Reuters: Raul Castro says hopes too high for Obama (as LGBTs have bitterly found out)

[IndianaGreen]

Rick Warren's invocation and the DADT repeal postponement to 2012 and beyond are bitter pills of reality to LGBT community. The rest of you will be next to experience the bitterness, anger, angst, and disappointment LGBTs had to endure since Warren was made the invocator.

Raul Castro says hopes too high for Obama

HAVANA (Reuters) - U.S. President-elect Barack Obama appears to be an honest and sincere man, but his election has awakened "excessive hopes" that the United States will change, Cuban President Raul Castro said in a television interview broadcast on Friday.

Castro repeated previous assertions that he is open to talks at any time with Obama, who takes office on January 20, but said he is not desperate to do so.

Obama has said he wants to ease the 46-year-old U.S. trade embargo against Cuba and meet with Cuban leaders as first steps toward normalizing relations with the Communist-run island 90 miles off U.S. shores.

"Now there is a president who has raised hopes in many parts of the world -- I think excessive hopes," Castro said in an interview on state-run television.

"Because even if he's an honest man -- and I believe he is -- a sincere man -- and I believe he is -- one man alone cannot change the destiny of a country and much less the United States," said Castro, who replaced his ailing older brother Fidel Castro as president in February.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5020E02...

[Grateful for Hope]

1. We will have to wait and see

This "prediction" is nothing more than a personal opinion.

[countingbluecars]

2. Really?

The rest of us will be next? Are you gazing into a crystal ball?

[Grateful for Hope]

4. Exactly. n/t

[IndianaGreen]

5. Current news: Obama silent on Gazan suffering, troop surge planned for Afghanistan

and he hasn't taken the oath of office yet!

[Grateful for Hope]

6. Yup. "He hasn't taken the oath of office yet" N/T

[Botany]

3. Bitter? Table for one please

[Solomon]

143. LOL Great Post!

Just about says it.

[Mudoria]

7. On a "my things to do" list..

Cuba should be close to the bottom for Obama. More important things by far to be concerned about than Cuba or Raoul Castro. Maybe he can ask if he's interested in coming to Washington for a talk in the second term.

[IndianaGreen]

8. Obviously LGBT rights are also close to the bottom of Obama's priorities

Palling around with Rick Warren and his ilk are clearly at the top of the list.

[Undercurrent]

141. .

"palling around with..."

I was feeling whiplash. Repuke guilt-by-association words made me think I'd been transported to that other site.

[wndycty]

9. I remain supportive of LGBT rights but is it really necessary to use every criticism of Obama. . .

. . .by anyone as an excuse to attack him over the Warren issue?

[firedupdem]

11. That's exactly what's happening here. Since when are the Castro

brothers the authority on the U.S.? Ridiculous

[IndianaGreen]

12. American made bombs are raining on Gaza as we post here

Obama could have said something about the human tragedy of what Gazans had to endure for months at the hands of a cruel occupier, yet he has chosen to hide behind the "there is one President at a time." Millions have marched across the world in condemnation of Israel's disproportionate response to Hamas, while we concern ourselves with the next BCS bowl game and NFL playoffs.

Then there is the upcoming troop surge in Afghanistan, as if an additional 20,000 troops can even make a dent is a situation already considered hopeless by many British commanders. It is too late to elicit any kind of positive result out of Afghanistan.

[FrenchieCat]

14. Perhaps because Obama's view differs from George Bush's on this, and so

Obama's decided that making a comment on foreign policy regarding the Gaza offensive that would be different from the acting President's is not what "One President at a time" means.

As far as the Raul Castro, and yesterday, the article you posted about Raul Castro's daughter.....I'm not sure what that is all about, but the last time I checked, neither of their opinion is relevant in anything that Obama does, in particular, as it relates to issues outside of Cuba. So I'm not sure why you are continueously posting what the Castros think about Obama.

[IndianaGreen]

16. I think all Cubans want the US to close down the US Naval station at Guantanamo

returning the land the US stole from Cuba at gun point.

[FrenchieCat]

102. Your response has nothing to do with the "One President at a Time" historical American tradition

on Foreign policy....and in particular when opinions differ, that I reminded you of.

[cali]

20. it is to rabid haters of Obama. And make no mistake, there are some on this site.

They lie their bitter little butts off and scream and whine about how they're just criticizing and the Obama worshippers are trying to shut down debate, but the truth is they're simply haters who were NEVER going to give Obama any chance at all, and who are as determined as the wingnuts to destroy him.

They're pathetic little....

[wndycty]

21. Watch your mouth

[Grateful for Hope]

25. I am beginning to agree with you on this. n/t

[IndianaGreen]

30. So Obama supporters are now "rabid haters?"

Did we spend our time and money to get this man elected just to have him slap us in the face with Rick Warren? Should we remain silent when Obama, adding insult to injury, decides to postpone repeal of DADT to 2012 and beyond? Should we not become alarmed at Obama's failure to condemn Israel's bombing of civilians in Gaza, or the military invasion currently under way? Dennis Kucinich did not remain silent at the human tragedy in Gaza, why couldn't Obama call for a cease fire? It would have been the human thing to do. It would have been change we could believe in!

