Bush Fully Committed to Democratic Transition in Cuba

[Osolomia]

26 September 2003

The Bush administration is fully and firmly committed to encouraging a peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba and the President's Initiative for a New Cuba is the best way to this end, says Under Secretary of State for Economic, Business and Agricultural Affairs Alan Larson.

In a September 4 statement before the Senate Finance Committee, Larson outlined the Bush administration's support for a democratic transition in Cuba, the wide-spread condemnation of Castro's recent repression, and the Castro regime's manipulation of tourism, investment and commerce.

The Bush administration's policy toward Cuba is "designed to encourage a peaceful transition to a democratic government characterized by strong support for human rights and an open market economy," Larson said. President Bush, he noted, is "firmly and fully" committed to this goal.

To this end, President Bush announced in May 2002 an Initiative for a New Cuba that challenges the Castro regime to undertake political and economic reforms. In particular, Larson explained, the initiative calls for the Cuban government to allow free and fair elections for its National Assembly, open its economy, allow independent trade unions, and end discriminatory practices against Cuban workers.

More…
http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&y=2003&m=September&x=20030926124736relliMS0.2089655&t=usinfo/wf-latest.html

Whow, that’s a lot of propaganda to swallow hook, line and sinker no questions asked in this internet day and bushwhacked age. But even Dems can do it, just watch the presidential contenders!

[ixion]

1. shouldn't they put the word democratic in quotes, when * uses the term?

Bush committed to 'democratic' transition in Cuba. There that fits, because the last thing Bush wants anywhere is a democracy. He's much more comfortable with tyrants and puppet regimes.

[indepat]

15. Because being dictator is

"easier?"

[oneighty]

2. Trade Unions? Indpendent?

Could use some-a-that-there kinda democracy in those right to work states. Must be a misprint.

180

[CO Liberal]

3. CO Liberal Fully Committed to Democratic Transition in America

Where Democrats take over at all levels of government, and Bush and his croneys are sent to prison.......

[glarius]

4. Can we expect to hear "axis of evil" bandied about any time soon?

Every time I hear that the moron has his attention on any country I start to worry about an invasion....:scared:

[patdem]

5. Castro's repression??? what about Asscraft???

Loved this line: the wide-spread condemnation of Castro's recent repression,

Like...we got gitmo....right down there IN CUBA...idiot in chief!!!

[sallydallas124]

6. Hmm...

Time to drag out old Operation Northwoods?

[FlemingsGhost]

7. Bush should be committed.

Wild-eyed and crazy as a shithouse rat, in my opinion.

[Malva Zebrina]

52. I agree, one hundred and fifty percent

Ugh--he is totally insane and should be impeached because of his insanity.

[Alpharetta]

8. Oh cool! Can we call it a "roadmap"?

n/t

[Minstrel Boy]

9. I agree. Guantanamo Bay sounds like an awful place.

Nothing urgent. They're saving Cuba for Jeb's first term.

[Chico Man]

11. "Fully commited to human rights" and Guantanamo, Cuba..

What an ass.

[saigon68]

24. He's not an ass

He's a MOTHERFUCKER. and if one believes what is going on in Guantanamo--- A War Criminal like Goring or Hess

[bushisanidiot]

10. Isn't That Code For "We're gonna bomb the hell out of 'em"?

isn't that how we bring 'democracy' to other countries now?

[Chico Man]

12. We only do that when we want to show we're not "all bark"

and no bite.

sure way to peace, my friend!

[DoYouEverWonder]

13. W is committed to CANF

And paying them back for staging the Elian fiasco and for sending in the riot squads during the 2000 recount in Florida.

[Vogon_Glory]

14. Cubans As Cynical About Bush's Democratic Objectives As We Are

The island Cubans are every bit as cynical about George Deucey-U Bush's "committment" to fair and open elections in Cuba as most DU readers. The island Cubans are well aware of Deucey-U Bush's brother Jebito's role in the 2000 elections.

I feel sorry for the Cubans. While I am thoroughly cynical about the Republican Party and the CANF's desire to return to the island and roll the clock back to 1958, I think that Fidel's regime has been a two-ton weight on the abilities of most island Cubans to better their lives and their economy. I hope whoever replaces mister beard opens up the Cuban economy, even if to only as limited an extent as Tito did in Yugoslavia; the Cubans would be one heck of a lot better off for it.

--VG

[Mika]

16. VogonGlory

Perhaps you are unaware of the fact that Cuba's economy is opening up.. to everyone but American citizens. Cuba's economy is growing, and private ownership & capitalism is becomong more entrenched in Cuban society every day. Cubans and the Cuban government are (and have been for decades) pleading for the US government to end the US sanctions against them.


Americans are banned by their own government, not the Cuban government, from freely going to Cuba to see this for themselves.



It is also the American economy that is negatively impacted by the outdated and ineffective sanctions against Cuba. That is one reason that the farm belt states are seeking more trade with Cuba.


