Saturday, December 20, 2014

A LOOK AT VENEZUELA PLUS CHANGES IN US-CUBA RELATIONS



Tags: Venezuela, US-Cuba  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

Friday, December 19, 2014

The story of the U.S. embargo on Cuba...and has anybody seen Fidel?

There are some serious emotions coming out of the Cuban-American community in the U.S.

There is also a lot of misinformation about the embargo reported in the media.  It was never about "regime change."  Instead, it was about making a point regarding the property and investments wrongfully confiscated by the Castro regime.

My friend Jorge Ponce came to the U.S. with his parents in the 1960s.  This is what he wrote about the embargo:
The purpose of the U.S. embargo is was to penalize the Cuban Government for wrongly appropriating all U.S. interests in Cuba and not offering any compensation to this day. The President did not mention any compensation for these U.S. companies in his remarks.
Moreover, the President did not mention any compensation for the families of the U.S. of the Brothers-to-the Rescue pilots who were shot down in international water by Cuban MIG’s in February of 1996.

And has the embargo worked?  The answer is yes, as Jorge Ponce writes:

To those who claim that the embargo is a figment of someone’s imagination, Cuban officials stated in September 2014 that U.S. economic sanctions had cost the island $3.9 billion in foreign trade over the past year, helping to raise the estimate of economic damage to $116.8 billion over the last 55 years. When factoring in the depreciation of the dollar against the international price of gold, the figure rises to $1.11 trillion. That's $ 1.11 trillion that the Cuban Government could not use to bankroll terrorist activities against the United States.
Another question is: where is Fidel?  Has anybody seen him? That's a question going around in Miami and Havana!

Fidel's absence from the stage raises two questions:

1) Is he dead or so sick that he can't enjoy the moment?  I say "enjoy the moment" because Raúl Castro's speech was not as conciliatory as President Obama.  In other words, Raúl Castro sounded a lot like a man who had accomplished a goal ("lift the embargo") rather than a man who wanted a new relationship with the US.

2) Was Fidel opposed to the new agreement?  

We don't know if he is dead or angry.  Let's wait a few days, but Fidel's absence is rather surprising.

P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.



Tags: US-Cuba issues  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

A chat with Jim Yardley about oil prices and Russia PLUS US-Cuba issues



Tags: Oil prices and the world economy  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

Thursday, December 18, 2014

Castro, 1; Obama, big zero!

(My new American Thinker post)

My cell phone has been going off for hours with messages and angry conversations with fellow Cuban-Americans and conservatives in the U.S.

I hear this question over and over: what did the U.S. get out of this deal? 

The answer is nothing, unless you are one of those who believes that the Castro regime is about to reform the economy, allow an independent media, and hold multi-party elections.  

I have a dual perspective on this issue.  I can address it as a Cuban-American and as a U.S. citizen.  In other words, I want the best for those on the island and in my adopted homeland, the U.S.


It's great to see that Alan Gross is finally home.  He was incarcerated on bogus espionage charges.  I do not understand why we released three Cubans sitting in U.S. prisons for real acts of espionage.  It's an insult to the rule of law to put Mr. Gross and these three spies on the same sentence.

As a Cuban-American, I can tell you that normalizing relations will have little impact on the Cuban people.  Everything of consequence in Cuba is owned by the Castro family or the military, as Professor Suchlicki pointed out recently:
Money from American tourists would flow into businesses owned by the Castro government thus strengthening state enterprises. The tourist industry is controlled by the military and General Raul Castro.    
Tourist dollars would be spent on products, i.e., rum, tobacco, etc., produced by state enterprises, and tourists would stay in hotels owned partially or wholly by the Cuban government.
The principal airline shuffling tourists around the island, Gaviota, is owned and operated by the Cuban military. 
Why are we consolidating their hold on the Cuban economy?  In other words, you are not going to Cuba to start a joint venture with a Cuban entrepreneur.  Instead, you are aligning yourself with a state enterprise that benefits a small group of elites related to the Castro family or the infamous Castro Inc.  
For over four decades, Fidel Castro has arbitrarily controlled and had at his sole disposal practically all of Cuba’s financial and economic resources. According to countless first-handreports by former regime higher-ups, he alone and at his discretion has the last word on all decisions affecting the political and economic destiny of the entire Cuban nation. Most Cuba experts and scholars agree on this point. Alcibíades Hidalgo, one of the highest-ranking defectors ever to flee the island, explained: “It is simply impossible to undertake any political or economic initiative in Cuba. The only option one has is to surrender to the dictates of the regimeand to the thinking of the one and only maximum leader, who is above all the citizens.” ...
“Fidel is accountable to no one and is able to live his own reality.”
As a U.S. citizen, raised here, and the father of three sons born in Texas, I don't see how this decision projects strength or promotes U.S. interests around the world.  

What message are we sending to the world?  Will rogue states understand that it's convenient to capture a U.S. citizen and then demand concessions from the U.S.?

What about the $7 billion of U.S. investment stolen by the Communists, or the reason that the embargo was created in the first place?  Who is going to compensate these U.S. investors?  Did the Cuban government agree to do it?  

A very bad day for freedom and the families of the thousands executed by the Cuban regime over the years.    

P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.


Check Out Politics Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Silvio Canto Jr on BlogTalkRadio





Tags: US-Cuba issues  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

PRESIDENT OBAMA AND CUBA WITH JORGE PONCE AND MICHAEL PRADA



Tags: US-Cuba issues  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Yes, Venezuela could collapse if oil keeps dropping

(My new American Thinker post)

The drop in gasoline prices is a wonderful Christmas present for U.S. consumers.  It's great up here, but keep an eye on Venezuela.  The country could collapse if prices keep dropping.
TIME magazine has a good summary about the mess in Caracas:
The economic dysfunction and falling price of oil leaves Maduro in a tough spot. He lacks both the political will and popularity to push through meaningful reforms to push Venezuela’s economic house in order. At the same time, he is being increasingly squeezed by the weakness in the oil price. Hugo Chávez was luckier. At the height of his powers, he commanded widespread domestic acclaim, and was buoyed by rising oil prices on the world markets (he was also adept at showmanship, hosting, for example, OPEC heads of state in Caracas soon after he first came to power). Maduro faces an altogether more challenging environment.
“Ordinary Venezuelans are starting to get tired of slogans and socialist rhetoric and no concrete actions on any front,” says Moya-Ocampos. “As the economy deteriorates, so will the political situation in Venezuela.”
There are several reasons that make Venezuela acutely vulnerable to a drop in oil prices:

2) the domestic subsidies, from cheap gasoline to giving Cuba cheap oil.  These subsidies have bought votes for the Chavez-Maduro regimes.  My guess is that these subsidies would have to be curtailed substantially if oil prices keeps dropping.1) The extremely inefficient public sector paid for by high oil prices.


3) Maduro is in a very weak political position.  He is not Chavez, a more popular figure who got to govern at a time when oil prices could finance every scheme and ambitious project.

There is a perfect storm brewing in Venezuela, and the leadership looks totally unprepared for it.

Naturally, we will watch Russia because it is a larger player on the world scene, especially after Ukraine.  At the same time, a collapse of Venezuela will impact Cuba and some of the characters in Latin America who get subsidized oil from Caracas.

P.S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.



Tags: Venezuela  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Bush 2016, Oil prices dropping and a few other thoughts



Tags: Bush 2016, oil prices  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

Democrats need more than speeches to win back the youth vote

According to Juan Williams, the Democrats did not give young people a reason to show up and vote in 2014: 
"Congressional Democrats gave those voters little reason to go to the polls this year. No one on Capitol Hill was standing up for their agenda.
As a result, exit polls from this year’s midterms give Democrats only an 11- percentage-point edge over Republicans among 18-29 year olds and a mere 3-point edge among 30-44 year olds.
Basically, the Democrats’ lead over Republicans among young voters was cut in half in 2014.
And among 18 and 19 year olds, turnout dropped from 19 percent in 2012 to 13 percent in the midterms, a loss of about 14 million voters.
The exit polls also showed a five-percentage-point jump in young voters who self-identify as Republicans – 31 percent this year as compared to 26 percent in 2012.
Self-identified Democrats as a share of young voters dropped from 44 percent in 2012 to 37 percent this year, while independents went up from 30 percent to 33 percent. 
Republicans are pressing their appeal to young voters by bringing in fresh faces, such as 30-year-old Elise Stefanik of New York and 39-year-old Mia Love of Utah.
The big question for the coming Congress is whether the House Democrats will get off the floor and fight for the interests of young voters." 
Let me disagree with Mr Williams.

First, the Democrats lost the youth vote when "hope and change" cease to be about idealism.   Many young people jumped on the bandwagon because they thought that Obama was different.    Well, he is not different and many young people got turned off.

Second, it's hard to be very excited about a policy that has you moving back with your parents or on their health insurance policy.    The American tradition is that young people became economically independent from their parents rather than live in their basement for lack of a good job,

I just hope that the 2016 GOP nominee talks about growth and job creation because that's what young people want to hear after years of "hope and change".

P. S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.


Tags: Young people and Democrats  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

A political chat with George Rodriguez, South Texas conservative



Tags: Immigration, CIA memo, 2014 elections,  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

Monday, December 15, 2014

The Feinstein CIA memo will make it more difficult to understand what happened

On the Friday after 9-11, I took our 11 year old to first fall baseball game.   The reality of 9-11 hit me right between the eyes.  The field was empty and the game was canceled because parents were concerned about going out.  It was a weird feeling but it confirmed just how scared everyone was.
 
I remember driving around to my business appointments for days after the attack.   Everyone was furious and ready to take whatever action to prevent another attack.   Over and over again, I heard about those kids who lost their fathers and those sickening images of people jumping to their deaths.
 
Torture?  Yes torture was watching those towers collapse and know that hundreds were killed instantly!   Yes torture was knowing that kids like my 3 sons would grow up with a dad to play catch with or talk sports.
 
For the record, I think that the Bush administration reacted with proper urgency after 9-11.    We had just lost 3,000 Americans, and worse than that, we had no idea of who we were at war with.  
 
This is what the partisan Feinstein memo did not take into consideration.   This is why CIA Director Brennan, and his predecessors, sound so credible when they speak of the awful choices that the CIA had to make, as David Gergen wrote: 
"Brennan also made clear that the CIA (he served as deputy director under President George W. Bush) was not prepared to run a detention and interrogation program -- who would have thought they needed one?  
They put it together quickly, but -- as Brennan readily conceded -- some agents then went far beyond the rules, employing brutal interrogation techniques.
He should also have conceded that was torture.  
What has been missing in much of the hyperventilation over the Senate report is that the number of people water boarded was actually tiny: three says Brennan, though the Senate Committee insists the number is slightly higher.  
With numbers that small, it is far more believable that most agents -- as Brennan said -- acted within the rules.
Is this any basis for treating the CIA like a brutal, rogue operation?" 
It would have been nice if this report would have been like the 9-11 or WMD reports.   In other words, bipartisan.
 
On the contrary, the Feinstein memo was highly partisan and will contribute nothing to understanding what happened or lessons we can learn from what happened.
 
Again, bipartisanship roared its ugly head and everyone is a loser.
 
P. S. You can hear CANTO TALK here & follow me on Twitter @ scantojr.

Tags: CIA report  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!