Bozell Column: Castro, Not a President

Photo of Brent Bozell.

Fidel Castro Resigns. That’s a fantastic headline, and should be cause for celebration. But just because the doddering dictator is stepping aside doesn’t mean that Cuba’s abandoning tyranny. And just because he’s leaving doesn’t mean the media are dropping their fictions about Castro, the Cuban "president." Glancing at a TV set, I caught this CNN screen graphic: "Fidel Castro Resigns: Cuban Pres. Rejects New Term." Where on earth is the media’s regard for accuracy?

A "new term"? This murderous despot has only had one, long, abusive term, and it’s lasted 49 years. Anyone who says otherwise, that the Cuban "parliament" would be setting another "election," is not just a useful idiot, he’s simply an idiot.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

AP reporter Anita Snow suggested using the word "dictator" to describe Castro is tantamount to mudslinging. While "Castro’s supporters admired his ability to provide a high level of health care and education for citizens," his "detractors called him a dictator." The American media was absolutely allergic to words like "dictator." Rudy Giuliani can be routinely attacked by liberal reporters as "despotic," "authoritarian," and "totalitarian," but Fidel Castro is just a "president" or a "Cuban leader."

For decades, this has been an easy display of the media’s foreign affections. Every right-wing dictator, like Chile’s Pinochet, is a "dictator," while every left-wing dictator is merely a "leader," or in Castro’s case, a "dashing revolutionary" and a "rock star." That was ABC’s Diane Sawyer on the morning of Castro’s abdication announcement.

It was nauseating to watch ABC’s Robin Roberts assert that so-called "Cuban President" Castro was stepping down, and then see reporter Jeffrey Kofman suggest that the "so-called" sneer should be leveled against his opponents! "The fervently anti-Castro community of so-called Cuban exiles here in Miami erupted in celebration" when Castro grew ill in 2006.

Cubans living in Miami are "so-called exiles"?They traveled on "so-called" boats, risking "so-called" death at the hands of a regime that promised to "so-called" kill them if they were caught escaping, too.

Kofman added insult to injury by dragging out the ancient trope that Castro outlasted our pathetic presidents and their bungling attempts to damage him: "The world's longest-serving political leader is leaving on his own terms, having survived efforts by ten different U.S. presidents to bring him down, including a disastrous CIA-backed invasion in 1961 and a missile crisis that brought the world to the brink of nuclear war in 1962." Everything wrong with Cuba-U.S. relations is the fault of American presidents.

How, to a media that would claim to favor democracy as a political ideal, is it a virtue to "outlast" freely elected presidents who have submitted their office to the people by killing or imprisoning all your political opponents?

Throughout Castro’s long history of dominating Cuba, he has also dominated the American media, who have covered him with a sickening parade of ardor and accolades, even after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Consider these morally bankrupt valentines:

1. Barbara Walters on ABC, in 2002: "For Castro, freedom starts with education. And if literacy alone were the yardstick, Cuba would rank as one of the freest nations on Earth. "

2. Dan Rather on CBS feeling all warm after Elian Gonzalez was ripped away from those "so-called Cuban exiles" in 2000: "There is no question that Castro feels a very deep and abiding connection to those Cubans who are still in Cuba."

3. Katie Couric applauding communist achievements on NBC in 1992: "Considered one of the most charismatic leaders of the 20th century....Castro traveled the country cultivating his image, and his revolution delivered. Campaigns stamped out illiteracy and even today, Cuba has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world."

4. Peter Jennings on ABC, in 1989: "Castro has delivered the most to those who had the least, and for much of the Third World, Cuba is actually a model of development."

5. Even sportscasters darkened their reputations. In a 1991 special covering the Pan Am Games, ABC’s Jim McKay spoke for the media in 2008: "You have brought a new system of government, obviously, to Cuba but the Cuban people do think of you, I think, as their father. One day you’re going to retire. Or one day, all of us die. Won’t there be a great vacuum there, won’t there be something that will be difficult to fill? Can they do it on their own?"

Castro has announced his retirement. I’m happy he’ll be gone, and hope he’ll spend his final days on Earth contemplating his eternity in Hell.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

ABC's Nightline called him a

ABC's Nightline called him a "patriarch" last night. I'm surprised they didn't affectionately call him "grampa".

Along with Keith

Along with Keith Olbermann's comment that "Fox News is worse than Al Qaeda", the reaction by the New York Times and CNN to the Castro "resignation" is the best insight into the extreme views of the traditional media.  They hold many Americans in contempt and treat "progressive" dictators with great respect.

 

 American Media: Doesn't this[insert example]make us as bad as the terrorists?

Hmm, would this report have

Hmm, would this report have the same angle if this was an American installed dictator such as Musharraf?

I guess we'll probably find out pretty soon.

The USA installed the

The USA installed the Pakistani Dictator?  I guess it came with instructions on installation?  I always thought he sorta rose to power through his connections to his military.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Dan the man 2 ... A

Dan the man 2 ...

A little history is in order. NOTE: We will use the nickname for Musharraf because it's the name he was raised with.

When Little Mush was 3 years old the CIA snatched him while he was breastfeeding in the arms of his peasant Mother in the border village of Iliveincrapola Pakistan. We then had him raised by a herd of Yaks in a secret location somewhere on the Nile river. The Yaks were then given training and all the Oats they could stand, to help raise little Mush to be a neo-con warrior. There were some problems along the way. At one point we almost ran out of Yaks because once Mush had been taught to live off the land he started to kill and eat his family. On top of that we had a Yak embargo put in place because we found out they were sympathetic to Castro.

