Author: Andrew2
Thursday, March 06, 2008 - 7:26 pm
|
 
|
Recently, John McCain was quoted as saying he would not sit down and talk with Raul Castro, Cuba's new president (who has been in charge of the country all along with his brother, anyway). This is insane. Why after almost 50 years can't America have at least some relationship with Cuba? I know they aren't a great regime - they have a bad human rights record, and they've shot down planes. But look at the human rights records of some of our "friends." And we now have completely normalized with communist Vietnam (not to mention China). Just look at how many Americans died or were wounded there. McCain has also said that he was upset that Cuba had sent an agent to Vietnam to learn torture techniques...on American prisoners, during the Vietnam war. Fine - why wasn't he irked about the North Vietnamese who tortured Americans when he was in favor of normalizing relations with Vietnam ten years ago? Hillary Clinton's position is much like McCain's: she doesn't want to talk to Cuba, either. Obama, at least, has a clear difference with both of them. He wants to relax travel restrictions and at least allow family visitations - a fairly bold stance, given that he risks alienating Cuban-Americans who hate the Castros. But can you tell me why we should have relations with China and Vietnam but not Cuba??? Andrew
|
Author: Herb
Thursday, March 06, 2008 - 7:46 pm
|
 
|
No it's not insane. You don't cuddle up with dictators and along with Cuba, we should put both China and Vietnam's feet to the fire, too. They want access to our markets? Then they need to free their people or we don't trade. I buy around China whenever possible and will until they have free elections, free speech and freedom of religion. China's forced abortion policy is a problem, too. Herb
|
Author: Littlesongs
Thursday, March 06, 2008 - 9:06 pm
|
 
|
Actually Herb, it is insane. Barack Obama would make thorough preparations and have a solid agenda before a visit to Cuba, but a meeting is not a carrot. What may come out of a meeting is the carrot. Peace is never achieved between bunkers. Richard Nixon made preparations for his trip to China, but there were no huge preconditions. They were far more despotic than Cuba, but he felt the peace was more important than a "reward based" foreign policy. Even after the hard work of Nixon, China is a tragic failure in American post-war politics. They were given most favored nation status by the Shrub after killing thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators, disappearing hundreds of organizers and jailing tens of thousands more. Most favored nation status was gladly renewed by the Clinton administration, and people are dying to this day. Hillary will not close Gitmo, so of course she will not negotiate with our neighbors either. Obama has coalition building experience that ranges from the rough streets of Chicago to the Senate. After reviewing his history, I believe that folks who scare Obama are few and far between. He has the calm grace of a battlefield medic combined with an understanding of the value of emotional reserve. He also is a top notch poker player. We sent a bowler to China, so why not send a card shark to Cuba?
|
Author: Herb
Thursday, March 06, 2008 - 9:15 pm
|
 
|
"They were given most favored nation status..." I really disagreed with that and still do. We should have hammered them non-stop until they freed their people and at least let them worship and not be forced to have abortions. Talk about basic civil rights. The Chinese, along with the less powerful Cubans, STILL want to bury us, as Nikita Kruschev told Mr. Nixon at the kitchen debates. Never trust a black-hearted commie who murders and oppresses his own people. As Mr. Nixon said 'they'll keep going through resistance like its mush...until they hit steel.' Herb
|
Author: Trixter
Thursday, March 06, 2008 - 9:44 pm
|
 
|
But yet DUHbya and Co. are going to hold SECRET meetings with Hamas? TERRORISTS! WTF!?!?!?!?!?! Diplomacy with TERRORISTS? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23510604
|
Author: Vitalogy
Friday, March 07, 2008 - 12:06 am
|
 
|
I say talk to Cuba. Clearly the current policy is ineffective.
|
Author: Skeptical
Friday, March 07, 2008 - 2:30 am
|
 
|
I'm thinking the people of Cuba IN CUBA, need to make the first move -- a series of small protests by the Cuban people IN CUBA will be nice. There is no point in talking with Raul Castro if he holds all the Aces. Never again should we "install freedom" without an enthusiasic support of a large percentage of that oppressed country's population.
|
Author: Herb
Friday, March 07, 2008 - 9:01 am
|
 
|
I agree it may seem counter-intuitive. However, it took 70 years to break the back of Soviet communism. A generation was lost, but what more could we have done? Herb
|
Author: Radioblogman
Friday, March 07, 2008 - 9:56 am
|
 
|
"You don't cuddle up with dictators" So, Herb, should the Bush family cut ties with Saudi Arabia? If Cuba had oil, rather than sugar, rum and cigars, we would be trading with them.
|
Author: Herb
Friday, March 07, 2008 - 10:02 am
|
 
|
"So, Herb, should the Bush family cut ties with Saudi Arabia?" The Bush family should have very firm boundaries. Either the Saudis stop funding terror, or we play hardball. Herb
|
Author: Wobboh
Friday, March 07, 2008 - 11:51 am
|
 
|
Hmmm
|
Author: Andrew2
Friday, March 07, 2008 - 12:05 pm
|
 
|
Wobboh: Little known trivia: Raul Castro attended the 1976 National Democratic Convention. Raul joined Jimmy Carter, Mo Udall, Scoop Jackson, George Wallace and Hubert Humphrey on the stage at the convention's grand finale. Bullshit.
|
Author: Trixter
Saturday, March 08, 2008 - 4:55 pm
|
 
|
The Bush family should have very firm boundaries. Either the Saudis stop funding terror, or we play hardball. Earth to Herb! DUHbya is leaving office! Play hardball? DUHbya tried that with the TexASS Rangers and drove them into the ground just like he did America! Why wasn't he playing HARDBALL in 2001? 2002? 2003? 04? 05? 06? 07? NOW? COME ON HERB! It's time to start using your head for something besides growing hair on!
|
Author: Mc74
Saturday, March 08, 2008 - 5:08 pm
|
 
|
Could you provide me with a link showing that President Bush drove the Texas Rangers into the ground. I am not a Baseball fan at all and would like more clarification on the matter. Thank you.
|
Author: Andrew2
Saturday, March 08, 2008 - 6:20 pm
|
 
|
No, he didn't drive the Rangers into the ground - but he turned a $600,000 initial investment ($500K of which was a loan) into a $14M profit when the team was sold a few years later. I'm sure Bush was included in the initial deal because of his years of failure as a CEO and not because his Daddy was president at the time. Andrew
|
Author: Amus
Saturday, March 08, 2008 - 8:36 pm
|
 
|
Bush made a profit on the Rangers using the perfectly legal methods of: Using eminent domain to seize private property, then passing a tax in Arlington Texas to pay for the Stadium. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/01182008/transcript.html
|
Author: Trixter
Sunday, March 09, 2008 - 11:46 am
|
 
|
Driving the team into the ground I mean he wouldn't spend ANY money on them while he was the owner and they (team and fans) suffered for it years after he left. Kind of like what the owner of the Kansas City Royals has done for so many years. Making a profit off a baseball team is expected and I bet you that if the the owner of the Tampa Bay Rays could make a profit if he sold the team TODAY even though they're the worst run and operated professional team on the planet.
|
Author: Brianl
Sunday, March 09, 2008 - 11:49 am
|
 
|
Even with the current CBA and luxury taxes on high payrolls in baseball, the haves are still getting more and the have-nots still get less ... with that stadium, there is NO reason why the Rangers aren't doing better financially. Tom Hicks has spent a lot of money, just foolishly. Bush did oversee trading away Sammy Sosa to the Cubs for a sack of potatoes ... that's probably the most egregious thing that happened under his watch there.
|
Author: Nwokie
Sunday, March 09, 2008 - 11:53 am
|
 
|
He signed Nolan Ryan.
|
Author: Mc74
Sunday, March 09, 2008 - 5:19 pm
|
 
|
So basically it sounds like he made a smart business deal. Taking 600,000 and turning it into millions. Dont we all wish we could do that.
|
Author: Andrew2
Sunday, March 09, 2008 - 5:33 pm
|
 
|
Mc74 writes: So basically it sounds like he made a smart business deal. Taking 600,000 and turning it into millions. Dont we all wish we could do that. Get offered a sweet business deal because my Daddy was President of the United States? Sure, I'd love to make millions off of that too. Why, maybe if I got that sort of offer, I'd be more inclined to pay those guys back with political favors later when I'm in a position of power. Andrew
|
Author: Trixter
Sunday, March 09, 2008 - 8:14 pm
|
 
|
You need to know HOW he got that sweet deal with ONLY a $600,000 investment of DADDY'S money! And that he was ONLY 1.8% of ownership. When you FAIL (which he does continuously) with an oil company your DADDY bails you out and get's you in with investors that purchase the team.
|
Author: Mc74
Sunday, March 09, 2008 - 8:38 pm
|
 
|
But you said he ran the team into the ground. Clearly he didnt. Now I will not to pretend to know anything about the oil business so maybe you could tell me about him running an oil company into the ground.
|
Author: Skeptical
Monday, March 10, 2008 - 1:36 am
|
 
|
Bush turned millions into nothing. Several times. And lives on a pretty nice ranch. Don't we all wish we could do that.
|
Author: Trixter
Monday, March 10, 2008 - 11:04 am
|
 
|
When your record is worse when you leave than when you got there. LAST PLACE is running the team into the ground!
|