The world isn't lacking in politicians caught in love scandals, but Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has embroiled himself in a drama so juicy it feels scripted for daytime soaps.

His ex-wife, Marisabel Rodriguez -- a blond haired, blue-eyed former television anchor (now married to her tennis coach) -- has been mirthlessly needling her ex-husband while she herself campaigns to become mayor of Barquisimeto, Venezuela, on an opposition ticket.

The couple divorced in 2004 after seven years of marriage and made headlines last year when Chávez rather publicly sued over custody issues pertaining to their daughter, Rosines. Though the president withdrew the suit, Rodriguez claimed it was a ploy to sabotage her newly announced political pursuits -- a ruling against her, under Venezuelan law, could have legally kept her from running for public office.

Chávez has good reason not to want his ex to run. Aside from any personal embarrassment the Venezuelan leader might endure over Rodriguez's outspoken campaigning style and her public criticisms of his presidency, he could suffer politically. His high approval ratings are said to be slipping, and the opposition stands to gain significant ground -- as many as one third of the country's governorships -- in regional elections Sunday.

Venezuelans are keen to hear the former Mrs. Chávez's insights on her ex-husband's intentions for his country:

[T]he Chávez of today ... doesn't have much in common with [the Chávez] of 1997,” she said. "If he is not a dictator, at least he seems it."

What's more, Ms. Rodriguez is proving hugely popular among women voters. In general, these women are turned off by the president's "testosterone-pumped politics" and can relate to the former first lady's emotional suffering.

Photo: ADALBERTO ROQUE/AFP/Getty Images

Proposition 8's defeat in California isn't the only thing making headlines for the gay rights movement as of late. According to the Washington Post, gay Mexican citizens who seek asylum in the United States are facing an increasingly uphill battle. Changes to the general asylum policy and a few rejected cases have resulted in what many fear is the end of a practice that provided safety for dozens since the mid-1990s. 

Persecution based on sexuality, in a country where machismo and conservative Catholic ideals run deep, once made a strong enough case for gay Mexicans seeking refuge up north. But liberalized laws on homosexuality and an increase in gay pride efforts have made the case a harder sell. Mexico City now recognizes civil unions, and the city's gay pride parade draws more than a million people each year. 

So why should the United States leave open the possibility of asylum? Despite the gains, negative attitudes in Mexico about homosexuality persist, leading to workplace discrimination and brutality against gays. Between 1995 and 2006, more than 1,200 Mexicans were killed because of their sexual orientation. And for all the good they might have done for the country's gay rights movement, liberalized laws have provoked a backlash from homophobic parts of society -- including some members of the Mexican police force.

Another reason to leave the asylum option? Consider the impact these homophobic attitudes and actions have on the spread of HIV/AIDS. Men who have sex with men in Mexico are over 100 times more likely to contract HIV than the general population. Says Martin Martinez Sanchez, a Mexico City hospital employee, of gay men in the capital city:

They have sexual encounters in clandestine areas, and in parts of the city that are just horrible and dangerous... Later they go home and have unprotected sex with their wives. Many gays feel they have to have a wife for appearances."

For many, asylum might not just mean escaping discrimination -- it can mean a lifeline to better care. Mexico's routine medication shortages mean inconsistent treatment for the disease, which usually requires daily pill dosages. As long as prevention and treatment measures for AIDS lag, the United States ought to think twice before closing its doors.

It appears President-elect Barack Obama's inspirational powers have even reached Cuba's reclusive former leader, Fidel Castro. Although he hasn't made a public appearance in the two years since passing power to his brother, the 82-year-old issued a public statement just before U.S. election polls closed on Tuesday. Predicting the win would go to Obama, Castro gave the Illinois senator a preemptive stamp of approval:

[Obama] was able to study at a higher education center where he graduated with outstanding results. He is surely more clever, better educated and calm than his Republican adversary."

