Nice case of la nausea this afternoon, prompted by pro-Castro comments summarized on Right Wing News. (Hat tip: Michelle Malkin.)
It's so easy to deconstruct Commie logic, it's almost a crime, but this'll make me feel better. So, here's a comment from "blurp" (which is obviously the sound of pieces of his/her brain dripping out and hitting the pavement) with running commentary from your humble correspondent.
"Sometimes violence is necessary for a better society. Great point."
(If you're talking about ridding the world of muderous, rapacious dictators, yeah, but that apparently is not what blurp had in mind ...)
"Also, consider tax evaders in the USA. They have a duty to pay their taxes to help society. If they don't, what should we do? Ask nicely again? No. We get police to toss them in jail. Sometimes you have threaten violence against people to create a greater social good."
(Oh ... I get it!! My money and resources don't belong to me, they belong to the government! And the government knows better and is just trying to make everyone happy! And throwing people in jail makes them more compassionate and helpful. Geez, thanks for clearing that up.)
"In way (sic), what Castro does is nearly democratic, in the sense that he uses his power to insure (sic) the majority are helped even though a few individuals may be treated poorly."
(I thought that was totalitarianism. Oh, but wait, it's all for the good of the majority, so it's OK. My bad.)
Besides, if there were a vote, Castro would win anyway. So I don't see how his actions against a small minority are anti-democratic.
(Threats of violence, jail and death are extremely persuasive with the voting population, even more so than John Edwards' hair.)