Usa Forum - The Hateful, Crazy, Embarrassing Miami Exiles

bromselick

8/17/2006 7:54:00 PM

Progreso Weekly - Aug 17, 2006
http://www.progresoweekly.com/index.php?progreso=lupalvaro&otherweek=...

Al's Loupe

What happened to the concept of Cuba - the "Motherland"?

By Alvaro F. Fernandez

Ding dong! The witch is dead.
Which old witch? The wicked witch.
Ding dong! The wicked witch is dead.

-Song from the movie, The Wizard of Oz

People danced on the streets. Others stared at TV cameras, yelled,
whooped
it up for the world to see. Nobody had given them reason to believe,
but in
their minds, Fidel Castro was dead.

Monday night, July 31, turned out to be another one of those moments
that
becomes historical lore in what is the soap opera life of Miami. At
around
9 p.m., Cuban TV had announced that Fidel Castro was ceding temporary
power
to his brother Raul. The Cuban leader was to have a delicate stomach
operation and would be out of commission for a while. Fidel, the
indestructible, would never cede power, people here said.

Suddenly, everyone had a theory. And the streets of Cuban Miami started
filling with revelers celebrating the death of their wicked witch.

Many Miami Cuban exiles have an uncanny ability to look ridiculous at
times. Theirs is a willingness to believe almost anything about Cuba
and
Fidel Castro while demonstrating an infirmed hatred that borders on
mass
paranoia.

Sadder still is the fact that the rest of the world, and many around
the
United States, have seen them act out a Caribbean tragedy here for
nearly
half a century. At critical moments, where there has been need for
reflection, they've turned the situations to, what could have been used
as,
studies for new psychiatric drugs that seem to pop up daily nowadays.

It has now been more than two weeks since Fidel Castro was operated on
in
Havana. This past weekend we saw him photographed in newspapers. And on
Monday he appeared on TV together with Venezuelan President Hugo
Chavez.
Also on TV over the weekend, Raul Castro was seen receiving the
Venezuelan
leader at the Havana airport.

You have to live in Miami to understand what has gone on here since the
night of July 31^st. The stories, speculations, etc., all centering on
the
two Castro brothers, is enough to fill a book of what ifs... And the
fact
is that in Cuba everything remains stable and Fidel Castro, at this
moment
no longer the leader of the island nation, recovers in a hospital bed,
or
at home - somewhere in Cuba - and seems to be doing pretty well for a
man
who just turned 80.

The big losers in this Miami song and dance fest: the Cuban Miami exile
community. Once more they looked like out of control wackos and greedy
SOBs. What stood out in my mind, although there were some smart spin
doctors trying to remedy the situation after a couple of days of the
senseless jubilation, was the fact that Fidel's death was celebrated,
the
return of lost properties on the island nation was debated, but Cuban
Miami, a land full of paunchy, overfed Calle Ocho patriots, seemed to
forget that foremost in everyone's mind should have been the
Motherland. It
speaks plenty of fanatics that frequent the restaurants on Calle Ocho,
and,
over huge portions of pork, chicken and rice, and flan for dessert,
with a
Cuban coffee chaser, plan out the invasion of Cuba. Of course, leaving
it
for tomorrow - they're just too full to take to the sea today.

They seem to forget that they tried that once, in 1961, and failed.
They
blamed the U.S. government for that one. And now men and women, some
older
than Fidel, still boast of invading some day. Of course, what they
won't
admit is that they're banking on the americanos to do the dirty work
for
them. "Send the marines," they will solve all of our problems.

Another thing I noticed during these more than two weeks of commotion
when
Cuban Miami's witch had supposedly died, the exiles are no longer in
touch
with mainstream Cuba. In my opinion, most exile Cubans are no longer
Cubans. Almost fifty years later they still dream of things that no
longer
exist; things that will never again exist. Call them americanos who
were
born in Cuba.

All the while, and like in 2000 with Elian, the young Cuban boy rescued
at
sea which turned into a political kidnapping that made Miami Cubans
look
bad, the world watches the events of the last few weeks and probably
wonders, again: "What's up with these nuts?"

Two days after the Fidel operation, a Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel
reporter
called me to ask about the reaction in Miami. She knew she would not
get
the standard answer from me, and she wanted to balance her story, I
suppose. Of course, I was glad to comply with her hidden wishes.

First, I told her, the Cubans celebrating on the streets of Miami
showed
little class. And to think, I continued, that many of them consider
themselves good Christians. Well it's not how good Christians would
act, I
informed her.

