Many in the media have celebrated Hugo Chavez as a person dedicated to helping the poor and empowering the powerless. He has been characterized as a hero, a great friend and even huggable. ABC News, CBS News, The Associated Press, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Atlantic, Bloomberg TV and many other news publications have portrayed Chavez as passionate leader who provided food and education for the poor. And it hasn't just been the media; former US President Jimmy Carter encouraged Venezuelans to remember Chavez's positive legacy, especially how he helped the poor. US Representative Jose Serrano calls Chavez a leader who was committed to the poor. Hollywood elites like Sean Penn, Michael Moore and Oliver Stone have distinguished Chavez as a great hero.
Meanwhile, Canadian academia at the University of Montreal's department of psychoeducation have released a study this past week characterizing Mother Teresa as a fraud who didn't actually help the poor. The study claims Mother Teresa had 517 missions in 100 countries at the time of her death, but practically all of the missions ignored its patients and did not care for them. They concluded that Mother Teresa left people to die. But it's not only the University of Montreal that has attacked Mother Teresa's legacy. British journalist and outspoken social critic, Christopher Hitchens, has notoriously attacked Mother Teresa. In 2004, Meg Greene released her book, Mother Teresa: A Biography, which recounts an article by the Lancet medical journal claiming Mother Teresa is responsible for neglecting the poor and dying.
The extent to which liberals in the media and academia have perverted the truth is mind-boggling. They would have you believe that the world is worse off for having lost Hugo Chavez, but better off for having lost Mother Teresa. The fact that people must stand up against such obvious lies is pathetic. The media and academia have embraced moral relativism and they embarrassingly struggle to distinguish between Chavez and Mother Teresa.