Congressional Black Caucus hearts Castros
posted at 10:55 am on April 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Leftists just don’t know when to stop. One can argue that the Cuban embargo has been a failure without trying to turn Fidel and Raul Castro into heroes. Unfortunately, the Congressional Black Caucus couldn’t figure that out, and instead beclowned themselves by fawning over the two men who have oppressed journalists and democracy activists for 50 years:
“The fifty-year embargo just hasn’t worked,” CBC Chairwoman Barbara Lee (D-Ca.) told reporters this evening at a Capitol press conference after returning from a congressional delegation visit to Cuba. “The bottom line is that we believe its time to open dialogue with Cuba.”
OK, that’s a defensible position. So far, so good …
“It was quite a moment to behold,” Lee said, recalling her moments with Castro.
Aaaaaand there we go down the rabbit hole.
Does she mean in the sense that meeting Joe Stalin would be? Unfortunately yes, although not in the sense that most free people would think. Nor was Lee the the only besotted participant:
“It was almost like listening to an old friend,” said Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Il.), adding that he found Castro’s home to be modest and Castro’s wife to be particularly hospitable.
“In my household I told Castro he is known as the ultimate survivor,” Rush said.
How sweet! Did they by chance ask whether the Castros offer that kind of hospitality and friendship to people who just want to vote freely in open elections? Or do they get thrown into prisons and accused of treason for their desire to have a representative democracy run Cuba instead of a military junta serving the dictators who suckered them into the meeting?
Apparently not. Supposedly, Democrats stand for human rights, but these Democrats went to a nation with one of the world’s worst records on human rights — and talked about Barack Obama. They demanded an end to the embargo. Apparently, they didn’t bother to demand an end to oppression and to dictatorship, which gives an indication of the CBC’s priorities.
I wonder if they got autographs from the Castros, too.
Update: Greg Hengler has video of Lee defending the visit.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Why don’t they move their families to communist Cuba.
tarpon on April 8, 2009 at 10:56 AM
The CBC must have been each given a rice cooker. Who couldn’t resist saying nice things about a dictator when you are given a rice cooker?
WashJeff on April 8, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Why should anybody be surprised at this?
notagool on April 8, 2009 at 10:57 AM
To Bobby Rush, I am sure it was like listening to an old friend – maybe memories of good times while they were making (molotov) cocktails…
Vashta.Nerada on April 8, 2009 at 10:59 AM
“It was almost like listening to an old friend,” said Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Il.)
If your “old friends” are Stalin, Hitler, maybe Ted Bundy and Charles Manson, I can see it.
paustin110 on April 8, 2009 at 11:00 AM
The second word in the “Head Line” says it all.
JoeySlippers on April 8, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Castro is a Man-Made Disaster
blatantblue on April 8, 2009 at 11:02 AM
What a bunch of useless idiots. I wish they would go to Miami and ask the Cubans there about how wonderful Cuba was under Castro.
kingsjester on April 8, 2009 at 11:02 AM
One of the dipsticks that visited Fidel is Bobby Rush, former Communist Party member, felon, Illinois Black Panther founder and author of HR45….whomever states that these Socialist and National Socialist Democrats aren’t up to evil will need to BACK AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE.
nelsonknows on April 8, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Because the CBC hates America, they must side with any others who hate America, no matter how vile and evil they may be. A simple philosophy of a warped psyche. Although these assclowns were elected into very cushy and well-paying and important offices, America is still racist and oppressive and just plain awful. Yeah, I get it. All honkeys suck…unless they are communist honkeys.
SKYFOX on April 8, 2009 at 11:04 AM
And it is so shocking that the cities they run seem to be JUST LIKE cuba!
Isn’t that a marvelous coincidence.
benrand on April 8, 2009 at 11:05 AM
CBC = dopes.
I worked in Miami for about three years in a professional environment with a fair number of Cuban-Americans. They are wonderful: generally conservative, family-oriented, rarely at a loss for words. And they hate Castro.
Sorry, CBC, I’m with the Cuban-Americans on this one. You are simply dopes.
BuckeyeSam on April 8, 2009 at 11:05 AM
And homosexuals too.
