After all that has happened for the last fifty years I wonder how many Cubans that helped overthrow Batista in favor of Fidel Castro are regretting their actions...

every single one.

I dont find - and I think I can speak for the majority here - that Humberto is "infatuated" with Batista. he simply uses the former "dictator" which everyone refers to as a dictator to hammer the fact that the man in charge in Cuba is, by each and every means, a dictator.

As long as the media refuse to refer to fidel castro as a dictator, and by the same token use the term dictator to refer to the man castro overthrew by violent means, not only does Humberto have every right to keep bringing up Batista, it is his duty, as it is ours, to continue to do so.

You know, Ive been doing this for almost 7 years now and One thing Ive learned is that you can tell a lot about a person not just by their comments, but on what they comment on. You always get more bent out of shape over some artistic and semantic license used by our writers than about, say, the beating of three Cuban bloggers in Cuba.

Funny, that.

Im my views Batista was an sob for not killing Castro and facilitating his arrival by overthrowing the democratic process in Cuba. Trust me many of the elders feel this way too.

Compared with Castro Batista was a "soft" dictator. And not all the people that followed Batista were gangsters as you claim (that's another bullshit line from the MSM).

We are still arguing about this because life in Cuba before Castro (even under Batista) was way much better (even with its flaws) than it is today (the last fifty years are living proof of that fact) and it seems that you don't want to see it this way.

Even under Batista the Cuba people had their culture and their way of life that Batista would not dared to interfere with or destroy and then came Fidel Castro and destroyed it all.

After all that has happened for the last fifty years I wonder how many Cubans that helped overthrow Batista in favor of Fidel Castro are regretting their actions and wished they had chosen another venue other that violence to remove Batista from office. I have a feeling the majority regret their actions.

In 1959 in Cuba an evil was replaced by a much greater evil and yet the MSM does not accept this fact to this day. The fact that Cuba could never go back to what it was back then (even with all it's vices) which compared to the shit hole that Fidel Castro has turn it into today makes many long for the old days and I don't blame them a bit for doing so.

(I can't believe that we're even arguing about this)

Having said that, the undeniable fact remains that Batista and his followers were gangsters as well and should be despised by every Cuban (just like Castro should be despised by every Cuban). Tell me: what is so hard to understand about that? Tell me.

And I have to disagree with you about something. Humberto does not post that in order to make comparisons. I have read many of his postings (and believe it or not, I do agree with the majority of his postings, but not on this issue)on this subject and he is definitely infatuated with Batista. It's bloody embarrassing.

Why? Because that truth and the fact of the matter is (that is not accurately portrayed by the MSM) is that life in Cuba under Batista’s murderous, corrupted regime was much better for the Cuban people and the country as a whole that it has been for the last fifty years under the Castro brothers dictatorship.

Just ask yourself the following question:

Why if Batista and his regime was so bad to Cuba very few Cubans back then left the island to live in exile instead of the two millions plus that left Cuba after Castro got to power?

When you analyze this fact, you’ll get the answer that the MSM has never accurately addressed for the last fifty years regarding Cuba.

Spygirl,

By the way, your line above correctly applies to Castro and his gang instead of Batista.

But you just decided to echo the line from the MSM regarding Cuba before Castro and it shows your complete ignorance of Cuba under Batista.

You tell this line to the elders that lived Cuba before Castro and they’ll laugh at your stupidity.

Yes Batista was corrupted and people were killed on his orders but his actions and sins were a small fraction compared of what Castro and his henchmen have done to Cuba for the last 50 years.

Apparently, you dont understand Humberto's postings about Batista because you havent been paying attention. Here, let me spoon feed you. Habre la boca que aqui viene el avioncito:

The reason Humberto brings up Batista is not because Humberto is a supporter, but to highlight the unbridled hypocrisy of the left, the MSM and Cuba experts, who have, for fifty years ignored the absolute brutality of fidel castro while decrying same in Batista. To those aforementioned, fidel castro can do no wrong while Batista was the most evil, most vile man that ever existed.

and castro, certainly responsible for much more mayhem and much, much more human costs, is rarely, if ever, efered to as a "dictator." while the same moniker is glued in front of Batista' name in every single mention.

Traga.

What I find bizarre is Humberto's constant fetish with Batista. Batista was a gangster in charge of a gang of cutthroats and he looted the country.

I mean, I just don't get it. It's like as if you had two criminals; one has killed a person and the other has crippled another person. Who in his right mind is going to eulogize the second one simply because the first criminal is a murderer. I simply cannot understand Humberto's apparent love affair with Batista.

You confuse "fact" with "fetish." The point was/is/will always be, that Batista was a "soft" dictator. While he was in power the Cuban people were free to do whatever they wanted with their lives. They could travel anywhere they pleased. The economy thrived and the Cuban people wanted for nothing. By 1956 there were 14 prisons on the island versus the 250 prisons since the castro's took over. There was no "Committee for the Defense" keeping tabs on what you do, buy, sell, or say; There were no "Rapid Response Brigades" to beat you, or kill you if you didn't tow the government "line." There was no food rationing. There was private and public education for everyone including Blacks. Medicine was FREE for the POOR and those that couldn't afford it. etc. etc. etc.

We don't mind the media calling it like it is... A dictator (except for when he was elected president) but they should do the same with the castro brothers. They've been murdering totalitarian dictactors for over 50 years and the MSM refer to them as "Presidents." It's the double standard of the leftist media we have a "fetish" with.

Cuba experienced NET IMMIGRATION.

What seperates them is that Batista wanted a thriving economy so that he skim off the top, while Fidel wants a crumbling economy so he can take all the bottom.

Talk about “CHANGE”, and it was definitely for the worse.