Here we go again again with our PM.

[msj]

19 minutes ago, betsy said:

You always bring up the king of  Saudi Arabia........explain that.  

I already have but from the top: 

The King of Saudi Arabia died in 2015. Like Castro, he was not democratically elected, like Castro, he was a dictator, like Castro his humanitarian record is spotty to say the least.  

Harper had nothing but nice things to say in his statement of the Saudi King.  In fact, his statement is little different than Trudeau's. 

Yet, partisan's like you and Derek go on about Trudeau's statement being embarrassing etc while ignoring the fact that no one cares. 

They did not care when Harper did his condolence suck up job in 2015 and no one will care about Trudeau's. 

It is being diplomatic. It is what leaders have to do.  It is no big deal. 

[Boges]

Just now, msj said:

It is being diplomatic. It is what leaders have to do.  It is no big deal. 

Actually what JT said was a big deal. Got a lot of international press. 

[Queenmandy85]

Trudeau's decision not to go demonstrates one difference between Senior and Junior. Pierre would have said they are just a bunch of bleeding hearts and let'em bleed. He didn't seem to care what people thought. He had guts.

Edited November 29, 2016 by Queenmandy85
incomplete

[msj]

Just now, Boges said:

Actually what JT said was a big deal. Got a lot of international press. 

Not really. I checked out some sources prior to the manufactured controversy and it was no big deal. 

His comments even fit in with some other world leaders. 

Then the #Trudeaueulogies happened and that got some press - all manufactured from the hypocrites like Derek and Betsy who will defend Harper's words about King Abdullah while criticizing Trudeau for saying similar things about Castro. 

It's the hypocrisy by them that I find so appalling - such partisan BS over something that amounts to a tempest in a teapot. 

No one of note, especially anyone overseas, is going to care about this story in a month. 

[Rue]

7 minutes ago, betsy said:

 

They both seem to be admirers of Communism.

Go to Cuba before you call it commy pinko names.

Does it have problems, yes. Is it perfect, no.

It came about in a country that was nothing but a corrupt 2% running the whole Island and Havana was just Mafia land.

Castro got rid of the mafia. Las Vegas came about as a direct result of Bugsy Siegel having to find a new place to launder mafia money.

Next, how can anyone suggest the former Cuba was not a problem place? Yah Castro took away what some of you call "freedom"-he emptied the streets of prostitutes,

made sure the poor got paid for their work, and all Cubans got the same access to hospitals and schools.

The US placed embargos on Cuba that punished who exactly? Years upon years of milk embargos hurt who exactly?

How did preventing aspirin get into Cuba do good?

The US could not kill Castro. They could not take over Cuba. They got hosed by him in the missile crisis fiasco guaranteeing they could not kill him after he pulled that fiasco via Kruschev at Kennedy.

He played hard ball. He loved baseball. Like most Cubans he was good at it. That and boxing. Cubans don't like to lose whether its playing hard ball or fighting.

The US needs to get over getting its ass whooped by this boy and move on.

Castro did what he did to assure the majority of Cubans got the same basic humanitarian standards of care,education and life. Did that make him a monster, no, a dictator, of course.

So tell me next door in Haiti and the Dominican or in Mexico how did they deal with their corruption exactly? Mexico is a drug state, Cuba wiped out the drug trade.

The Dominican and Mexico are plagued with time shares and Cuba?

Yah its people don' have the latest flat tv o r bug homes or cars and so...?

I don' doubt for some they thought there was too much government run lack of freedom. but to portray Castro as Stalin? Not quiet. He didn't starve people, he made sure when the Americans tried to, and tried to control his economy through the IMF, he found his people another way to survive.

America is no innocent in this. Its used the IMF to crush and engage in predatory pricing and control on West Indian economies.

America has been to the West Indies what China now is to everyone, a smothering, giant choking out all competitive and the ability of tiny nations to have their own markets.

You want to sell an orange, banana, pineapple it goes through DelMonte, Chiquita Brand or Coca Cola.

Come on lets get real-you hate Castro fine but you aint Cuban. Its an issue for Cubans.

Sorry on this one I pass on peyassing on Castro. He's no angel, but he did what he did for his people.

Dictator, yes. Tyrant, yes but compared to who....Stalin? Mugabe? Mao? Pinochet?  Nixon? Trump?

Come on let's geat real. The very same Cubans who hate Castro in Miami loved Pinochet and the extreme right wingers in Argentina.

Come on who did more harm their people...Pinochet...the Argentinian juntas... Stroessener in Paraguay...Samoza?...the blood thirsty sob's in Guaremala now or

Castro? When I was in Guatemala they were lining up farmers and shooting them dead. Its why Belize insisted on having a garrison of 500 British soldiers

to protect them. Any of you complaining of Castro ever say a thing about Guatremala and what's going on there?

Some stuff Castro did was extreme and inexcusable but he did good things too for his people.

He did not kill 20 million like Mao did or orchestrate a mass starvation like Stalin did to Ukrainians and he was no Hitler, Franco or Pinochet and now

Mugabe and he certainly was no Hussein, Ghaddafi or Hitler.

Perspective is all I ask.

His people will decide now his legacy, not some Canadians who have never been to Cuba.

 

[msj]

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Trudeau's decision not to go demonstrates one difference between Senior and Junior. Pierre would have said they are just a bunch of bleeding hearts and let'em bleed. He didn't seem to care what people thought. He had guts.

Gotta love it: no matter what he does, Trudeau is always doing the wrong thing. 

Fine with me, as long as you guys want to focus on non-stories like this then it only serves to make you look partisan and petty. 

What's wrong? Can't find anything of real substance to criticize a sitting government with?  

Well, you're in luck as there are announcements to be had later today.  Maybe that will work in your favour.  

[msj]

Just now, Rue said:

Go to Cuba before you call it commy pinko names.

Does it have problems, yes. Is it perfect, no.

 

Agreed. 

After going to communist Laos and Vietnam (and going back to Vietnam in December) and seeing first hand, including X-mas decorations and lights all over the place, I think people who have not traveled are so insular as to be borderline ignorant of what actually goes on in these countries. 

Not perfect, not great, but not the communist "big brother" waste land fed to them by anti-communist propagandists.  

[segnosaur]

33 minutes ago, Rue said:

Trudeau I am no fan of...but to be fair no matter what he would have said someone would have taken offence to it.

Its much ado about nothing. If someone wants t o say something nasty about Castro, say it for themselves. He's a friggin elected politician

 

You know, there is a happy medium between praising a person like Castro and condemning him. Its possible for someone to issue a statement regarding the death, without either gushing all over the person or breaking out in a chorus of "Ding Dong the witch is dead!"

I think Obama handled it much better by being more or less neutral... he expressed condolences to the family, but directed other comments at the people without saying they should be happy or sad. He talked about how he impacted people's lives, but it was vague enough without claiming that that impact was for the better or worse. Granted, his statement wouldn't necessarily please everyone, but it was a smart political statement, and certainly nothing to laugh at.

His comments were pretty precise and short.

No, they weren't "precise and short".

If he wanted to be precise and short, he didn't need to mention his family's relationship with Castro. He didn't have to mention how Castro was supposedly loved by the Cuban people or lie about how even his detractors knew he cared about Cuba. He could have simply said "We extend our condolences to the family. We look forward to continued diplomacy with Cuba.". Drop mike, peace out. That would have been precise and short.

 

[?Impact]

25 minutes ago, Rue said:

His people will decide now his legacy, not some Canadians who have never been to Cuba.

Well said, and the other stuff. There is a lot to dislike about Castro, but he also made some very positive changes in spite of the corner he was squeezed into.

[eyeball]

 

1 hour ago, betsy said:

They both seem to be admirers of Communism.

Trudeau also appears to admire capitalistic dictatorships like Saudi Arabia's and is more than happy to sell them the weapon systems required to maintain its dictatorship. Would you be lambasting Trudeau if he chose not attend this funeral if it was Batista who'd just died?

It appears a lot of folks are a lot more concerned about the communism than the dictatorship and I'm just wondering how these folks sleep at night with such a foul stench of BS following them everywhere they go. Like babies apparently.

Edited November 29, 2016 by eyeball

[bush_cheney2004]

The Trudeau family's love affair with Cuba's dictator is well documented and was very purposeful, if only to use as leverage against aggressive U.S. Cold War policies.

As a child in the 60's and 70's, the elder Trudeau was commonly regarded as a communist sympathizer in U.S. media.

Justin Trudeau should go to the funeral....make daddy very proud.

[PIK]

1 hour ago, msj said:

I already have but from the top: 

The King of Saudi Arabia died in 2015. Like Castro, he was not democratically elected, like Castro, he was a dictator, like Castro his humanitarian record is spotty to say the least.  

Harper had nothing but nice things to say in his statement of the Saudi King.  In fact, his statement is little different than Trudeau's. 

Yet, partisan's like you and Derek go on about Trudeau's statement being embarrassing etc while ignoring the fact that no one cares. 

They did not care when Harper did his condolence suck up job in 2015 and no one will care about Trudeau's. 

It is being diplomatic. It is what leaders have to do.  It is no big deal. 

Not even close, and Harper said the basic nice things you can say in a situation like that. The sauds has help in fighting terror and still are and they supply the world with oil, and yes they are very behind the times in human rights, but Cuba is nothing to the world ,just a nice beach Canadians can go to. Trudeau meant every word he said and would have said more if his handlers allowed him to go to the funeral. Harper never wanted to go and he sent the GG just like what trudeau is doing now.

[PIK]

5 hours ago, betsy said:

Yes he did.  Scroll back up.  He made jabs at Trump during the Republican primary.

He has also said he would never tell another country how to run internal business,then recently came out how he tells everyone to shape up on human rights, which one is it.

[cybercoma]

.

Edited November 29, 2016 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

1 hour ago, msj said:

Agreed. 

After going to communist Laos and Vietnam (and going back to Vietnam in December) and seeing first hand, including X-mas decorations and lights all over the place, I think people who have not traveled are so insular as to be borderline ignorant of what actually goes on in these countries. 

Not perfect, not great, but not the communist "big brother" waste land fed to them by anti-communist propagandists.  

Not to mention, you can't address the conditions in Cuba without mentioning the US embargo.

[segnosaur]

36 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Well said, and the other stuff. There is a lot to dislike about Castro, but he also made some very positive changes

First of all, while there may have been some "positive changes" in Cuba, similar changes have also occurred in other Latin American countries.

For example, education... many like to point to the fact that Cuba has all but eliminated illiteracy. Admirable. But other countries have improved too. For example, Chilie and Brazil have also seen education standards improve substantially. Similarly health care is improving too: life expectency has also increased in Brazil by about 5 years over the past 2 decades.

And those improvements also occurred at the same time they improved economically, yet they still managed to maintain a democratic government. So while things improved in Cuba under Castro, any improvements should be compared relative to other countries in the area, not just based on what it had been pre-Castro.

http://www.developmentprogress.org/sites/developmentprogress.org/files/case-study-summary/chile_summary_-_final_digital.pdf

http://www.efe.com/efe/english/life/life-expectancy-in-brazil-rises-to-75-2-years/50000263-2778815

in spite of the corner he was squeezed into.

Keep in mind that most of the 'squeezing' was done by Castro himself.

Ok, Batista was a dictator that shouldn't have been in power... fine. Overthrow him, stabalize the country, then hold free elections. It was Castro's decision to maintain power for decades. It was Castro's decision to send Cuban troops all over the world in an attempt to spark revolutions world wide and annoy the U.S. It was Castro's decision to implement a command economy.  And while many Castro apologists claim "its all the fault of the U.S. and its embargo", other countries DID trade with Cuba.

[segnosaur]

17 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Not to mention, you can't address the conditions in Cuba without mentioning the US embargo.

Keep in mind that Cuba:

- Had diplomatic and trade relations with many nations throughout the world, so while they may have lost out on a major trade partner in the United States, they still had multiple other countries that they could have traded with

- Has made little change to its command economy, unlike other communist countries (like China, Viet Nam and Laos) that have introduced reforms, and as a result have seen their economy improve

Had Cuba decided to implement reforms earlier, if they recognized that a command economy was counterproductive years ago, perhaps the U.S. might have been willing to start trade relations long ago.

Its ironic... Castro railed endlessly about the U.S., and the evils of capitalism, and then people complain that the U.S. and its capitalist system isn't being permitted to improve the lives of Cubans.

[drummindiver]

On Sunday, November 27, 2016 at 0:26 PM, msj said:

The lesson? 

Partisans are dickheads! 

So, you're a dick head? 

[drummindiver]

On Monday, November 28, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Moonlight Graham said:

Yes, blind attachment to an ideology that says all communism is bad is pointless too.  Castro was a repressive tyrant, but Cuba still has a GDP per capita better than Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, Barbados, Costa Rica, Grenada, Ecuador, St. Vincent, Saint Lucia, Jamaica, Paraguay, El Salvador, Guyana, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Honduras, Dominica, Haiti, Dominican Republic, so economically it's doing better than the overwhelming majority of Latin American countries and about as well as the ones not mentioned, not to mention having the same life expectancy as Americans.

All this while having virtually no access to trade or tourism dollars with the world's largest economy.  I guess when American corporations, the US gov and the CIA are perpetually trying to screw every Latin American country, that turns out to not be such a bad thing.

Then it really says something that the populace lived in poverty while Castro was worth a billion.  #eventrudeaucantmakethatshitup

[drummindiver]

3 hours ago, msj said:

Not really. I checked out some sources prior to the manufactured controversy and it was no big deal. 

His comments even fit in with some other world leaders. 

Then the #Trudeaueulogies happened and that got some press - all manufactured from the hypocrites like Derek and Betsy who will defend Harper's words about King Abdullah while criticizing Trudeau for saying similar things about Castro. 

It's the hypocrisy by them that I find so appalling - such partisan BS over something that amounts to a tempest in a teapot. 

No one of note, especially anyone overseas, is going to care about this story in a month. 

They sure care about it now.  MSM around the world are reporting it. What news source are you looking at, Granma? Ciber cuba?  Juventud reveled?

 

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2016 by drummindiver

[segnosaur]

On 11/28/2016 at 4:08 AM, Moonlight Graham said:

Yes, blind attachment to an ideology that says all communism is bad is pointless too.  Castro was a repressive tyrant, but Cuba still has a GDP per capita better than Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, Barbados, Costa Rica, Grenada, Ecuador, St. Vincent, Saint Lucia, Jamaica, Paraguay, El Salvador, Guyana, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Honduras, Dominica, Haiti, Dominican Republic, so economically it's doing better than the overwhelming majority of Latin American countries and about as well as the ones not mentioned, not to mention having the same life expectancy as Americans.

All this while having virtually no access to trade or tourism dollars with the world's largest economy.  I guess when American corporations, the US gov and the CIA are perpetually trying to screw every Latin American country, that turns out to not be such a bad thing.

Alright, lets take a look at some of those figures, shall we?

First of all, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba#Economy

Before Fidel Castro's 1959 revolution...Cuba ranked 5th in the hemisphere in per capita income, 3rd in life expectancy, 2nd in per capita ownership of automobiles and telephones,

So, its not like Castro was taking a country that was destitute and turning it around. It was already successful (even under the corruption of the Batista regime).

Secondly, lets look at some of the countries that you are suggesting have a worse per-Capita GDP...

Venesuela... run by another left-wing authoritarian... while perhaps less dictatorial than Cuba, its far from being an example of capitalist failure.

Brazil... Yeah, lower per-capita GDP. But, almost 1 million people are classified as 'indigenous' and many people live a traditional hunter/gatherer lifestyle. (i.e. they would not be contributing significantly to the GDP.) So the stats for Brazil may be a little distorted.

Granada / St. Lucia: You're talking about some pretty tiny countries, without any sort of population base and limited resources. So comparing the "success" of cuba to those places is a bit like comparing apples with really tiny raisins.

So, that leaves countries like Mexico, Columbia, Peru, etc. So lets look a little deeper. GDP is only part of the picture. Consider Average or Median income.

Cuba: around $300-2000 / year (its hard to tell exactly, since there are differences between "official" salaries and what people earn on the side.)

Mexico: around ~12,000/year

Peru: ~$6000/year in Lima

So, in at least a couple of cases, countries have lower GDPs than Cuba, but they have higher actual incomes.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/cuba/article89133407.html

https://www.reference.com/world-view/average-income-mexico-9ac363baf5bf6204

As for life expectency, yeah, they're pretty close. (Its slightly higher in the U.S., but not by a lot.) But, one major cause of death in the U.S. is car accidents. Given the lower number of cars per-capita, that's less of a problem in Cuba.

ETA: One other point... Cuba has been the benficiary of significant aid... first from the Russians for several decades, then from Venezuela. So, keep in mind that at least some of its GDP figures may be inflated thanks to the generosity of wealthy patrons, rather than the success of its own economic policies.

Edited November 29, 2016 by segnosaur

[poochy]

4 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Well said, and the other stuff. There is a lot to dislike about Castro, but he also made some very positive changes in spite of the corner he was squeezed into.

yea, and if he had to murder a few thousand of his own citizens, jail homosexuals, and frighten away tens of thousands of people, to make it work, why not, right liberal?

[Omni]

21 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Justin Trudeau opened his big yap before the election and now he has to kiss Trump's ass.

 

 

I'm sure you'd like to think so, but don't count on it. Trudeau is giggling at him just like most of the rest of us.

[Moonlight Graham]

2 hours ago, drummindiver said:

Then it really says something that the populace lived in poverty while Castro was worth a billion.  #eventrudeaucantmakethatshitup

He was a corrupt dictator.

Compared to the rest of Latin America they weren't that poor at all.  And they had a high life expectancy, the same as the average American.

[bush_cheney2004]

7 minutes ago, Omni said:

I'm sure you'd like to think so, but don't count on it. Trudeau is giggling at him just like most of the rest of us.

 

I would expect many nervous Canadian giggles, playing nice and hoping that Trump doesn't hose them too badly.

Trudeau will do what he has to..."because it matters so much".

Alberta has invited Trump's brilliant campaign manager (Kellyanne Conway) over for a visit, because they know how their bread gets buttered.