexicans who are pro FECAL, know that your kind has had it way too good, 4 way to long. And if you or your kind, will not support democracy in Mexico, then u will have to step aside, or be removed, which ever u choose. Because, if FECAL is imposed on Mexico, this tiny dictator, will be stopped. By any means necesary.
So dont fret cabroncitos, dont sweat the noches where u live. Just get out of the way, because the temming millions have had it up to here, and anyone of u who try to stop us, will be rolled over and flatend into a eary grave. Thats a promise not a threat.
Or we get a solution in Mexico, Or comes a Revolution in Mexico. Its not the 1st X is it? So dont be suprised when a busting down your frt door happens.
U have been all forwarned

Posted by: maya0 | August 17, 2006 11:24 PM


Capitan/capitana, we, the trembling de la Huertistas are shrinking violets to your thunderous grandiosity! K Vrona wants to know about your Indestructible Roostercito. All show and no action. Those mean tanquetas at San Lazaro are waiting for your heavy pounding. Don't cry uncle after Poquito Dolor. Mucho pain or no gain! Padierna, Brugada, Tierra y Libertad O la Chingada!

Posted by: rodolfo | August 17, 2006 11:45 PM

Fox is such a SAD character... he came to Mexicali and people were asked to drop their pants to make sure no voto por voto would emerge during his speech... what a moron! This traitor must know that his attempt to impose Calderon will mean that everywhere he will enconter this demand: voto por voto.

Posted by: Vivi | August 17, 2006 11:48 PM

I don't know who you are Maya but I think you have it wrong about Rodolfo and the rest of all these bums. I was reviewing the blog and he obviously does not have anything better to do than ramble all day long with other conservative looneys. I think his employment candidate owes him at least a little changarro in payment for his contributions to this blog.

Posted by: Vivi | August 17, 2006 11:51 PM


I can afford more guns than you.

Posted by: PeterN | August 17, 2006 11:51 PM

Dear Ceci,
Today Mr. Obrador in his daily meeting made rough critical comments about the Washington Post, Is every respectable newspaper and media against him? Is he and other PRD fellows looking for a AMLO-Certified Media mark?

Posted by: Luis | August 17, 2006 11:53 PM

Dear Luis,

No, not every respectable newspaper is against AMLO. The New York Times published an op-ed by him and it has supported the full recount. The Guardian has ran quite a few pieces favoring AMLO. The Financial Times has also called for a recount. The quick response is no, not every newspaper is anti-AMLO but you are quite right, the Post has taken this stand and so has the LA Times. I personally think it insulting the way the Post has been covering this whole issue. Its editorials are biased and under researched. The worst part is, as someone also pointed out in this blog, that the Post is taking orders from the Calderon campaign when the little guy asked them not to cover the irregularities and told them to say he won.

Posted by: Vivi | August 17, 2006 11:59 PM


Supreme Judge of the Universe, do not assume what you don't know. What people say about others reflects what they feel about themselves. How do you know I'm not being paid to hold the fort in THIS changarro.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 12:01 AM

Other respectable newspapers that have not fallen prey to Calderon's demands to not cover irregularities and follow word by word the official line:

Le Monde
El Clarin
El Mostrador
Siglo XXI en Guatemala

In Mexico of course, you have the best political mag Proceso asking for a citizen recount. You should all sign up.

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 12:02 AM

Nooooooooo please don't say that? are you also behind other wonderful citizen web efforts such as mi voto fue limpio, hazte oir, yo influyo?

Have fun covering up fraud all day long in this blog, it is a pity only five people or so came to visit today... seems like you are taking advantage of your contractors :)

And on that note I say so long wackos!

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 12:04 AM

Just heard Cuauhtemoc Cardenas answer that this election has nothing to do with the one of 1988, that everything is different. What's the over/under on the number of minutes before he's declared a traitor to democracy?

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 18, 2006 12:06 AM


get a life and stop dreaming that you will have a nice home and a sports car because you killed somebody to get them. It doesn't work that way, just check the history books. Your foul language and threats don´t scare anybody who worked his ass to get what you want for free. Why don´t you get a job -any job- to make your dreams come true?

