The Banality of Henry Kissinger

[H2O Man]

The presidential primary seasons are perhaps the least attractive times to read or participate in discussions on DU:GD. On one hand, I think it would be better to simply stop reading this part of the larger forum …..and perhaps limited myself to the sports forum, where I can enjoy debating the upcoming Mayweather versus Pacquiao fight. Yet, I am drawn to it, like a moth to a flame. It would likely take a 12-step program, with recognition that I am powerless when it comes to politics, to help me maintain what little sanity I’d like to think that I normally have.

Last night, for example, I read an OP by one of my best friends from the DU community. This wonderful lady stated that while she would vote for Hillary Clinton in November of 2016, that she wasn’t happy at that prospect. Her OP included a photograph of Ms. Clinton with Henry Kissinger. There were, not surprisingly, a wide range of responses to the OP. The majority of those from the pro-Clinton folks on DU ignored what my Friend wrote, and instead focused exclusively on the picture.

Of these responses, most correctly pointed out that in the world of politics, Good People do at times attend meetings or social events where horrible specimens of humanity -- such as Kissinger -- not only attend, but are treated respectfully. Indeed, a photo is shown of Nelson Mandela, an honorable man, along side of Kissinger. It happens.

Instead of focusing upon that, however, the majority of these responses included insults and atacks upon the character of the lady who posted the OP. She explained that she was a college student during the Vietnam War, and as such, had strong feelings about Kissinger. As a person who is of similar age, I can understand her feelings about Kissinger. It may be difficult for younger people to fully appreciate this. But Kissinger was as offensive in that era, as say Dick Cheney is in 2000 to 2015.

For many of us of this generation, it wasn’t simply disagreeing with Kissinger on policy. It was having a brother, cousin, neighbor, or classmate who died in Vietnam, while Kissinger was inflicting his policies on both Vietnam and the United States. Thus, when one pro-Clinton person states several times on the thread that those who identify Kissinger as a war criminal are a tiny, insignificant minority -- because, gosh almighty, old Henry is invited to so many fancy get-togethers -- I can only shake my head. For everyone of my generation remembers that, on the infamous White House tapes, Henry himself noted that Nixon and he could be charged with -- and convicted of -- war crimes for their actions in southeast Asia. But, for good or for bad, US politicians such as Kissinger and Cheney cannot face such trials.

Those who note that having to meet such creeps as a Kissinger or Cheney is simply a reality of modern politics are correct. Yet those who find this reality extremely offensive are equally correct, and should not be attacked for expressing their frustrations with the system as it is. Again, the author of the OP clearly stated that if Ms. Clinton is the Democratic Party’s nominee, she will definitely vote for her. How odd that Clinton supporters would attempt to shame her for imply expressing her opinion …..for isn’t part of the strength of Hillary Clinton rooted in the concept that women of her generation do not need to be silenced? And that their thoughts and contributions to the national debate have value?

[Tom Ripley]

1. K&R

[H2O Man]

3. Thank you!

[Octafish]

2. K&R

Thank you for standing up for what's right and true and democratic, H2O Man.

[H2O Man]

4. Glad to.

In my opinion, a very good case can be made for supporting Hillary Clinton. Likewise, a very good case can be made for not supporting her. The DU community would benefit from discussing those two issues.

However, while a good case can be made for the fact that, from time to time, a politician may appear on the same stage as some toxic republicans -- and where the politician should behave in a civil manner -- no good case can be made that Henry Kissinger is a good man. He's not. He is, by definition and reality, a war criminal, just as surely as Dick Cheney is. Those who claim otherwise do not add value to the conversations here. Indeed, the basic differences in character should always be presented as an ethical reason to vote for Democrats.

[Octafish]

150. Kissinger doesn't think Democracy should apply to the Little People

"The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves... l don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist because of the irresponsibility of its own people."

-- Henry Kissinger on the US-backed coup d'etat in Chile.

And we wonder why the US keeps moving to the right, even when we vote in leaders who promise to move things to the left.

[spanone]

5. appreciate your insights...k&r

as a member of your generation, i hated kissinger with all my being.

this does not translate as hatred toward hillary.

[H2O Man]

8. Right.

My thought about Kissinger are absolutely distinct from my thoughts about Hillary Clinton.

I favor a DU:GD where everyone can express their opinions -- including women from our generation, no matter if they are pro- or anti-Clinton -- without being subjected to insults.

[spanone]

26. i favor the same, thank you for expressing it in such an eloquent way.

[billhicks76]

135. Hillary Didn't Just "Meet" Kissinger

She was and is a good friend of his. C'mon. The man is a powerful war criminal. They chose him to cover up the 911 Commission. His replacements didn't accomplish much but they were better and Max Cleland resigned in disgust of the cover up...a triple amputee war hero. Where was Clinton when not sticking up for him? Oh right it's not her duty to.

[mylye2222]

136. Well said.

Hillary Clinton, a since decade good friend with war criminals. Kissinger, the Bushes...

[Enthusiast]

138. I find it very hard to overlook.

[billhicks76]

143. Impossible To Overlook

Unless you're a fat-cat Vichey-like Democrat.

[MissDeeds]

144. Reminds me of an old saying

"You're judged by the company you keep".

[BrotherIvan]

6. Well said

[H2O Man]

9. Thank you.

[G_j]

7. if nothing else,

let us learn our history. Thank You.

[H2O Man]

10. Right.

And if history has taught us nothing else, we should recognize the importance of keeping people such as Henry Kissinger far away from powerful positions in Washington, DC.

[bluesbassman]

11. Nice post H2O Man.

This is going to be a long primary season and it's going to be a lot longer if we treat each other's opinions and concerns with contempt and derision.

[H2O Man]

15. Exactly right.

Thank you.

Malcolm X used to say that any time two people think exactly alike, it is proof that only one of them is thinking. I'm reminded of this when I see some groups of DUers who think just alike, and insist that others are obligated to think just like them.

We are at a serious time in our nation's history. We need to understand the differences between finding common ground, versus being mere cogs in a machine. The 2016 elections -- and surely not just the presidential contest -- are hugely important. People need to be thinking of how far thy are willing to go to bring about needed change .....about what, for example, they are willing to sacrifice and give up. For some, that might mean being asked to give up the knee-jerk insults and attacks on others who simply think differently than they do.

[JEB]

12. K&R

Thank you for the thoughtful post. Excellent work.

[H2O Man]

16. Thank you.

I appreciate it!

[mylye2222]

13. Thanks for this thread.

Yes... some can only answer with hurtfull comments.... Depressing.

[H2O Man]

19. Right.

The attacks on the character of the lady who wrote the OP yesterday were foolish. They served no good purpose. That does not mean, of course, that people were obligated to share her opinion. But it is better to focus on discussing issues, rather than attacking individuals.

[Blue_Adept]

14. Very true

Also worth remembering that politics is very generational. The ultimate evil and experience of one is the banality of another.

Both sides need to remember it.

[H2O Man]

20. Great point.

Thank you.

[sabrina 1]

28. Is it generational, or a burying of inconvenient history? Not dismissing your comment, but in my

experience, once people are informed, their views are based on the information they receive, assuming they care about such things as War Crimes, eg.