[Lightning Jack]

45. you don't call someone you support an 'empty vessel'

why even keep up the facade?

[IndianaGreen]

47. He is an empty vessel if he stands for nothing we thought he stood for

The Warren pick was only the first step, and there have been others.

[Lightning Jack]

60. we? please don't include the rest of us in your delusion.

According to your criteria, anyone who doesn't do exactly what you want is an 'empty vessel'.

[FrenchieCat]

71. Sorry, but he hasn't done anything different from what he said he would do.....

and unfortunately for us, that includes the Warren invite.....considering that he clearly stated in many of his speeches....

On Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran, Obama clearly stated:

I will end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight against al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan. I will rebuild our military to meet future conflicts. But I will also renew the tough, direct diplomacy that can prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. I will build new partnerships to defeat the threats of the 21st century: terrorism and nuclear proliferation; poverty and genocide; climate change and disease. And I will restore our moral standing so that America is once more the last, best hope for all who are called to the cause of freedom, who long for lives of peace, and who yearn for a better future."
http://www.zimbio.com/Democratic+National+Convention+Sp...

On how he will get things done.....

The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term. But, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there.

I promise you, we as a people will get there.

There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as president. And we know the government can't solve every problem.

But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And, above all, I will ask you to join in the work of remaking this nation, the only way it's been done in America for 221 years -- block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/04/obama.transc... /

In this country, we rise or fall as one nation, as one people. Let's resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.

Let's remember that it was a man from this state who first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House, a party founded on the values of self-reliance and individual liberty and national unity.

Those are values that we all share. And while the Democratic Party has won a great victory tonight, we do so with a measure of humility and determination to heal the divides that have held back our progress.

As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, we are not enemies but friends. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.

And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn, I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too.

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces, to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world, our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.

To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you. And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope.

That's the true genius of America: that America can change. Our union can be perfected. What we've already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/04/obama.transc... /

If you misled yourself on what Obama stated and what he is following up on, then you have no one to blame but yourself. Perhaps, you are the empty vessel who filled himself up with fantasies of what a President Obama would do, without listening to what Obama said he would do. You obviously jumped to some unwarranted conclusions prior to November 4th....and now wish that McCain would have been elected so that you would have someone there to hate without reservation.

[PVnRT]

152. I guess that means people should just shut up...

After all, he said we'd disagree with him sometimes, so we shouldn't disagree.

DU is failing bad at logic lately.

[democrattotheend]

154. Well, maybe you should have listened to what he said he stood for

If you read his book or listen to his 2006 speech on faith and politics or several of his other speeches you would see that he has felt strongly for a long time about reaching out to people like Warren despite disagreements on social issues. Disagree with him on Warren if you want, but don't attack his character for doing exactly what he promised to do. If you think this runs counter to what you thought he stood for, then you obviously did not do your homework on what he stood for before the election.

[Number23]

136. You're damned right. And it's a GODD*MNED shame when Raul Castro

... the quintessential man in the bubble, has a better understanding of American politics than large swaths of American citizens.

Even Obama has tried to tamp down the feverishly high expectations people have of him. Some of it is because many people have so much faith in him, but I have no doubt that just as many others are working overtime to create an environment in which he has little choice but to fail.

[Bullet1987]

10. WOW! We're listening to Raul Castro now? Just to trash Obama?

Sickening depths some people will go to vent.

[IndianaGreen]

13. Change means lifting the US embargo on Cuba

not just to restrict visits to Cuba to the Miami gusanos.

[FrenchieCat]

15. I believe that Obama made himself clear on what he meant by change.....

during the campaign. I'm not sure if it is you that gets to decide that.....as opposed to the Cuban-Americans that voted for Obama, as well as Obama.

For you to equate Raul Castro's opinion to the plight of the Gay community is quite ridiculous. One is a communist dictator, the other is a group of American Patriots.

Here's the speech that clearly states what Obama "will" do in reference to Cuba, once he takes office: http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgraham...

[IndianaGreen]

17. The empty vessel in which we poured all of our hopes...

or as Hillary said, he had "one speech."

[FrenchieCat]

23. Actually, Obama had many speeches, and will have many more.

you on the other hand, are starting to sound like a broken record.

I listened to the speeches Obama made throughout the campaign, although I'm starting to wonder if you ever bothered. His take on Cuba was quite clear......regardless of your relationship with Raul Castro and Family. Obama's is as much of an empty vessel as you are someone willing to give Obama the chance to actually get sworn in prior to passing judgment on his presidency.

Obama also discussed his differences with McCain and Bush and stressed the need to renew the leadership of the United States in the hemisphere through direct diplomacy.

As President, Barack Obama will:

Engage in direct diplomacy throughout the hemisphere to advance democracy and promote American values and ideals
Immediately allow Cuban Americans unlimited family travel and remittances to the island
Create an Energy Partnership for the Americas—a regional energy initiative to develop alternative energy and promote clean and sustainable growth
Launch a regional security initiative to develop a new approach to battling criminality and drug trafficking in the hemisphere
Target development assistance for Latin America aimed at promoting bottom-up growth
Reinstate a Special Envoy for the Americas in the White House and open more consulates and expand the Peace Corps in Latin America.
You can read Obama’s full Latin America plan here.
Here's an excerpt...