Secondly, I said, and probably most important, Miami missed an
opportunity
to start mending fences: To send a message to our brothers and sisters
on
the island that we're in this together - for better or worse. Instead
they
heard hatred spewing from the mouths of fanatics. And newspapers quoted
entrepreneurs - from the past and the present - who spoke of the
opportunities available in Cuba to make money in the future.

And more than two weeks later, I still ask myself, "Shouldn't this be
about
Cuba, the Motherland?"

4 Answers

Rockinghorse Winner

5/25/2012 9:50:00 PM

* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Sid9 <sid9@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>
> "Rockinghorse Winner" <badass.superman@gmx.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnjrv6m6.50h.badass.superman@badass.edu...
>> * It may have been the liquor talking, but
>> wy <wy_@myself.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On May 24, 7:46?pm, David Hartung <da...@hotmaiil.com> wrote:
>>>> On 05/24/2012 04:18 PM, wy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On May 24, 5:03 pm, BillyBobMarley<wha...@gmail.com> ?wrote:
>>>> >> On May 24, 12:05 pm, "Sid9"<sid9@ bellsouth.net> ?wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>> "Yak"<y...@inbox.com> ?wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> >>> Federal income tax is not burden on wealthy Americans
>>>>
>>>> >> Except for those wealthy Americans that employ people and have to run
>>>> >> a buisness.Ever heard of overhead?
>>>>
>>>> > Yeah, Warren Buffet is really eye-deep in debt over having to own and
>>>> > run all his businesses and pay all his employees. ?You do realize that
>>>> > people like him have a nice capital gains cushion to live on for the
>>>> > rest of their lives even if their businesses go bust, something that
>>>> > the 90% don't have at all. ?I don't think you really understand what
>>>> > obscene wealth really amounts to.
>>>>
>>>> Posts such as this illustrate the real problem wth these discussions.
>>>> You, Sid, Zepp, and the like honestly believe that those who have high
>>>> incomes do not deserve them.
>>>
>>> No, those who have high incomes, especially obscenely high ones, can
>>> never spend all of it on themselves in a single lifetime. So what's
>>> to really deserve if you can't even spend it all on yourself in a
>>> single lifetime? In fact, someone like Warren Buffet, whose net worth
>>> is $44 billion, would have to live 44,000 lifetimes at a million
>>> dollars per lifetime to spend it all just on himself. Actually, he
>>> could produce 43,999 millionaires instantly if he just donated every
>>> penny of his wealth, except the million he'd keep to himself. And if
>>> everyone else on the Top 400 list joined him, over 17 million more
>>> instant new millionaires could be created. Well, maybe 12-15 million
>>> since not all the others are as rich as Buffet. In fact, if the Top
>>> 400 did that and just donated to those people who are still
>>> unemployed, the unemployment rate would go down to 0%. And everybody,
>>> including the Top 400, would still have plenty to live on for the rest
>>> of their lives - although the Top 400 would each be billions poorer,
>>> but by no means nowhere near flat-busted broke as a lot of unemployed
>>> people are.
>>>
>>> That aside, they can make as much money as they like. But in
>>> recognition of their disproportionate wealth compared to everyone
>>> else, their taxation rate should also be disproportionate compared to
>>> everyone else's, not virtually even or less so, as seen in just the
>>> fed effective tax rate.
>>>
>>> http://biz570.com/polopoly_f...!/image/2210303409.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_490/2210303409.jpg
>>>
>>> And that's why I'd revert it back to the 50s model, when it worked for
>>> all Americans (most, at least), not keep it at the current one, when
>>> it heavily favors the rich.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> All your plan would do is succeed in driving the rich and their money
>> overseas. The rich can move much easier than you or I can. They will
>> simply invest or park their money elsewhere where the taxes and labor
>> costs
>> and regulations are less onerous. Or they will move their businesses.
>>
>> Class envy is no friggin' way to run a first world economy, let me tell
>> you.
>> This country was built on having an unlimited scale of success. Start to
>> put
>> a lid on that and you will absolutely squash the entrepreneurial spirit in
>> this country.
>>
> .
> .
> Which "overseas" would they go to?
> Austerity has already driven Spain, Italy, and Greece back into recession.
> The UK's austerity will put them there next.
>
> They'll like drachmas? Euros? better than US Dollars?
> Not likely

It's not hard in this day to move your assets wherever you want them if
taxes are too high where you live. There are plenty of countries that would
welcome US dollars. :)

> America's wealthy, smarter than you will stay right here where they know
> their money is safe.

Some would say the problem is that the currency is not safe under this
administration.