Eg, I remember being shocked when I first learned about Churchill's shameful bigotry and it caused me never again to view him as a 'hero', just someone who was there at a particular time in history who performed well at that time. But overall, I have drastically changed my views of him.

Kissinger is still wanted in Chile for questioning wrt to that horrible period when the people were murdered, tortured and disappeared. So it isn't exactly history yet. Just knowing that and reading his opinions on US Foreign Policy, I despise the man.

We need new ideas regarding our FP and I would prefer they come from people who are not accused of war crimes.

I can't get the victims out of my mind.

[H2O Man]

36. There is some of both.

In many, if not most cases, I'm confident that it is primarily generational. Yet, plenty of younger folks understand exactly why many of their elders strongly dislike Kissinger.

There are also a few who simply want to ignore his well-documented history of war crimes. Indeed, I believe you saw just that on yesterday's thread.

[sabrina 1]

63. Oh I agree that some people DO ignore war crimes, when it suits their purposes.

However some of those same people were OUTRAGED over Bush/Cheney but have simply 'moved forward' now it seems.

I have zero respect for such people, which is why their opinion of me, which they are not shy about telling me, doesn't matter at all to me. I worry about the opinions of people I respect.

However I think most Americans think that overall, we are the GOOD GUYS and have no idea of what has been done in their name, because no one has informed them. Even those who WERE there were okay with Kissinger's cozying up to dictators, so long as we WIN.

Otoh, I like to think that most people do NOT want to see their country go down the path Kissinger has taken us. They just are not aware of it.

But I could be wrong. I hope not.

[H2O Man]

121. Exactly.

Well said -- as usual!

When the powers-that-be allow corruption and crime to go on, without consequence, it can only build upon itself. And that is, of course, the sad reality when it came to Nixon and Kissinger, the people most responsible for the Iran-Contra scandals, and the entirety of the Bush-Cheney administration.

As I have stated elsewhere on this thread, I didn't expect Hillary Clinton to slap Henry Kissinger on stage ......I would have defender her, if she had .....but what I want from all Democrats is a clear message that people of Henry's ilk will not be involved in any manner in Democratic administrations.

[sabrina 1]

123. The problem is, it wasn't just that she met him casually and was just being polite.

She has stated that he was been an adviser to her when she was SOS and speaks of him in pretty glowing terms.

To be honest when I first heard about her relationship with Kissinger, I was shocked. Seeing the photo knowing what I already did, didn't surprise me at all.

I don't think there is any doubt he will be advising her, but I do think it is something she needs to be asked.

Because you are correct, Democrats do need to send a message that people like Kissinger should not be anywhere near a Democratic President, or SOS for that matter.

I share Scarlet Woman's sentiments and was surprised to see that there was anyone on this forum at least, who did not.

[Scootaloo]

129. Good post

We absolutely do need a new foreign policy. I see glimmers of hope in some of the things Obama is doing... but I do not trust Clinton to continue them, and I am certain Republicans will smash it entirely.

We need someone who is even more progressive than Barack Obama to continue what he has started. We cannot brake or turn around.

[Jetboy]

17. A lot people avoided the thread altogethether.

'Here's the thing... don't expect me...'

It's just snarky, pretentious and trolling for a fight before ever getting to a point. Best avoid but the OP knew she'd get exactly what she got. Avoid, do not reward.

[H2O Man]

23. If a person is

unfamiliar with the lady who posted the OP, I suppose they might mistake it for being "snarky, pretentious, and trolling." And that error in perception and judgment likely does explain the toxicity of many of the responses to the OP. Still, rather than adding something positive to the discussion -- something that several people who disagreed with the OP proved was indeed possible -- a number of pro-Clinton folks displayed the attitude that seems unattractively entrenched in some of our most vocal community members.

I should note that, in the past 36 hours, I've read a few OPs that were misguided, at least one being an obvious attempt to "stir the pot." Thus, on one that expressed "concern" about a photograph of Ms. Clinton used on a campaign ad, I simply wrote that I like the picture. I do. And one one that claimed Ms. Clinton cannot defeat Jeb Bush, I responded that indeed she can, though it is possible that he could win, too.

I'm convinced that it is possible to discuss the topic of Hillary Clinton's run for president in 2016 in a rational, logical manner. It takes no more energy, I find, than to engage in silly personal attacks -- including with people we do not know, and incorrectly assume are snarky, pretentious, and/or trolling.

[Jetboy]

49. The words typed and posted are important, who did the typing is not.

Toxicity is toxicity and it is to be avoided. Sometimes snarky pretentious trolls are really great people IRL but what matters is the words they type as that's all most people have to go by. Her's were counter-productive IMO. The responses were completely predictable especially to the OP. So why bother other than to be a snarky pretentious troll?

I'm for civility and bringing Dems together to win elections. IMO her thread was against that agenda.

[dflprincess]

122. Referring to a long time DUer as a "snarky pretentious troll" doesn't do much for civility either.

And it makes it very clear that you are not at all familiar with the poster.

[Jetboy]

124. Who needs to be familiar with anything but the words posted?

I don't care who wrote it, my words accurately describe it. I already said she could be a very nice person IRL. The words she wrote were snarky, pretentious and trolling for the exact responses she got. She admitted to expecting the responses she got.

edit for grammar

[H2O Man]

145. Your words

provide nothing more than a projection of yourself. They in no way describe the author of the OP that you are attempting to insult.

[sabrina 1]

164. What she got was over a hundred recs, the last time I looked which says that a whole lot of people

here know exactly where she was coming from and no, to those who know her, which is a large % of the DU membership, it was not snarky or 'trolling for a fight'. Knowing her over the years, I knew she was being honest, as she is always is. I asked someone else this, but do you think people should be dishonest regarding how they feel about something as important as choosing a Presidential Candidate? Or remain silent?

Seems she made her point very well and the community 'rewarded' her by rec'ing her OP.

[KingCharlemagne]

18. Hat tip for the allusion to Hannah Arendt's phrase-coining title

about Eichmann! Very a propos. Kissinger deserves universal scorn and shunning for the first 9-11 (9-11-1973). Those of us who remember will never forgive nor forget.

[H2O Man]

24. It seemed the

obvious choice for the title, I think! Glad that you appreciated it. What's more, that you understand why it is important.

[Oilwellian]

21. Thank you for coming to the defense of a fellow liberal...

who remembers Kissinger's reign of terror. I'm also of the age to remember his war crimes.

Hillary's friendship with Kissinger goes beyond the normal demands of DC protocol. She did not have to write a glowing review of his book World Order where she said:

Kissinger is a friend, and I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels.

This is what liberals who remember are angry about. Hillary has shared Kissinger's vision of "World Order" since at least 1984. We should all be concerned about her becoming president and those who do remember will neither be shamed or silenced...at least until the primary is over.

[H2O Man]

27. Right.

Henry Kissinger is a repulsive human being. While one could debate if he is primarily immoral or amoral, it is impossible to make the case that he is anything other than one of the most vicious war criminals of the last century.

