http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/…

Today, Cuba officially lifted its ban on the sale of computers to the general public. Some other prohibitions have also been scrapped in recent weeks: Cubans can now buy cell phones, stay in hotels previously reserved for tourists, and buy appliances like microwaves and TV sets.

Is this a sign of openness from Cuba’s geriatric regime? Not so.

A Cuban dissident I met in Havana last year sent me today an article he wrote about the real motive behind relaxing these bans. It has been reported in the state-controlled media that people purchasing these goods are later being investigated by the authorities who want to know the real sources of their income. As it’s widely known, the average Cuban salary is less than $20 a month, while the cost of most of these goods ranges in the hundreds of dollars. Many Cubans get their extra money from relatives in the United States, but many others run independent (and illicit) small businesses.

My friend tells the story of the first person to purchase an electric bicycle, which cost the equivalent of $1,070. This man had a small butter factory that apparently was very profitable, since he was selling the butter at a lower price than the government. After buying his electric bicycle, the authorities investigated him and discovered his factory. They proceeded to confiscate everything they found in his home, including the bike.

Let’s not forget that, after all, there is still a Castro brother running the show on the island. As my Cuban friend says about the so-called “reforms,” the fact that something is no longer prohibited doesn’t mean that you can do it.

I hadn’t thought about this though I should have. I’ve read about this being done in other authoritarian governments. It’s OK… there will be a black market that will likely provide these products without tipping off the officials and now that they are no longer prohibited it will be less risky to have them.

http://www.ballot-access.org/…

California State Senator Alan Lowenthal has introduced SB 1322, which deletes some state laws that discriminate against members of the Communist Party. California’s Constitution, Article 20, says that no one may run for either partisan office or non-partisan office, if that person is a member of the Communist Party, or has been within the last 5 years. The Lowenthal bill does not try to repeal that. It does repeal statutes that bar party members from being public school teachers, and statutes that require organizations that want to meet in a public school to sign an affidavit that they are Communist “fronts”.

The bill has a hearing on April 2 in the Senate Education Committee. If SB 1322 passes, it will probably then be possible to repeal various California election laws that also single out Communist Party members. California is one of only six states that has such election laws. The others are Illinois, Arkansas, Kansas, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. None of these laws are enforceable. In 1974 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that they violate the First Amendment, in a case called Communist Party of Indiana v Whitcomb. The decision was unanimous.

I’m not surprised there are still laws on the books which discriminate against Communists. I doubt very much anyone but the most hardcore bother with any official “Communist” party. I’d think given the stigma real communists are in one of the many socialist parties or maybe the Green party.

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/story/480841.html 

An ailing, 81-year-old Fidel Castro resigned as Cuba’s president Tuesday after nearly a half-century in power, saying he will not accept a new term when parliament meets Sunday.

The end of Castro’s rule - the longest in the world for a head of government - frees his 76-year-old brother Raul to implement reforms he has hinted at since taking over as acting president when Fidel Castro fell ill in July 2006. President Bush said he hopes the resignation signals the beginning of a democratic transition.

“My wishes have always been to discharge my duties to my last breath,” Castro wrote in a letter published Tuesday in the online edition of the Communist Party daily Granma. But, he wrote, “it would be a betrayal to my conscience to accept a responsibility requiring more mobility and dedication than I am physically able to offer.”

This should be interesting. How Raul, if selected, will run the country. What kind of reforms will he push through if any? Will the USA make any attempt to open up our sanctions?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…

The Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the United States, hinting that it may liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries if Washington imposes trade sanctions to force a yuan revaluation.

Two officials at leading Communist Party bodies have given interviews in recent days warning - for the first time - that Beijing may use its $1.33 trillion (£658bn) of foreign reserves as a political weapon to counter pressure from the US Congress.

Shifts in Chinese policy are often announced through key think tanks and academies.

Described as China’s “nuclear option” in the state media, such action could trigger a dollar crash at a time when the US currency is already breaking down through historic support levels.

How much hard assets do you have? Looks like buying gold may be a good idea. This is possible because we have such an out of control foreign policy. Having to borrow billions to keep up our policing of the world and an unconstitutional war. I find it unlikely however that China would do this without some major event provoking. The USA is a huge consumer of their exports and to devalue the dollar would cause a decrease in those exports.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter103.htm
Complete list of DMS-IV codes
U.S. Code section 922(g)
H.R 2640: The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007

Under the DSM-IV-TR codes, there isn’t an person in the United States that would not fit in some category. Why does the government need gun control laws when they can effectively bar every citizen from owning a gun through DSM-IV-TR mental disorder codes?

While US Code section 922(g) say that you have to be legally defined as a ‘mental defective’ or committed… and actually section 101(c)(2) of HR 2640 says that each department or agency which makes any adjudication related to the mental health of a person must also “permit a person to apply for relief from the disabilities imposed by such subsections” and that record of mental illness may not be provided afterward when applying for a gun again. I still don’t like this bill. It’s still too easy, both theoretically and practically, to have someone declared a mental defective based on the DSM-IV codes. They have something for just about anything and if the government really wanted to keep guns out of our hands it could do so through these bullshit disorders.

All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party. -Mao Tse Tung

The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. -Adolf Hitler