I have some friends in England and, no lie, they went on a *tourism* trip around Cuba's beaches and through the pretty version of Havana. They came back home seriously telling me Cuba was a beautiful country, Castro seemed to take care of his people, and they couldn't understand why America was always bashing it.

And the other day, I had a guy from Norway make fun of me because the movie Sicko was supposedly censored in America even though Cubans are better off than us.

We need to expose Cuba for the starving ghetto it is - to stop Europeans from pressuring us into socialism and to stop lefties here from brainwashing kids that Castro is a good man.

Let us all join hands and pray... :)

candance...I want insult your or anyone else's intelligence by making the claim of ideological neutrality regarding the Times.  The editorial page has regrettably tilted even farther to the left [although it was distinctly anti-Clinton during his presidency] in recent years, and I think it would serve its own interest as well as that of its readers and the nation if it adopted a more balanced approach.

But, turning to the more immediate and narrower issue addressed in this thread, you say you "could go on" with further evidence of the "NYT always blaming evil capitalist America".  Well, perhaps you should "go on", because the evidence you cite is woefully inadequate to sustain your argument.

Porter Goss, the author of the op ed article you first cite, notes the most egregious example of printing classified information was the 1998 disclosure that the CIA was tracking bin Laden via his cell phone usage.  This revelation caused enormous damage in our efforts to track his movements.  He simply stopped using his cell phone.  My recollection is that it was the right-wing, Clinton-hating Washington Times which proudly broke that story.  So I hope you will reserve at least some of your outrage for that publication.

With respect to the second article, I'm really not sure what you're most upset with:  the Times?...American businesses courting Cuban markets?...or Bush's anti-Castro trade sanctions?  I'm guessing the Times, but, really, a straight-forward piece about the irony of a number of businessmen acting at variance with the administration's Cuban policy is one of your major exhibits for the "Times-blaming-evil-capitalist-America charge"?  Out of the hundreds of thousands of articles in the Times archive, there surely must be more worthy examples--even from the era when the Times was a conservative journal.

Your final example--an op ed by Roger Cohen--also falls short of the mark.  While Cohen does take a few shots at Bush's America [and I too think a couple of his characterizations are overstated and gratuitous] he nevertheless leaves little doubt what he thinks of the current Venezuelan regime and Chavez--and it is not favorable.  Nor does he even remotely suggest that its political system is intrinsically more democratic than ours.  And if you really want to know what Cohen thinks of Chavez, read his column from just one week earlier.  Hint--it's entitled "Shutting Up Venezuela's Chavez":

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/29/opinion/29cohen.html?n=Top/News/World/Columns/Roger%20Cohen&pagewanted

You may need to broaden your research.

Jer

Please try to keep up with the topic or question at hand! It makes for a more enjoyable experience for all

1] NYT printing classified info? How is that 'blaming evil capitalist America? Oh, yeah, it isn't.

2] Bush's anti-Cuban agenda? A story about 'evil capitalists' who want to invest and trade with Cuba? Reaching for straw[men]s?

3] Democracy in the Americas? That is an op-ed, not news content. But either way, the opinion piece you reference had to do with Hugo Chavez' acceptence of a majority of Venezuelan voters, something that Bu$h & Co. refuse to do, and again, there is nothing regarding 'evil capitalist America.'

I believe the correct response is, _you_ should do _your_ research before you look like a liar again.

"The USA is the only country who refuses to trade with Cuba."

I'm still not sure if you're saying the embargo isn't working and if so, why not drop it, or that it IS working, but it isn't causing any change, then if so, why not drop it?

But then you aren't coherant, in that you only defend an embargo against Cuba when our largest trading partner China denies its citizens long-sought freedoms including the right to assemble, criticize their goverment, and vote, all guaranteed without threat of reprisal.

So, are you wrong or are you a hypocrite?

We're all "takers," and we all must therefore "contribute." That's the problem with it.

You could imagine a hypothetical great piece of art that's as American as apple pie, and beloved by political types from Jesse Helms to Jesse Jackson to even-me. I'd STILL be against our taxes funding it.

Social conservatives seem to want to make the NEA issue about the quality of the resulting obese-government "art," which is admittedly sometimes quite low for many of us. That's a distraction, IMO. Artistic quality is not my issue with the NEA's existence. The issue is Constitutional principles, and those principles should, and used-to, trump artistic quality or lack-of-same.
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.