[sabrina 1]

31. He was a friend of Pinochet.

He encouraged this vile dictator to 'do what needs to be done'.

His views of how the world should be are repulsive.

The world according to Kissinger means toppling democratically elected leaders of nations we have 'interests' in, and replacing them with Dictators.

Dictators will sell their countries out, people like Aliende will not.

We need dictators. We have many allies right now who are dictators.

[Oilwellian]

54. Very similar to the right wing coup Hillary supported in Honduras while SOS n/t

[forest444]

146. All the more pathetic,

when one remembers that Pinochet was trained in Nazi Germany - and remained an unabashed Nazi until his death from diabetes in 2006. As a Jewish man, that alone should shame Kissinger to tears - but alas, Henry is nothing if not shameless.

Pinochet, besides sheltering the Nazi pedophile den Colonia Dignidad, was always good to his fellow Nazis in Chile: two of Chile's three richest people - retail tycoon Horst Paulmann and shipping magnate Sven von Appen - are apparently ODESSA network Nazis, and of course benefited greatly from Pinochet. The same goes for Pinochet's principal civilian apologist, the right-wing former President Sebastián Piñera (who made his first fortune by cleaning out the Bank of Talca in 1982, the 2nd-largest bank failure in Chile up to then).

These "success stories" are in sharp contrast to other businesspeople in Chile, more of whom were ruined by the two Pinochet-era financial crises than even under the misguided Allende. That said, what Chile has experienced since Pinochet stepped down in 1990 is almost a miracle similar to Portugal's and Spain's in the '80s and '90s.

[sabrina 1]

160. Thanks I wasn't aware of all that history re Pinnochet and the Nazis. But NOTHING that vile excuse

for a human being surprises me, and that goes for Kissinger also.

They are all psychopaths, they have no human emotions. And they got enough power to destroy what could have been a decent world.

To think these monsters are influencing our foreign policies. It is shameful.

[forest444]

163. Ah, the human condition.

We can only hope and pray.

[KoKo]

45. ....1! & Video

[KittyWampus]

53. a fellow "liberal" who portrayed Hillary and her "cozy relationship" with Kissinger dishonestly.

[Oilwellian]

56. Hillary's own words

Kissinger is a friend, and I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels.

WP

Looks like an honest assessment by my fellow liberal.

[sabrina 1]

61. What was dishonest about the portrayal?

[KittyWampus]

64. Hillary is COZY with a mass murderer (Kissinger). It is a blatant misrepresentation

to imply she's close on any level w/Kissinger.

Anyone with any self-respect would admit that.

[Luminous Animal]

80. Really? Do you call people you are not close to your friend?

[sabrina 1]

89. Well, that's what Hillary said. So blame Hillary not someone simply repeating what she learned from

the source. Hillary has spoken of Kissinger in glowing terms. She has called him, A WAR CRIMINAL, for advice on Foreign Policies. Airc, his record on that subject is why is wanted for questioning in Chile. Why on EARTH would a Democrat be calling such a person for advice on FP? Is she unaware of his record?

That man along with Nixon and Cheney and the rest of the gang who were there at the time, Rumsfeld too, belong in jail. Not advising Democrats on FP.

[leveymg]

76. She means "liberal" in the same archaic sense as Kissinger did about Metternich in A World Restored.

Prince Metternich was to the "liberal" era that dawned in the early 1800s what Kissinger was to America in the late 20th Century.

Henry the K wrote his doctoral dissertation at Harvard on Metternich, the arch conservative who restored the Old Order in the Old World after Napolean was put down. He means liberal in an entirely different sense from most Americans today do.

His dissertation was published as "A World Restored" in 1954. Wiki:

explains the complex chain of Congresses, which started before the end of the Napoleonic wars in 1814 with the Congress of Vienna and extended into the 1820s, as a system expected to give Europe peace and a new order after the violent struggles of the previous quarter century.

At the same time, the book introduces the reader to the political biographies of two important characters of the time. The first and main character is Klemens von Metternich, the Austrian Chancellor at that time. As the statesman of an old and fragile multilingual empire, Metternich had to deal with the task of organizing the alliance against Napoleon, while at the same time being a forced ally of France. After Napoleon was defeated, Metternich became the organizer of the Congress system, through which he would seek the survival and advancement of Austria.

[Hekate]

22. There you go, talking history and common sense again. Whatever will we do with you?

[H2O Man]

29. That's a tough question there.

I note that an increasing number of people simply ignore my contributions to the discussions here. That's not an option that I have, however: I just can't seem to get away from myself. Indeed, even when I'm talking to myself, and I politely tell me that I do not want to talk to me, I just won't stop.

[sabrina 1]

62. DU has changed. You have not. Neither have I. And maybe I'm an egotist but don't want to 'get away

from myself'. That would mean selling my soul in order to 'win'. Can't do that.

[annabanana]

74. I ALWAYS listen to what you have to say here.

Whether YOU want to listen to you or not! You seem to have a knack for bring light where heat is the medium du jour.

[bullwinkle428]

25. Thank you for expressing these thoughts far better than I'm capable of. This is just

what I was thinking as I read through the thread.

K&R.

[H2O Man]

32. Thank you!

I'm not comfortable with the swarming tactics of one group here on DU:GD. And it's funny, because I like most of those who participate in the swarms, as individuals. And, even among those that I don't particularly like, there are some that I respect, again as individuals.

Group behavior is a curious thing. It doesn't always bring out the best in us.

[Chiyo-chichi]

30. ...

[H2O Man]

34. Thank you.

[democrank]

33. Recommended

I also thought the response to the Clinton/Kissinger post was, in part, a generational thing. Your comparison of creep Kissinger to creep Cheney was aptly used as part of your explanation of some reactions to the post.

The thought of being in the same room with either Kissinger or Cheney makes my skin crawl. Many who lived through the Vietnam era and saw just about every blue collar kid they knew get drafted while kids with connections safely carried on with their lives aren`t big fans of either Kissinger or 5-deferment Cheney. Some think both are war criminals and I certainly wouldn`t want to hug or hang out with a war criminal, no matter what the political function was.

I`m a Paul Wellstone/Russ Feingold type of Democrat so naturally I`m not wild about some of Hillary Clinton`s friends and past votes, but I certainly want to hear what she has to say about the issues most important to me....just like I want to hear from Democrats who oppose her. If we can`t have a debate on the issues, we`re no better than the Republicans we constantly complained about when they followed George W. Bush in lockstep....without debate lockstep.

[H2O Man]

43. Well said.

Thank you.

I think that for younger community members, comparing how our generation viewed Kissinger to how people currently view Dick Cheney, has value. Both are terrible human beings. That neither faced any legal consequences for their vicious actions is a shame.

No matter who the Democratic Party decides upon for our candidate in 2016, I truly hope that person will not allow anyone of Kissinger or Cheney's ilk of being part of our government.

[asiliveandbreathe]

35. A good synopsis of events...and support of a fellow DU'r

As a woman of the Vietnam Era..both brothers served in Vietnam..a woman who never gave up - supported our Mom at the most difficult of times - unimaginable despair knowing at any day a knock on the door could happen...I take exception to someone who would present a pic..for what purpose????

