A: I'm going to make sure that he didn't survive 10 US presidents. Fidel Castro is unique in many respects. He represents the only non-democratic government in the hemisphere. He is uniquely brutal. He is still tyrannizing his own people. He lures the vulnerable and the naive Americans down there and puts on shows for them and they come back and do his propaganda. There are not many people who can pull that sort of thing off. He's obviously in bad health. That situation, probably, is in God's hands. He will probably be succeeded by someone who's no better than him, and that is Raul Castro. And we should treat Raul with the same contempt that we show Castro, including keeping the embargo on Cuba.
A: Of course we need to keep our embargo up. Of course we cannot allow economic aid to flow to Cuba. And if I were president of the United States, I would order an investigation of the shoot-down of those brave Cubans who were killed under the orders of Raul and Fidel Castro, and, if necessary, indict them.
A: You've got to think about who Fidel Castro is, and who Raul Castro is as well. We call them strongmen--dictators, totalitarian leaders. And yet these are individuals who are not strong. Look at what they have done: People wearing a wristband that says "change" are arrested--25 of them just for wearing a wristband. These Castro brothers are cowards, and we have to recognize they are cowards. And for that reason, the course for America is to continue our isolation of Cuba. It is not to say, as Barack Obama on the Democratic side said, that he would dignify the Castros with a personal visit to Cuba. That's not the way to go. Instead, it's to bring our friends together to isolate Cuba, to put together a strategy that helps all of Latin America, weakens Hugo Chavez who is propping up Castro. We need a Latin American policy that frees Cuba and that eliminates a threat of people like Hugo Chavez.
A: I do. Now, I did not say that I would be meeting with all of them. I said I'd be willing to. Obviously, there is a difference between pre-conditions and preparation. Pre-conditions, which was what the question was in that debate, means that we won't meet with people unless they've already agreed to the very things that we expect to be meeting with them about. And obviously, when we say to Iran, "We won't meet with you until you've agreed to all the terms that we've laid out," from their perspective that's not a negotiation, that's not a meeting.
Q: You're not afraid of being used in a propaganda way?
A: You know, strong countries and strong presidents speak with their adversaries. I always think back to JFK's saying that we should never negotiate out of fear, but we shouldn't fear to negotiate.
A: I don't. I think we've come to the point where it's time to call this for what it is. This is a civil war in the country. $10 billion a month, $2 billion every week, not to mention the cost of lives, what it's cost the Iraqis themselves, the emergence of al-Qaida in the country, developing a sort of incubator for terrorism. In the coming days in the US Senate, I'll offer that we terminate the funding.
Q: But do you think you can get enough political support among Republicans to make it veto-proof?
A: I doubt it at this point, but I'll start anyway. I think we should have started it earlier here to build that case. And even many Republicans have serious doubts and reservations. [Bush's] language is so eerily reminiscent of language I heard 40 years ago about showing more patience, wait a little longer, this may work down the road, that frankly, many of us who went through that are saying today that's enough.
A: The Cuban people deserve freedom and democracy, and we're all hopeful that that can be brought about peacefully. It appears as though the reign of Castro is reaching an end. We don't know what will follow Fidel Castro, but we need to do everything we can to work with our friends in Latin America who are democratic nations, with the Europeans and others, to try to bring about a peaceful transition to democracy and freedom for the Cuban people. Now, that requires that we work with the entire hemisphere. You know, in 1994 I remember being here in Miami when my husband hosted the Summit of the Americas. At that time, there was only one anti-democratic, anti-American leader in the hemisphere, namely Castro. Look at what we face today because of the misguided, bullying policies of this president. So let's reverse it and get ready for freedom in Cuba!
A: No, not at all. In fact, I would reach out to him. Do we forget that our CIA tried to depose him? Do we forget that? So, is he an enemy? No, he's not an enemy. We've created him as an enemy. We're doing the same thing with Iran. What's the difference if Chavez deals with Iran? We hope that a lot of countries begin to interchange their leadership and begin to think about the globe as one entity. There's nothing wrong. The same thing with Fidel Castro. Why can't we recognize Cuba? What's the big deal, after 25 years, that these people 125 miles from this country are discriminated against? It makes no sense at all. We need to open up our arms to all nations and treat them as friends, not start looking for enemies.
