And After Further Review... And Recent Statements...
The Next Act of the NeoconsAre Neocons Getting Ready to Ally With Hillary Clinton?
By JACOB HEILBRUNN - NYT
JULY 5, 2014
Neocons like the historian Robert Kagan may be connecting with Hillary Clinton to try to regain influence in foreign policy. Credit Left, Stephanie Sinclair/VII via Corbis; right, Colin McPherson/Corbis
<snip>
WASHINGTON — AFTER nearly a decade in the political wilderness, the neoconservative movement is back, using the turmoil in Iraq and Ukraine to claim that it is President Obama, not the movement’s interventionist foreign policy that dominated early George W. Bush-era Washington, that bears responsibility for the current round of global crises.
Even as they castigate Mr. Obama, the neocons may be preparing a more brazen feat: aligning themselves with Hillary Rodham Clinton and her nascent presidential campaign, in a bid to return to the driver’s seat of American foreign policy.
To be sure, the careers and reputations of the older generation of neocons — Paul D. Wolfowitz, L. Paul Bremer III, Douglas J. Feith, Richard N. Perle — are permanently buried in the sands of Iraq. And not all of them are eager to switch parties: In April, William Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard, said that as president Mrs. Clinton would “be a dutiful chaperone of further American decline.”
But others appear to envisage a different direction — one that might allow them to restore the neocon brand, at a time when their erstwhile home in the Republican Party is turning away from its traditional interventionist foreign policy.
It’s not as outlandish as it may sound. Consider the historian Robert Kagan, the author of a recent, roundly praised article in The New Republic that amounted to a neo-neocon manifesto. He has not only avoided the vitriolic tone that has afflicted some of his intellectual brethren but also co-founded an influential bipartisan advisory group during Mrs. Clinton’s time at the State Department.
Mr. Kagan has also been careful to avoid landing at standard-issue neocon think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute; instead, he’s a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, that citadel of liberalism headed by Strobe Talbott, who was deputy secretary of state under President Bill Clinton and is considered a strong candidate to become secretary of state in a new Democratic administration. (Mr. Talbott called the Kagan article “magisterial,” in what amounts to a public baptism into the liberal establishment.)
Perhaps most significantly, Mr. Kagan and others have insisted on maintaining the link between modern neoconservatism and its roots in muscular Cold War liberalism...
<snip>
More: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/06/opinion/sunday/are-neocons-getting-ready-to-ally-with-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0
= new reply since forum marked as read
& John McCain in Ukraine a few weeks before Nuland...having a photo op with RW Svoboda Party Neo-Nazi Fringe before the Ukraine Government was overthrown. Nuland's hubby NeoCon Kagen worked for McCain's Campaign and Adviser to State under Democrats.
And it's Putin's Fault. 
-------
Wikipedia:
Kagan spent 13 years as a Senior Associate with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, before joining the Brookings Institution as a senior fellow in the Center on United States and Europe in September 2010. During the 2008 presidential campaign he served as foreign policy advisor to John McCain, the Republican Party's nominee for President of the United States in the 2008 election.
Kagan also serves on the State Department's Foreign Affairs Policy Board, originally under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He is also a member of the board of directors for The Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI).
Is electing Hillary or "More and Better Dems" when many of us have been Gerrymandered out of existence? When Our Phone/Mails/E-Mails come back letters asay "We are Working for You but you need to Understand why we are taking our Democratic Position ..which had nothing to do with my E-Mail..Phone to some person who "dutifully assured me that the message will be relayed in answer to your call or we go on..(after we Call/E-Mail) and get Mailing.. with Donation Solicitations to Contribute to "Elect More and Better Democrats? Like they never LISTENED? 
Been there and Done that. "MADem" you live in Massachusetts...you have NO IDEA how besieged we are out here in the REST OF AMERICA which isn't so liberal and altruistic as where You ARE.
And.......we get no help from our Dem Party these days ...unless we are a SWING STATE.... I won't even get into that ..because I'm a Southern State who went for Obama First Term...and then we got taken over by Republicans (due to lack of Dem Party Help) and turned RED in 2010. It wasn't the VOTER DEMS...it was terrible mismanagement or "Out to Lunch...we Won) Dem Ops who allowed my state to GO DOWN...because Obama CAMPAIGN...dropped the ball and left us hanging out to dry. (Yes ....we had some of our Dems caught up in Scandals..(John Edwards) and our Governor caught up in the Housing Bubble...doing some "under the hat deals" and our Governor, Bev Perdue caught up in that along with RW Tea Baggers going after her for minor Campaign Trips.......but WHERE WAS OUR DEM BACK UP.
THEN...we HOSTED THE Democratic Convention in Charlotte, NC! And Obama Picked "Bank of America Stadium" when the Banking Crisis was still the BIG NEWS?
AYYYYYYYYY! The hurt...the pain...all our Activist Dem Party who got Obama Elected......washed away.....