Okay, so Hillary may not be your cup of tea..but what is the point of the pic...

Kissinger was and is a war monger...he was among the many who thought it was okay to send my generation of men - to war..but I do not hold that against Hillary.....

I will vote for the best Democratic candidate who WILL prevent a republicon in the WH - and I will not hold my nose doing it! - The stakes are too high...if that is Hillary - so be it!

Liz Warren is a home state gal - Bernie to the North - love them both...she is not running and Bernie can't win..

Sometimes you don't get what you want, you get what you need...

[H2O Man]

47. Well said.

I appreciate you sharing your experiences and opinion on this topic. I like that you are able to communicate your thoughts clearly and directly.

One thing that I find interesting -- and I'm not commenting on how the photo of Ms. Clinton and Kissinger was used (and I definitely recognize that they are two distinct people -- is the power of a photograph. And not just this one. I'm talking more in general, how certain photographs get a strong, often emotional reaction.

Obviously, this can be used in a good or bad way. In terms of the OP this thread has discussed, I'm more than happy to recognize everyone's right to their own opinion, as to if it were used in a good, bad, or whatever manner. Rather, I find the intensity of the reactions to it, to be fascinating.

[geek tragedy]

37. "He is that rare and foul beast, a man whose record shows sympathy for communism and fascism.

It comes from a natural hatred of the democratic process, which he has done so much to subvert and undermine at home and abroad, and an instinctive affection for totalitarians of all stripes. True, full membership in this bestiary probably necessitates that you say something at least vicariously approving about the Final Solution. What's striking about the Nixon tapes is that they show Kissinger managing this ugly feat without anyone even asking him. May my seasonal call be heeded: Let this character at last be treated like the reeking piece of ordure that he is."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2010/12/how_can_anyone_defend_kissinger_now.html

[geek tragedy]

38. "Henry Kissinger should have the door shut in his face by every decent person and should be shamed,

ostracized, and excluded. No more dinners in his honor; no more respectful audiences for his absurdly overpriced public appearances; no more smirking photographs with hostesses and celebrities; no more soliciting of his worthless opinions by sycophantic editors and producers. One could have demanded this at almost any time during the years since his role as the only unindicted conspirator in the Nixon/Watergate gang, and since the exposure of his war crimes and crimes against humanity in Indochina, Chile, Argentina, Cyprus, East Timor, and several other places."

ibid.

[Tom Ripley]

70. +1000

[H2O Man]

78. Thank you.

I think that Kissinger is best understood in the context provided for by Erich Fromm, in his 1973 book, "The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness." He found the Nixon administration a comfortable place to exercise his pathology. It is difficult to think of him doing so as an individual; it's impossible to think of him being a threat to one's safety in person. Kissinger is a grand example of someone who depersonalized those he caused to be at war -- including American service men and women, as well as all the Vietnamese.

[geek tragedy]

79. A man who celebrates the absence of humanity from his life's work.

He should be Cheney's cellmate.

[H2O Man]

82. Right.

There is a total disconnect with people like Kissinger, Cheney, and Bush. They have no regard for the value of human life. None.

[sabrina 1]

92. I absolutely agree and especially with the suggestion in one of your quotes from the article that he

should be shunned rather than being entertained by hostesses at glittering cocktail parties.

Btw, did hell freeze over lately?

[zeemike]

39. Sometimes I think I should go to the sports forum too

And talk about the upcoming fight.
Instead of GD looking at the shaming being used to quash any opposing opinion that we see far too often.
That poster was one of my old favorites I had not seen for a long time and was glad to see her post again...and expressed what I offten feel, that if you say what you really think and feel it just causes trouble.

Hang in there Mr Waterman, don't leave us altogether, I would miss that a lot.

[H2O Man]

81. There are fewer

in the sports forum. There are, of course, one or two that pass through every so often, that take a different approach than that of the gang that hangs out there. A while back, for example, some poor fellow wanted to argue with me about boxing,. Gracious!

He used information from sources he didn't mention, but that I was fully aware of, to argue that Floyd Mayweather would refuse to fight Manny Pacquiao. This was shortly after a friend of mine was hired by Floyd as a sparring partner, though that fact hadn't made the "news" yet. But my buddy was telling me (and others) about Floyd's intense focus on, and preparation for, the May 2nd bout.

I'm fine with debates, or even arguments, about social-political issues. But I don't understand why anyone would want to argue with me about boxing. Is nothing sacred?

[zeemike]

87. Lol...I can't imagine anyone wanting to argue with you about boxing.

But I love it too, but I have not kept up with it much in years, but I have seen both of them fight, and I can't believe they would back out of it...the payday will be a big one and many fans will want to see it.

My money would be on Maywether, but it is by no means a sure thing.

[H2O Man]

91. I think that

a good case can be made for both of them being able to win the fight. But, while one can make a case for Manny losing, you can't really make a case for Floyd losing -- because that hasn'y happened.

Styles make fights. I think that after three rounds, Floyd will impose his will. I think that I've told you that when I interviewed Greg Haugen, he said both him and friend Roberto Duran think Floyd will stop Manny in 5 rounds.

[marym625]

40. K&R

This is a very nice piece. Awesome that you are standing up for your friend and for the right to say what you think.

I disagree with your assessment of those of us that agree with your friend's OP. She did not just have a photo op with this war criminal, she praised him.

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/hillary-clinton-henry-kissinger-world-order

You can be polite, and even friendly, without, to quote mother Jones article, fawning over him.

The disgust is deserved

[H2O Man]

83. Thank you.

And you are correct about the other information provided on that OP/thread.

[marym625]

88. Thank you

I just reread my reply to you and I wasn't very clear about the "she." Glad you knew which one I meant.

[Martin Eden]

41. DU Rec

Guilt by association is almost always unjust, and guilt by being photographed together even moreso.

Also wrong are DUers launching personal attacks against other DUers instead of rationally discussing the ideas at hand.

[H2O Man]

84. Well said.

Thank you.

[Rex]

42. Face it, DU de-evolves into High School when it comes to our pet issues.

Yes there are some real mean things being said right now, I read that thread and it made me ask the question - what is Henry so famous for? I know why he is infamous...but what got him noticed in the first place?

MADem replied to me with that he was basically a good politician as far as connections go. Good meaning, connected. I too sometimes post my emotions and not my rational thoughts on a subject and know that we have to take the good with the bad. It seems to be the fine print in the Constitution or something.

I've also known your friend for a very long time and she has always struck me as very down to earth. Also not the first person to say they were not happy with HRC. She is NOT my first pick either, but if she is the ONLY pick...then guess who gets my vote?

A lot of people are frustrated too, because they don't see anyone else as viable and they don't want to vote for HRC. So they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Me myself, I vote for whomever ends up the primary candidate.

I keep it simple.

[calimary]

66. Sorry. You made me laugh. I LOVE that title of your post here!

This IS like high school sometimes! There ARE cliques and all that adolescent shit. Sometimes it's quite hilarious, all things considered. I was yammering on elsewhere here about the arrested development I witnessed, on parade at a shooting event to which I was invited a couple of years ago. Arrested development seems EVERYWHERE sometimes, doesn't it!