The US sanctions against Cuba exist primarily to pander to a small minority of wealthy Cuban-Americans in Miami.

[Osolomia]

17. The pandering to a minority of Cuban-Americans

is the pathetic excuse Dems have been using for over a decade now to justify this immoral and unethical and internationally condemned embargo.

I for one expect a hell of a lot better than pathetic pretzel logic excuses from the Democratic Party in this internet day and bushwhacked age but after reading DU sure as hell don't expect it to happen any time soon.

[Mika]

19. I'm not justifying it

Just pointing out how pathetic it is.

[Vogon_Glory]

71. I Have Traveled to Cuba--I Remain Cynical About Castro's So-Called Reforms

Yes, I am aware that there is more private investment in Cuba these days, and that many of the hotels and resorts are built with foreign capital and employ Cuban workers. Nevertheless, I wonder just how deep these private-sector reforms go.

Just how much freedom do individual Cubans have to buy and sell their labor and keep at least some of their profit? Are they allowed to compete with state enterprises, and what happens if they do? Just how large does a Cuban small business get before it's considered "too big" and is nationalized and/or suppressed?

Reading Ben Corbett's This Is Cuba: An Outlaw Culture Survives makes me sceptical as to how sincere or how deep these long-needed reforms are.

I may oppose the trade embargo and the travel ban on US citizens wishing to visit Cuba. I may also oppose the deposed kleptocratic Batista-era elite and their exile politics. But I do believe that at least some private-sector activity is a cornerstone of freedom and I see no reason to conceal the current Havana regime's foul-ups because I also oppose the hermanos Bush's and the CANF's policies.

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. Hi, welcome to DU

BTW: Did you know that Jeb's business partner, Armondo Codina was on the Board of Directors of CANF for many years. Nothing like consorting with known terrorists. Without CANF, W probably won't have been able to steal the Florida's electoral votes.

[Sick of Bullshit]

33. Opening up the Cuban economy

Canada trades legally with Cuba. However, a Canadian was arrested and jailed in the US because he traded with Cuba while he was living and working in Canada.

The problem, mis amigos, is the hypocritical posturing of the United States vis-a-vis Cuba.

[Mika]

36. Not quite

"Canada trades legally with Cuba."

Not quite. This is a red herring that relies on the basic lack of understanding of the US's Helms-Burton law.

The US Helms-Burton law prevents any business that trades with the Cuban government from doing business in the USA. (For example: Bayer cannot sell Aspirin to the Cuban health care system without foregoing their US business, by US law. Obviously Bayer will choose the vastly larger US market.)

While Canada does have normalized diplomatic relations with Cuba, Canadian business that do biz with Cuba cannot do biz in the USA.

The US embargo on Cuba is made extraterritorial by the US's Helms-Burton law (and hundreds of amendments).

[dflprincess]

18. As I recall, it was reported that when Castro heard about this

in particular the line about "...for the Cuban government to allow free and fair elections". His response to Bush* was "You first."

[Mika]

20. Please show us a link to that

"His response to Bush* was "You first." ''

Please post a link that shows that Castro said that.

[dflprincess]

23. I'm sorry I don't have one

I think I heard it on MPR - but I can't swear to it. It was so long ago. I do know it was a reliable news source and I just howled when I heard it.

[leesa]

22. The last thing bush wants anywhere is democracy

The rich elite HATE democracy.

[saigon68]

25. He wants a dictatorship

where those who are anointed by wealth and power "lead" the little people.

[Osolomia]

26. Show me a Dem prez candidate saying anything different than Bush

Therein lies the problem folks!!!

[Eloriel]

27. What? Does Cuba have oil or somethin'?

Gotta be some reason.

And is it just me, or is this insanely arrogant:

To this end, President Bush announced in May 2002 an Initiative for a New Cuba that challenges the Castro regime to undertake political and economic reforms. <\i>

Like, is it REALLY our business?

And if they're talking about "free and fair elections," does that mean we're trying to sell them Diebold or ES&S machines?

Eloriel

[Osolomia]

30. Goes to show what a foolish strategy ABB is

When even DUers haven’t a clue why Cuba policy is an issue in so many states nor where their Dem presidential candidates differ from Bush on it, if at all. Ignorance is bliss eh?

[havocmom]

31. Maybe the Bahamas are out of P.O. boxes for huge Amerikan Corps?

And the Golbal Feudalists want a new offshore colony for their tax dodges?

[Judi Lynn]

28. Brazil's President Lula da Silva visits Cuba

Posted 9/26/2003 2:00 PM

Brazilian president arrives in Cuba
HAVANA (AP) — Brazil's leftist president arrived in Cuba Friday for a 26-hour visit to discuss regional trade, aid and political integration with his old friend Fidel Castro — while keeping quiet on the communist island's internal affairs. (snip)

(snip) Relatives and supporters of the Cuban dissidents have asked Silva to intervene on their behalf during meetings with Castro. But after his meeting Thursday night with Mexican President Vicente Fox, Silva indicated he had no such plan.