>
> Obama has offered a plan which deals with the CBO's objections
> Republicans more interested in defeating Obama than America's well being
> have refused to budge.
>
> The Tea Party racism is more important than America to Republicans
>

I think they are in principle objecting to the halting half measures of the
President after an unprecendented explosion in the debt over the past 3
years, and little to show for it except high unemployment, low housing
prices and all the social costs that go with that.

Terry
--
"For I would ride with you upon the wind, |/
Run on the top of the dishevelled tide, |/ Gentoo Linux
And dance upon the mountains like a flame." |/
-Yeats |/

wy

5/25/2012 9:56:00 PM

On May 25, 3:36 pm, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 25, 1:26 pm, wy <w...@myself.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 25, 1:05 pm, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 25, 11:16 am, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > > "Rockinghorse Winner" <badass.super...@gmx.com> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:slrnjrv6m6.50h.badass.superman@badass.edu...
>
> > > > > * It may have been the liquor talking, but
> > > > > wy <w...@myself.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >> On May 24, 7:46?pm, David Hartung <da...@hotmaiil.com> wrote:
> > > > >>> On 05/24/2012 04:18 PM, wy wrote:
>
> > > > >>> > On May 24, 5:03 pm, BillyBobMarley<wha...@gmail.com> ?wrote:
> > > > >>> >> On May 24, 12:05 pm, "Sid9"<sid9@ bellsouth.net> ?wrote:
>
> > > > >>> >>> "Yak"<y...@inbox.com> ?wrote in message
>
> > > > >>> >>> Federal income tax is not burden on wealthy Americans
>
> > > > >>> >> Except for those wealthy Americans that employ people and have to run
> > > > >>> >> a buisness.Ever heard of overhead?
>
> > > > >>> > Yeah, Warren Buffet is really eye-deep in debt over having to own and
> > > > >>> > run all his businesses and pay all his employees. ?You do realize that
> > > > >>> > people like him have a nice capital gains cushion to live on for the
> > > > >>> > rest of their lives even if their businesses go bust, something that
> > > > >>> > the 90% don't have at all. ?I don't think you really understand what
> > > > >>> > obscene wealth really amounts to.
>
> > > > >>> Posts such as this illustrate the real problem wth these discussions.
> > > > >>> You, Sid, Zepp, and the like honestly believe that those who have high
> > > > >>> incomes do not deserve them.
>
> > > > >> No, those who have high incomes, especially obscenely high ones, can
> > > > >> never spend all of it on themselves in a single lifetime. So what's
> > > > >> to really deserve if you can't even spend it all on yourself in a
> > > > >> single lifetime? In fact, someone like Warren Buffet, whose net worth
> > > > >> is $44 billion, would have to live 44,000 lifetimes at a million
> > > > >> dollars per lifetime to spend it all just on himself. Actually, he
> > > > >> could produce 43,999 millionaires instantly if he just donated every
> > > > >> penny of his wealth, except the million he'd keep to himself. And if
> > > > >> everyone else on the Top 400 list joined him, over 17 million more
> > > > >> instant new millionaires could be created. Well, maybe 12-15 million
> > > > >> since not all the others are as rich as Buffet. In fact, if the Top
> > > > >> 400 did that and just donated to those people who are still
> > > > >> unemployed, the unemployment rate would go down to 0%. And everybody,
> > > > >> including the Top 400, would still have plenty to live on for the rest
> > > > >> of their lives - although the Top 400 would each be billions poorer,
> > > > >> but by no means nowhere near flat-busted broke as a lot of unemployed
> > > > >> people are.
>
> > > > >> That aside, they can make as much money as they like. But in
> > > > >> recognition of their disproportionate wealth compared to everyone
> > > > >> else, their taxation rate should also be disproportionate compared to
> > > > >> everyone else's, not virtually even or less so, as seen in just the
> > > > >> fed effective tax rate.
>
> > > > >>http://biz570.com/polopoly_f...!/image/2210303409.jpg_gen/deri...
>
> > > > >> And that's why I'd revert it back to the 50s model, when it worked for
> > > > >> all Americans (most, at least), not keep it at the current one, when
> > > > >> it heavily favors the rich.
>
> > > > > All your plan would do is succeed in driving the rich and their money
> > > > > overseas. The rich can move much easier than you or I can. They will
> > > > > simply invest or park their money elsewhere where the taxes and labor
> > > > > costs
> > > > > and regulations are less onerous. Or they will move their businesses.
>
> > > > > Class envy is no friggin' way to run a first world economy, let me tell
> > > > > you.
> > > > > This country was built on having an unlimited scale of success. Start to
> > > > > put
> > > > > a lid on that and you will absolutely squash the entrepreneurial spirit in
> > > > > this country.
>
> > > > .
> > > > .
> > > > Which "overseas" would they go to?
> > > > Austerity has already driven Spain, Italy, and Greece back into recession.
> > > > The UK's austerity will put them there next.
>
> > > > They'll like drachmas? Euros? better than US Dollars?
> > > > Not likely
>
> > > > America's wealthy, smarter than you will stay right here where they know
> > > > their money is safe.
>
> > > > Obama has offered a plan which deals with the CBO's objections
> > > > Republicans more interested in defeating Obama than America's well being
> > > > have refused to budge.
>
> > > > The Tea Party racism is more important than America to Republicans
>
> > > The liberal mantra - when all else fails, call your opponent "racist"
>
> > > Now how exactly is the Tea Party racist, Sid9?
>
> > See any members of theirs in Congress as being black?
>
> I see many, many members of the Tea Party that are minorities. Don't
> you?

