Obama takes a controversial message to Miami

There’s always a little something fun about presidential candidates appealing for votes in unexpected places. Take Barack Obama, for example, visiting the Cuban American National Foundation this afternoon, where he’ll defend his position of changing course on Cuba policy.

“Now I know what the easy thing is to do for American politicians,” Obama will say, according to prepared excerpts. “Every four years, they come down to Miami, they talk tough, they go back to Washington, and nothing changes in Cuba. That’s what John McCain did the other day. He joined the parade of politicians who make the same empty promises year after year, decade after decade.”

“Instead of offering a strategy for change, he chose to distort my position, embrace George Bush’s, and continue a policy that’s done nothing to advance freedom for the Cuban people.”

The Cuban American National Foundation, historically, this isn’t a group you’d approach with a less-than-hard-line on relations with the Castro regime. The group was founded by Jorge Mas Canosa, a stalwart of anti-Castro sentiment. Normally, anyone who wants to stray from the U.S. policy of the last half-century would go out of their way to avoid the Cuban American National Foundation.

But Obama is not running a normal campaign, and he’s apparently willing to take his message to an unfriendly audience, seeing if he can maybe win them over. For that matter, these are not normal political conditions, with Cuban-American voters open to competing policies that would have been unwelcome in any recent campaign cycle.

This strikes me as good policy and probably good politics. On the prior, the status quo doesn’t work and never has. We’ve tried the same policy for a half-century and have nothing to show for it. On the latter, Obama doesn’t have much to lose — hard-liners weren’t going to vote for him anyway, but he’s making an appeal to those open to a new way. At a minimum, some in the Cuban-American community who disagree with him might end up respecting him for trying.

The AP described Obama’s speech this afternoon as “daring.” Good for him; we need more daring, not less.

Of course, I should also note that today’s remarks are not exclusively about Cuba — Obama is outline a new regional approach to U.S. policy towards Latin America.

Obama will also discuss his differences with McCain and Bush and stress the need to renew the leadership of the United States in the hemisphere through direct diplomacy.

As President, Barack Obama will:

* Engage in direct diplomacy throughout the hemisphere to advance democracy and promote American values and ideals;

* Immediately allow Cuban Americans unlimited family travel and remittances to the island;

* Create an Energy Partnership for the Americas — a regional energy initiative to develop alternative energy and promote clean and sustainable growth;

* Launch a regional security initiative to develop a new approach to battling criminality and drug trafficking in the hemisphere;

* Target development assistance for Latin America aimed at promoting bottom-up growth;

* Reinstate a Special Envoy for the Americas in the White House and open more consulates and expand the Peace Corps in Latin America.

This is a very progressive, forward-thinking policy towards Latin America. We’ll see how the Cuban American National Foundation responds, but it’s hard to deny the merit of the regional approach.

Viva Obama!!

  • I would love to vacation there, so “Go Obama!”

    Current relations only hurt the people there. Castro has never been hurt, nor has his government. The people living there are the ones getting hurt. Lets just normalize relations. The people living here who think they are going to go back and rule Cuba (again) never will.

  • Okay, two things I like about this:

    1. He reaches out across the ideological divide just as he promised. We need this. Standing each on the other side of the fence calling each other names won’t do squat.

    2. He’s doing it the right way. He isn’t pandering to the conservative groups by using their language. He is saying: “Look, it’s not like I DON’T want to help you. I do. But this is how I want to do this. What do you think?” That’s damn smart and insanely fearless.

    Oh, one more thing: Obama has been very very careful in declaring his undying allegiance to Israel… this may look like borderline pandering, but watch him take this same approach to the Jewish groups. I am willing to bet that very soon he will visit an AIPAC meeting and give a speech about negotiations with Hamas. And you know what I think? I think he will get away with it. I don’t speak for all American Jews (just this one) but I’ll tell you, I’m tired of the goddamn hawks. I’ll be watching this with much, much interest.

  • I heard that the speech was well received. I live here in Miami. HRC is looked favorably by Hispanics (including Cubans) because of her husband’s presidency. Obama needs to make himself more well known down here.

