You can tell a lot about the character of a journalist by the way they correct their own errors.
Apparently the VIO requested a correction of Andres Oppenheimer’s allegation the other day that the so-called “Rule By Decree” law allows Chavez “to sign sweeping economic and political laws, including one allowing for his indefinite reelection.” And so, today we get this:
Post script: The Venezuela Information Office, which according to its website is funded by the Venezuelan government, says I incorrectly stated in my last column that a new ''enabling law'' will allow President Hugo Chávez to, among other things, call a referendum to change the Constitution and allow his indefinite reelection. Indeed, Chávez has repeatedly said he will do that, but this is unrelated to the new law.
So, he uses his retraction to get a little dig in against those who pointed it out. And, he totally misrepresents his original statement. If he’d mentioned the referendum in the first place, nobody would have been asking for a retraction. Now, I’m no psychoanalyst, but this “correction” sheds a little light on Mr. Oppenheimer’s personality.
How old are we, dude, twelve?
