An educational request

From its inception, the mission of this blog has been to educate people on Cuba. The blog is written primarily in English for precisely the purpose of informing and educating Americans of the real Cuba, the Cuba that has been in chains for almost fifty years. It is, in essence, an antidote for the lies and propaganda heard on the airwaves and in print in favor of castro and his evil regime.

This morning I opened my email and read this comment left on my post called “Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid” by commenter Melia Soler.

Hey fellow bloggers:

First time posting. I need to ask you all a question. Why do you feel the need to vote Republican especially when you see all the harm they are doing to our country AND to the world? Please enlighten me.

I am willing to bet that the Democrats will win the election by a landslide.

NOW having said that- Let me tell you that I am a Cuban-American and I love my homeland but can’t for the life of me understand how the Republicans have done anything of great importance to help our cause for a free Cuba.

As I said please enlighten me! I am willing to learn.

I am going to forego what would be my usual knee-jerk (but correct) reaction to rant. So here is my request: I want our contributing writers and commenters to respond to this. If you are of the same mind-set as this reader, don’t bother to write. I want her comment addressed directly by folks who hold the opposite of her opinion, myself included.

The issue is an important one that is thrown in our face constantly. But the answer is easy: I do not trust Democrats. Period. While I can agree that no Republican administration has stepped up to the plate on the issue of Cuba, I can guarantee you that Democratic administrations would do everything in their power to normalize relations with fidel and, by so doing, complete the legitimization of the murderer’s regime. As a matter of historical fact, it is well known that the Clinton Administration was ready to do this until the shootdown of the Brothers to the Rescue planes. (An act of war that went unanswered, by the way. But that was SOP with the testicularly deficient Clinton gang.) Many, many Democrat politicians have gone out of their way to support the Beast, Christopher Dodd and Charles Rangel being the two I can think of off the top of my head. Rangel, in fact,

introduced legislation [In April 1993] to repeal the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992, which called for repeal of assistance to the Castro government and promotion of democratization, and to lift the embargo against Cuba. When Castro toured Harlem in October of 1995, Rangel greeted him with a bear hug and joined in a prolonged standing ovation for the visiting dictator.


So when asked this question I have to scratch my head and wonder how anybody could support a party that has, since its abandonment of our soldiers on Playa Giron, done everything in its power to support, help and legitimize the castro regime with the most disgusting sycophancy imaginable. The Republicans may not have done what he hoped they would, but at least the call the Beast what he is.

As for the comment by Melia about the “harm” Republicans are doing in the world, I’ll just say that I don’t want to alienate this new reader with my answer to her query…

84 thoughts on “An educational request”

  1. “Why do you feel the need to vote Republican especially when you see all the harm they are doing to our country AND to the world?

    The Republicans party is not perfect (no one is), and I definitely have problems with certain issues they support and don’t support, BUT….

    It was a Republican administration that:

    1. Recently iberated millions of people from a mass-murderer. Such people, who at this point in time, collectively, have not demonstrated the societal gratitude and will to defend their liberation from those who want to take it away again.

    2. Recently tried to implement a surveilance program to catch terrorists in our own country before they commit acts of terror, but were opposed by those who have a record of ignoring such terror.

    3. Historically have tried to enact domestic policy agendas that would support sound economic principles for the betterment of everyone, as opposed to others who are more hell-bent on stirring up “class-warfare” for their own power-grabbing agendas.

    4. Historically have placed a priority in maintaining a strong military and national defense posture, in order to ensure the safety of its citizens.

    Now, I agree that they have not sent a liberation force to land in La Habana (yet), and this is one of my beefs. But…. consider the alternative!

  2. Melia, I would start by asking you exactly what harm do you think the republicans are doing? And please tell me what you think the democrats have done or will do that’s better.

  3. From a historical perspective, Cuban Americans have generally regarded Democrats as weaker when it comes to dealing with the Cuban dictatorship.

    John Kennedy not only wavered at the Bay of Pigs, leaving Brigade 2506 men stranded on the beach without support, but the following year he negotiated the secret Kennedy-Khruschev understanding, promising never to invade Cuba again, prohibiting Cuban exiles from doing so, and allowing a Soviet combat brigade to remain on the island indefinitely.

    In 1975, Senator Ted Kennedy called for the renewal of diplomatic and economic relations with Castro’s Cuba, prompting the veterans of Brigade 2506 to demand that the Kennedy family return their flag which had been given to President Kennedy for safekeeping.

    It was under Democrat presidents that Fidel Castro unilaterally sent waves of thousands of discontents to the U.S. during Camarioca (1965), Mariel (1980) and the rafter crisis (1994).

    Bill Clinton not only returned Elian Gonzalez to Cuba but afterward shook hands with Castro at the United Nations. Jimmy Carter traveled to Cuba in 2002 and Castro played him like a fiddle for propaganda purposes.

    Cuban Americans who have arrived after 1990, generally tend to be Democrat, although many do not vote, because they see this as the party that represents their interests for lifting the embargo and allowing open travel to Cuba.

  4. Let us consider other examples of unwise actions by former president Jimmy Carter:

    He failed absolutely during Iranian crisis and convinced Iranian generals loyal to the Shah to surrender and they were executed.

    He was instrumental in allowing the Panama Canal to fall into the hands of Mainland Chinese control

    He “verified,” in about three hours the highly “diddled” Venezuelan referendum on Chavez and then left the country

    He “verified” the recent Hamas victory in the elections in Arab portions of the west bank of “Palestine” ….

    One should never suggest malice when incompetence can fully explain events. However, such incompetence does few favors to the US.

  5. Hi, again, not in jail yet…! ;-).

    delacova said:

    “Cuban Americans who have arrived after 1990, generally tend to be Democrat, although many do not vote, because they see this as the party that represents their interests for lifting the embargo and allowing open travel to Cuba.”

    This’s something that I found quite interesting, not because surprise me, as I live in Cuba and I know how people from this side thinks. But because now I know why, even with all the solids facts pro-republicans I had read from you guys, I also see democrats as a better option. Sure, is not like I think any american voter should give a cent for my opinions.

    I also found interesting that people who have been away from this country for a long time, are so sure that the right thing to do is what they think is the best for the freedom of Cuba. Even when the vast majority of people with more directly and present information has a very diference opinion.

    Is it, that you have a very low opinion about people like me or the one arriving right now to USA?, do you think we doesn’t want a free Cuba?


  6. Val or George,
    Please check out DotCu’s IP address to see if they are really writing from Cuba, as they claim. This person seems to have taken it very personal that I made a statement in fact. Let’s see if they are lying.

  7. let me put on a flak jacket and helmet first… now im registered republican, and my views are mostly libertarian.. i like the republican slant on economic and foreign policy, and on most everything else im of the opinion whatever i do with my time and money is my own damn business and govt has no business telling me what i can and cant do (no im not saying i want to run out and kill, but i should be able to drink, smoke whatever i want, buy pornography if i so desire, etc).. that being said, ever consider that A)as long as castro is in power the cuban american vote will by and large go republican, and B) if castro was to be removed, the cuban american bloc might not always vote GOP? what has the GOP done to induce castros removal from power? yes, the dems have tried to acomodate him by trying to block restriction, ease trade, but has GOP done much to remove him? unless there is some secret plan that reagan had stuffed in a drawer somewhere, i dont think much.. again, aside from keeping the “embargo” in place, which is supposed to limit his access to cash, what has the GOP done to effectively REMOVE him? ok guys let’er rip..

  8. DotCu, si tu estuvieras aqui oyendo la verdad, tu no escribirias lo que escribistes. Los Democratas son los amigos fieles del regimen que te quita a ti tu libertad. No dejes que te cojan de comemierda con las mentiras que han estado diciendo pr decadas.

  9. Democrats have historically caused considerable damage and pain to the Cuban exile community. I won’t go into details on this, since I do not want to repeat what has already been said here. Republicans are also at fault by not not doing enough to help bring about a free Cuba and they take advantage of the fact that most Cuban exiles will vote for them, but the point is that when you compare them to democrats, it just becomes a no-brainer.

    The main philosophical differences are that republicans believe in a small federal government, which usually means lower taxes, while democrats believe in a large federal government, which usually translates into higher taxes.

    Democrats historically weaken our national defenses and take advantage of the strong armed forces and lets not forget the economies of their previous republican administrations.

    Kennedy lost the cold-war chess game being played at the time with the Soviets, by giving them Cuba on a silver plater, and let’s not even go into his mishandling of the Cuban missile crisis.

    Carter brought our national defenses to it’s knees (thank God he only lasted 4 years, and we had Reagan came soon thereafter and rapidly rebuilt our armed forces to the point that the Soviets could catch up and capitulated without firing a shot!). Carter also left us with very week economy (those of us that were around still remember ridiculous interest rates and inflation.)