I've often wondered how I would behave if I found myself in a photo with people I did not like or really didn't want to be seen with. Well, it's a photo. A moment captured visually forever. I'd probably try to come up with a nice smile. I've certainly had to work with people I didn't like, didn't trust, didn't really want to be seen with. But hey, you're at a big convention or hospitality suite or Christmas party or something, and there are the inevitable photos. Whaddya do? You make nice. For appearances sake. Unless you really WANT some sort of confrontation or to make a stink of some sort. Sometimes there are situations in which it's just not doable. A woman I once worked for had, on prominent display in her home, a photo of herself meeting reagan at some reception. She had this huge smile on her face. I knew she personally reviled him, opposed everything he stood for, and thought he was a complete brainless and therefore seriously dangerous nincompoop. But MAN did she smile in that photo!

[Rex]

68. I'm sure most people smile for the camera.

Well you and I have been here since the beginning...not like it is our first rodeo!

I don't mind the fighting so much anymore, not like it is unnatural among people that know each other online.

Or offline.

[H2O Man]

147. I wonder if we

could hold rehearsals for a DU production of "High School Musical"? Or should we try "West Side Story"? (grin)

You are correct, of course.

MADem is always a great source for information .....one of my favorite community members.

[herding cats]

44. Thanks for putting that in perspective for everyone here.

The comparison to Cheney does drive the point home for me.

[H2O Man]

93. Thank you.

I think that "Dick Cheney" is something that everyone understands.

[Bluenorthwest]

46. And yet those who support Warren get very testy indeed if anyone dare ask about the fact that she

voted for Nixon, who first appointed Kissinger by the way, and then for every Republican through George Bush, including two votes for Reagan during the Great Silence toward AIDS, when nearly 30,000 Americans died without any form of reaction from our government. She voted for that a second time, then for Bush. I have been told is is 'stupid' to mention that. One of her boosters asked 'was AIDS really all that bad?'. Because they don't want to talk about the facts.

I find it grating that those of you who do not respect the activism done by others during the 80's and 90's demand such respect for your own activist views from the 60's and 70's.

[Luminous Animal]

85. She was a registered Republican from 1991 to 1996.

She registered Independent prior to that. You haven't a clue who she voted for.

[H2O Man]

94. There are people

who only seem to complain. We encounter them in every-day life, and even here, on DU. No matter what the topic of discussion, they make it about themselves and their victimhood. That's a sad way to be.

[LovingA2andMI]

48. K/R

Thank You for Writing This!

[H2O Man]

95. Thank you.

[onyourleft]

50. Thank you.

There are not many of my generation who remember Kissinger fondly.

[H2O Man]

96. Right.

He is a terrible human being.

[BlueMTexpat]

51. I am a staunch Clinton supporter and I

would never have attacked your friend's OP. I am also one who abhors Kissinger with every fiber of my being.

Yes, good people can be in photos with bad people as you state so correctly. It does not mean that they necessarily like and/or agree those individuals. Without more, inferring liking or agreement is wrong. But, to be fair, it is somewhat provocative to post such a photo here when too many DUers are not nearly as kind towards Hillary as your friend was. Some of those DUers have been unnecessarily nasty, IMO, and feelings have been rubbed raw as a result. It seems as if your friend got caught up in some of the unintended crossfire and, although I was not part of that, I am sorry that it happened. We should be able to discuss Hillary or any other Dem candidate courteously. Let's all please save our opprobrium for the GOPers who so richly deserve it.

I wonder though whether, rather than describing the "banality" of Henry K, you possibly mean his "ubiquity" as Kissinger seems to pop up everywhere these days - self-serving war criminal that he is.

"Banality" is something that I associate - rightly or wrongly - with the phrase "banality of evil," used as part of the subtitle of Hannah Arendt's report on th­e Adolf Eichmann trail. Eichmann was, of course, one of the principal organizers of the Holocaust (and I will likely be "Godwinned" out right here by someone, I am sure).

Arendt described Eichmann as a man responsible for the deaths of millions yet distinct only in his blandness, his mediocrity, his averageness (i.e., his banality), and in her report investigated how a totalitarian state could turn seemingly ordinary citizens into criminals. Arendt's report was attacked by many, including some who were supposedly her friends, in part because her portrayal of Eichmann as a figure at odds with the established mold of the monstrous Nazi was considered an insult to Holocaust victims and an apology for Eichmann. For more, see http://cabinetmagazine.org/issues/5/dedemonization.php She caused quite a stir with that phrase and other statements in the report, btw.

[H2O Man]

98. Thank you!

There's no need for all the acrimony that is found in discussions about the primaries. Reminds me of 2008. Yikes!

I meant to use the word, as I used it, for a very specific reason. Kissinger believes himself to be not merely the life of the party, but the exact center of the universe. I do not, and thus purposely compared him to another of history's violent shitheads, a war criminal who was otherwise a rather dull turd.

[BlueMTexpat]

134. Excellent description! :) eom

[KittyWampus]

52. No, sorry. She clearly said Hillary was COZY w/Kissinger.

And by implication agreed with his actions.

Sorry, showing that photo and saying she is COZY with Kissinger is dishonest.

And among other things, it's guilt by association.

Since humans started organizing civilizations, those who are in positions of power and leadership have had to learn decorum and "court politics". How to act when in the public eye. And this is true on the national, state and local level down to your local garden club.

Trying to make Hillary out as a Kissinger acolyte is ethically and factually wrong.

This thread comes across as you trying to school us on who Kissinger is and what he did/didn't do. As if that makes a difference to the fact your friend essentially lied about Hillary and her relationship to Kissinger.

Because ONE person on that thread seems to downplay Kissinger's role in what happened many decades ago.

You totally ignored the bogus thread title that said Hillary is cozy with Kissinger.

I don't need you to school me on Kissinger. I don't care who was in college back in the day.

LYING about Hillary by showing a photograph of her with Kissinger and making more out of it than is realistic is indefensible. And you are defending it.

And your good buddy was totally unwilling to admit she was wrong even after photos of Nelson Mandela, Jimmy Carter and others with Kissinger were posted.

[Jetboy]

55. Well said.

I would challenge that person to pick her favorite Dem candidate for President, anybody ever alive or dead ANYBODY and defend every single person they were ever photographed with.

Guilt by association is not ok.

[hifiguy]

59. That HRC described war criminal Kissinger as a "defender of human rights"

in her review of said war criminal's latest book goes well beyond showing up at the same function.

Kissinger's utter and complete disdain for human rights was a hallmark of his career, perhaps the defining one. See Chile for an example. He has more blood on his hands than any other living person, and HRC simply chooses to ignore everything that is known by anyone who can read histror/. An apologia for/whitewash of a monster like Kissinger is well beyond the expediencies of politics as usual.

[Scootaloo]

131. Isn't that bewildering?

I mean it should piss me off, but... It doesn't. It's like it's so completely fucked-up that I can't process it enough to get pissed. i'm just sitting there going "wait, what say again? ¿Como?"

