2016 Postmortem

CoffeeCat

(24,411 posts)

79. Hillary was endorsed by the founder of PNAC, Robert Kagan.

Fri Mar 4, 2016, 12:56 PM

Mar 2016

Last week, Robert Kagan endorsed Hillary Clinton.

Kogan founded PNAC and the entire neocon movement with Bill Kristol. On DU, Democrats were united in our disdain for all things neocon. Now, it seems that Hillary supporters enjoy it.

Kagan didn't just endorse Hillary Clinton. Clinton tapped Kagan as her Middle-East foreign-policy adviser while she was Secretary of State. The godfather of this horrendous Middle East war plan sits at the right hand of Hillary.

The neocons always wanted Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya. They stated that in their plan, Rebuilding American's Defenses.

Hillary sure gave them Libya, didn't she? Following the neocon script to the letter, she leveraged the overthrow of Gaddafi, despite the fact that he was negotiating and cooperating with the United States. Now, Libya is a failed state with no government and untold numbers of refugees fleeing into Europe.

This is by design. Exactly what they did with Iraq. Exactly what is happening in Syria.

I don't understand how any Democrat is not alarmed and against Hillary being a neocon.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

88 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Clinton gets the nomination, what do you think [View all] mmonk Mar 2016 OP

survived after 2008 - a few hurt feelings, but time heals . . . . DrDan Mar 2016 #1

In 2008, Clinton DIDN'T get the nomination... Herman4747 Mar 2016 #29

of course not - hyperbole DrDan Mar 2016 #49

.... it was thumped by the party-proper in 2004, as well ... Myrina Mar 2016 #39

Kerry was and is more liberal than Dean ever was karynnj Mar 2016 #62

If you believe it, it must be true. Myrina Mar 2016 #66

Obviously, you can't refute even one thing I said karynnj Mar 2016 #75

Politics is cyclical. auntpurl Mar 2016 #2

Yes but marions ghost Mar 2016 #8

progressives have plenty of voices bigtree Mar 2016 #25

A Bernie win would be a shock to the system. mmonk Mar 2016 #32

no question bigtree Mar 2016 #63

I would rather Bernie accomplished very little, than see Hillary accomplish her Third Way and PNAC djean111 Mar 2016 #55

the PNAC stuff is fantasy bigtree Mar 2016 #64

Well it seems we are UglyGreed Mar 2016 #73

Hillary was endorsed by the founder of PNAC, Robert Kagan. CoffeeCat Mar 2016 #79

Not sure I want to align with "progressives "- it has become a catchall term marions ghost Mar 2016 #65

1. Stein leads the Green Party to new hights; 2. Trump wins 2016; 3. Warren wins 2020 in Progressive Vote2016 Mar 2016 #3

The problem with Stein and the Greens is getting on mmonk Mar 2016 #6

Agree marions ghost Mar 2016 #10

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2016 #41

You might want to delete your post. It is probably going to get flagged. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #52

Just like * was a great deal for us. WhiteTara Mar 2016 #61

Many of us have been working for progressive solutions for decades. NCTraveler Mar 2016 #4

Oooo cutting marions ghost Mar 2016 #11

It wasn't meant to be cutting in any way. NCTraveler Mar 2016 #14

You are claiming that a person who strongly opposed the rights of some minorities for decades has Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #21

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! monicaangela Mar 2016 #31

what about that tax plan do you find to not be progressive? NCTraveler Mar 2016 #42

Hillary Clinton is not a progressive. She's not working for progressive solutions. BillZBubb Mar 2016 #54

Have at it. NCTraveler Mar 2016 #56

you're right. She's not a social conservative, she's a conservative. Kip Humphrey Mar 2016 #80

Brilliant. #winningmessageoftheday nt. NCTraveler Mar 2016 #83

Delusion whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #67

Since she's very popular among progressives nationally, I'd imagine the future will be good Recursion Mar 2016 #5

Those of you who are so thrilled at the idea of retaining the politicians from the anti gay past Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #22