    Then after the Reagan/Bush era, Clinton inherited a country with a strong national defense and a powerful economy. His mishandling of the USS Cole and the Somalia incidents (among other things) gave al-Qaeda the courage to attack the United States on 9/11. Let’s not forget how the economy started tanking during the last years of the Clinton administration, caused primarily by the Internet bubble bursting. The whole Internet bubble thing was a reflection of the times. During this time we had a president that taught our children it was ok to lie, while at the same time the dotcom’s were valued not on what they were worth, but on what spin they presented, and thus based their values on lies themselves.

    The main-stream media (MSM), which has always been liberal, and therefore always pushed the agenda of the democrats and others of the left wing. After all, it was New York Times that lied on collaboration with Fidel’s gang that helped swing the American public in favor of Fidel and lead the world to believe his army was much larger than what it really was (but that’s another story in itself). The MSM is now doing what they can to discredit the republicans (some of which is understandable), and slant public opinion in favor of the democrats.

    I could go on and on, but I think I’ve said enough. The point is, it doesn’t matter if you’re a Cuban or Cuban-American, after all the democrats have done (or not done), why would anyone vote for them in the first place!

  10. george i completely agree, the option is much worse, in regards to cuba it becomes a situation of a which toilet do you want to drink out of, the one in the mens room or the one in the ladies room.. while i will point the finger at the dems saying they coddle him, i point the finger at the GOP and say what the f have you done to get rid of him? i understand why we went into grenada, iraq, vietnam, why we supported the contras et al.. why not cuba? and im not one who wants the us installing a puppet regime either, you know, a quickie in/out slambamthankyoumam let the cubans run cuba, not a 51 state or anything.. but reagan (RIP) did alot of good and still let the cuba issue go unadressed..

  11. First of all, I do not accept the premise of the question that Cubans feel “the need” to vote Republican. There are many Cubans who vote Democratic especially in local elections. There is a Democratic Cuban-American Senator, Robert Menendez, from New Jersey and soon to be a Cuban-born Democratic congressman from, Albio Sires, also from New Jersey.

    Cuban-American voters are issue driven voters, not straight ticket voting robots as the questioner generalizes. This can be seen in the splitting votes between Local/National elections. There are some Democrats, like Joe Lieberman, who raise large sums of money from Cubans.

    What the blogger see as harm caused by Republicans, Cuban-Americans who are unfortunately better educated in the geopolitical struggle between good and evil than most Americans, see as America protecting itself and the world from those that want to engulf it in a cloud of hate and totalitarianism like the pseudo socialist thugs that run Cuba, Venezuela, China, North Korea, and Russia, to name a few and the Islamofacists that run Iran, Syria, and want to expand Sharia law over the whole middle east and ultimately the world, through terrorism.

    Like Val said, the democratic party is full of left leaning cooks who defend a guy who wanted to vaporize America and make it sound like America drove him to it. These ex-hippies, who whine and blame their country for everything and now run the Democratic Party’s, only solution is to “drop out” and “be excellent to each other”. A Bill and Ted foreign policy will not work and Cubans know this. Once the Democratic Party realizes that they are Americans first and Democrats second, and that what the rest of the World thinks doesn’t keep us free, then maybe they can garner some Cuban votes in a presidential election.

  12. DotCu.

    Glad to know that you are ok but be careful. Be sure of doing a clean up in your PC when you are done.

    A few days ago. After reading your reply I realize how litter has change the mentality of the Cubans after I left more that twenty five years ago. In fact you are a picture of me back in the late 70’s. Like you, I am from a town somewhere in the middle of the country, Santa Clara to be precise. Probably, like you I attended college in Cuba’s “Universidad Central de Las Villas” where I receive a degree in Electrical Engineering in 1978. Then I left the country in 1980.

    I still remember back then, when I though that all my hopes for a free Cuba were gone I was somehow in favor of relaxing the embargo. I saw it as the only way to improve my living there. Then I left the country, the Berlin wall came down, the soviet bock disintegrated, and as many Cubans I expected that the Cuban dictatorship will soon come to an end. It did not happen.

    Slowly I started to realize that the embargo is the only tool existing to control the grow of the regime. It is true that those inside the island see it as the responsible for their problems. But as you acknowledge in your response a few nights ago. Just because the US import goods to Cuba do not mean that you will be able to buy it. It is time for Cubans inside the country to see who the real responsible is. One more time, it is not the embargo look around you there you have the responsible in all those corrupt “dirigentes” driving around in cars while you have to push you way into a bus each night to get to a home with an empty refrigerator that probably have no power . The Cuban government conducts business all over the world. In fact they don’t need a single penny from here to improve the live of the population. All they need is to promote political and economical opening and stop living in a political/economic model that was a complete failure in East Europe. Once the country is giving back to its citizens their proven ingenuity will bring prosperity in the future. Stop blaming the embargo and find the solutions within.

    Going back to those that came in the 90’s they as me, are going through an adaptation process that include the adoption of a particular party. And after being deceived couples of times by the democrats and learn about that party historic record, they also will become republicans in it’s majority unless they live in California.

    I send you the picture because I have no way to post it.

  13. To Vote or Not to Vote Republican?

    Seems to me that answer to this question depends what you place your priorities on.

    If you are a conservative/liberterian/live and let live type, i argue that the current replublican crew has left you behind, and the democrats not even come close. So if you like drinking from toilets take your pick.

    If you are priority is the cuban-american agenda then the repubicans seem to be more attractive to you.

    If you are social-conservative/moralist then the republicans are your best fit.

    if you like big/goverment social and entitlements raise your taxes then the democrats are your party.


  14. Vic you say: “..they also will become republicans in it’s majority unless they live in California.”

    How do you come to this conclusion. Are you saying that if you live in california you are a democrat? Or you just generalizing?


  15. Very fascinating topic and one that I’ve always been interesting in addressing.

    All the explanations given in the previous comments vis-a-vis our political parties and Cuba issues are right on, so I won’t repeat them except to say that most of us (Cuban-Americans) distrust Democrats more, if that makes sense.

    Gusano correctly stated that Cuban-Americans generally aren’t single ticket voters. There are several high-profile Cuban-American Democrats, even and especially in Miami (Alex Penelas, Raul Martinez, etc). The common perception that Cuban-Americans blindly follow the Republican (or Democratic) Party without any solid basis is wrong and also an extremely biased belief.

    Having said this, I think that if you focus on the core conservative beliefs and forget about Cuba relations for a second, you’ll find that many if not most Cuban-Americans share them. Cubans tend to be quite traditionalist (similar to most Hispanics) and lean towards social conservatism. Older Cubans and their children – second generation Cuban-Americans – are also very entrepeneureal and believe in a strong military (their experience with castro has no doubt helped shape this belief). All these things are generally supported by the Republican Party. That’s why I don’t think you’ll see a big shift in party affiliation once Cuba becomes free again.

  16. I, of course, can only speak for myself.
    I would vote for a Democrat, if I thought he/she was a better candidate, specially for our cause.
    ….BUT, I do not like the condescending, paternalistic ways of the Democrats toward minorities,
    –Like we will not be able to cross the street, if they don’t hold our hand –.
    As an immigrant I know that the roads had been paved by those who came before me, and like them
    all I ask is an opportunity, a fighting chance…
    In the Republican party, even when sometimes, i do not agree with it’s politics, I feel like a contender, a voice,
    an opinion, a citizen…
    i refuse to play the “Good little helpless Hispanic”. for the Democrats
    I hope I have explained myself clearly (like mud?) English is not my forte
    Daisy A,

  17. I’ve only met a couple of Cubans, up here in the Northeastern US.

    My semi-ignorant take on the thing is that these folks want to work and be left the Hell alone by government. They’ve had quite enough of that kind of ‘help,’ thank you very much.

    Progressives- i.e. Democrats- actually think that iniquity on Cuba is due to the US, not Castro. As if it is some great moral stand Castro has taken by allowing other people to suffer. Such courage.

    And anyway, Progressives disdain Cubans who refuse to see themselves as oppressed minorities.

    They much prefer their Hispanics in a helpless pose, with their hands out and a piteous whine on their lips.

    If you feel that being Cuban means you are victimized and just plain unable to achieve like other Americans do, then by all means become a Progressive. They will make sure to give you all the pity-parties you require.

    Just don’t say anything bad about Castro. They love that guy.

  18. George, Vic,

    I don’t really think for a second that I have a chance to trully understand american politics, even when I’ll love to. So I wasn’t trying to tell you dems are the way to go, It will be stupid to said something like this. But as “delacova” touch the newly arrived cubans choicing dems, I just wanted to comment about that.

    Maybe for you it is easy to understand that a hard position like Reagan/Bush(s), is the rigth direction, but, and I’ll recieve some hard word for this, if you ask me, Jimmy Carter speaking about the “Proyecto Varela” in national TV, do far more for the freedom of Cuba, than any “lackness” of cash this regine could had in the past or future.

    And Vic, yes I know what is the problem with Cuba economics, I also think many cubans already know it, but we’re far from the point where the cuban’s people make something to change that. And IMHO information it is what is missing.

    So is a weak dem like Jimmy Carter give some information to the people in __national_TV__, you can bet that is a good thing, is many cubans, cuban-americans and americans come here and start talking to the people, not just getting a “mojito” in a hotel’s pool, that is a good thing.

