The Success of the Cuban Communist Revolution

Today (January 1st, 2015) is the 56th Anniversary of the revolution. When the communists took over, the Cuban Republic was 56 years in progress (May 20, 1902 – January 1st, 1959). To be precise, as of today Cuba has had only 226 more days of Republic than it has had of Dictatorship, so it is an excellent time to make a comparison and to reflect.

Those of us who do not support and/or have suffered the consequences of that ill-fated day need no explanation. It has simply been a total disaster. On every front you can make a comparison Cuba has failed. I will list a few for the benefit of the readers who might not be familiar with this reality.

Hope

• 1959 - The Cuban people had just gotten rid of a president who had taken steps to derail the country’s progress and were hopeful to get back on track.

• 2015 - Today it is the hope of every Cuban to get out of the island.
  

Emmigration

• 1959 - Up to 1959 it was not customary for Cubans to leave their country, in fact Cubans freely traveled abroad and regularly returned.

• 2015 - Today there are nearly 2 million Cubans and their children living outside of Cuba.
  

Exodus

• 1959 - Up to 1959 the only time Cubans left in mass was during the Spanish rule of the 1800’s and those numbers are significantly smaller than post 1959.

• 2015 - During the 56 years of Communists Rule there have been several mass migrations, in some cases on boats, rafts and anything that floats.
  

Government & Elections

• 1959 - During the period of the Republic, Cuba had several elections and presidents, these governments were weak and many times corrupt hence the opportunity for the Castro brothers.

• In 56 years there has only been 1 leader and no elections.
  

Human Rights

• 1959 - One life lost to an act of political vengeance or anything of the sort is one life too many. There were some lives lost in this period.

• 2015 - The past 56 years has been a blood bath: firing squads, long prison sentences, and death on the high seas, suicide, high incidence of drug and alcohol abuse and other unspeakable acts of abuse.
  

Economics

• 1959 - During the period of the Republic there was economic progress even amongst the corruption within government. This is a fact as listed by international agencies that keep track of country specific statistics.
  

• 2015 - Today the Castro government has fully absorbed the Economy. Cuba has several companies and industries, but they all have the same parent company and only on share holder.
  

Those who support the Socialist (Communist) government of Cuba are always very quick to point out that they receive free medical care in Cuba. A fact that is very dubious for many reasons, but I say to you, let's not even argue that point, let's give it to them. Let's say Cuba has a good medical care system, better yet, let's say it is the best one in the world. Would you be willing to have your freedoms limited or taken away so you could get the "best health care in the world", I think not.

To quote a great American "As for me, give me Liberty or give me death"

Luciano E. Orta

PS. Socialism's only success is to have Capitalism pay for it's generosity.

“Hay Cuba tus Hijos Lloran…!”   -   (Cuba Your People Cry).

With one stroke of the pen President Barack Obama has ended the stalemate; The United States has had with Cuba for 5 decades. Many will comment that it is time for a change, that the embargo did not work and that we must work at affecting/effecting change on the ground through our engagement with the Cuban people and government. Regardless of how you feel about the embargo and this opening towards Cuba the facts are not what they seem sometimes. The embargo has not worked (i.e. the Castro’s are still there) because there was never a true embargo. Goods have come to Cuba from everywhere for years; however we had the moral high ground for refusing to do business with Cuba.

This change has nothing to do with either one of the Castro brothers, because of their age and limited time. It does have a lot to do with the future of the island and of the people, because we have just given away the one trump card we could have used to really shake that tree. The vast majority of Cuban assets are already in the hands of various state owned entities controlled by the next generation of heirs.

Not commonly known by people in the U.S. is that although neither Castro brother has died; “the last will and testament” has already been read and the inheritance has been distributed. The country’s wealth and power is already in the hands of the sons of the Castro’s and the sons of several of the generals and ministers. There is nothing left for anyone else, and with this political recognition by the United States we can now say “They Won”.

The struggle of so many was in vein, Cuba has just been sentenced to another 50 years of modern style dictatorship. The island will now have the type of government that has total control on major economic matters and disperses trivial or symbolic rights and benefits to the people; something once known as an Oligarchy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy. The military presence will gradually fade away from public view and the bearded men with the green fatigues will all get a state funeral. The others will get a good shave and put on a suit, many of them already have. The marketing of Cuba will change, but the reality for most people will not change, and when it does change it will not be because of what was done today.

PS.
A very personal note, I gave up on the idea that I could ever go back and live in the country of my birth. Many factors come into play on that reality; however I have always hoped that my birthplace would become a place of free men and women, a place where democracy and the rule of law are respected. To have The President of my adopted country sign the future of the island away just like that hurts; it really hurts. If Cuba will truly ever be free it will not happen in my lifetime. I will share the same fate of my parents and grand-parents ; not seeing the island again.

The President is now a Dictator

Six years ago I wrote a letter to my Cuban friends warning them not to vote for Obama, because of his ideas about our country; I called him a Socialist. What I could not have predicted is that he would become a Dictator. According to the US Constitution, this one act of his calls for impeachment, but that will not happen. We elected him for the wrong reason and we will not impeach him for the wrong reason and on both counts we are wrong.