[Enthusiast]

140. Very well said.

[Oilwellian]

60. Except that she mirrored his actions in Honduras while SOS

I'd say she identifies closely with Kissinger's foreign policies.

[H2O Man]

77. For sake of accuracy,

she did not say Hillary Clinton was "cozy" with Henry Kissinger. She did use the word "cozy," in the context of saying she could never be cozy with Kissinger. It's good to be accurate, and not attempt to place your words in another person's mouth, or to claim that they have said anything other what they actually did say.

Having said that, I can understand why you would think that the author of the OP implied that Ms. Clinton was cozy with Kissinger. More, I take you at face value, regarding that you do not believe that is accurate. Several others have posted information that a reasonable person could believe indicates she has a friendly relationship with him. I trust everyone to decide that for themselves.

I don't think it would be realistic to expect Hillary Clinton to either turn her back on Kissinger in the setting they were in, or to have smashed a banana-shaving cream pie into his mug. This is not to say that I would not have been happy if Ms. Clinton did just that. But I fully understand the setting.

I am not offended by people who are either comfortable, or uncomfortable, with Ms. Clinton's interaction with Henry Kissinger. While I consider him a poisonous snake, who disrespected the Constitution of the United States, and who shares responsibility for the suffering and deaths of thousands of human beings, I also recognize that he was an intelligent, capable politician.

Someone else noted that it was Nixon who first elevated Kissinger, which is not entirely accurate. Yet, it is interesting to consider what type of career he might have had, but for Nixon. From 1960, '64, and early '68, he was, of course, closely tied to Nelson Rockefeller. Had "Rocky" been elected in 1968, I suspect that Kissinger might be remembered quite differently. Nixon brought out the worst in people. And Kissinger was indeed a terrible human being in those years.

[rhett o rick]

165. You are quick to call someone you disagree with a liar, "LYING about Hillary by showing a photograph

of her with Kissinger and making more out of it than is realistic is indefensible." There are numberous stories on the Intertubes that show HRC to be a close friend of Mr. Kissinger. Like this one:

But former-Madam Secretary Clinton had no obligation to praise Kissinger and publicly participate in his decades-long mission to rehabilitate his image. In the review, she calls Kissinger a "friend" and reports, "I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels." She does add that she and Henry "have often seen the world and some of our challenges quite differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past." But here's the kicker: At the end of the review, she notes that Kissinger is "surprisingly idealistic":

from: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/hillary-clinton-henry-kissinger-world-order

You said: "Trying to make Hillary out as a Kissinger acolyte is ethically and factually wrong. " If it is wrong it should be easy to prove. Show a quote where she is describing him with anything but praise. She has publicly praised him for decades.

Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they are lying.

[SHRED]

57. BRAVO!

K&R

[H2O Man]

99. Thanks.

[one_voice]

58. K&R

[H2O Man]

100. Thanks!

[treestar]

65. I was merely pushing back on the idea that

ever speaking to someone we don't agree with is so wrong that you have to be associated with their ideas. That is Saul Alinsky right wing territory.

And yes, society at large does not consider him a "war criminal." I don't know why DU has people who can't hate someone for the evil they have done unless it receives its most extreme label. The things he was wanted for questioning for were not wars the US was involved in.

And there are plenty of other people to have over the Vietnam war.

Making an OP just requires a certain thickness of skin. It amazes me you are making a whole new OP dedicated to chiding people for opposing the victim who made the Kissinger OP.

[H2O Man]

72. That there are

members of the DU community who speak kindly of Henry Kissinger is of no surprise. That you are the most vocal of these, even less so.

I respect your right to post your opinions and values here. Likewise, I respect my right to disagree with you, based upon my opinions and values. Now, that adds up to a good thing: for our opinions and values are complete opposites. It allows others to compare them, and decide for themselves what their opinions and values are.

[treestar]

73. Well that is dishonest.

I did not speak kindly of Kissinger - that is a mischaracterization clear as day. I actually don't think much of him. But to insist that he be treated as a pariah by the rest of society is not something that is going to happen. We all know that.

[H2O Man]

75. Not at all.

There is nothing "dishonest" about what I wrote. It is definitely my interpretation of the things that you have said on this thread, along with yesterday's thread.

You can, obviously, believe that I am mistaken. But I assure you that I am not lying -- it is absolutely my opinion of you, as honest as can be.

[stone space]

156. How many people do you know...

...who don't consider Kissinger to be a war criminal?

And yes, society at large does not consider him a "war criminal."

I can't think of anybody, myself.

[H2O Man]

162. Right.

Whenever a person says something like that, they expose their true thinking.

[Douglas Carpenter]

67. knr

[H2O Man]

103. Thanks!

[Blue_In_AK]

69. Absolutely!

Also being of a "certain age," I couldn't agree more.

[H2O Man]

104. Thank you.

It's difficult, I suppose, to really understand the emotions that a generation connected with certain events or people. For example, a person can watch a film of The Beatles, and be able to pass any test on the history of that group .....but unless you lived through it, you can't really fully appreciate what they were.

Among the bad characters in America in the late 1960s and early '70s, Henry Kissinger stood out as one of the very worst.

[countryjake]

71. Thank you!

Yes, for those of us who lived thru it and have remained active for half a century, it does strike a sour chord when valid opinions are characterized as disingenuous or immature, hateful or blind, and, worse yet, nefarious, dishonest trolling of this world we now find ourselves struggling in.

As one who also remembers very well, it seems as tho all that's missing are charges of pinko commie, eh?

I commend you for this post and heartily agree with your final sentence!

[H2O Man]

105. Thanks, countryjake!

You nailed it. It's interesting, I've been thinking about writing an essay for DU:GD .....not "against" anyone here, because I do like most people, even if I disagree strongly with them ......and even of the few that I dislike, I still respect more than half of those. But when groups of people who share a common belief, or value, gather together, that group will always contain both a very good and very bad potential.

This includes, as you note, a tendency to view your opposition as your enemy. And that often involves name-calling and labeling that dehumanizes the other.

I'm not pointing fingers at any one group of people on DU:GD. That potential exists in every group.

[fadedrose]

86. They don't allow for differeces in opinion

very close to fascism, but I'm not an expert in that...

Aren't there some countries where the government would put Kissinger in jail if he showed up -

and didn't a few just proclaim that they would jail members of the Bush administration.. Cheney was the worst and still is...

[H2O Man]

107. Right.

The greatest difference between the Democratic Party and the republican machine is that we promote individuals thinking for themselves. The republicans are discouraged from thinking, and are instead rewarded for being mere cogs.

[Scuba]

90. I'm often favorably impressed with your posts. This is one of your best. Thanks H2O Man.

As a Viet Vet, Kissinger is anethema to me, and I feel strongly about Hillary not only posing for pictures with this scumbag, but actually praising him in her book. To me this is a horrible character flaw and a terrible lapse of judgement.

[H2O Man]

109. Wow, thanks!

Every so often in life, I hear or read something that has special meaning. Your response is a great example. Thank you for making my day.