So why did Fidel’s daughter flee the workers’ paradise that is Cuba?
rbj on April 8, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Not surprised, with friends like these……
UltimateBob on April 8, 2009 at 11:05 AM
But you know conservatives are crazy people for thinking we’re headed for socialism. Where would we ever get such ideas?
msmveritas on April 8, 2009 at 11:06 AM
The Congressional Black Caucus is a Socialist and Racist organization that needs to go away immediately. Since when do Idiots representing Racist groups make US Foreign Policy? If Castro’s Socialist State looks good to them, let them go there and not come back.
There will come a time when the American taxpayer will tire of this treason and sedition. There will be a backlash that could make the US Civil War look like a church picnic. I would not advocate the overthrow of the government but when the majority of Americans see their quality of life going away, they will hold someone responsible.
old trooper2 on April 8, 2009 at 11:08 AM
So let me see if i have my Democrat decoder ring set right. When referring to the Republicans, you say they are fascists, and that they are stifling free speech, and they are terrorists, without a shred of factual proof. But when you actually meat a person that fits all those descriptions, you kiss there ass.
MDWNJ on April 8, 2009 at 11:08 AM
For the first time in my adult life I am proud of my life-long home state of Illinois. I mean George Ryan, Obama, Blago, and Bobby Rush, who wouldn’t be.
WashJeff on April 8, 2009 at 11:09 AM
I listened to this lady speak on TV last night and she gave off a peculiar mixture of defensiveness and searching for the right tone. She was taking herself very, very seriously and came off as somewhat to very shallow. Best described as an odd and uncomfortable moment for both the speaker and the listener.
jeanie on April 8, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Fidel Castro is an “old friend” only to dictators and wanna-be dictators. Nobody else.
RBMN on April 8, 2009 at 11:11 AM
C’mon Ed, don’t be a racist.
/sarcasm
therightscoop on April 8, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Socialism . . . probably not, but communism would be a good bet.
rplat on April 8, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Does anyone know the opinion of the Congressional White Caucus on this?
carbon_footprint on April 8, 2009 at 11:11 AM
meh. its sort of a “duh” moment for the CBC to show up at Castro’s door. harp on the ironies to be sure…but from a realist perspective the opening up of relations with Cuba has no costs and definite benefits (not political benefits, of course, as the loud anger of a vocal minority drowns out a silent majority).
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 11:12 AM
HUMAN BONDAGE is something the BLACK CAUCUS should be very, VERY sensitive too….but I guess “movin’ on up” does tend to cloud one’s memory.
TREASON. Plain and simple.
FOLKS>>>>BUILD YOUR ARK…..its coming . And SOON.
seejanemom on April 8, 2009 at 11:13 AM
I would say that these liberals would be just as fawning of Hitler if he were alive to day, but he was white.
Grafted on April 8, 2009 at 11:14 AM
The socialism would be appealing. And that’d mitigate most other things.
lorien1973 on April 8, 2009 at 11:14 AM
As is the Congressional Black Caucus.
AZCoyote on April 8, 2009 at 11:16 AM
I think most people agree, but that isn’t what the cbc, was doing. They were fawning over a dictator. Like ED said, if they would have left it at this….
dont think it would have been a big deal.
MDWNJ on April 8, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Considering their shared ideologies, this isn’t that surprising.
Thank you, JFK, for the situation we have in Cuba. That was a real bang-up job he did with the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis, not to mention the Berlin Wall. I guess that’s what happens when the blood meant for one’s brain is constantly redirected elsewhere.
Send_Me on April 8, 2009 at 11:17 AM
lifting the embargo will not improve the life of regular cuban slaves, it will just strengthen the regime.
Castro also claims the CBC told them the reason the Embargo is because of “RACISIM” in America
jp on April 8, 2009 at 11:18 AM
The CBC, the NAACP, Al Sharpton’s group of racist crazies. Shall I go on? Oh yeah, I almost forgot Jesse Jackson. Well, I’m not sure what point that I was going to make, but I think you get the drift?
pcpower1 on April 8, 2009 at 11:19 AM
the irony in this is that Castro himself is white and very racist against blacks or Mulatos in Cuba. Most of his political Prisoners are blacks, and they are routinely tortured.
jp on April 8, 2009 at 11:20 AM
From my link above:
It goes on to say:
In other words, he wants YOU, the law abiding American citizen to be an unarmed sitting duck, so that his illegally-armed BPP buddies can come and help themselves to your wealth and your wives and daughters.