Anyway, little Mush turned out to be quite the little warrior so we unleashed him on the Pakistani Army. He exceeded all our expectations so in another highly classified move, we brought him to the United States to take the Freemason oath. The Yak embargo had been lifted by then so it was easy to sneak him into the country. Gotta love the imagination of those CIA spooks! After the ceremony, which was topped off by mixing the blood of both Bush and little Mush, we snuck him back into Pakistan.

And as they say in the movies (I think), the rest was history.

I have done my best to be as accurate as another poster here by the name of Thought Police. He and I are both sworn to secrecy so I can't tell you anymore. 

 

Ct... ROFLMAO! Beautiful

Ct...

ROFLMAO!

Beautiful work there friend.

bt... Thank you. I was

bt...

Thank you. I was just doing my civic duty. You know, me and TP gotta stick together!

Oh geez, here we go

Oh geez, here we go again...

"In its most rigorous definition, blowback does not mean mere reactions to historical events but rather to clandestine operations carried out by the U.S. gov't that are aimed at overthrowing foreign regimes, or seeking the execution of people the United States wants eliminated by "friendly" foreign armies, or helping launch state terrorist operations against overseas target populations. The American people may not know what is done in their name, but those on the receiving end surely do--including the people of Iran(1953), Guatemala(1954), Cuba (1959 to present), Congo (1960), Brazil (1964), Indonesia (1965), Vietnam (1961-73), Laos (1961-73), Cambodia (1961-73), Greece (1967-75), Chile (1973)< Afghanistan (1979-present), El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua (1980s), and Iraq (1991 to present), to name only the most obvious cases."

Blowback by Chalmers Johnson

Emphasis added.

Clearly this book was written for you all. I suggest you read it and learn a bit about our "great" country.

In My Name

I know what has been done in my name, as I am one of the hundreds of millions that elected the people who make those types of decisions IN MY NAME! That's called a representative system of government and it's how America operates, both on the Federal and State level. I suggest you read a little about America and how our system of government actually works. You just may learn something.

Lol, the last time an

Lol, the last time an elected official did what the people wanted was the early twentieth century. Since then, we have had the Federal Reserve imposed on us, IMF, World Bank, New Deal, UN, CIA, NAFTA, CAFTA, etc. etc. ad nauseum.

So please, don't tell me that rich elitists in power have done a damn thing for us. You need to wake up from your slumber. You know the saying "ignorance is bliss." Well, what the F do you think that is about!!! 

CT that was a beuatiful

CT that was a beuatiful begining and set me up good.  You had me going there until you got into your diatribe.  Keep up teh good work, do ya think I could get a job as a Yak herder?

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

You might want to check

with your sources - Yaks on the Nile? Oh, I get it, they were disguised water buffalos (I remember seening a secret CIA document concerning that - was published by the NYT's). Shhhh, don't tell anyone.

There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V

Astounded

I'm still trying to figure out how or why Liberals can sing the praises of such a tyrannical beast as Castro. Are they really that deluded? Or is it that they're afraid to admit that the socialism they believe in inevitably leads to societal ruin and can only be held together by force? Or is it something else. It really astounds me.

  Only dictators opposed

  Only dictators opposed to the US are held up for praise. 

  For example, the democratically elected leaders of Iraq are dismissed by our media and most dems as 'lackeys' of the US so are not legitimate.  By contrast, the leaders of the brutal and repressive regimes in Iran and Syria who oppose the US are considered 'real' governments and should be treated with the utmost courtesy.  So it's quite simple for the Iraqi's if the dems win the Whitehouse all they have to do to continue receiving aid and support is to bring out street demonstrators who chant 'Death to America'.  That always warms the heart of any left-winger in the US.

Astounded

Save your mental energy by trying to understand liberal thinking. They are not logical and do not think rationally. They are, by nature, emotionally driven. Facts do not matter in their strange little world. In a word, they are stupid. Otherwise, they would be conservatives.

Does anyone think this is a setup???

Is this a setup? By that I mean, get Castro off into "retirement", wait until the US gets a more liberal president, then shoot for a lift of the embargo??? Isn't this quite possible with Obama or Hillary in there? We have a press that is in the tank for Castro, he "steps aside", and the MSM starts pushing the "why the embargo" and "poor Cuban people" stories until Obama or Hillary do just that. Sorry to be so cynical but I don't trust the MSM whatsoever, nor will I trust a liberal in the White House. Thoughts?

Castro

My suspicion is that the old geezer finally croaked and so they had to quickly cover it up with a letter to the editor:  "Oh by the way, I resign."  (they cleverly mis-spelled expired) and in a month or so we'll suddenly get the news that he died in his sleep, having been in control of his own destiny at all times. (Ah the wonders of embalming fluids to preserve the too-soon gone dictator!)

Commence state funeral and none-the-wiser. 

But that's just me waxing cynical.

"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war"  - Shakespeare

-

You have brought a new system of government, obviously, to Cuba

... um, sorry to break it to you, Jimbo, but Castro didn't break any ground. The form of government known as a "Dictatorship" has been around for quite a while.

High Level of Health Care

Here's a sampling of the "high level of health care" that Cuba provides for its citizens.

I'm sure Peter didn't mean it this way, but...

Peter Jennings on ABC, in 1989: "... for much of the Third World, Cuba is actually a
model of development."

Perhaps, but at least Jennings admitted that Cuba was still part of the Third World ...

~~~

I admire that [Franklin D. Roosevelt] smoked in public and did not insist on getting the approval of France and Germany before going to war.
--Anne Coulter