If you start a thread, you should IMO be a continuing participant. I felt the thread topic has merit, but I felt badly that I will not have time to give it the attention it deserves -- too many medical and tea activities.
I'm surprised you guys didn't get that the whole point of this thread was to say in essence that Democrats/Liberals want Cuban style Communism in America and that thumbs thought it odd that we didn't react to Castro basically saying Communism didn't work because obviously we are Commies...Commie-Nazis: <object width="640" height="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.megavideo.com/v/E2CDL0P1c7498e313dc00bb6ddd5d804a1aa9420"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.megavideo.com/v/E2CDL0P1c7498e313dc00bb6ddd5d804a1aa9420" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="480"></embed></object>
It was. It was. However, I was wondering in what regard -- the school opinion or the federal government opinion?
Thumbs, I thought this thread was about a startling and newsworthy comment by Fidel Castro, a man who has been a thorn in the side of the United States since the late 1950's. You obviously, much to my surprise, want to make his comments more about the midterm elections here in the States, along with the "tea party movement," its "stand" on the issues, and so on and so on. Otherwise, the post I replied to makes no sense whatsoever, in my opinion. It is disappointing to me that such a statement by Castro, a statement that will one day find its place in history books read by our grandchildren, is nothing more to you than a tool to promote your political ideas/beliefs regarding the November elections. Tell me how I'm wrong. I've finished the spaghetti sauce. (I make a mean spaghetti sauce!)
Well, you are right in a sense. Castro's anti-bureaucracy statement just stuck with me -- I was debating something along those lines with a tea party associate -- and I carried it over to here. Actually, I see great hope that Cuba and America can be friends again. The two nations have so much in common and so much to gain if friendship breaks out. I don't think we need a Reaganesque "tear down this wall" moment of triumph but rather a "let's shake hands and get on with our lives" moment.
"Actually, I see great hope that Cuba and America can be friends again. The two nations have so much in common and so much to gain if friendship breaks out. I don't think we need a Reaganesque "tear down this wall" moment of triumph but rather a "let's shake hands and get on with our lives" moment." Now this is something I completely agree with! The absurd relationship between the two countries is so totally out of date and so out of touch with reality that common sense cries out for normalization of relations. The rest of the world, in the main, has normalized relations with Cuba. Few believe we should forget Cuba's past history of crushing political dissent, but the time to move on is here. Heck, it's past time. After all, this country and the other nations of the developed world have relations with countries far more oppressive than Castro's Cuba. Normalizing relations would speed change in Cuba and would also be good for American businesses forced to watch as Canadian and European companies invest and profit from relations with Cuba. If President Obama wants to make history in foreign policy, a golden opportunity is sitting just south of the Florida Keys. He should go to Cuba. Besides... I want to sit on a sunny Cuban beach and sip a tasty Cuba Libre.
Again, I agree. However, I don't think Obama would be politically wise to do it. Yes, I'm working hard as I can to oppose his policies, but just as a political spectator, I would still advise against it, principally because there are enough people now who question his loyalties. Any Presidential trip to Cuba would IMO exacerabate the political tensions -- to his detriment. In the long run, Obama would be hailed as a hero but in the short term he would be castigated without mercy. However, that is not to say this can't be done and that Obama can't take the lead. He just has to be crafty, perhaps using someone like Bob Dole to give it a bipartisan flavor without rewarding a current political opponent. See, I can put on a Democratic hat every once in a while. Meanwhile, few dictators have the chance to live long enough to see the long-term results of their work with impartial perspective. I'm sure Castro has moments of pride and moments of despair over the results of his rule, but, no matter who likes it or not, Castro is the key in "releasing" Cuba from despotism and restoring normal relations between Cuba and the U.S.
No, he wasn't the only one. Your subsequent statement regarding the "cumbersome bureaucracy" verifies his correct extrapolation. edit: I see Deckard already busted you on this also.
We have had extraordinarily cumbersome bureaucracy for 60 years -- and we keep adding to it. It's time to stop. Castro could see the damage it causes in his own country, and that is to what I was alluding. I don't believe you want to learn from events, just capitalize on them to attempt to score a point for whatever it is you believe. Your approach to discussion is both limited and childish.
I disagree here, thumbs. The last thing Obama should do is send a former Republican senator to make an historic visit to resume normal relations with Castro's Cuba. If he doesn't do himself, he should send Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. I'm way past the "Bipartisan Train" in this administration. Over and over again, for far too long, the president has attempted to be bipartisan, and how has he been rewarded for his efforts? By the Republicans throwing tradition in the trash can and using the filibuster in the Senate more than at any time in modern history. To the Republicans, bipartisanship is a joke. It is a joke on the American people. It is a joke on the Sunday talking head shows, where they mouth the words, when their actions are obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. **** them. Obama should have dumped bipartisanship months ago and started telling it like it is. He should have gone on the attack in response to Republican hypocrisy and named names. Now, he's decided to do that, months too late, and it pisses me off. Send a Republican to Cuba? Never. Send a Democrat or send yourself, Mister President.
Then, please, ignore me. That is your right. People like you who close their eyes to other opinions ultimately eliminate themselves from the political game -- like a batter who closes his eyes shut when the pitcher throws a ball. Try to take a cue from Deckard. We disagree all the time, but there are few on the board for whom I have as much respect because he tosses out thoughts rather than insults.
When Richard Nixon opened relations with China, he had the political standing and credentials as an active "anti-Communist" to forge the deal. Obama does not. He is suspect -- regardless of the facts -- for his leftward lean. This is the current reality / perception regardless of truth / fiction. As I said earlier, if Obama does go to Cuba, he will be hailed as a hero by future generations. However, in the current political climate -- short term -- he will be excoriated. I will agree with you, ahead of your coming comment, that this short-term perception is wrong-headed, but it is reality. Now, here is where we differ. IMO Obama has not truly been bi-partisan. In most issues he has said "Here is my plan. Get on board or you're not playing." Republicans did offer a number of suggestions on issues from health care to stimulus, but they were stonewalled and ignored. Thank Rahm Emmanuel on that. However, I chose Dole because he is still beloved but long past being a player. He was a right-wing stalwart but a compromiser at the same time. If Obama sends Hillary, he can assure himself of a presidential opponent in the Democratic primaries because she will get the glory and he will get the heat. He could send Jimmy Carter, but Carter has made too many people unhappy over the years -- despite his good works in building homes for the poor -- by championing global causes unpopular with the right.
Early in your political "conversion" many posters tried to engage you in meaningful discourse but your disingenuousness was quickly exposed. It continues to this day. You are not seeking enlightening discussion, you are actively campaigning, politicking, and seeking to discredit the current administration. You've become a shill. There is a difference. I do not close my eyes to other opinions, however, I do call bull**** when I see it. Live with it. PS: Deckard is obviously much nicer than I; just don't disparage JFK or you will set him off.
