I think the assumption is that Castro will be dead within a couple years anyway, and that there's symbolic value in waiting until that point.

Yep, in his op-ed, Obama even referenced that fact. Plus, this was as much about national politics as anything, as RealClearPolitics understood:

Obama was more or less daring Clinton endorse the current US policy toward Cuba, knowing that it might cost him votes in Florida but would also serve to reinforce the broader theme of his campaign as a "change of direction."

Clinton took the bait, giving Obama exactly the line he wanted: "she would continue the Bush administration's hard-line stance."

Clinton takes the bait

I thought the same thing this morning... which, I think, tends to underline why some of us find the rhetoric doesn't really match up to the reality with him. If he's such a Breath of fresh air, he sure seems a far more political, do it the way it's always been done, type of person. Clearly someone explained to him why agreeing to meet with Castro without preconditions would upset Cuban American voters, and here he is... backpedaling. Which can only help Clinton's point.

Although I'm a Clinton supporter, I agree 100% with Paul, here.

Lift the restrictions and let the travel and trade begin!

I agree. However, I also believe that the level of blind rage is not relegated solely to "aging Cuban exiles" but to many Cuban Americans throughout the country. The hatred of Castro is a religion unto itself. Even a mild rolling back of a fiasco of a policy will be seen as capitulating to Castro. Perhaps these Democrats are just trying to let sleeping dogs lie.

I wish the Democrats would pounce on the Bush administration's recent Cuban policy, which has been met with hostility amongst Cuban Americans. At worst, it will help suppress rabid GOP support amongst Cuban Americans, especially in all-important Florida.

Obama's on the money, Kucinich even more so. The embargo is old men fighting older wars. All it does is punish both countries, robbing both of civil communications and commercial potential. I wish all the Democratic candidates simply said of the embargo, enough already.

I think the assumption is that Castro will be dead within a couple years anyway, and that there's symbolic value in waiting until that point.

"Symbolic value" in this case meaning: The U.S. will get to boast that it 'won' by having outlasted him.

I agree that's what seems to be behind a lot of status quoism re. Cuba policy among political elites. Needless to say, though, holding out for strictly symbolic victories never made anyone's life any better.

Really, it's comparable to the claim that we can't leave Iraq because bin Laden will call us wimps. Except in the case of Cuba a greater share of Dem leaders buy into this pettiness.

"But doing so communicates something about who you are -- brave, innovative, etc. -- to everyone, whether this is their most important issue or not. It's a political winner."

This is exactly why it's been interesting to watch Obama challenge the foreign policy establishment views on a variety of issues in the past month or so. Obama's Cuba policy might not be an especially strong break from the status quo, but it comes in the context of him making some risky statements about attacking terrorists in Pakistan, meeting with leaders of hostile nations unconditionally, etc.

Whether or not he's right about everything he's been saying about foreign policy is beside the point. He's showing voters he can take principled and risky stands on thorny issues.

We have to be realistic. The embargo isn't going to be ended overnight; it has to be taken apart bit by bit, and it has to happen by attacking the most unpopular aspects of it first (travel restrictions and money barriers). Everyone knows this is stupid policy; by challenging it, Obama is at least signaling that he wants to change the status quo. Clinton is too afraid of change to even go that far.

And why would it be such a problem to annoy older Cuban-Americans? They vote Republican anyway. What are they going to do, get so angry that they go out and vote Republican twice? Oh wait, it is Florida....

Just look at how the virtual ban on cultural and economic exchanges imposed on Cuba enforces the status quo, Buena Vista Social Club and a few wheat shipments not withstanding.

Compare to the Cold War when the State Department sent top musicians such as Satchmo, Brubeck and Dizzy on goodwill tours with the theory that culture would open up the way for politics and economics.

From the Bay of Pigs to the saga of Elian Gonzales to some of the homegrown terrorists. ie.Luis Posada and Orlando Bosch, who were involved in the 1976 mid-air bombing of a Cubana Airlines flight that killed 73 people, including members of the Cuban national fencing team. Bosch was pardoned in 1990 by the elder Bush.

There has been no interest group in the last 40+ years more deleterious to the body politic than the far-right Cuban exile community.

Bravo to Obama for not pandering and at least opening the door for lifting the travel and family reunification restrictions.

A smart strategy for lifting the economic and trade restrictions is to form an alliance with farm state pols, which has been done recently with the likes of maverick-like Republican Jeff Flake from Arizona.

It's not just Castro and the embargo, it's the Bay of Pigs too. My mother in law who is in her 50's will not vote for any Democrat..period. The reason? John F Kennedy. In other words, in my very limited personal experience, no Democrat would get the older Cuban vote. That was decided many years ago.

Dear Candidates,

Let me challenge your reductionist political thinking. The political embargo against Cuba is not my number one issue. And, I don't favor it. So, your conventional wisdom suggests that sticking with the current policy doesn't risk my vote.

Maybe not. But, the first one of you who comes out and says that you'll end the embargo by the end of your first term will get my vote because Cuba is a great litmus test of your ability as a leader.

Thank you.

And if Obama doesn't have the guts, why doesn't somebody else pick up the ball?

Chris Dodd came out against the travel ban explicitly. From The Washington Note site:

It is simply un-American to bar American citizens from traveling to foreign countries. In fact, Americans are currently free to travel to both Iran and North Korea, two countries which pose far more serious threats to American national security than the government of Cuba.

Couldn't agree more. I've always thought that some form of Sudpolitik, meant to draw Cuban society into closer relations, would have a liberalizing effect, ie., help move Cuba in the direction we allegedly favor. I suspect that the forces in the US that insist on the embargo and the unbending posture of militant hostility towards Cuba would not be satisfied with anything less than a complete repudiation of everything that has happened in Cuba since the revolution. Even if a more attracive, more open (even more capitalist friendly) govt emerged, so long as it was a direct institutional continuation of the present govt, didn't erect statues to Batista in every public square, didn't re-jigger all the public holidays and so on, it would be no good in their eyes.

Castro's death will open up a whole new bag of worms, when his more hard-core brother takes over. American and Cuban exile big business won't be getting their properties returned to them anytime soon...