“Why does this embargo debate ALWAYS start from–not one–but TWO false premises?”

stosselshow16

“But the embargo hasn’t worked. Castro’s still there….the definition of insanity is doing the same thing…blah…blah…blah”

“As usual, the very first sentence of this embargo debate contains TWO falsehoods

“First off: The U.S. does NOT enforce anything remotely definable as an embargo against Cuba.

“Secondly: The embargo’s original goal was NOT regime-change!”



My opening remarks (like much else) were completely edited out of the show. But a badly-butchered version of what actually took place in that Fox Studio can now be seen here:

stosselshow28
“Le RRRRRRRONCA!!!”

1 thought on ““Why does this embargo debate ALWAYS start from–not one–but TWO false premises?””

  1. Look, Cuba is not taken seriously, so it winds up painted to suit those who deign to bother with it. Cubans have been objectified, not to say dehumanized, to either “noble savages” or “those people,” both of which are treated as “other.” In the former case, there’s patronizing condescension, and in the latter, there’s malicious resentment. Either way, we wind up getting the shaft.

Comments are closed.