Barack Obama on the freedom of Cuba....
Today's Miami Herald containst an op-ed signed by Barack Obama, who is going to pander to Cubans for their vote in Miami. Let's see if he sings the Bola de Nieve classic, Ay Mama Ine, todo lo negro tomamo cafe on the Versailles sidewalk in another political circus of the ignoramuses. Let's deconstruct his article.... (my words in parenthesis)
Our main goal: Freedom in Cuba (really? This is just kind of news to us, we thought that your damn main goal was to be elected to office!)
Posted on Tue, Aug. 21, 2007 (this seems to be right)
By BARACK OBAMA (or his ghost writer)
www.barackobama.com
When my father was a young man living in Kenya, the freedom and opportunity of the United States exerted such a powerful draw that he moved halfway around the world to pursue his dreams here. My father's story is not unique. The same has been true for tens of millions of people, from every continent -- including for the many Cubans who have come and made their lives here since the start of Fidel Castro's dictatorship almost 50 years ago.
(Kenya was not a communist nation, and Cuba was not the backwoods of Africa, Mr. Obama, even though the 50 years of castrofascism have sent Cuba to a position not even envied by Kenya, the comparison is moot)
It is a tragedy that, just 90 miles from our shores, there exists a society where such freedom and opportunity are kept out of reach by a government that clings to discredited ideology and authoritarian control. A democratic opening in Cuba is, and should be, the foremost objective of our policy. We need a clear strategy to achieve it -- one that takes some limited steps now to spread the message of freedom on the island, but preserves our ability to bargain on behalf of democracy with a post-Fidel government.
(your spinmeisters gets more of the wording right, but this is not about bargaining with a post-Fidel government -that's raul and he only negotiates from positions of force, that spawn of Stalin- this would be about the freedom of Cuba, what did you write in your title?)
The primary means we have of encouraging positive change in Cuba today is to help the Cuban people become less dependent on the Castro regime in fundamental ways. U.S. policy must be built around empowering the Cuban people, who ultimately hold the destiny of Cuba in their hands. The United States has a critical interest in seeing Cuba join the roster of stable and economically vibrant democracies in the Western Hemisphere. Such a development would bring us important security and economic benefits, and it would allow for new cooperation on migration, counter-narcotics and other issues.
(but you have to promise to do all of this without pandering to Cubans and to the tyranny suscessor at the same time, either you have the cake or you eat it. Don't be so afraid to use the word freedom, which has no equivalent in "economically vibrant democracies in the Western Hemisphere". Which are those? The USA, Canada, and Chile are the ones that really qualify into that category. Nicaragua is democratic, but since they elected Ortega is not vibrant or free, for example. Mexico is not even democratic in praxis, even though it is democratic in name)
Advance political reform
(no, it's not political reform what's needed, it's freedom, coño!)
These interests, and our support for the aspirations of the Cuban people, are ill served by the further entrenchment of the Castro regime, which is why we need to advance peaceful political and economic reform on the island. Castro's ill health and the potentially tumultuous changes looming ahead make the matter all the more urgent.
(So, are you taking raul's olive branch? seriously dude, get a grip.... there's no need for reforms of the regime which will continue after castro's demise, as designed. There is a need for dismantling that regime and all that was attached to it. Was Apartheid kind of revamped and salvaged with a few reforms to make it more palatable? No! Was European fascism treated with such a gentle touch and warm towels? I don't think so!)
Unfortunately, the Bush administration has made grand gestures to that end while strategically blundering when it comes to actually advancing the cause of freedom and democracy in Cuba. This is particularly true of the administration's decision to restrict the ability of Cuban Americans to visit and send money to their relatives in Cuba. This is both a humanitarian and a strategic issue. That decision has not only had a profoundly negative impact on the welfare of the Cuban people. It has also made them more dependent on the Castro regime and isolated them from the transformative message carried there by Cuban Americans.
(Congratulations, you've been reading KillCastro, but... this all was started by Bill Clinton, maybe you can also roast your rival Hillary for that, he penned the wet foot dry foot and was the first in establishing limitations of travel and help to Cuba, I mean the first after Castro did his part in Cuba. Bush, well.... he's been a really good student of Bill and screwed it up a bit more with his "dismistakable" style)
In the ''Cuban spring'' of the late 1990s and early years of this decade, dissidents and human-rights activists had more political space than at any time since the beginning of Castro's rule, and Cuban society experienced a small opening in advancing the cause of freedom for the Cuban people.
("Cuban society experienced a small opening in advancing the cause of the freedom of the Cuban people".... really? and when was that? I probably thought that it was a deodorant commercial and ran to the bathroom, because I missed it! Please get in touch with some dissidents in Cuba and they will tell you about the size of the openings, that's a damn closed tyrannical society! The only loopholes are the ones the dissidents carve themselves because of the disfunctionality of the goverment of Cuba. I think that you should call Gorki. But... don't count on him doing a "Come Together" cover for your political campaign!)