    And I make this point the other day, if commercing with all the world, except USA, hadn’t maked this regime wealthty, then helped to prolong it, why lifting the embargo will do it?


  19. Robert: I guess i fall in your conservative older cuban category, however i have issues with the goverment defining morality, like abortion and gay marriage and all that stuff. I’m also for strong defence not offense. Meaning let’s protect our homeland first, like our borders and ports, before we go chasing terrorists everywhere. Those are my issues with the current republican party. They need to get back to the traditioonal convervative values of Barry Goldwater, the father of the conservative movement.


  20. Ray,

    I did not mean to offend you. I have some republican friends that live in California. What the heck! Ronald Reagan came from there. But in my opinion the “democratic machine” as we call it here in New Jersey, is very active there attracting new voters. My perception from this side of the county is that the Cubans are more disseminated there that here or in Miami and succumb to the democrat’s propaganda easier. Then, I was talking about those that came from Cuba recently and became citizen in recent years. I believe that, in proportion, more of them will vote democrat there than in any other state.

    Beside, it appears to me that, with some noticeable exceptions, those Californians that post comments in this blog are way more “liberals” that the ones from the east. Again, please, is not my intension to offend any one. It is just an opinion that appears to be different that yours. After all this is what we want for our country: A place where different opinions can be express freely by anyone

  21. Tell this lady that the thought in her head of America causing the problems has been fabricated.
    She simply believes what she is told.
    What explanation does she give for people around the world wanting to come to the USA?
    It’s such a bad place, yet they keep coming.

    Please explain to her that with our tragedy not only do we have prisoners in Cuba being arrested for telling the truth, but we also have to deal with a domestic media that only knows how to lie.

    It’s known as the mushroom affect:keep them in the dark, feed them shit, and eventually they will pop. Voting for democrats will only give them what they’ve engineered.A stupid population that believe everything with a D is good and everytrhing with an R is bad.

  22. Vic,you didn’t offend me at all. Californians come in all molds. We threw out our democratic governor and elected a moderate conservative repulican actor that’s married to democrat. We are the big tent!

    If you live in san-franciso, you are most likely a democrat, if you live in southern california then you may be either. I’m not as political as the rest here and try to avoid being boxed into a particular political perspective.


  23. Democrats attracting new voters?

    You mean like those few thousand disease stricken
    Africans that have never even seen or flushed a toilet, yet were given refugees status and government jobs and sent over last month.

    Isn’t multi culturalism great?

    I see that and I see it for what it is. More democrats.
    More bringing in the 3rd world,eventually the US will be a 3rd world. After all, aren’t we an empire?
    An empire that does Marshall Plans and extends credit to countries we’ve helped liberate.
    Castro has survived because the Communist media want him to stay.
    It’s an “alternative” to capitalism.
    And the deaths of thousands in rift raft boats , don’t matter.Why its not good for ratings?
    Who would watch

  24. One important note. The Democratic party of the early 60’s was a LOT more conservative than the leadership of this version of the DEMS. Today’s leadership is mostly WACKO. I am very concerned about these coming elections. Can you imagine Pelosi as the speaker if the house? Rangel as the lead of some foreign subcommittee? All of Fidel’s friends in leadership roles governing this country.

    Granted, with the GOP one could complain about the chaos in Iraq. If you look at press releases during the occupation of Germany after WW2, there was much loss of life, and the press was negative there as well.
    Still, the economy is buzzing, Wall Street is happy and overall we are prosperous, yet the MSM is gladly not giving credit where credit is due.

    The left really believes you are powerless without their form of government – that you are not capable of succeeding on your own. Now, because of the noble effort in Iraq – ridding the world of a mass murdering terrorist dictator, the press (and the left) turns that into a negative. They forget (or choose to ignore) that we are at war with those that want to obliterate our way of life.

    I hope the American people are not so short-sighted as to vote against the GOP just because of Iraq. What gives me hope is that the press and their stupid polls had Kerry in the White house during the last election.

    Mention the word “malaise”. What comes to mind? Jimmy Carter and Democrats. I hope our country does not return to that.

  25. Dime con quien andas y te dire quien eres, and so far the left in this country has idolatrized individuals that would like nothing more than the defeat of this country. I spend my whole childhood being told to fear and hate capitalism and the US by communist and that is the same rethoric I hear from the democratic party today.

  26. I spend my whole childhood being told to fear and hate capitalism and the US by communist and that is the same rethoric I hear from the democratic party today.

    Perfect and succinct.

  27. History is a bitch. Facts are something Democrats hope everyone else forgets.

    I am still waiting for the answer to the question What will Democrats do to fight the War on Terror. All I hear is talk the terrorists to death, which sounds unlikely. When they can’t respond properly when a group of people want to destroy their country, when can they …


    “You mean like those few thousand disease stricken
    Africans that have never even seen or flushed a toilet, yet were given refugees status and government jobs and sent over last month.

    Isn’t multi culturalism great?”

  29. Politics is a nasty, dirty business. All politicians are questionable and should never be taken at face value. There’s no point expecting them to be saintly or beyond reproach. They all do (or are capable of) shady, unethical or downright illegal things. The difference between them is a matter of degree, of how bad, how far, how seriously they’ll go wrong. Voting is simply about choosing the lesser evil. There is always some down side or undesirable aspect to what a politician or a party is selling, meaning there’s always a trade-off or compromise involved in supporting anybody. Voters just have to go with their priorities and instinct.

    For me, Cuba is a priority, though I certainly have others. I know Republicans haven’t done that much for Cuba and probably won’t. I know they play the Cuba card to their advantage, just like all politicians play any card that helps them. But if politicians don’t make things better, then at the very least they should not make them worse. No Republican has utterly screwed Cuba the way JFK did. No Republican has let Castro make a fool and laughingstock out of him like Carter did. No Republican has pulled something as disgusting as the Elian business while referring to the exile community as “those people,” just like he referred to Monica Lewinsky as “that woman.”

    It’s not just that the Democratic Party will not admit that those things, among others, were seriously wrong. They continually add insult to injury, especially at election time. What am I supposed to feel when I hear JFK praised to the skies and see his highly dubious little brother holding forth? How am I supposed to react to the likes of Carter, and of course Clinton, being trotted out and shoved in my face? What should I think about some porcine, bigoted, rabidly anti-Cuban buffoon like Michael Moore having VIP status at the Democratic National Convention? What does that say about how Democrats feel about Cuban-Americans and Cuba in general?

    Of course Democrats have other fish to fry. Let them. However, if somebody pisses in my soup, so to speak, he’d better not expect me to like it, let alone thank him with my vote.

  30. I’m with Vedado.

    I came from Cuba at the age of 5. And even at that young age; I was sick to death of the “revolution” you couldn’t do anything without hearing about it and the murdering “yankis”. The idea permeates every aspect of life on the island.
    It would drive me crazy, if I couldn’t get away from politics completely sometimes.

    I feel that the Dems are very much like the Communists…they want to rewrite history and never tell it like it is. They are ALWAYS blaming America first. Since they’re not in power; they whine and moan and criticize and do NOTHING constructive for the Country. I won’t vote for them because I believe they would do everything in their power to help keep Cuba as it currently is.

    But, even if I wasn’t Cuban, I would not be able to vote for a democrat in a national election due to their big government ideas. I also see how Dems abandon they’re “ideals” whenever it is convenient. When a black man -Clarence Thomas- was nominated for the Supreme Court; they attacked him just because he’s a conservative. When Clinton was accused of sexual harassment by Paula Jones; they attacked her for daring to say anything against their darling.

    I feel most politicians are hypocrites…it goes with the territory. But the Democrats are worse by far, in my opinion.

  31. Go ahead and vote Democrat, no one will stop you. But if you do vote Democrat be prepared one day to bow down to fascists and be wrapped in a burka Miss Melia. Yes you will have all the increased tax revenues dedicated to green causes and feel good policies but sooner than later the Bin Ladens of this world will place their heavy boot on your neck (aided by the lefty useful idiots Michael Moores and Jane Fondas). They will not place their boot on my neck because even if your afeminate dems repeal the 2nd Article in our perfect Constitution I will somehow keep enough ammo to make them meet the 72 virgins or whatever heaven or hell awaits commies.

  32. I have to declare that I am one of those silent blog readers. However, this one is too good to let it go by.
    Today’s Democratic Party, and (has been for a quite while)is represented by individuals that are sympathizer, apologizer and admirers/supporters of the communist-anti-American causes disguised under liberalism, secularism or progressiveness.
    There is a vast representation among the majority of media (written and broadcast) outlets, Academia, and Hollywood. Just the most common ones; there are endless examples.
    Perhaps this data will enlighten you or amused you. These are 40 reasons for me a Cuban-American to vote republican.
    The following are events and/or policies that took place and/or were implemented by American Administrations (Republican, Democrat, or both) since 1945.