Sounds like a plan to me.
This communist is a threat to the safety of all Americans. He should be behind bars, not sitting in Washington making laws.
UltimateBob on April 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM
yeah that’s fair, but at the same time…who’s taking the CBC seriously? and even if we were…this is their M.O…not exactly shocking. just more proof that they’re that far gone.
taking a foreign policy position that serves no US interest just doesnt make sense. keeping the status quo because changing it wont help a 3rd party is an inadvisable way to go about international relations. its not about regular cubans, its about US interests…which are not served in any way by embargoing Cuba.
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Castro nearly pulled off an attack on the level of 9/11 in NYC in the 60′s, only reason it didn’t happen was because of Hoover’s FBI.
really think this is a guy we can trust? the same guy who is working with Islamic radicals and Russia against US interest.
jp on April 8, 2009 at 11:26 AM
the embargo does serve US interest, atleast the moral interest and given Castro’s past actions against the USA, a national security interest.
jp on April 8, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Lee and Rush were both members of the Black Panthers. Castro, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Mao, Hugo Chavez are all right up their alley.
mchristian on April 8, 2009 at 11:30 AM
Big Al must be feeling left out, so he’s started another one of his big media campaigns.
Al Sharpton calls for Arizona sheriff to step down.
When does it stop?
Knucklehead on April 8, 2009 at 11:30 AM
What interests would be served by ending the embargo?
mchristian on April 8, 2009 at 11:31 AM
These idiots representing our country had the nerve to go to a communist country and make a statement that America was RACIST? They should never be allowed to represent our nation in any capacity if they are going to talk against our nation.
workingforpigs on April 8, 2009 at 11:31 AM
you’re delusional if you really believe Cuba still represents a national security interest. and if moral superiority is part of our basket of interests…what of our dealings with the Saudi’s, or Egypt? Egypt is every bit as bad as Cuba when it comes to prisons and stifling dissent. Personally, i don’t consider moral obligations under the realm of US international interests…and so i consider our stance towards Egypt an acceptable trade off in support of our interests. But its tough to make a legit case for the embargo serving US interests.
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 11:32 AM
We can’t be a racist nation, since we have them as ignorant slugs going on trips and a Black president, who do these people think they are.
workingforpigs on April 8, 2009 at 11:32 AM
I want a White Caucus!!!
Sonosam on April 8, 2009 at 11:33 AM
The interests are minor, to be sure, but there nonetheless. bilateral trade being good, that alone is enough of a benefit to outweigh the costs (of which there are none). plus an influx of american tourists could bring with them journalists and private citizen human rights types that can get information in and out of the country. sunlight is a powerful disinfectant after all.
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 11:34 AM
ergo congressional black caucus members are morons
D2Boston on April 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM
I always knew they were Commie lovers! What’s worse is that tax payer dollars fund this racist group. The “Congressional ‘Black’ Caucus” is inherently racist and their funding should be ended. The same with the Latino caucus. Just try having a “Congressional ‘White’ Caucus” and see what happens!
CrusaderPatriot on April 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Does anyone actual believe that lifting whatever is left of the embargo will change things in Cuba?
That the Party apparatus and state security will allow the trade and tourism to reach the ordinary people?
Cuba trades and has relationships with Canada, Mexico, Sweden, Japan, Germany and every other major industrialized nation in the world.
Why hasn’t that trade worked to open up the country?
Whatever economic benefits accrued by Cuba with greater trade with the US will be siphoned off by the Party to benefit the members.
That’s what they’ve done for the past 25 years with trade with Europe and Latin America.
Okay, the embargo is an anachronism that made sense during the Cold War. Let’s eliminate it.
But let’s not kid ourselves as to the effects on the Cuban dictatorship.