U.S. policies -- especially the fact that Cuban Americans were allowed to maintain and deepen ties with family on the island -- were a key cause of that ''Cuban spring.'' Although cut off by the Castro regime's deplorable March 2003 jailing of 75 of Cuba's most prominent and courageous dissidents, the opening underscored what is possible with a sensible strategic approach.
(It served castro very well that the travels and remittances were cut off. Castro puts people in jail and in a wise move, what do we do? we cut the support to the Cuban people -who do you think the dissidents are?- and not only that.... we left them without a safety net, because we are sending them back to Cuba when they escape!)
We in the United States should do what we can to bring about another such opening, taking certain steps now-and pledging to take additional steps as temporary openings are solidified into lasting change.
(Is there anything wrong with advocating for a swift change to democracy through total freedom? Please loss the fear that world, it's freedom. Nothing short or shy of it!)
Cuban-American connections to family in Cuba are not only a basic right in humanitarian terms, but also our best tool for helping to foster the beginnings of grass-roots democracy on the island. Accordingly, I will grant Cuban Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send remittances to the island.
(Congratulations again to your spinmeiesters for reading KillCastro, but... aren't you missing something here? are you going to eliminate the dry-foot wet-foot or not? Are you going to treat the Cuban dissidents with the same level of interests that let's say, Mandela was treated? Are you going to give them the same support?)
But as we reach out in some ways now, it makes strategic sense to hold on to important inducements we can use in dealing with a post-Fidel government, for it is an unfortunate fact that his departure by no means guarantees the arrival of freedom on the island.
(ah, at least you got that right, that his departure doesn't mean that Cuba is going to be free out of a sudden. But, why that interest in dealing with his successor? Do you know that the sucessor is Raul Castro? He's nephew is the cousin of the Diaz Balarts in Congress, talk to them they know the guy. Maybe they don't tell you much because they want their political careers to continue, and that after Raul, cousin Fidelito gets "elected" to officce. That's a transnational political dynasty (move over Bush, move over Kennedy) I already warned you, Raul the Stalinist will negotiate from a position of force, only)
Bilateral talks
(do they want to talk to you, too?)
Accordingly, I will use aggressive and principled diplomacy to send an important message: If a post-Fidel government begins opening Cuba to democratic change, the United States (the president working with Congress) is prepared to take steps to normalize relations and ease the embargo that has governed relations between our countries for the last five decades. That message coming from my administration in bilateral talks would be the best means of promoting Cuban freedom. To refuse to do so would substitute posturing for serious policy -- and we have seen too much of that in other areas over the past six years.
(do you really think that raul will open Cuba to democratic change? if you do, get out the presidential race because your political culture and your knowledge of your enemy is zilch. But maybe Raul is not your enemy. And no to talk to Raul will not promote "Cuban freedom". It would promote a fascist model of thwarted economics otherwise known as the "Chinese model)
We must not lose sight of our fundamental goal: freedom in Cuba. At the same time, we should be pragmatic in our approach and clear-sighted about the effects of our policies. We all know the power of the freedom and opportunity that America at its best has both embodied and advanced. If deployed wisely, those ideals will have as transformative effect on Cubans today as they did on my father more than 50 years ago.
(as I said up above, cut it off already Obama. Your fundamental goal is to be elected to office. Then you -as others- would no nothing for Cuban freedom because you're already thinking that a post-Fidel government might be prone to talks and change. In the back of your mind, you know perfectly well that you cannot negotiate with a fascist or with a stalinist, and Raul Castro is both. You know perfectly well that Cuban freedom will not be achieved with a member of the Kasstro Kommunist Klan in power, or with one of his close associates in power. And no, I don't buy the story of your father, he didn't flee communism, he was not chased by the Cuban Coast Guard and the American Coast Guard working as one solid force, he was not prohibited to visit Kenya or from assisting his relatives back in the old country, and much less was he prohibited from liberating Kenya if he wanted too. Please be reassured of one thing: Cubans in the Island don't vote for American politicians, so they couldn't care less for those desires of negotiating with a post-Fidel government. Cubans in the USA will not give you their vote if what you want is to negotiate with the release 2.0 of the tyranny, at least not the ones who really care for a free Cuba. Suggestion: set up a Cuban city in Guantanamo Base, with prosperity and freedom, take down the dry foot wet foot, and get your spinmeisters to read us more often for more ideas! it's about the freedom of a nation of 12 million souls, not about any political siren song, Obama, got it?)
Sen. Barack Obama is a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.
(as if we didn't know it!)
Our main goal: Freedom in Cuba (really? This is just kind of news to us, we thought that your damn main goal was to be elected to office!)