A: Well, a very important one, and the transition is already occurring. You don't have to wait for it to happen. The question is whether or not we're going to sit on the sidelines or be a part of this transition here. Certainly what we've done over the last 50 years I don't think has worked. Fifty years of this policy, of the embargo has basically left the same man in power, the same repressive politics, an economy that's been failing in the country. He has been using that as an excuse for his own failures. As president, I would begin to unravel that embargo. I would lift travel restrictions, so Cuban Americans can go visit their families. I would be lifting the restrictions on remissions. We need to understand that the hopes and aspirations of the Cuban people are as important as anything to us. We need safety and security; we need not fear Fidel Castro.
A: For one, I would pay attention to Latin America if I'm president. This president does not. Number two, we've got to fix the immigration issue. That is central not just to Mexico but Central America. Number three, we've got to deal with the Cuba issue. What we need there is possibly start lifting the embargo but only after Fidel Castro releases political prisoners and their democratic freedoms. Then I would have a new alliance for progress with Latin America like John F. Kennedy that would improve contacts in renewable energy, and microlending, and human needs. I would try to associate myself, too, with democratic populist movements like that are taking place in Brazil, in Argentina, in Chile, but most importantly recognize that what happens in Latin America is key to America's future. A kid here in Miami has more contact and more opportunities in Latin America than anywhere else.
A: Yes, I think Barack Obama is confused as to who are our friends and who are our enemies. In his first year, he wants to meet with Castro & Chavez & Assad & Ahmadinejad. Those are our enemies. Those are the world's worst tyrants. And then he says he wants to unilaterally go in and potentially bomb a nation which is our friend. We're trying to strengthen Musharraf.
Q: But if the CIA said, "We had Osama bin Laden in our sights, Musharraf says no," what do you do?
A: It's wrong for a person running for the president to get on TV and say, "We're going to go into your country unilaterally." Of course, America always maintains our option to do whatever we think is in the best interests of America. But we keep our options quiet.
OBAMA: I would. And the reason is this: the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them--which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration--is ridiculous. Ronald Reagan constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when he called them an evil empire. He understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward. And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them.
CLINTON: I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I don't want to be used for propaganda purposes. I don't want to make a situation even worse. But I certainly agree that we need to get back to diplomacy.
OBAMA: I would. The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them is ridiculous. I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them.
CLINTON: I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I will promise a very vigorous diplomatic effort but not a high level meeting before you know what the intentions are. I don't want to be used for propaganda purposes. But I certainly agree that we need to get back to diplomacy, which has been turned into a bad word by this administration. I will use a lot of high-level presidential envoys to test the waters, to feel the way. But certainly, we're not going to just have our president meet with Fidel Castro & Hugo Chavez & the president of North Korea, Iran & Syria until we know better what the way forward would be.
OBAMA: I would. The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them is ridiculous. I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them.
CLINTON: I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I don't want to be used for propaganda purposes. But I certainly agree that we need to get back to diplomacy.
Q: Sen. Edwards, would you meet with them?
EDWARDS: Yes, and I think actually Sen. Clinton's right though. Before that meeting takes place, we need to do the diplomacy to make sure that that meeting's not going to be used for propaganda purposes, will not be used to just beat down the US in the world community. But I think this is just a piece of a bigger question, which is, what do we actually do to restore America's moral leadership in the world?
FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE COLIN POWELL: If it was up to me, I would close Guantanamo. Not tomorrow, but this afternoon. Every morning I pick up a paper and some authoritarian figure, some person somewhere is using Guantanamo to hide their own misdeeds. And so essentially, we have shaken the belief that the world had in America's justice system by keeping a place like Guantanamo open.Q: Do you agree with Secretary Powell?
A: I know it's become a symbol of what's wrong. It's more symbolic than it is a substantive issue, because people perceive of mistreatment when, in fact, there are extraordinary means being taken to make sure these detainees are being given, really, every consideration.
(Videotape)
Man posing as job interviewer: (To Richardson) OK, 14 years in Congress; UN ambassador; secretary of energy; governor of New Mexico; negotiated with dictators in Iraq, North Korea, Cuba, Zaire, Nigeria, Yugoslavia, Kenya; got a cease-fire in Darfur; nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize four times. So what makes you think you can be president?
