Requiem for a Badass

Another old Cuban exile died today. He will be buried in Miami not his beloved homeland.

I am not writing this to bury him, but to praise him.

This man spent his whole adult life doing anything he could think off to free his country, and I mean anything.

His name, as you might have guessed, was  Luis Posada Carriles. He is described in the media today as controversial, at best or a terrorist, at worse.

We live in an age where the moral relativity of political correctness considers one man’s terrorist another’s freedom fighter. In reality, there is good and there is evil. Fighting against evil is noble and just.

Make no mistake, this man was fighting Castro, his secret service, the KGB, the Stasi or any other evil that tried to enslave people under the jack boot of communism. Period.

He was incarcerated, many times, persecuted, betrayed by his adopted country, shot up and turned into a pariah because he fought for mankind’s freedom.

He believed that Castro’s regime could only be eradicated from this earth violently. I concur. Communism doesn’t bend or give an inch peacefully. It is a dangerous delusion to think that the tactics of Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. will work on Godless monsters with no morals or conscience. Just ask Boitel, Paya , Tamayo or Pollan. Even the Michael the Archangel resorts to violence to defeat Satan and evil forever in Revelation.

In the days ahead, the Castro regime’s lies and propaganda decrying Posada Carriles as a terrorist will be repeated as fact. The only facts are that Posada Carriles was never convicted of any of the trumped up charges and atrocities that the Castro agents and their useful idiot allies in the American media and even government claim he perpetrated. The most famous of these is the bombing of Cuban commercial jet out of Barbados that killed 73. He was arrested, tried and acquitted of these charges…twice. Double Jeopardy be dammed! The Castro regime or the KGB have never, ever killed civilians or framed their enemies. Never.

Real terrorists, those that took up arms against America and its Constitution, like Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Oscar Lopez Rivera, Angela Davis, Joann Chesimard, (who lives in Havana), just to name a few, are folk heroes, college professors and friends of American Presidents. Le Zumba. These Marxists thugs that wanted to burn America to the ground, were financed by the Soviets through the Cuban operatives in the USA who wanted to fulfill Che Guevara’s dream of “two, three, many Vietnams.” These thugs are terrorists.

Posada-Carriles was fighting for the American values of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness in a global struggle against death, slavery and the spread of misery spearheaded by Castro and his murderous minions. He fought evil. And that is why he is hated and will be maligned. He was nobody’s terrorist. He was Castro’s worst enemy:

Castro whines about Posada-Carriles

He was a freedom fighter.

More than that , he was a Badass; a real live action hero.

Godspeed

I know, right?

A Babalu PSA: Rabies Alert

Ted Cruz Declares His Candidacy for President
Ted Cruz Declares His Candidacy for President

So finally the Miami Herald mentioned Ted Cruz’s presidential candidacy in the main page of their online edition.(!)

(I wouldn’t know about the print edition because I confess I haven’t looked at that fish wrap since April of 2000.)

And it goes something like this:

A Cuban, a Canadian, a white supremacist and a Chihuahua with rabies walk into a bar and the bartender says: “What will it be, Mr. Cruz?” … Then, he turns around and tells all the white trash in the bar to run for the hills.

It came in the form of a cautionary opinion hit piece by Andres  Oppenheimer warning Republicans, because you see, the well being of the Republican party is his primary concern, bless his heart, that if you sleep with dogs , you wake up with fleas. As we all know, it’s in the Miami Herald’s rich journalistic tradition to look out for the Republican party and to denigrate Cubans using canine metaphors.

Here’s the money quote: (emphasis mine)

The Canadian-born son of a Cuban father and a U.S.-born mother, Cruz — a first-term Republican senator from Texas — is one of the most rabid critics of President Obama’s executive action to regularize the legal status of up to 5 million undocumented immigrants, most of them Hispanic.

So, how does this newspaper stuff work anyway? Does the Herald call Oppenheimer and ask him to write an opinion piece on Cruz because he’s Latino Hispanic a Spic and Oppenheimer is also a Latino Hispanic a Spic and he can get away with saying he’s “rabid” without the risk of being called racist? Or is it that Cruz’s candidacy isn’t important enough to get an opinion hit piece by a real opinion journalist?

