Here's more on the Carter-Castro Fest.
May 15, 2002 - Carter Addresses Democracy on Cuban TV JOHN RICE, AP - [Full Text] HAVANA (AP) - Jimmy Carter addressed Cubans in an unprecedented hour of live, uncensored television - telling them that their country does not meet international standards of democracy and repeatedly promoting a grass-roots campaign for greater civil liberties.
It was not immediately clear if Carter's Tuesday night speech, broadcast across Cuba, would turn out to be more than a dramatic goodwill concession by Cuban President Fidel Castro toward the former American president who did more than any other to try to ease tensions between their two nations.
For many Cubans, it was the first time they had heard such a public airing of opinions that differ from their government's views. For some it caused discomfort, but many expressed optimism about Carter's hopeful words on improving relations.
"On the day that relations between our countries are normalized, Cuba should thank Carter," said Gisela Frances, a 36-year-old office worker. "He has planted an important little seed."
Castro, who had been shunned by current and former American presidents for four decades, welcomed Carter with a promise that he could meet anyone, say anything, and speak his mind over Cuba's state broadcast network.
Democracy, Carter told viewers in heavily accented Spanish, "is based on some simple premises: all citizens are born with the right to choose their own leaders, to define their own destiny, to speak freely, to organize political parties, trade unions and non-governmental groups and to have fair and open trials."
"Your constitution recognizes freedom of speech and association, but other laws deny these freedoms to those who disagree with the government," Carter added.
He balanced comments on Cuba's system with a call for the United States to end the embargo on U.S. trade and travel that for 40 years has failed in its expressed purpose of bringing change in Cuba.
"Our two nations have been trapped in a destructive state of belligerence for 42 years, and it is time for us to change our relationship," he said.
"Because the United State is the most powerful nation, we should take the first step," Carter added, urging "unrestricted travel between the United States and Cuba," and an end to the U.S. embargo.
In a historic moment of domestic promotion for Cuba's dissident movement, Carter praised the Varela Project, which gathered 11,020 signatures to appeal - under Cuba's constitution - for a referendum on rights such as free speech, free assembly and freedom to create a business.
"When Cubans exercise this freedom to change laws peacefully by a direct vote, the world will see that Cubans, and not foreigners, will decide the future of this country," said Carter.
For many Cubans, it was the first time they had heard of the Varela Project. Given an opportunity to comment, pro-government members of the audience attacked the project as a U.S. plot.
Castro offered only lukewarm applause as Carter finished his speech, but smiled as Carter expressed gratitude for the chance to speak.
In a sign that there were no hard feelings, Castro accompanied Carter in throwing out the first ball at Cuba's All-Star baseball game, and sat beside him for four innings - often chatting and gesturing in ways that suggested they were discussing baseball.
While many Cubans said they had listened to Carter's words, the reaction was muted - and circumspect - in the streets of Old Havana.
Unlike many other countries in Latin America, Cuba has no polling industry, so public reaction is nearly impossible to gauge.
Carter's speech "was excellent," said housewife Landolina Tenerero, 57. "He's the only one who has spoken correctly about things here." Asked if that could mean change, she said, "anything can happen here."
Francisco Cordero, a 37-year-old industrial worker, grinned as he said that Carter's speech was "very good." He said he agreed with Carter's call for better relations with the United States. Asked about the Varela project, he added, tersely, "The same."
Carter - who traveled here with official permission from the U.S. government, which licenses all American travel to Cuba - did not spare his own country, pointing to America's large prison population, inequalities in applying the death penalty, and the shortcomings of health care.
"Still, guaranteed civil liberties offer every citizen an opportunity to change these laws," he said. [End]
Here's a little jab at Bush:
Democracy is a framework that permits a people to accommodate changing times and correct past mistakes. Since our independence, the United States has rid itself of slavery, granted women the right to vote, ended almost a century of legal racial discrimination, and just this year reformed its election laws to correct problems we faced in Florida eighteen months ago.
IMHO much of it boils down to an egregious misunderstanding of the meaning and proper application of the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an Establishment of religilon or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,If you look at its clauses in reverse order you can see its meaning and intent more clearly:
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,
or the right of the people peacably to assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
assembling to petition the government could hardly be more obviously political.Also, the conceit that the government should respect "journalistic objectivity" is completely at odds with the First Amendment. That is, if someone appeals to the First Amendment in defense of their speech or writing they are not appealing not to the right to be right but to the right to publish their own opinion, right or wrong. Which means that everyone is equal before the law in their right to publish their own opinion at their own expense.
But in truth, speaking and publishing what the government might wish to suppress is also highly political; the framers weren't particularly afraid that medical textbooks would be banned!
And the governments with which the framers were familiar all entangled with the local churches; the king of England was "defender of the faith" and considered that title to be an essential part of the political legitimacy of his crown. Taking a man's religion to be the near-constant that we are familiar with, essentially freedom of religion protects the political franchise of people whose religion is discriminated against.
It is important to note that the FCC created broadcasting by giving licenses to broadcast at high power in particular frequency bands and censoring the transmission of "interfering" signals by the riffraff like you and me. Thus we see that the FCC is an evasion of the First Amendment. Broadcasting has essentially transcended the press as a medium of political discourse, yet nothing the FCC does would pass muster if applied to the press or to in-person speech.
And journalism is not--as it loves to style itself--either "the press" or "the first draft of history." Print journalism is part of the press--as are magazines and books--but government-licensed broadcast journalism is no part of the First Amendment "press" at all. Commercial journalism is entertainment, and as such is systematically negative and superficial towards we-the-people and our institutions.
So our melieu is saturated with anticonservative propaganda, and we wonder why. It is no accident. No accident at all . . .