PS. Don't call me father because I will deny it publicly!

Posted by: father | August 18, 2006 12:09 AM

Peter or is it dick?
That u can afford more guns than I? U brit mope, we got more people, more arms, being next to the most amred society in the world, the USA, has given that 2 us. More ready to give (your) life up for true democracy. So either step aside, or step into a early grave all u FECAL and facist Panistas sell outs. We have millions, u have only a few hundred thousands. U lose.
Solucion O Revolution

Posted by: maya0 | August 18, 2006 12:10 AM

I think it's a good practice to read a range of different viewpoints, as my PASCifista compañera Bunburina does; it can open your eyes to things to which you might otherwise not be exposed.

If, according to your viewpoint your candidate is perfect, you've no personality or criteria. SAD, SAD, SAD.

Posted by: K. Vronna | August 18, 2006 12:11 AM

I just had to answer this last one... ha ha ha it has been so much fun to watch how this conservative looneys have embraced Cardenas... now he is the real left they say... the reason he is acceptable and the sell out media chases him to make stupid declarations is that he poses absolutely no treath to their hold on power... now that is what the forces of the left should be like, small like Mercado's, or cowed down with a supid job to plan a party like Cardenas... give me a BREAK! it was only some years ago that the same morons citing Cardenas now were acussing of the same traits they now see in AMLO...

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 12:12 AM


If you watch things evolving, AMLO has to cross the Rubicon or stand down. He will be alienating Mexico City's population on Sept.15 AND the army the next morning. Talk about a rock and a hard place.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 12:14 AM


"Its editorials are biased and under researched."

Thats to say if you don´t agree with them, they must be biased.

As for the Guardian (if you mean the UK Guardian) they´ll always support a leftist cause, the further away from their 4 million pound houses (that´s 80,000,000 pesos) in west London the better. Always feels so good to be doing something for the revolution! But, please, don´t do it in Notting Hill, Jemmima might miss her pony riding classes, or Hugo his country dancing lessons.

Posted by: PeterN | August 18, 2006 12:22 AM


We are a few hundred thousand culeros but each one of us will be driving very large expensive Panzer Tankesotes. No little water for muchedumbres. Big Sticks for Big Problemas. Pan o palo, no problema.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 12:25 AM

K. Vronna, I actually laughed out loud at your stats jab. Guilty as charged. I guess I get too passionate, but in my defense I though I was engaged in what looked like meaningfull debate but was proved wrong by Mr. Theis... err... drgcc. As you can probably tell, stats manipulation is a pet peeve of mine (you know: "Venezuela grows at 7%, Fox sux0rs!!!"), I promise I'll refrain myself in the future.

BTW, why do you guys engage the loonies that drop by every so often? I mean, they have nothing to add even if the unintentional comedy content is priceless... it's too bad that we have lost the only interesting voice from the left on this blog.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 18, 2006 12:26 AM

The federal police, is in charge of the Narco traffic business in Mexico.
The army is not. So when the army walks down to the plaza de la constitution, whose side do u think it will take?
AMLO promsied to involve the army deeper into the War on drugs, which where almost legalized in Mexico, untill, Fox the tratior of democracy was told to stand down by his USA handelers.
On Sept 15th, When AMLO and his movement stands tall for the freedom he and his movement represents in frt of that flag, in the place where Mexico was killed and reborned, we shall see, what side if any, the army marching by AMLO, and his movment, take. We have the millions, we have the arms. U lose.
Solucion O Revolucion

Posted by: maya0 | August 18, 2006 12:26 AM

So now we are bashing The Guardian? oops I think you have bitten your mouth my British friend... it seems like to you, any newspaper that does not engage in AMLO bashing and does not follow orders from the Calderon campaign like the Post most be the biased one... poor Guardian you don't like it... I pity them sniff

To the Alternativa people would you be willing to take part in the Proceso vote count effort? Sorry foreigners can't participate, not even you Beatle guy because it would be against Article 33 and you could be expelled from the country, that is unless your name is Aznar or Solá

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 12:34 AM

Dammit! I picked 12 minutes, it only took 6.