If we don’t turn away from the policies of the past, then we won’t be able to shape the future. The Bush Administration has offered no clear vision for this future, and neither has John McCain. So we face a clear choice in this election. We can continue as a bystander, or we can lead the hemisphere into the 21st century. And when I am President of the United States, we will choose to lead. It’s time for a new alliance of the Americas. After eight years of the failed policies of the past, we need new leadership for the future. After decades pressing for top-down reform, we need an agenda that advances democracy, security, and opportunity from the bottom up. So my policy towards the Americas will be guided by the simple principle that what’s good for the people of the Americas is good for the United States.
Continue reading for the full remarks... http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgraham...

[countingbluecars]

26. Try as you might

you will not bring us all down with your anti-Obama views.

[firedupdem]

28. Hillary isn't President and you are evidently stuck there.

It's going to be a long 8 yrs for you. Looks like Hillary moved on and took a position in the Obama administration. You may want to try and move on as well.

[IndianaGreen]

37. Hillary is a war hawk, I thought Obama was different.

His silence rubber stamps Israel's actions in Gaza. His support for a surge in Afghanistan, a war that was long lost, gives me even less comfort.

[firedupdem]

39. You've been uncomfortable all along. Any reason at this point

will do. That's too bad.

[FrenchieCat]

48. IndianaGreen, Obama has been nothing but consistent on Afghanistan.....

and you terming his repeated plans for Afghanistan as support for a "surge" is as simplistic as the GOP termed the "Success of the Surge" in Iraq. It is not a surge that Obama supports in Afghanistan, it is an entire strategy......

It appears that you only find nuance where you want to find it, and absolute Black and White stances when it advances your point. This appears to mean that you are as intellectually dishonest as you accuse Obama of being.

[IndianaGreen]

51. The situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated much further since the primary season

War on Taliban cannot be won, says army chief

Christina Lamb Helmand, Afghanistan

Britain's most senior military commander in Afghanistan has warned that the war against the Taliban cannot be won. Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith said the British public should not expect a “decisive military victory” but should be prepared for a possible deal with the Taliban.

His assessment followed the leaking of a memo from a French diplomat who claimed that Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, the British ambassador in Kabul, had told him the current strategy was “doomed to fail”.

Carleton-Smith, commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade, which has just completed its second tour of Afghanistan, said it was necessary to “lower our expectations”. He said: “We’re not going to win this war. It’s about reducing it to a manageable level of insurgency that’s not a strategic threat and can be managed by the Afghan army.”

The brigadier added: “We may well leave with there still being a low but steady ebb of rural insurgency . . . I don’t think we should expect that when we go there won’t be roaming bands of armed men in this part of the world. That would be unrealistic and probably incredible.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4882597...

[FrenchieCat]

98. The article states clearly that the "Current" strategy isn't working....

Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith said the British public should not expect a “decisive military victory” but should be prepared for a possible deal with the Taliban.

His assessment followed the leaking of a memo from a French diplomat who claimed that Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, the British ambassador in Kabul, had told him the current strategy was “doomed to fail”.

Carleton-Smith, commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade, which has just completed its second tour of Afghanistan, said it was necessary to “lower our expectations”. He said: “We’re not going to win this war. It’s about reducing it to a manageable level of insurgency that’s not a strategic threat and can be managed by the Afghan army.” http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4882597...

I believe that Obama's strategy will differ greatly from the current one.

Obama to Explore New Approach in Afghanistan War
Tuesday, November 11, 2008; Page A01
The incoming Obama administration plans to explore a more regional strategy to the war in Afghanistan -- including possible talks with Iran -- and looks favorably on the nascent dialogue between the Afghan government and "reconcilable" elements of the Taliban, according to Obama national security advisers.
--
But conversations with several Obama advisers and a number of senior military strategists both before and since last Tuesday's election reveal a shared sense that the Afghan effort under the Bush administration has been hampered by ideological and diplomatic constraints and an unrealistic commitment to the goal of building a modern democracy -- rather than a stable nation that rejects al-Qaeda and Islamist extremism and does not threaten U.S. interests.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

[High Plains]

139. Okay, sounds good, but huh?--wait a minute.

Obama is going to end the "unrealistic commitment to the goal of building a modern democracy" in Afghanistan? Instead he wants "a stable nation that rejects al-Qaeda and Islamic extremism"? Man, that smells a lot like a military dictatorship or some other form of strong-man government.

That is change, indeed, but I'm not sure I want to believe in it.

[sniffa]

32. How do you sleep at night?

[Lightning Jack]

43. she sure was handled easily by Mr. OneSpeech

you are reverting to your primary mode now, Obama was never an empty vessel to anyone except those who had no respect for him at all.

at least we know where you stand.

[marimour]

49. now you're just getting pathetic

You could at least try to pretend like you're being objective lol.

[Botany]

77. Facts don't seem to bother you

"one speech."

First in his class Harvard Law
Editor Harvard Law Review
Worked in the Private Sector
Gave up hundreds of thousands of dollars to help poor people in Chicago
Civil Rights Law
Business Law
Charity work
he has written 2 best sellers
loyal to family and friends
Professor of Constitutional Law University of Chicago
Extensive work as an Illinois State Senator
State title as a high school basketball player
Worked with republicans and ind. people to better understand agriculture in Illinois (including showing up and
do "grunt work" at a number of different farms)
strong enough to pick people who disagree w/ him
community organizer
picked an openly gay women:
The official said that Mr. Obama's choice is Nancy Sutley, who supported Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in her primary campaign for the presidency.
Ran the best campaign I have ever seen
committed to getting us out of Iraq
committed to the closure of Gitmo
sees global warming as a real problem

Warren was a mistake but that does not mean Obama is a total mistake too.

[wndycty]

79. In the mind of the haters it does. . .

. . .and its getting very sickening.

[Botany]

101. I could have kept the list going too

It seems to this person just wants to be bitter and full of hate .... end of story.

BTW Obama reached out to a republican "down state" State Senator in Illinois
and told him he knew very little about the agriculture sector but he knew he needed
to learn more about it so as to be better @ his job .... Well the State Senator who
was in farming and connected to the farm community saw it as a chance to see
what Obama was made of so he set him up w/ a dairy operation and told Obama
to be @ the farm some morning @ Oh dark thirty .... Obama showed up and went to
work .... he did this on and off for awhile and then asked to move on to another
type of farm .... he did corn,beans, cattle, hogs, and so on .... the State Senator
still a republican became an Obama supporter and now thinks of Obama and his
family as friends. All the farms were Obama worked have nothing but good to say
about him too.

BTW what does Castro have to do with the Gay community in America anyway?

[IndianaGreen]

84. Speaking of Obama's constitutional law background

Blago hasn't been indicted, much less convicted, so what's the legal justification for blocking a sitting governor from appointing someone to a vacancy in Congress? Spare me the political argument, which is quite different and I am very familiar with. Let's stick to the legal argument.

[FrenchieCat]

108. Being removed from office doesn't always have to do with being convicted by a court of law.

Just like acting unethically while sitting in a public office doesn't always means one has broken a law, but rather one has compromised his/her integrity to the people to which he/she serves.

I know that Obama knows the difference between being convicted by a court, and acting unethically while in office. They are not the same, and therefore, one doesn't always follow another.

That would be the same regarding George Bush. He has yet to have been indicted or convicted, and yet, I'm sure I can find your post of you believing that he has compromised himself and the trust of the public office he serves.

[Botany]

109. unlike you I don't pretend to know everything and ....

not being a lawyer, a Constitutional scholar, or living in Illinois I wouldn't begin to try to make a "legal case"
about something I don't know about. However the Illinois A.G. who is a lawyer, lives in Illinois, and no doubt
knows about the U.S. & the Illinois State Constitution says Blago should be blocked on legal grounds .... I'll
take her word on it over some nobody on the internets any day.




BTW nice try at changing the subject too.

[elizm]

132. Now it's clear...

...It's coming from a still bitter Hillary supporter.

[Maru Kitteh]

145. No. Indiana Green is a citizen in good standing of the League of Perpetual Dissaproval

With a four-star certification in Righteous Indignation.


You'll have to leave your dull primary axe at the front door on this one.

[Mika]

22. Obama changed his position. He supports the sanctions and travel restrictions.

Years ago he repeatedly called the sanctions/embargo unrealistic and unhelpful if not harmful to the people of Cuba.

Then, like nearly all US political candidates on Cuba, they get to Miami and pander to the wealthy extremist minority of exiles.


Flashback YouTube vids. Obama changes Cuba policy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


Its about campaign funding. We need change here first.

[FrenchieCat]

34. So you are suggesting that we contrast what Obama said in 2004,

and what he said in 2007 in reference to Cuba and call it a flip flop, as opposed to going with what he said in 2007, and calling it a day?

What he said in 2007 and in 2008 is what his policy is....not what he said in 2004. Folks are actually able to firm up their position with the passage of time based on additional information, last I checked.

[Mika]

56. Funny how they do that when they come to Miami to campaign for $$.

Just a coincidence (over and over again, by pols on both sides of the aisle), that so many speak of the futility and damage done by the US standoff with Cuba, until they get to the Magic City (Miami).

Nothing to see here. Move along.

[Mika]

18. America's change must be holistic.

Cuba is a part of it.

It has to start with real campaign financing change. We need a civilized democracy, not a corporate one.

[IndianaGreen]

19. The first thing we need to do is to dismantle Bush's police state

and restore Constitutional rule. Everything else follows the restoration of the republic.

[Mika]

24. The police state is backed by money.

That's why we need to get the money out of our elections.

[FrenchieCat]

36. Till then, we have a new President who will be swearing in

in about 17 days!

[rockymountaindem]

123. IndianaGreen also posted material from the Indiana Communist Party

Which I'm sure has half a dozen members. We can't afford to piss off that voting bloc

I don't think that IndianaGreen is in the mainstream here on DU or anywhere else.

[a la izquierda]

144. He's not trashing Obama.

Read the article again. Slowly. He opines that one man cannot make all these changes alone. I think he's got a really good point.


But I'm probably trashing Obama just to vent.

[sniffa]

27. And here I thought this article would somehow relate to the GLBT community

Weird.

[DevonRex]

115. Just my opinion but it seems like GLBT was used as a "hook"

to get folks to come in here to read his Obama slam. Also, JMHO, the civil rights issue is a serious one that does not deserve to be used in that manner. The challenges ahead are difficult enough without the efforts being cheapened by people who simply hate Obama and always have.

[FrenchieCat]

125. This tactic is called The "Pile on".

One starts with Obama's made up stance on Cuba, goes directly to Warren without passing GO, some Gaza silence just cause, then turns to a possible DADT repeal made up unattributed dateline, then on to Afghanistan and the made up "surge" criticism leaving "Change of strategy" behind, include a bit of unrealistic No More Money in Elections and damming for pandering for the Cuban vote, and then degenerates to calling the President elect an empty suit, and calling DUers homophobes and hypocrites, with a dash of Washington Moonie Times and UK military reporting thrown in as back up sources, with some Flip Flopper labeling thrown in for good measure.

At the end, its all pretty transparent.

[DevonRex]

127. Yeah, that empty suit, one speech thing kinda ticked me off.

Haven't seen that one since the primaries ended, so it caught me off guard. And yeah

[Number23]

137. Well 6 fools fell for it, Jennifer as evidenced by the number of recs

6 out of 120,000.

[DevonRex]

148. I guess 6 out of 120,000 isn't bad, eh? nt

[dbmk]

29. Lol! Political goating 101.

[Thrill]

31. Oh please. With the Warren shit again

[Jennicut]

33. What does Raul Castro have to do with the LGBT community?

Next time a dried up communist stuck in the past has anything to do with the wants and needs of the LGBT community let me know. Obviously the US has not really gone about Cuba in the right way but what does this have to do with Obama? The Castros are idiots and have done nothing for their people for years.

[Mika]

52. Cuba is among the more progressive nations re: LGBT rights.

Not always the case in Cuba's history, but the Cubans are working hard to make things right.

The president's daughter is the head of the largest national LGBT rights advocacy organization in Cuba.

Sexual reassignment surgery is now part of their world class national universal health care system.

The first recognized gay weddings in Cuba were in 2001.

[IndianaGreen]

57. And Cuban women have more reproductive rights than American women

For that matter, Soviet women enjoyed more equality and had more reproductive rights in 1922 than American women do in 2009.

[FrenchieCat]

76. So are you advocating that America should be more like Communistic Cuba?

If so, I hope your views never oppose the Cuban Government once you move there......or else, you might find yourself in solitary confinement, you and your opinions.

[Jennicut]

104. One good deed does not make a thousand deeds wrong

Do they forget that its basically a military-ruled country?

[Mika]

131. You don't know what you're talking about.

Cubans can and do vigorously participate in their own government.

The MSM's so called "dissidents" in Cuba are on the US gov payroll aiding and abetting the declared enemy state of Cuba.

Cuba has a wide ranging political spectrum not exposed much in the western media. I've been to Cuba during elections there and it surprised me very much to see how contentious and wide ranging some of the politicking is. From hard right to the farthest left.

I guess you've never heard of Oswaldo Paya?

Another example is Eloy Gutierrez Menoyo.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Menoyo+Cuba&btnG=G...


You know jack about Cuba, though it doesn't seem to stop you from propelling the US gov/exile propaganda.

[High Plains]

140. Yes, that would be good in many ways, actually.

And while Cuba is not perfect when it comes to freedom issues (which country is?), your prediction is a bit melodramatic.

[Jennicut]

106. And in Russia people are poisoned for speaking against the government

Really, all countries have something wrong with them, none is perfect or better.

[tammywammy]

35. *phew* I've been anxiously awaiting Raul Castro's views of Obama n/t

[FrenchieCat]

40. Well, if you are interested,

here's Raul Castro's daughter's views on Obama posted by Indiana Green yesterday.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I'm sure that many Americans had been waiting breathlessly for her views as well.

[tammywammy]

42. And with that, now I can sleep well at night

My life wouldn't have been complete without the Castros input on the American election.

[Mika]

62. Better to not know?

[FrenchieCat]

81. Perhaps, Raul's daughter's views on Obama just don't mean much,

in the larger scheme of things. It's not like folks don't have their own take on things regardless of what Ms. Castro believes.

[merh]

38. I'm curious

where do you get that the DADT repeal will be postponed until 2012?

Do you have something that backs that up or do you just like posting negative shit and no substance?

[IndianaGreen]

41. Obama punting on gays in the military repeal

Obama punting on gays in the military repeal

The Washington Times reports the Obama administration may wait until at least 2010 before pushing through Congress an end to the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy towards gays and lesbians.

While Obama campaigned to the gay community on a repeal - which would allow gays and lesbians to serve freely - it is not surprising that he is placing the issue on the backburner. It has gained public support in recent years among both the general public (75 percent supported gays in the military in a July Washington Post-ABC News poll) and military brass (more than 100 retired generals and admirals called for the repeal last week). It would likely pass Congress as well. But it is not where Obama would like to use his political capitol right now.

For one, the LGBT community is at a period of weakness, coming off losses in California and Florida on propositions to outlaw gay marriage. By focusing initially on an issue prominent in the LGBT community, Obama would be essentially ignoring the message he received from two states that helped get him elected, which supported a Democratic candidate but did not back steps forward in gay rights. A repeal now would be perceived as an appeal to a liberal base at a time when he should be reaching out to moderates, including religious moderates for whom gay issues remain a touchy subject.

Secondly, a change in the military rules would not go down smoothly. Conservative veterans would likely protest, as would many of the religious groups that mounted the strong challenges against gay marriage in California and Florida. The Republican Party would likely quickly grab hold of the debate as a wedge issue as well. Obama would need time and energy to defend the repeal, and that would distract from the economic crisis, which could hurt his public support at a time the nation is economically weakening.

By punting the issue, though, it reopens the perennial question - is there ever a right time to make a big move on gay rights. By 2010, midterm congressional contests will add new reasons not to push a repeal on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/11/ob...

Obama to delay 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal

Advisers see consensus building before lifting ban on gays
Rowan Scarborough (Contact)
Friday, November 21, 2008

President-elect Barack Obama will not move for months, and perhaps not until 2010, to ask Congress to end the military's decades-old ban on open homosexuals in the ranks, two people who have advised the Obama transition team on this issue say.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/21/obama-t... /

[EconomicLiberal]

64. Your favorite source, the Moonie Times?

I thought DU "progressives" were above using right-wing garbage sources such as the Washington Times.

I guess not.

[merh]

116. So might wait until 2010 is consistent with your OP?

Did you make a typo (twice) - you have stated with certainty 2012.

Seriously, you truly do need to stop exaggerating - it doesn't help things.

I posted a thread about organizing efforts and it has been ignored and left to sink, yet you and others post "certainties" which are not certainties and have yet to say what groups you will join or what efforts you will take to be heard.

Rather than complaining, do you think you could suggest some action to take to let the concerns be heard, so that the Obama admin will know that so many consider DADT and other GLBTQ issues are vital?

[FrenchieCat]

44. He didn't.

Nor has he ever said that one of his first acts in office would be to deal with DADT.


Two of President-Elect Barack Obama's advisors say that the new administration will not make overturning the military's policy of "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" an immediate priority and may wait untl 2010 to act. Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network has spoken with Obama about the issue and came away with the impression that Obama believes "2009 is about foundation building and reaching consensus." Another Obama advisor, Larence Korb told the Washington Times:

"The new administration should set up a Pentagon committee to make recommendations to Congress on a host of manpower issues, including the gay ban.

"If it's part of a larger package, it has a better chance of getting passed," he said"
http://www.queerty.com/obama-says-dont-do-anything-on-d... /

[IndianaGreen]

46. The witch hunts of LGBTs in the ranks have a negative impact on our national security

Many gays in uniform were highly skilled linguists and intelligence officers. Why should we let the fundie fraking pukes continue to impose their twisted sickening religious views on everyone else?

[FrenchieCat]

50. Obama doesn't have the power to reverse the DADT policy on his own,

in particular if it is to be done with success.

I don't think that Obama disagrees with your statement in reference to Gays in Uniform.

As stated by Joe Moag:
"Obama's approach makes complete sense to me. (I am now awaiting the massive amount of incoming flak from posters who will call me a self-hating fag, sell-out, etc…).

Truman signed an Exec. Order to "deseg" the armed services, but it took Ike, working WITH the Pentagon, to actually INTEGRATE the armed services.

Let's try to remember Clinton's shoot-from-the-hip approach to gays in the military. He built up no Pentagon support, no public support, had no credibility on military affairs (in his 1st year in office) and what did we get? Don't Ask, Don't Tell. That's what happens when you act before thinking.

Moreover, Obama's position flows directly with the position taken by over 200 retitred military officers, including 4-star Rear Admiral Charles Lawson, in a signed statement calling for an end to DADT through deliberate yet goal-oriented work with the Pentagon. Not UPON the Pentagon. With the Pentagon.

This is what Obama seems to be saying he will do.

God forbid someone take their time, build support, and get it right."
http://www.queerty.com/obama-says-dont-do-anything-on-d... /

[merh]

119. I know he didn't.

I was expecting the OP to at least give some source that backed up his 2012 declarations. He couldn't do that and has posted about 2010 and even that is not from Obama but the impression of others.

It definitely gets tiresome that all the negative is posted yet the efforts to organize and unit go ignored. Makes me wonder what the agenda is, to make the voices of the GLBTQ community heard, to fight for equality for all, or just to post negatives?

[FrenchieCat]

122. The sources, even if it not Obama clearly states 2010.....and like you said, it is speculative

opining....but realistically justified,

yet Op writer states 2012.

Where did the two years difference come from,
and why is it being used as a statement of fact by the OP?

Things that make one go Mmmm.....
or as some would say.....Mysteries abound!

[sniffa]

53. Dupe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[IndianaGreen]

54. different forum

nice try!

[sniffa]

58. Yeah, and you should stop spamming

Nice effort!

[IndianaGreen]

63. You shouldn't put your trust in people that see you as less than a human being

Even Cuba is more progressive when it comes to the transgender.

[sniffa]

67. You should move there

[IndianaGreen]

68. So you are now part of the "America, love it or leave it" crowd?

There are no Rick Warrens in Cuba, and that alone is a good thing.

[sniffa]

70. Not really but if you moved there

your internet access to DU would be blocked.

[tammywammy]

72. LOL!

[IndianaGreen]

73. No, it wouldn't!

and I've been there!

[wndycty]

78. Waaa Waaa Waaa

LOL

[sniffa]

94. Ok

Move to China then.

[cali]

147. delicious.

I'm gonna start a sniffa fan club.

[jackpan1260]

55. speak for yourself

Don't lump me in with your community. All you strive to do is be a wet blanket around here. Once all the Warren hysterics have died down, you'll find something else to bitch about.

[wndycty]

83. No, despite whatever Obama may do on behalf of the LGBT community. . .

. . .there are some who will never let go of Warren.

[knowledgeispwr]

110. Ditto...

I'm not to be lumped in with that particular crowd either. I hate the Warren pick and believe it is a mistake, but I'm willing to wait and see what sort of policy measures are put into place and what efforts are made; I'm not ready to judge based on inauguration fanfare and political gossip between now and when Obama is sworn in.

[Cha]

133. Thank you, jackpan.. It's

too freakin' obvious.

[wndycty]

59. How does the she-man thread get locked and this one stays open. . .

. . .wow! Just fucking WOW!

[IndianaGreen]

65. You know why that one was locked

Comparing Ann Coulter to the most oppressed group within the LGBT community.

[wndycty]

69. That should be unacceptable but so should trying to use a Castro quote to attack Obama. . .

. . .if we are going to be sensitive let's be consistent.

[IndianaGreen]

74. Raul and his daughter Mariela spoke well of Obama

or did you even bothered to read the OP?

BTW, Gaza is burning as we post!

[wndycty]

75. Please you are nothing but a hater who will stop at nothing to slam Obama. . .

. . .your sig line is a joke.

[IndianaGreen]

80. I supported Obama, and I won't back down to the DU homophobes or the STFU crowd

[wndycty]

82. And which crowd do you accuse me of belonging to. . .

. . .go ahead say it in public. I would love to know.

[IndianaGreen]

87. You belong to the crowd that needs a healthy dose of enlightenment

[wndycty]

88. Again, which crowd is that. . .let me know. . .

. . .what do I need to be enlightened about?

[IndianaGreen]

92. I won't play with you, there is a war going on

a war that Obama is in denial about, and I am heading back to I/P forum.

[wndycty]

There is a war going on but that didn't keep you from using Cuba to slam Obama on LGBT rights. . .

. . .so why bring up the war?

[countingbluecars]

96. How is Obama in denial about the war?

I don't understand what you mean by this.

[wndycty]

100. The war is being used by the OP. . .the OP started a fight. . .couldn't back up his or her words...

. . .then threw out the war as a diversion. If the war is the only thing worth talking about to the OP he or she wouldn't have even started this thread.

[FrenchieCat]

85. You're down to the low of calling folks here names now?

How so Castro of you!

[IndianaGreen]

86. Funny, I can be called names but I can't respond in kind

What a pathetic bunch of hypocrites!

[wndycty]

90. I didn't say you couldn't call me names. I just want you to call me those names in public. . .

. . .I would like to know what you think of me.

[FrenchieCat]

118. And you were called what, IndianaGreen?

and are you a group to be Broad Brushed?

[merh]

120. No one has said to STFU

Plenty of opportunities to get involved and to have our voices heard have been posted an those threads have gone ignored, they aren't flame worthy enough.

In this thread it was back your shit up and you failed. Why must you do this, why do have to make this "us against them" and stir the shit when there is no shit to stir?

[EconomicLiberal]

61. Another new low for this specific whiner.

Comparing Obama to a communist dictator? How long can he/she go?

[IndianaGreen]

66. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

Or is your education limited to just being an obedient consumer?

[firedupdem]

89. what is your post about?....really

we've gone from silence on afghanistan, to how great Cuba is, to Hillary and whatever she said as she lost to Obama, to Obama being an empty suit, to homophobia and bigots.

You should let it go. Really.

[DevonRex]

97. Plus he apparently didn't even understand the quote HE provided to us. nt

[EconomicLiberal]

91. What the fuck are you talking about?

Your post above was completely irrelated to what I said. It's as if you pulled out your favorite talking point with little attention paid to context.

[IndianaGreen]

93. You are the one that said: "Comparing Obama to a communist dictator?"

[DevonRex]

95. I'm wondering about YOUR reading comprehension skills. The quote

basically says that Obama can't change everything by himself. Raul believes Obama is honest and sincere and that one man can't change the world.

I think that there's probably NOTHING in that quote that you agree with. I think you believe Obama is dishonest and insincere and that he should have been able to change everything wrong in the US the moment he was elected, even BEFORE he is sworn in.

So, perhaps you should concentrate on your own limited education and reading comprehension skills.

[Teaser]

114. OH SNAP

.

[DevonRex]

117. Heh. I posted a good one, didn't I?

[NYC_SKP]

99. McCain Palin 2012!!!

We REALLY screwed up, we did!


Oh, how were we EVER convinced by this man that he would do EVERYTHING we wished for???


I think HE uses HAND GESTURES to make us SUBLIMINALLY love HIM!!!111!!1!


Seriously, this attempt to use Raul Castro's opinion to stir dissention and disapproval is full of FAIL.

[DevonRex]

103. ROFL! Could it BE more fucking obvious? heh

I swear, the man didn't even understand the quote he linked to. Raul thinks Obama is an honest, sincere man. But the OP obviously doesn't.

[zulchzulu]

105. You're wrapping two issues where each have a different degree of complexity

DADT will be repealed... it's a matter of time when Obama can get a decent military coalition and have it where the repeal will happen without a glitch.

As for Raul Castro, that's another matter. Obama wants to open the trade embargo with Cuba, but that also needs to have a coalition to make it pass as well. I would hope we also have the trade embargo lifted by the end of Obama's first term.

No, it won't all happen in February before Valentine's Day. There's a hell of lot of major shit on the plate where DADT and the Cuban embargo aren't exactly in the first tier of things to get done. Don't respond with the obvious answer... that's just the way it is.

If I lived in Utopia, we'd have DADT repealed, universal single payer healthcare, withdrawal from Iraq/Afghanistan and the Middle East, get everyone fat and happy in Darfur, eliminate all traces of global warming, have equal marriage rights, have an amazing stable economy and beautiful people dancing naked in the streets on January 21. But...

[Teaser]

107. Always good to have the dictators weigh in

.

[onefreespiritedchick]

111. Sigh.... n/t

[anonymous171]

112. Obama has betrayed the gay community by signing all sorts of anti-gay legislation. nt

[Phx_Dem]

113. Want some cheese with that whine?

[Joe the Revelator]

121. It's "progressives" like this OP that made me embaressed to be a Democrat sometimes.

[rockymountaindem]

124. Same here

I'm not happy with Obama picking Warren, but calling on the brothers Castro to back up one's opinion is an embarrassment to all of us.

[Forkboy]

126. I don't care what we think of Raul, what he says here may be right.

It may indeed be excessive hopes. The expectation game in any area is a dangerous one, especially in politics.

Jeez, relax all you Gunga Dins.

[DevonRex]

128. What Raul said was actually pretty good. What the OP said

not so much.

[jberryhill]

129. News Flash - White Guys Who Run Cuba Have Lost a Propaganda Point on Race

Castro said Obama couldn't win.

Now someone has to figure out why multi-racial Cuba is run by a bunch of white guys.

[FrenchieCat]

130. The exact same White Guy for the last 50 years.....

to be precise.

Now, for some, that's "no change" they can really believe in!

[Hanse]

134. Isn't he one of those "certain ethnic minorities"

... you were blaming for the gang rape of a woman a few days ago in LBN?

[ClarkUSA]

135. WTH cares what Raul Castro has to say? What has he ever done in his life besides suck up to Fidel?

Cuba is one of the most poverty-stricken nations on earth, so what the hell does he know about good governing,
considering it's a communist dictatorship?

[K Gardner]

138. OMG... this crap AGAIN?? How in the name of god do you get from

Castro to Rick Warren 2 minute prayer to Obama sux and "you're next !"

Sad commentary on the OP, not Obama.

[Fearless]

142. Oh please don't make this another GLBTQ bitter pill thread.

The article says nothing about that, it's just pandering of the worst kind.

[CakeGrrl]

146. Now it's down to using any lame excuse to start an Obama-bashing thread

but maybe you were worried that your other bazillion or so "Obama is a failure for selecting Warren" comments didn't really get your point across.

[DevonRex]

149. You totally nailed it. Funny, but Raul thinks Obama is honest and sincere.

I very much doubt the OP does. Oh heck. I know he doesn't.

[uponit7771]

151. Yeap, it sounds like Raul likes Obama but doesn't share his optimism. Raul has never heard of ...

...MLK either, Rome wasn't built in a day.

[uponit7771]

150. Raul...ever heard of MLK? Jus sayin, Rome wasn't built in a day

[democrattotheend]

153. I know there will be times when I am disappointed

But my coworker put it perfectly: if we have a president who pisses us off 25% of the time, isn't that a lot better than a president who pisses us off 99% of the time?

I guess it depends on expectations, and in that Raoul Castro is right to some degree. I never expected Obama to be some stealth liberal warrior and I took him at his word when he spoke on the campaign trail about overcoming petty partisanship and reaching across the aisle and reaching out to people of faith even when there are disagreements on social issues. So I wasn't surprised at all by the Warren pick, and that's probably why it didn't bother me as much as it bothered some people who seemed to think he was just pandering when he talked about outreach to people like Warren on the campaign trail.

I'm sure there will be promises Obama will break, but so far, I'm not aware of any broken campaign promises (perhaps you could call letting the Bush tax cuts expire on their own in 2011 instead of spending political capital to end them a year early a broken promise, but it's a stretch), so people who got their hopes up too high have only themselves to blame.

[Rwalsh]

155. As I said in a previous post,

I understand what's going on. We want to believe that finally our country is going to change and for the better. But deep down inside of us there's that nagging doubt that says 'It is really true? Is is possible? Are things really going to change?

I suffer from that myself. The past 8 years have given us every reason to believe that nothing will ever change.

But we can not give in to those doubts. We have to believe that things are going to change and for the better because that's the only way that things will change and for the better.

Reality is what you make of it.