I mean there are so many more pressing issues going on for this niche Latino Hispanic  Spic commentator to expound upon. There’s the food shortages and long lines for essentials in Venezuela, the anti-government demonstration and unrest in Brazil,  the scandalous and suspicious  suicide  murder government hit of Alberto Misman in his own birthplace, Argentina, lots of stuff. But…I guess warning the Republican Party about evils that can befall it by associating with such a “rabid” Cuban-American trumps all these very Latino issues.

Oh well, like they say…you can’t teach an old dog new tricks…

Here’s my cautionary opinion hit piece: If you’re Cuban, please don’t buy the Miami Herald. If you need to wrap your fish or line your bird cage that badly, do it with one of those free real estate magazine things they give way at Publix. Or ask for paper and not plastic and use cartucho, por favor.

Ricky Ricardo would tell the NAACP-Los Angeles that they have a “little esplainin to do”

We hear that the NAACP in LA had a rather substantial relationship with Mr Sterling, the man who allegedly said some very nasty and racist things on tape.

The relationship is a bit strange given Mr Sterling’s past, as we read at TPM:

“For years, the NAACP’s Los Angeles chapter maintained a mutually beneficial but head-scratching relationship with Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling.

But the civil rights organization was finally forced to confront Sterling’s alleged transgressions this weekend when reports of racially charged remarks exploded from the gossip website TMZ.

Leon Jenkins, president of the chapter, gave a statement and fielded questions Monday at a press conference in California, attempting to explain why his branch of National Association for the Advancement of Colored People had been planning to give Sterling a lifetime achievement award, despite the basketball team owner’s history of alleged racist behavior.

Jenkins’ tone was strikingly defensive, asserting that he didn’t know whether it was really Sterling whose voice could be heard making racist statements on audio recordings that became public on Saturday. Jenkins also left the door open for future collaborations with the Clippers owner if Sterling proved penitent.

“There is a personal, economical and social price that Mr. Sterling must pay for his attempt to turn on racial relations,” Jenkins said in his opening statement.

The chapter also plans to return Sterling’s recent donations to the group, Jenkins said, though he declined to disclose how much the owner had given, saying only that it was “not a significant amount.”

It was the culmination of a strange affair between a man alleged on multiple occasions to hold racist beliefs and a group founded with the goal of eradicating those beliefs.

The 20-minute press conference, during which Jenkins was openly combative with the media, did little to illuminate how the NAACP had managed to ignore the prior allegations against Sterling. Jenkins portrayed the team owner simply as the winner in a philanthropic contest between Los Angeles area sports franchises.

“We looked at the body of work that he’s done. What we looked at all of the sports franchises in L.A. We look at how involved all these organizations in the community,” Jenkins said. “His organizations gave more money to the minority community.”

Sterling had already been given an award, which has alternately been described as being for lifetime achievement or humanitarian work, by the group back in 2009. There was outragethen, too, because Sterling had been sued for wrongful termination and was accused of allegedly freezing an ex-employee’s salary because of his race. He had also been sued in 2004 and 2006 for alleged housing discrimination. He eventually settled a $2.73 million lawsuit from the Department of Justice in 2009.

“He has a unique history of giving to the children of L.A.,” Jenkins said in 2009.

“We can’t speak to the allegations, but what we do know is that for the most part [Sterling] has been very, very kind to the minority youth community.””

Like many of you who don’t live in LA, I was not familiar with Mr Sterling or his background.

It’s tough to keep up with other sports-team owners when we have local personalities like Mr Cuban of the Mavericks & Mr Jones of the Cowboys.  (The Rangers’ owners stay away from the limelight!)

The NAACP spokesman is correct.  Mr Sterling has done a lot for LA kids and others.  He has contributed millions, like a lot of other wealthy people in this country do.

The NAACP needs to answer a few questions:

Why did the group have a relationship with this man? What about the racist allegations past?

