|
Post by Vince524 on Dec 2, 2016 13:50:26 GMT -5
If Trump grew up in Cuba, he wouldn't be the Trump we all know. Who knows if he'd be the Castro with orange hair.
|
|
|
Post by CG Admin on Dec 2, 2016 13:59:37 GMT -5
If Trump grew up in Cuba as Trump, he would have moved to Miami in 1959. It is, I think a poor comparison. Trump grew up an entitled snot. Any leanings he had toward political power were overshadowed for a long, long time by his greed. And both of these are overshadowed by his need for attention, imo. He's no tyrant and I doubt he wants to be one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2016 14:06:18 GMT -5
Fidel Castro was America's boogeyman. Nobody disputes he was a ruthless dictator who oppressed his people and crushed his opponents without mercy or restraint. But Castro never proposed building a wall, never boasted about grabbing women's vaginas, never said women who have abortions have to be punished, never took out full page ads demanding the death penalty for five youths later found to be innocent, never held rallies where he encouraged beating up protestors, never threatened to start waterboarding and torturing anyone determined to be an enemy and never said despite two Supreme Court decisions to the contrary, burning a flag should mean jail time or loss of one's citizenship. Donald Trump has more in common with Fidel Castro in that they are both worshippers of power, fond of brutality, and autocrats without respect of due process or individual rights. Castro was no threat to America, but Trump is. Castro was a brutal, oppressive dictator but his reign of terror is over. Trump would like to be a brutal, oppressive dictator and he's only getting started. I prefer the dead Cuban Castro to the live American Castro. Just fyi, "disrespecting" the flag in Cuba--or other national symbols, or the "heroes" of the state--is punishable by jail time. So, like, are you saying that hypothetically, if a Cuban sports star had gone down on a knee to protest during the Cuban national anthem, Castro might not have applauded?
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 2, 2016 14:07:16 GMT -5
The "seventh inning stretch" would have had a whole new meaning...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2016 14:46:42 GMT -5
So, if I'm getting your drift, you're implying that maybe a sports star wearing a Castro shirt while engaging in a protest against the nation anthem is maybe ironic in a way the sports star may not necessarily have intended?
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Dec 2, 2016 22:37:31 GMT -5
Fidel Castro was America's boogeyman. Nobody disputes he was a ruthless dictator who oppressed his people and crushed his opponents without mercy or restraint. But Castro: never proposed building a wall (He didn't have to, he had the ocean. And he shot or imprisoned people who tried to leave (including children) without permission. And he rarely let people in.)never boasted about grabbing women's vaginas, (Well, you really don't know that.)
never said women who have abortions have to be punished (no, but Cuba's abortion rate is one of the highest in the world and their birthrate is drastically low - see NYT article - this is a crisis.) www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/world/americas/in-cuba-an-abundance-of-love-but-a-lack-of-babies.html) never took out full page ads demanding the death penalty for five youths later found to be innocent (No, he simply executed people without due process, whenever he wished to. Oh and at times, he drained their blood before execution) www.hrw.org/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htmlnever held rallies where he encouraged beating up protestors (Castro threatened protestors all the time, threw them in jail, tortured them, or had them executed. How else does one keep the masses in line? It's ingrained in Socialist regimes) The Criminal Code mandates a three-month to one-year sentence for anyone who "publicly defames, denigrates, or scorns the Republic's institutions, the political, mass, or social organizations of the country, or the heroes or martyrs of the nation."86 This sweeping provision potentially outlaws mere expressions of dissatisfaction or disagreement with government policies or practices, clearly violating free expression. The protection from insult of lifeless entities, and state-controlled institutions and organizations in particular, appears designed solely to preserve the current government's power.never threatened to start waterboarding and torturing anyone determined to be an enemy (he tortured "enemies" frequently and in the thousands - see Human Rights Watch link) and never said despite two Supreme Court decisions to the contrary, burning a flag should mean jail time or loss of one's citizenship. (Maybe you'd like to tell ME what Castro would do to anyone burning the Cuban flag. Nevermind, I will tell you what Human Rights Watch says -
Insulting the Nation's Symbols
Cuba also punishes someone who "insults or with other acts shows disrespect to the Flag, the [National] Anthem, or the National Seal," (escudo) with three months to one year of imprisonment.87 In past years, the government used this provision against Cuba's community of Jehovah's Witnesses, whose religion bars them from swearing allegiance to any flag.Donald Trump has more in common with Fidel Castro in that they are both worshippers of power, fond of brutality, and autocrats without respect of due process or individual rights. (Trump is not "fond of brutality". And of course he will have to respect due process and individual rights. He's a blowhard who says things for effect. And he walks back a fair amount of his bluster)
Castro was no threat to America, but Trump is. Castro was a brutal, oppressive dictator but his reign of terror is over. Trump would like to be a brutal, oppressive dictator and he's only getting started. ( Well, I of course don't agree with you, but thank goodness we have checks and balances. And thank goodness he's surrounding himself with smart and qualified people.)
