Kerry (remember him?) has said that promoting democracy will not be a priority under his administration. What does that mean for the world? The New York Times has an example.
John Kerry's view? As he told Oppenheimer, the Varela Project "has gotten a lot of people in trouble . . . and it brought down the hammer in a way that I think wound up being counterproductive."
Imagine if you are a Cuban political prisoner rotting in a jail, and you learn that the leader of the oldest democratic party in the world thinks you're being counterproductive. Kerry's comment is a harpoon directed at the morale of Cuba's dissidents.
Imagine sitting in Castro's secret police headquarters and reading that statement. The lesson you draw is that crackdowns work. Throw some dissidents in jail, and the man who might be president of the United States will blame the democrats for being provocative.
This is actually consistent with critisism of Bush. What ever you think about our invasion of Iraq, one goal was always to make it a better place. That shouldn't be hard. Between Sadam and sanctions, tens of thousands were dying each year.
Kerry, Dean, and the rest of the anti-war group think that this was swell. Who cares how many people die or live under a dictator as long as none no Americans die.
They won't say this but no other interpretation is possible.