While Castro mostly praises Obama and his "change" factor -- at one point invoking author Toni Morrison's endorsement -- the better part of the lengthy statement is spent lambasting the United States and President George W. Bush. He criticized the "parasitical and plundering empire", the country's history of racism, and deemed the Iraq War one of "conquest imposed by the empire seeking for oil." Castro also repeated his earlier criticisms of John McCain, whom he called "an old, bellicose and uneducated man; he is not very smart and he is in poor health."

Castro is just one of several leftist leaders in Latin America who had warm words for Obama. Among the others is Fidel's protégé, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, who sees the president-elect as "a small light on the horizon." Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega clearly favored the Democrat, saying, "If it's Barack Obama -- and a miracle is produced -- or McCain, our position is that we're ready to work in a framework of respect with the United States."

It would certainly be nice for a U.S. president not to be hated in Latin America and these are vibes worth enjoying since, quite rightly, hard work -- of which there will be much in any future dealings -- and honeymoons don't often mesh well together.

(Hat tip: Albert Eisele)

Photo: Jorge Rey/Getty Images

When you watch this video of Hugo Chávez speaking about Barack Obama, you feel like it was probably the closest the Venezuelan president could bring himself to a complimenting an American leader. Quoted in Spanish newspaper El Pais, he says [our translation]:

Tomorrow the U.S. will have an election. The world awaits the arrival of a black president to the United States, we can say this is no small feat [...] We don't ask him to be a revolutionary, nor a socialist, but [we ask] that he rise to the moment in the world."

Chávez also says he will sit down and speak with Senator Obama, should he become president, and urge him to lift the embargo on Cuba. He seems particularly pleased that Obama is black, a detail that fits nicely with Chávez's own rhetoric of freeing the enslaved indigenous from the throws of capitalism.

So does this mean it's not so much the United States that Chávez finds so displeasing as it is President George W. Bush himself? It's no small news for Chávez, who recently kicked out the U.S. ambassador in Caracas, to promise friendly ties with "the Great Satan" under a new administration.

Of course, the U.S. public has grown equally skeptical of Chávez, so Obama might not be so grateful for the public endorsement. Yes, it is slightly reminiscent al-Qaeda's sort-of endorsement of John McCain. But privately, the Obama camp must be gratified to see that even the United States' most bitter critics are now trying to win the senator's good graces.

Following up on the recent military and energy agreements with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, Russia has now announced a deal to sell five military helicopters to Bolivia. Ambassador Leonid Golubev called it the "first step" in military cooperation with the country's anti-American government:

We want to show the United States that Latin America is not their backyard," Golubev said Tuesday. "We also have interests in various spheres, including military ones."

I get the basic idea here: "You play around in our backyard, we'll play in yours."

But the Russians are kidding themselves if they actually think Americans will be that rattled by Bolivia buying five helicopters. Yes, Latin America is traditionally the United States' sphere of influence, but Americans understand that concept in a fundamentally different way than Russians understand their "near abroad" in the Caucasus and Central Asia.

When U.S.-supported "color revolutions" overthrew Russian-backed governments in Ukraine and Georgia, many Russians (and high-ranking ones) feared they were next on the American regime change list. NATO expansion in Eastern Europe is seen as a direct military threat.

Chávez and Evo Morales certainly aren't well-liked in Washington, but most foreign-policy mavens here see them more as angry buffoons or strategic obstacles, not serious threats to America's sovereignty.

Venezuela and Bolivia are resource-rich countries with a major aversion to yanqui imperialism, so it makes sense that Russia would want to cultivate ties with them. But the Kremlin shouldn't think that Americans will fret about developments in Bolivia in the same way that Russians worry about Georgia or Ukraine. Honestly, the country has bigger things to worry about right now.

JUAN BARRETO/AFP/Getty Images

Hugo Chávez didn't agree with Human Rights Watch's assessment of Venezuela's fall from democratic ways, released in a 230-page report today. He didn't agree that he has "undermined freedom of expression," or that he has undertaken an "aggressively adversarial approach to local rights advocates."

So, with no apparent sense of irony, he kicked out the Americas director of HRW, José Miguel Vivanco (shown here leaving a press conference in Caracas).

