|
nChrist
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: March 22, 2016, 06:54:45 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 3-22-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Obama’s trip to Cuba is part of realizing his foreign policy vision, and he hopes that his visit to the brutal regime will “encourage generational evolution.” Surely, the Cuban people are hoping for the same, but as long as they live under the brutal rule of the Castro regime there will be little that the minister of hope can change. And nothing Obama has done actually weakened that regime; on the contrary, he has legitimized it.
One of the topics for conversation with Castro was freedom of speech and assembly. So it speaks volumes that just hours before Obama arrived18, the Cuban police broke up a larger than normal crowd of political dissidents known as the Ladies in White and hauled many of them off to detention facilities. That would be the same Ladies in White Obama promised in a March 10 letter to meet.
Castro effectively denied even holding political prisoners: “Give me a list and I’ll release them,” he said, adding, “If we have those political prisoners they will be released before tonight ends.”
They weren’t released, and Obama remained silent.
Worse, on Monday Obama lamely accepted Castro’s criticism of the U.S. on human rights: “I actually welcome President Castro commenting on some of the areas where he feels where we’re falling short because I think we should not be immune or afraid of criticism or discussion as well.” Does Obama mean to imply that he’s falling short on jailing dissidents here in America?
As for free speech for members of the Cuban opposition, The Wall Street Journal’s Mary Anastasia O'Grady predicted19, “The regime will turn out plenty of compliant Cubans who will tell reporters that the embargo is the source of Cuban poverty.” It’s all political theater.
O'Grady further noted, “Yet even if there is a U.S nod to the opposition, there also will be a wink, as the president poses with the dictator along with members of the Colombian terrorist group FARC — invited by Mr. Obama — at a baseball game and pushes for U.S. policies that will finance the totalitarian apparatus. The big lie will be that by legalizing commercial and banking relations with Cuba, the U.S. will empower the Cuban people. The opposite is true.”
In other words, given the backdrop of people with whom Obama will pose, who does he really side with — the Cuban people or the Cuban dictators? The question answers itself.
As for the embargo, the idea of opening up business with Cuba along with lifting the embargo on trade is a complete reversal of U.S. policy for the last 50 years. This isn’t to say the policy has been entirely effective — the Castros are, after all, still in power. Some say Obama’s move in a different direction could open the Caribbean island to Liberty via free trade, especially as the young generation learns the value of capitalism.
Then again, Europe, Latin America, Canada and Asia have been trading with Cuba for decades to no avail.
Obama claims his visit will reduce tensions between the U.S. and Cuba and bring about change in the region. Given that the Castros are ideological kindred spirits with Obama, however, it’s doubtful that the Cuban people will benefit from Obama’s display. Recall that Obama’s mentor was avowed Communist Frank Marshall Davis20, and it’s very possible that Obama’s desire to renew relations with Cuba will make things worse instead of better for those under Castro’s iron fist.
How so? Consider that if American money starts flowing into the Cuban economy, the Castro regime will undoubtedly use the funds to further solidify its power over the Cuban people. Funding dictators and coddling up to them, whether directly or indirectly, rarely works out well for the advancement of freedom.
Does anyone really think that Obama is visiting Cuba to help that nation set a path toward freedom? Given his administration’s relentless assault on Liberty in our own country, it may be delusional to think so.
MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE
ANALYSIS: Shining Sunlight on Solar Power21
Kasich: Hey, Maybe We Should Consider Garland22
Georgia Under Attack for Religious Liberty23
Rhode Island to Require Helicopter Parenting?24
TOP HEADLINES
Terrorists Strike Belgium; 30+ Killed25
FBI May Have Found Way to Crack iPhone26
Trump’s Trade Proposals Could Cost $250B Per Year27
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report28
OPINION IN BRIEF
Thomas Sowell: “Conservatives who took part in the civil rights marches, or who were otherwise for equal rights for blacks, have not made nearly as much noise about it as liberals do. The first time I saw a white professor, at a white university, with a black secretary, it was Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago in 1960 — four years before the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She was still his secretary when he died in 2006. But, in all those years, I never once heard Professor Friedman mention, in public or in private, that he had a black secretary. By all accounts, she was an outstanding secretary, and that was what mattered. The biggest difference between the left and right today, when it comes to racial issues, is that liberals tend to take the side of those blacks who are doing the wrong things — hoodlums the left depicts as martyrs, while the right defends those blacks more likely to be the victims of those hoodlums. Rudolph Giuliani, when he was the Republican mayor of New York, probably saved more black lives than any other human being, by promoting aggressive policing against hoodlums, which brought the murder rate down to a fraction of what it was before. A lot depends on whether you judge by ringing words or judge by actual consequences.”
SHORT CUTS
Insight: “Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer.” —Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973)
Belly laugh of the week: “There’s just no shred of evidence to suggest that I’m favoring Hillary Clinton.” —DNC chief Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Surrender: “Well, [Merrick Garland] received, you know, overwhelming support — I think even from Senator Hatch — so of course we’d think about it. … I don’t care about [his] peccadilloes from 30 years ago.” —John Kasich
Good question: “Poor black, brown, red people are catching so much hell on every level — education, job market, mass media, family’s weak, communities shot through with too many guns and drugs. We acted as if we could evade it and avoid it. That’s what Barack Obama did for the first six years. He held it at arm’s length. And of course what happened? You end up with a Black Lives Matter movement under a black president. What does that say?” —Cornell West
Two peas in a pod: “President Castro I think has pointed out that in his view making sure that everybody’s getting a decent education or health care, has basic security in old age, that those things are human rights as well. I personally would not disagree with him. … I actually welcome President Castro commenting on some of the areas where he feels that we’re falling short, because I think we should not be immune or afraid of criticism or discussion as well.” —Barack Obama
That’ll scare ‘em: “We stand in solidarity with [Belgium] in condemning these outrageous attacks against innocent people. This is yet another reminder that the world must unite, we must be together.” —Barack Obama
And last… “Obama posed in front of a terrorist mural yesterday, so I guess a couple lines vaguely condemning Islamic terrorism [in Belgium] is all we could expect.” —Ben Shapiro
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson
Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families. |
