Please. The U.S. stance toward Venezuela, except for the 2002 coup and especially since then--and even that, as Arbenz and Allende could tell you, was a pretty halfassed effort--has been marked more by tolerance than anything else. That is, when it hasn't been indifferent to the developments there. There are probably many reasons for this--other priorities, inability to pull off a counterrevolution because of diplomatic constraints, etc.--but at least part of the reason is that the U.S. realizes its "interests" are not threatened by Venezuela. The occasional mildly belligerent statement by U.S. officials only acts as a reminder that the U.S. has been relatively unconcerned with Chavez.
But this has done nothing to relieve Chavez--and when I say "Chavez," I don't of course just mean the person--of the feeling that the U.S. is out to get him. It's as if every moment of silence from the U.S. is a provocation, more evidence of subterfuge. You can see this most obviously in his louder and more frequent statements, especially since 2004, about U.S. imperialism and the like. But the fear that he will be overthrown is evidenced in his actions: the increasing importance of the military to the revolution, his desire to become president for life, his dissolving of independent unions in the name of "cooperatives," the unification of parties, etc. All while the U.S. ignores him.