"I don't give opinions about the internal political conditions of other countries," Silva told a Mexico City news conference. (snip)

(snip) Brazil's national Development Bank is negotiating a credit line of up to $400 million to finance Cuban imports of Brazilian machinery, farm equipment and food.

Santiago said Silva might also begin renegotiating a $40 million Cuban debt and arrange the purchase of some Cuban products. (snip/...)

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-09-26-brazil-cuba_x.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This bit of additional connection should surely help get things moving more quickly for Cuba, wouldn't you think?

I'm sure a whole lot of people will be watching to see what retribution the _Bush collection visits on Brazil after this bit of uppity negotiation with Cuba knowing they are dead set against ANY COUNTRY, EVER having a business relationship with a country our right-wing psychopaths have tried to destroy.

[Mika]

35. On foreign leaders/dignitaries meeting "dissidents"

Why should American's insist that leaders & dignitaries of foreign countries meet with Cuban dissidents under the watchful eyes of Cuba's avowed enemies?

Is there any pressure put upon foreign leaders & dignitaries to visit dissidents in the USA? Is there any pressure put on foreign leaders & dignitaries to visit America's prisoners of conscience who languish in Bush's brutal and overcrowded barracoons?

Its pure f-ing hypocrisy.


_

On the US funded so called "independent journalists" and "dissidents" in Cuba..


Would the US government permit avowed enemies like Libya or Al Queda (as an example) to fund a "dissident" movement bent on overthrowing the US government IN the USA, just as the US (the avowed enemy of Cuba) does now in Cuba?

Would the US government permit avowed enemies like Libya or Al Queda to fund "independent journalists" IN the USA to write anti American propaganda for foreign consumption, just as the US (the avowed enemy of Cuba) does now in Cuba?

Would the US government permit avowed enemies like Libya or Al Queda to fund and stock anti American propaganda in illegal "independent libraries" IN the USA, just as the US (the avowed enemy of Cuba) does now in Cuba?

The answer to the above three questions is no.

[Judi Lynn]

29. Bush isn't going to like this news -

Posted on Sat, Sep. 27, 2003

Port to send goods to Cuba
DANA SANCHEZ
Herald Staff Writer

Port Manatee officials learned at a trade show in New Orleans on Friday that a second shipment of animal feed will be headed to Cuba from the port next week.

The first shipment was made in January, marking the first time Port Manatee had done shipping business of a non-humanitarian nature with Cuba since the trade embargo imposed in the 1960s. The embargo actually predates the port, which opened in 1970.

Arthur Savage, president of A.R. Savage & Son, the shipping agent representing the Cuban buyer Alimport, said the trade represents the fourth to Cuba for his company from Tampa Bay this year. Two were sent from Port Manatee and two from Tampa Bay.

And there's more to come, Savage said.

"We expect that to grow steadily and expand into phosphate fertilizers shipping from Port Manatee and Tampa," Savage said. "The Cuban government is soliciting more and more cargoes to go through Tampa Bay. We'll be down in Cuba next month talking about how to grow it." (snip/...)

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradentonherald/news/local/6873233.htm

Fascinating watching so many American towns moving ahead, creating their own individual exchanges with Cuba, while _Bush and his crew and the Miami Mafia plot and scheme smashing and grabbing Cuba for their own personal interests.

[Gin]

32. The headline has a misprint...should have read...

"Bush Committed! Mental Illness obvious."

[Osolomia]

34. Fascinating watching DUers ignore the Dem candidates on this

Here’s a very quick sample from the past few weeks for those who do want to know where they stand:

Fri, Sep. 19, 2003
CAMPAIGN 2004
Presidential candidate Clark's first stop is in Broward deli
The retired general says he wants to 'listen to people' before taking stands on issues such as the Cuba trade
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/6808621.htm

Thu, Sep. 18, 2003
Candidates lack original ideas on Cuba policy
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/columnists/jim_defede/6798041.htm

September 15, 2003
Democrat Howard Dean supports U.S. embargo of Cuba
http://www.themilitant.com/2003/6731/673105.html

Mon, Sep. 01, 2003
Keep Cuba sanctions, Democratic presidential candidate Kerry says
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6666091.htm

[Jack Rabbit]

37. Pardon me while I laugh

Okay, I've never thought Castro to be above criticism. However, while he may not be the best Cuban leader imaginable, he has been for over forty years the best one available.

Casto's Cuba today is better off than it was on January 1, 1959, when Fidel rode into Havana as Batista fled. He has a better public health care system than the US. The standard of living for most Cubans is up.

Bush would replace this with a "free market" economy, which no doubt would work the same wonders for Cuba that it has for Argentina. Those who rhetoically speak of the failures of Communism loudest would replace it with another tried-and-failed system, unbridled capitalism. It may work for the rich in the North, but for the rest of us it has been a disaster.

Bush's initiative offers Cubans nothing. They would lose their economic gains, modest as they are, and send them North. Of course, that is exactly what the Frat Boy has in mind.