    1) D Sent Japanese-Americans to internment camps
    2) D Deployed nuclear bombs against Japan
    3) R Ended Korean War
    4) D Began War in Vietnam
    5) D Established Embargo against Castro
    6) D Abandoned Cuban allies in Bay of Pigs
    7) R Created Welfare Program
    8) R Created Affirmative Action
    9) R Ended the War in Vietnam
    10) R Treaty with Communist Vietnam allows communist troops to remain in South Vietnam
    11) D Gave away millions in Corporate Welfare
    12) D Apologized to the world for American “wrongdoings”
    13) D Ignored the mass killings of former US allies in S.E Asia
    14) D Rise of Islamic Fundamentalism
    15) D Sent troops to Lebanon at request of United Nations
    16) D Trained and armed Jihad fighters in Afghanistan
    17) R Ended Cold War with defeat of Soviet Union
    18) R Gave amnesty to illegal aliens
    19) R Ordered US troops to pull out of Lebanon after Islamist suicide bombing kills 269 Marines
    20) R Ordered bombing of Libya because of its support of terrorism
    21) R Led a United Nations’ coalition against Saddam’s Iraq
    22) R Ignored the massacre of US’ Shiites allies by Saddam
    23) D Ordered missile attack on Sudan because its support of terrorism
    24) D Al-Qeda operatives bombed Twin Towers, 5 killed
    25) D Al-Qeda suicide bombers killed 18 GI’s on attack on Kobhar Towers, Saudi Arabia
    26) D Al-Qeda suicide bombers killed 300 on attack of US embassies in Africa
    27) D Ordered bombing of Iraq in defense of the Kurd minority
    28) D Ordered missile attack on Afghanistan because of its support of terrorism
    30) D Sent troops to Haiti to restore presidency to Aristide
    31) D Sent troops to Somalia at request of United Nations
    32) D Ordered US troops to pull out of Somalia after Al-Qeda’ s attack kills 18 Marines
    33) D Al-Qeda suicide bombers attacks USS Cole, killing 13 sailors
    34) R Sent troops to Haiti to remove Aristide from presidency
    35) D Ordered bombing of Belgrade Serbia, killing 23,000 civilians plus 6 Chinese at Chinese Embassy

    36) D Sent troops to occupy Bosnia without United Nations’ approval
    37) D Eliminated millions from Welfare rolls, after Welfare Reform denies benefits to illegal aliens
    38) R Proposed a Workers Program for undocumented aliens
    39) R Let coalition troops to occupy Afghanistan with United Nations’ approval
    40) R Sent troops to Iraq without United Nations’ approval

    Manipulated data and wishful thinking is the last resource of the secular progressives and passé media archetypes, and some misguided and lost Cuban souls, to make us think that they even have a chance
    Will like very much, to read the elections results, and take pleasure in the victory that conservatism will bring. While once again, progressives guzzle defeat in the dawn of perpetual disappointment

  33. Dunny how the democrats are always convinced they’re going to win “by a landslide”. When’s the last time they actually did that?

  34. Here are 97 reasons why you can’t trust Democrats:

    Today’s Democrats are nothing like Presidents Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy, who with courage and decisive action kept on top of their jobs and aggressively confronted one national defense crisis after another.

    Jimmy Carter, elected during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, and (1) believing Americans had an inordinate fear of communism, (2) lifted U.S. citizens’ travel bans to Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia and (3) pardoned draft evaders.

    President Carter (4) also stopped B-1 bomber production, (5) gave away our strategically located Panama Canal and (6) made human rights the central focus of his foreign policy.

    That led Carter, a Democrat, (7) to make a monumental miscalculation and withdraw U.S. support for our long-standing Mideast military ally, the Shah of Iran. (8) Carter simply didn’t like the Shah’s alleged mistreatment of imprisoned Soviet spies.

    The Soviets, (9) with close military ties to Iraq, a 1,500-mile border with Iran and eyes on Afghanistan, aggressively tried to encircle, infiltrate, subvert and overthrow Iran’s government for its oil deposits and warm-water ports several times after Russian troops attempted to stay there at the end of WWII. These were all communist threats to Iran that Carter never understood.

    Carter (10) thought Ayatollah Khomeini, a Muslim exile in Paris, would make a fairer Iranian leader than the Shah because he was a religious man. (11) With U.S. support withdrawn, the Shah was overthrown, and (12) the ayatollah returned and promptly proclaimed Iran an Islamic nation. (13) Executions followed. Palestinian hit men were hired to secretly eliminate the opposition so the religious mullahs couldn’t be blamed.

    Iran’s ayatollah (14) then introduces the idea of suicide bombers to the Palestine Liberation Organization and paid $35,000 to PLO families whose young people were brainwashed to attack and kill as many Israeli citizens as possible by blowing themselves up. This inhumane menace has grown unchallenged.

    The ayatollah (15) next created and financed with Iran’s oil wealth Hezbollah, a terrorist organization that later bombed our barracks in Beirut, killing 241 Marines and sailors. With Iran’s encouragement this summer, (16) Hezbollah attacked Israel and started a war that damaged Lebanon and (17) diverted the world’s attention from Iran’s nuclear bomb program.

    In November 1979, Iranians, including (18) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, their current puppet president who was elected in an unfree, rigged election in which opponents were intimidated into not running, (19) stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held 52 U.S. personnel hostage for 444 days.

    Carter, after nearly six months, (20) belatedly attempted a poorly executed rescue with only six Navy helicopters (three were lost or disabled in sandstorms) and Air Force planes with Delta Force commandos. The mission was aborted, but foul-ups on the ground resulted in a loss of eight aircraft, five airman and three Marines. The bungled plan was never put down on paper for the Joint Chiefs to evaluate. There were practice sessions, but no full dress rehearsal, and pilots weren’t allowed to meet with their weather forecasters because someone in authority worried about security.

    America (21) can thank the well-meaning but naive and inexperienced Democrat, Jimmy Carter, for a foreign policy that lost a strong military ally, Iran, and (22) put the U.S. at odds with a gangster regime that was determined to build nuclear bombs to wipe Israel off the map and threaten the U.S. and other nations. Iran also has a working relationship with al-Qaida, which also wants nukes. Care to connect the dots?

    Shortly after a meeting at which Carter kissed Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev on each cheek, (23) the USSR invaded Afghanistan. Carter the appeaser was shocked. “I can’t believe the Russians lied to me,” he said.

    During the Carter Democrat period, (24) communism was on a rampage worldwide. In an unrestrained country-capturing spree, communists took over (25) Ethiopia, (26) South Yemen ( (27) located at the mouth of the Red Sea where they could block Mideast oil shipments and access to the Suez Canal), (28) Afghanistan, (29) Angola, (30) Cambodia, (31) Mozambique, (32) Grenada and ( 33) Nicaragua.

    Compared to the pre-Vietnam War defense budget in 1964, Carter requested in fiscal 1982’s defense budget (34) a 45% reduction in fighter aircraft, (35) a 75% reduction in ships, (36) an 83% reduction in attack submarines and (37) a 90% reduction in helicopters.

    The Soviets for years (38) consistently spent 15% of their GDP on defense; (39) in 1980 we spent under 5%. As a percentage of our government’s spending, defense was lower than before Pearl Harbor. No wonder a Republican, Ronald Reagan, had to vastly increase defense spending to help us win the 45-year-old Cold War and relegate the USSR to the ash heap of history — an astounding feat no one (except Reagan) believed possible.

    In addition to a communist enemy rapidly expanding its territorial conquests, Reagan (40) inherited from Democratic management a 12% inflation rate (highest in 34 years), (41) 21% interest rates (highest since Abraham Lincoln was president), (42) a depleted military and (43) a serious energy crisis.

    For eight years (44) congressional Democrats ridiculed and fought with Reagan and were on the wrong side of nearly all his defense and economic policies. They said he wasn’t bright — an “amiable dunce,” as party elder Clark Clifford (45) put it. They maintained his tax cuts wouldn’t work, (46) that he insulted the Soviets by labeling them the “Evil Empire” (47) and that he was going to start World War III by putting missiles in West Germany to counter new Soviet SS-20 nuclear missiles installed in East Germany. (48) John Kerry wanted a nuclear freeze that would guarantee the Soviets overwhelming tactical nuclear superiority in Europe. (49) Kerry seemed to constantly advise retreating, giving up and handing our enemies what they wanted — a recipe for us to lose every war.

    Democrats waffled (50) on Reagan’s request for support of Contras who were fighting to stay alive and take Nicaragua back from Daniel Ortega’s communist Sandinistas. Each month, the Soviets poured $50 million worth of Russian tanks, anti-aircraft weapons, Hind attack helicopters and munitions into that central American country.

    Democratic leaders (51) all dismissed as a ridiculous pipe dream Reagan’s plan for the U.S. to develop a missile that could shoot down incoming enemy missiles. (52) Showing no vision, Democrats mockingly called it Star Wars.

    Democratic politicians (53) were proved wrong on virtually every vital Reagan policy. (54) His tax cuts set off a huge seven-year economic boom that created 20 million new jobs. (55) Interest rates tumbled from 21% to 7 1/2%. (56) Inflation nose-dived from 12% to 3%. And (57) oil prices collapsed when — contrary to warnings from Democrats — he removed price controls on natural gas.