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Dec 2, 2016 22:44:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Don on Dec 3, 2016 6:05:10 GMT -5
Fidel Castro was America's boogeyman. Nobody disputes he was a ruthless dictator who oppressed his people and crushed his opponents without mercy or restraint. But Castro: never proposed building a wall (He didn't have to, he had the ocean. And he shot or imprisoned people who tried to leave (including children) without permission. And he rarely let people in.)never boasted about grabbing women's vaginas, (Well, you really don't know that.)
never said women who have abortions have to be punished (no, but Cuba's abortion rate is one of the highest in the world and their birthrate is drastically low - see NYT article - this is a crisis.) www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/world/americas/in-cuba-an-abundance-of-love-but-a-lack-of-babies.html) never took out full page ads demanding the death penalty for five youths later found to be innocent (No, he simply executed people without due process, whenever he wished to. Oh and at times, he drained their blood before execution) www.hrw.org/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-03.htmlnever held rallies where he encouraged beating up protestors (Castro threatened protestors all the time, threw them in jail, tortured them, or had them executed. How else does one keep the masses in line? It's ingrained in Socialist regimes) The Criminal Code mandates a three-month to one-year sentence for anyone who "publicly defames, denigrates, or scorns the Republic's institutions, the political, mass, or social organizations of the country, or the heroes or martyrs of the nation."86 This sweeping provision potentially outlaws mere expressions of dissatisfaction or disagreement with government policies or practices, clearly violating free expression. The protection from insult of lifeless entities, and state-controlled institutions and organizations in particular, appears designed solely to preserve the current government's power.never threatened to start waterboarding and torturing anyone determined to be an enemy (he tortured "enemies" frequently and in the thousands - see Human Rights Watch link) and never said despite two Supreme Court decisions to the contrary, burning a flag should mean jail time or loss of one's citizenship. (Maybe you'd like to tell ME what Castro would do to anyone burning the Cuban flag. Nevermind, I will tell you what Human Rights Watch says -
Insulting the Nation's Symbols
Cuba also punishes someone who "insults or with other acts shows disrespect to the Flag, the [National] Anthem, or the National Seal," (escudo) with three months to one year of imprisonment.87 In past years, the government used this provision against Cuba's community of Jehovah's Witnesses, whose religion bars them from swearing allegiance to any flag.Donald Trump has more in common with Fidel Castro in that they are both worshippers of power, fond of brutality, and autocrats without respect of due process or individual rights. (Trump is not "fond of brutality". And of course he will have to respect due process and individual rights. He's a blowhard who says things for effect. And he walks back a fair amount of his bluster) Castro was no threat to America, but Trump is. Castro was a brutal, oppressive dictator but his reign of terror is over. Trump would like to be a brutal, oppressive dictator and he's only getting started. ( Well, I of course don't agree with you, but thank goodness we have checks and balances. And thank goodness he's surrounding himself with smart and qualified people.)Beautifully done, ce. Just the kind of factual rebuttal I like to see in debates. I'd just like to add one more thing, regarding the bolded bit above. It ignores Castro's inviting the USSR to park missiles and bombers 90 miles from American shores, as well as the letter that Castro sent to Khrushchev, recommending that the Soviet Union should launch a first-strike nuclear attack on the United States. Other than that, though, Castro was no real threat. Just those couple of little things. Minor stuff, really. Like attempting to start WW III and turn the US into a vast nuclear wasteland.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Dec 4, 2016 16:14:00 GMT -5
Well, it's a pretty simple thing to allow that the US government in general and the CIA in particular made some fairly stupid moves, when it comes to Castro and his seizure of power. And imo, many of the policies after the Bay of Pigs era--from trade embargoes to wet foot/dry foot policies--that continued on into the 21st century were equally stupid.
But allowing all of this doesn't turn Castro into a benevolent dictator, who was only seeking to help "his people." It doesn't absolve him of establishing a totalitarian regime and all that went into that.
As you say, "nobody* disputes he [Castro] was a ruthless dictator." But trying to frame Trump as somehow worse or as bad as Castro (in specific situations, to be sure) is a pretty tough row to hoe, as celawson effectively demonstrated.
* Nobody here, so far. But certainly, Castro has his fans, still. So did and does Stalin.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Dec 5, 2016 1:22:20 GMT -5
Hi Ohio. There's this new karma system that Robo implemented. Exalt and Smite. As far as I know, there's no way to tell someone why you exalted or smited them, which is a bummer. But at least it's something.
I actually think it's fascinating how (as a generalization) people on the left view Trump as a monster. His negatives, IMO, run from being ignorant about some things (though maybe not as ignorant as people suspect), narcissistic, impulsive, a blow-hard. But I don't view him as an evil person (nor racist nor homophobic), and I truly think he wants to do a good job as POTUS for as many Americans as possible. He might be out of his league, but he's putting smart people around him and he's a good delegator. Now, just because I don't think he's a monster (meaning evil) doesn't mean I don't think he could get us into trouble. But that's very different from thinking he could actually go the way of a Castro type dictator.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Dec 5, 2016 5:25:22 GMT -5
celawsonI'm not convinced about the "smart people" So far, at least 3 out of 4 of his selections have been denizens of the swamp he claims he's going to drain. Monsters and snakes and vampire bats, either right out of the Republican political establishment or fabulously wealthy people who got that way playing the Crony Crapitolist game and seem woefully unqualified for their posts.
|
|
|
Post by CG Admin on Dec 5, 2016 7:48:18 GMT -5
If The Colline Gate really wants a diversity of opinion and not a private club of like-minded types, it really is going to have to be a lot more accommodating to the dissenting view. As it stands, it needs some work. Perhaps. But in the future--if you return after the ban expires--try the suggestion box thread if you have some ideas in this regard. Otherwise, stop trying to play the martyr.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Dec 5, 2016 8:11:12 GMT -5
Hi Ohio. There's this new karma system that Robo implemented. Exalt and Smite. As far as I know, there's no way to tell someone why you exalted or smited them, which is a bummer. But at least it's something. I actually think it's fascinating how (as a generalization) people on the left view Trump as a monster. His negatives, IMO, run from being ignorant about some things (though maybe not as ignorant as people suspect), narcissistic, impulsive, a blow-hard. But I don't view him as an evil person (nor racist nor homophobic), and I truly think he wants to do a good job as POTUS for as many Americans as possible. He might be out of his league, but he's putting smart people around him and he's a good delegator. Now, just because I don't think he's a monster (meaning evil) doesn't mean I don't think he could get us into trouble. But that's very different from thinking he could actually go the way of a Castro type dictator. We can only judge Trump and his "people" by their words and their actions. There is plenty there to be concerned about. Though I will agree that words like "monster" and "evil" are emotionally charged, don't communicate specific concerns, and are thus unhelpful. Plus, it would be better for people who are optimistic about Trump (to a certain extent) to be able to spend their time talking about those things rather than defending against extreme rhetoric. Take Don's post for example: celawson I'm not convinced about the "smart people" So far, at least 3 out of 4 of his selections have been denizens of the swamp he claims he's going to drain. Monsters and snakes and vampire bats, either right out of the Republican political establishment or fabulously wealthy people who got that way playing the Crony Crapitolist game and seem woefully unqualified for their posts. This is my position as well... not saying it doesn't happen on both sides, but Bannon? DeVos? Sessions? Carson? God help me, if Guiliani gets SOS I'll fling myself from a cliff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2016 10:14:37 GMT -5
This is my position as well... not saying it doesn't happen on both sides, but Bannon? DeVos? Sessions? Carson? God help me, if Guiliani gets SOS I'll fling myself from a cliff. I'll join you on the jagged rocks. I'm really hoping he picks Romney for SoS. I have some faith in Romney's level-headedness, temperament and integrity. Also, I think he'll stand up to Trump and not be a sycophant.
|
|
|
Post by CG Admin on Dec 5, 2016 11:00:15 GMT -5
Just as a general point of information:
Tangents and derails happen. I have no plans to shut them down, because oftentimes that's where a lot of interesting and informative ideas appear.
That said, we have threads on Trump's cabinet and admin selections. It would be nice to expand those threads with discussions about their topics, as opposed to having those discussions on a thread about Castro.
|
|