Ouch!

I'd like to add to the story of the doctored image of fidel holding up a Barack Obama "progress" poster that Henry posted on yesterday. You know, the one that Joe Garcia's all indignant over.

Here's the text from the press release sent out by the Joe '08 campaign and linked at Henry's Babalu post above:

"At a time when our nation faces true challenges, I am appalled that the Republican Party would use a doctored image of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro to scare voters. This is the Diaz-Balart style of politics that uses the suffering of the Cuban people to avoid addressing important issues affecting families in our community, such as the rising cost of fuel and lack of funding of schools".

OK Joe, here's what I think. It was a parody, which basically means that it's an exaggeration of the truth. Your response clearly shows that the image and its message struck a nerve, similar to the one Bush recently struck when he made the comment about appeasers while in Israel. In other words, you understood the message that the image intended to deliver. You have a lot of explaining to do to this constituent about how YOU feel about having unconditional talks with murderous dictators such as raul castro. Perhaps you're scared that if you come out and state that you don't agree with Obama's belief that unconditional talks should be held, your party will be upset at you and you'll end up sounding too much like Diaz-Balart. If you come out and state that you agree with Obama, then you can kiss the Cuban-American vote good-bye. It's a tough choice, but if you ask me, the first choice is best.

Speaking of avoiding other issues, Diaz-Balart did a nice job of explaining his views on those other issues in a recent El Nuevo Herald article. I'm sure you saw it, Joe.

Garcia campaign spokesperson Amy Araya added this:

"The Republicans should know better than to use photoshop to play on the stereotype that our elderly are misinformed and easily scared. Cuban-Americans are smarter and deserve better than this from the party that currently occupies the Oval Office".

Ahh, a clear attempt to pander to the viejitos that are key to who will be elected. Believe me, the viejitos clearly know what's going on. If there's a topic they are keenly aware of, it's Cuba. Ms. Araya's attempt to steer them Joe's way won't work unless there's real meaning and substance to Joe Garcia's message, which is highly questionable at this point. Also, we have your typical "we know what's better for you" comment from the Democrats.

The next 5 months will prove to be quite interesting, to say the least.

Just Your Average Joe Politician

It's not every day that I agree with the gist of an Ana Menendez column. In fact, it must be a little chilly in Hell right about now, because her column today, while splattered with the usual Menendez pomposity, arrives at the right conclusion regarding Joe Garcia and his experience as a seasoned politico.

I briefly alluded to this at the end of the previous post, but while Joe is campaigning as the outsider who's bringing long-needed change in Washington to South Florida politics, reality tells a whole 'nother story. Garcia has been playing politics since the early 1990s, both in a run for a county commission seat and as a prominent member of CANF. He is just as good as anyone in the back-and-forth "red-baiting" that is common in today's political landscape. Garcia supporters are certainly entitled to their opinion and their candidate. But I hope they're not naive enough to think that Garcia brings something new to the table of local politics. The man's got a LOT of baggage.

Garcia Reaping Hysteria He Helped Cultivate

By Ana Menendez

Fidel Castro is out of power and brother Raúl is preoccupied with Cuba's delicate transition, but in Miami, island politics can still resonate as if it were 1992.

Take last week's news that a congressman who has met with Fidel would attend a fundraiser for Democratic candidate Joe Garcia.

The announcement, a boring political footnote anywhere else, was greeted here with the hysteria, glee and indignation that is the mark of manufactured scandal.

SOUND-BITE SCANDAL

Charles Rangel, the Democrat from New York, has traveled to Cuba as Fidel's guest and repeatedly called for an end to the embargo. Not surprisingly, he's earned the hatred of many conservative exiles.

By Thursday, Rangel's support for Garcia had become a minor, easy-to-digest controversy.

Some of Garcia's fellow graduates from Belen Jesuit Preparatory School asked him to cancel the fundraiser. The hosts on Spanish-language stations amused themselves by rhyming Rangel with Fidel.

And Garcia's opponent Mario Diaz-Balart, invoking his own inner poet, contributed the catchy school-yard taunt: ``Left-wing birds of a feather tax and spend together.''

By contrast, the presence of incumbent U.S. representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Lincoln Diaz-Balart at a rally attended by militant Luis Posada-Carriles Sunday prompted just a mildly worded letter to the editor.

The lesson: If you're going to hang out with controversial people, make sure their anti-Castro credentials are solid.

Friday, a frustrated Garcia called a news conference.

''I'm not going to be afraid of meeting with Charlie Rangel,'' he told me after.

I agree with Garcia and share many of his political values. But in many ways, he's caught in a culture of intimidation that he helped nurture.

In 1992, The Miami Herald published an editorial that argued against tightening the U.S. embargo against Cuba.

1992 CANF CAMPAIGN

The tone was respectful, the arguments solid. But The Cuban American National Foundation, then led by Jorge Mas Canosa, immediately went on the offensive. Mas Canosa, who died in 1997, told Spanish-language radio listeners that The Herald manipulated information ``just like Granma.''

Within weeks, billboards and bumper stickers went up around the city: ``I don't believe The Herald.''

The campaign -- which generated vandalism and death threats that CANF disavowed -- lasted for months. It was run by an ambitious 28-year-old at the foundation named Joe Garcia.

Today Garcia stands by his youthful adventure, saying he didn't think The Herald had treated the community fairly at the time. ''I wasn't an advocate to anything but one issue,'' he said. ``My job then was to represent the Cuban American community.''

At 44, Garcia remains the ambitious in-your-face fighter, the kind of guy who prefers an argumentative dinner guest to a sweet, friendly one.

POLITICS AS USUAL

Last year, supporters of a Democratic candidate on Miami Beach attacked a Republican rival for working for a company that once did business in Cuba.

It was the kind of red-baiting that Democrats ought to avoid. But Garcia, the local party chief, refused to condemn anyone.

''This is part of politics in South Florida,'' he told me at the time.

Friday, Garcia went after the GOP with the same tactics, accusing his opponents of hypocrisy for taking money from backers who do business with Cuba.

It's part of the way politics is waged here. And Garcia is a veteran.

Joe Garcia vs Diaz-Balart

I have a keen interest in the Florida District 25 Congress race between Mario Diaz-Balart and Joe Garcia, mainly because I live in said district. Also, it involves two Cuban-Americans and is a seat that the Democratic Party and its supporters are desperately seeking.

I figured it would be interesting to analyze some key issues and where the candidates stand. In doing this, I primarily used the information provided at their respective web sites, with frequent links provided. Keep in mind that aside from a couple of issues, neither candidate has offered many specifics (we do have MDB's voting record, however), and as such it's hard to make any clear opinions at this early stage.

Consider this post a preliminary look of sorts.

Let's start.

- Iraq

Garcia offers some goals and ideas, such as a "safe and responsible end" to the Iraq war; not building any permanent bases in Iraq to avoid "fanning the flames of anti-American sentiment"; engaging in "vigorous diplomatic talks" with all sectors of Iraqi society; and engaging all of Iraq's neighbors in "extensive and principled diplomatic talks".

Diaz-Balart provides little detail other than "I voted for establishing the Department of Homeland Security and for military action against Iraq because I believe these were necessary steps to improve our national security." As a rank and file Republican in Congress, it's safe to assume that he's in line with the current strategy being employed in the region.

However, he does give what could be considered by some to be a somewhat moderate view of the Patriot Act: "While we must be proactive and diligent in the fight against terrorism, we must be careful to balance security concerns with civil liberties. Attempting to provide absolute security to law-abiding American citizens could undermine the freedoms that have made America the sole global superpower."

My analysis: a clear demarcation along party lines and ideologies, the best-defined difference between the two candidates.

- Economy:

Garcia offers nothing in the way of specific ideas, just general points such as lower taxes for working families, tax credits for small businesses, creating better jobs for South Florida and promoting investment in South Florida.

Diaz-Balart has his economic plan broken up into separate categories, making it hard to put together into a concise package. Regarding affordable housing, Diaz-Balart favors "down payment assistance" and recently voted in favor of the Section 8 Voucher Adjustment Act of 2007 sponsored by Democrat Maxine Waters of California (in fact, the Florida Republican contingent was split on this vote, with MDB voting in line with the Democrats). He did, however, vote against funding $70 million for the Section 8 program back in 2006.

MDB is more specific on taxes, such as favoring the elimination of the marriage penalty and death tax, and pledged for American for Tax Reform.

My analysis: We'll wait for Garcia to offer more specifics. In the meantime, Diaz-Balart's record doesn't offer any major surprises. Hopefully the debates will provide a clearer distinction.

- Healthcare:

This one's a bit more contentious, although at first glance the differences really aren't all that big. For example: both Garcia and Diaz-Balart state that affordable healthcare should be accessible to all. Diaz-Balart focuses on seniors and small businesses while Garcia specifically mentions those between jobs, working families and small businesses. Both advocate greater choice. Garcia, however, mentions that people should "always have healthcare". I'm not sure if this is an indication of support for universal health care, but it does sound like it.

The main disagreement lies with the vetoed S-CHIP bill. Garcia goes as far as illustrating the differences in his "factcheck" section. He criticizes the South Florida GOP contingent for voting against the S-CHIP bill, stating that it would have helped thousands of immigrant children. He mentions a comment by MDB which I myself was critical of back in October in response to the effect of a proposed tax increase on cigars that S-CHIP would have brought about. Mario stated that the cigar tax increase was an "attack" on the Cuban-American community. While I still believe that statement was a bit over the top and a poor choice of words, I agree with the general sentiment that taxing tobacco to fund S-CHIP is wrong, and President Bush was correct to veto the bill. Garcia also points out apparent contradictions in subsequent statements made by MDB

I'm sure this is something that will come out and become clearer as we get closer to the election.

- Education:

Garcia hits a lot of the right notes here, and is probably the issue that he's most specific and passionate about on the web site. I found it surprising that he favors No Child Left Behind, which puts him at odds with the traditional Democratic opinion.

Diaz-Balart is more general, although he clearly expresses favoring school vouchers, as well as parental involvement and local involvement in decisions on school funding, all good ideas in my book.

My analysis: again, no apparent big difference here. Too early, I guess.

- Cuba:

Neither candidate has a Cuba section on their web sites, but it's well known that the main differences between the two is that Garcia favors lifting travel restrictions by Cuban-Americans as well as allowing more remittances to go directly to dissidents. All in all, the differences really aren't as stark as Garcia and Diaz-Balart make them out to be, although what differences exist are important.

Garcia points out a comment MDB made on Maria Elvira Live about castro allies' interest in the defeat of MDB and the other GOPers Congress members from South Florida, insinuating that MDB accuses Garcia of being one of those castro allies/appeasers. I would have to see the full transcript of that interview, not just a select sound byte before passing judgment on that accusation.

Even if Diaz-Balart meant to say that Garcia is a castro appeaser, that doesn't exactly absolve Garcia from making equally ridiculous comments about his opponents. In this Washington Times editorial, Garcia is mentioned as berating MDB's brother Lincoln for helping nine disabled Ukranian kids obtain prosthetic limbs.

This is shaping up to be quite an interesting race, not necessarily because it MAY be a close one, but because of the obvious interest by Democrats to win the seat. Also, it's MDB's first serious challenge since he was first elected in 2002.

More on this in future posts, you can be sure of that!