Discussion for article #231915
Rubio’s objections are partisan. We all know that. Read his words and you can feel him straining to find something to be critical of. As for this being “economic incentive” alone: hooey. Anything that gets America in Cuba ( our popular culture most importantly ) precipitates the end of the Castro regime. Castro KNOWS this and knows the embargo has worked to sustain him. He also knows that Cuba is going to take a different path either with him or without him.
When they write the history books on this crap its the South Florida Cuban that will take the heat. They have in their insular behavior perpetuated the Casto’s and the misery of the Cuban people. Thank God we’ve stopped listening to them and let the other 99.9 % of America form American foreign policy.
4 Likes
What’s with the anti-logic required to interview Sen. Marco Rubio on this topic. He isn’t particularly knowledgable on the subject, is not an authority in the Senate, nor has he ever expressed opinions that weren’t reflexively the opposite of whatever the Obama Administration is proposing.
Being of Cuban heritage is a nice background for his interest, but so far his stated views are diametrically opposed to those of even his Cuban -American constituents! Modern journalism is o lazy!
2 Likes
“there is “no current example” around the world where a “government of resistant tyranny” has moved to greater freedom and democracy as a result of changes in international relations that are based on economic incentives.”
What exactly does that mean? Oh yeah, it doesn’t have to mean anything, just as long as it uses big words and buzz words the knee-jerk south-Florida Republicans will applaud.
Any idiot should be able to look at China and Russia to see what happens to communism once the population gets a dose to capitalism.
Rubio is gradually realizing the Cuban wedge issue is being taken off the table, along with any hopes of his presidential candidacy.
“Rubio, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who’s
considering a run for the presidency, said there is “no current example”
around the world where a “government of resistant tyranny” has moved to
greater freedom and democracy as a result of changes in international
relations that are based on economic incentives.” Well, nice fudge factor. What does “current” mean? Go back just a few years and there’s the example of Myanmar. “Based on economic incentives” gives Rubio a fudge factor because there’s always more than one cause.
Not great examples, IMHO, as they demonstrate that the economic engagement leads to more capitalism, but still with plenty of authoritarianism.