The Green Screen

By LAURA WIDES-MUNOZ, Associated Press Writer
August 20, 2007 - 22 minutes ago

MIAMI - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is leaping into the long-running Cuba debate by calling for the U.S. to ease restrictions for Cuban-Americans who want to visit the island or send money home.

Obama's campaign said Monday that, if elected, the Illinois senator would lift restrictions imposed by the Bush administration and allow Cuban-Americans to visit their relatives more frequently, as well as ease limits on the amount of money they can send to their families.

"Senator Obama feels that the Bush administration has made a humanitarian and a strategic blunder," spokeswoman Jen Psaki said in an e-mail. "His concern is that this has had a profoundly negative impact on the Cuban people, making them more dependent on the Castro regime, thus isolating them from the transformative message carried by Cuban-Americans."

Obama was explaining his position in an op-ed piece Tuesday in The Miami Herald.

While the U.S. embargo has limited who can travel to the communist island and what can be sent there since the early 1960s, restrictions added by the Bush administration in 2004 made visiting and shipping gifts to Cuba more difficult.

Most Cubans in the U.S. can only visit the island once every three years and can only send quarterly remittances of up to $300 per household to immediate family members. Previously, they could visit once a year and send up to $3,000. The U.S. also tightened restrictions on travel for educational and religious groups.

The Cuban-exile vote is considered key to winning Florida, and top presidential candidates have generally followed the recommendations of the community's most hard-line and vocal leaders, who support a full embargo against Fidel Castro's government. Castro, 80, is in poor health and turned over temporary power last year to his brother Raul.

But sentiment in the Cuban-American community is changing. Unlike the early waves of immigrants who brought their entire families, often by plane, to the U.S., most Cubans now flee by boat and are forced to leave relatives behind. Fewer of these immigrants were overt political opponents of the government, and they want to be able to visit loved ones and to send money home.

Many Cuban exiles are also frustrated with the U.S. embargo, which has failed to yield fruit after nearly 45 years. And with the specter of an ailing Castro and a possible change in leadership, they are more open to changing U.S. policy.

Last week, the Miami-Dade Democratic Party came out against the restrictions. Obama will speak at a fundraiser for the chapter Saturday at the Miami-Dade Auditorium, the same Little Havana site where Ronald Reagan won over many in the Cuban-exile community more than two decades ago.

Joe Garcia, the group's chairman, praised Obama's proposal.

"It shows courage, and it shows commitment to move beyond the status-quo politics of rhetoric, which is all the Cuban-American community has received from any party for the last half century," said Garcia, a former head of the Cuban-American Foundation, a leading exile group.

None of the other top presidential candidates have sought to ease the restrictions.

In May, Democratic rival Hillary Clinton said she opposed immediate changes in Cuba travel but added that there may be need for change in the next presidency if Castro is no longer in power.

Such a change would be contingent on commitments to human rights and more openness from the Cuban government, the New York senator said.

Clinton must contend with her husband's legacy on U.S.-Cuba relations, particularly when he authorized U.S. agents to return young Elian Gonzalez to his father in Cuba, alienating many exiles.

Mauricio Claver-Carone, a spokesman for the U.S.-Cuba Democracy Pact, which supports full sanctions, said Obama's statement could hurt U.S.-Cuban relations at a crucial time.

"I'm sure he's well intentioned," Claver-Carone said, but he added that with the death of Castro possibly approaching and the potential for change on the island, such a statement could send the wrong message.

"It entrenches the regime at this historic time," Claver-Carone said.

Glad someone is running with a little bit of sense.

pblee Wrote:Glad someone is running with a little bit of sense.

yeah, Mauricia cadaver or whatever Fkg stooge is a complete assclown.

message?

what message?

the only message is your approach has been a laughable failure for 45 years.

clearly any "entrenchment" of the regime, has absolutely NOTHING to do with the sanctions regime..

indeed, one can make a persuasive case that it has enabled Fifo to hide all of his economic failures on the "bloqueo". He needs it more than we need it.

and it's all cleverly spun by Obama - he's advocating something most Cuban Americans (if polls are to be believed) actually support AND once again it highlights his message of needing to think outside of the stupid "conventional wisdom" of the Washington establishment (the one that says you don''t mention nuclear weapons, for e.g. when everyone and their dead grandmother knows nukes would be off the table in a specific situation)

Hilary is an assclown and you never know what she really believes. Her every position and statement is analyzed and combed over for political effect and maximum political gain (just like Mitt Romney)

one of the most disingenuous political figures ever (more than Slick Willy, who you could tell when he was pissed off or passionate about something. Hilary is a machine, though she has the most annoying human voice, like Fkg fingernails on a chalkboard.. when she tries to sound forceful she merely sounds really shrill - I think she's fortunate any husband of hers hasn't severed her vocal chords if she runs around nagging with that voice.

here is Obama's article in the Herald.

There are already some nasty comments from the very thickheaded numbskull exilio crowd

but a comment from one 1961 exilio stands out as an example of opening up one's mind, realizing the obvious and drawing appropriate conclusion.


Comments

I am Cuban exile that had to leave Cuba in 1961, and I agree fully with Sen. Obama's approach.

Let Cubans travel back to the island freely , if Castro does not change his mind about it, and things will change for the better in Cuba. The old approach has not worked for nearly fifty years, it is time for a change.

Cayman Cubano
Miami



Our main goal: Freedom in Cuba
Posted on Tue, Aug. 21, 2007

By BARACK OBAMA
http://www.barackobama.com

When my father was a young man living in Kenya, the freedom and opportunity of the United States exerted such a powerful draw that he moved halfway around the world to pursue his dreams here. My father's story is not unique. The same has been true for tens of millions of people, from every continent -- including for the many Cubans who have come and made their lives here since the start of Fidel Castro's dictatorship almost 50 years ago.

It is a tragedy that, just 90 miles from our shores, there exists a society where such freedom and opportunity are kept out of reach by a government that clings to discredited ideology and authoritarian control. A democratic opening in Cuba is, and should be, the foremost objective of our policy. We need a clear strategy to achieve it -- one that takes some limited steps now to spread the message of freedom on the island, but preserves our ability to bargain on behalf of democracy with a post-Fidel government.

The primary means we have of encouraging positive change in Cuba today is to help the Cuban people become less dependent on the Castro regime in fundamental ways. U.S. policy must be built around empowering the Cuban people, who ultimately hold the destiny of Cuba in their hands. The United States has a critical interest in seeing Cuba join the roster of stable and economically vibrant democracies in the Western Hemisphere. Such a development would bring us important security and economic benefits, and it would allow for new cooperation on migration, counter-narcotics and other issues.

Advance political reform

These interests, and our support for the aspirations of the Cuban people, are ill served by the further entrenchment of the Castro regime, which is why we need to advance peaceful political and economic reform on the island. Castro's ill health and the potentially tumultuous changes looming ahead make the matter all the more urgent.

Unfortunately, the Bush administration has made grand gestures to that end while strategically blundering when it comes to actually advancing the cause of freedom and democracy in Cuba. This is particularly true of the administration's decision to restrict the ability of Cuban Americans to visit and send money to their relatives in Cuba. This is both a humanitarian and a strategic issue. That decision has not only had a profoundly negative impact on the welfare of the Cuban people. It has also made them more dependent on the Castro regime and isolated them from the transformative message carried there by Cuban Americans.

In the ''Cuban spring'' of the late 1990s and early years of this decade, dissidents and human-rights activists had more political space than at any time since the beginning of Castro's rule, and Cuban society experienced a small opening in advancing the cause of freedom for the Cuban people.

U.S. policies -- especially the fact that Cuban Americans were allowed to maintain and deepen ties with family on the island -- were a key cause of that ''Cuban spring.'' Although cut off by the Castro regime's deplorable March 2003 jailing of 75 of Cuba's most prominent and courageous dissidents, the opening underscored what is possible with a sensible strategic approach.

We in the United States should do what we can to bring about another such opening, taking certain steps now-and pledging to take additional steps as temporary openings are solidified into lasting change.

Cuban-American connections to family in Cuba are not only a basic right in humanitarian terms, but also our best tool for helping to foster the beginnings of grass-roots democracy on the island. Accordingly, I will grant Cuban Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send remittances to the island.

But as we reach out in some ways now, it makes strategic sense to hold on to important inducements we can use in dealing with a post-Fidel government, for it is an unfortunate fact that his departure by no means guarantees the arrival of freedom on the island.

Bilateral talks

Accordingly, I will use aggressive and principled diplomacy to send an important message: If a post-Fidel government begins opening Cuba to democratic change, the United States (the president working with Congress) is prepared to take steps to normalize relations and ease the embargo that has governed relations between our countries for the last five decades. That message coming from my administration in bilateral talks would be the best means of promoting Cuban freedom. To refuse to do so would substitute posturing for serious policy -- and we have seen too much of that in other areas over the past six years.

We must not lose sight of our fundamental goal: freedom in Cuba. At the same time, we should be pragmatic in our approach and clear-sighted about the effects of our policies. We all know the power of the freedom and opportunity that America at its best has both embodied and advanced. If deployed wisely, those ideals will have as transformative effect on Cubans today as they did on my father more than 50 years ago.

Sen. Barack Obama is a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Well Bogey. Maybe you can now shove your stupid comments about ALL THE CUBANS IN MIAMI where the sun don't shine.

Mercy Wrote:Well Bogey. Maybe you can now shove your stupid comments about ALL THE CUBANS IN MIAMI where the sun don't shine.

I always said I was generalizing about the "troglodyte" crowd.

ya know, the one that celebrated Orlando Bosch day and vote for Lehtinen the Bozo Balarts.

You are preaching to the choir you sabe nada mocoso.

They aren't in my district. :action_smiley_055:

Mercy Wrote:You are preaching to the choir you sabe nada mocoso.

They aren't in my district. :action_smiley_055:

now that I'm on a fast track to geezerdom, all of a sudden being called a mocoso sounds like a compliment.

gracias

Geezerdom leads to "mocosoism".

Adding to discourse is never wrong.

BUt the US has little interest in Cuba..we must accept this. Must of what we hear during a political year are based on empty insignificant self serving BS.

The solution MUST arise from inside the island. IF it must be a long lansting solution. If if IS what is TRULLY important

Lillian Wrote:Adding to discourse is never wrong.

BUt the US has little interest in Cuba..we must accept this. Must of what we hear during a political year are based on empty insignificant self serving BS.

The solution MUST arise from inside the island. IF it must be a long lansting solution. If if IS what is TRULLY important

I agree with 100%.

But I have to wonder if this will be allowed to happen. The US has way too many "interests" in Cuba and it's too closeby.

too much "bidness" to be done.

the Cubans will have a new lucha to steer their own destiny once the old goat and his brother croak.

I wonder how much money the State Dept will pour into the first election for their "preferred candidate", not to speak of US business interests, Cuban American potential business interests. etc etc etc

Hey Bogey, I can run for President in Cuba.

Mercy Wrote:Hey Bogey, I can run for President in Cuba.

go for it.

local born but American raised candidates have done well in ex commie countries.

with lots and lots and lots of Cuban traditions. I also speak Cuban which will come in handy.

This happens to lots of Cubans who cross over to the dark side (USA).

Bogey Wrote:

Lillian Wrote:Adding to discourse is never wrong.

BUt the US has little interest in Cuba..we must accept this. Must of what we hear during a political year are based on empty insignificant self serving BS.

The solution MUST arise from inside the island. IF it must be a long lansting solution. If if IS what is TRULLY important

I agree with 100%.

But I have to wonder if this will be allowed to happen. The US has way too many "interests" in Cuba and it's too closeby.

too much "bidness" to be done.

the Cubans will have a new lucha to steer their own destiny once the old goat and his brother croak.

I wonder how much money the State Dept will pour into the first election for their "preferred candidate", not to speak of US business interests, Cuban American potential business interests. etc etc etc

I'm staying with my friends in Miami now and there are a lot of Cuban American - with tons of cash - sharpen their claws and teeth. There is no need for USA government to invest in Cuba.