Ahem. . .
I question the timing.
The Cato Institute invites you to a Capitol Hill Briefing
Time to End the Travel Embargo on Cuba
featuring
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ)Phil Peters
Vice President, Lexington Instituteand
Ian Vasquez
Director, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, Cato Institute
Over the past half century, the United States has deployed sanctions and other punitive measures in an unsuccessful attempt to dislodge Fidel Castro’s communist government. Now that most Americans—including most Cuban-Americans—favor ending the ban on traveling to Cuba, congressional support for changing this policy is increasing. At this briefing, Rep. Jeff Flake will explain how ending the ban would better respect the rights of Americans to travel and promote freedom in Cuba. Phil Peters and Ian Vasquez will discuss current political and economic conditions in Cuba and the impact that increased travel by Americans would likely have.Wednesday, December 2, 2009
12:00 p.m.
B-339 Rayburn House Office Building
(Lunch Included)
M.A.N.I.P.U.L.A.T.I.O.N. OF YOU KNOW WHO.
Back in the late '80's, before the Wall came down, I went to a CATO event at Palm Beach. At the close I approached Boaz and I told him flat out that I loved everything they said except their foreign policy. Boaz said that he hears that a lot.
CATO is infuriating but the are if nothing else consistent. I did write to them in the past complaining that some of the suggestions that they make EVERY SINGLE EFFING YEAR in their Congressional Handbook once it comes to Cuba is based on reports made by Montes. They did write me back promptly and give a response, albeit one that did not satisfy me. You guys should check it out and see if they still use the Montes report as a reference.
Ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching. Talk about underhanded amoral rats; these characters would sell their mothers to advance their self-interests, so why should 12 million oppressed slaves matter, high profile or otherwise.
Don't let Flake fool ya. His Cuba position doesn't issue strictly from his fidelity to that infantile libertarian dogma.
From the Miami Herald:
"Flake first became INTRIGUED by Fidel Castro when he did missionary work in Southern Africa, where Cuba had active military involvement. As executive director of a democracy promotion group in the late 1980s, he dealt with Namibian independence leaders who spurned communism but revered Castro for his support of their cause.
"They LOVED the man!" Flake told The Miami Herald.
Hummmm...just LOOK at this guy?
http://www.esquire.com/cm/esquire/images/jeff-flake-1108-lg-63455994.jpg
He strikes as someone who could be easily "swept off his feet" by a "macho" figure.
Some time ago I spoke to Flake at length to try to persuade him against his thoughts about tourism and dropping the embargo in Cuba. He seemed sincere. But there was no getting through to him. He gave me a lot of time to explain my position but I made no headway.
It is really unfortunate because I do think on most things he is one of the good guys. He is a big deficit hawk. He spends a lot of his energy and time fighting pork. The spenders on Congress roll their eyes in exasperation because he is always giving them trouble.
His idea is that Cuban can handle the tourists from everywhere else, but the U.S. is an entirely different thing. If we were permitted to flood the island with our numbers, their infrastructure couldn't handle it and he'd either have to open up the island and lose his tyranny or he'd have to clamp down and show his true colors to those who still believe he is a great guy. Flake thinks this is a win win situation for anti communists and those who want the island to be free again. He may be on the wrong side, but I don't think it is for evil reasons.
It seems that the idea of "American tourists flooding the island," is always part of the "end the embargo mantra," but anyone who believes that Cuba isn't going to deny visas to those they don't want visiting or control the number of visitors is delusional, and the MSM, already in bed with the dictator isn't going to write that story. The American tourists like their Canadian counterparts will stay at all inclusive resorts, sipping mojitos and come back talking about the happy friendly "natives," while the regime smiles at their bank balance.
As for Flake, I'm not convinced of his sincerety, and wonder what's on the videos of his visits. Not listening to Cuban exiles who know better than US politicians what is best for their homeland smacks of arrogance to me. Or he may be sincere, but you know what they say about good intentions.
Ziva,
I'm with you. I was just trying to separate Flake from the liberals surrounding Obama who have a more insidious agenda.
When I spoke to Flake, I complained that he takes a cursory look and sees nothing. He bragged that he made it a point to publicly meet with dissidents every time he visited Cuba. He seemed sincere. But like you say, the road to hell....
I say this as someone who is very sympathetic to libertarians and the libertarian way of thinking but they think the market can solve anything. Flake has "joked" before that if the Cubans aren't nice to him that he will push to have the entire embargo lifted. He sees that as a threat to them.
What Flake fails to take into account is that if the Cubans percieved any type of threat that they would instantly curtail the flow of yanquis onto the island.
I have long said that while I do believe in negotiating elements of the embargo the truth remains and I do believe that in the beginning repression in Cuba will indeed get worse. First the regime will want to make it clear to all concerned that they remain firmly in charge. Second, with additional funding they will have the means to put more restrictive measures in place. Third, with investment into the country the US will be less likely to criticize HR violations.