OP-ED: “Stirring Up Trouble in Puerto Rico,” by Jeane J. Kirkpatrick and Kenneth L. Adelman, New York Times, 26 February 2006, p. WK13.
Weird to see Kirkpatrick and Adelman making this argument. They seem unhappy with this quiet plot of the Bush White House to force Puerto Rico to either chose independence or statehood, ending the cushing “commonwealth” deal we gave them a half century ago.
Here’s the trick the Bushies are pushing: a special vote to force Puerto Rico to decide on a “permanent solution” to their status. In this vote, locals will be forced to yes or no, thus encouraging the statehood types and the independence types to vote similarly in the hopes of forcing a second vote that would allow only two choices: independence or statehood.
Apparently Adelman and Kirkpatrick don’t like forcing this issue, because it mimics the long-term complaints of Fidel Castro about P.R’s unresolved status.
Like anybody should give a rat’s ass about anything that tired dictator has to say other than to clutch his chest and yell out, “OMYGOD! This is it!”
Here’s the weirdest part from Adelman and Kirkpatrick: their defense of the status quo in which Puerto Ricans have no vote in Congress or for the presidency yet enjoy no income tax. “Given that deal,” they write, “many of us stateside might seek commonwealth status.”
Criminy! So no-taxation-plus-no-representation is being held up by two conservatives as a better model for America?
I say, either join the club or make your own. Free country, free world.
P.R. should have been the 51st state a long time ago.
Want to scare the crap outta Castro anybody?
| Permalink |
Comments (5)
Prior to 1959 and the Castro takeover the Lincoln Adminstration decision to reject the lobbying of William T. Sherman and others to take over Cuba based on bi-lingualism issues stood as federal policy. Now the sub-rosa issue represented by Puerto Rico is how Post-Castro Cuba will "really" be treated by the U.S. Cuba it is true is much larger than P.R. but given that since 1959 Cuban immigration has changed the politics of the US through Florida votes it is not impossible to see the new domestic Cuban vote becoming one of advocacy for statehood. Can we really allow the geographic guardian of the Cuban straits to remain fully independent of the U.S.? I predict statehood both for P.R. and Cuba in this century. Watch out Canada! Now that French Louisiana is gone to Katrina winds and water, we need a new French speaking state-Quebequois? Who knows perhaps even Great Britain with its neat political divisions will need statehood for its parts, now that North Sea oil is about to end and the British "spring" is about to turn into winter.
Posted by William R. Cumming | March 2, 2006 4:34 AM
From what i see Puerto Rico is going to be the 51st state in 2008.
Posted by Don Omar | May 31, 2006 3:03 PM
I believe we could see most of North America (and possibly Central and South America) and the European Union (which could eventually include Russia and much of the former U.S.S.R.) joining the U.S. by the middle of the century.
Posted by Randy Jones | November 17, 2006 2:46 PM
I do believe, that within the near future the united States will grow before the end of the 21st century. I believe that Canada will join us first, then Mexico follow by Cuba and Puerto Rico/American Virgin Island. I don't think the Russians would be happy to see her Siberia going to the U.S>A>, without a fight.
Posted by Victor Kottinger | December 30, 2007 8:13 PM
Feb 19,2008
Okay, the old man is going away. What next?
How about TransAmerican representative democracy?
But first, a few prerequisites:
-English as the language of trade and law
-The U.S. dollar as currency
-The option of statehood for those protectorates who meet criteria for real capitalistic growth: low taxes and programs which foster employment over welfare
-Constitutional rights based on the US Constitution
We either have the right system, ready for export, or our "product"
won't compete in the world marketplace.
If you believe in the Constitution, The Bill of Rights and the power of capitalism, then you have got to believe those principles will mean peace and prosperity here, there and everywhere!
Posted by Lee | February 19, 2008 5:33 PM