[Mika]

38. Castro does not rule Cuba

"However, while he may not be the best Cuban leader imaginable, he has been for over forty years the best one available.

-

Casto's Cuba .."



Castro isn't a one man band. Focusing on the one man is pure distraction from the real Cuba. Cuba adopted a parliamentary system in 1976, by popular vote. The elected Cuban National Assembly is occupied by about 603 leaders.

Democracy in Cuba
http://members.attcanada.ca/~dchris/CubaFAQDemocracy.html




BTW, On January 1, 1959, Fidel Castro addressed a crowd of 1million people in Santiago de Cuba. He arrived in Havana on January 8 to address several million Cubans after a one week tour of Cuba called the Caravana de la Libertad.

[Judi Lynn]

39. It would be interesting seeing magazines from that time, wouldn't it?

I admire this Albert Korda (source of the world-famous "Che" image) photograph of the guy who climbed the lamppost to get a better look, the "Don Quijote of the Lamppost":

[Mika]

40. JudiLyn

Try to find this book,


It has many photos that I know you would love to see.

[Judi Lynn]

41. Thanks, Mika!

Looked it up at Amazon, it must be a whopper, at $65.00 in soft back!

Think I'll check at the local library first.

Had no idea it contained more than immediate information about that narrow window in time, 1997-1998. Very good news.

Good Cuba photos are intriguing. Very interested in running this book down now.

By the by, how cool to learn YOU WERE THERE to witness the proceedings.

[Osolomia]

75. Pardon me while I puke

If “Bush's initiative offers Cubans nothing” then what initiatives are the Dem presidential candidates offering as an alternative?

Apparently many Dems here are content to let Bush and Florida’s Batistiano “exiles” do whatever the hell they want in Cuba while keeping American-Americans ignorant and travel banned for many more years to come using the excuse that the issue isn’t important enough to deal with. Naw, that doesn’t smell like complicity huh!

[Judi Lynn]

76. Yeah, we shouldn't worry our pretty little heads about this

Just leave it all to the right-wing extremists and the Cuban exile group which hires the bombers and assassins, as we have in the past.

What makes any of us think we are entitled to visit countries which have never been at war with us? It's just best we went on about our business, and stay the hell out of Cuba, because that's the way our most corrupt right-wing reactionary politicians and the violence-prone Cuban "exile" organization want it.

[Osolomia]

42. Cuba: Now Or Never?

Cuba: Now Or Never?
BY CINDY LOOSE
washingtonpost.com;
Sep 28, 2003

… … Such opportunities are about to end for most Americans, or at least for those not of Cuban descent.

A 42-year-old U.S. embargo against Cuba has severely restricted travel, but exceptions had included trips for religious, family and humanitarian reasons, and for "educational, people-to-people contact." That exception was the largest for Americans without Cuban relatives.

But in March, the Bush administration issued two sweeping changes: Cuban Americans would be able to visit Cuba more often and without a compelling humanitarian reason, but travel permission would no longer be given for educational and cultural tours.

This month, the House of Representatives countered the administration's crackdown by passing an amendment to end the travel ban to Cuba. It also passed a less sweeping amendment that would restore permits for educational and cultural visits. However, Bush has vowed a veto.

Tour operators that held permits for travel to Cuba before the new ban are quietly advertising "last chance" visits before their permits expire on or before Dec. 31. If you want to see Cuba before it becomes a forbidden country, better act fast.

… One afternoon, I meet with government officials, who estimate that if the embargo were lifted, 5 million Americans would visit Cuba annually. I ask how the country could suddenly handle such an influx.

"We would like to assume the challenge," answers Juan Fernandez, a foreign ministry spokesman. "We want to see Americans here visiting us. Our only limitation is our infrastructure. Our hearts are open."

Cindy Loose will be online to discuss this story Monday at 2 p.m. during the Travel section's regular weekly chat on www.washingtonpost.com.

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/03/r_travel_092903.htm

[Judi Lynn]

50. Great article.

( I think you may have attracted a gusano/a, Osolomia. Didn't see his/her post before it disintergrated.)

I heard it explained that when the Miami Mafia Representatives, Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Mario Diaz-Balart, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and their New Jersey cousin Robert Menendez go balistic and start putting pressure on American born legislators to keep the ban ON Americans, they are speaking from the position of someone who has never been affected by this travel ban.

The travel ban is okey dokey with them, as they don't get their travel restricted. Very ugly, very selfish, very nasty on their parts.

[Osolomia]

57. The lack of public outrage to Bush banning educational trips to Cuba

while swinging the door wide open for the “exiles” is revolting. Imagine what the reports are going to be like next year when even fewer American-Americans are free to go and see what’s happening in Cuba for themselves if the Senate vote does not pass or Bush vetoes it? Even so, it appears Bush has pre-empted lifting the travel ban by banning educational exchanges with Cuba under his latest war on sex and human trafficking, again without an informed peep from the loyal opposition.