  • While I’m prepared to be disappointed, actions like this make me have some hope that Obama will be the great leader this country needs right now.

    Now if we can just get him 61 senators to work with…

  • Obama may be speaking at the Cuban American National Foundation, but he’s talking to the children and grandchildren of the CANF’s hardliners. Smart move.

  • The information in this post nicely illustrates the reason I support Obama so strongly.

  • We’ve had enough of people who say whatever it takes to get elected and then trample all over their own promises, not to mention the Constitution, once they’re elected. By bucking the gas tax holiday bullshit, and now taking a challenging message right to these people, it’s easy to imagine that he DOES mean what he says.

  • He is also speaking to a much larger group of general election voters with actions like this. He’s backing up his call for change with new policy directions. He might get a chilly reception from the Cuban community in Miami, but his fresh thinking in the end might broaded his appeal amongst the larger electorate. Votes he might not secure from a special interest group could be made up by votes gained from the larger population.

    Also he attacking the conservative at their core. He’s attacking the failures of their policies. It will be difficult for them to defend their positions, especially since they haven’t worked.

  • Obama has everything to gain and nothing to lose on this. The Castro regime will be changing due to the age of the old guard, with younger, possibly less dogmatic leadership on the horizon. With the Soviets and their money long gone, the Cubans could sure use tourist dollars and do so without compromisig their sovereignity. Likewise, the anti-Castro types are going to start dying off, and soon there won’t ba any Castro for them to be anti about. By now, this is largely an emotional issue for them, and the younger set are just not going to feel that excited about it. Obama would be a fool not to appeal to them, as they stand to benefit by a raproachment with Cuba.

  • One of Obama’s proposals regarding Latin America is to “Create an Energy Partnership for the Americas — a regional energy initiative to develop alternative energy and promote clean and sustainable growth.

    If we’re lucky, this proposal would include removing tariffs on Brazilian sugar imported specifically for ethanol fuel. This simple act alone would do wonders for our capacity to inexpensively and efficiently reduce carbon emissions.

  • Does anyone know how the Cuban American community received his speech? Any reactions published?
    I managed to view portions of the speech by flipping between CNN and MSNBC, but then they both interrupted it, and so far I haven’t caught any local reactions. Also, though there was applause, it was hard to gauge the size of the crowd?
    Anyone know more on this? -Thanks!

  • Obama’s speech got at least one standing O. It sounded like the State of the Union where you shout at TV “Stop Applauding! Let him get on with it!”

    VERY well received.

  • FreeProton@3, THIS American Jew agrees with you completely!

    Have you heard about the new Jewish lobbying group? Called “JStreet” (which unfortunately sounds like a dating site), it is forward-looking in our relations with Israel. Also, Thomas Friedman had a wonderful column last week, stating that the best thing for Israel was the strength of America, which has been sadly waning the last eight years.

  • Most Cubans are Republican, there are 2 main reasons for this.

    1. They want to see democracy in Cuba, and do not advocate pacifying Castro
    2. Elian Gonzalez (google it) because Janet Reno (a democrat) gave in and forced his extradition

    Cubans in Florida are likely to go out of their way to vote against Obama just like the Jews, and for similar reasons.. he seems weak on foreign policy. It also won’t take much coaxing to get them to vote Republican either, they tend to stick to tradition.

  • Not that I’d call them liberals or social democrats but, the Cuban American National Foundation, since Jorge Mas Canosa died has moved away from its Hard Right line.

  • So … does this mean I can get a decent cigar some time soon?

    🙂

    Cubans in Florida are likely to go out of their way to vote against Obama just like the Jews

    FAIL

    My lord … you change the reasons you think Obama will lose as often as Clinton changes the requirements for getting the nomination. In other words, about every other day.

    In fact, the only thing consistent is your willingness to obfuscate and lie in order to make Clinton look better. Strangely, it’s having the opposite effect.