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Let’s not forget the Russias discussed stationing Russian naval assets in Cuba recently. Furthermore, Chavez talks up military ties with Cuba. So, your statement, “delusional if you really believe Cuba still represents a national security interest,” seems a far fetched. If unchecked and not monitored, Cuba could become a large national interest.
WashJeff on April 8, 2009 at 11:36 AM
I am sure that Castro would love to open relations, then he could send all of his loosers on a boat legally and have the Americans support them.
workingforpigs on April 8, 2009 at 11:37 AM
I just threw up.
ladyingray on April 8, 2009 at 11:38 AM
Birds of a feather.
MB4 on April 8, 2009 at 11:40 AM
And obviously our embargo has prevented movement on these issues…
a trade embargo and russian naval assets are unrelated, as indicated by the fact that the rhetoric is being put out there regardless of the state of the current embargo.
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Sure, China is all cleaned up.
mchristian on April 8, 2009 at 11:42 AM
If only there would be reciprocity we would come out way ahead.
MB4 on April 8, 2009 at 11:42 AM
I believe the State Department lists Cuban as a state sponsor of terrorism. At least they have in the past.
They’ve provided support for numerous Latin American terror groups.
So, we’re going to have trade with state sponsors of terror?
The only country, I believe, that we have such an economic relationship with.
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 11:43 AM
The Messiah leaves town for a few days, and the Congressional idolators have to seek another figure to worship?
catmman on April 8, 2009 at 11:43 AM
I did not make any statement on the embargo. I was commenting on your statement, “delusional if you really believe Cuba still represents a national security interest.” That I believe is utterly wrong. How to contain Cuba? Well since I am not privey to intelligence, as our POTUS says, “It is above my pay grade.”
WashJeff on April 8, 2009 at 11:44 AM
The only country named as a state sponsor of terror that is.
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 11:44 AM
I was IN Grenada in October 1983 for Operation Urgent Fury, these Castro Bastards CANNOT be trusted and folks, don’t buy the History Channel Propaganda, Grenadans didn’t overthrow their government, they were INVADED.
P.S. (Cubans jump like binnies when you shoot them) MWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA
nelsonknows on April 8, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Makes sense, Castro has made quite a good living propagandizing and exploiting poor people for his own ends. Why shouldn’t likes attract likes?
LevStrauss on April 8, 2009 at 11:45 AM
Princesses all, who can feel a pea under forty mattresses.
MB4 on April 8, 2009 at 11:45 AM
They were no asked because they are obviously Racist and not on board with the destruction of America
old trooper2 on April 8, 2009 at 11:45 AM
It’s STILL above O’bunghole’s paygrade.
nelsonknows on April 8, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Don’t forget the Humanitarian Aid missions the Cubans participated in in the 70′s to murder thousands of Africans.
old trooper2 on April 8, 2009 at 11:49 AM
The State Department lists the following countries as state sponsors of terrorism, er, man-made disasters.:
Cuban, Iran, Syria and Sudan (link).
Cuba will be the only one that we have trade with.
Until Cuba ends its support for terror, I think the embargo should stay.
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 11:49 AM
This was from a Nyt’s blog, I think?:
“How’s this for hope and change: U.S. officials flying to Cuba, not to interrogate prisoners at Guantanamo Bay but to meet with the Castro brothers in order to ease the 50-year tensions between the two nations.”
And, of course my response was rejected:
Would these “tensions” have anything to do with Cuban history, or those in the CBC that choose to ignore it?—-like the 1971 Anti-Loafing Law where the un-employed were either put in prison or could go fight Soviet wars in Africa. Tensions where 15 to 20 thousand dissidents were tortured and executed? All this under these “Castro brothers” that the CBC wants to embrace as what? Rehabilitated genocidal murderers? By all means, let’s “ease the tension”. Some one should remind Bobby Rush that you can’t “normalize” relations without accepting the current leadership of the nation who’s atrocities have never been reconciled. Interrogating prisoners at GITMO would show more sanity. Idiots one and all!
Rovin on April 8, 2009 at 11:51 AM
How “progressive” of them.