Such silence on Cuba policy speaks of complicity of the Dems until proven otherwise imho.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bridget Burke]

44. No, we're more concerned about Democracy in the USA.

It's in some danger, especially since the stolen election of 2000.

Castro is not perfect but the current regime in Washington has abolutely NO moral high ground.

We need to see some fair elections here, first.

[Osolomia]

46. With no difference between Bush and the Dem candidates on this issue

What "moral high ground" do the Dems have? Any wonder why anyone would be disgusted with the hypocrisy behind DU's ABB campaign?

[Mika]

47. What is DU's ABB campaign?

Please fill me in on what ABB stands for? :shrug:

[Jack Rabbit]

48. Anybody But Bush

EDITED for typing.

One is resolved to vote for the Democratic candidate regardless of who he is -- even Lieberman -- because he can't be worse than the yuppie fascists we have now.

I count myself in this camp. Bush stands outside the American political tradition and is a threat to democratic institutiuons. Think of it as the situation in which French Leftists found themselves in 1940. They were able to make an alliance with General de Gaulle, who was politically a sober conservative, in order to drive the Nazis from their soil. Other political arguments were postponed until after the war.

[Mika]

49. Thanks J R

Anybody But Bush.. Damn, I knew that too.. yikes.. my brain cells weren't firing on that one.

Thanks.

[Osolomia]

51. Dems have been avoiding the issue for over 10 years now

This will be the 4th such presidential election campaign except this time ABB is the Dem’s new excuse since pandering to the Cuban-American “exiles” doesn’t hold water any more in the face of the bipartisan majority who want the embargo lifted.

So you elect Anybody But Bush, then what? Duh!

[Jack Rabbit]

53. We're doing this with our eyes open

There are many issues I'd like to address, including relations with Cuba, that won't be.

On the other hand, we can withhold support over matters like that and see Bush re-elected. Then we might get branded terrorist sympathizers and disappear into some military brig or Gitmo for suggesting that relations with Cuba be improved.

[Judi Lynn]

54. Speaking of Gitmo, just found some interesting info. today

which I had never heard on the physical aspects of the place:

(snip) After US relations with Cuba deteriorated with the rise of the Revolution, Guantanamo underwent a serious face-lift. During the 1960s the base expanded to include 2 parallel full length run way system, with dual control towers. Enough anchorage to accommodate 42 ships, (the exact number required to constitute a complete war fleet). The navy stations 16,000 permanent military personnel at the base, with an additional 20,000 rotating in and out of the base through out the year. Deepening of the harbour to allow submarine access, and a 5 km wide mine field encompassing the perimeter of the base, which isolates it from the rest of the island. The navy also established its own power facilities and road systems. And in the 1990s the first McDonald’s arrived in Cuba at Guantanamo Base.

During the Revolutionary struggle between 1956 and 1959 Fidel and the Guerrillas wisely chose to avoid attacking the base at Guantanamo, as a US reaction would be devastating for everyone on the Island. Instead, the base has remained a thorn in the side of Cuban nationalistic spirit. As a protest, Fidel has not cashed a single rent cheque for Guantanamo since 1959. Tourists can pay eight dollars to travel to a hillside near Guantanamo and look through the telescope to see the going ons of the base.

The US has no interest in closing, or scaling down its operations in Guantanamo, although it costs an estimated $400,000,000 annually to operate and maintain its “high alert status”. Not to mention the fact that geographically, the base is in an inconvenient location for transatlantic, and even Pan-American voyages. In fact the navy has brought Guantanamo back into the spotlight with the holding of Afghani prisoners at the base. (snip/)

http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~idis309/issuesaboutCuba.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I had no idea the base was this LARGE, or had this many people working there!

[Osolomia]

56. Excuses, excuses, excuses. Pathetic!

Like I said, this is the 4th election campaign since the Soviets left Cuba that Dems have been making up excuses to avoid the issue, in this case, even when there's a bipartisan majority in Congress that wants the travel ban lifted now despite Bush's threatened veto! So who's side are you on?

[Mika]

58. So how about some suggestions or solutions.

Osolo, how about posting a short list of suggestions for DUers who support a candidate who might have 'reservations' about ending the US embargo on Cuba, especially if that includes all of the candidates?

<sarcasm on> Vote Green? <sarcasm off>

[Osolomia]

59. If Dems won’t support the MAJORITY in Congress and across the country

who have figured this one out and are defying Bush on the embargo, then what kind of “democracy” do Dems have in mind if elected?

It's going to take a helluva a lot more than just ABB to win imho.

[Jack Rabbit]

60. I agree. It's pathetic.

Our relations with Cuba are absurd. They remind me of the way we backed Chiang Kai-shek for many years. That was pretty silly, too.

Every American president in my memory (and that goes back to Ike) has pronounced Castro's impeding doom. They've been predicting his downfall for so long that he is now (if I am not mistaken) the world's senior head of state.

