« Diplomacy, Iran-Style | Main | Home Defense »
December 14, 2005
Why Cuba?
Maine Governor John Baldacci is being criticized for visiting Cuba.
Despite the fact that the trade mission will benefit numerous Maine industries and businesses, including apple and potato growers and dairy cattle farmers, Baldacci's trip to the communist country was assailed by Republican legislative leaders who claimed the governor's Havana stop amounted to "political grandstanding."First, allow me to say the first part of David Bowles' statement is crazy. I don't think Baldacci's trip was political posturing or to embarrass the president, and those sorts of statements muddy the main issue - no matter the benefit to Maine, should we be doing business with dictators?"There was no reason for him to fly all the way down there at taxpayers' expense other than political grandstanding and posturing and to embarrass President Bush," said House Republican leader David Bowles of Sanford in a prepared statement. "It worries me that he's willing to meet with communist rulers who have absolutely no regard for human rights. If trade is the goal, why not go to friendly countries? Also, I question why the governor is spending so much time traveling when we have tremendous problems here in Maine with health insurance costs and other serious issues."
The BDN reporter seems to have his or her mind made up on this one. "Despite the fact that the trade mission will benefit numerous Maine industries and businesses, including apple and potato growers and dairy cattle farmers..." I mean, look at all the benefits and those damn pesky Republians want to carp about human rights violations? Piffle.
Fidel Castro is a despot whose regime regularly imprisons dissidents, executes those who criticize his rule and keeps people living under repressive rules and in poverty. The governor may have been there to do "anything he could" to help Maine's economy, but I believe there are some lines that should not be crossed in the name of economic development for the state.
Heck, loosening the child labor laws in Maine would have an economic benefit, but we don't consider such a move because it would be wrong. So why is making deals with a tyrant okay?
Posted by slublog at December 14, 2005 12:14 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.slublog.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2017
Comments
I think I have to disagree with you on this one. Is China any better at human rights? What about Saudi Arabia--a paragon of religious tolerance if there ever was one. The difference between Cuba and those countries, I think, is that we can afford to be principled about trade with Cuba, but cannot afford to be principled with China's goods or Saudi oil. The slippery slope ends at the bottom line.Castro isn't going to live forever, and I'd be surprised if someone worse human rights-wise takes his place (or if so, lasts long). My opinion is that the sanctions against Cuba are Cold War leftovers, human rights is jsut the excuse we give them today while we tolerate worse abuses elsewhere. Castro has insisted on continued pointless defiance or I bet we'd have done so a long time ago. Once he keels over we'll be able to relax them without losing face. Maine might profit from having their foot in the door already when that happens.
Posted by: MainiacJoe at December 14, 2005 12:58 PM
BLAH!
Sorry, just hit the wrong key and lost a nice statement about how we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good and should not allow inconsistency to excuse inaction, etc.
I think we should deal with China and Saudi Arabia, and some have suggested steps to do so. Until we formalize a way to deal with those situations, Cuba remains the only country at present (I think) with a formal trade embargo against it and I do not believe that states should act against federal law and make deals on the side.
Posted by: Slublog at December 14, 2005 01:19 PM
I do not believe that states should act against federal law and make deals on the side
I'll buy that for sure.
Posted by: MainiacJoe at December 14, 2005 03:19 PM
I dunno...I saw one glaring similarity between Castro and Bladacci based on your first post.
Quote about Castro: "...keeps people living under repressive rules and in poverty."
Personal feeling about Baldacci: "...keeps people living under repressive rules and in poverty."
Hmmmmmm....
Posted by: kurtronix at December 15, 2005 09:32 AM