Great point; I agree that's something Clinton needs to address Recursion Mar 2016 #37

The most I can do for her is hold my nose and get drunk right after pulling the lever for her. VulgarPoet Mar 2016 #58

Good for you, because that's how I feel about my primary vote for Sanders Recursion Mar 2016 #59

I am fine with my . stonecutter357 Mar 2016 #7

I come from a musically inclined family myself. mmonk Mar 2016 #9

So... in effect.... you got YOURS, so who gives a fuck? Smarmie Doofus Mar 2016 #34

" this posts has been hidden by a DU Jury" DanTex. stonecutter357 Mar 2016 #47

I was wondering the same. The problem today is it's a top down movement WhaTHellsgoingonhere Mar 2016 #12

How does one differentiate without the media? mmonk Mar 2016 #13

We have to look at individual policies WhaTHellsgoingonhere Mar 2016 #15

I agree but the party has had success at calling us radicals mmonk Mar 2016 #17

Well, let people decide for themselves. WhaTHellsgoingonhere Mar 2016 #18

I think Adam Green and his PCCC might be the problem WhaTHellsgoingonhere Mar 2016 #57

If Clinton gets the nomination and the turnout is pathetic, the powers that be will "examine" Vinca Mar 2016 #16

Pathetic Turnout tazkcmo Mar 2016 #30

Downticket races, where change actually happens. JaneyVee Mar 2016 #19

There should be four parties DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #20

So with 40% what are your Conservative Democrats going to do in Congress, order lunch? Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #26

More of the same, really. MineralMan Mar 2016 #23

And the government whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #70

If it pleases you to say so. MineralMan Mar 2016 #72

Oh no, not at all gollygee Mar 2016 #24

Exactly. And the entire conversation has changed, issues are being discussed that previously were Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #27

So far, they appear to me to be on a counter move instead. mmonk Mar 2016 #35

Hard to switch midstream and when your candidate is campaigning against him gollygee Mar 2016 #40

Only over if we quit. n/t tazkcmo Mar 2016 #28

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2016 #33

Sure we do. Starting Day 1. nt Smarmie Doofus Mar 2016 #38

As our history shows, progressives don`t just give up democrank Mar 2016 #36

Another 4-8 years of mild, caretakerish reform while inequality grows? Orsino Mar 2016 #43

True. mmonk Mar 2016 #45

Inequality has decreased for each of the last 30 years Recursion Mar 2016 #46

I would love to have a party that reflected my values. Scruffy1 Mar 2016 #44

The Republicans were a third party. They successfully displaced the Whigs.[n/t] Maedhros Mar 2016 #81

The progressive movement isn't over. I don't think it ever will be. It's in our souls. Jarqui Mar 2016 #48

At might start a party of its own, and then throw Demos and GOP into the dustbin of history. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #50

Donald Dick will eat it for breakfast randr Mar 2016 #51

It should move to electing US Congressmen, US Senators, Governors, State legislatures, Mayors, Agnosticsherbet Mar 2016 #53

Since a Hillary presidency will be pretty much a continuation of Obama's, Nye Bevan Mar 2016 #60

Third party. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #68

The Republicans could disintegrate, leaving the Conservative field to the Democrats Maedhros Mar 2016 #82

That's a plausible scenario. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #87

A unification of the entire progressive left would be necessary for Zorra Mar 2016 #85

I concur. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #88

Over?? No way dana_b Mar 2016 #69

EOTEAWKI RobertEarl Mar 2016 #71

It seems to get stronger and stronger as time goes by pdsimdars Mar 2016 #74

That's an odd question. gwheezie Mar 2016 #76

progressives will do fine under a Clinton presidency 0rganism Mar 2016 #77

Frankly it depends if the Democratic Party remains rigid or reforms Armstead Mar 2016 #78

I think it matters more if she wins the GE or not. If she doesn't win Nanjeanne Mar 2016 #84

There will be a lot more Independents who will no longer fall for the "not as bad" ploy. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2016 #86