CP on April 8, 2009 at 11:57 AM
I bet Fidel and Raul scored I-pods! Oh yippeeee.
jbh45 on April 8, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Obvious, idiot liberals envy the control of the people they have.
kirkill on April 8, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Just what terrorist groups are they supporting, ones that try to knock off our South American puppets? Also do you think we should place an embargo on Saudi Arabia, or Pakistan? Frankly that list is a big joke.
LevStrauss on April 8, 2009 at 12:02 PM
Yeah i just looked through that write-up…the evidence against Cuba is pretty weak. A lot of “refuses to track so and so” “refuses to enact new counter-terrorism legislation” etc. etc. And you’re point about Saudi Arabia is extremely valid…
…if we dont trade with supposed sponsors of terror when we have no proof of terrorist activities on their soil (Cuba), why do we trade with a country that we can prove has sponsored terror directly (Saudi Arabia)?
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 12:04 PM
They support – and have over the decades – a number of Marxist guerilla groups that kill innocent peasants and others.
FARC in Columbia, for example, has received funding and support.
Citing Saudi Arabia or Pakistan is not a defense of Cuba’ support for terror.
If you want to have the US trade with a state sponsor of terror, go for it.
Include me out.
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:05 PM
The discussion on the table is trade with Cuba, a supporter of terror.
I don’t think it’s worth it.
What benefit is it for us to trade with such a regime?
What’s the quid for our quo?
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Lefty fascists loving lefty fascists…I’m shocked!
jwp1964 on April 8, 2009 at 12:08 PM
I recall Barbara Lee (CBA member-D California)
complaining after Obama appointed Judd Gregg
Secretary of Commerce. She told Obama he couldn’t be trusted
to run the Census in 2010. Glad Gregg got out when he did.
Apparently her judgement is not in question here.
elderberry on April 8, 2009 at 12:09 PM
Ah, good ‘ole Barbara Lee. Such a patriot.
“She has a long history of support for the Castro regime and its surrogates. She provided counterintelligence support to the regime in Grenada in 1980, tipping off the Cuban-backed government to a possible anti-communist spy in the office of Marxist-Leninist premier Maurice Bishop.”
h/t one of my former professors.
http://jmw.typepad.com/political_warfare/2009/04/congresswoman-barbara-lee-still-stuck-in-the-cold-war.html
AuH20 on April 8, 2009 at 12:10 PM
Safe haven for members of officially recognized terror groups.
Close relationships – trade, et cetera – with other state sponsors of terror.
That means our trade with them can be used to help other state sponsors of terror.
No deal.
The issue of the table is trade with Havana. Not Riyadh.
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:11 PM
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:05 PM
No your the one that cited the list and when we happen to point out countries that should be on the list, thus questioning the credibility of the list and the consistency of your argument you flounder. Castro’s a bastard, but we have traded with worse and considering the embargo hasn’t worked…what’s the definition of insanity…doing something over and over and expecting the same result? And then there were multiple terrorists that tried using terrorist tactics to kill Castro and guess what state protected them? We did.
LevStrauss on April 8, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Again our trade with Saudi Arabia benefits who? Al Qaeda.
LevStrauss on April 8, 2009 at 12:14 PM
Because “we can” with Cuba, we have no choice with Saudi Arabia. Cuba doesn’t have a resource that the entire Western world is dependent on the free flow of.
jp on April 8, 2009 at 12:15 PM
If you’re making an assertion that you then walk away from even if the circumstances are exactly the same…then your argument has no validity. So long as “state sponsor of terror” remains amorphous…so long as supposed sponsoring of terrorism is not a consideration in other bilateral deals…it is impossible to raise the issue here. period.
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Come mierdas
bella710 on April 8, 2009 at 12:16 PM
The topic on the table is Cuba. And its support for terror. And whether we should have normalized trade with a sponsor of terror.
Not Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.
The fact that you wish to change the topic to other countries is evidence of your inability to respond to my argument that we shouldn’t be trading with officially recognized sponsors of terror.
To my knowledge, we have laws forbidding American countries from trading with state sponsors of terror.
We’ll need to change all of those laws.