(End videotape)
Q: You're running on your resume.
A: I'm running on my record. And the reason for that ad is I'm an insurgent candidate. You've got to do things differently. I'm also positive. I'm trying to draw attention not just to my record, but the fact that I can bring people together. The country is bitterly divided. We need to regain our international moral authority. I believe I know how to be a president for the middle class, improve our schools, universal health care. That was what I'm trying to get through in that message.
ROMNEY: Never given that a lot of thought, but with Arnold sitting there, I'll give it some thought, but probably not.
Gov. THOMPSON: No.
HUCKABEE: After I've served eight years as president, I'd be happy to change the Constitution for Governor Schwarzenegger.
PAUL: I'm a no, because I am a strong supporter of the original intent
GIULIANI: When he called me up to endorse him, he got me on the phone, he said, "Will you endorse me?", and I was too afraid to say no. I would say yes.
TANCREDO: Intimidating as he might be, I'm saying no.
ROMNEY: Never given that a lot of thought, but with Arnold sitting there, I'll give it some thought, but probably not.
Gov. THOMPSON: No.
HUCKABEE: After I've served eight years as president, I'd be happy to change the Constitution for Governor Schwarzenegger.
ROMNEY: Never given that a lot of thought, but with Arnold sitting there, I'll give it some thought, but probably not.
Gov. THOMPSON: No.
HUCKABEE: After I've served eight years as president, I'd be happy to change the Constitution for Governor Schwarzenegger.
HUNTER: We haven't seen his endorsement yet. That's a no.
GILMORE: No, I want to amend this Constitution in a variety of different ways, and this would be not a good start to do it that way.
McCAIN: He and I have many similar attributes, so I have to seriously consider it.
PAUL: I'm a no, because I am a strong supporter of the original intent
GIULIANI: When he called me up to endorse him, he got me on the phone, he said, "Will you endorse me?", and I was too afraid to say no. I would say yes.
TANCREDO: Intimidating as he might be, I'm saying no.
PAUL: I'm a no, because I am a strong supporter of the original intent
GIULIANI: When he called me up to endorse him, he got me on the phone, he said, "Will you endorse me?", and I was too afraid to say no. I would say yes.
TANCREDO: Intimidating as he might be, I'm saying no.
HUNTER: We haven't seen his endorsement yet. That's a no.
GILMORE: No, I want to amend this Constitution in a variety of different ways, and this would be not a good start to do it that way.
McCAIN: He and I have many similar attributes, so I have to seriously consider it.
A: We need to find ways to deal with a post-Castro Cuba. I would bring Cuban-Americans into the dialogue. I would change the Bush administration policy which is limiting family visits, which is limiting remittances from Cubans. We should be re-evaluating the embargo. Also finding ways that we ensure that Cuba becomes democratic, with trade unionism, with free elections. And we should be engaged in a policy right now.
The World Health Organization ranked the US 37th [worldwide] for overall health performance and 54th for healthcare fairness. Yet the United States spends more per capita for healthcare than any other nation in the world.
At that time, Cuba charged $600 for exit documents. This was prohibitive to thousands who wanted to leave. The "Richardson Agreement" cut that figure in half for up to 1,000 Cubans per year who could demonstrate financial hardship. Castro suggested, without making a promise, that we could build on this agreement, perhaps leading to the relaxation of restrictions in other areas. I also succeeded in returning home with several imprisoned dissidents.
I am no fan of Castro's politics and the repression he has visited upon Cubans for the past 46 years. But all in all, he was probably the best-informed foreign leader I met during that period in the mid-1990s.
A: Yes.
Q: Do you support the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you support continued U.S. membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO)?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you support the trade embargo against Cuba?
A: Yes.
Q: Should trade agreements include provisions to address environmental concerns and to protect workers' rights?
A: No.
A. No, I’m a hardliner on Castro. I still find it incomprehensible that he would release mentally ill criminals, prone to violence, onto an innocent population here in the US. I find his whole penchant for repression and his whole style abhorrent. We have been asking Castro to have elections for a long time [with no response]. Cuba has been moving headlong in the wrong direction. I do not favor any openings to the Castro government.
| ||||||||||||