Posted on Tue, Aug. 21, 2007 (this seems to be right)
By BARACK OBAMA (or his ghost writer)
www.barackobama.com
When my father was a young man living in Kenya, the freedom and opportunity of the United States exerted such a powerful draw that he moved halfway around the world to pursue his dreams here. My father's story is not unique. The same has been true for tens of millions of people, from every continent -- including for the many Cubans who have come and made their lives here since the start of Fidel Castro's dictatorship almost 50 years ago.
(Kenya was not a communist nation, and Cuba was not the backwoods of Africa, Mr. Obama, even though the 50 years of castrofascism have sent Cuba to a position not even envied by Kenya, the comparison is moot)
It is a tragedy that, just 90 miles from our shores, there exists a society where such freedom and opportunity are kept out of reach by a government that clings to discredited ideology and authoritarian control. A democratic opening in Cuba is, and should be, the foremost objective of our policy. We need a clear strategy to achieve it -- one that takes some limited steps now to spread the message of freedom on the island, but preserves our ability to bargain on behalf of democracy with a post-Fidel government.
(your spinmeisters gets more of the wording right, but this is not about bargaining with a post-Fidel government -that's raul and he only negotiates from positions of force, that spawn of Stalin- this would be about the freedom of Cuba, what did you write in your title?)
The primary means we have of encouraging positive change in Cuba today is to help the Cuban people become less dependent on the Castro regime in fundamental ways. U.S. policy must be built around empowering the Cuban people, who ultimately hold the destiny of Cuba in their hands. The United States has a critical interest in seeing Cuba join the roster of stable and economically vibrant democracies in the Western Hemisphere. Such a development would bring us important security and economic benefits, and it would allow for new cooperation on migration, counter-narcotics and other issues.
(but you have to promise to do all of this without pandering to Cubans and to the tyranny suscessor at the same time, either you have the cake or you eat it. Don't be so afraid to use the word freedom, which has no equivalent in "economically vibrant democracies in the Western Hemisphere". Which are those? The USA, Canada, and Chile are the ones that really qualify into that category. Nicaragua is democratic, but since they elected Ortega is not vibrant or free, for example. Mexico is not even democratic in praxis, even though it is democratic in name)
Advance political reform
(no, it's not political reform what's needed, it's freedom, coño!)
These interests, and our support for the aspirations of the Cuban people, are ill served by the further entrenchment of the Castro regime, which is why we need to advance peaceful political and economic reform on the island. Castro's ill health and the potentially tumultuous changes looming ahead make the matter all the more urgent.
(So, are you taking raul's olive branch? seriously dude, get a grip.... there's no need for reforms of the regime which will continue after castro's demise, as designed. There is a need for dismantling that regime and all that was attached to it. Was Apartheid kind of revamped and salvaged with a few reforms to make it more palatable? No! Was European fascism treated with such a gentle touch and warm towels? I don't think so!)
Unfortunately, the Bush administration has made grand gestures to that end while strategically blundering when it comes to actually advancing the cause of freedom and democracy in Cuba. This is particularly true of the administration's decision to restrict the ability of Cuban Americans to visit and send money to their relatives in Cuba. This is both a humanitarian and a strategic issue. That decision has not only had a profoundly negative impact on the welfare of the Cuban people. It has also made them more dependent on the Castro regime and isolated them from the transformative message carried there by Cuban Americans.
(Congratulations, you've been reading KillCastro, but... this all was started by Bill Clinton, maybe you can also roast your rival Hillary for that, he penned the wet foot dry foot and was the first in establishing limitations of travel and help to Cuba, I mean the first after Castro did his part in Cuba. Bush, well.... he's been a really good student of Bill and screwed it up a bit more with his "dismistakable" style)
In the ''Cuban spring'' of the late 1990s and early years of this decade, dissidents and human-rights activists had more political space than at any time since the beginning of Castro's rule, and Cuban society experienced a small opening in advancing the cause of freedom for the Cuban people.
("Cuban society experienced a small opening in advancing the cause of the freedom of the Cuban people".... really? and when was that? I probably thought that it was a deodorant commercial and ran to the bathroom, because I missed it! Please get in touch with some dissidents in Cuba and they will tell you about the size of the openings, that's a damn closed tyrannical society! The only loopholes are the ones the dissidents carve themselves because of the disfunctionality of the goverment of Cuba. I think that you should call Gorki. But... don't count on him doing a "Come Together" cover for your political campaign!)
U.S. policies -- especially the fact that Cuban Americans were allowed to maintain and deepen ties with family on the island -- were a key cause of that ''Cuban spring.'' Although cut off by the Castro regime's deplorable March 2003 jailing of 75 of Cuba's most prominent and courageous dissidents, the opening underscored what is possible with a sensible strategic approach.
(It served castro very well that the travels and remittances were cut off. Castro puts people in jail and in a wise move, what do we do? we cut the support to the Cuban people -who do you think the dissidents are?- and not only that.... we left them without a safety net, because we are sending them back to Cuba when they escape!)
We in the United States should do what we can to bring about another such opening, taking certain steps now-and pledging to take additional steps as temporary openings are solidified into lasting change.
(Is there anything wrong with advocating for a swift change to democracy through total freedom? Please loss the fear that world, it's freedom. Nothing short or shy of it!)
Cuban-American connections to family in Cuba are not only a basic right in humanitarian terms, but also our best tool for helping to foster the beginnings of grass-roots democracy on the island. Accordingly, I will grant Cuban Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send remittances to the island.
(Congratulations again to your spinmeiesters for reading KillCastro, but... aren't you missing something here? are you going to eliminate the dry-foot wet-foot or not? Are you going to treat the Cuban dissidents with the same level of interests that let's say, Mandela was treated? Are you going to give them the same support?)
But as we reach out in some ways now, it makes strategic sense to hold on to important inducements we can use in dealing with a post-Fidel government, for it is an unfortunate fact that his departure by no means guarantees the arrival of freedom on the island.
(ah, at least you got that right, that his departure doesn't mean that Cuba is going to be free out of a sudden. But, why that interest in dealing with his successor? Do you know that the sucessor is Raul Castro? He's nephew is the cousin of the Diaz Balarts in Congress, talk to them they know the guy. Maybe they don't tell you much because they want their political careers to continue, and that after Raul, cousin Fidelito gets "elected" to officce. That's a transnational political dynasty (move over Bush, move over Kennedy) I already warned you, Raul the Stalinist will negotiate from a position of force, only)
Bilateral talks
(do they want to talk to you, too?)
Accordingly, I will use aggressive and principled diplomacy to send an important message: If a post-Fidel government begins opening Cuba to democratic change, the United States (the president working with Congress) is prepared to take steps to normalize relations and ease the embargo that has governed relations between our countries for the last five decades. That message coming from my administration in bilateral talks would be the best means of promoting Cuban freedom. To refuse to do so would substitute posturing for serious policy -- and we have seen too much of that in other areas over the past six years.
(do you really think that raul will open Cuba to democratic change? if you do, get out the presidential race because your political culture and your knowledge of your enemy is zilch. But maybe Raul is not your enemy. And no to talk to Raul will not promote "Cuban freedom". It would promote a fascist model of thwarted economics otherwise known as the "Chinese model)
We must not lose sight of our fundamental goal: freedom in Cuba. At the same time, we should be pragmatic in our approach and clear-sighted about the effects of our policies. We all know the power of the freedom and opportunity that America at its best has both embodied and advanced. If deployed wisely, those ideals will have as transformative effect on Cubans today as they did on my father more than 50 years ago.
(as I said up above, cut it off already Obama. Your fundamental goal is to be elected to office. Then you -as others- would no nothing for Cuban freedom because you're already thinking that a post-Fidel government might be prone to talks and change. In the back of your mind, you know perfectly well that you cannot negotiate with a fascist or with a stalinist, and Raul Castro is both. You know perfectly well that Cuban freedom will not be achieved with a member of the Kasstro Kommunist Klan in power, or with one of his close associates in power. And no, I don't buy the story of your father, he didn't flee communism, he was not chased by the Cuban Coast Guard and the American Coast Guard working as one solid force, he was not prohibited to visit Kenya or from assisting his relatives back in the old country, and much less was he prohibited from liberating Kenya if he wanted too. Please be reassured of one thing: Cubans in the Island don't vote for American politicians, so they couldn't care less for those desires of negotiating with a post-Fidel government. Cubans in the USA will not give you their vote if what you want is to negotiate with the release 2.0 of the tyranny, at least not the ones who really care for a free Cuba. Suggestion: set up a Cuban city in Guantanamo Base, with prosperity and freedom, take down the dry foot wet foot, and get your spinmeisters to read us more often for more ideas! it's about the freedom of a nation of 12 million souls, not about any political siren song, Obama, got it?)
Sen. Barack Obama is a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.
(as if we didn't know it!)
4 Comments:
"dismistakable" style..rolf
He's not gonna get elected anyway, why does he waste his saliva talking shit he's not gonna do a damn thing, just wants to get elected, that's all
Charlie,
Obama just got endorsed by the MINREX through the words of Perez Roque. This is the kiss of death for Obama as far as the Cuban-American community of Democratic voters is concern. No one candidate endorsed by the MINREX will get the Cuban-Americans votes in this election. I am sure Obama is less than thrilled by this new development. As they say: with friends like these, who the hell needs enemies!
That's because the MINREX and the Government of Cuba have their own horse in the race, or actually, a mare: Hillary Clinton. That's why they are "favouring" Obama The Muslim, to get him out of Hillary's way.
Post a Comment
<< Home