[Pathwalker]

97. EVERYONE in washingtom calls people from the other side

"friend". Teddy Kennedy, Paul Wellstone, Tip O'Neil, Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell have all stood in the Senate and House and called their opponents friend. So, when Hillary Clinton, as HEAD of the Diplomatic Corps in Washington calls Kissinger her friend, I see it as simply "Washington speak" because she's smart enough, and diplomatic enough not to call him a piece of shit used car salesman.

I am no fan of Henry Kissinger; while both of my brothers, several cousins and more than a few childhood friends were fighting in that horrible war, I watched the nightly news as Kissinger sat at the Paris Peace talks and argued about the size and shape of the table FOR SIX FUCKING MONTHS, while our brothers, cousins and friends died. I will never have one atom of respect for him, but if the idea that calling someone in Washington, D.C. "friend" disqualifies someone from being president, then the only ones who are qualified are the likes of Ted Cruz or Donald Trump. No thanks.

I know you won't reply, you probably have me on ignore, but I find the idea that a Head of the Diplomatic Corps speaking diplomatically of that old cretin disqualifies her from being President to be laughable. Just my humble opinion. YMMV.

[H2O Man]

111. I tend to talk

with anyone/everyone who wants to engage in a sincere conversation. And I've never put anyone on "ignore." Those who I find insincere, I just chose not to bother with. In your case, I think you might be imagining more significance there, than I do.

As the OP makes clear to anyone who reads it, I understand how politics works, including how various people meet and interact. I have zero problem with DUers who correctly note that "this is how Washington works."

More, I understand, and have no problem with, those who are equally aware of how Washington works, but express outrage and revulsion at that reality.

[dhill926]

101. I cannot recommend this post enough...

I was of age during Vietnam, luckily the draft ended before I got called up ( I had a shitty draft number). Kissinger was (and is) pure evil. And yes, people from all sides get together for a number of reasons. I hate her support of him....but it ain't a deal breaker. No one is beyond reproach in all things....just how the world works...

[H2O Man]

112. Thank you.

It was an ugly war. Nixon and Kissinger extended it -- both in time, and place -- for purely political reasons. They damaged the Constitution of the United States, and the social fabric of our nation.

[babylonsister]

102. Great OP, my friend. She is a voice of reason

and has been for many years, and we are in silly season. Thanks, and I hope you keep posting your thoughts; they are valuable to all of us.

[H2O Man]

113. Well, thank you!

I appreciate that compliment from my Favorite Sister!

And I think this place is stuck with me, at least for the time being!

[Thespian2]

106. K & R !!!

Yep. I was there to protest 'Nam...and couldn't understand why no one, including Kissinger, was put on trial for war crimes. I was too old to go, but had relatives in this senseless war.

[H2O Man]

114. Right!

I remember quite clearly that it wasn't only Democrats who found Kissinger offensive. He was secure in the Nixon - Ford administrations, where he definitely had way too much power.Plenty of republicans knew he was toxic, too.

[PosterChild]

108. I recently read k's book....

...World Order, not in the least because Hillary "reviewed" it. I told one of my my fellow liberals at work about it and recommend he read it. He got all flustered and ranted about K starting the Vietnam war (!)

LOL - I had to remind him that Kennedy was the major instigator, Johnson was the major esculator and that Kissinger shared the Nobel Peace Prize for ending it.

[H2O Man]

116. The US's role in

Vietnam goes back to President Truman, of course. During WW2, Ho was respected by FDR; had FDR lived, history would have been significantly different.

After his death, Truman took a very different approach. He believed that "yellow people aren't ready for democracy," and thus supported France's attempts to re-colonize Vietnam. France, of course, could not afford this on their own. So Truman had the US foot the bill, a policy that Ike continued.

That Kissinger shared the Nobel Prize definitely cheapened it.

[Enthusiast]

141. PLUS ONE!

[PosterChild]

166. You definitely have...

... a better grasp of the history and chronology of the conflict than did my friend at work. I was a bit schocked by his confusion.

Of course, he isn't a boomer. It's all kind of fuzzy , ancient history to him.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

110. Very well said

Kissinger was an asshole, pure and simple.

[H2O Man]

118. And that's his good side!

A fucking asshole, he was and is.

[scarletwoman]

115. Dear H2O Man - thank you for your kind words, and most of all for your generous compassion for all.

My apparently infamous OP from yesterday was really just a spur of the moment thing. I so rarely post OPs, and most of the time when I do, it's just to get something off my chest.

It didn't bother me to be attacked and derided - that just comes with the territory and was to be expected. I said what I wanted to say and am content with having done so. I am not by nature a defensive person, so I'm disinclined to defend myself - I understand peoples' reactions, and firmly believe that they have every right to their points of view. I hadn't intended to start a brawl, although I suppose I ought to have been aware that one was likely to ensue.

Oh well.

Seriously though, this is a wonderful thread, and as always I continue to learn from you - your beautiful knack for equanimity and respect for all veiwpoints. I so appreciate it! You are a treasure, and that you call me "friend" means more to me than I can ever adequately express.

Love always,
sw

P.S. - I hope I'm not bringing additional discord to this thread by posting on it!

[H2O Man]

119. I believe the exact

quote was "one of my best friends." (smile) And I absolutely meant that. Others on the forum have no idea about some of the issues we have discussed privately, which are a most important part of why I think so highly of you.

I recognize -- very well, in fact -- that you post exactly what you want, when you want. And you are fully secure to "defend" your positions, if you chose to ....and therefore, do not need your older brother butting in here, trying to "protect" you. I've seen you respond to yappy chihuahuas before.

Rather, I wrote this OP to communicate a simple message to my friends, be they pro-Clinton, anti-Clinton, or undecided. The responses to your OP provided the vehicle that allowed me to do that.

[OKNancy]

117. I'm the same age as well...

I was pretty scared my husband was going to be sent to Vietnam. Fortunately he only got sent to Ft Sam Houston.
I don't really need a lecture on Kissinger and I don't think Hillary supporters "shamed" her.. they disagreed because the post was a dishonest representation.

In real life, not people's big, bold internet life, people are cordial. Well, normal people are.

[H2O Man]

120. Oh, I agree with you.

You are right in saying the Clinton supporters did not shame the author of that OP. I had wrote that they tried to shame her. But I should have been clearing, in saying that their attempts failed.

I think that Henry Kissinger is an interesting topic for discussion. I don't necessarily agree with those who say he is really important in the context of the 2016 election, or those who claim that he is of no significance in it. Still, I enjoy reading other people's opinions.

The one thing that I might have a minor disagreement with you on is about normal people being cordial. As an abnormal human being, I am convinced that a lot of us are cordial, too!

[indivisibleman]

125. our son had to shake the hand of Donald Rumsfeld

I have often asked myself what I would do if brought face to face with the likes of Kissinger or Cheney. It depends upon the circumstances. If I traveled in those circles I am sure I would have to be civil.

[H2O Man]

148. No better reason

to use soap when you wash your hands!

It's funny: my buddy Robert has been neighbors with Donald Rumsfeld. He said that in that context, Rumsfeld is a quiet, rather likable man. I don't think that I could stand having him for a neighbor myself.