Chávez's Ministry of Foreign Relations, quoted in the Colombian newspaper El Tiempo, said in a statement that Human Rights Watch had illegally intervened in Venezuela's sovereignty. But more importantly, he called the organization an agent for the interests of the United States government, "cloaked in the robes of defending human rights, deploying an unacceptable strategy of aggression." 

Alrighty then! According to Human Rights Watch, that's pretty much the standard Chávez reaction when he senses criticism a-brewin'. Clearly, they are on to something.

While everyone has been dissecting whether Obama called Palin a pig, or whether Palin insulted Obama's community organizing, we've missed some rather massive mud-flinging in the United States' backyard.

Last night, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez told the United States to "Go to hell a hundred times." In front of an applauding crowd, he yelled "We have had enough of so much s**t from you, s**t Yankees!" as he expelled the U.S. ambassador, giving him just 72 hours to leave. Watch him here:

I know: Chávez has always been something of a loose cannon (he enjoys calling President George W. Bush a donkey, the devil, and other colorful names). But to think this is nothing more than his usual Yankee-bashing would be a mistake. Minor crisis would be a better interpretation.

The Venezuelan strongman's outburst comes after his neighbor and left-wing soulmate Evo Morales expelled the U.S. ambassador earlier this week, accusing him of backing conservative opposition movements  now protesting in the streets. The United States in turn kicked out Bolivia's ambassador.

Bolivia is in far more trouble than just having a few picketers on the street. Morales has proposed drastic energy and government reforms, to be voted upon in December, that would consolidate his power and allow him to redistribute agricultural land. Protesters, demanding a greater autonomy from the government in the natural gas industry, have shut down much of the country and dozens have been killed in street fighting. Perhaps emboldened by joint exercises with Russia, Chávez promised to militarily intervene if his buddy Morales is lifted from power.

But the U.S. government is in no mood for such funny business. Not only has the State Department sent the Venezuelan ambassador packing, but the Treasury Department today called out Venezuelan officials for helping the cocaine-trafficking rebel group FARC in neighboring Colombia.

"Today's designation exposes two senior Venezuelan government officials and one former official who armed, abetted, and funded the FARC, even as it terrorized and kidnapped innocents," said Adam J. Szubin, director of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, in a toughly worded press release. Interpol accusations that Venezuela -- and even Chávez himself -- aided the FARC first surfaced this summer after Colombia got its hands on a FARC laptop, but this is the first time the U.S. government has formally charged any Venezuelan officials.

No doubt Chávez has a response up his sleeve.

BEHROUZ MEHRI/AFP/Getty Images

Remember Angel Matos, the Cuban Olympic martial artist who kicked a referee in the face after he was disqualified from a bronze-medal taekwondo match? According to Fidel Castro, he was totally justified since the match was obviously fixed:

"They had tried to buy his own coach," Castro wrote in his essay, published in state media. "He could not contain himself."

Cuba is accustomed to winning gold in boxing, but settled this year for four silver and four bronze medals. Overall, Cuba took home only two gold medals, down from nine in Athens four years ago.

"I saw when the judges blatantly stole fights from two Cuban boxers in the semi-finals," Castro wrote. "Our fighters ... had hopes of winning, despite the judges, but it was useless. They were condemned beforehand."

After their ejection, Matos's coach alleged that he had been offered a bribe before the match by their Kazakh opponents.

Castro vowed big changes for Cuban sports in the four years in order to counter the "European chauvinism, judge corruption, buying of brawn and brains...and a strong dose of racism" that they were sure to encounter in 2012.

I never like to tell a fellow blogger what he should be writing about, but it seems to me that Castro would better serve Cuban sports by praising an exceptional Cuban athlete like hurdler Dayron Robles, who turned in one of Beijing's more dominating performances, rather than sticking up for an unprofessional bully like Matos.

