Multi quoting on my tablet does not function at Cruisersforum, so I'm addressing the phrases enclosed by ".
This post is made because it seems patently unfair to me that some politically orientated comments deserving scrutiny remain while others may not.
Furthermore, insofar as most people who come to Cruisersforum would welcome an opportunity to sail to Cuba, the conversation is related to sailing. How though can posters avoid addressing something so politically charged without venturing into the political realm with statements addressing the politics, old and new related to the renewal of diplomatic relations?
Originally posted by rognovald
"You are technically correct in your first point about the presidential powers granted to a president. However, the reason that Obama's action angered many in the US and was considered as "overstepping" his powers is because, as with many of his programs( ie; Obamacare is the most egregious), he refuses to consider any opposing views/considerations and effectively negates almost half of the American electorate in doing so."
Not so. I mean how do you know whether or not the Obama administration considers other viewpoints? And, what objective information/data is available to support your declaration "...programs ...effectively negates almost half of the American electorate..." Whatever this is supposed to mean.
"This was not a frivolous matter and there should have been ,at least, a general consensus, parity and approval among both parties and their leaders. This is where the intent of Democracy and a democratic government is violated."
Consensus? Most of what the Obama Administration has tried to accomplish has been met with Republican stonewalling and threats to shut the government down absent their ability to get what they want or to successfully slam dunk everything else.
"In regards to the loss of personal property by Cubans who fled after Castro's revolution, the reason that many left(especially among the business/upper classes) is that their homes, businesses and properties were expropriated by the Communist government and redistributed to the government and the general population. Also, international businesses were confiscated and their owners/management thrown out of the country. The remaining Cubans who left, who were the majority, left because they could not live in a repressive, Marxist, Fascist, Big Brother government where personal freedom no longer exited.
This is in no way similar to your statement that "Most of the people who populated . . . the US left everything behind to flee some sort of oppression."
??? Well, lots of immigrants have come to America with expectations of a better life when compared to the life led where they came from. Does it really matter which aspect of their previous life experience was deficient?
"The pilgrims who first came to North America were fleeing religious prosecution and left with whatever possessions they owned. Their lands/homes were not confiscated by the English Monarchy and they were dispossessed of nothing other than religious freedom."
All of them?
"The Cubans did not choose to "leave their belongings behind." This is patently untrue and historically inaccurate. They were robbed of their life's hard work as well as their liberty. A friend of mine in the 70's was the son of the Cuban ambassador to France
. Their family
lived in Cuba for over 200 years.
They were a wealthy, successful and highly educated family."
And, the rest?
"In their family residence, they were given 24 hours to leave since a Cuban working class family of eight were better served in the size of a house they owned. They left with nothing other than the clothes they wore. All family furniture, personal belonging and mementoes remained behind. To trivialize this historic fact without any attempt at a fair solution or some form of reparations from this Communist regime is patently wrong."
"It has been done with the American Indians, American Blacks through affirmative action, the Jews of the Holocaust and even in East Germany
where former landowners ,before the Berlin Wall, had the opportunity to recently reclaim their former family properties."
It? Affirmative action? How so?
"Should we resume relations with Cuba? Yes, I am in favor of doing so but not without any cost or concessions from the brutally repressive Communist government."
What costs or concessions do you expect of them?
"For those of us who have traveled to Cuba and think that everything is fine and the people are happy, my personal opinion is that you are very naïve and have been allowed to see exactly what the Cuban government wanted you to see. I still am fortunate to count as my friends Cubans who have first hand knowledge of what is really the reality in Cuba today. In can assure you, it is not the rosy picture painted by some on this forum."
I haven't seen any "rosy pictures painted by some" on this forum. There is near consensus the old policies toward Cuba have proved ineffective and why shouldn't the U.S. change tack with the hope a consequence will be improved standards of living ? There have already been some recent notable changes in Cuba toward fulfilling this end.