YOU POST HERE from your "Comfortable Perch" overseeing the rest of us Dems out here in States battling against Koch Brothers/ALEC and you point finger of RIDICULE..... When you know nothing about how hard and how long we tried to overturn this Crap of the Republicans...and we have YEARS in my state where we won...we weren't RW like SC and the other SunBelt States. But....we got lost in the DEM "Top Down" Strategy. And THIS...is where we are.....without help and working to build something else....Because...what else can we do?
EDITE: Typo's and such...
You know, I have done a little work north of my border in the past to change the coloration of New Hampshire, which used to be a lot redder than it is today. I don't sit on my laurels--I'm simply pragmatic. I go for what can be achieved, a step at a time, because that is how it is done.
I know full well that what sells in MA does not sell in Montana, and without the votes, we get NUTHIN'. You can't "push to the left" if there's no one there to push or if the entire "left" population of the state sits somewhere to the right of you. You have to be incremental.
And here's something too--when I write to my senators or rep, they write back. I don't ask for the moon, I'm not amorphous in my comments, I am very specific and I let them know how I feel about an issue.
If you're getting back run-on garbage, write a letter back to them, one paragraph, that says "This did not answer my question--my question was (fill in the question) and I want a response" and then send the pile of crap BACK to them. It will take awhile to get a response because of the anthrax checks, but they'll stop sending you garbage if you call them on it. You could also get the name of your senator's/ rep's chief of staff and call him/her (get a hold of a congressional phone directory) and TELL that person that the staffers are trying to shut you up with garbage and you don't like it. If you're very professional on the phone and adopt a tone that suggests you know the person, those interns will often put you right through.
Look, I am active in that I GOTV and get voters to the polls, and I'll gather signatures or stuff like that if needed, and I make the occasional (very piddling, not big bucks because I don't have 'em) donation, but I'm by no means a party insider. I'm just an interested, and more importantly, reliable voter who pitches in where and when I can. And if I don't like something, I pipe up, but I do it in a targeted way.
As for Obama's convention venue, he (realistically, his staff, to include the Secret Service) picked the place that would hold the crowd and could be secured appropriately. When Kerry did it in Beantown, he used the Boston Garden. Oh ... wait... that's the TD BANKNORTH Garden. Yep, there's that BANKY word again... Good luck finding a massive, securable venue that isn't coated with corporate stink. It's a convention, and it ain't gonna work at a place like Woodstock. You need a massive facility surrounded by thousands and thousands of hotel rooms, lots of 'convention' support, restaurants, transportation, etc., and you're not going to get that everywhere. It's just not a fair criticism.
The only "good" candidate is the one who is dipped in promise, has very little in the way of a record, and has never yet disappointed you. This is why people glom on to Elizabeth Warren. I am confident--and I like her, I supported her, I worked very hard to get her elected, in fact, and I think she is a wonderful senator--that if she somehow found herself in the White House (not that it will happen) she would be trashed here on the august pages of DU within six months of her inauguration. The same people cheerleading her would be shitting on her, pointing out that she used to be a Republican, and researching all the votes they've ignored to this point and looking askance on them in order to paint her as a "failed progressive."
What? She doesn't support pot legalization? Under the bus with HER! She voted to retain unneeded defense programs to spare Bay State jobs? CRONY! Pork barreler!! How DARE she?
Out would come the "I knew it all the time-rs" and the unreasonable purists, and any discussion of her would turn into a political Lord of the Flies.
Like it or not, the President has to be the President of ALL of the people. That said, I think Obama has done a LOT, and without a lot of help, either. Does anyone truly think we would have gotten the LGBT gains we've seen to this point, the ACA, or have gotten out of Iraq, if John McCain and Sarah Palin had been elected? I mean, sometimes you have to judge your progress by stepping back and looking at the larger picture. I shudder to think of eight years of Grumpy Old Man and That Freak from Wasilla--we'd probably all be hoarding food and digging out bomb shelters in the back yard, and we wouldn't have time to post gripes on the internet...!
Some background I didn't get into...that I won't press you on. But, appreciate your view. And, I understand about Warren.
We Differ in our Experience...but, we are BOTH Democrats... so a "Handshake" that we can a agree to disagree on some important issues where we could haggle over the bones...but..we are Democrats. We've GOT TO DO BETTER, though. I think we could agree on that moving forward. We've not done what we were capable of...and we cannot allow our selves to sit back and wait for Clinton Admin II...
Our Party has let those of us in many states down. And, we who are out here needed help after the Dean 50 State Strategy helped us build.
But...that's "been there and done that" ....and that's what I was trying to point out. We do what we can...let's hope we can work out of this. But Dem Party needs to be bigger than Obama/Biden or Hillary/Bill. It's going into neglect if we don't get better messaging and get our core beliefs into a BIGGER MESSAGE back to a Dem Party that Works for the Workers and Not for the Elites of Wall Street, Think Tank Operatives, Corporate Lobbyists, Military/Media/Industrial Complex, etc. We are becoming "Republicans." The Republicans are so far Right that they are bordering on either Fascism or Insanity.
Anyway... we both are Democrats...and there's going to be a party split if we don't 
and work through this.
But, they are crafty "SOB's" ....but, who the Heck would run to the LEFT of Hillary from the Right to Sucker our Dems?