NELSON ALMEIDA/AFP/Getty Images

Despite the recent biofuel backlash, there is one place still singing the praises of ethanol. It's estimated that Brazil has cut fuel costs by 30 percent since switching to fuels based on sugarcane -- an agricultural commodity that the country produces in droves. And the country hasn't just saved money from its biofuel habit: it has been turning some profit too, exporting several million tons of its crop to the United States, Europe, and even Japan this year and last.

Brazil's happiness with the ethanol boom underlies an important point about biofuel production: namely, that a regional or country-tailored approach works best. For a nation with a high production of sugarcane -- which packs more than five times the energy of corn and hasn't resulted in major environmental degradation -- it's understandable why biofuel is so popular and promising.

The sugarcane situation in Brazil isn't without its shortcomings: some sugarcane workers face slave-labor conditions, while some worry that their jobs will be replaced by more mechanized cane-cutting. But sugarcane production is an overwhelming boon for Brazil, and other countries would do well to learn from it's success -- and to benefit from it themselves.

The U.S. could step up its imports of cheaper, greener Brazilian fuel rather than continuing to subsidize domestically produced corn-based ethanol. The anti-biofuel crusaders could also stop lumping together Brazil's sugarcane with other "bad" ethanols so that countries like the U.S. will continue to lower trade barriers. That'll be a sweet deal for everyone.

It's going to be hard to top this Reuters headline for hilarity:

Chavez may hug king, won't shut up

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez said on Sunday he would like to give the king of Spain a hug when he visits Europe next week, but the outspoken leader, referring to a diplomatic spat last year, said he will not shut up.

Memín Pinguín might be adored in his native Mexico, but he hasn't been feeling much love lately on the other side of the border. Wal-Mart has stopped selling comic books featuring the popular Cuban-Mexican character after a customer in Texas complained about the boy's racially insensitive appearance. Memín's mother, who looks an awful lot like Aunt Jemima, sparked similar complaints.

Let's be honest: Memín's huge lips, dark skin, and big ears really don't make for a flattering physical portrayal of African-Americans (Houston community activist Quanel X likened Memín's appearance to a monkey and his mother's to a gorilla).

But many Mexicans don't get what all the fuss is about, especially because they consider Memín a hero rather than a mocking caricature. He's known to them as an impish, yet thoughful boy who helps out his mother by shining shoes and selling newspapers. Says Javier Salas, a Spanish language radio-show host in Chicago,

We grew up reading, learning and educating ourselves with a lot of the topics [Memín Pinguín comics] always touched on, which was honesty, justice, tolerance. He was a very unique character."

The culture clash over Memín isn't new. Three years ago, a Mexican stamp collection featuring his likeness was discontinued after African-American leaders protested his stereotypical appearance. Yet despite the hits Memín has taken, his status as a Mexican cultural icon and a teacher of important life lessons isn't likely to fade. Nor too are the use of beloved cartoons that provoke outcries on both sides of the border (Speedy Gonzales, anyone?). Still, Memín could probably benefit from a facelift. Until then, his lessons on tolerance risk being overshadowed.

El Espectador/Getty Images

Colombia announced today that it has rescued 15 hostages held by the country's notorious FARC guerillas, including former Colombian presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt. The rescued group also includes three American military contractors who were seized when their plane went down in FARC territory during an antinarcotics mission.

Fans of Betancourt worldwide are thrilled. A dual citizen of Colombia and France, she became a venerated figure during her six-year captivity, her frail figure and willfull words focusing the world's attention on a hostage crisis in a remote part of the Andes. Yet the celebration is bittersweet. As Betancourt and 14 others go free, largely because of their status as "bargaining chips" used by the FARC to gain political concessions, hundreds of others reportedly remain behind in the guerrilla group's hands.