Posted by: Ariel R. Orellana | August 18, 2006 12:35 AM

You are so smart Ariel... why can't we all be like you and blog all day long... hey I noticed you have a blog! I will pay a visit one of these days to give you a much needed self-esteem boost... please do keep on quoting Cardenas and maybe get something from Lazarito... that way you can prove your point that AMLO is being abandoned by his everyone ha ha ha

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 12:38 AM

and rodolfo is a poet... oh my...

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 12:39 AM


The army is no go. Clean smelly Zocalo or they won't go. Their clean boots kick ass
not democracy, you got them wrong. Police love making new friends and buy them lots of lethal toys. Army makes friends with winners, losers have to go. This is Mexico,
we'll see it glow, chachalaca mayaO.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 12:41 AM

To the moron that said all respectable newspapers bashed AMLO... one way to tell a newspaper's bias is their use of the words

firebrand populist

all of these have been used to qualify Lopez Obrador. The Post has fallen in line with the bashers because it chose to do so and because they made an agreement with Calderon. I think the Post's editorials are every bit as virulent and emotional as those of La Cronica De Hoy one of the worst newspapers in Mexico that is continiously quoted in this blog although no one in Mexico would fess up to buying it (they give it out for free).

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 12:49 AM

Peter Windsor... you mean to say you contributed to Calderon's pile of votes? Sorry fellow, a lot of Mexicans don't agree with you. We think this election was fraudulent and we have doubts that have not been clarifies.
If you voted that is also fraud because you claim to be a foreigner. I think we should file a complain with those smart and impartial guys at FEPADE so they can investigate your case. It truly worries me that foreigners like you were also given out ballots.

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 12:54 AM

Maya0 (IQ?)

I´ll think you´ll find that this "brit mope" comes from a country that stood up to real fascism , on its own, before some other countries, naming no names, decided to join in when they saw which way the tide was turning.

And if we are such a minority, why didn´t AMLO "Adolf" win the election.

Maybe I will step aside for you, in the same way I try to avoid dog s%"t in the street. I can still clean the street up afterwards.

What does "mope" mean?

Posted by: PeterN | August 18, 2006 12:55 AM


You present one mean negative reverse positive list of ugly pejoratives. Your REALISTIC list would include LITTLE ROOSTER, BEAM OF HOPE, INDESTRUCTIBLE, BRAVE HONESTY, PURIFYER, TRANSFORMER, COMPLOT. Gee, I thought the left was treating us like gullible children.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 12:56 AM


The Guardian is a newspaper for journalists who can´t get any other jobs. Why don´t you also read the "Job" section in it as well. You could work out the type of people who buy it that way.

Posted by: PeterN | August 18, 2006 12:58 AM

U know about Mexico, as good as grass grows on the moon. U should learn about this place where I and millions like me live, and work. We know whats up with the police, federal, local, state. Ppl are not blind Rodoll.
AMLO prmoise to the army is but 1 thing u prombally didnt knw, or dont want 2 knw.
Fox betrayed Mexico, by not legalizing drugs, because his US handlers didnt let him. Who does this benefit? The average maria or jose in Mexico?
The narco buss in Mexico is its no.1 money maker, bigger than oil remesasas or tourists. If u legalize it, u ruin the money pig. Who gets all this money? The avarage maria or jose in Mexico? The army has everything to gain with AMLO, it will not take FOXes side or FECALs. Because we are the winners, we won. The army will go with the legititame winner, AMLO.
The legitimate President of Mexico.
Like it or not.
We are millions, u are only a few hundrend thousands, we have the numbers, we have the weapons, U lose.

Posted by: may0 | August 18, 2006 12:58 AM

Oh my... journalists that cannot get other jobs than to be journalists? the DISGRACE poor fellas I feel sorry for them... no rodolfo hitler... I was making a point of how newspapers dealt with AMLO... what about your little guy... he was quite funny today screaming histerically that he won the election... yeah if he keeps on repeating that maybe some of his voters will buy it... Felipe Calderon the jobs guy, Felipe Calderon, the guy with the strong hand, the steel will, the defiant streak, the leader of the peaceful army, the candidate of the winners, it's all so droll... no wonder none of these attributes that were repeated on and on by the sell out media stuck... in everyones mind the guy is a puppet, a quite boring and grey one, I bet his bosses would toss him out in a second if he failed to comply with his agreements with them.

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 01:04 AM


Vivi says in her 12:34 post you have bitten your mouth. Can you? Is it a British thing or do all Europeans have that skill.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 01:08 AM

Here is what the BBC is reporting... you can read it Peter if you have time to get away from La Cronica de Hoy and Radio Imagen

Mexico challenger senses history
By Duncan Kennedy
BBC News, Mexico City

"A historic moment."
Those were the words of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, taking the opportunity, yet again, to cast Mexico's contested presidential contest in apocryphal terms.

He used them on Sunday at the latest of his mass rallies.

And, standing amongst his supporters, I sensed that many here agree with him. Perhaps even his opponents.

Since 2 July, when the presidential election was held, Mexico has lurched its way through an acrimonious and divisive political crisis.

Why? Well, the election produced a victor, but it was not Mr Lopez Obrador.

And he is doing his best to change that result in a monumental battle for the future of this infant multi-party democracy.

He says he is the victim of mass fraud at the ballot box.

He told the crowd: "We will not allow an illegitimate and illegal government to be installed in our country."

They loved it because they believed him. Mr Lopez Obrador and his supporters want all the votes recounted, not just the sample that has just been looked at again in recent days.

Their chant was deafening: "Vote by vote, polling station by polling station."


Many of the tens of thousands of supporters who turned up to hear Mr Lopez Obrador speak did not have far to travel.

The central square in Mexico City and the surrounding roads have become a tent city in the past few weeks, crowded with protestors taking their message out on the street.
Banks, government buildings and hotels have all been blockaded - symbols, say those involved, of the institutions that have kept the majority of Mexican people in poverty and out of government.

They are symbols that Mr Lopez Obrador also stands against.

It is democracy in action, and it is putting much of the capital city out of action.

The movement has a permanency that Mr Lopez Obrador does nothing to discourage.

At his rally some of the biggest cheers came when he said: "We are prepared to resist for as long as necessary and we could be here for years if the circumstances merit it".

Imagine Trafalgar Square in London or Time Square in New York blocked for weeks on end and you can imagine the scale of this mass resistance.


Throughout all of this there is another key player in this drama - the man who actually won the election, the conservative Felipe Calderon.

But he is rarely seen. He has said the election was clean and that a total recount is not necessary.

It is a strategy of careful detachment. Perhaps he is hoping for the street protests to run out of steam, to exhaust themselves in a draining and ultimately futile battle of wills.
Mr Calderon may want to appear more statesmanlike. But he is not there yet.

He won by 244,000 votes. Quite a margin, you might think.

But there are some here who believe that if the findings of the partial recount reveal significant irregularities and/or Mr Lopez Obrador closes the gap substantially by a legitimate re-examination of the ballot papers, then the electoral authorities may yet yield to his demand for a wider recount.

Possibly even of all 41 million votes.

But it is a long shot for Mr Lopez Obrador, and he is already speaking of organising a demonstration against Mr Calderon's presidential inauguration ceremony in October.

That is a sign, perhaps, that he believes Mr Calderon may yet be declared Mexico's new president by the 6 September deadline.

Whatever happens, some have likened this whole experience to Ukraine's Orange Revolution.

This time the colours are not orange but the yellow of Mr Lopez Obrador's PRD party.

And while this may not yet be a revolution, a struggle is certainly underway. Mexico's future is not yet set in stone.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 01:14 AM

PeterN, you should know a bit about the empire that england had. Well look over what countries egland controlled, and maybe even u can find out what Maya means. If u get that, then maybe u will understand the zero, but i dont think so. Now about them facists u mentioned. Dont u find it amazing that former Nazis ran amok within the top echelons of power in the west and the soviets after WW2? Who built your rockets and your propaganda machines? Former Nazis. But no matter of evidence will get u 2 believe that. But then again u probally support Blairs incursion into Bushs insanity called Iraq. N E chance they will draft U? Heres 2 hope.
Mexico for Mexicans, not sell out brits and yankees.
Voto X Voto
Solucion O Revolucion

Posted by: maya0 | August 18, 2006 01:17 AM


I've had a lot of fun but this capitalist must go. Your Tortilla University educated opinion is what not must go. I have no more energy but will continue tomorrow and answer all your further postings blow by blow. Good night , everybody.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 01:22 AM

Maya I agree with that last point. Here is a reminder to the Brits and the US. Article 33 of the Mexican Constitution:
"FOREIGNERS CANNOT IN ANY WAY MEDDLE IN POLITICAL AFFAIRS IN THIS COUNTRY" I guess if Peter voted for Calderon that means he violated the law of the land...

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 01:22 AM

Vivi, I´m going to assume you´re trying to badmouth me with the Peter Windsor bit.

You´re quite close, I do have an aristocratic history....

Did I ever say I voted? Please remind me where.

The point might just be that I couldn't due to the safeguards put up by the electoral authorities in Mexico. Not that I would have done, or would have needed to have done, since the North of Mexico wouldn´t have required a stolen vote to beat Adolfo.

Please advise me why if the electoral process is so easy to manipulate here in Mexico, it was the model chosen by the UN for the elections in Iraq. Or maybe the answer is obvious, it was just another "complot" by the USA, to make sure they get cheap oil.

Incidently, if you really believe we use the word "fellow" to one another in UK in 2006, you must be living in some time warp. Oh you are, communism works.

Just caught up with some more of your posts whilst I was writing this. Back soon.

Posted by: | August 18, 2006 01:31 AM

To rodolfo hitler with compliments... some people cannot see AMLO as president because biz groups have told them that it just would not do... never mind that AMLO won the election... now they are calling for AMLO to be the leader of a social transformation in Mexico... I wonder how that will work since biz groups are so bent in defending the status quo.

López Obrador better suited as social reform leader

Web Posted: 08/17/2006 10:42 PM CDT

Arturo Gallardo
Special to the Express-News

A few questions concerning moments in Mexico's political and social life have been haunting my thoughts. I often find myself wondering how Mexico's people will see these events 70 or 80 years from now.

Will the current political situation be a mere transfer of power, or will this reshape the social landscape of the country?

Today, corruption continues to be widespread in Mexico, a byproduct of social stagnation of a very hierarchical culture -- the track record is not good enough yet to fully endorse institutions in that country.

The rhetoric and the calls for civil disobedience from leftist presidential candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador have stopped being just about the presidency. The efforts of López Obrador and his supporters are more than a well-planned attempt to seek the nullification of the presidential election and a subsequent attempt to undermine a Felipe Calderón presidency. The current events may be the beginning of a social movement that seeks to exert pressure on the government and president and achieve some structural changes to some of Mexico's institutions.

López Obrador's intuition is well-known in Mexico's political circles, but now he has truly found a niche among the people and in the streets of Mexico City and the south. But he has consistently demonstrated difficulty adhering to rules, which would stifle him as president. He appears much more effective as a social leader than as a presidential hopeful.

The opportunity to turn this into a social movement that would reshape Mexican society is slowly presenting itself, but we shall see if he is up to that challenge. López Obrador is a leader, maybe an imperfect one, but a leader nevertheless. He needs to recognize this historical moment and make the most of it. Civil society in Mexico needs leaders who want to achieve more than short-term political goals. A deep social reform is needed.

Meanwhile, the economy has started to suffer from the acts of civil disobedience. And more troubling, signs of violence have appeared for the first time since the start of demonstrations demanding a full vote recount. Demonstrators practicing civil disobedience -- AMLO style -- clashed with the federal police, or PFP, outside the Legislative Palace of San Lázaro. The PFP -- in full riot gear -- forcefully removed demonstrators, and some of them were injured, including congressmen from López Obrador's party.

López Obrador had already called for a few high-profile demonstrations during some special occasions in Mexico, such as the last state of the nation speech from Vicente Fox and Independence Day celebrations.

In 1810, an armed movement started in Mexico against Spanish rule. Then in 1910, came another armed movement to achieve a more egalitarian society. Could a third large social movement -- but this time a peaceful one -- force some much-needed reforms to achieve a certain degree of social justice in Mexico?

Only time will tell.

Arturo Gallardo is an online editor for MySA.com with degrees in international business and communication studies.

Online at: http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/stories/MYSA081806.2O.gallardocomment.15b1694.html

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 01:32 AM

Peter Windsor... I am sorry but this lady has to work tomorrow... yes some of us who voted for Lopez Obrador do have jobs and pay taxes surprised? If you are a foreigner you cannot vote. Plain and simple. It is against the law. It is against the Constitution.

And now I am a communist for supporting AMLO? you guys are so predictable with your Chavez, Castro, communist talk. The Cold War is over get it? The fact is conservative Washington consensus governments have given way in all of Latin America to left-of-center options. Sorry Windsor but that's a fact. Deal with it.

And now you say you are an aristocrat...PLEAAAAASEEEEEEEEE... if you are go back to your Oxbridge cocktail parties and leave us alone in Mexico. We will find a way to survive.

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 01:37 AM

And yes... aren't we all proud of IFE organizing elections in Iraq... a country that is OCCUPIED by a foreign military... I am glad IFE was of any service to the real rulers in Iraq. Nice example Peter. It seems like for IFE to work we need a military intervention. That way I guarantee you the right people will win and no one will protest.

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 01:46 AM


Don´t read or listen to(?) "La Cronica de Hoy and Radio Imagen"

Read that BBC stuff last night,your point please?

Posted by: | August 18, 2006 01:46 AM

Sorry mate... that was for rodolfo hitler and other wackos who want to believe all newspapers follow the AMLO bashing line dictated by the Calderon camp because that is the case with the Post.

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 01:49 AM


No, I can´t bite my mouth. I could if I had false teeth, I could come at my own mouth by surprise, and just take a huge chunk out of my gums, lips or tongue, mayby my epiglotis as well, if I was really quick!

Posted by: PeterN | August 18, 2006 02:04 AM

British humor!

Can you bite your tongue? Better not... you could end up being poisoned like rodolfo hitler...

As I have said Windsor... no one is asking you to stay in a country with millions of commies where that awful Constitution won't let you vote for alcoholic shortie... you can pack your bags and get on the next British Airways flight... I am sure rodolfo and the other conservative cranks will miss you when you are gone...

Be sure to take a walk alongside the million pound houses of Guardian readers to enjoy yourself :)

Posted by: Vivi | August 18, 2006 02:41 AM


I know what you base your username on, I´ll get back to you soon on that.

Meanwhile, just quit the teenager "ready to kill" s%!t.

Have you ever been up and close when somebody is shot, stabbed, beaten or kicked to death?

Have you any idea?

Not pretty, and I guess you would be as sick as I was the first time I saw it.

Would you consider the wifes or husbands you killed in the "solution o revolution", the children who would be taught " your mama/papa was killed because AMLO said,´with one third of the voting population we have the mandate to rule. We had to exercise my right to be president, your parents disagreed, but we will educate you better´.

It´s not TV you know, death is forever.

And if you want, come and find me, like the dog I am, I´m still waiting

Posted by: PeterN | August 18, 2006 03:55 AM


Don´t get confused with the postings, make sure you address your vitriol to the right person. That can be me if you want....

Please tell me when I claimed I could vote?

Did I ever state that AMLO supporters couldn't work, or earn a living?

Are all Latin American countries left of centre?

Where do you choose to place yourself on the issue of the Mexican system being employed in Iraq? Were you not proud that your system had been chosen? Or at that time did you think, " oh they´ve been setting us up for years" Fox must have planned all of this?

No doubt you saw Saddams gassing of the kurds in the north of Iraq who disagreed with his dictatorship.

I could go on about Saddams brutality but I won´t.

What has it got to do with who was there, are you claiming UK and USA troops "stuffed the ballots" how many of them could have read the text?

This is the best though,

"And now you say you are an aristocrat...PLEAAAAASEEEEEEEEE..."

Did I say I was an aristocrat, or did I say

"I do have an aristocratic history...."

As you may be aware, England was invaded several times, by Romans, Vikings, and most recently (about one thousand years ago) by the Normans. The aristocratic families in the Norman invaders were the ones who had the largest amount of wifes and offspring. You can actually match genetic characteristics to trace back which "Territory" they were granted.

I´ll get you the genetic details soon, since that was my first degree.

But the problem is you have no sense of humour whatsoever, isn´t it?

OK vivi just seen you latest post before sending this one.

Why are you so keen on the Mexico for Mexicans stuff, that's how Hitler got started you know.

Never asked to vote in your election., So no problems there..

Did I say Guardian readers? I believe, as you supported with one of your posts, it was journalists.

Please look into the figures for Guardian readership social groups in England, I´m sure you´ll find they´re just the people AMLO would consider his natural allies.

Finally vivi, don´t just assume, if you want to share in this group.......read and consider. Have I assumed anything about you? If I have, in my own posts please direct, I´ll apologise. Have I stereotyped you? Did you assume that because I mentioned Oxford, I drunk cocktails every night?

Why do losers and socialists always start off by trying to mock the people who disagree with them.

Call we Windsor (or dick, as Maya0 seems to think will work), it´s not going to make a difference.

More tomorrow, this capitalist bastard has to do another 20 hours for no profit, but he´ll pay his employees this evening. Because that was the deal.

Posted by: PeterN | August 18, 2006 04:33 AM


After searching in our rabid capitalist pig
database, my employee Dick Morris and his team of dictator vanquisher campaign experts, (oops I guess I wasn't supposed to divulge that), as I was saying it has been brought to my attention just what mayaO's gender is. He/she is the last Neanderthal hermaphrodite of its species. It was developed in Cuban labs
and perfected by Fidel-o-nada zealot anthropologist social engineers.

mayaO does not fool me anymore. She/he is a 500 pound gorilla on the outside with an inner Tinkerbell afraid to be exposed. A hermaphrodite gorilla, but very lovely if you just have the patience. She is vulnerable, as Hermaphrodite Neanderthals go, don't let that gorilla exterior fool you. She's really a foul mouth Tinkerbell.

I knew you couldn't bite your mouth, that only happens in Vivi Peron's very hot very little head.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 06:54 AM

There's a new Ceci blog.

Posted by: rodolfo | August 18, 2006 10:52 AM

It is obvious that there is no validity in the posted comment, of someone not signing for it.
As I noticed that whoever already has posted comments criticizing Felipe Calderon.
It must be another perredista that as usual is either known to hides his/her real identity or expertices in the use of bad language.
The fact is that Mexico has voted and the majority voted for Felipe Calderon.
and even most of the people that voted for AMLO has already changed their minds.
Felipe Calderon would be our next Mexican President.
His educational curriculum, his intelligence and ideas makes him to be the perfect choice.
On the other hand, AMLO is crazyly fighting for the presidency, BUT,
What good would he bring to MEXICO???
What good would he bring to the Mexican Citizens.
His college grades were terrible, his language skills are awful, and he does not speak good spanish, nevertheless english language.
He makes false promises when he claims he would be increasing the salaries,
This is not the solution to improve Mexico!!
THe solutions are:
Better and affordable school education, better and affordable housing, better health programs.
Calderon would continue what FOX already started.
For the international people that don't know, Now, it so easy now to buy a house in Mexico,
Easier than United States.
Everybody qualifies now,
Even with a low income salary,
FOX created that!!!! PAN DID IT!!!!
Before there were no Mortage loans,
Now look at any Mexican paper and there are all kinds of loans for mexican residents.
I KNOW IT because I have friends and family members that earning the minimiun salary they already own a house,
A HOUSE that would be paid soon.
Not like in USA where takes forever to pay off a home mortgage.
AMLO has critized FOX in the past,
for FOX having a good relationship with United States, AMLO does not like United States, AMLO wants to implement a communist government in Mexico,
He is friends with Chavez and Castro.

Posted by: Kukiss Garcia | August 21, 2006 05:56 PM

Post a Comment

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

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


© 2006 The Washington Post Company