neo con Bob Woodward re: Hillary

[ensho]

stinky Woodward suggested that the dems want Hillary to be VP.

I think that the neo cons in the State Dept. are having trouble getting Hillary to go along with them and think if they push the media to talk about her being VP then they can get rid of her and perhaps get someone they can bully around.

Hillary is doing great at her job. neo cons don't like that.

if they can get her to be VP then she can't do much of anything.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BeyondGeography]

3. Actually "we'll" kick your ass again in 2012

:hi:

[mod mom]

2. Neocons love Neolibs.

and I like neither.

[ensho]

7. what is a neolib?

nt

[mod mom]

9. Neolibs:

The main points of neo-liberalism include:

THE RULE OF THE MARKET. Liberating "free" enterprise or private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no matter how much social damage this causes. Greater openness to international trade and investment, as in NAFTA. Reduce wages by de-unionizing workers and eliminating workers' rights that had been won over many years of struggle. No more price controls. All in all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this is good for us, they say "an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone." It's like Reagan's "supply-side" and "trickle-down" economics -- but somehow the wealth didn't trickle down very much.

CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES like education and health care. REDUCING THE SAFETY-NET FOR THE POOR, and even maintenance of roads, bridges, water supply -- again in the name of reducing government's role. Of course, they don't oppose government subsidies and tax benefits for business.

DEREGULATION. Reduce government regulation of everything that could diminsh profits, including protecting the environmentand safety on the job.

PRIVATIZATION. Sell state-owned enterprises, goods and services to private investors. This includes banks, key industries, railroads, toll highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although usually done in the name of greater efficiency, which is often needed, privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.

ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF "THE PUBLIC GOOD" or "COMMUNITY" and replacing it with "individual responsibility." Pressuring the poorest people in a society to find solutions to their lack of health care, education and social security all by themselves -- then blaming them, if they fail, as "lazy."

-snip

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376

Policy implications

Broadly speaking, neoliberalism seeks to transfer control of the economy from public to the private sector,<3> under the belief that it will produce a more efficient government and improve the economic health of the nation.<4> The definitive statement of the concrete policies advocated by neoliberalism is often taken to be John Williamson's<5> "Washington Consensus", a list of policy proposals that appeared to have gained consensus approval among the Washington-based international economic organizations (like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank). Williamson's list included ten points:

Fiscal policy Governments should not run large deficits that have to be paid back by future citizens, and such deficits can only have a short term effect on the level of employment in the economy. Constant deficits will lead to higher inflation and lower productivity, and should be avoided. Deficits should only be used for occasional stabilization purposes.

Redirection of public spending from subsidies (especially what neoliberals call "indiscriminate subsidies") and other spending neoliberals deem wasteful toward broad-based provision of key pro-growth, pro-poor services like primary education, primary health care and infrastructure investment

Tax reform– broadening the tax base and adopting moderate marginal tax rates to encourage innovation and efficiency;

Interest rates that are market determined and positive (but moderate) in real terms;

Floating exchange rates;

Trade liberalization – liberalization of imports, with particular emphasis on elimination of quantitative restrictions (licensing, etc.); any trade protection to be provided by law and relatively uniform tariffs; thus encouraging competition and long term growth

Liberalization of the "capital account" of the balance of payments, that is, allowing people the opportunity to invest funds overseas and allowing foreign funds to be invested in the home country

Privatization of state enterprises; Promoting market provision of goods and services which the government can not provide as effectively or efficiently, such as telecommunications, where having many service providers promotes choice and competition.

Deregulation – abolition of regulations that impede market entry or restrict competition, except for those justified on safety, environmental and consumer protection grounds, and prudent oversight of financial institutions;

Legal security for property rights; and,

Financialization of capital.

-snip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism


THINK: the Clintons, Robert Rubin, DLC types & even Wolfowitz & Perle

[ensho]

11. none of that is Hillary

nt

[mod mom]

14. Are you kidding?

In the United States, the ‘neo-liberal’ moniker, reportedly coined by Washington Monthly editor Charles Peters, was given form in a 1983 conference of academics and professionals (teachers, lawyers, journalists and academics) sympathetic to the Democratic Party (Farrell, 1983). This was one of various fora that helped to solidify a market-friendly political movement stirring among the Democrats—the rise of a ‘new philosophy’ that sought to break with the party's past by, among other things, shifting economic policy priorities ‘away from an emphasis on redistribution and toward an emphasis on the twin goals of restoring growth and opportunity’ (Hale, 1995, p. 211). In 1985, this neo-liberal drift within the Democratic Party culminated with the establishment of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC)—the organizational basis from which the Clintons would later rise to political power.

-snip

http://ser.oxfordjournals.org/content/6/4/703.full?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=What+is+neo-liberalism%253F&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

The Clintons (& their DLC colleagues) are the face of the neo-libs.

research it yourself. They tie back to Milton Friedman's embrace of free markets.

[ensho]

17. no not kidding

nt

[blm]

27. OK...you're not kidding. Tell us how you came to your conclusion based on HRC's votes and actions

over the last 10 years.

Thank you.

[Fire1]

4. What a crock! n/t

[blm]

5. Hillary's a neocon hawk, no different than Lieberman, and no surprise the neocons want HRC as VP

Especially since Biden has backed down a bit from his former support of hawk positions.

[ensho]

6. can you give some proof that she is a neo con hawk?

nt

[blm]

8. Did you ever show one time where she and Lieberman were NOT on the same page?

Or did you forget that she was a senator during the Bush years? A senator who stayed on the same page as Lieberman throughout. She adjusted her hawk RHETORIC slightly when she faced primary voters.

And...Here's some of what you may have missed recently of Sec of State Clinton's hawk influence on military matters:

http://www.alternet.org/world/144511/afghanistan:_how_the_war_hawks_caged_obama

Afghanistan: How the War Hawks Caged Obama
How a desire for bipartisanship and peace within his own party led Obama to appoint a hawkish cabal that pushed him to a renewed war in Afghanistan.
December 12, 2009 |

Two of President Barack Obama's most acclaimed Cabinet appointments -- keeping Republican Defense Secretary Robert Gates and picking former Democratic rival Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State -- set the risky course that his administration is following toward a military escalation in Afghanistan.

According to a variety of press accounts, Gates and Clinton proved to be a powerful tandem urging a more hawkish approach to the Afghan War and lending crucial political support to Gen. Stanley McChrystal's request for tens of thousands of additional troops.

Gates and Clinton more than counterbalanced the more dovish recommendations from Vice President Joe Biden and U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry, a former U.S. military commander in Afghanistan who warned about increasing Afghan government dependence on American forces.

So, as Obama prepares to unveil a plan expected to send about 30,000 more American soldiers to Afghanistan -- pushing the U.S. total to about 100,000 or roughly double the size of the U.S. force there when President George W. Bush left office -- it looks in retrospect as if the Gates-Clinton appointments a year ago effectively baked in this decision.

Though Washington's conventional wisdom remains enamored of those two "Team of Rivals" appointments – and especially the bipartisan appeal of the Gates selection -- it is increasingly apparent that warnings from the Democratic rank-and-file about the need to make a clean break with Bush-era warmongering carried some real-life wisdom.

Instead, Obama went with war-time "continuity" and bipartisanship in keeping Gates and U.S. Central Command Gen. David Petraeus. By doing so, Obama ensured that the "surge" escalation strategy that Gates and Petraeus sold in Iraq would be repackaged for Afghanistan.

In April, Obama further locked in the escalation by allowing Gates to fire Gen. David McKiernan as commander in Afghanistan, and replace him with McChrystal, a Petraeus favorite who had led the ruthless "war on terror" special operations under Bush. McKiernan was regarded as insufficiently aggressive and supposedly lacking the charisma and press savvy of Petraeus and McChrystal.

While Obama basked in some praise from neoconservative editorialists for these national security personnel selections – and for dispatching about 20,000 more troops to Afghanistan in the spring -- the president was outflanking himself. That is, assuming he really had any serious notion of pursuing a more diplomatic and less militaristic approach to Afghanistan.

A Dire Report

McChrystal, the new Afghan-theater commander, next prepared a dire report demanding 40,000 more troops to avert defeat. Reflecting the press savvy of these war hawks, the report was promptly leaked, touching off demands from Republicans and right-wing news outlets that Obama stop "dithering" and give his field commanders what they wanted.

.....

Robert Parry allows unlimited use of his articles...but, the entire article is long.

[mod mom]

10. on Hillary:

Neolibs and Neocons,
United and Interchangeable

-snip

The two leading Democratic candidates for president are undeniably Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Hillary is regarded as by far the more conservative candidate in that she has carefully triangulated her potential supporters and is unwilling to say that her vote in the Senate in support of the Iraq war was a mistake. She has also positioned herself with the Israel lobby through her pledge to disarm Iran by whatever means necessary and her threat to use nuclear weapons on terrorists. Her foreign policy advisers are a who's who of neoliberal hawks, including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who famously believed that the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children due to sanctions was "worth it." Clinton is also being advised by Richard Holbrooke, who is reported to be close to Paul Wolfowitz. Holbrooke is a possible candidate for secretary of state if Clinton is elected president. Holbrooke has been a supporter of the Iraq war, and he was an architect of the 1999 bombing of Serbia. Strobe Talbott, who advised Bill Clinton and was also involved with the bombing of Serbia, is reported to be another Hillary adviser.

-snip

http://antiwar.com/orig/giraldi.php?articleid=11438

[ensho]

12. I disagree with your points

nt

[blm]

13. Do you disagree based on the historic evidence of HER votes and actions or YOUR wishful thinking?

.

[mod mom]

16. Gut feelings versus researching the facts.

I have found the Democrats that have supported the Clintons comment about what a great job they did with the economy with little knowledge of the effects of their policies:

supported war & defense
free trade which ended up as a disaster (repeal of Glass Steagall (banking de-reg!!!!!!!, NAFTA, MFN status for China)-their policies lead to mass exodus of jobs through outsourcing.)
allies to corporations-think Telecom Act of '96 which allowed media consolidation.

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. You can disagree with opinions, but you cannot disagree with facts.

Facts are.

She was one of the founding members and leading lights of the DLC - the official voice of the 'new Democrat' neolibs.

[AtomicKitten]

19. +1

[paulk]

34. actually

she wasn't a "founding" member of the DLC - her husband was

get your "facts" straight.

[RaleighNCDUer]

46. She was right there with him - Team Clinton, you know.

If she disagreed with the fundamentals of the New Democrats, he'd have not joined up with them. Their political fortunes have been intertwined from day one, and neither did anything politically without the full knowledge and consent of the other, as each knew the others' stands would reflect back on them both.

[ensho]

18. I'm surprised that DUers are sitting by and letting Hillary be

badmouthed.

don't DUers think she is doing a great job?

do DUers agree with stinky Bob?

[Baltimore]

21. Hillary DLC

I think Hillary is doing a great job. As far as the DLC is concerned, she's an opportunist in that regard, that is, tactical DLC, like Al Gore. I think she's much more liberal than her membership in the DLC would have indicated. Anybody remember about Hillary saying the rich are not paying their fair share?

[blm]

24. I'm surprised you would rather have a neocon warhawk as VP over reformed-hawk Biden.

and also surprised that any DUer would ignore facts and data deliberately.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mkultra]

20. HRC would be an active and effective VP. and i think its a good idea

[ensho]

22. VPs aren't all that 'active' compared to the job she has now

but then you are you

[mkultra]

41. A VPs job is to be a lighting rod

To be more vocal than the president to get out the message but yet deflected the blowback. Most people know that.

but then you are you.

[ensho]

23. I feel like I've stepped into a repug forum

nt

[blm]

26. Please link to any GOP forum concerned that Hillary sides with Lieberman and neocon warhawks.

Thank you.

[Beacool]

31. Hear, hear!!!

x(

[blm]

33. Please link to any GOP forum concerned that Hillary sides with neocon hawks like Lieberman.

Thank you.

[mod mom]

44. So just put a D after their name and you no longer have to scrutinize their records?

Blindly following the party was what W republicans did. Sorry if it upsets you if some of us look at the details.

I'm from Ohio. Here is what bothers me about both Clintons (IE FOLLOW THE MONEY AND LOOK HOW IT EFFECTED THEIR POLICY):

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/31/21045/9822/688/446786

If you are interested, here is the source of what lead me to expose the Clintons for the opportunists that they are, an art book by artist/archivist Mark Lombardi:

Jackson Stephens rivals Bath in his role as conduit between high-level factions. A Little Rock, Arkansas tycoon who attended the U.S. Naval Academy with Jimmy Carter and staked Sam Walton to found Wal-Mart in 1970, Stephens was owner of the notoriously toxic WTI Incinerator in East Liverpool, OH, and a munificent contributor to the campaign warchests of both Bill Clinton and George Bush, Sr. He was also embroiled in the BCCI affair through his association with BCCI satellite Union Bank of Switzerland—UBS, in turn, contributed $25 million to the moribund Harken Energy Corp.

http://www.wburg.com/0202/arts/lombardi.html

but of course you are welcome to glorify the past w/o researching, just don't be surprised when other DUers remove the blinders.

BTW I came to DU as an election integrity activist. Look what I discovered along the way:


After Mining Deal, Financier Donated to Clinton



By JO BECKER and DON VAN NATTA Jr.
Published: January 31, 2008

Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in southeast Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them.

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

-snip


"Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent."

"Mr. Nazarbayev walked away from the table with a propaganda coup, after Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader’s bid to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy."

-snip

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra’s more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton’s inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html


In the Democratic Party you support, do you tolerate a former leader who is willing to sell out democratic process for a noted tyrant in order fill his pocket with big bucks? I DON'T!

[RaleighNCDUer]

25. What is it she's doing such a 'great job' on?

Her support of the Honduras coup? Constantly rising tensions with Iran? Her close relationship with the near-fascist Colombian government, and the secret war we are fighting there?

Hell, the neo-cons LOVE all of that. I'd like to know the source of your dis-information.

[Beacool]

28. Good Lord!!!!

Sometimes this place makes me ill. The vitriol oozing against either Clinton is almost as bad as on the Freepers's site. No wonder so many have left for other boards.

:puke:

[blm]

29. Do you know the difference between 'vitriol' and making note of a politician's votes and positions?

Or is hyperbole helpful to your mission?

[Beacool]

30. No more than it is to yours.

;)

[blm]

32. Can you explain how noting a politician's votes and stated positions is 'vitriol' to you?

If you think restating the neocon position is offensive maybe you should take it up with Hillary...and Bill...and Lanny Davis....and Lieberman.

My mission is to elevate Open Government accountable to the people as an issue. Hyperbole isn't needed.

[Metric System]

37. Speaking of mission...Hey Bea, I never received any instructions for this month. Have you?

;)

[Beacool]

42. Neither have I..........

:D



:hi:

[Jakes Progress]

39. There are many here

for whom the primary wars were their first taste of politics. They are like the high school quarterbacks from small high schools who three years after graduation like to relive their glory days over beers and hang out at the HS stadiums on Friday nights. They have nothing prior to base their emotions on and nothing sense that gives them the rush they got from "beating" the other team. So they sit around and wait for someone to mention one of the other teams. Then they puff up and try to have a rematch. Sad, but inevitable.

Most have moved on. But a few just miss the drama that first attracted them to politics.

[Beacool]

43. Very well said!!!

:hi:

[CakeGrrl]

36. Well, at least this is another spin on the old "Hillary as VP" speculation.

:crazy:

[budkin]

38. Bob Woodward is a Neocon?

You mean the Bob Woodward of Watergate fame?

[Freddie Stubbs]

40. For some people, anyone to the right of Dennis Kucinich is a conservative

[jefferson_dem]

48. And then some. I wonder how many know that Daniel Patrick Moynihan was a neocon...

Look it up.

Bob Woodward... not so much.

[mod mom]

45. Yes Bob Woodward of naval intelligence fame:

"Woodward, a former Naval intelligence officer, is usually pretty friendly to members of the military and intelligence community, in his tales of White House foreign policy fights."

-snip
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/09/07/new_woodward_cover

[jefferson_dem]

47. Being a former Naval intelligence officer makes one a neocon? Good grief. Do you even know...

what the term means?