You're right. For years we heard we survived because the Soviets poured money into his economy and that without them he was doomed. Well, he survived the fall of the Soviet Union, too; not by just a couple of years, but by 14 years. It is obvious that the Cuban Revolution has something more going for it than Soviet sponsorship. Recognoizing that is long overdue.

On the other hand, I regard Bush as a threat to American democratic institutions and our tradition of civil liberties. Relative to that threat, the issue of normalization of relations with Cuba is not very important to me, one way or the other. You may have reasons to feel differently, and I respect them. However, I don't think we should stake the next election on Cuba. I don't think we should stake it all on capital punishment (which I oppose) or medical marijuana (which I favor), either.

We should stake the 2004 election on the restoration of political liberty, on re-establishing multilateral agreements on climate and arms control that Bush has torn apart, on putting a stop to the PNAC agenda, on focusing a war on terrorism on real terrorists rather than using it as an excuse to invade sovereign states for their natural resources, about deveoping renewable energy sources so we don't tempt ourselves to go to war over somebody else's natural resources and on fair taxation.

That's the problem we're facing right now. It's not just that Bush has made such a mess of things, but that he has made a mess of things because he is alien to both the traditions of Jeffersonian democracy that has been inherent in America for over two hundred years and of internatinal co-operation since the end of World War II. Consequently, the election of 2004 will be fought over broad issues of what kind of government should America have and what kind of international framework should we have. In that kind of political climate, there will little time to discuss narrow, specific issues like normalizing relations with Cuba.

[Judi Lynn]

61. Maybe it's not obvious that something else is going on here

Maybe this might help clarify a few questions. It's not the best I can find, just the first I found which seemed possibly helpful in google:

(snip) It would be inaccurate, however, to portray Mas and his supporters as a criminal gang. He and the members of the organization that he created, the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF), are politically sophisticated extremists with a tight grip on the Cuban-American electorate. They direct Cuban Americans to vote overwhelmingly for hand-picked candidates, who purvey hard-line anti-Castro policies in Tallahassee and Washington. Farther afield, CANF's money has helped elect presidents and has heavily influenced the outcome of political struggles in Latin America and Africa, always on the conservative side. And, most importantly, the foundation has succeeded in imposing its views on the Clinton administration, literally dictating its policy toward Cuba.

For newcomers to Caribbean politics, the puzzling question is how an organization of first-generation immigrants, not a majority even in Miami, gained so much power. How did it restrict freedom of expression in Miami by dictating local ordinances that forbid public appearances by Cuban artists and sports teams? How did it bring the federal government to finance radio and television stations dedicated to beaming anti-Castro propaganda to the island? How did it persuade Congress to pass the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996 (the Helms-Burton Act), which directs the U.S. government to impose sanctions on foreign companies that trade with Cuba, thereby eliciting immediate opposition from Canada, Mexico, France, and other major U.S. allies?

In answer to these questions, outside observers have commonly focused on Cuban exile leaders' disregard for fair play and ruthlessness in pursuing their goals. In 1992, the Miami Herald ran an editorial opposing the bill sponsored by New Jersey Congressman (now Senator) Bob Torricelli, a liberal Democrat, which aimed at tightening the existing embargo against Cuba. The Herald's opposition to this bill infuriated CANF, which had donated money to Torricelli. Mas went to Miami's Spanish radio stations to denounce the newspaper as an enemy of Cuban exiles, likening it to Granma, Cuba's official daily, in its suppression of dissenting opinions. This was followed by a public intimidation campaign in which 60 Miami public buses were decked with ads in English and Spanish reading "I DON'T BELIEVE THE MIAMI HERALD." Destruction of dozens of the newspaper's selling stands and death threats to its personnel followed. Although the Herald's editors gallantly resisted this offensive, the paper trod much more carefully thereafter when addressing CANF's initiatives.

In the same spirit, Mas and his supporters never hesitated to brand their congressional opponents and South Florida critics as stooges of Fidel Castro and friends of communism. Their influence over a powerful media apparatus made these charges stick, at least in South Florida. (snip/...)

http://www.prospect.org/print/V9/38/portes-a.html

Once you start really looking into it, you'll see there are MANY American politicians who have gotten totally bound up with these people, in hopes of gaining the power of their voting bloc, in a state with a large electoral vote. They wield, for the moment, a lot of power. If the embargo is lifted, the travel ban removed, these people will be up the proverbial creek, their "power" totally shot to hell, and we can have more streamlined elections, possibly.

[Osolomia]

63. That was then, this is now

And now A BIPARTISAN MAJORITY WANTS THE SANCTIONS LIFTED!!!!!!

Obviously CANF no longer has the power and influence it once had, not even in Florida!!!!!

Except when it comes to 2004 Dem presidential candidates.

[Osolomia]

62. There’s no time to address this issue is another favorite Dem excuse

The world is not going to stand still waiting for Dems to get their act together in their own hemisphere. Meanwhile, do you know anything at all about what’s been going on in Congress and in state legislatures all across the country in regards to Cuba policy in the past few years and few weeks? You are aware of the vote in the House, and the upcoming vote on this issue in the Senate eh?

