Actual caption under this photo in the VTV piece celebrating this joyous occasion: “Chávez y Fidel: La amistad de dos pueblos.”
Check back in five years from now, when VTV will probably be running things like:
Caracas, August 13th, 2019, VTV – Today the nation celebrates the 93rd birthday of Fidel Castro, the Cuban-born doctor and revolutionary who, on February 4th, 1992, was second in command in Comandante Chávez’s brave attack on Cuartel Moncada. Aboard their legendary ship, Granma, Chávez and Fidel gallantly steamed up the Rio Guaire for a glorious ambush against the Fascist forces of dictator Carlos Andrés Batista.
En serio, chamo, yo así no puedo…
Caracas Chronicles 
Oh, my God! The worst, I think, is how badly written the text is from the purely linguistic point of view, not how pathetic, how outlandish the personality cult manifests itself there.
When Stalin was alive, you could see kitsch crap like that but the apparatchiks would mind the syntax and punctuation of Russian.
The person who wrote that article never read anything more than propaganda brochures made in Cuba.
LikeLike
I know we can only cover one chavista “metida de pata” per day, but check back later in the day for another jewel of chavista writing…
LikeLike
I hope the ship’s name (Grandma :-O) was spoofed in the “futuristic” version of the news.
LikeLike
Well, from that angle it looks like el Che also had a verruga, so…
LikeLike
Love all the double surnames used, as per convention, in the VTV piece. That is, by those who mock the use of same among the opposition.
Speaking of convention, I especially love the sanitization of Castro’s birth, making it appear as though his parents, together, brought Fidelito into the world. The picture of happy domesticity would seem to be a stretch, given that Fidel’s father, Ángel Castro,, an immigrant from Lugo, Galicia, had “hooked up” with the Spanish maid in his household, while he was still married to Lidia Argote, having already fathered a couple of kids with the latter.
LikeLike
It seems that being a communist is the only way for attaining “madurez politica” according to these savages.
LikeLike
Doctor? did you mean lawyer instead? His ole mucker, Che was the Dr.
LikeLike
You’d almost think this was a post about mixing up the stories of che, fidel and chavez…
LikeLike
does it matter?
It’s not about the facts, or the truth. It’s about the POSSIBILITIES.
LikeLike
lol, porsiac.
LikeLike
Robin Williams is dead and Fidel Castro is still alive. Sigh… The world just isn’t fair.
LikeLike
When I think of Fidel, I am reminded of Billy Joel’s song “Only the Good Die Young.”
LikeLike
When I look at what is going on all around the world today, I think of Billy Joel’s song, “We Didn’t Start the Fire”
LikeLike
I don’t think that’s meant to be a caption to the picture but rather a section heading for the text. If you see the photo carousel on top of the article the same picture correctly identifies the Che and Mr Fidel.
Just saying. Pero no me maten.
LikeLike
So Fulgencio Batista represented “neoliberalism”? Why then did Pablo Neruda deliver a salutation dedicated to Batista as a father of the people? Why did the Communist Party of 1953 denounce Castro’s Moncada attack as a “bourgeois putsch”? Why did Hugh Thomas call Batista “a radical reforming soldier of the Nasser type”? And why did the US cut off all weapons deliveries to Batista in early 1958 ?
LikeLike
Batista era tan arrecho que era neoliberal 20 años antes de que inventaran esa vaina…
LikeLike
50 anyos!
LikeLike
50 anyos! https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Neoliberalism&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CNeoliberalism%3B%2Cc0
LikeLike
Quizas haya ocurrido a Batista que era un neo liberal , sin saberlo , como el celebre nino portugues que hablaba perfecto el portugues sin estar consciente de ello , !! , Al comunista no les preocupa el anacronismo historico de sus frases por que ellos creen que retrospectivamente pueden cambiar los hechos historicos al molde de sus prejuicios y fantasias.!!,
LikeLike
Wait, Jeffry: to be honest, you know Batista was really eclectic. From 1953 onward the US ambassador became more important for Cuba’s affairs than Batista, US got control of nearly every industry sector of the island, Batista became a “revolutionary” who wanted to ingratiate himself with the old elite as if his life depended on it.
You can check out the “nostra culpa” John F. Kennedy did about the Batista time.
Of course, we know Diosdado Cabello and people like him would become a Batista if they knew that would keep them longer in power. For the moment and under the geopolitics of the time, they think it is not appropriate, the Chinese would do.
LikeLike
US got control of nearly every industry sector of the island,
I would suggest that you research US % control of the sugar industry, 1900-1958. From what I recall, the percentage was going steadily down. Suggested sources: Hugh Thomas’s works on Cuba [Cuba: The Pursuit of Freedom , or some such title is his obra maestra.] , Carlos Alberto Montaner’s Secret Report on the Cuban Revolution [or some such.]
Yes, Batista was “electic.” Democratically elected, and also a successful coupster. IIRC. Communists were in his cabinet in the 1940s.
LikeLike
Tejano,
We know he was initially a commie. We also know how close the US was with the Cuban regime for several years. Let’s not make things nicer than they were. I am not defending the Castro regime, but we need to tell things as they are. The US really wasted an opportunity by going along a very cruel dictator and using all its clout for controlling everything in the island.
LikeLike
I repeat: “I would suggest that you research US % control of the sugar industry, 1900-1958.” etc etc . Then get back to me.
LikeLike
Thank you for every other excellent post. The place else may anybody get that type of info in such a perfect method of writing?
I have a presentation next week, and I am on the search for
such info.
LikeLike