Not in Congress, that's where it really counts. Hey, you can barely
see any blacks in the regular Repugnant party itself in Congress. I
count what, maybe one or two at most? Some majority they claim to be
when they miserably fall short on representing the percentage of
blacks in the country - 13% of the US population vs .007% in the
Repugnant party. Racists all of them.

wy

5/25/2012 10:00:00 PM

On May 25, 5:39 pm, "First.Post" <OccupierDumberThanD...@invalid.org>
wrote:
> Steve <stevencan...@yahooooo.com> wrote innews:3ttvr7l072ekmcvtk86e18nubd4rs19inu@4ax.com:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 25 May 2012 16:00:53 +0000 (UTC), 3006 Dead <d...@gone.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>On Fri, 25 May 2012 15:42:00 +0000, First.Post wrote:
>
> >>> Rockinghorse Winner <badass.super...@gmx.com> wrote in
> >>>news:slrnjrv6ut.50h.badass.superman@badass.edu:
>
> >>>> * It may have been the liquor talking, but David Hartung
> >>>> <da...@hotmaiil.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On 05/24/2012 07:37 PM, wy wrote:
> >>>>>> On May 24, 7:46 pm, David Hartung<da...@hotmaiil.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 05/24/2012 04:18 PM, wy wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> On May 24, 5:03 pm, BillyBobMarley<wha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On May 24, 12:05 pm, "Sid9"<sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>> "Yak"<y...@inbox.com> wrote in message
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Federal income tax is not burden on wealthy Americans
>
> >>>>>>>>> Except for those wealthy Americans that employ people and have
> >>>>>>>>> to run a buisness.Ever heard of overhead?
>
> >>>>>>>> Yeah, Warren Buffet is really eye-deep in debt over having to
> >>>>>>>> own and run all his businesses and pay all his employees. You
> >>>>>>>> do realize that people like him have a nice capital gains
> >>>>>>>> cushion to live on for the rest of their lives even if their
> >>>>>>>> businesses go bust, something that the 90% don't have at all.
> >>>>>>>> I don't think you really understand what obscene wealth really
> >>>>>>>> amounts to.
>
> >>>>>>> Posts such as this illustrate the real problem wth these
> >>>>>>> discussions. You, Sid, Zepp, and the like honestly believe that
> >>>>>>> those who have high incomes do not deserve them.
>
> >>>>>> No, those who have high incomes, especially obscenely high ones,
> >>>>>> can never spend all of it on themselves in a single lifetime.
>
> >>>>> So? They earned it, you did not.
>
> >>>>>> So what's to really deserve if you can't even spend it all on
> >>>>>> yourself in a single lifetime? In fact, someone like Warren
> >>>>>> Buffet, whose net worth is $44 billion, would have to live 44,000
> >>>>>> lifetimes at a million dollars per lifetime to spend it all just
> >>>>>> on himself. Actually, he could produce 43,999 millionaires
> >>>>>> instantly if he just donated every penny of his wealth, except
> >>>>>> the million he'd keep to himself. And if everyone else on the
> >>>>>> Top 400 list joined him, over 17 million more instant new
> >>>>>> millionaires could be created. Well, maybe 12-15 million since
> >>>>>> not all the others are as rich as Buffet. In fact, if the Top 400
> >>>>>> did that and just donated to those people who are still
> >>>>>> unemployed, the unemployment rate would go down to 0%.
> >>>>>> And everybody, including the Top 400, would still have plenty to
> >>>>>> live on for the rest of their lives - although the Top 400 would
> >>>>>> each be billions poorer, but by no means nowhere near flat-busted
> >>>>>> broke as a lot of unemployed people are.
>
> >>>>>> That aside, they can make as much money as they like. But in
> >>>>>> recognition of their disproportionate wealth compared to everyone
> >>>>>> else, their taxation rate should also be disproportionate
> >>>>>> compared to everyone else's, not virtually even or less so, as
> >>>>>> seen in just the fed effective tax rate.
>
> >>>>>>http://biz570.com/polopoly_f...!/image/2210303409.jpg_gen/d
> >>>>>> eri vatives/landscape_490/2210303409.jpg
>
> >>>>>> And that's why I'd revert it back to the 50s model, when it
> >>>>>> worked for all Americans (most, at least), not keep it at the
> >>>>>> current one, when it heavily favors the rich.
>
> >>>>> So what it boils down to is that you, Zepp, Sid and the other are
> >>>>> simply jealous.
>
> >>>> It's more than jealousy. It's covetousness - they want what they
> >>>> have, and are more than willing to take it by force. If I felt they
> >>>> way they do, I'd hate myself. :)
>
> >>>> Terry
>
> >>> The idiots are too stupid to realize that no matter how much the
> >>> government seizes from the wealthy it won;t put a single penny more
> >>> in their own pockets.
>
> >>Yes oddly enough GIVING to the wealthy took thousands of dollars out
> >>of our pockets.
>
> Sid, Zepp nor any of the other jealous fools can show how a single penny
> left their pockets because of some rich guy getting a tax break.