Nobody’s talking about “staking the next election on Cuba” and it’s this kind of moronic pretzel logic by Dems that stinks. It may not concern you but the fact of the matter is there is a bipartisan majority that wants the embargo and travel ban lifted now. For one thing, it’s worth hundreds of millions of dollars in sales by US farmers in 38 states already. Go and tell them that the Dem Party is too busy with other things to even give enough of a damn to take a stand and see what happens! Especially when Bush has thrown the doors wide open for the Cuban-American “exiles” to travel and do whatever they want in Cuba while banning American-Americans from setting foot on the island. What’s next while Dems are sound asleep at the wheel?

[Jack Rabbit]

64. You make good points, but normal political discussion is not in order

These could be brought up, but not as the centerpiece of any presidential campaign. It will be drowned out by discussion of greater issues and even put aside for the purpose of forging some very strange and necessarily temporary alliances.

Let me put it to you this way: in 1940, when the Nazis overran France, the French Left favored independence for Algeria and Indochina. General de Gaulle favored continued French rule over those countries. Did the French Left refuse to make an alliance with de Gaulle because of his committment to colonialism? No, they made an alliance with him to rid France of Nazis.

Meanwhile, in China, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek insisted that he could fight at once two wars: one against the Japanese and the other against the Chinese Communists. Mao's Communists kidnapped Chiang and forced him to agree to a truce with them so that they could fight the Japanese invaders as a united front. Of course, the offer of a truce and a united front with the Communists against the Japanese was one Chiang couldn't refuse. On the other hand, the Communists didn't need to offer him anything under the circumstances. They could have just killed him; but if they had done that, there would have been an internal power struggle in China that Mao and the Communists knew would be a disaster for their nation.

In both of these cases, conflicts between rivals were postponed in order to deal with a far greater and more immediate threat to all sides. That is what I believe should be done now.

Mr. Bush and his aides stand outside the tradition of American politcal thought. They seized power after losing an election and have used that power to remunerate those who paid the bills for Bush's unsuccessful election campaign and successful coup by giving to them the keys to the federal treasury. After the US was attacked by terrorists on September 11, Mr. Bush did not make a serious effort to apprehend the perpetrators of the attack or to avoid wars that might have proven unnecessary had he persued other channels. Instead, he fought wars to seize territories and force open markets to multinational corporations controlled by his cronies. In addition, Mr. Bush used the attacks to further consolidate his ill-gotten power by restricting civil liberties, then to start a war against Iraq predicated on a pack of lies unchallenged by jounalists employed by his corporate cronies. In all this, Bush and his aides govern alternately as banana republic dictators and totalitarian thugs.

Bush must be driven from power. His dominance of American political life creates a national emergency. All our energies must be directed toward the goal of defeating him and discrediting the neoconservative movement so that it is never again a force that threatens American freedom or the health of American society. To this end we should invite all those who oppose Bush and desire to restore the rule of constitutional law; liberals, progressives and even sober conservatives should be invited to join in the struggle against this common enemy. After that, we can go back to arguing about normalizing relations with Cuba, the death penalty and whther marijuana should be legalized for medical purposes.

So far, you have called my reasons for wishing to postpone a national debate on Cuba an "excuse" without addressing the gravity of the situation that I describe. The election of 2004 is not going to be an ordinary presidential election. We are being presented a choice between liberty and empire, between constiutional law and concentrated power in the hands of a tyrant, between the sovereignty of the people and the sovereignty of multinational corporations. Please address this. How is Bush's control of power not such a threat that we can afford to discuss ordinary issues in an ordinary manner?

I agree with you about Cuba in principle. I believe this is something citizens of free society should discuss. However, America is no longer a free society. Under these circumstances, the kind of discussion about this issue and several other issues that would do them justice will not be possible. If you want to direct anger at someone for this state of affairs, please direct it at Mr. Bush and his cronies. They are the ones who have created a national crisis that pits liberty against tyranny, not I.

[Billy Burnett]

66. Question for Jack Rabbit

Jack Rabbit, I agree with you wholeheartedly regarding the importance of electing a different regime in the USA.

What I don't understand is why would candidates shy away from an issue that would win them support.

The policies of sanctions and embargoes have clearly failed to accomplish their objectives and in addition to hurting the common Cuban the sanctions have hurt US businesses and jobs.

A bipartisan majority of both houses, and a majority of Americans and a majority of Cuban-Americans and 99% of the international community support ending the US sanctions against Cuba - just why do the Democratic presidential candidates refuse to get on board with the majority of almost every demographic (except a small minority of hard core exiles)?

Wouldn't supporting the stance held by the majority of Americans, a majority of states, a majority of US workers and businesses, and a majority of both houses in DC help the larger issue of ousting the Bush regime? Wouldn't it support the principal of representative democracy?

Please explain why it wouldn't.