JUAN MABROMATA/AFP/Getty Images

Republican presidential candidate John McCain jets off to Colombia tonight, where he'll stay for just a day before visiting Mexico. While he'll no doubt devote most of his time to photo ops with presidents Uribe and Calderon, here are a few things Senator McCain (or any future U.S. president) ought to know about Latin America before he goes:

• No "radical socialist revolution" is sweeping the region. Aside from Venezuela's Chávez, the aging Castro brothers, and to a lesser extent, Bolivia's Evo Morales and Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega, Latin American leaders are moderates (e.g. Lula in Brazil, Kirchner in Argentina, and Bachelet in Chile). These countries enjoy fairly good relations with El Norte, with which they have cooperated more closely on the trade and environmental fronts in recent years. Lula even signed an ethanol accord last year with George W. Bush, promising to boost research and production of biofuels.
• Since 9/11, President Bush has spent more time on security issues than on building Latin American goodwill. Talks on immigration reform with then-Mexican President Vicente Fox stalled and immigration enforcement got tougher. Latin American opposition to the Iraq invasion got pretty heated too -- Mexico and Chile both voted against the invasion at the U.N. in 2003, to Bush's displeasure. A transcript released last year revealed that Bush even threatened to stall a free trade agreement with Chile if the country voted against the United States. Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, and El Salvador each had troops in Iraq at one point, but only El Salvador's remain.
• The drug war remains a major flashpoint. From 2000 to 2006, the United States spent $5.5 billion on Plan Colombia to combat drug production in the Andes, but cocaine production rose 14 percent from 2002 to 2007. Aerial spraying, an integral part of Plan Colombia, often kills licit crops and destroys farmers' livelihoods. And farmers in Bolivia have recently said they will stop accepting aid from USAID because the United States "undermines" leftist President Evo Morales. They plan to rely on Venezuela for help instead.
• Trade brings its own share of touchy points. NAFTA has met with mixed reviews for the less-than-expected boost it has given the Mexican economy. Many in Latin America fear that CAFTA will have a similar impact -- Costa Rica just narrowly ratified the agreement, almost two years after the U.S. Congress passed it. In Colombia, 57 percent approve of the proposed bilateral free trade agreement with the United States, which awaits congressional approval. President Bush and Senator McCain both support it, but Human Rights Watch has warned against its passage, citing the hundreds of Colombian trade unionists that have allegedly been killed by paramilitaries in recent years. Leading Democrats, including Barack Obama, also oppose the agreement in its current form.

In 1960, the average Brazilian woman had 6.3 children. By 2000, the fertility rate was down to 2.3. The decline was comparable to China's, but Brazil didn't have a one-child policy. In fact, for a while it was even illegal to advertise contraceptives.

Many factors account for the drop in Brazilian fertility, but one recent study identified a factor most people probably wouldn't consider: soap operas (novelas). Novelas are huge in Brazil, and the network Rede Globo effectively has a monopoly on their production. Here's a sample:

During the past few decades, the vast majority of the population, of all social classes, has regularly tuned into the evening showings. The study, conducted by Eliana La Ferrara of Italy's Bocconi University and Alberto Chong and Suzanne Duryea of the Inter-American Development Bank, analyzed novelas aired from 1965 to 1999 in the top two time slots and found that they depict families that are much smaller than those in the real Brazil. Seventy-two percent of leading female characters age 50 or below had no children at all, and 21 percent had just one child. Hence, the authors hypothesized that the soap operas could be acting as a kind of birth control. 

Using census data from 1970 to 1991 and data on the entry of Rede Globo into different markets, the researchers found that women living in areas that received Globo's broadcast signal had significantly lower fertility. (And yes, the study did control for all sorts of factors and addressed the concern that the entry of Globo might have been driven by trends that also contribute to fertility decline. I'll spare you the gory econometric details.) Additionally, people in areas with Globo's signal were more likely to name their children after novela characters, suggesting that it was the novelas specifically, and not TV in general, that influenced childbearing.

These findings on the power of TV are reminiscent of last year's FP article "TV Privileges," which reported on a study about the effect of satellite TV on Indian villages. Women living in villages that acquired satellite TV -- whose shows tend to depict relatively liberated urban women -- came to have less tolerance for spousal abuse and less bias in favor of having boys. They also became more able to spend money without a husband's permission.

It all suggests that soap operas can be a soapbox for social change.