I don’t know where to start in telling you about this article from the Trinidad Express. I’ll try to just give the highlights.
It begins with the title, Cuba in the ‘politics of change,’ Look out for Obama-Castro meeting… by alerting the reader to an Obama-castro meeting, should Obama become president, and then rails on President Bush for insulting the Cuban regime in last week’s speech, comparing his demand for free and democratic elections as a farce since he was never democratically elected in 2000. The article’s author, one Mr. or Ms. Rickey Singh, then mocks Bush for telling castro to release Cuba’s political prisoners when the United States is responsible for “gross human rights violations” in Guantanamo. (These prisoners, it should be noted, are not there for writing articles against the US government, they are there because they are terrorists, but I suppose that is not of any consequence.)
The author points out that requiring voter ID for the elections means “serious negative consequence for Democratic voters, especially of the Black American and Hispanic communities, according to reports in leading US media,” and then quotes Nancy Pelosi as saying: “The court’s decision places obstacles to the fundamental right, especially the poor, the elderly and individual with disabilities, to participate in the electoral process…”
Is it me or do other people not understand how requiring voters to show proof of who they are when they cast a vote for the President of the United States (or for anyone) not to be an obstacle to the right to vote? Are there that many people in this country who do not have a driver’s license, their voter’s card, or any other form of valid and acceptable identification? If it truly is a problem, then the Democrat and Republican groups can assist their registered voters to procure the necessary id, just like they help to get them registered to vote. But in Indiana, where the law exists, the” Democratic party and civil rights groups have failed to identify a single individual in Indiana whose right to vote was hurt by the law,” per U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement.
But getting back to the title of the article, Mr./Ms. Singh explains that while Hillary Clinton wants to see if Cuba will have made any changes before she decides to have talks with the regime, if she is elected, that Obama plans to “move quickly” toward establishing direct talks with castro. Obama is quoted:
“If we (presidential candidates) think that meeting with the Cuban President(sic) is a privilege that has to be earned (by him), I think that reinforces the sense that we stand above the rest of the world…”
Another anti-American quote by the man who won’t wear the American flag pin because he wants his actions to show his patriotism and whose wife was never proud of her country until her husband ran for president.
You can read the whole arroz con mango HERE