  • phoebes@19, yes, I read about JStreet and my thought was “fricken’ FINALLY!” I’ve been mortified to hear just how much influence AIPAC wields, and fools like Kristol and Goldberg give me the heebee-jeebees. As for Friedman… yeah, that was a surprisingly decent column, which I found myself agreeing with, despite my recent disappointment.

    And to contradict Greg@20, “the Jews” will not all turn out for McCain, that’s for sure. Many of us are young, most are liberal and a strong majority disagrees with the AIPAC hardliners. And even the staunch “Bush is good for Israel” conservatives circa 2000-2004 have been fleeing the bandwagon in droves (at least in my rather Israel-centric extended family.) I think this time, of all times, cynicism is not in order.

  • Mark D, I know a lot of Cubans personally, these cats are hard corps, very traditional and very tough. They don’t trust liberals, they still hated JFK even after the Cuban missile crisis ended and supported Nixon after Watergate.

    Even if Obama can win over some jews, he will not win over many Cubans, they simply cannot relate to his ideology.

  • I don’t get it. Since the fall of communism with the Soviet Union wy do we still treat Cuba as part of the “communist threat”. We have a lot more in common than in contrast and establishing trade agreements could open the door to changes in ideology. At the very least we should be having a dialog rather than a pure closed mouth condemnation of their country. Acting tough doesn’t mean too tough to open our ears and discuss our concerns without feeling intimidated.

    Obama says hey this ain’t working so let’s try something else rather than promote the same old same old just to look tough. It’s refreshing.

  • As of March 2007, this what a poll of 1,000 Cubans in Hialeah showed:

    POLITICAL PARTY

    Republican 66.1%
    Democrat 18.3%
    Independent 15.2%
    Other 0.4%

    When I state that most Cubans are going to vote Republican, I mean that no matter who the nominee is.

    I live in South Florida, with the exception of a few very young Cubans, as a whole they are very much Republican.

  • Even if Obama can win over some jews, he will not win over many Cubans, they simply cannot relate to his ideology.

    My point wasn’t that Obama will magically win over the hard-core Cuban folks. I doubt that will happen, for the reasons you state.

    My point was that THERE IS NO “JEWISH PROBLEM” with Obama.

    In fact, the American Jewish community has been leaning left the past few cycles, with only a small cadre of very vocal Jewish neocons giving the impression otherwise.

    It’s just another red herring Clinton folks are using to undermine the likely Democratic candidate … a rather annoying habit with you folks. Hell, if I didn’t know any better, I’d think you all were Republicans.

    :-p

  • Greg, you are absolutely correct that Florida’s Cuban-Americans tend to be very right-wing, and have been a reliable Republican voting bloc for quite some time. Obama’s not likely to overturn that, but there’s a hope that he may be able to chip away at the margins.

    On your reasons why Cubans are strongly Republican, I think you’re a little off base.

    1. Primarily, it’s not so much that they want democracy in Cuba (I’m sure that they do), it’s that the CubanAmerican community is composed of the conservative ruling elite (and their decendents) who were deposed and lost their land when Castro took over. They want their stuff back. But they aren’t gonna get it no matter what happens.

    2. I really doubt that the Elian thing is a significant *source* of Cubans’ anti-Democratic attitudes. For one thing, as you mention their Republican leanings long pre-date the Elian fiasco. Further, the Elian incident didn’t happen in a vacuum. The drama there was a direct result of the existing tensions between the Cuban-American community and Castro. I realize that many may still be grousing about that incident 8 years later, but I’m pretty sure it’s more that it is a convenient shorthand for the anger and resentment they already had rather than anything new.

    And of course, the reason why some liberals want to open relations with Cuba isn’t because they think the Castros are so awesome, it’s because they think that the current state of things is against the interests of both Americans and Cubans. But as I said above, the exile community is less interested in the welfare of Cubans than they are in getting their stuff back. A gently liberalizing Cuba absolutely won’t lead to them getting their proprerty back, whereas a violently overthrown Cuba just might. That’s why they are so gung-ho anti-Castro and anti-relations

  • Don’t take my word on this, the truth is in the polls.