No man is above The Constitution despite the subject at hand or the importance of it. His short speech to the American people attempting to justify the action is by itself very telling, because he spent that time appealing to our sense of fairness and the good heart of the American people. He had little to say about the legality of what he is doing, and that is because it’s not legal. While The President identifies himself as a Constitutional Scholar, he seems not to really care about its protection, I consider myself an admirer of that document and of the men who created it. Never before in human history has anything like the American Constitution existed and however noble the cause or issue at hand we should never let any one man or woman rise above it; even if only for one decision. The justification of “prosecutorial discretion” might work if this were being done for a few individuals but not for 5 million; that is called “abuse of power”, and failure to “faithfully execute” the oath of office. If he has not been able to agree with the Congress, then he needs to go back and work it out.

STEP BACK and LET GO OF THE PEN !

God save this Great Nation from the perilous road we have embarked on.


Below you will find a copy of the letter I sent to my friends a few days before Obama was elected for his first term in November 2008. Yucas and the Presidential Election of November 4, 2008.

Marriage and the Current Debate

The discussion, debate, argument, posturing and legal maneuvering is at an all-time high over the issue of same gender unions. There are some things which I find fascinating in this process and two of them particularly stand out to me. The first is what marriage is and where does it come from, and the second closely related to the first; does a same gender couple have the right to require a pastor/clergyman to marry them.

Point of clarification, what each of you does with your life is your business, not mine and not ours. This commentary goes as to the definition of marriage (not a legal exercise) and also as to the religious freedom of others regarding marriage.

Marriage as I see it and as most people see it, is the union of one man and one woman and many of us in the Judeo-Christian tradition hold it as a sacred union created by God at creation and later affirmed by Christ at the weddings of Cana. That’s it, that’s the simple definition. We also believe that what the state does regarding marriage is to give legal status to a union created by God. The argument for the longest time has been that same gender partners should have the same “legal rights” as those in marriages. My only disagreement with that is that it would also be called “marriage” although it could not from a religious stand point, if we hold that it is God who instituted marriage. Many have said over the years give same gender folks the opportunity to have the same legal rights and call it “xyz”.

The argument would continue, we want to go ahead and do this and call it marriage anyway, even if you religious folks don’t consider it marriage; the state says it can be called marriage. The Church does not have a copyright on the word “marriage”. OK the church does not have a copyright on the word marriage, so the aspiring couple could go ahead and “marry” under the laws of a given state and call it marriage. So we now have the same word for two very different things. The problem with this is that the folks that support same gender “marriage” have now managed to confuse themselves into thinking that since it is called “marriage” they can “require” a minister to perform a wedding ceremony.

Hold it there folks, the “marriage” that was just legalized is the one performed by the state which has no power or jurisdiction over the marriage the church performs. You see the confusion this has created. The marriage the Church performs by its ministers, pastors, priests, deacons or rabbis is protected by the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution and by God Himself.

All along the folks that argued for the rights of same gender unions explained that this was a legal issue and that folks in those relationships should have the same legal rights and that consequently God or his ministers had no business in this argument. It was not a religious matter only a legal one. OK, since the state can issue any license and call it what it wishes then the state can go ahead and perform whatever ceremony it wishes.

However, once you attempt to force a minister to “marry” the couple then this is no longer about rights for same gender couples. This is now something else; what should we call it?

The Fourth Religion

I am of course referring to modern American Liberalism. We often hear mention of the three great world religions, but we do not often hear of the fourth one as a religion. While they act, worship and defend their “core beliefs” as strongly as any person of faith, they and we not often think of this group as a religious group. Let’s examine this component of modern American culture and politics, and see why it is a religion or more like a cult.

They will espouse strong views on subjects that sometimes are either generally or narrowly defined, depending on the most beneficial definition for the moment. In this endeavor they will claim to defend the first amendment of the constitution; freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly. You will hear the liberal faithful claim to defend this most basics of American Rights, yet have you really sat down and observed the liberal group respond to a comment that does not agree with their agenda or is “offensive” according to liberal parlance. Recently one of the old guys from the Duck Dynasty show said some things that strayed from the liberal parlance. The things he said however are perfectly acceptable within his belief system and as an American he has a right to say them, period. (And yes period means period when I say it) We either have freedom of speech or we don’t.

You will see those same liberal citizens who so strongly support the first amendment pounce on this man, his family and his business to quiet him, destroy him and send a message to the others who dare disagree with the modern acceptable standards set, defined, and often re-defined by the liberal conscious. The liberal conscious is this nebulous collective thought that permeates everything and is ever present, emanating from the liberal luminaries of “the great church council”.

They reside as members of the press, who by definition would be defending the first amendment and this man’s right to speak, yet they will be amongst the most vocal, not in denouncing his comments, but in attempting to discredit every aspect of his life, integrity and family. They would not be satisfied with disagreeing and having a debate on the merits, nope. He will be vilified and his person will be destroyed. The first amendment is not for him.

Another group is the members of the professional punditry, they by definition would also defend the first amendment, but they will not in this case. They will pounce and will join the collective. In this case if you watch closely and listen to different commentary on different stations you will hear the same comments, sometimes verbatim as if they were coming from some higher authority (Not God by the way), they never listen to God “He has nothing to say” you see. This great consciousness knows no higher authority than their own intellect, and they worship at this altar constantly.

The “great church council” will punish the old man and they will sit in judgment and pontificate, because you see they know. What do they know you ask; everything because there is no higher authority. What are their core beliefs you ask, that depends, is today Wednesday or Thursday, has any one member of the high council fallen out of favor. All these factors must be consider when arriving at what is today’s great wrong or offense to be corrected, and how severe the punishment will be.

Stayed tuned.