Ummm…does anyone notice that Chavez is legally elected? He is a punk and he may try and stay on beyond his term which would be a problem. However, this bit of framing is disingenuous. The rule of law must be given strong weight in determining when elections take place. There are times when exceptions are reasonable and necessary. Maybe this is the time, but that isn’t the argument being made. Instead the opponents of Chavez are attempting to frame the debate as Chavez being the impediment to the well workings of democracy when he is following the law.
The real problem seems to be what if he wins the next election? Do the opponents accept such a result or do they continue to subvert the process?