    The only reason he is in Florida campaigning is that he is losing outright to John McCain while Clinton is winning big.

    The data in the graph of the site linked by Matt Yglesias was not exclusive, meaning it was not just Florida jews, which means that data would include the more liberal jews in New York and elsewhere, therefore skewing the numbers.

    Most jews in Florida are just like other residents of Florida, OLD.

  • ResumeMan, very well put.

    Just for clarification, if Obama wins the nomination, I’ll vote for him regardless, just not sure the rest of Florida will be so quick to follow suit.

  • The data in the graph of the site linked by Matt Yglesias was not exclusive, meaning it was not just Florida jews, which means that data would include the more liberal jews in New York and elsewhere, therefore skewing the numbers.

    So what? You claimed Obama had a “Jewish problem.” You never made mention of those “problems” being just with Jewish folks in Florida.

    What the hell is it with you people always moving the goalposts?

  • With the latest speech, Obama is now buttressing his recent abstract comments about talking to our enemies with some specifics about a particular instance where not talking with an enemy has failed miserably. This costs him nothing with the hard-liners who weren’t going to vote for him anyway, but may be a great move with younger Cuban-Americans, who might like to try something different for once. This also allows him to stake a counter-claim to the “straight talk” label. It looks to me like a very smart move.

  • A little off topic but needs to be talked about.

    Chris Mathews in Hardball or Great Ball’s of fire, there is a whole lot of shaken goin on.

    This has got to be the best of the worst for MSNBC Chris Mathews Hardball. Hillary makes a reference to the assaination of Bobby Kennedy as a time line to consider in what happened in that historic Primary from an Associated Press article. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. Here is criticized for it, but it has more than an air of truth. There is debate in this time line that shows America was under Islamic attack forty years ago by Sirhan Sirhan.

    To be in the Senate seat of Bobby Kennedy how could one not think of that issue constantly and not talk about it. It takes courage and gut’s because the Mainstreamers like MSNBC will shift every gear in the contextual mix to play this against Hillary. Actually it presents something in history that has been suppressed, for me anyway.

    Here Chris Mathews said that “Any objective Journalist would interpret this story as invoking a slanderous comment and Clinton should apologize for it” Then has an interview with Axelrod, Obama’s manager is using good sense to dismiss it. Contrary, to those ideals, one can see both Chris Mathews is doing what he does best, hide the truth.

    Obama would like to stay away from any of rhetoric with this stuff highly likely because of the dangerous reflections that it not only might repeat it self, but the historical background has ties to Obama that is not talked about. By Kennedy endorsing Obama showed everyone that a target is now on Obama. For me that was a given when it happen, and I could not believe it. That begs two questions that are significant. Did Kennedy do all that Grandstanding for that purpose? Is Hillary being polite to warn Obama better take a look at what happening? Huckabee already said there is a man with a gun over there.

    There are so many things to debate about this time line that are buried in favor of McCain. In name alone the Arab world will have an effect, but what? Jordan’s King Hussein, famous Middle East King from a long line of Arab family of the prophet he is from the oldest tribe in the Arab world, the king once said of his Hashemite ancestry. Obama’s friendship links also to Syrian born Rezko, also friendly talks with Qazwini a State Department terrorist living in America? And ties with meetings to an Iraqi convicted billionaire former oil minister. Sheesh that’s just a simple list I have learned about, not from MSM, which totally makes me cringe if Obama is nominated.

    With that said, everyone could see a basic favor towards Obama. Mainstream Media especially MSNBC is waiting for the political “Analysis Assaination” of words that these Journalist have spoken, did use, very much, and never have been held accountable.

    This does not appear to be a desperate stunt by Hillary; actually Hillary is being a sweetie to show the Obama camp that Chris Mathews and that Pimp guy David Shuster have buried a lot of history and Obama should take a look at it. Because, there are Great Balls of fire coming at ya. And, this an’t gona be a side show. It is immature for Obama to suggest it should not be aired and debated. Obama should do it now for before the convention.

  • Like most here, I support Obama, but the love-fest over this speech has got to stop. I can appreciate Obama reaching out to Cuban Americans, but promising to continue the embargo, one of the most disastrously stupid policies in American history, because it provides “political leverage” is unacceptable. The Cuban right is not about democracy, and it’s not about “getting their stuff back;” it’s about an elaborate scheme by which elites within the Cuban American community profit from an ineffective anti-Castro movement that is generously subsidized by the US government. These people should not be pandered to; they should be left behind, relegated to political insignificance.

  • “These people should not be pandered to; they should be left behind, relegated to political insignificance.”

    Just part of the “To-Do” list come Jan ’09.

  • I would imagine Cuba’s change of power is working in Obama’s favor. It really is a golden opportunity for sit down with Raul and see what has changed in what 40 to 40 years.

    Talk about ego and holding grudges, it been 50 years and they are 90 miles away. Talks with Cuba are long over due.

  • The funny thing about this is that the Cuban policies weren’t President Bush’s, they were the democrat’s beloved JFK’s. They started over the whole fact that the USSR was placing medium-range nuclear weapons on our doorstep. Now enough of a history lesson…

    Sen. Obama stated that Sen. McCain was just being another politician. The fact is that every president has stated they are for normalizing relations if Cuba changes it’s tune. It’s not a political move, it’s just international policy of every president from George Washington to George Bush. If Sen. Obama wants to have diplomatic talks with a government that is oppresive of it’s people, essentially changing our policy towards dictatorships, we might as well tear up the Declaration of Independence and tell England we were wrong all along. It sends the message to all governments that we are willing to talk to you and try to make you change through possible negotiations, giving something for you to do the right thing. Where all other presidents take the stance of “You know what we want you to do. Do it or otherwise we have nothing to talk about.” Richard Nixon did, yes, talk to China. They had just become communist a very short time earlier. Reagan talked to the USSR. That’s cause Gorby was for a change in Russia. Sen. Obama wants to act like diplomatic relations will change a country’s direction, where it only opens the door for them to get exactly what they want. Perhaps I should teach Sen. Obama about public and international relations. He could use some help.

  • Just so you know, I’m Hispanic and I have lived in South Florida for at least 22 years [I’m 23 by the way]. Now, even though I am from Nicaragua, I have friends and relatives who are Cuban and through them I learn about how life is in Cuba. After hearing their stories and after going though dozens of books and documentaries about the history of Cuba, it has come to my conclusion that the right-wing policies that most Republican nut jobs, including Bush v2.0, and John McCain [Bush v3.0] have supported can by summed up with just two words:

    THEY SUCKED!!!!

    I have just recently turned from Republican to Democrat because of the right-wing policies and how they seem to have done absolutely nothing to the evil Castro Regime while unexpectedly having a negative toll on the Cuban citizens still living on the island. I feel saddened and ashamed that much of the older Cuban generation are still supporting a failed policy. But I can thank God that I am part of a new generation that think it’s time to have a new policy in place. A policy of talk and unconditional negotiations. This is why I voted for Obama.

    Hang in there, Obama! Us younger voters have high hopes for you!

  • Nixon did, yes, talk to China. They had just become communist a very short time earlier. — Jeremy, @38

    China became communist in 1950, after 23yrs of struggle. Nixon was president 1969-1974. It all depends on the meaning of “a very short time”, eh?

    And…True, the policy of not talking to Cuba has not been invented by Bush; he only continued to follow the well-trodden path. But that path had been trodden for *forty effing years* and has not resulted in any benefits to either country. So, perhaps, it’s time to find a different path?

  • The reason you don’t talk to dictators is that it legitimizes that regime, and aids the dictator in oppressing the people.

    Why haven’t the U.S. Cuba policies worked? Is Cuba a threat to the United States? No. Ergo, the policies ARE working.

    Instead of having tea with murderers and thugs, here is a better answer.. let’s arm the citizens of Cuba; lets send them money; send them support; the citizens should overthrow Castro..