Was the NAACP’s silence bought with contributions?

Also, how many other “liberal’ groups did Mr Sterling give money to over the years?  Will the media confront them for an explanation?

P. S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

The NYTimes should have spoken with the bishops before publishing Maduro’s Op Ed

My American Thinker post about The New York Times, President Maduro’s Op-ed & the bishops in Caracas.

In 48 hours, we’ve seen two rather different assessments of the situation in Venezuela.

First, The NY Times opened its editorial page to President Maduro by publishing “A call for peace.”  As I posted yesterday at Babalu, this op-ed is so embarrassing that everyone at The NY Times should be ashamed of themselves.

We like a debate of ideas but President Maduro did not tell the truth, especially about the daily attacks on demonstrators in Caracas and elsewhere or the way that legislator Maria Corina Machado has been treated:

“Last night, Venezuela’s Supreme Tribunal said that, indeed, Maria Corina Machado’s expulsion from the National Assembly could stand.

On its own, this shouldn’t seem so shocking – chavismo has created a habit of kicking people out of Parliament, out of city hall, and out of politics altogether. ”

Miss Machado’s “crime against the state” was trying to speak before the OAS about Venezuela.  My question is this:  Where does it say in the Venezuelan constitution that a legislator can not go to the OAS and speak his or her mind?

Second, the bishops in Caracas are concerned about the totalitarian nature of Maduro’s government, as reported in The Washington Post:

“Venezuela’s organization of Roman Catholic bishops is accusing the government of seeking totalitarian-style rule, comments that potentially could complicate the Vatican’s offer to facilitate talks between the socialist government and its opposition.

The Conference of Venezuelan Bishops is calling on President Nicolas Maduro to halt his crackdown on critics who have been protesting in the streets for seven weeks. The conference president is Bishop Diego Padron. Speaking in Caracas on Wednesday, he accused Maduro of attempting to criminalize dissent.

The statement comes a few days after the Vatican said it was willing to facilitate talks between the two sides. Maduro indicated he would accept such talks, but the position of the various groups that constitute the opposition remains unclear.

The bishops association has periodically criticized the Venezuelan government.”

God bless the Bishops for their warnings about repression in Venezuela. Shame on The NY Times for refusing “to edit” the words of a man responsible for the death of 39 Venezuelans, including a young pregnant woman.

Maybe everyone at The NY Times should take a night off and go to “confession”!

P. S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

 

Univision: “You got some ‘splainin’ to do!”

(This is my new American Thinker post about Univision and Hillary Clinton)

Am I the only one who finds the Hillary Clinton-Univision arrangement a bit strange?  After all, isn’t the lady a candidate for president and the other a news organization?

According to Marc Caputo of The Miami Herald, little has been said in the media about this very unusual union:

“The Spanish-language network, which broadcasts from Doral, has remarkably close ties with Clinton – from the way the media giant covers immigration to the financial backing of its top leader to a new initiative between the network and the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

Barely a peep from the press, though.

Last week, at an East Harlem event featuring Clinton, Univision touted a multi-year partnership with a foundation-led learning initiative for children 5 and younger. The success of the ” Pequeños y Valiosos” (or “Young and Valuable”) partnership will take time to measure.

But it began paying immediate dividends for Clinton.

Clinton’s face is featured in five of seven slides on the Univision website promoting the partnership with the foundation’s “Too Small to Fail” initiative. Taking no press questions at the event, Clinton was featured in the type of feel-good classroom setting that politicians on the campaign trail crave.”

I guess that Univision wants us to believe that Hillary Clinton is not a political figure or a partisan on education issues.  It would have made a lot more sense if Univision had “partnered” with high visibility athletes or movie stars.

I like that Univision wants to promote education learning initiatives for kids 5 and under but did they have to do it with a woman running for president?   That’s “a no-win” situation for a news organization!

Finally, the irony is that Hillary Clinton, and Democrats, oppose the  kind of reforms or vouchers that would liberate many Hispanic parents from the public schools.