[indivisibleman]

167. He should place iron bars on that side of his property. n/t

[rhett o rick]

126. But Mr. Kissinger said in his book that H. Clinton contacted him for advice while Secretary

of State. She admires the man. This is not unexpected considering her hawkish foreign policy decisions. I bet Kissinger applauded her support for the Republicon invasion of Iraq.

[H2O Man]

149. Thank you.

I've seen adequate pro-Clinton responses to our friend posting a photograph of Ms. Clinton and Henry Kissinger. But I've noticed that none of them are responding to messages such as your's, which suggest a closer relationship between the two.

As always, I appreciate the contributions that you make here at DU. I'm always very favorably impressed with your thinking.

[rhett o rick]

159. And thank you for the kind words.

And I would like to return the complement. Sometimes it's hard to keep it real when faced with irrationality. And it's going to get harder. I think we need to keep focused on supporting the Populist Movement.

[H2O Man]

161. An unfortunate amount

of what passes for discussions on DU:GD in recent times, is nothing more than mindless chatter. I'm confident that you are no more interested in participating in such nonsense than I am. And there is also a lot of mean-spirited crap here, too.

At times, I think that there are influences on the forum, who are attempting to get people to conform with the moderate-conservative wing of the Democratic Party. It reminds me of what Erich Fromm discussed in his introduction to A. S. Neill's 1960 book on education, "Summerhill." In it, Fromm spoke about the differences between overt authority -- "do it my way, or else" -- and anonymous authority -- "don't you want to be just like everyone else?". (Fromm goes into much greater detail on "authority" in his classic 1941 book, "Escape From Freedom.&quot

I'm far more comfortable with the Populist Movement, as it is in line with liberation theology. And I'm pleased that, along with you and myself, there is a good sub-group of people here, that recognize this, as well.

Thanks!

[Scootaloo]

127. It's not just your generation

First-hand, yes. But it's been a long, winding road of war crimes for all to witness. In Latin america and Africa as well. All with hte goal of boostign the right-wing movements around the world.

"Good people do photo ops with bad people' indeed. Good people tend ot not write glowing book reviews for bad people. Good people tend to reserve themselves to shaking hands or being in the same frame as bad people, when it's a photo op. Even accepting that there is a vast gulf of difference between Clinton and Kissinger - and yes, there certainly is! - it bears acknowledgement that she has been extremely tone-deaf in her positioning with the lumpy sebaceous little thug.

And yes, one poster in that thread told me that Kissinger deserves a pass because he dressed nicely. i don't know if it's the same poster you had in mind, but i coughed up into my mouth a little bit. i don't know what's with some DU'ers.

[H2O Man]

151. Well said.

I'd assume that the person behind the "well-dressed man" comment was attempting to tell a joke. While it's not funny, it isn't as sad as it would be, were they serious.

There have been a number of war criminals who have done serious damage to our nation. But Kissinger earned a place by himself. It is terrible that some people honor him.

[lexington filly]

128. Direct from the pages of the Republican Playbook???

Who doesn't remember candidate Obama being damned for for his church's minister? Or palling around with a terrorist? Or his birth father, etc.? And now we Dems are going to do that same number on one of our own candidates for talking or writing publicly positively about someone many of us justifiably detest?

While Kissinger and Nixon should have been charged and tried for crimes, it's another system that was/is rigged---to use Warren's term. I lived through Viet Nam and Watergate then. But 40 long years later, I don't have any emotional investment in Kissinger. I do have it in income equality, catastrophic climate change, equal civil rights, racism, voting rights, total police reform, real friend to the poor, etc. And I'm looking for whatever high IQ, educated candidate best represents my values whatever the race, gender or gender identification, religion or non-religion.

[Jetboy]

130. Guilt by association goes back to at least McCarthy.

Probably further.

Best to ignore it or call it out but for whatever reason, everyone is defending it. Who cares how nice the poster is IRL? Guilt by association is wrong and people defending it are wrong.

[Scootaloo]

132. Jeremiah Wright never napalmed anyone

I'm glad you don't have any emotional investment. I'm sure that's a relief fr you.

But thousands and thousands of people were killed and maimed by this oily troll's actions. A lot of them still live with what he did.

So congratulations on not wasting your beautiful mind on things like that. Sadly, others do not have that option.

[H2O Man]

152. Not at all.

The author of the OP in question is far from being a right-wing republican. She is, in fact, from the Democratic Left.

It's interesting that, although she made in very clear that she would vote for Hillary, some people are entirely focused on her saying that she'd be holding her nose. In my opinion, that probably holds true for most people from the Democratic Left.

I think the most important part of her message was that she will vote for Ms. Clinton, if she is indeed the Democratic Party's nominee.

[Change has come]

133. Thank you...

for standing up for our friend.

[H2O Man]

153. Thank you.

I try to stand up for everyone's right to speak their mind, even if I disagree with them, here on DU.

Likewise, I exercise my right to express my opinion.

[Enthusiast]

137. Kicked

and recommended a whole bunch!

Wonderful, H2O Man!

When I read the responses to the OP I was flabbergasted. I was at a loss for words. I only wish I could have expressed my thoughts as well as you have in this OP.

I am of a similar age. I react to Kissinger much as I do Cheney. You nailed it.

[H2O Man]

154. Thank you.

Lots of people appear to be comfortable in being rude to others on the internet. There are times that the behaviors, even here on DU, remind me of "road rage." There's no need for it. No one benefits. And it tends to get others to increase their internal rudeness, and splatter it upon various discussions here.

Kissinger and Cheney have a lot in common.

[LynneSin]

139. As I said in that thread - if I refused to vote for any Dem who posed with Kissinger...

I probably would not be able to vote again in my lifetime.

[H2O Man]

155. Very good.

You always seem to apply common sense and clear thinking into the discussions on DU:GD. Thank you for that.

[LynneSin]

158. You must skip half my posts then

I try but sometimes I lose it.

Or maybe I'm just getting too old for this nonsense again.

I see our country in the same position as we were back in 1999 where the country seems to be going in the right direction and people are starting to do better with their lives. Does that mean everyone is? Oh hell no, we have a long way to go. But I think at least we are going in that right direction. But I do know that if a Republican gets in the White House then we will be set back again another 8 years or maybe another 80 years. I never lived in the era of Jim Crow south but I'm worried that might happen if the GOP gets elected.

[malthaussen]

142. The guilt by association crowd is pretty strong.

IIRC, Mr Obama has also been attacked for some of his occasional acquaintances. Which kind of ignores the fact that people in public life are going to rub up against all kinds. I doubt one can accurately guage the depths of their connections, so I tend to ignore associative guilt. The media love it, of course, since it fits in with their perspective of everything being about personalities.

Which is not, of course, what the OP is about. The frequency of name-calling, invective, and junior high debate-team practices in GD seems at times to be in inverse proportion to the substance of the post. It's sad that this flaw exists even in Democrats, who are supposed to be the party of reason. It appears, too, that subjects even tangentially related to the issues of gender and race are sure to bring the poison out. Which could lead one to ask that age-old question, can't we all just learn to get along?

-- Mal

[H2O Man]

157. Really well said!

I enjoy your second paragraph, even more so than the first one -- which is solid, itself.

Thanks!