Thanks

[Osolomia]

68. The silence of the Dems reeks of complicity with Bush

imho.

[Jack Rabbit]

70. I am saying it will not be a major issue

I am also saying that I will not make it litmus test in my support for a candidate.

Increasingly, my litmus for supporting a candidate opposing Bush is to hold a mirror under his nose and see if it fogs.

[Osolomia]

67. Egads, “normal political discussion is not in order”?

While a bipartisan majority all across the country is defying Bush on Cuba policy Dems should keep their heads in the sand and let Bush and the Batistianos do whatever the hell they want in Cuba, especially after doing such a great job in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Nobody is saying this should be the "centerpiece of any presidential campaign" so why do you keep trying to twist it that way? If a bipartisan majority across the country is "free" to talk about this issue, especially with a vote in the Senate expected any week now, then why can't you?

Sorry, but I’m not about to vote for more ignorance and hypocrisy and pathetic excuses. Dems are going to have to do a hell of a lot better than that imho.

[Jack Rabbit]

69. Clarification

While a bipartisan majority all across the country is defying Bush on Cuba policy Dems should keep their heads in the sand and let Bush and the Batistianos do whatever the hell they want in Cuba, especially after doing such a great job in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I agree. If the Bushies make a move against Cuba like they did against Iraq, that should be an issue -- a big one. they've made some noise in that direction that should be of concern. On the other hand, if all the Bushies do is continue the silly embargo that has been going on so long that Castro is now the world's senior head of state, that will be dwarfed by other issues.

Nobody is saying this should be the "centerpiece of any presidential campaign" so why do you keep trying to twist it that way? If a bipartisan majority across the country is "free" to talk about this issue, especially with a vote in the Senate expected any week now, then why can't you?

Okay, we agree that this is not going to be an important issue. If the Senate votes in favor of lifting some restrictions on Cuba, so much the better. If Bush vetoes any legislation, he can be thumped for it before the matter goes to page 2.

Sorry, but I’m not about to vote for more ignorance and hypocrisy and pathetic excuses. Dems are going to have to do a hell of a lot better than that imho.

Here, I disagree. I am not willing to risk losing votes to Bush over Cuba. Over the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and over the doctrine of pre-emptive wars, yes. Over tax cuts that benefit only the rich while defunding the nation's infrastructure, yes. Over Mr. Bush's misuse of the Spetember 11 attacks to mask colonial wars as a war on terror, yes. Cuba is a small issue next to that.

If Cuba is a small issue, as we seem to agree that it is, then why should I withhold my vote for Bush's opponent because I may disagree with that person over his policy towards Cuba? Again, that would be like refusing to join the French underground in 1940 because de Gaulle supported French rule over Algeria.

This is war. Anybody but Bush.

[Osolomia]

73. Bush has already made a number of moves but they don’t bother you

Who is going to thump Bush for vetoing the upcoming Senate vote
when even you and the Dem presidential candidates are NOT supporting the MAJORITY in the first place and think it doesn’t matter?

It may not be an election issue in your neck of the woods but it is in others. Keep your head in the sand on this and other issues at your own risk of blowing it big time!

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Judi Lynn]

55. Link to article on Brazil's new business arrangement with Cuba

developed by a country which has not knuckled under, in uncontrolable fear of _Bush's plans for the Hemisphere.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=135682

[Vogon_Glory]

72. Lula Knows That Size Matters

Brazilian President Lula doubtless knows that when your country's economy and military reaches a certain size and weight, you can afford to make decisions that upset the Republican Party and the Cuban exile lobby. Unlike Venezuela, for example, Brazil has reached that happy plateau where they can afford to do more of what they please without having to worry as to whether Dubya will have a hissy fit or not.

[Judi Lynn]

74. Brazil would be a little harder to shove around, for sure!

It's refreshing seeing a country in this hemisphere which is not cowering in a corner, in recognition of the U.S. history throughout Latin America.

It's really too bad more Americans haven't taken the time to start looking into what has really been happening. Maybe they're waiting until their great grandchildren explain it to them.

Welcome to D.U., VogonGlory! :bounce: :bounce: :hi:

[Say_What]

65. Title 18, Section 91 of US Code: Agents of foreign governments

Rather than try to overthrow a sovereign nation, the USSA ought to practice what it preaches.

---

Section 951. Agents of foreign governments

(a) Whoever, other than a diplomatic or consular officer or
attacheAE1, acts in the United States as an agent of a foreign
government without prior notification to the Attorney General if
required in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(b) The Attorney General shall promulgate rules and regulations
establishing requirements for notification.
(c) The Attorney General shall, upon receipt, promptly transmit
one copy of each notification statement filed under this section to
the Secretary of State for such comment and use as the Secretary of
State may determine to be appropriate from the point of view of the
foreign relations of the United States. Failure of the Attorney
General to do so shall not be a bar to prosecution under this
section.

<http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/45/sections/section_951.html>

---

Can everyone spell H_I_P_O_C_R_I_S_Y???