PINAR DEL RIO


support babalú


Your donations help fund
our continued operation

do you babalú?

what they’re saying


bestlatinosmall.jpg

quotes.gif

activism


ozt_bilingual


buclbanner

recommended reading





babalú features





recent comments


  • Gallardo: In any self-respecting country such megalomaniacal piece of shit would not have been put in an insane asylum but rather in a...

  • Humberto Fontova: Matter was explained at the time–where else?–right here at Babalu. Big-time AIPAC beneficiary and Israel...

  • Honey: Antonio2009, yes Netanyahu says a lot of things that perplex me, like how wonderful the relationship is with Obama and the U.S....

  • Honey: I would like someone to explain to me why the U.N. remains in NYC, in America. Please send this monstrosity to Cuba or Gaza or...

  • antonio2009: Israel applies its doublespeak to Cuba. Netanyahu was praising Fidel Castro in 2010 https://romancatholicworld....

search babalu

babalú archives

frequent topics


elsewhere on the net



realclearworld

Soledad O’Brien puts words in Christine O’Donnell’s mouth, then invokes her mother’s Cubanness to justify it.

In this interview, Christine O'Donnell comments on the Romney campaign's communications strategy and its criticisms of what she calls Obama's philosophy of "collectivism." Soledad O'Brien, whose mother was born in Cuba, pounces: "Collectivism is another word for communism."

From there, O'Brien rides the premise that O'Donnell is referring to "communism" through the end of the clip, using that premise to beat back an O'Donnell charge that never actually came.

As evidence tat Obama is not a communist, O'Brien points out that his administration has put money "into the private sector."

"I mean, my mother's Cuban right? So I can talk a lot about communism, between you... I know a lot about it."

She goes on to talk about government-funded levees that protect private oil company assets.

My opinion:

O'Brien's statement that the Obama administration has put tax money into the private sector, or invested it to the benefit of the private sector, is right. Where she misses the mark (in principle, not in scale) is in suggesting that there is difference between taxing Americans to redistribute wealth to the benefit of American corporations, and enslaving Cubans to the benefit of Spanish investors in Cuba.

The somewhat uniquely ignorant ("uniquely," that is, among people news media) thing about O'Brien's comment is that she invokes her mother's Cuban heritage as evidence that she "knows a lot about communism." But the fallacy she engages in together with people of both parties is the suggestion that crony capitalism and Cuban Communism are significantly different in any way other than how they're branded.

There isn't a fundamental moral difference between government saving an automotive company from the market forces of a financial crsis and government saving a hotel chain from consequences of freedom in the labor market.

The Cuban system is only communist in name. It has never redistributed wealth equitably. There are still slums. There are still privileged classes. And it's all by design.

No. Cuban-brand communism is the same cronyism we're accustomed to here, but taken to its most radical extreme. It's government taking what is rightfully the people's to protect big businesses in which the people have no stock, sell the people propaganda that claims its all in their best interest, and maintain what is, ultimately, the hemisphere's largest government housing project.

It's one thing to debate the degree to which government involvement is acceptable. Maybe you think there's a place for a little socialism, communism or redistribution in America. In fact, chances are you do. You might not describe it that way, but if you want income tax money being spent on just about anything the government currently does, you favor a government initiation of force for the sake of wealth redistribution. Maybe you even think the world needs a crony or two (like a some big infrastructure and military contractors) to run properly.

But this — having the responsibility of so prominent a place in journalism, only to treat it so flippantly as to say "my mother was born in a certain place, so I know what I'm talking about," and then turn it into an excuse to grandstand on empty rhetoric and avoid calling a spade a spade — is another thing entirely.

4 comments to Soledad O’Brien puts words in Christine O’Donnell’s mouth, then invokes her mother’s Cubanness to justify it.

  • Rayarena

    Soledad O'Brien is a major piece of work and an opportunist--to evoke her mother's Cubaness! Indeed! She is about as Cuban as an ant is an elephant. I remember during the Elian thing, how she attacked Cuban exiles. She wasn't Cuban back then. Subsequently, if I remember correctly, she has repeated the same soundbites about the embargo and engagement with the castro brothers, etc...on different occasions.

    Do us a favor Soledad, don't remind anyone that you are part Cuban. We don't want you, nor do we need you.

  • raddoc

    Typial leftist that doesn't understand collectivism, and it's various facets. We need to send her a copy of "Liberal Fascism".
    I am always saddened to see Cubans here in America-or their spawn-so screwed up and misinformed. You would think she should no better; but then some few of the Cubans that did come over back in the day were Socialist leaning which may explain her upbringing. Batista's policies were also very leftist, and many of the changes he brought about in pre-Castro Cuba make me cringe.

  • asombra

    O’Brien is fully representative of her profession as currently practiced. Enough said.

  • asombra

    You know, of course, that O'Brien thinks she gets the Cuba thing better than we do.