    Reagan’s motto was “Peace through Strength,” (58) not peace through weakness and accommodation. With his steadfast determination and perseverance, the communists were kicked out of Grenada and defeated in Nicaragua, Ethiopia and Afghanistan. And for the first time in history Soviet expansion ended.

    Reagan (59) never quit exerting pressure on the Soviets. In Berlin, he demanded that Gorbachev “tear down this wall,” and in time the Berlin Wall fell. In the end the communist Soviet Union dissolved. The Reagan-Bush administration had won the Cold War.

    Years later, (60) a group of Russian generals were asked about the one key that led to the collapse of the USSR. They were unanimous in their response: “Star Wars.” Gorbachev feared it would render the Soviets’ nuclear missiles obsolete for an overwhelming first strike, and they could not afford to build the hundreds more that would be needed or hope to match America’s great technical ability. (61) So Gorbachev threw in the towel after Reagan held firm at Reykjavik and refused to stop SDI research. Years later (62) Gorbachev said he didn’t think it could have ever happened if Reagan hadn’t been there.

    In July 2001, (63) the U.S. military used an SDI missile launched thousands of miles away and flying at near bullet speed to blow a test missile out of the sky. (64) Democrats from Dukakis to Gore to Kerry all said this would be impossible and that missile defense would never work. They were all wrong. Reagan was right.

    The current terrorist threat (65) to U.S. national security did not begin on 9/11, but in the early 1990s. Bill Clinton was elected November 1992. (66) The first bombing of our World Trade Center on Feb. 26, 1993, killed six people and injured 1,000. Terrorists hoped to kill 250,000. (67) Some of the apprehended terrorists were trained in bomb making at the Khalden terrorist camp in Afghanistan.

    October 1993. (68) A Somali warlord, with help from weapons and top trainers sent by al-Qaida, shot down two U.S. Blackhawk helicopters. Eighteen Americans were killed and 73 wounded. Clinton, under pressure from a Democratic Congress, ordered retreat and withdrawal of all U.S. forces. Said Osama bin Laden: “They planned for a long struggle, but the U.S. rushed out in shame.”

    January 1995. (69) Philippine police discovered Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the World Trade Center bombing, had a plan to blow up 12 American airliners over the ocean and fly a plane into CIA headquarters. They informed Clinton’s government of the plot.

    Bin Laden (70) tried to buy weapons-grade uranium to develop a weapon that would kill on a mass basis — like Hiroshima. (71) In November 1995, a car bomb exploded at a Saudi-U.S. joint facility in Riyadh, killing five Americans.

    June 1996. (72) Khobar Towers, which housed U.S. Air Force personnel in Saudi Arabia, was blown up by Saudi Hezbollahs with help from Iran and some al-Qaida involvement. Nineteen Americans were killed and 372 wounded.

    July-August 1996. (73) The U.S. received from senior level al-Qaida defectors intelligence on the creation, character, direction and intentions of al-Qaida.

    February 1998. (74) Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri issued a fatwa declaring “war on America” and making the murder of any American anywhere on earth the “individual duty” of every Muslim.

    May 29, 1998. Finally, (75) after a long series of deadly bombings carried out since 1992, and bin Laden calls to attack the U.S., Clinton’s CIA created a plan to raid and capture the al-Qaida leader at his Tarnak Farms compound in Afghanistan. After months of planning, consultations with senior officials in other departments and numerous full rehearsals that went well, the raid was called off at the last moment by CIA Director George Tenet and others worried about possible collateral damage and second-guessing and recrimination if bin Laden didn’t survive.

    Aug. 7, 1998. (76) Al-Qaida blew up U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, five minutes apart, killing 200, injuring 5,000.

    Now (77) Clinton’s team, wanting to take stronger action, decided to fire Tomahawk missiles at bin Laden’s training camps as well as a Sudan aspirin factory. (78) But the administration gave up to 48 hours notice to certain people, including the chief of staff of Pakistan’s army, so India wouldn’t think the missiles were aimed at them. Somehow forewarned, bin Laden and his terrorist leaders all left — no terrorists were killed, but U.S. ineffectiveness was on full display.

    Dec. 20, 1998. (79) Intelligence knew bin Laden would be at the Haii house in Kandahar but again passed up the opportunity due to potential collateral damage and the risk of failure. (80) Clinton approved a plan by his national security adviser, Sandy Berger, to use tribals to capture bin Laden. But nothing happened.

    Next, (81) the Pentagon created a plan to use an HC 130 gunship, a more precise method, against bin Laden’s headquarters, but the plan was later shelved. Lt. Gen. William Boykin, deputy undersecretary of defense, told the 9/11 Commission “opportunities were missed due to an unwillingness to take risks and a lack of vision and understanding.”

    Feb. 10, 1999. (82) The CIA knew bin Laden would be at a desert hunting camp the next morning, the 11th. But the military failed to act because an official airplane of the United Arab Emirates was there and it was feared an Emirate prince or official might be killed.

    May 1999. (83) Detailed reports from several sources let the CIA know that bin Laden would be in Kandahar for five days. Everyone agreed it was the best chance to get bin Laden. But word came to stand down. It was believed Tenet and Clinton were again concerned about civilian collateral damage. A key project chief angrily said three opportunities were missed in 36 hours. October 2000, (84) the USS Cole was bombed, killing 17 U.S. sailors. No action was taken due to concerns expressed by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

    Americans must learn from history and costly mistakes. Sadly, (85) Democrat Jimmy Carter, a Southern peanut farmer, became our Neville Chamberlain, creating the specific conditions that have brought us the three greatest threats to our national security today: 1) (86) Iran’s nuke-bound terrorists; 2) (87) al-Qaida and other terrorists; and 3) (88) North Korea and its nuclear weapons.

    Carter’s (89) inability to deal with the Soviet communists emboldened them to invade Afghanistan. A 23-year-old bin Laden also was drawn there to recruit young Muslim fighters and build a network to raise money for the anti-Soviet jihad that later became al-Qaida.

    Years later, (90) civilian Carter took it on himself to go to North Korea and negotiate a peace agreement that would stop that communist country from developing nuclear weapons. He then convinced Clinton and Albright to go along with it. (91) The signed piece of paper proved worthless, as the Koreans easily deceived Democrats and used our money, incentives and technical equipment to build nuclear bombs and increase the threat we face today.

    The Clinton administration (92) had at least 10 chances to get bin Laden, but it repeatedly could not make the decision to act. There were too many people and departments involved, too much confusion and no strong leader to make the tough decisions to act. They were too timid and concerned about repercussions if they failed.

    Contrast this inability to take action with Harry Truman’s ability to make sound decisions and get results on complex defense issues — from dropping the bomb to end WWII to helping Iran and Turkey stave off the Soviets, from defending Greece from communist takeover following WWII to confronting and beating the Soviet’s Berlin blockade with a 14-month night-and-day Berlin airlift, from taking on the North Koreans to ultimately firing the popular Gen. Douglas MacArthur for insubordination.

    Further Democratic incompetence in matters of defense emerged from Clinton’s attorney general, Janet Reno, and her deputy, Jamie Gorelick. (93) They built a legal barrier that in effect prevented the CIA from sharing intelligence with the FBI before 9/11.

    Democrats in the Clinton administration (94) allowed the selling of important defense technology and secrets to the Chinese, who are now engaged in a massive military buildup.

    Estimates are that (95) 10,000 to 20,000 terrorists were trained in bin Laden’s many camps in the years before 9/11.

    Oil is also vital for our national defense. In 1952 we produced 93% of the oil we consumed. Now we depend on the Mideast and others for 66%. Democrats have been largely responsible for this because they have blocked all efforts to drill in Alaska and certain offshore areas estimated to contain 10 billion to 20 billion barrels of crude.

    Democrats (96) in Congress condemn current efforts to intercept terrorist phone calls, to mine data to ferret out future attacks against us, and to trace the movement of terrorist money through banks. All the while they want special treatment for enemy prisoners captured on the battlefield. This helps the enemy and undermines our troops in the field.

    We’re in a war. Something always goes wrong in a war, and our military leaders have made mistakes in Iraq. But quitting and leaving would amount to defeat for the U.S. in the global war on terrorism and create chaos. Quitters never win.

    Here’s the problem: America needs two strong, sound political parties. As far as domestic policy is concerned, it really doesn’t make much difference if Democrats or Republicans are in power. Ours is a free, entrepreneurial society where anyone can do anything he or she wants if they have a positive attitude and the desire to work, learn and achieve. Ambitious people come from all over the world to take advantage of this tremendous opportunity. This is one reason our economy is so resilient, continually bouncing back from periodic setbacks, driven by new inventions and achievements.

    However, (97) when it comes to which party has proved more capable in acting to defend and protect Americans from foreign enemies, there is only one choice. From Johnson to Carter to Clinton, virtually all the defense policies and decisions made by Democratic administrations have been unsuccessful. And in many cases, they have unintentionally but materially increased the danger to our national security and the safety of all Americans.