P. S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

 

 

“Duck Dynasty”: El dinero habla y “Abuelo Duck” ganó!

It took less than 2 weeks for A&E to crack:

“The A&E channel said it’s reversing its decision to drop “Duck Dynasty” patriarch Phil Robertson from the show for his remarks about gays.

In a statement Friday, A&E said it decided to bring Robertson back after discussions with the Robertson family and “numerous advocacy groups.”

The channel had put Robertson on what it called “hiatus” following his comments in a magazine article about how the Bible informs his view of gays.

His comments were slammed by groups including GLAAD, the gay media watch organization. But A&E’s decision drew a backlash from those who said they supported Robertson’s comments and others who defended him on the basis of freedom of speech.”

A&E has been running show marathons for the last week, or a very funny way of showing their displeasure with Granpa Phil!

Can we now get serious and talk about real problems?

Like violence in Venezuela?

“The Venezuelan Violence Observatory estimates that 24,763 killings occurred this year, pushing up the homicide rate to 79 per 100,000 inhabitants. It was 73 per 100,000 people in 2012. In 1998, the rate was 19.”

The latest Obama Care problems?

“Some patients who think they have insurance may not get insurance cards on time, and they’re afraid they might fall through the cracks. “

Frankly, I thought that this whole “Duck” story was an intentional distraction from the Obama Care mess and growing disillusionment with President Obama.

A word for Obama: “Camarón que se duerme se lo lleva la corriente”

Wake up Obama or you may drifting downstream with all of the other “camarones”.

The latest explanation about the ObamaCare “fumble” is that President Obama does not like to hear “bad news”.

This is from Gloria Borger:

“People don’t like to tell him bad news,” says an ex-White House staffer. “Part of it is the no-drama culture.””

My guess is that President FDR did not like getting the bad news from Pearl Harbor or those horrible casualty reports from 1943-44.  Also, President GW Bush did not enjoy hearing  about planes flying into the World Trade Center or that violence was out of control in Iraq 2006.

To say the least, bad news comes with the job.  In other words, a man who does not like “bad news” should be holding a safe Illinois Senate seat in Rev Wright’s neighborhood rather than serving as commander in chief of the US.

My guess is that this is a lot more complicated than the “boss” does not like bad news.

I think that there are two problems in this White House:

1) The boss is “disengaged”, “disinterested” or “an abdicative manager” as Frank Burke wrote at American Thinker in 2011:

“In classic management theory, Barack Obama would have to be described as an abdicativemanager.

The abdicative manager evidences a tendency to flee from responsibility and is frequently encountered in situations where he or she never wanted the job in the first place (for instance, a son or daughter who inherits a company or the individual who discovers that they are incapable of adequate performance). Abdication can be exhibited in a variety of ways, ranging from physically removing oneself through travel (the confusion of movement with action), to obsessing about personal interests or a limited range of controllable subjects.

Obama’s frequent vacations and absences, especially in times of crisis, coupled with his unwillingness to personally invest himself in key initiatives, are demonstrative of this style. An excellent example occurred after passage of the healthcare initiative.

Having ceded authority in what would later be described as his key achievement to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, he watched as they forced the bill through under a manufactured emergency that precluded lawmakers from having time to read it.

He then went on a four-day vacation before signing it.”

2) No one was put in charge of the ObamaCare project. There were lots of people with titles or who made appearances before Congress. Unfortunately, there was no project manager who oversaw all of the components and held people accountable along the way.

President Obama has been using a lot of football analogies, i.e. fumble, my team, etc.

The truth is that he fell asleep on the job!  He did not take the time to get engaged or to demand explanations.  Sadly, the message came down the chain of command that the boss was not demanding results!

He should have read what Lee Iococca said about being the boss:

“I’ve always found that the speed of the boss is the speed of the team.”

 

“El que tiene palanca”: ObamaCare is so great that some of Obama’s friends get waivers

There are many reasons to dislike ObamaCare, such as the whole issue of federal overreach and impact on the private insurance market.

However, the #1 reason is that the law does not apply equally to all.    President Obama has unilaterally changed the law to give groups special favors or treatment.