    But maybe Obama should ask his terrorist buddies Ayers and Dorn first, yes?… They would seem to have a useful insight into the mind of a terrorist thug…

  • Just think, if it were not for John F. Kennedy we would not have to discuss the Cuban immigration problem. Bay of Pigs stupid move has been the basis of so much of our Cuban problems. Was it not also the credit of John F. Kennedy that we were to become involved in Vietnam?

  • Since taking the “hardline” approach with Cuba has done precisely no good at all, how can talking with Raul Castro make it worse? So what if the Castro regime feels itself validated somehow by a presidential meeting? That don’t make it so, chum.

    I think a lot of people underestimate Barack Obama. That’s good, when those people are our enemies. Let Hamas prefer him, too; they’ll have plenty of time to regret that, one day.

    It does NOT have to legitimize a regime merely to have the president talk to them. That’s a wrong assumption entirely. On the contrary, such publicly-held meetings can easily serve to add disrepute to such a regime in the world. They’d have to explain their behaviors. Since they’re unexplainable, it’d be a public foot-in-mouth media op.

    If anything, a top-level meeting with the man will likely bring the regime’s recalcitrance clearly to the public eye. From there, a hardline approach will have GAINED validity, instead of being same-old, same-old. In the process of the meeting, Obama might also pick up some good clues about their “buttons,” and things that might work better than others in dealing with the regime.

    Get this straight: A president meeting with the leader of a regime who is an enemy is NOT equivalent to appeasing them or granting them legitimacy or prestige, or conceding one inch to them. It CAN be used to establish a firmer policy than before, though. This time with widely publicized, up-to-date, valid reasons for doing so. It can be the basis for a harder line than before.

    There is nothing to lose in meeting Raul Castro. The only reason the American Cubanos don’t want it done is because of their pride, their loathing of the regime – understandable, of course. But when it comes to getting freedom for Cuba, all that matters is what might WORK. We already know what doesn’t work.

    In addition, Cubanos have a very BIG reason for voting Obama. Republicans could care less about Latinos; their policies clearly show that. Xenophobia is far more a GOP trait than a Democratic one. In addition, a Democrat would bring reforms which Cubanos, particularly poor ones, need desperately. They’ll get none of those from McCain. Health care. Better schools. Tax relief. Restoration of some of our stolen civil rights.

    Why ANY Cubano would wish to vote McCain over Obama is beyond me.

    I’ve lived in Mexico for 14 years. So what I’m saying isn’t remotely xenophobic. I have no reason to suggest Obama with intent to harm the Cuban people. He’s truly their best and wisest choice. This dude is smart. A lot smarter than the Castros. And he WILL do all he can to free Cuba’s people. For a change there’s a politician who means what he says. If Cubanos prefer to keep hearing the hardline rhetoric that gets nothing done, they’d be voting against their own best interests to choose McCain.

    What can ANY Cubano think McCain would deliver that they haven’t already seen the GOP do? More of the same? Doing nothing but talking tough, imposing sanctions that accomplish nothing? It’s time to change gears.

    The Cuban regime is already legitimized around the world; it is recognized virtually everywhere. A U.S. president can’t add or subtract from that. Nobody can promise how such talks may turn out, or whether ANY policy of the U.S. can make a substantial difference. One thing IS already known, though. What we’ve been doing up to now has NOT worked. Cuba is as oppressed as it was decades ago. Changing gears could only help, by stirring things up, drawing world attention to this oppressive regime. And a mature, tolerant, levelheaded and rational man like Obama can make them look like a bunch of oafs. Which they are.

    Cubanos! Vote Obama. He can do more for you than anyone else.

  • Obama is smart! He is now PIMPING the CUBANS! Don’t drink his kool-aid. President Clinton got your party Wet Foot Dry Foot. If a Hispanic touches our soil they can stay! REMEMBER WHO HELPED YOU ALL! Hillary 2008!

  • Telling teachers he supports merit pay.
    Telling union auto workers their cars blow and THAT’s why they’ve been laid off.
    Now this…

    Dammit. Now I gotta send him another check.

  • Comments are closed.