  35. Back to Melia (if that’s your real name): I vote GOP these days for one and only one reason: It’s BEST for the country. Maybe it’s the lesser of two evils, but the alternative has nothing better to offer.

    Since the 1960’s, we’ve witnessed administration after administration conduct a failed policy toward Cuba for one reason or another. That said, HOWEVER, ever since JFK the Dem party has been infiltrated and now hijacked by an irrational elite that drinks the Kool-Aid of socialism and anti-American sentiment to the hilt — and at the ballot box, to their demise.

    More and more, they appear to be the ones calling the shots across the board for everyone else in the party. They’ve become an obnoxious and insidious lot. They ignore that most of America doesn’t inhabit San Francisco or NY City. And too many of these leftists bow at the altar of Che Guvara mythology and castroite propaganda. No, thank you.

    More government and taxes, and a socialist approach to the economy has brought eventual misery to the peoples who have embraced it and put it into practice; in some countries, it has dragged their economy into the ground. If I fled Cuba because I didn’t want the political and socioeconomic oppression that rules the place, why would I come here and vote a similar mindset into office?

  36. Hemetero.
    Even for us Cuban-Americans who live in the left coast specially California the Democratic agenda it is not an alternative. Congri and tostones keep us from their delusional pinko programs.

  37. Lesly,
    I know you directed your source request at Mandingo, but if you read most of the posts on this thread, you can see the all the evidence and historical FACTS about the DEMs. You are entitled to your opinion. It appears to me that your requests for “sources” is just a defense mechanism brought on by your state of denial. Like the old saying says “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink it.” Please, I respect your opinion and your right to it. But we feel this way because of all these facts as we witnessed PERSONALLY over all these years. We ask you to respect our views and not try to paint a picture of the Democratic party that we simply see as not true.

  38. Lesly, just a reminder– You are not in charge here and if there is a problem with any of the comments the Babalusian who put up the post will take care of it. You will notice that very few of our commenter’s list their sources. Debate is fine, but please do not presume editorial rights. In other words, you are out of line.

  39. Max wrote: “I know you directed your source request at Mandingo, but if you read most of the posts on this thread, you can see the all the evidence and historical FACTS about the DEMs. You are entitled to your opinion. It appears to me that your requests for ‘sources’ is just a defense mechanism brought on by your state of denial.”

    First question: Have we spoken?

    Second question: How does one conclude citing a source is evidence of a state of denial?

    Third question: Which opinion of mine do you respect?

    Fourth question: How did I “paint a picture of the Democratic Party” (or paint any picture, for that matter) by sourcing Mandigo’s post?

  40. Ziva, quoting an entire article is not a good idea, IMO. Failure to cite sources can lead to a misunderstanding about editorial rights. I’ve never put on airs about having any say on Babalu Blog. If citing a source puts me “out of line” you can ban my IP to balm your ego.

  41. HavanaJuan you say: Even for us Cuban-Americans who live in the left coast specially California the Democratic agenda it is not an alternative. Congri and tostones keep us from their delusional pinko programs.

    For the record i’m neither democrat or republican. Neither party appeals to me. If you feel the republicans best represent your interest then go for it. But I got to tell you around here there’s alot frustration with politicians in general. Here’s what i see around me, broken borders, illegal imigrants demanding services eating up our tax dollars, a broken down school system, kids that can’t compete in the global econony, they tell us we have a healthy economy but most people i know live from pay check to paycheck and are deep in debt, i see a war that’s going nowhere eating up all our precious resources, i see our soldiers being put a no-win situation in a middle of religious war, i see a social security system that’s going bankrupt, i see poliicians trying to define morality for me. HavaJuan that’s what i see. I don’t know about you but these guys are not looking out for me, i had high expectations for this republican majority but they been a big let down.

    Now i’m with you tostones and congri on election day that sounds good to me


  42. Lesly – I’d say it’s your ego,not mine. My point is comments are up to the reader. You can assume they are his opinion whether original or not. The choice to list “sources” is up to our readers, but generally speaking unless the commenter thinks reading the original would enhance their point of view in some way it’s a waste of space.

  43. Lesly,

    I did not post with the intention of denigrating you in any way, but to point out where I feel some of your viewpoints in regards to the Dems and politics in general is wrong.

    Answer to first question:
    We have not PHYSICALLY “spoken”, but the very nature of this blog is communication. I am simply responding to what I see as your viewpoints based on your comulative posts.
    I respect and agree with some of your viewpoints. I feel we share the same dislike of the despot. Yet I feel you are wrong in some of your other viewpoints as I have pointed out.

    Answer to the second questions:
    I feel your asking for the source is your way of asking him for proof, when we all have witnessed many of those things first hand, it is kind of insulting on your part to ask for this.
    If you disagree, tell us why. For example, it is a known fact that the hostages in Iran happened in large part because of Carter’s policies of appeasement. Note that the hostages were freed the moment Reagan took office. I will NOT go through a cumbersome regurgitation of all these facts again simply satisfy what YOU feel is required. Now, If I know for a fact that you were to state something that is NOT factual, for example that Fidel is beneficial to Cuba. I would ask you for the source. The onus is on YOU to provide evidence to the contrary.

    Third question:
    I respect your right to your opinion, and I have already indicated to you that I agree with SOME of your views.

    Fourth Question:
    I have read your posts.

  44. Max: I did not post with the intention of denigrating you in any way, [snip]

    I didn’t think you did but I wondered how you picked up so much from one sentence.

    We have not PHYSICALLY “spoken”, but the very nature of this blog is communication. I am simply responding to what I see as your viewpoints based on your cumulative posts.

    Moneo will be so disappointed to know someone besides him reads my “leftist crap”. 🙂

    I respect and agree with some of your viewpoints. I feel we share the same dislike of the despot. Yet I feel you are wrong in some of your other viewpoints as I have pointed out.

    Okay, in general you disagree with me. I disagree in general with a lot of posters here. That goes without saying for both sides of the aisle, but it doesn’t mean more than that.

    I feel your asking for the source is your way of asking him for proof, when we all have witnessed many of those things first hand, it is kind of insulting on your part to ask for this.

    I didn’t ask for a source. I gave it. Are you reading too much into one line?

    If you disagree, tell us why. For example, it is a known fact that the hostages in Iran happened in large part because of Carter’s policies of appeasement.

    Thing is, I haven’t said what I disagree with. Or to put it another way, you haven’t quoted anything I’ve said that you disagree with, so it seems we’re debating some amorphous idea.

    In regards to Mandigo’s post, I think it’s a lot like other comments I’ve read here. I can overlook the fact that the article is biased, but what’s worse in my opinion, is that it is devoid of context. For example, the list someone posted about events that took place over a period of history with a D or R beside the events to indicate party. Such a list doesn’t need to distinguish between the liberal Radical Republican Party that took control of the federal government after the Civil War or the paradigm shift concerning economics following the Great Depression and the second paradigm shift both parties underwent as a result of the 1967 Civil Rights Act. There are lots of generalizations too, like one I read about Democrats being weak on security or some such nonsense because they don’t support legislative measures that allow the president to spy on U.S. persons. Blanket generalizations can overlook the fact that intelligence agencies can apply for a FISA warrant after conducting surveillance, and if the intelligence agencies aren’t snooping on political opponents or engaging in other unjustifiable activities (which is the whole reason why Congress passed the FISA legislation) they should have nothing to worry about with the FISC rubber stamp court. I get the impression I’m supposed to take the president’s word he wasn’t abusing his power when he broke federal statute by the same people who like to preach about limited government? I don’t think so.

    I actually thought the Shah example was funny because it overlooks the complete disregard that regime had for the rule of law. But it was pro-U.S., and for some people, that’s the only fact they need to be concerned with.

    Ziva, am I on your timer or something?

  45. Lesly,

    You implied that Mandingo was being impolite by not providing his source? Ism’t that indictecly asking for the source?

    Why is it so necessary to impede the war on terror and emphasize what you perceive to be a loss of rights? We are at WAR. It is a question of survival. If you are not a terrorist out to destroy the western world, you really don’t have anything to worry about.

    So, you are quick to point out your perceived shortcomings about the Shah, yet look the other way at what Carter helped bring about, an Islamofascist regime that is on the brink of threatening us with Nuclear war. Geez, arent you proud of Carter’s legacy? Doesn’t it bother you that that same regime has close ties with Fidel and Chavez? The Dems parrot a lot of the same ideas we here from the regime in Havana and our enemies in general. When you hear and see this this over and over again through the years, I am puzzled how your perception of things can be so different.

  46. Max:

    You implied that Mandingo was being impolite by not providing his source? Isn’t that implying asking for the source?

    You’re right. It does suggest that. I should’ve said is it’s a smart idea to provide a link.

    Why is it so necessary to impede the war on terror and emphasize what you perceive to be a loss of rights?

    Should I assume you can prove my preference for constitutional rights impedes the war on terror? Is it possible you can honestly believe every government lawyer, every MI finds it “necessary to impede the war” if they agree with my position that the Constitution doesn’t suspend itself during war?