Who paid for the tax break? You did through loans from China which
you now have to pay back with interest. In other words, by not having
the rich pay their fair share, you've ended up subsidizing their tax
break at your own expense via the government having done it for you.
Tax breaks don't come free. That's money lost to the government that
it still needs to have to do what it has to do, so that's why you guys
have to go begging to Daddy China now. Fuck, you're stupid.

Rockinghorse Winner

5/25/2012 10:34:00 PM

* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Yoorghis@Jurgis.net <Yoorghis@Jurgis.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 May 2012 15:42:00 +0000 (UTC), "First.Post"
> <OccupierDumberThanDirt@invalid.org> wrote:
>
>>The idiots are too stupid to realize that no matter how much the
>>government seizes from the wealthy it won;t put a single penny more in
>>their own pockets.
>
> Sure it will
>
> It doesn't have to "seize" anything you dumb asshole
>
> What is MUST do---is have policies that put MORE money into Millions
> and millions of peoples pockets so that the wealthy can "try and get
> it" That means allowing LESS money to flow to FEWER people.
>
> The policy of giving it to the wealth class--(which is what we've done
> since the 80's)---is what caused the mess we're in.
>
> Even a moron (like yerself) should figure out that if people have no
> money (and no jobs), that creating anything to get "their money" is
> ludicrous.
>
> Businesses and the wealth class DO NOT "Create jobs"---People who
> SPEND money do.
>
> Businesses and the wealthy (investors) MUST have people to have money
> to spend.
>
> You idiots can't grasp that simplistic concept.
>

It doesn't work that way. :) Someone has to create the companies that build
the factories that make the products that people want to buy. If you put
money into the economy while stifling entrepreneurship, all you've done is
made a lot more dollars chase fewer products, and you end up in an
inflationary spiral.

In addition, you haven't solved the problem of unemployment. If you
encourage investment and risk taking, you create jobs, which creates
consumers. That's the way a healthy economy is supposed to work. That's the
way our economy has grown and expanded over the last 100 years - not by
throwing money off the castle wall, but by letting people be free to grow
and invest their income, invent products and services that people want, and
dream of being big some day.

That's how HP started. How Microsoft started, how Apple started, UPS and
down the line of great companies. They all started small, and through
innovation and the free flow of capital came to employ thousands and raise
the standard of building, advance in technology, etc.

You don't get there by being a demagogue and creating fear and uncertainty.
By impoverishing the country, and then pitting the haves against the
have-nots in a cynical ploy to stir up resentment. That's the way of tin pot
dictators like Chavez and Castro. Not the great U.S.A. That's not how we
became great.

Terry
--
"For I would ride with you upon the wind, |/
Run on the top of the dishevelled tide, |/ Gentoo Linux
And dance upon the mountains like a flame." |/
-Yeats |/

soc.culture.cuba

The Hateful, Crazy, Embarrassing Miami Exiles

bromselick

Rockinghorse Winner

wy

wy

Rockinghorse Winner

x Login to ForumsZone