Occupy Wall Street Populated by the 1%

This is rich.

According to a new study from sociologists at the City University of New York, more than a third of activists in the Occupy movement in New York City had household incomes above $100,000, placing them at the cusp of the top quintile of income distribution in America. Researchers surveyed 729 people who participated in a May 1 rally last year and were involved in the “occupation” of Zuccotti Park in the fall of 2011, and found that they were more affluent, whiter, younger, much more highly educated, and more likely to be male than the average New Yorker.

Non-Hispanic whites constituted 62 percent of all respondents, though they make up only 33 percent of New York City residents. While only about a third of Americans hold bachelors’ degrees, 76 percent of respondents who had completed their education had a four-year college degree and 39 percent had graduate degrees. Among college graduates, more than a quarter went to top-ranked schools, which might help explain why the majority of graduates under 30 had some student debt. While 10 percent of participants were unemployed, 71 percent were employed in professional occupations. Eight percent were “blue collar.”

So, the “we are the 99%” crowd was made up of primarily one percenters?

You can’t make this stuff up.

Though most respondents were highly educated and employed, about a quarter of those with jobs worked less than 35 hours a week. They had time to participate in protests, the authors write, because they were “unconstrained by highly demanding family or work commitments.”

“It’s a pretty affluent demographic and highly educated,” Professor Ruth Milkman, one of the authors of the study, told the New York Post. “Many were the children of the elite, if you will.”

This was the equivalent of Marie Antoinette leading the charge on the Tuileries Palace.


White Hat Days

If there was a saving Grace to those days spent in Cuba between the advent of la puta revolución and the bittersweet day of our departure, it was that we were one of the few houses in our block who actually owned a working television.

We were gusanos, but that old Zenith B&W set made us very popular worms in our neighborhood.

Even in those days of State-controlled broadcasts, with Cuban television’s version of El Zorro sounding way more Socialist than a pre-Lost in Space Guy Williams ever did, and where the prophetic irony of a show with a title like Sán Nicolás Del Peladero was lost in the time prior to the official kickoff of Castro’s “Periodo Especial”, otherwise known as the “Cuban Gatocide” as multitudes of domestic cats mysteriously disappeared from the Island, that TV was a lifeline to sanity and a way to remind ourselves that there was a world outside the shrinking walls of fear and distrust in Castro’s Cuba.

A better world, somewhere, out there.

I remember sitting down nightly to enjoy the few hours of entertainment programming sandwiched between the endless stream of propaganda and government directives (Ahorre agua!) that constituted Cuban television programming in the mid 1960’s; we seldom went out at night those days. Maybe my parents were being cautious as every gusano lived with the fear of random revolutionary acts of retaliation, even back then, before things got worse, or maybe there just weren’t a whole lot of things to do at night for a young family in Cuba after the fall.

So, we’d eat dinner, clean up, and sit on the couch under the wide louvered window in our living room ready for the night’s entertainment. We had two such windows in our apartment that more than made up for the lack of air conditioning with an ever present breeze. One window faced the bay in the distance, and the other overlooked a walkway between our apartment building and the house next door. The walkway was bordered by a concrete wall…un muro, and as soon as we turned on our set that muro was immediately covered with the neighborhood kids, silently watching the shows over our shoulders. I guess that old muro would be the Gonzalez family theater’s balcony.

We all sat there, the gusanos and the neighborhood kids, watching TV and hoping for an old American flick to come on.

There were old Cagney flicks (Made it Ma! Top of the world!), as well as films from starts with exotic names like Rooney, Flynn, Stewart and Ladd, and as we sat there and watched these films, with the country literally falling apart all around us, there was one thing we knew beyond the shadow of a doubt because we saw it in the movies we watched.

To the North of us, there was a land where the good guys always won, a land where the bad guys didn’t stand a chance, and where for every Jack Wilson there were two Joe Starretts and a Shane to stand up to them.

And good guys always wore white hats.

That’s what we knew then…we knew this about the land to the North, and the thought of a nation populated by white hat wearing good guys who would defend their homes, their families, and their towns against any number of black hat-wearing bad guys, kept hope alive in the hearts and minds of that little band of gusanos watching an old Zenith black and white TV set in those Havana nights of so very long ago.

Something has happened since then to that land, to that culture and to Hollywood.

Sometime between “Shane” and “Thelma and Louise”, between “I Love Lucy” and “Sons of Anarchy” we lost sight of the good guys, and the nation that believed in principles became a nation that gorged itself in amoral self indulgence and wanton violence.

And I blame Hollywood for a lot of it.

Sexual content for the sake of sexual content and gratuitous violence became the norm. Bad guys became heroes, the Joe Starretts of the world became victims, and we were convinced that people were defenseless in the face of evil.

So much so that now the guys in white hats have been replaced by superheroes, wizards and noble robots from other galaxies. A message so subtle yet so strikingly clear that it is hard to miss: we’re not enough to handle threats to our existence. We need a greater power to protect us.

The culture of violence and lack of respect for human life promoted by Hollywood has permeated every aspect of our lives, and Hollywood is the one place in the US where mindless violence is rewarded, even if it is only the realistic portrayal of gratuitous violence.

Sit with your kids and play a few minutes of Grand Theft Auto if you don’t believe me, or try to keep track of how many people Liam Neeson kills in Taken 2.

Or just watch this.

We have been systematically desensitized to violence and gore as violence and gore became movie themes in and of themselves. Little by little, as a nation, whether in our choices at the box office or in our support of abortion as a “right”, we lost sight of the worth of life.

We can hold an honest debate on whether it was Hollywood that changed the culture, or whether it was the changes in the culture that drove Hollywood’s standards into the gutter, but there’s little to debate on whether or not Hollywood’s influence on society has been largely negative.

So the sight of self-aggrandizing, self-indulging Hollywood personalities demanding that “something be done” and that we should “demand a plan” just set me off.

The absolute insulting irony of being prodded to “demand a plan” by these effete acting school trendies with their feigned accents and armed bodyguards was a bit more than I could bear, but then I saw this:

Yeah…I got a plan.

My plan is that you leave me to defend my home, my family, and my country, while you all get on your knees and apologize to all the victims of the senseless, gratuitous violence and immorality that you make millions promoting.

My plan is to raise my kids to understand that your social relevance is as real as those Marvel superheroes that you play on the big screen.

My plan is to teach my kids to defend themselves, and by extent their families from not only the morally corrupted and the psychopaths in this world, but from their enablers as well.

My plan is to make sure that my children understand who and what makes a person a role model, and that neither you, or the politicians that you support are it.

My plan is to raise men, not “low information voters”.

My plan is to bring back those white hat days of old, days when bad guys got their asses kicked at the end of the movie.

So, you think I should demand a plan?

Yeah well, I got your plan right here.

White Hat Days

The Choice, revisited: our Republic on the precipice

“At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? — Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! — All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

–Abraham Lincoln,
address before the Young Men’s Lyceum

of Springfield, Illinois, January 27, 1838.

* * *

“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

–Attributed to Benjamin Franklin at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787,
when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation;
in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention.

— — — — — — — — — — —

It’s been a long four years, hasn’t it?

I’ve never experienced writer’s block as I have in preparing this essay. Some of you are thinking that I’m crazy; that this essay, outlining my thoughts and ideas about tomorrow’s election, should come out of me without effort. You’d be wrong. I have much to say and very little inclination to say it. I’m tired of repeating myself to mindless drones who do not care to listen to facts and common sense. I’ve said it all before, and my co-writers and co-contributors have all said it before as well, more eloquently than I.

But I was compelled to write this because tomorrow is the day of reckoning, the day we’ve been waiting for since January 20, 2009. Tomorrow America decides whether it wants to walk in the light of liberty or whether it continues the relentless four-year path to tyranny and socialism. Or, as the other side calls it, “forward.”

In the two years since I wrote “The Choice,” where I made my pitch for electing conservatives in the mid-term election, things have gotten worse. And, remarkably, also better. Worse in the sense that the left has doubled-down on every bad policy and idea — and have lied to the American people over and over again. The mendacity, disinformation, and sophistry I have witnessed from the left and Democrats over the last two years has been breathtaking. The left is content to speak in platitudes and slogans and roundly ignore the dangers facing our country. Domestic and foreign.

But also better. A large percentage of the American People — WE THE PEOPLE — have finally awakened. That public, that in 2008 ingested the Kool-Aid in big, sloppy gulps, have experienced an epiphany about who Obama is and what his party wants for us. And they’ve realized that it’s not pretty. Obamacare, one of the most pernicious and destructive pieces of legislation ever passed by a United States Congress, is singularly unpopular. Majorities are opposed to it and have been opposed to it since its debate and ultimate passage, against the will of the American people. This one piece of legislation, upheld by the Supreme Court on June 28 of this year in a tortured and nonsensical decision, has mobilized a great many citizens to roundly reject the agendas of the left. They have finally awakened to the unassailable fact that Democrats want more and more control over our lives, not less. They have awakened to the fact the Democrats don’t care one whit about the taxpayers who fund these programs. Why would they? A small majority of American taxpayers fund the programs for the rest. With 47% of the population receiving government benefits without paying taxes the Dems feel safe that they have bought the votes necessary to continue their path “forward.” What that path is, however, is economic Armageddon.

Our economic system is on the verge of collapse. Entitlement spending has exploded, promises made to Americans about their retirement — which was never the intent of Social Security — and promises made about Medicare can no longer be kept. The unfunded liability of the United States of America for entitlement programs is so staggering that the number is almost unbelievable. We cannot continue to spend money we don’t have.

One of the salient facts I throw out at every opportunity is our national debt number. This administration has doubled the combined debt from 1791-2008 in just four years. Read that again. This administration has doubled the combined debt from 1791-2008 in just four years. It is a staggering statistic that few understand or care to believe. But it affects every man, woman and child in this country. Today’s generations, and tomorrow’s yet unborn generations, will be paying for the ill-conceived largesse intended to ensnare tens of millions in a web of dependency. We’ve had forty consecutive months of unemployment over 8% — forty-two if you count the last two months of 7.8% and 7.9% unemployment that many think are doctored numbers. Entire industries are under assault. Coal miners are losing their jobs left and right because of this administration’s policies. Businesses are sitting on well over a trillion dollars in cash, afraid to spend it because they do not know the extent to which their money will disappear due to the policies of the leftists in Washington.

Fortunately, the mid-term election of 2010 marked the beginning of the end of the Dems continued push “forward” on their socialist path. Control of (at least) the House of Representatives has meant an effective end to four years (2007-2011) of Democrat control and unfettered spending. They make the Republicans I criticized in 2006 look like pikers in comparison.

The American people have also come to the realization that a president who bows to other leaders — his equals — and who apologizes for his country is unacceptable. America is not perfect. We never were. But we were (and still are) the last best hope of the world. Our enemies — Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and the now-developing Muslim Brotherhood-inspired caliphate — sense weakness, indecision, confusion, and vacillation. I don’t care if they love us or not. They no longer respect us.

How can you respect a country that abandons its ambassadors and service men to die?

I do not think it is hyperbole to make comparisons between this year, and the end of the Roman Republic in 44 BC, the Reformation in 1517, the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860, and the beginning of World War I in 1914. The events in each of those pivotal years changed the world forever. The election that will play out tomorrow will most certainly determine the future course of this country — and change the world for better, or worse.

We are on the precipice of an unstable cliff. WE THE PEOPLE have total control over our destiny. WE THE PEOPLE are still the sole arbiters of whether we stand away from the ledge, we’re pushed off, or we jump off.

Let us pray to Almighty God that we make the right choice.

Delivering us from evil, one inappropriate site at a time…sort of.

I was having a terrible day.

We arrived at Jackson Memorial Hospital at 6:30 that morning to check in for surgery slated to begin two hours later. It wasn’t until 3:45 that afternoon that the OR finally became available.

Now, in my humble opinion, if you must have complex surgery, University of Miami’s Jackson Memorial Hospital’s facilities is where you want to have the surgery; we had the best surgeon, in the best hospital. It seems that everyone agrees with that assessment, and that accounted for the delay.

So, before I write another word, I want to make something CRYSTAL clear:

The people that I had contact with there, from the cheerful lady who brought the meals to the room, to the nurses and doctors, from our surgeon to his interns, and from the patient care specialists to the cafeteria staff, were all just incredible. After all the bad publicity that Jackson gets I expected a disaster, but that disaster never materialized; to be fair, the delay in the surgery was due to an emergency, and that’s a normal. everyday occurrence in any hospital in the U.S.

Anyway…I sat here, nearly 12 hours after pulling into the parking lot, lounging in a waiting room that I will admit was far more comfortable than your run-of-the-mill two-bad-couches-and-an-old-TV-tuned-to-CNN typical waiting room, thinking that someone would update me on how the surgery was progressing, when I decided to avail myself of the computers set up for guests and family members to use as they wait. I wanted to bun some time checking my email and catching up on what was going on in the world.

My inbox was typically bulging with Presidential election year political spam…but from the good guys, so I didn’t mind, and off to the web I went.

The first site I tried to visit was blocked, deemed as inappropriate.

I was slightly annoyed, but I have run across public access computers that block blogs and forums based on content in the past, so I wasn’t surprised. Having no choice, I decided to get my news from elsewhere, and I was glad to see that Drudge was available.

However, I couldn’t let that “inappropriate” word out of my mind.

Who decides what is inappropriate for the public computers at a State facility, and what exactly is the definition of what may be deemed inappropriate to begin with?

So, I went off in a search:


OK, so lefty sites trying to pretend to be centrist are not blocked.


Flat-out vulgar leftist sites are not blocked.


Sites promoting the overthrow of our Republican form of government and our Constitution are not blocked.


The official media arm of a murdering dictator is not blocked.


A murdering dictator’s useful idiot is not blocked.

But if you try to access a site run by a hard-hitting bunch of intransigent Cubiches with a passion for freedom, justice, and truth, you get this:


I don’t know whether to be proud, insulted, or both.


I am thinking that I may have to issue a public apology here, because men should own up to their errors.

It seems that “Alex” at Two Shores has take umbrage at my describing him (the blog) as “a murdering dictator’s useful idiot”, and perhaps that was a crazy thing for me to say.

Alex, you are right…I went too far by calling you “a murdering dictator’s useful idiot.”

There is absolutely nothing useful about you.

The Infinite Postmenopausal Liberal Monkey Theorem…Part 2.

If one million monkeys typing away for all eternity can type out the collected works of William Shakespeare, and five hundred thousand drunk monkeys typing away for five hundred years could turn out most everything written by Paul Krugman, then three post-menopausal liberal monkeys typing away for a week could turn out two Maureen Dowd columns for publication.

But enough about Maureen Dowd, that was Part 1.

This is Part 2.

This is about Don Ediger, not Maureen Dowd.

“Gosh, is HE still alive?”

If Mr. Ediger is reading this, he knows that I am not showing a lack of respect for his age. I am just echoing his words, from a 1967 article on then 63 year-old Sally Rand, published by the Miami Herald. I don’t know how old Don is, but forty-five years ago, he was writing for The Miami Herald and thinking that 63 was old. Today, he probably disagrees with that idea.

Ediger’s current article “Cuba’s Post-Castro Future” published by the Liberal online publication Consortiumnews.com, is yet another attempt by someone who, possessed with a little knowledge of pre-Castro Cuba, perhaps some personal experience in Castro’s Cuba (there are many reasons for aging men to travel to Cuba these days), and the opinions of a handful of Liberal-thinking friends in academia and jurisprudence, thinks he can speak for what “most Cuban-Americans now believe”.

He can’t.

It is to be expected, this idea that he would have his journalistic thumb on the undercurrents of Miami’s Cuban-American politics, but the primary flaw with liberals writing for liberal publications remains the same, whether one is writing for the consortiumnews.com site, or a real publication, like, let’s say, anything else. They walk among liberals, speak to liberals, read liberal publications, watch liberal news networks, read liberal pundits, and attend liberal functions hosted by liberal activists. In limiting their world to all things liberal, they come to believe that the whole world thinks like them.

It’s like living a never-ending, back-slapping, “aren’t we great”, ideological-circle-jerk-sans-the-need-for-a-case-of-moist-tissues life, and thinking that’s the norm.

Mr. Ediger quotes Andy Gomez, senior fellow at the University of Miami’s Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies, a registered Republican and Obama supporter, Miami attorney ( and known dialoguero) Antonio Zamora, and calls their opinions “a growing consensus” (to be fair, there are 14 listing for Miami attorneys named Antonio Zamora, but I think I got the right one). If that’s enough to give Mr. Adiger the idea that he understands what Miami Cuban-Americans think, I’d like to invite him to spend a few hours with my family down Kendall way.

We’ll feed him some ropa vieja, and enough opinion on what we think to stave off an entire cadre of liberal professors and dialoguero lawyers, and before anyone goes labeling me “intolerant”, well, yes and no. Everyone is free to say and opine as they see fit, what they can’t do is to speak for me, or mine, charter members of that Miami, cafecito-at-Versailles-drinking, dos-croquetas-de-jamón-y-un-cortadito-merienda-at-La-Carreta-en-Coral-Way eating, Los-Marlins-loving Cuban-American community. We are the true representatives of that group of “most Cuban-Americans” that he keeps talking about in his piece.

Come talk to us.

The most astounding part of the piece, is the misrepresentation of the Cuban embargo’s intended purposes by Jose Gabilondo of FIU’s Cuban Research Institute.

“The logic of the U.S. embargo is ‘Let’s create conditions of civil unrest in Cuba by creating conditions of economic hardship such that there will be a popular uprising that will lead to a revolution.’ I reject that approach. I don’t think it makes sense.”

I reject that interpretation.

Fidel Castro’s regime stole from American citizens, and declared itself an enemy of everything American. It sought to install weapons of mass destruction on Cuban soil, for the sole intended purpose of threatening the United States, and by default, the people of the United States. It brought the world to the edge of nuclear war, and in spite of a failing economy that routinely left its own people short of even the most basic necessities, has financed and fostered strife in Central and South America, and beyond.

Moody’s gives Cuba a Caa1 credit rating, a distinction that the Island nation shares with Ecuador, Greece, and Pakistan.

And these are things that we all know!

They are things certainly known to the individual who heads FIU’s “Cuban Research Institute”.

The embargo was set in place because the Castro government all but declared war on the United States.

All these experts seem to miss the most glaring contradiction on their argument. Then, it was Castro and his useful idiots who accused American businesses of exploiting the people of Cuba, blaming all that allegedly was wrong with pre-Castro Cuba on the fact that Cuba had close economical ties with the U.S. Now, the current crop of useful idiots are blaming everything that ails Cuba on the lack of close economical ties with the United States, and are arguing in favor of going back to the halcyon days of cheap Varadero vacations, and plentiful Cohibas.

Gabilondo must see that incongruity, he must know that, just as he knows that there is no embargo. The U.S. today, is Cuba’s largest food supplier.

Why then, one has to ask, would someone who knows these things continue to beat that “lift the embargo, it hasn’t worked” dead horse to death, while simultaneously acknowledging that as a result of the embargo, Cuba is largely irrelevant, and massively broke?

You have to translate what they mean by “lifting the embargo”, when there is no embargo to be lifted for all intent and purposes.

This agitprop is designed to change the existing trade laws which force the Castro government to pay cash for anything they purchase from the U.S.

Castro wants credit, and the liberal elite in the U.S. want to give it to him.

By being allowed to sell to the government of Cuba (there is no Cuban trade entity in Cuba other than the Cuban government) on credit, U.S. companies come under the protective umbrella of the Export-Import bank of the United States of America, with all receivables generated by sales to Cuba, guaranteed by the American taxpayer.

The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) is the official export credit agency of the United States federal government. It was established in 1934 by an executive order, and made an independent agency in the Executive branch by Congress in 1945, for the purposes of financing and insuring foreign purchases of United States goods for customers unable or unwilling to accept credit risk.

I’ve never been asked my opinion on the “embargo”, and as far as I could discern from phone calls made and emails sent prior to writing this response, neither has anyone that I know, so either we’re not part of the group chosen to respond to the survey, or the definition of what constitutes a Cuban-American has somehow changed to not include anyone that I know. And THAT concludes my own poll, equally as politically slanted as any poll of liberal thinkers made by any liberal writer for a liberal online publication.

Add them both together and what do you get?

A realization that after 52 years of debate on the subject, all that anyone, including liberal writers, academics, and lawyers engaged in a liberal circle-jerk can do, is write slanted speculative fiction on the subject of what is going to happen in Cuba after Castro dies.

There are only three things that are known with any measure of certainty:

  • There will be a party in Miami. One that will dwarf the night that LeBron “El Varón” James, Dwayne “Miami” Wade, and Los Miami Heat brought the NBA title back to the Magic City.
  • Post-menopausal Liberal monkeys will continue to pound away at their keyboards, turning out liberal drek, based on liberal circle-jerk suppositions of how the world should be.
  • We, the tens of thousands of unpolled Cubanitos, will help rebuild Cuba, not just sell her to corporative buitres and jinetera-hunting travelers in search of cheap thrills and cheaper vacations.

We will help Cuba rebuild, because we owe it to ourselves, and to those who never got the chance to do it.

Come to think of it, that opening sentence still applies here:

If one million monkeys typing away for all eternity can type out the collected works of William Shakespeare, and five hundred thousand drunk monkeys typing away for five hundred years could turn out most everything written by Paul Krugman, then three post-menopausal liberal monkeys typing away for a week could turn out two Maureen Dowd a Don Ediger columns for publication.

Granted, people actually know who Maureen Dowd is, so the sentence has far greater clarity unedited.

Warning: Put Down Your Morning Coffee Before Reading

Well, I guess it’s officially official now. The U.S.A. is the world’s biggest human rights nightmare … according to Obama:

Move over Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Syria. The State Department has made it official: The United States violates human rights. In an unprecedented move, the Obama administration submitted a report to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights detailing the progress and problems in dealing with human rights issues in this country. The document is a strange combination of left-wing history and White House talking points.

It describes how the United States discriminates against the disabled, homosexuals, women, Native Americans, blacks, Hispanics and those who don’t speak English. There is the expected pandering to Muslims, noting that the government is committed to “challenge misperceptions and discriminatory stereotypes, to prevent acts of vandalism and to combat hate crimes,” offenses that the American people evidently keep committing. And the current economic woes are blamed on the housing crisis, which itself was the result of “discriminatory lending practices.” The implication is that if Americans had only been less racist, they would be enjoying prosperity today.

The report notes that until recently, the U.S. engaged in torture, unlawfully detained terrorist suspects and illegally spied on Americans communicating with terrorists – but the report assures readers that Mr. Obama has been putting a stop to all that.

The main impact of the document will be to confirm critiques of the United States as a haven for hatred and rights abuses. […]

Harmless enough, you say, it’s just the idiotic U.N. … Heh! I say:

Dictatorships, authoritarian regimes and theocracies competing for legitimacy on the world stage have been handed a potent new weapon, the kind of assessment they would never offer about their own governments.

Read in full at The Washington Times. And here is Report of the United States of America Submitted to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights In Conjunction with the Universal Periodic Review

You may now reach for your coffee … or something stronger.