    If you are not a terrorist out to destroy the western world, you really don’t have anything to worry about.

    This is wrong on so many levels. Tell that to Maher Arar and extradited Muslim British citizens who’ve made a round trip from Gitmo. My question is, why do you trust the government, any government, that much?

    So, you are quick to point out your perceived shortcomings about the Shah, yet look the other way at what Carter helped bring about, an Islamofascist regime that is on the brink of threatening us with Nuclear war.

    This is starting to get a little banal. Please cite where I said this…

    Geez, arent you proud of Carter’s legacy?

    And this…

    Doesn’t it bother you that that same regime has close ties with Fidel and Chavez?

    It bothers me more than a little, but I have no idea what assumption you’re basing your response on at this point.

    The Dems parrot a lot of the same ideas we here from the regime in Havana and our enemies in general.

    As I said, this thread is full of generalities.

  47. Guys/Gals this thread reminds of the lyrics from song the Trees, by rush. Here’s the lyrics
    There is unrest in the forest,
    There is trouble with the trees,
    For the maples want more sunlight
    And the oaks ignore their pleas.

    The trouble with the maples,
    (And they’re quite convinced they’re right)
    They say the oaks are just too lofty
    And they grab up all the light.
    But the oaks can’t help their feelings
    If they like the way they’re made.
    And they wonder why the maples
    Can’t be happy in their shade.

    There is trouble in the forest,
    And the creatures all have fled,
    As the maples scream “Oppression!”
    And the oaks just shake their heads

    So the maples formed a union
    And demanded equal rights.
    “The oaks are just too greedy;
    We will make them give us light.”
    Now there’s no more oak oppression,
    For they passed a noble law,
    And the trees are all kept equal
    By hatchet, axe, and saw.
    which one are you a maple or an oak?


  48. Lesly, I know a lot of Cubans that are democrats and they find repulsive the Castro and comunists regimes, they are really good people just like a lot of democrats are, I have personally voted democrat a couple of times, but the main problem is that the party as a whole has been taken over by lunatics whom I do not want running the asylum. Most of the people high up in the party are lifelong socialist sympatizers and that really pisses me off. I really do not care whom to vote for as long as they have the best interest for the the country and seeing how much left the democrats have tilted I would not trust them with goverment.

  49. Ahhh … didn’t want to spoil such a nice Saturday night to deal with talking points, but will give it a shot:

    “… intelligence agencies aren’t snooping on political opponents or engaging in other unjustifiable activities…”

    This is totally bogus. The government has neither the hardware capacity nor the legal disposition to snoop on all the communications of its citizenry, genius. What the agencies are interested in are the communications from presumed terrorists who call here, or the ones here who call out.

    I spent 11 years of my career working with Secret Service and FBI agents in law enforcement activities. It takes an enormous amount of effort and time, dozens of reviews, and reams and reams of paper for these agencies to obtain permission (not clearance, but permission) to submit a REQUEST to a court for AUTHORIZATION to get a wiretap going. See the hoops???? It goes up the food chain slowly and gets minced at every step. By the time the judge gets it and reviews it, the agents can only hope their targets have not moved.

    That’s why the laws were changed after 9/11; actually, the PATRIOT Act was not a new law at all. If you read it, you will see it’s mostly old laws that were tightened or streamlined.

    It always amazes me how the people who now get soooooo very uptight about the “surveillances” being conducted in a post-9/11 world NEVER think twice of the 900+ FBI files that the Clintons pulled from FBI headquarters when they arrived at the White House. It was totally unprecedented in the history of the feds to have anyone request that volume and kind of information …. but THEY did, and got away with it. They looked at every opponent, real and imaginary, with impunity. (FBI files, for your edification, are considered sacred cows — it’s virtually impossible to access one unless you have good reason to do so and have all sorts of clearances.)

    Nice try, there.

  50. Vedado but the main problem is that the party as a whole has been taken over by lunatics whom I do not want running the asylum.

    I personally don’t like Pelosi and Reid turned out to be a disappointment for a Senator from Nebraska. Of course I’m biased when I say this, but if I had to choose which party has been taken over by the wingnut faction I’d say the Republican Party. Of course Democrats have their wingnuts, but they tend to be obscure, or mainly unelected followers like Sheehan, Streisand, and Mike Rogers; people conservative pundits like to use to set up a Straw Man for the rest of the party. We are in short supply of devout partisan zealots like Tom DeLay.

    The reason I say Republicans win the award is because at this time I think they’ve allowed the Christian Right to take over their agenda. It’s my goddamn bedroom, it’s my goddamn porn, and speaking of my goddamn money, I should be able to blow it on the internet if I damn well please. So I’m boggled when I hear someone say the Republican Party supports personal responsibility.

  51. Lesly, from your last post it sounds that you don’t like either party? I’m reading this right?

    Not choosing either is still a choice, isn’it?


  52. Gigi: This is totally bogus. The government has neither the hardware capacity nor the legal disposition to snoop on all the communications of its citizenry, genius.

    Genius? You should have stayed in bed, darling. Please point out where I said the government has the personnel and hardware capacity to snoop on all the communications of its citizenry. Good luck!

    What the agencies are interested in are the communications from presumed terrorists who call here, or the ones here who call out.

    The Executive has never, to my knowledge, needed a warrant to intercept incoming foreign calls. The Executive, at least according to FISA, does need a FISC warrant when tapping calls within the U.S. for intelligence purposes. Why, one should not have to point out this distinction to an expert such as yourself.

    It takes an enormous amount of effort and time, dozens of reviews, and reams and reams of paper for these agencies to obtain permission (not clearance, but permission) to submit a REQUEST to a court for AUTHORIZATION to get a wiretap going. See the hoops?

    Do they take these hoops before or after the tap?

    By the time the judge gets it and reviews it, the agents can only hope their targets have not moved.

    Honey, are you talking about criminal investigations by the FBI and other agencies, or intelligence surveillance? Yes, agencies have to go through the usual motions when requesting regular warrants. Intelligence warrants requests to FISC are retroactive.

  53. Ray, I identify with the Democratic Party, though I was mistaken for a conservative once. o_O

    Aside from my beef with personal liberties I’m more concerned with practical solutions. I support Social Security but think LBJ seriously messed up the program when he nationalized it to cover the cost of the Vietnam War. So I’m somewhat “pro-big government”. But, hey, so are my Republican parents if that’s the measuring stick we will use. At the same time I think the amount of lobbying going on in D.C. is unprecedented and inexplicable. If the free economy party is in charge, why do businesses need to help the party draft legislation?

    If the Democrats take over Congress I would consider it a success if they’re able to cut pork to the level Republicans used to bitch about before Contract With America. I’m afraid they’ll look at Republicans and think, hey, we can get away with this shit too! It won’t work, and they’ll be voted out of office. The public gave Republicans a lot of slack because they’re the anti-government party. Their expectation for government performance under the Democratic Party won’t be as lenient. As the pro-government party, they should know how to govern without media blitzkriegs.

    Having said all that if I had my druthers I would change electoral law in all 50 states to an instant runoff ballot. Independents, Greens, Libertarians, etc., major 3rd parties would at least have a decent shot at influencing federal legislation more quickly. We do ourselves a disservice by limiting political discourse to a two-party system.

  54. Lesly,

    Now that at least we agree about generalities, GENERALLY SPEAKING, the facts here bear out that DEMS, not the GOP, is the lesser evil of the two.
    I would rather trust our government and give them ALL THE TOOLS to protect us from those that wish to destroy us. If that means taking away the rights from the terrorists to protect us, SO BE IT!!!!

    You may not outright say you tilt to the left, but your implications speak very loudly. Stop and think for a minute. You are more concerned with the rights of the terrorists than allowing the govt who we have tasked to protect us all the tools necessary to do this. You may not want to admit this, BUT WE ARE AT WAR.. (caps for emphasis only).

  55. Max: Stop and think for a minute. You are more concerned with the rights of the terrorists than allowing the govt who we have tasked to protect us all the tools necessary to do this.

    No, Max; I’m more concerned with our freedom and way of life, I’m more concerned with reducing the oldest constitution on the planet to empty platitudes about representative democracy, I’m more concerned with innocent Americans being extradited or held without charges being brought against them than I am concerned about Abu in Iraq biting a bullet. You have no idea how insulting your suggestion is. You have no idea because you accept this administration’s talking points hook, line, and sinker.

  56. Lesly, I have to agree with Max
    The suppression of any civil liberty in the name of combating terrorism is justified any day of the week and twice-on Sunday. We have to learn to get down from that– western superior moral pedestal– and understand that this people are using our on liberties against us, and nothing that we could do or said will change their anti-Americanism. They are ruthless and any pitiful concession to the rules to them is a victory against the imperialism Yankee. Something to reflect on.
    Military Maxims of Napoleon
    Maxim V. All wars should be governed by certain principles, for every war should have a definite object, and be conducted according to the rules of art.
    Maxim LXVIII. There is no security for any sovereign, for any nation, or for any general, if officers are permitted to capitulate in the open field, and to lay down their arms in virtue of conditions favorable to the contracting party, but contrary to the interests of the army at large. To withdraw from danger, and thereby to involve their comrades in greater peril, is the height of cowardice. Such, conduct should be proscribed, declared infamous, and made punishable with death. All generals, officers, and soldiers who capitulate in battle to save their own lives should be decimated.
    He who gives the order and those who obey are alike traitors, and deserve capital punishment.