The Wall Street Journal reminds us of how “unions” are about to get another one of those “waivers“:

“The unions ought to consider this tax a civic obligation in solidarity with the (uninsured) working folk they claim to support.

Instead, they’ve spent most of the last year demanding that the White House give them subsidies and carve-outs unavailable to anyone else.

But don’t expect ObamaCare favors unless you helped to re-elect the President.

In an aside in a Federal Register document filed this month, the Administration previewed its forthcoming regulation:

“We also intend to propose in future rulemaking to exempt certain self-insured, self-administered plans from the requirement to make reinsurance contributions for the 2015 and 2016 benefit years.”

Allow us to translate.

“Self-insured” means that a business pays for the medical expenses of its workers directly and hires an insurer as a third-party administrator to process claims, manage care and the like. Most unions as well as big corporations use this arrangement.”

Don’t get me wrong.  I think that private sector unions are good.  They represent workers and should continue to do so.

My problem is with favors not unions.

This is why health care should not be run by politicians. They will find a way to take care of their friends at the expense of the rest of us.

Wonder when The NY Times will get their special little waiver for being such a staunch defender of the cause?

 

ObamaCare vs Katrina: The NY Times “sigue comiendo de lo que pica el pollo”

The Obama Care roll out is so bad that there is panic on the Democrat side of the aisle.

On Friday, 39 Democrats in the House voted with the GOP, or the Upton Bill.

Over at the US Senate, “red state Democrats” are desperately trying to explain their vote for ObamaCare to very angry constituents in places like Arkansas, Louisiana, North Carolina, and others.

Political reality aside, The NY Times has the latest and silliest explanation. They are comparing Katrina to ObamaCare:

“The disastrous rollout of his health care law not only threatens the rest of his agenda but also raises questions about his competence in the same way that the Bush administration’s botched response to Hurricane Katrina undermined any semblance of Republican efficiency.

But unlike Mr. Bush, who faced confrontational but occasionally cooperative Democrats, Mr. Obama is battling a Republican opposition that has refused to open the door to any legislative fixes to the health care law and has blocked him at virtually every turn. “

What are they smoking over at The NY Times?  Cooperative Democrats?

I am happy that Professor Althouse has fired an excellent response. This is so good that I want you to share it with your friends::

“1. Bush’s political party didn’t design and enact Hurricane Katrina.

2. Bush didn’t have 5 years to craft his response to the hurricane.

3. Bush didn’t have the power to redesign the hurricane as he designed his response to it.

4. The Republican Bush believed he could not simply bully past the Democratic Mayor of New Orleans and the Democratic Governor of Louisiana and impose a federal solution, but the Democrat Obama and his party in Congress aggressively and voluntarily took over an area of policy that might have been left to the states.

5. The media were ready to slam Bush long and hard for everything — making big scandals out of things that, done by Obama, would have been forgotten a week later (what are the Valerie Plame-level screwups of Obama’s?) — but the media have bent over backwards for years to help make Obama look good and to bury or never even uncover all of his lies and misdeeds.

6. If Bush experienced a disaster like the rollout of Obamacare, the NYT wouldn’t use its front page to remind us of something Bill Clinton did that looked bad.”

Last, but not least, let’s not forget the total and incomplete incompetence of the mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana.

Of course, we are really watching something more profound than a comparison between Katrina and ObamaCare.    The NY Times, and others in the left, are in a panic because the incompetent roll out has dealt liberalism a potentially fatal knockout, as Charles Krauthammer wrote yesterday:

“The damage to the Obama presidency, however, is already done. His approval rating has fallen to 39?percent, his lowest ever. And, for the first time, a majority considers him untrustworthy. That bond is not easily repaired.

At stake, however, is more than the fate of one presidency or of the current Democratic majority in the Senate. At stake is the new, more ambitious, social-democratic brand of American liberalism introduced by Obama, of which Obamacare is both symbol and concrete embodiment.”

The NY Times is going to get more hysterical, specially as the collapse of ObamaCare becomes inevitable.