So, do you support removing the laws that forbids company’s trading with state sponsors of terror?
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Did Maxine Waters threaten to help Cuba’s oppressed people riot like she did during Rodney King’s riots? Nah, didn’t think so. These people are idiots are numero uno reason to get rid of affirmative action in all of its forms.
SouthernGent on April 8, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Most liberals wish they could have the kind of power that Castro does. In their minds, they would use that power to perfect the world. Whether the world wants to be perfected or not.
MarkTheGreat on April 8, 2009 at 12:20 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=10612
Terrorist, under Castro, targeted Macy’s over 40 years ago and nearly had a 9/11 scale attack. hoover thwarted it.
the Regime in Cuba needs to be overthrown asap, dealing with them will only strengthen the regime which will further oppress its peoples and increase their ability to Fund Terrorism against us.
Castro is 100% ideologically opposed to Capitalism and what America, other than the Black Caucus, represents to the world.
jp on April 8, 2009 at 12:20 PM
http://therealcuba.com
jp on April 8, 2009 at 12:21 PM
I wrote here that the CBC has much in common with Fidel. It’s another shameful moment in liberal foreign policy.
LFRGary on April 8, 2009 at 12:22 PM
What assertion am I walking away from?
What was my view on our trade with Saudi Arabia or Pakistan?
Nowhere did I give it did I? I can’t walk away from an assertion I didn’t make.
I cited the official standards of the US government when it came to state sponsors of terror.
Cuba is on the list.
You can reject it or accept it.
I accepted it.
As such, I don’t think the US should be trading with officially recognized state sponsors of terror.
Cui bono? For what benefit?
If you want to trade with US government recognized sponsors of terror or if you reject that Cuba is a state sponsor of terror you can think otherwise.
I think the evidence of Cuba’s support for Marxist terror groups is extensive.
I don’t want to trade with such a country.
We can debate Saudi Arabia or Pakistan in another post.
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Id consider your walking away from the obvious implications on you view a bit lazy intellectually but if you insist i can’t stop you.
Simply put, i stand on the basis that the rubric for determining a state sponsor of terror is amorphous, and thus an unreliable method for determining who we should or should not trade with.
As for who benefits…aside from the obvious benefits of bilateral trade, an open flow of americans and information can have a positive effect on the state of things there…even though the state of the cuban people is irrelevant when assessing US interests.
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 12:31 PM
What is my view on our trade with Saudi Arabia and/or Pakistan?
You must know it since you state that I’m walking away from my assertion.
So, what is my view on the matter?
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:34 PM
So, when is the Spicoli-esque trip to Venezuela to visit tHugo planned?
Sponge on April 8, 2009 at 12:36 PM
I’ll take your hanging on that statement as agreement on everything else I said, or i presume you would have addressed that as well.
Your view is that we shouldn’t trade with state sponsors of terror. Saudi Arabia is a sponsor of terror. Thus, you feel we shouldn’t be trading with Saudi Arabia.
Now…if you’re really going to get hung up on the semantics of the actual “list”, which we all know is an amorphous rubric and a politically motivated one, as evidenced by North Korea’s absence…then fine. be that way. but its intellectually dishonest and you know it.
ernesto on April 8, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Cuba, it should be recalled, is a command economy, even more so than China’s (sheer size relative to scope of government control). Trade is mutually beneficial, yes, but let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that Cuba’s gains from trade will reach ordinary Cubans. My guess is the primary beneficiary will be the regime.
I’m willing to accept an end to the embargo, but let’s not gloss over some obvious facts here.
DrSteve on April 8, 2009 at 12:38 PM
We should have retaken the gulf oil fields after 9/11. All threats from the arab/persian/muslim world start and stop with the oil fields.
progressoverpeace on April 8, 2009 at 12:40 PM
So, you believe that the Cuban government hasn’t been a state supporter of terror?
They haven’t been providing funds, training, diplomatic immunity and protection for Marxist terror groups that deal in drugs and kill peasants and civilians throughout Latin America?
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Again, what is my view on our trade with Saudi Arabia?
You don’t know it do you?
SteveMG on April 8, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »