Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Where does Kerry stand on PNAC?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:47 AM
Original message
Where does Kerry stand on PNAC?
It makes me wonder. Kerry supported the Iraq invasion in the Senate. Pardon me for missing any facts about Kerry and PNAC. I would love to find out where he stands on PNAC. More importantly, would be continue the PNAC policies if he gets the White House?


John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kera Donating Member (294 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:14 AM
Response to Original message
1. well he has been
for so long in congress that he is to agree with all sides

...........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justitia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:52 AM
Response to Original message
2. uh, don't ask
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 03:51 AM by Lady Texan
It has been reported here on DU that Will Marshall, a PNAC signatory, is crafting Kerry's foreign policy <gulp>. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. PNAC Lite perhaps?
A kinder, gentler version of the PNAC. (Yeah, right!) All I can say is yes I will vote for Kerry to get that cocky, all hat and no cattle faux Texan out of D.C., but be warned, if Kerry does anything ANYTHING that is in contrary to the principles of the Democratic Party, I will not go lightly with my criticism. No special treatment at all because he has a D at the end of his name!


John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justitia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:56 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. PNAC Lite = PPI
Does it strike you as odd that Will Marshall signs PNAC pronuncements and is the president of PPI (Spec Ops division of DLC/New Dems)?

Will Marshall looks like a mole to me.
Have I mentioned I hate Will Marshall?

And I really hate hearing he is writing Kerry's foreign policy.
Why don't we just ask Cheney to sit in and make suggestions too?

Way too weird and creepy :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I really wonder about DLC in general.
I am almost convinced that the DLC is a right-wing group who's main goal is to either neutralize or destroy the Democratic Party. I mean look at them. They have weakened the Democratic Party with their "play it safe" tactics and their support for globalization and Republican, Reaganomic type policies. I simply have never trusted them.

John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justitia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. In my opinion, you shouldn't - I don't.
I have learned quite a bit about them (and PPI, New Dems, etc) and some days I really, really wish I hadn't.

You would be amazed at all the links between these groups and the other side of the aisle.

Their history and current relationships are fascinating and deeply disturbing.

When you have some free time, flex your google muscles and keep a notepad handy to keep track of all the names that pop up over and over and over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
63. wrong
Sorry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. Oh god that is fucking sick`
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 02:02 PM by Classical_Liberal
thanks for making it difficult for me get my ass out of bed on election day.

I know it isn't really your fault.

I want to like Kerry, I really do.

Somebody please debunk this. Please Please Please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyblitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #16
40. i started to read his book " a call to duty" and couldnt finish it
I wasnt his target audience obviously, but anyways, I started out with this phoney gung ho ABB attitude in an attempt to muster genuine enthusiasm to support him and it didn't happen. I will vote for him in November and not badmouth him but that is about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kitsune Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #2
46. And people here wonder why I can't bring myself to vote for him *nt*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
7. Okay now I'm scared
Seriously? Kerry has a PNAC'er advising him? We need to know more about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Makes me wish that Howard Dean was getting the nomination.
eom



John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maggrwaggr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #8
25. no shit. Every time I see Kerry I realize "that guy voted for the war"
and I think "that's just fucking great".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. I always suspected the trashing of Dean was DLC inspired
now I am convinced it is true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #25
36. Me too.
It is very demoralizing. I am not voting for Kerry but against Bush. Sad sad sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #8
56. Care to show where their foreign policy positions differ greatly?
Because Dean was to Kerry's right on I/P. And Dean followed the same type of foreign policy road as Clinton.

In fact, Dean's first foreign policy speech in 2003 was almost a precise ripoff of Kerry's given a month or so earlier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justitia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. it's for real
about Will Marshall, PPI (he's their president) and PNAC - he signed another pronouncement of theirs recently. I'd link it, but I've got to run at the moment.

Now, what remains to be checked out thoroughly is how involved he is in writing Kerry's foreign policy. I heard it mentioned here on DU, and given Kerry's involvement with both PPI and it's parent DLC, I lend this great credibility. However, I cannot affirm the depth of his (Marshall's) involvement on the foreign policy thing.

Perhaps someone else can follow up on this for now, since I'm short on time. I'll check back here later and try to narrow down that PNAC link on Marshall for you - I have reams of info on PNAC & PPI to sort through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. Will Marshall Bio:
"A University of Virginia graduate and former Richmond-Times Dispatch reporter, the wily Marshall plots ideas campaigns the way Robert E. Lee mapped strategy for the Confederates. His small but nimble "New Democrat" think tank, an arm of the Democratic Leadership Council, has kept "Old Democrats" off balance with a fusillade of proposals to reform traditional party thinking on welfare and other issues."

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?contentid=1100&knlgAreaID=87&subsecid=112

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Yeah, he likes to keep those Democrats "off-balance"
This guy COULD be a mole. Absolutely.

Does that mean he IS ONE?

I don't know.

Here's a link to the PNAC "Wannsee Protocol" signed by Mr. Marshall:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqstatement-031903.htm

Jesus Christ that's bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
50. Will Marshall and Al From called the 1994 loss of Congress a "Liberation"
Funny how every time neocons use that word it means exactly the opposite :grr:

http://www.worldandi.com/specialreport/1995/March/Sa13505.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corporatewhore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. Hes got his very own pnac-ppi
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greatauntoftriplets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
11. He ya go -- PPI = PNAC-lite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frangible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. oh lovely
So either vote gets more warmongering? So much for "choice"...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kanary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #13
52. careful there...
No "N" word here...

The "choice" is...... do you want a Democratic war, or a Republican war...

See how "liberating" it is to have "choice"?

Kanary, glad others are seeing it now......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #11
31. liiiiiiiieess.... LIIIIIIES... LIES!
We also backed the goal of ousting Saddam Hussein's malignant regime in Iraq, because the previous policy of containment was failing, because Saddam posed a grave danger to America as well as his own brutalized people, and because his blatant defiance of more than a decade's worth of United Nations Security Council resolutions was undermining both collective security and international law.

sheesh, is this the CARTOON WORLD view clintoon was talking about the other week? he better give'm a call and tell'em to take down the 'third way' slogan and put up the PNAC-lite slogan...

a PROJECT for a 'NEW' american CENTUARY :puke:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aidoneus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
12. a kinder, gentler face to it
You can see the crisis for the bosses here:--ShortBush has provoked too much international resistance and is a liability, but the same bullshit has to be maintained somehow (maybe a small alteration for appearances sake)..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
14. PNAC has been discredited
Pres. Kerry will ignore PNAC.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rdfi-defi Donating Member (395 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. but not ignore a policy that is slightly different in methods and has
the same goals as pnac?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mulethree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
45. and then get
the PNAC people to publicly trash his "new" plan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
18. Marshall wrote Kerry's Jan. 21 Georgetown speech.
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 02:24 PM by madfloridian
http://www.portlandphoenix.com/features/other_stories/multi2/documents/02833709.asp

"First, there’s Harlan Ullman, author of the " Shock and Awe " concept
employed by the Pentagon at the start of the war against Iraq, who shares
Kerry’s background as Naval veteran of the Vietnam War. And there’s Will
Marshall of the Progressive Policy Institute (the think tank linked to the
centrist-leaning Democratic Leadership Council), whom Kerry tapped to draft
his January 21 Georgetown speech. He’s also been in touch with Michael O’
Hanlon, a senior fellow in foreign-policy studies at the Brookings
Institution. O’Hanlon spoke out in favor of continued " containment " of
Saddam Hussein in February 2001, but came out in support of Bush’s Iraq
policy after the president addressed the United Nations on September 12,
2002. Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on October 2,
2002, O’Hanlon predicted between 1000 and 5000 American casualties in a war
with Iraq."

ON EDIT: To be fair, some of the foreign policy advisors for all the candidates were PNAC. Daalder advised Dean, though he later backtracked from his own policy speech....for fear of retribution according to TNR. They all shared a lot of the same advisors.

I do not agree with the remaking of the mideast, and it does not matter who espouses it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. uhg! The next time Kerry fucking claims that IWR didn't give Bush a blank
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 02:37 PM by Classical_Liberal
check, people should point out Marshall's relationship to the fucking PNAC, the people who gave us this infernal Iraq war.

I am so disgusted and dissapointed. This is just as bad as when Gore chose Lieberman as VP.

No wonder he has been spouting antichavez crappolla.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AG78 Donating Member (840 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
21. American Empire
Yes. It's where we're headed. We can't skip it. Human history is filled with various empire's. We're no different.

I don't think it matters who gets elected. At least to a point. With one party, you'll get there slower. With the other, there's no messing around.

This is what human history is. We'll fall one day, just like every other empire that's ever existed. Which will then cause the next mad dash for power.

Every war that has ever been fought has led us to this point in time. This war against the Middle East will lead to the next war. Who that will be against, I don't know.

I know what PNAC is. I know what they want to do. And I don't agree with it. If I could, I'd take them down myself. I don't want to continue to live in the world that we've created, because humans do terrible things to each other. But that's what we do. That's what we've always done.

It's one power grab after another. That's all human history is. We're no different. Seems fairly pointless to exist, only to try to conquer the next center of power. But again, that's all human beings do.

There's a reason the soldier has always been honored. There's a reason the best warrior in the village always ended up being chief. There's a reason the conquering hero was always given riches, women, and food fit for a king. It's not so much soldier's these days though. It's the corporation that receives the spoils.

I don't know how you stop it. I don't know if you can. It's what we are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Take drugs
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 02:38 PM by Classical_Liberal
Nader voting is nowhere, but so is voting for any adminstration that would include a PNAC signitory. You might as well enjoy yourself waiting for the apocolypse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. And what is the given is that all Empires fall at some point.
The Mayans, Romans, Ottomans, Austro-Hungarians, British, and Soviets. All had empires and all collapsed. The reason? Mainly complancency, arrogance, and greed.

America better learn from those who went before them.


John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
22. GODDAMN IT. Kerry will NOT get my vote!!
I take back any previous declaration I made about voting for Kerry - this little revelation nixes that.

:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. I will still vote Kerry in but.....
I am still going to call b.s. on anything corporate and right-wing inspired should he get the job. DLCers be damned! I think we should keep a watch on Kerry and at the same time get Bush out of the White House. It is the least the people can do.


John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #22
34. No, Melinda. We need to vote for him. He can block more changes
and if we need "a finger in the dyke" (old story about little boy in Holland who held his finger in the dyke to save the townspeople from floods) then we need to go with him.

Kerry is the only game left in town when it comes to the Dem Convention in Boston.

I'm working here in NC to try to give delegates to Dean or Kucinich, but it's not looking good to get the delegates to confront our Dem Party and FORCE change.

So, Kerry it is. "the finger in the dyke to keep the floods from getting through."

It's the best we can hope for. Not the "best I would have wanted." :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thethinker Donating Member (403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #34
41. This needs to be discussed


This country is in a mess not only because of the Republicans and Bush, but also because the Democrats have let it happen.

The party has been moving more and more to the right - thanks to DLC, corporate money, people like Will Marshall, spineless Democrats in Congress, etc. This has not happened by accident. America doesn't really have a two party system the way it use to.

There are some good minds here on DU. There are many people here who know what is going on. What would it take for some of you people to go to the convention in Boston as delegates? It is not as hard to get to be a delegate as one might think. How hard would it be to organize and make some changes in this Democratic party? Does anyone have some ideas about this?

I think there are enough of us here at DU to make some changes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. It's "Dreams of what could be.." unfortunately. I was at a Dem precinct
meeting here in NC last night and was told they are "locking out" Dean/Kucinich Dems because the party will rally around our Governor (whom many on Dem Left, think has problems...and Kerry...who in our group was considered "Boring."

We tried to address "Grassroots Activism" and in our group of EIGHT (8) there were still two folks whos said: "Be quiet, shut up...vote for Kerry because NC Party will NOT allow dissention."

And the rest of us "rolled our eyes." And, "I" as the lone "DU'er" was shocked at the naivete of that group! Because here on DU, I'm miles forward of them in reflective thinking, but in forward thinking because I can look at the "pulse" of the Dem Party here.

It's really bad "out there" for our Democratic Grassroots. We are NO WHERE near what the Repugs have achieved.

So, Kerry is "babby steps" for us coming off the best team we ever had but the team that "gave away so much" Clinton/Gore.

We Dems will and have "Compromised Ourselves into Oblivion!" IMHO...

But, yeah.....we will get Kerry in. What will we do with him when we get him in, is the question. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
24. "Two Party System" - yeah, right.
This will be the first time that the presidential choice on my ballot will be left blank. It's a good thing that I have an anti-war senator and rep to vote for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
28. Kerry will need to work with PNAC. He will need to heal the wounds
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 05:12 PM by KoKo01
and bring the PNAC'ers and Armaggedonists into the Democratic fold. He will be able to do this because he voted for the "Iraq Resolution."

He will bring them into his administration in a "minor capacity" and that way he will co-opt the right wing.

He could do this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. Bring Armeggedonists to the Democratic fold????
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 05:17 PM by Cascadian
Are you kidding???? I am sorry but why on earth should we work with those people? This sort of thinking is naive and lacks any rational thought. No way! Why work with these clowns. I am sorry but with all due respect to you, that is wrong!!


John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. I agree for me and you, it's wrong--Revulsive. But he will need to do it
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 05:53 PM by KoKo01
to keep the peace in the country with a Repug Senate and House. Even if the Senate goes Dem it will only be 1-3 seats. He won't have "wiggle room" to do a defining policy. He will be set upon by the "dogs of war" the "dogs who dogged Clinton" and the "Whore Media."

He won't be able to do much except hold back on more implemintation of what the Chimp& Co. have already done.

It's a fact of life...and political reality. America has changed since "the Selection." We will have to deal with it...with the same cast of characters on the "pundit shows" and in the House and Senate.

Kerry can only hold back the worst of what Chimp would have done if he had been re-elected. He can't "undo" what's been done. :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. Why not just immigrate
Why bother voting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. Because we have to try to save what's left of what our ancestors came here
for. I believe the "American Experiment" is and was worth saving. But, OTOH, like you, I think I need to leave this country, ancestors or not.

After all, my ancestors came here thinking they could find "a better way" to deal with civilization, and they saw "opportunity."

I need to "rethink" how I honor their adventurism and enterprise.

I need to get outta here..:-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. I can see I am not the only one that is fucking maudlin over this
. I don't like slow death vs quick death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. Well, I understand what you say with a "wink and a nod..."
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #32
42. It's like a mouse trying to negotiate with a hungry cat.
eom


John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
35. Jimmy Carter
is too much like their lost consciences, and they hate him for reminding them of that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnyCanuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
44. Beyond Bush
Beyond Bush Part 1

July 1, 2003 1600 PDT (FTW) -- Let's just suppose for a moment that George W. Bush was removed from the White House. Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Wolfowitz and Rove too. What would that leave us with? It would leave us stuck in hugely expensive, Vietnam-like guerrilla wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It would leave us with the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and Total Information Awareness snooping into every detail of our lives. It would leave us with a government in violation of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendments to the Constitution. It would leave us with a massive cover-up of US complicity in the attacks of 9/11 that, if fully admitted, would show not intelligence "failures" but intelligence crimes, approved and ordered by the most powerful people in the country. It would leave us with a government that now has the power to compel mass vaccinations on pain of imprisonment or fine, and with no legal ability to sue the vaccine makers who killed our friends or our children. It would leave us with two and half million unemployed; the largest budget deficits in history; more than $3.3 trillion missing from the Department of Defense; and state and local governments broke to the point of having to cut back essential services like sewers, police, and fire. It would leave us with a federal government that had hit the debt ceiling and was unable to borrow any more money. And we would still be facing a looming natural gas crisis of unimagined proportions, and living on a planet that is slowly realizing that it is running out of oil with no "Plan B". Our airports however, would be very safe, and shares of Halliburton, Lockheed and DynCorp would be paying excellent dividends.

This is not good management.

Leaving all of these issues unaddressed is not good management either.

And this is why, as I will demonstrate in this article, the decision has already been made by corporate and financial powers to remove George W. Bush, whether he wants to leave or not, and whether he steals the next election or not. Before you start cheering, ask yourself three questions: "If there is someone or something that can decide that Bush will not return, nor remain for long, what is it? And if that thing is powerful enough to remove Bush, was it not also powerful enough to have put him there in the first place? And if that is the case, then isn't that what's really responsible for the state of things? George W. Bush is just a hired CEO who is about to be removed by the "Board of Directors". Who are they? Are they going to choose his replacement? Are you going to help them?


Beyond Bush Part I

Beyond Bush Part II

October 20, 2003 1000 PDT (FTW) --Since Part I of this series was published, the credibility of the Bush administration has - as predicted - been assaulted on a variety of fronts. W's approval rating has dropped below 50%. The Republicans are worried about whether he is re-electable. The political, military and economic situation in Iraq has worsened. The US economy staggers on the brink of meltdown, in debt and an anemic dollar. The reality of Peak Oil and Gas has been acknowledged in a number of mainstream publications including CNN, The Independent, and Jane's Intelligence Summary. Recent stories have confirmed reports that actual oil reserves may be 80% smaller than previously reported. The US has experienced the first of many major power blackouts yet to come. American military morale is plummeting as quickly as is its readiness for additional (inevitable) conflicts. And the military situation in Iraq and Afghanistan remains as dangerous, and uncertain, as Iraqi oil remains undeliverable.

The last development is perhaps the biggest of all the Neocon blunders, but it still accomplishes the primary objective laid out by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard: The oil and many rebuilding contracts have been denied to any powers "that might seek to usurp the US on the world stage". Even as the US has gone hat-in-hand to the UN asking for help in Iraq (and been rebuffed), it has made it clear that it intends to retain absolute control of Iraqi resources. Europe and Russia will not play that game. Oil in the ground is oil in the bank and, at least for the moment, by tweaking supplies and conflicts around the world, the US can maintain enough supply from other sources to keep the house of cards from falling. Within three to five years, that may not be possible.

The race now is to stabilize Iraq in time to rebuild the infrastructure, and bring its 11% of proven world reserves online. The US majors won't invest there until it is safe. On October 11, The Arabic News reported on a recent World Bank report stating that the reconstruction of Iraqi infrastructure would require four years and more than $50 billion (US). This is another reason why the Bush junta is in jeopardy. There are few left anywhere who believe that they have the cachet to pull it off. The oil companies have lost confidence in the oil men.

Had the US not invaded Iraq, however, French, Russian and German companies would currently be working on billions of dollars of contracts to refurbish the oil infrastructure, thus increasing the amount of Iraqi oil (priced in Euros rather than dollars) reaching world markets by legal or extralegal means outside of UN sanctions. Since the occupation, we have learned much about Iraqi oil being smuggled through Syria, and by other means. As a result, Europe and Russia would have been getting economically stronger and "marking territory" for the day when oil for food sanctions were inevitably lifted. Europe's economy is now sustained by the speed with which Russia can sell its diminishing oil reserves - estimated at just under 60 billion barrels (Gb) - something that it appears eager to do. This will inevitably force Britain into the EU at an accelerated pace, especially if BP can't get any supplies out of Iraq. (Note: Russia's 60 Gb is enough to supply global needs for just under two years excluding all other sources, and it is now being pumped faster than ever. According to Reuters, on August 4, 2003 Russian exports had reached 8.5 million barrels per day.) Since Russia has long passed its production peak, it is problematic as to whether these levels can be sustained for more than ten years.



Beyond Bush Part II
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
47. You be the judge from Kerry's own words. You already know the votes
You be the judge. As you read some of these very familiar ideas, ask yourself which ones sound like things Bush has said...

Our backs are up against a wall!


“I do not fault George Bush
for doing too much in the war on terror;
I believe he’s done too little.”

John Kerry 27th February 2004


====

“Fighting a Comprehensive War on Terrorism”
Remarks by Senator John Kerry at the Ronald W. Burkle Center for International Relations

February 27, 2004

University of California at Los Angeles


As Prepared for Delivery

It’s an honor to be here today at the Burkle Center – named in honor of a good friend and one of America’s outstanding business leaders.

Day in and day out, George W. Bush reminds us that he is a war President and that he wants to make national security the central issue of this election. I am ready to have this debate. I welcome it.

I am convinced that we can prove to the American people that we know how to make them safer and more secure – with a stronger, more comprehensive, and more effective strategy for winning the War on Terror than the Bush Administration has ever envisioned.

As we speak, night has settled on the mountains of the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. If Osama bin Laden is sleeping, it is the restless slumber of someone who knows his days are numbered. I don’t know if the latest reports – saying that he is surrounded – are true or not. We’ve heard this news before.

We had him in our grasp more than two years ago at Tora Bora but George Bush held U.S. forces back and instead, called on Afghan warlords with no loyalty to our cause to finish the job. We all hope the outcome will be different this time and we all know America cannot rest until Osama bin Laden is captured or killed.

And when that day comes, it will be a great step forward but we will still have far more to do. It will be a victory in the War on Terror, but it will not be the end of the War on Terror.

This war isn’t just a manhunt – a checklist of names from a deck of cards. In it, we do not face just one man or one terrorist group. We face a global jihadist movement of many groups, from different sources, with separate agendas, but all committed to assaulting the United States and free and open societies around the globe.

As CIA Director George Tenet recently testified: “They are not all creatures of bin Laden, and so their fate is not tied to his. They have autonomous leadership, they pick their own targets, they plan their own attacks.”

At the core of this conflict is a fundamental struggle of ideas. Of democracy and tolerance against those who would use any means and attack any target to impose their narrow views. ((Excuse me while I puke))

The War on Terror is not a clash of civilizations. It is a clash of civilization against chaos; of the best hopes of humanity against dogmatic fears of progress and the future.

Like all Americans, I responded to President Bush’s reassuring words in the days after September 11th. But since then, his actions have fallen short.

I do not fault George Bush for doing too much in the War on Terror; I believe he’s done too little.

Where he’s acted, his doctrine of unilateral preemption has driven away our allies and cost us the support of other nations. Iraq is in disarray, with American troops still bogged down in a deadly guerrilla war with no exit in sight. In Afghanistan, the area outside Kabul is sliding back into the hands of a resurgent Taliban and emboldened warlords. ((As if the Iraqis would have welcomed troops sent by anyone but Bush))

In other areas, the Administration has done nothing or been too little and too late. The Mideast Peace process disdained for 14 months by the Bush Administration is paralyzed. North Korea and Iran continue their quest for nuclear weapons – weapons which one day could land in the hands of terrorists. ((Gee, where have we heard this before?)) And as Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld has admitted, the Administration is still searching for an effective plan to drain the swamps of terrorist recruitment. The President’s budget for the National Endowment for Democracy’s efforts around the world, including the entire Islamic world, is less than three percent of what this Administration gives Halliburton – hardly a way to win the contest of ideas.

Finally, by virtually every measure, we still have a homeland security strategy that falls far short of the vulnerabilities we have and the threats we face.

George Bush has no comprehensive strategy for victory in the War on Terror – only an ad hoc strategy to keep our enemies at bay. If I am Commander-in-Chief, I would wage that war by putting in place a strategy to win it. ((SO the war is still A-ok!))

We cannot win the War on Terror through military power alone. If I am President, I will be prepared to use military force to protect our security, our people, and our vital interests.

But the fight requires us to use every tool at our disposal. Not only a strong military – but renewed alliances, vigorous law enforcement, reliable intelligence, and unremitting effort to shut down the flow of terrorist funds.

To do all this, and to do our best, demands that we work with other countries instead of walking alone. For today the agents of terrorism work and lurk in the shadows of 60 nations on every continent. In this entangled world, we need to build real and enduring alliances.



Allies give us more hands in the struggle, but no President would ever let them tie our hands and prevent us from doing what must be done. As President, I will not wait for a green light from abroad when our safety is at stake. But I will not push away those who can and should share the burden. ((Of what? Of cleaning up America's messes?))

Working with other countries in the War on Terror is something we do for our sake – not theirs. We can’t wipe out terrorist cells in places like Sweden, Canada, Spain, the Philippines, or Italy just by dropping in Green Berets.

It was local law enforcement working with our intelligence services which caught Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Ramsi Bin al Shibh in Pakistan and the murderer known as Hambali in Thailand. Joining with local police forces didn’t mean serving these terrorists with legal papers; it meant throwing them behind bars. None of the progress we have made would have been possible without cooperation – and much more would be possible if we had a President who didn’t alienate long-time friends and fuel anti-American anger around the world.

We need a comprehensive approach for prevailing against terror – an approach that recognizes the many facets of this mortal challenge and relies on all the tools at our disposal to do it.

First, if I am President I will not hesitate to order direct military action when needed to capture and destroy terrorist groups and their leaders. George Bush inherited the strongest military in the world – and he has weakened it. What George Bush and his armchair hawks have never understood is that our military is about more than moving pins on a map or buying expensive new weapons systems.

America’s greatest military strength has always been the courageous, talented men and women whose love of country and devotion to service lead them to attempt and achieve the impossible everyday.

But today, far too often troops are going into harm’s way without the weapons and equipment they depend on to do their jobs safely. National Guard helicopters are flying missions in dangerous territory without the best available ground-fire protection systems. Un-armored Humvees are falling victim to road-side bombs and small-arms fire.

And families across America have had to collect funds from their neighbors to buy body armor for their loved ones in uniform because George Bush failed to provide it

The next President must ensure that our forces are structured for maximum effectiveness and provided with all that they need to succeed in their missions. We must better prepare our forces for post-conflict operations and the task of building stability by adding more engineers, military police, psychological warfare personnel, and civil affairs teams.

And to replenish our overextended military, as President, I will add 40,000 active-duty Army troops, a temporary increase likely to last the remainder of the decade.

Second, if I am President I will strengthen the capacity of intelligence and law enforcement at home and forge stronger international coalitions to provide better information and the best chance to target and capture terrorists even before they act.

But the challenge for us is not to cooperate abroad; it is to coordinate here at home. Whether it was September 11th or Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction, we have endured unprecedented intelligence failures. We must do what George Bush has refused to do – reform our intelligence system by making the next Director of the CIA a true Director of National Intelligence with real control of intelligence personnel and budgets. We must train more analysts in languages like Arabic. And we must break down the old barriers between national intelligence and local law enforcement.

In the months leading up to September 11th, two of the hijackers were arrested for drunk driving – and another was stopped for speeding and then let go, although he was already the subject of an arrest warrant in a neighboring county and was on a federal terrorist watch list. We need to simplify and streamline the multiple national terrorist watch lists and make sure the right information is available to the right people on the frontlines of preventing the next attack. ((LIHOP, MIHOP, ideas totally foreign to Kerry- if he doesn't know better, we have a serious problem))

But we can’t take any of those steps effectively if we are stuck with an Administration that continues to stonewall those who are trying to get to the bottom of our September 11th intelligence failures. Two days ago, the Republican Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert refused the request of the bipartisan 9-11 commission for just a little more time just to complete their mission. This after the Commission has had to deal with an Administration that opposed its very creation and has stonewalled its efforts.

He didn’t hesitate to pick up the phone and call Denny Hastert to ram through his Medicare drug company benefit or to replace a real Patients Bill of Rights with an HMO Bill of Goods. This President told a Republican fundraiser that it was in the “nation’s interest” that Denny Hastert remain Speaker of the House. I believe it’s in America’s interest to know the truth about 9-11. Mr. President, stop stonewalling the commission and stop hiding behind excuses. Pick up the phone, call your friend Denny Hastert and tell him to let the commission finish its job so we can make America safer.

Third, we must cut off the flow of terrorist funds. In the case of Saudi Arabia, the Bush Administration has adopted a kid-glove approach to the supply and laundering of terrorist money. If I am President, we will impose tough financial sanctions against nations or banks that engage in money laundering or fail to act against it. We will launch a "name and shame" campaign against those that are financing terror. And if they do not respond, they will be shut out of the U.S. financial system. ((The financial threats- always the first weapon before the armies are sent in))

Fourth, because finding and defeating terrorist groups is a long-term effort, we must act immediately to prevent terrorists from acquiring nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons ((but it's A-ok for us to have, develop then)). I propose to appoint a high-level Presidential envoy empowered to bring other nations together to secure and stop the spread of these weapons. We must develop common standards to make sure dangerous materials and armaments are tracked, accounted for, and secured. Today, parts of Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal are easy prey for those offering cash to scientists and security forces who too often are under-employed and under-paid. If I am President, I will expand the Nunn/Lugar program to buy up and destroy the loose nuclear materials of the former Soviet Union and to ensure that all of Russia’s nuclear weapons and materials are out of the reach of terrorists and off the black market.

Next, whatever we thought of the Bush Administration’s decisions and mistakes – especially in Iraq – we now have a solemn obligation to complete the mission, in that country and in Afghanistan. Iraq is now a major magnet and center for terror. Our forces in Iraq are paying the price everyday.

And our safety at home may someday soon be endangered as Iraq becomes a training ground for the next generation of terrorists.

It is time to return to the United Nations and return America to the community of nations to share both authority and responsibility in Iraq, and take the target off the back of our troops. This also requires a genuine Iraqi security force. The Bush Administration simply signs up recruits and gives them rudimentary training. In a Kerry Administration, we will create and train an Iraqi security force equal to the task of safeguarding itself and the people it is supposed to protect.

We must offer the UN the lead role in assisting Iraq with the development of new political institutions. And we must stay in Iraq until the job is finished. ((So the war-mongering G-5 will nicely carve it up, drain it of its resources, and install their puppets? No different than what Bush & Blair want except that they don't want to equally divvy up the loot with other participants- They remember how Bush I BURNED them after Gulf War I and the US & UK took all the contracts))

In Afghanistan, we have some NATO involvement, but the training of the Afghan Army is insufficient to disarm the warlord militias or to bring the billion dollar drug trade under control ((under whose control? what control? Why not just destroy it?)). This Administration has all but turned away from Afghanistan. Two years ago, President Bush promised a Marshall Plan to rebuild that country. His latest budget scorns that commitment.

We must – and if I am President, I will – apply the wisdom Franklin Roosevelt shared with the American people in a fireside chat in 1942, “it is useless to win battles if the cause for which we fight these battles is lost. It is useless to win a war unless it stays won.” This Administration has not met that challenge; a Kerry Administration will.

But nothing else will matter unless we win the war of ideas. In failed states from South Asia to the Middle East to Central Africa, the combined weight of harsh political repression, economic stagnation, lack of education, and rapid population growth presents the potential for explosive violence and the enlistment of entire new legions of terrorists. In Saudi Arabia and Egypt, almost sixty percent of the population is under the age of 30, unemployed and unemployable, in a breeding ground for present and future hostility. And according to a Pew Center poll, fifty percent or more of Indonesians, Jordanians, Pakistanis, and Palestinians have confidence in bin Laden to “do the right thing regarding world affairs”

We need a major initiative in public diplomacy to bridge the divide between Islam and the rest of the world. For the education of the next generation of Islamic youth, we need an international effort to compete with radical Madrassas ((a good effort to compete with radical Christian Fundamentalism and radical Zionism would be a better start- "own back yard" kind of thing! )). We have seen what happens when Palestinian youth have been fed a diet of anti-Israel propaganda. And we must support human rights groups, independent media and labor unions dedicated to building a democratic culture from the grass-roots up. Democracy won't come overnight, but America should speed that day by sustaining the forces of democracy against repressive regimes ((Chavez, you're next no matter who wins this election))and by rewarding governments which take genuine steps towards change.

We cannot be deterred by letting America be held hostage by energy from the Middle East. If I am President, we will embark on a historic effort to create alternative fuels and the vehicles of the future – to make this country energy independent of Mideast oil within ten years. So our sons and daughters will never have to fight and die for it.

Finally, if we are going to be serious about the War on Terror, we need to be much more serious about homeland security. Today, fire departments only have enough radios for half their firefighters and almost two-thirds of firehouses are short-staffed. We should not be opening firehouses in Baghdad and closing them down in New York City. We need to put 100,000 more firefighters on duty and we need to restore the 100,000 police on our streets which I fought for and won in 1994 but which the Bush Administration has cut in budget after budget.

We need to provide public health labs with the basic expertise they need but now lack to respond to chemical or biological attack. We need new safeguards for our chemical and nuclear facilities.

And our ports – like the Port of Los Angeles – need new technology to screen the 95 percent of containers that now enter this country without any inspection at all. And we should accelerate the action plans agreed to in US-Canada and US-Mexico “smart border” accords while implementing new security measures for cross border bridges. President Bush says we can’t afford to fund homeland security. I say we can’t afford not to.

The safety of our people, the security of our country, the memory of our brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, neighbors and heroes we lost on September 11th call on us to win this war we did not seek.

And our children’s future demands that we also do everything in our power to prevent the creation of tomorrow’s terrorists today. Maybe there’s no going back to the days before baggage checks and orange alerts. Maybe they’re with us forever. But I don’t believe they have to be. I grew up at a time of bomb shelters and air raid drills. But America had leaders of vision and courage in both parties. And today, the Cold War is memory, not reality.

I believe we can bring a real victory in the War on Terror. I believe we must, not only for ourselves but for all who look to America as “the last best hope of earth.” I believe we can meet that ideal – and that’s why I’m running for President.


http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0227.html

((The graphic is courtesy of Indymedia and not on the Kerry web-site / Bush said at West Point on 1st June 2002 that, “We must uncover terror cells in 60 or more countries.”))

------------------

“Making America Secure Again: Setting the Right Course for Foreign Policy”
An Address to the Council on Foreign Relations by John Kerry

December 03, 2003

New York, NY -

<snip>

I have specific concerns.

Saudi Arabia has long been a major supporter of Islamic extremism here and elsewhere. Saudi-funded hate speech can be found in schools, mosques, and other institutions across the world, fostering hatred of Jews, Christians, Americans, and the West. This kind of officially sanctioned bigotry breeds terrorism. Spokesmen for the Saudis now say that textbooks are being rewritten to remove "possibly offensive" language and that Islamic clerics are being told to tone down their rhetoric. But we need more than promises. We need to see the new textbooks. We need to hear what the government-financed clerics are preaching. ((Replace Saudi with America/Israel & let's begin with the plank in our own eye))

Saudi officials and spokesmen have said repeatedly that the Saudi government is opposed to every form of terrorism; yet the Saudi regime openly and enthusiastically supports Palestinian terrorist groups, such as Hamas demonize the Palestinians, demonize the Palestinians - Uh, John, who founded Hamas? . The Saudis cannot pick and choose among terrorist groups, approving some while claiming to oppose others.

<snip>

President Bush pays lip service to the idea that Mideast Peace is critical to combating terrorism. But his Administration has lurched from episodic involvement to recurrent disengagement, jeopardizing the security of Israel, encouraging Palestinian extremists, and undermining our own long term national interests. ((John and I must not read the same news))

<snip>

There are a number of uniquely qualified Americans who I would consider appointing, including: President Carter, former Secretary of State James Baker, or, as I suggested almost two years ago, President Clinton. James Baker? The Carlyle man? The guy who interrupted his Carlyle meeting to rush over and organize the bussing of those fanatical Georgian rednecks who stopped the recount for Selection 2000? Is this guy for real??!))

<snip>

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1203.html

((Silly me though, I guess we should overlook anything said in a speech to the CFR which has for decades pursued an imperialistic agenda. ))

Hmmmm....

<snip of excellent analysis by Sanders Research Group>

In considering all this, ask yourself the following question: if you were a neo-conservative strategist, with all the huge plans for world-wide “democratisation” which that entails, who would you rather have in the White House? A red-neck Texan surrounded by a bunch of corporate war profiteers, whose very selves excite furious opposition from whole swathes of leftish public opinion in America and around the world, or a smooth multilateralist Patrician with a pleasing mix of patriotic and liberal credentials? Go figure.

http://www.sandersresearch.com/Sanders/NewsManager/ShowNewsGen.aspx?NewsID=577

About SRA: http://www.sandersresearch.com/Sanders/NewsManager/faq.aspx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeronimoSkull Donating Member (335 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Incredible
James Baker???

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiCoup2K4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. Yes, James Baker
ThatJames "I fixed the Florida election for George W Bush" Baker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. wow! GREAT words from Kerry!
Bush has been a misirable failure on this front. If he ever really had a clear vision to get bin Laden and al Quada, he lost it in Iraq.

And to think there are actually some people who don't want to combat the menace of terrorism.

Not big on James Baker. He has the resume for the postion but Clinton or Carter would be a much wiser choice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #51
54. I don't mind going after Osama, but I saw no plan to do it
Edited on Sat Apr-10-04 08:52 PM by Classical_Liberal
I did see where he says the Arabs are mad at Israel because of propaganda and rather than the reality of land theft.


Also his hotheaded comments toward foreign leaders in Venezuela and Spain, are pretty much the same as Shrubs.


There really is no there there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #47
53. THAT James Baker, huh? Defending the Saudis against the 9/11 families?
Oh, that one. I am getting tired of being told that we MUST accept Bush buddies as part of a Democratic administration....and being told that is the way we are going to win them over. OR win against them.

I still do not understand how you are able to defeat someone by becoming more like them every day. I do not understand it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #47
60. My friends in the early 90s scorned my support for that DINO Kucinich.
Edited on Mon Apr-12-04 09:06 PM by blm
My feminist friends in LA said I was crazy for sending money to his congressional campaign in Ohio. He was antichoice, he was against the first amendment re protesting, he was for prayer in school.....blah, blah.....I heard every negative thing there was over and over again.

I knew Kucinich's heart and motivations were more consistent with a liberal mindset. I knew he'd make a kick ass congressman who would really search his soul to make the right decisions.

He proved me right....eventually. I lived through some heartbreaking votes of his over the years, but, most of the time he votes the right way for me.

I remember some of the posts here that dumped on Kucinich as a stealth rightwinger because of his many anti-choice votes in the past or his votes with the Republicans on flag-burning. Those accusations were superficial based on a superficial read of what the detractor thought they knew about him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeronimoSkull Donating Member (335 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
55. What is going on?
It seems that Kerry must approve of the PNAC plan if he chooses a PNAC signer to write his speeches and craft his foreign policy.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #55
58. Some of Kerry's advisors are on the left and others in the center
like Marshall.

In the PNAC crowd, Marshall was a voice from the left, probably balancing some of the further right voices.

Just like within the parties there are ranges - just like the DLC where Kerry was way to the left while Dean was part of the crowd pulling the Dems further right.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeronimoSkull Donating Member (335 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #58
61. I'm not sure I would consider a PNAC member to be centrist
Their philosophy is world domination.

I find this very troubling.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. Marshall was likely one the furthest left voices at PNAC.
Edited on Mon Apr-12-04 10:48 PM by blm
That would put him to the right on the SPECTRUM of advisors to Kerry.

Why does anyone think Marshall alone would make all decisions? That's absurd. He's a VIEWPOINT who also has to bear in mind the VIEWPOINTS of others as well as the strongly held viewpoints of the very well versed TOUGH DOVE nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waldenx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
57. where are the Kerry apologists?
I can't wait to hear their spin about how PNAC is great if a Dem is doing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #57
59. Kerry doesn't NEED apologists - he's NOT a PNACer so why pretend he is?
ONE of his advisors is a centrist, Marshall, who signed a PNAC document.

Have you paid any attention to other advisors who are well to Marshall's left?

Kerry is also strongly advised by men like Ted Kennedy, but who cares, eh?

Amazing how so many are shocked that Kerry has advisors from the left and the center.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #57
64. so far no one has established Kerry is a part of PNAC
kind of renders your thought useless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC