Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"No, Mr. President, 1776 Wasn’t Anything Like Castro’s 1959 Putsch"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "No, Mr. President, 1776 Wasn’t Anything Like Castro’s 1959 Putsch"

    Just when I thought Dear Leader Chairman Maobama couldn't become any more anti-American..."In one of his last acts in Havana, President Obama threw out a false equivalency between the American Revolution and Cuba’s 1959 communist takeover."
    No, Mr. President, 1776 Wasn’t Anything Like Castro’s 1959 Putsch

    Diplomacy: In one of his last acts in Havana, President Obama threw out a false equivalency between the American Revolution and Cuba’s 1959 communist takeover. What are we to make of a U.S. president who embraces such hoary Marxist equivalencies?

    In his Tuesday address to the Cuban people, Obama declared that the communist takeover that led to the Castros’ 57-year dictatorship was a “liberation movement,” same as America’s 1776 revolution. Obama’s well-known for his false equivalencies, but this one stands out for its idiocy.

    “Here’s my message to the Cuban government and the Cuban people,” Obama said.”The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution, America’s revolution, Cuba’s revolution, the liberation movements around the world, these ideals find their truest expression, I believe, in democracy.”

    It must have drawn a stifled horse-laugh from Cuban military dictator Raul Castro.

    Because the fact is, the American Revolution — whose courageous patriots pledged “to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor” — wasn’t anything like the Castroites’ 1959 communist takeover. The latter was a gang of thugs’ brutal destruction of a weak democracy with the sneaky aim of installing a totalitarian tyranny. The American patriots of 1776 were all about a free press, a fiery and open interplay of ideas, and the bravely signed names of 56 men of liberty standing up for what they believed in.

    The bearded Castroite revolutionaries were a different beast altogether. They claimed to favor democracy as part of their Orwellian Newspeak, making use of willing media toadies such as New York Times correspondent Herbert Matthews to fool U.S. policymakers. But for those on the ground, the Castroite takeover was nothing but a brutal leftist oligarchy intent on installing a communist agenda and turning Cuba into a Soviet satellite. From the very beginning, the Castroites and their so-called revolution had absolutely no democratic ideals. None.

    [...]

    19
    George Washington and the American Revolution.
    36.84%
    7
    Pol Pot and "The Killing Fields" of Cambodia.
    36.84%
    7
    The 2008 election and 2012 reelection of Dear Leader Chairman Maobama.
    0.00%
    0
    Maobama didn't equate America’s revolution and Cuba’s revolution.
    26.32%
    5
    Last edited by The Doctor; 24 Mar 16, 09:16.
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

  • #2
    Well, I'd say none of the above. Castro's revolution was a typical one for a Leftist government. Gain power, set up a one party dictatorship of some sort, kill off or imprison the opposition, and grab all the wealth in sight for the cronies now at the top.

    That is akin to revolutions from the French one, with the Terror of Paris for example, to the Russian, to the Chinese, Vietnamese, Mexican, Zimbabwean, and dozens upon dozens of others.

    The US revolution was unique in its outcome. The revolution's leaders didn't grab power. If anything, they tried too hard to divide and spread power out so nobody had control. That resulted in a central government too weak to govern, so they tried again and ended up with the Constitution and an excellent system of divided government between the nation, states, and people.
    Since then, the Left in particular has done its best to concentrate power with the federal government and take it from the states and people.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
      Just when I thought Dear Leader Chairman Maobama couldn't become any more anti-American..."In one of his last acts in Havana, President Obama threw out a false equivalency between the American Revolution and Cuba’s 1959 communist takeover."
      No, Mr. President, 1776 Wasn’t Anything Like Castro’s 1959 Putsch

      Diplomacy: In one of his last acts in Havana, President Obama threw out a false equivalency between the American Revolution and Cuba’s 1959 communist takeover. What are we to make of a U.S. president who embraces such hoary Marxist equivalencies?

      In his Tuesday address to the Cuban people, Obama declared that the communist takeover that led to the Castros’ 57-year dictatorship was a “liberation movement,” same as America’s 1776 revolution. Obama’s well-known for his false equivalencies, but this one stands out for its idiocy.

      “Here’s my message to the Cuban government and the Cuban people,” Obama said.”The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution, America’s revolution, Cuba’s revolution, the liberation movements around the world, these ideals find their truest expression, I believe, in democracy.”

      It must have drawn a stifled horse-laugh from Cuban military dictator Raul Castro.

      Because the fact is, the American Revolution — whose courageous patriots pledged “to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor” — wasn’t anything like the Castroites’ 1959 communist takeover. The latter was a gang of thugs’ brutal destruction of a weak democracy with the sneaky aim of installing a totalitarian tyranny. The American patriots of 1776 were all about a free press, a fiery and open interplay of ideas, and the bravely signed names of 56 men of liberty standing up for what they believed in.

      The bearded Castroite revolutionaries were a different beast altogether. They claimed to favor democracy as part of their Orwellian Newspeak, making use of willing media toadies such as New York Times correspondent Herbert Matthews to fool U.S. policymakers. But for those on the ground, the Castroite takeover was nothing but a brutal leftist oligarchy intent on installing a communist agenda and turning Cuba into a Soviet satellite. From the very beginning, the Castroites and their so-called revolution had absolutely no democratic ideals. None.

      [...]

      The President did not make the statement that the story attacked and the story even shows us that.

      His quote from the story:
      ”The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution, America’s revolution, Cuba’s revolution, the liberation movements around the world, these ideals find their truest expression, I believe, in democracy.”
      Clearly points out that the President is talking about the ideas that START the revolution, i.e WHY the people want to over through the current government. NO where in his statement does he compare the cuban revolutionary leaders to the US revolutionary members.

      Strawman.
      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
      “To talk of many things:
      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
      Of cabbages—and kings—
      And why the sea is boiling hot—
      And whether pigs have wings.”
      ― Lewis Carroll

      Comment


      • #4
        Classical Strawman.
        Puttin words in someones mouth to have a reason to hate.
        Oh dear....


        posted from mobile
        One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
          Just when I thought Dear Leader Chairman Maobama couldn't become any more anti-American..."In one of his last acts in Havana, President Obama threw out a false equivalency between the American Revolution and Cuba’s 1959 communist takeover."
          No, Mr. President, 1776 Wasn’t Anything Like Castro’s 1959 Putsch

          Diplomacy: In one of his last acts in Havana, President Obama threw out a false equivalency between the American Revolution and Cuba’s 1959 communist takeover. What are we to make of a U.S. president who embraces such hoary Marxist equivalencies?

          In his Tuesday address to the Cuban people, Obama declared that the communist takeover that led to the Castros’ 57-year dictatorship was a “liberation movement,” same as America’s 1776 revolution. Obama’s well-known for his false equivalencies, but this one stands out for its idiocy.

          “Here’s my message to the Cuban government and the Cuban people,” Obama said.”The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution, America’s revolution, Cuba’s revolution, the liberation movements around the world, these ideals find their truest expression, I believe, in democracy.”

          It must have drawn a stifled horse-laugh from Cuban military dictator Raul Castro.

          Because the fact is, the American Revolution — whose courageous patriots pledged “to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor” — wasn’t anything like the Castroites’ 1959 communist takeover. The latter was a gang of thugs’ brutal destruction of a weak democracy with the sneaky aim of installing a totalitarian tyranny. The American patriots of 1776 were all about a free press, a fiery and open interplay of ideas, and the bravely signed names of 56 men of liberty standing up for what they believed in.

          The bearded Castroite revolutionaries were a different beast altogether. They claimed to favor democracy as part of their Orwellian Newspeak, making use of willing media toadies such as New York Times correspondent Herbert Matthews to fool U.S. policymakers. But for those on the ground, the Castroite takeover was nothing but a brutal leftist oligarchy intent on installing a communist agenda and turning Cuba into a Soviet satellite. From the very beginning, the Castroites and their so-called revolution had absolutely no democratic ideals. None.

          [...]

          How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?

          Taxation No Tyranny (1775).
          "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it"
          G.B Shaw

          "They promised us homes fit for heroes, they give us heroes fit for homes."
          Grandad, Only Fools and Horses

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
            The President did not make the statement that the story attacked and the story even shows us that.

            His quote from the story:


            Clearly points out that the President is talking about the ideas that START the revolution, i.e WHY the people want to over through the current government. NO where in his statement does he compare the cuban revolutionary leaders to the US revolutionary members.

            Strawman.
            Strawman? Maybe. Maobama didn't draw a direct analogy between 1776 and 1959. The article is more based on the author's interpretation of Maobama's speech, rather than the speech itself.

            However, Dear Leader did say, ”The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution... find their truest expression, I believe, in democracy.”

            So, Maobama either must think that the "ideals" that drove the American Revolution are the same as those that drove the Communist revolutions in Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba, Zimbabwe, etc., is ignorant of the fact that the ideals are different in every revolution and that the ideals of the American revolution were antithetical to those of Communist revolutions. Private property rights and individual liberty (the pursuit of Happiness) are not among the ideals of Communist revolutions. Communism relies on the eradication of these ideals.

            Or he was just blabbing whatever popped up on the teleprompter.

            So... Was Maobama ignorant or just blabbing?
            Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
              The President did not make the statement that the story attacked and the story even shows us that.

              His quote from the story:


              Clearly points out that the President is talking about the ideas that START the revolution, i.e WHY the people want to over through the current government. NO where in his statement does he compare the cuban revolutionary leaders to the US revolutionary members.

              Strawman.
              Actually most revolutions start out with calls and demands for things like democracy and freedom, but their principal leadership has no intention right from the get go of actually implementing any of that. They make such rhetoric only to gain support for their side.
              Once the revolution succeeds, democracy and freedom stop being things the new state says and demands for obedience and servitude replace them.

              So, Obama's still wrong on why revolutions start. Yes, some portion of "the people" want the current government overthrown, but it's usually a bunch that wants to replace an oppressive government with a new and even more repressive government.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Sergio View Post
                How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?

                Taxation No Tyranny (1775).
                Originally posted by Sergio
                How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?

                Taxation No Tyranny (1775).

                Democracy and freedom my arse.
                Is there an echo in here?
                Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                  Well, I'd say none of the above. Castro's revolution was a typical one for a Leftist government. Gain power, set up a one party dictatorship of some sort, kill off or imprison the opposition, and grab all the wealth in sight for the cronies now at the top.

                  That is akin to revolutions from the French one, with the Terror of Paris for example, to the Russian, to the Chinese, Vietnamese, Mexican, Zimbabwean, and dozens upon dozens of others.

                  The US revolution was unique in its outcome. The revolution's leaders didn't grab power. If anything, they tried too hard to divide and spread power out so nobody had control. That resulted in a central government too weak to govern, so they tried again and ended up with the Constitution and an excellent system of divided government between the nation, states, and people.
                  Since then, the Left in particular has done its best to concentrate power with the federal government and take it from the states and people.
                  If you look at it that way...

                  "The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution" revolve around left-wing thugs and hoodlums eventually seizing power...
                  Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                    Strawman? Maybe. Maobama didn't draw a direct analogy between 1776 and 1959. The article is more based on the author's interpretation of Maobama's speech, rather than the speech itself.

                    However, Dear Leader did say, ”The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution... find their truest expression, I believe, in democracy.”

                    So, Maobama either must think that the "ideals" that drove the American Revolution are the same as those that drove the Communist revolutions in Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba, Zimbabwe, etc., is ignorant of the fact that the ideals are different in every revolution and that the ideals of the American revolution were antithetical to those of Communist revolutions. Private property rights and individual liberty (the pursuit of Happiness) are not among the ideals of Communist revolutions. Communism relies on the eradication of these ideals.

                    Or he was just blabbing whatever popped up on the teleprompter.

                    So... Was Maobama ignorant or just blabbing?
                    No, you just made that up. He clearly states his thought which you quickly change to mean something else. The ideals that are the starting point ARE the same, the desire by the PEOPLE to be free from oppression and living in a dictatorship. Simple stuff.
                    “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                    “To talk of many things:
                    Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                    Of cabbages—and kings—
                    And why the sea is boiling hot—
                    And whether pigs have wings.”
                    ― Lewis Carroll

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      You forgot some ethnic groups when writing about the liberty, freedom and democracy.

                      There is really no need to go into the historical details, events, coalitions and conditions in respective areas of revolutions.

                      Trying to portray pre-communist Cuba as a positive and happy place... suuuure.

                      There is no equality here, and Obama for all his faults didn't try to make one.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                        Is there an echo in here?
                        Oops double post.
                        "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it"
                        G.B Shaw

                        "They promised us homes fit for heroes, they give us heroes fit for homes."
                        Grandad, Only Fools and Horses

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                          No, you just made that up. He clearly states his thought which you quickly change to mean something else. The ideals that are the starting point ARE the same, the desire by the PEOPLE to be free from oppression and living in a dictatorship. Simple stuff.
                          Here is the full quote...
                          "The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution, America’s revolution, Cuba’s revolution, the liberation movements around the world, these ideals find their truest expression, I believe, in democracy.”


                          Maobama clearly states that all revolutions have common ideals which form their starting point. This is a cold, hard fact.

                          The ideals of the American Revolution were antithetical to those of every Communist revolution in history. It is politically and philosophically impossible for the American revolution to have common ideals with Communist revolutions. This is another cold, hard fact.

                          The ideals of Communist revolution...
                          1. Abolition of private property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose.

                          2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

                          3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

                          4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

                          5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

                          6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state.

                          7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

                          8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

                          9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.

                          10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.

                          http://laissez-fairerepublic.com/tenplanks.html

                          Ideals of the American Revolution...
                          We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

                          http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/cha...ranscript.html

                          Planks 1, 3 and 4 of the Communist Manifesto are diametrically opposed to the "pursuit of Happiness."


                          Is Maobama ignorant of the cold, hard fact that the ideals of the American Revolution were totally different than those of Communist revolutions? Or was he just blabbing whatever popped up on the teleprompter?
                          Last edited by The Doctor; 24 Mar 16, 16:14.
                          Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Epigon View Post
                            You forgot some ethnic groups when writing about the liberty, freedom and democracy.
                            Ideals and actualization are two different things. The ideals of the American Revolution weren't actualized until the late 1800's.

                            Originally posted by Epigon
                            There is really no need to go into the historical details, events, coalitions and conditions in respective areas of revolutions.
                            There wouldn't be if all revolutions shared common ideals.

                            Originally posted by Epigon
                            Trying to portray pre-communist Cuba as a positive and happy place... suuuure.
                            Strawman. No one portrayed pre-Communist Cuba in such a manner.

                            Originally posted by Epigon
                            There is no equality here, and Obama for all his faults didn't try to make one.
                            He said this, "The ideals that are the starting point for every revolution, America’s revolution, Cuba’s revolution, the liberation movements around the world, these ideals find their truest expression, I believe, in democracy.”

                            If all revolutions start out with the same ideals, there is equality here.
                            Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              So, you honestly believe that soon-to-be-American-aristocracy/oligarchy were motivated by noble ideas and humanitarian aspects when they organised the Revolution? That the European coalition figthing that same war did it for some purpose other than weakening of the UK?

                              Or that the French Revolution was organised and fought by the poor?

                              Or that every single revolutionary in Cuba, China, Yugoslavia, Vietnam etc. was an adherent of Marxist principles? No, poverty and existential threats, foreign presence were used as a trigger and rallying call, while ideology and power usurpation came later, after the victory. The key to Bolshevik/Communist Revolutions is the opportunistic use of genuine societal and economic hardships, wars. Only in such terrible conditions where the people are desperate or threatened enough, can they gather strength and usurp power.

                              EDIT: Why do I even bother.
                              Last edited by Epigon; 24 Mar 16, 16:23.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X