  57. We can agree in disagreeing that political parties do not really give a dam to other except of their agendas. Let me re-fraise that, neither rep nor dem give a rat ass about Cuba or Cubans, but as many have expressed the leadership of the Democratic Party is being taken by lefties fundamentalist that look for support in all the wrong places.
    My greatest disappointment in coming to the States, was when I realized that a great majority of the people that I admire for their outspokenness against the system were devotees of the communist totalitarian regimes specially the one I was trying to escape from.
    Democracy is not perfect but allows us to choose our on evils and debate them in our on terms. Moreover, democracy empowers us with the ability to articulate our discrepancies. Nevertheless, democrats are trying to suppress that inalienable right –given to us by the constitution of this nation– vilifying, twisting the truth, annihilating, or condescendingly disregarding the opinions of those that disagree with their point of view. At least republicans (we have to agree with) advocate for the prompt end of the semi- departed tropical dictator.
    Did any one really, really want to vote for a party whose leaders are Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry or Hillary Clinton? If that happens (god save us) we will find ourselves sooner than later eating picadillo de Soya and calling companero our next door neighbors.

  58. I just knew that if I wrote this:

    If you are of the same mind-set as this reader, don’t bother to write. I want her comment addressed directly by folks who hold the opposite of her opinion, myself included

    Lesly would just have to stroke her ego and open her yap.

  59. Lesly,

    WRONG. If you are implying that the so-called Guantanamo detainees are “innocent Americans” I ask you to put down the kool-aid.

    These are terrorists, or “enemy combatants’.
    These people are trying to kill the “innocent Americans” you mention. I refuse to allow your very dangerous line of thinking. Why give those bent on destroying us ANY advantages?

    I wanted to be civil but since you insist on implying that I follow some sort of “talking heads’:

    These “talking heads” you mention have learned the facts the hard way, like myself. You really need to go over the archives of this blog, and of history in general and educate yourself on the facts. You need “remedial” education and to have the leftist drivel version of history rewritten in your head. Now I ask you – WHAT ARE YOUR SOURCES? The MSM, NY Times?

    You really need to take a step back and see just how bogus your arguments are.

  60. Cuba has had the life sucked out of its people as effectively as if a vampire had attacked the entire nation. The embargo has not added to the suffering of the Cuban people. The suffering ahs been due to the tyranny of castro. He has run a very corrupt regime, lying to the Cuban people about their education, healthcare, and status. He has had the constitution written making him the de facto owner(!) of the Cuban people. They have been reduced to puppets and slaves.
    To say that the democrat party offers something good for the Cuban people is to ignoer the fact that the democrats have enabled castro since Kennedy chickened out during the Bay of Pigs.
    To address the assertion that Republicans ahve hurt the world, I can only say that millioins of people are more free today because of REpublican policies. Those people will disagree with your assertion. I can also point out that in Europe, where they have tried appeasement of moslem immigrants, they are now in the midst of a violent uprising. I think history is showning that the Republican policy has not only given America one of its strongest policies ever, has kept America safe during a war, but it is also carrying the day against islamofascists, and North Korea. Both problems, by the way, were made much worse by democrat strategies and policies.

  61. Lesly, basically you are advocating that my enemy’s enemy’s is my friend, if you listen to this terrorist talk, they sound like the democratic party talking points, they blame Bush and the US and they just want peace, sorry but I do not buy into, for all your people that are always talking about the goverment taking away our freedoms and commiting acts of torture, you really have not idea what it is living under a dictatorship and if for one minute you that the enemy(Commies, muslims) are going to respect our values and personal freedoms you are in for a treat,I personally feel that I have not given away any of my freedoms, eventhought I look like a middle eastern I do not get upset when searched at the airport, because I have nothing to hide and that tells me that they are doing their job.


    Frankly, I don’t care about labels. I don’t believe in them. I’m not going to let myself be influenced by a tactic of the left.
    What I said was an actual story that happened a few weeks ago. Human beings who live in villages with no plumbing which happen to be in Africa, thousands of them were given refuge, government job and sent over.
    And I’m sure they are all going to vote D in the next election

  63. I can almost understand the writer’s wonderment about how the majority of Cuban immigrants to this country affiliate themselves and relate to the republican party. I have often wondered why the majority of the Jewish citizens of this country are democrats given the party’s history of lacking the courage to stand up to terrorists and support Israel. This paradox vexes me especially when you take into consideration that it has been republicans who have staunchly supported Israel whether it was a popular stance at the time or not. But in my opinion, I believe the affiliations that both of these groups have chosen have more to do socially than politically.

    I will speak of Cubans since I have lived and experienced the life of a Cuban immigrant in this country first hand (maybe someone will be able to explain to me the other group). First of all, I believe the writer of this e-mail grew up in a place where you don’t find a lot of Cubans. I may be wrong, but I strongly believe that if she had grown up in Miami or Union City during the 60’s and 70’s, there wouldn’t be a question. What many commentators, liberal thinkers and their ilk seem to ignore is that the huge Cuban migration to this country in the first 15 to 20 years after the infamous revolution was for the most part, politically motivated. My parents did not come here for better jobs or to be able to have the luxuries that are unheard of in a third world country. Cuba’s standard of living before the revolution was on par with most of the modern world. My parents, and the hundreds of thousands with them, came here to be free. After the revolution, the middle class, along with the rich and powerful were persecuted. The revolution wanted everyone equal; equally poor and desperate.

    Therefore, the mass exodus began. And who are the people arriving in Miami? The vast majority of them are, like my parents, middle class, educated, hard working families. Here is where the Cuban immigrant story differs from most other Latin American immigrant stories. The majority of the people arriving in this country from Cuba during that time arrived here looking for freedom and individuality. They did not come to the US looking for free food, shelter and health care. In other words, they were not economic immigrants.They came here looking for the freedom. They fled a system in Cuba that dictated to them where they worked, how much they made, what and how much they could eat and where they could or couldn’t live. All the while their children were being brainwashed and indoctrinated in school to believe that only the government can give you life. Not yourself, not your family, only the government.

    Now, the democratic party here in the US has always enjoyed the voting support of those who are enrolled in social programs such as the welfare system. And, to keep this large voting block happy, they have historically voted to continue increasing funding and enlarging the welfare rolls of this country in an effort to expand their voter base. [Now most democrats will scream at this moment and point out Clinton signing the welfare reform act. Please remember that Clinton was and is, above all things, a pragmatist. And he will do whatever is necessary to stay on top, whether it goes against the democratic party’s principals or not. Let’s not forget the outrage the democratic leaders of congress expressed when Clinton signed that bill.] Cuban immigrants on the other hand, for the most part were not interested in government hand outs. All they wanted was the freedom to work where they wanted, open their own business’ if they wanted and live wherever they wanted. History shows that these people were successful in obtaining that goal. If the writer would’ve grown up around these people, maybe she would’ve had a different perspective.

    So why do Cuban immigrants tend to be republicans? The answer might be simpler than you think. Cubans that fled the oppressive communist dictatorship have seen first hand the harm that big government, with large social programs can do to its people, the social structure of their families and the economy. It is not to say that the democratic party wants to install the same system in the US (although there are a few that would if they could), but the leftist leanings of the democrats make those who lived under a leftist dictatorship cringe. Have the republicans done great things for Cuba and its people? That is simply not the case. But their core principals are quite similar to that of the Cuban immigrants that arrived in this country. So when you only have two choices in party affiliation and one of them shares a lot of the leftist ideals of your enemy, where do you think you would end up?

    I could get into the atrocities that have been committed by democratic leaders against Cuba, its people and its immigrants (Kennedy, Clinton, Carter, Rangel), but unfortunately, that is just icing on the cake.

  64. Lesly, on my timer? No, your ego is showing again. I have no timer, its just as George said:

    “Lesly would just have to stroke her ego and open her yap.”

    You are completely predictable.

  65. Folks, the complete and 100% dead-on answer to the question has been provided by PilotAl a few comments above this one.

    “Melia” and Lesly: Read it several times. Educate yourselves.

  66. Lesly ~ you have no idea what you are saying; I don’t engage people who are willingly ignorant and uninformed and prefer to remain that way.

    But that was a nice try.

    ~~ Annoy a Liberal: Word Hard, BE HAPPY ~~

  67. P.S. — and don’t “honey” me ….. I don’t do condescending commentary either. Get your own honey. Get some more facts. And some happiness.

    ~~ Annoy a Liberal: Work Hard, BE HAPPY ~~

  68. Pilot Al, that was supremely well put. I hope the original poster will consider herself duly “educated.”

Comments are closed.