Bush is usually blamed for cronyism, allowing the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer and most leftists, deep down inside hate Bush and love, albeit reluctantly maybe, Hugo Chavez.
But Hugo acts as an x-ray machine, showing us just what hypocrites these Hugo supporters are.
At the center of the argument is that Hugo is good and holy, helping the unfortunates, while Bush is evil and conspires with his cronies to make money and trip old people and murder poor people.
The reality could not be any different.
Not that I believe Gini coefficients matter, but an article in The Economist shows that under Hugo Chavez the Gini coefficient has increased, increasing the disparity between rich and poor.
Additionally if you read the whole article (or just the next paragraph) you'll see Hugo is infinitely more corrupt and cronyistic than Bush ever was, dealing out contracts and deals to his buddies and those loyal to him on levels that make Bush seem like a Swede when it comes to corruption.
But the hard core leftists won't believe it, simply because they don't want to. They have a rationale to hate Bush and love Hugo, to fight capitalism and advance socialism, even if it doesn't carry out their self-proclaimed aims of helping out the poor and fighting off corruption. But that's the rub of it all. It isn't about the poor, the poor are just pawns in this game. It is again, as it always has been, about making the left feel good about themselves. Reality be damned, freedom be damned, economic growth and prosperity and the abolition of poverty be damned, I want to think of myself as a good person.
Though deep down inside, you wonder if they really believe it themselves.