Hillary teams with Cuba for “free” Haiti castrocare

The U.S. and Cuba held a rare, unusual, unprecedented meeting over at the United Nations yesterday. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills was there, sitting down to talks with Bruno Rodriguez, the foreign minister of Cuba.

It would be normal to think the topic of this meeting would be Cuba’s political prisoners, given that Cubans like Guillermo Farinas are in grave condition, one of many willing to die so that Cubans can be free. Or that Orlando Zapata Tamayo died last month. These acts have moved millions of people across the world, drawing hundreds of thousands to march in the streets in demonstrations that span the political spectrum – democratic leftists are among them – all to support these authentic heroes, and their families.

No such luck – and no surprise, given who’s running Washington.

Instead, the U.S. is teaming up with castro to provide “free” medical care for the Haitians who have been devastated by the Jan. 12 earthquake. See here.

That would be the SAME Cuban doctors who are literally slaves in castro’s medical racket (can Hillary be sued for slavery?), and who have brought lawsuits in U.S. courts over their conditions. Court documents show that these Cuban doctors do not serve of their own volition, are abysmally paid, are subject to slavecatchers, and live in fear. With this new “alliance,” the U.S. is going to support that!

That would also be the SAME Cuban doctors within whose ranks lurk spies and agitators for the Cuban regime. Countries like Paraguay and Honduras have already kicked quite a few of them out for meddling, trying to overthrow their host governments in the past, so can there be any doubt that they’ll try this in Haiti too, given the weakness of the Haitian government and the green light Hillary is giving them to go for it? Castro doesn’t give these doctors away for free.

And this would be the SAME castroite racket whose doctors cannot even provide Band-aids to its own people, let alone Haiti. I have had more than one conversation with State Department people about the Haiti aid effort and they’ve already told me the Cuban doctors have been highly ineffective in Haiti because they are poorly trained and don’t have any supplies. The U.S. at the time was providing supplies to them because they were helpless otherwise. The U.S. never sought to publicize that, but there you have it. The cooperation being talked about will be for Americans to provide supplies, castroites to sell them on the black market and castroites to obtain another steady stream of gringo cash, and Haitians to end up with nothing.

It’s pretty obvious what castro gets out of this – free resources and the U.S. imprimatur for whatever shenanigans he’s got cooked up for Haiti. He also gets to deflect world attention from his horrific treatment of political prisoners – some of whom have DIED because of castroite medical care – and tout his new cooperation effort with the U.S.

Worst of all, castro gets to claim credit for leading the Haiti aid effort, snatching the crown of credit right off our heads and putting it on his own – something he and Hugo Chavez have been trying to do from day one. Never mind that any aid he gives is something that would not be possible at all were the U.S. not backing him up. It was the U.S. that expended the heavy resources and did the dangerous jobs in delivering relief to Haiti. Castro’s agents tried to smear the effort and spread lies about the U.S. Navy causing the quake.

Perceptions are all, and poor Haitians respond to the guy who’s in front of them. So instead of seeing vast American generosity upon receipt of free medical care, a Haitian will see that castroite doctor in front of him providing a(n American-paid) Band-Aid and immediately will conclude that castro is the generous one and those gringos (who denied him his emigration visa) are the stingy ones. castro will be Lady Bountiful and America will be Scrooge.

How do you like that means of expending taxpayer dollars? This is one stupid, harmful alliance to make with a murderous machiavellian monster.

Gitmo terrorists are refugees?

Gitmo terrorists are now Guantanamo refugees. How’s that for change? As Humberto would say, unreal.

From Human Events:

REPORTER QUESTION: Talk to us a little bit about response and talks and any commitments that you may have gotten from our European and other friends in the international community about taking in Guantanamo detainees as the camp in Guantanamo is expected to close at some point in the near future. Have you gotten any commitments from our European friends and anybody else?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY PHILIP J. CROWLEY: Ambassador Dan Fried continues his efforts to resettle, you know, Guantanamo refugees to various places around the world.

Listen in at 24:10 minutes.