Yep, the "love it or leave it" argument misses the essential push and pull of ideas that are crucial for a democracy (or republic!) to thrive. That said, let's not mistake the current Venezuela for a real democracy. They've just violated their own 1999 constitution (re-written after Chavez was elected the first time). In the event of death of a president in this case, the leader of the legislature (Diosdado Cabello) is supposed to take power temporarily. Nicolas Maduro (the VP) would still be allowed to stand for a presidential election held within 30 days of Chavez's death. However, the Venezuelans inexplicably swore in Maduro today. Would be nice for the O.A.S. to show some consistency and refuse to recognize Venezuela until this constitutional wrong is righted. They stood up to Honduras in what was more ostensibly a constitutional transfer of power against Manuel Zelaya after he broke the law. To not do so here would signal that the Banana Republics (pardon the expression, but it's really pretty accurate) are firmly in charge of that organization.

Why is this important? Chavez nominated Maduro as the more-pure Communist who would be more aggressive about toeing the revolutionary line. People in the government have long suspected that Cabello is a rightist/centrist in leftist clothing. He has closer ties to moderate elements in the military and is know to favor a (slightly) more centrist economic view. Think Brazil but with more spending/debt.