I keep hearing Kerry is PNAC. I keep asking for proof.

[wyldwolf]

Will someone provide some proof or should I quit wasting my time asking?

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

1. KERRY is PNAC???

NEver ever heard that! Who is saying that?

I'd need to see some serious backing up of that, too. Actually a lot of what he says (I just read very carefully and summarized his foreign policy speech of Feb) is very NOT PNAC.

[Wickerman]

2. That's exactly what they want you to believe

They make you think he is the opposite, the, blammo :tinfoilhat: :P

Oh, wait, that was pretty much compassionate conservatism...
nevermind

[wyldwolf]

3. here's one example of that sentiment

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=509180&mesg_id=509583&page=

[Frank Rose]

4. I think they are thinking of skull & bones

however, unlike bush* Kerry seems to have left his college days behind him, and gone on to be an adult.

[wyldwolf]

5. no, they use terms like "PNAC" and "warmonger" for Kerry

..they think they know what they're talking about.

[lovedems]

6. My favorite was from cspan this morning

and that Teresa Heinz-Kerry was funding Hamas and that is why she needed to release her tax returns!

She is with the terraist!

[Classical_Liberal]

7. His campaign statements, , and his advisors

have got everybody bugged, including myself. Not to mention the fact that Weekly Standard Crowd is tilting his direction, looking for an escape route from a Bush defeat. I sure as hell hope Kerry doesn't provide them one. I admit to suspicion and circumstantial evidence of this tilt but no proof.

I don't know how anticoup thinks there can be another nominee at this point though. We are stuck with Kerry so I'll push him my way.

[Old and In the Way]

8. I'm not bugged.....maybe the 12 posters who don't like Kerry on the

board are. He's leaving his options open on Iraq, as well he should. Who knows what the state of Iraq will be in next January? For all Kerry knows, this administration could turn Iraq into one big parking lot by then.

Kerry needs to win big for a couple of reasons...(1) it can't be close enough to steal and (2) he will want a mandate to drive change when he takes office. The greater the majority of voters side with Kerry, the easier it will be to get a Republican Congress (if they maintain mjority) to accede to his agenda. If he gets 60-65% of the vote in November, that will send a message to Republicans that the voters are fed up with the so-called adults who have allowed Bush to wreck the domestic economy as well as trashed our international reputation.

[Classical_Liberal]

11. He is not going to win big by agreeing with Bush

That confuses centrists. It doesn't make them feel more comfortable at all. My feelings toward Kerry are about his campaign and professed policies. They have nothing to do with liking or disliking him. It is much more then 12 dems who are worried.

[Old and In the Way]

14. He's not trying to agree with Bush, but he is trying to win over the

Bush voter. Centrists aren't confused, this is the rhetoric that they want to hear. It's the far left that seems to be freaking out. You hear him talking like a centrist because that's precisely the demographic that'll win the election for the Democrats. To win big in November, it's going to come from the middle, not the fringe.

[Classical_Liberal]

43. He said America will win the war on terrorism even if Bush wins.

How does that win centrist? Now the centrist will vote for Bush in comfort and certainty. You have to create doubts about Bush to win centrists. It isn't the far left that is freaking out. It is the people who were smart enough to not want to invade Iraq, vs the dlc dummies that supported this mess.

These lame brains also wanted to take the war issue off the table in 2002, and look where it got usl.

The people who are advising Kerry now are two time losers trying to lose for a third time.

[Old and In the Way]

52. Nice...attack his advisors. Smear by association.

[IrateCitizen]

53. While you may be correct in "smear by association", this is no attack...

... on his advisors.

Will Marshall is a signatory to PNAC. Will Marshall has endorsed the neocon agenda via his participation in such a project. This is not an attack -- rather, it is fact.

Personally, if I were in Kerry's shoes, I would be running from anyone associated in any way with PNAC like I was running from the plague. So long as he continues to take advice from such people, it can only be assumed that they are influencing his foreign policy outlook.

Does this make Kerry a PNACer? Of course not. But it is most certainly a cause for alarm for anyone concerned about the issues of militarism and imperialism, regardless of whether those forces are completely overt or are concealed with a happy face.

[Old and In the Way]

59. I know it's hard to understand this concept, but Kerry is not an ideologue

like Bush. Kerry is taking counsel from all viewpoints, Bush only listens to a very narrow band of opinions. Perhaps if Bush had sought counsel from a variety of positions, he'd have been less likely to have sunk us in this quagmire. Personally, I like the idea that Kerry is seeking counsel from a variety of viewpoints...it makes him better informed and likely to make the right decisions.

[IrateCitizen]

60. Nice condescension, OAITW

Despite your suggestions to the alternative, such nuanced observations are not beyond my mental capabilities.

Is Kerry taking foreign policy advice from the likes of Noam Chomsky and Daniel Ellsberg? Of course not. If he were to do so, there would even be many people here completely discrediting him. However, if he were truly interested in "balance" with regards to foreign policy, he would be seeking the counsel of people like that, people who advocated a radical change in our foreign policy. He wouldn't necessarily have to endorse their advice -- but if he were truly interested in being totally balanced, he should at least LISTEN to it and CONSIDER it.

But when he takes counsel from people on the right fringe of the Democratic Party, like Mr. Will Marshall, the signatory of PNAC, he is taking counsel from some pretty radical viewpoints. However, since the "acceptable" political spectrum, especially vis a vis foreign policy, is from the center-right to the far-right, Kerrys consult with people like Mr. Marshall is considered seeking "balance" while a large part of the spectrum is completely ignored.

The problem with this, of course, is that in the end we end up with a very narrow range of options WRT US foreign policy. I would have thought that after Vietnam and the proxy wars in Latin America during the 1970's-80's through to the fight on terrorism that only succeeds in creating more terrorists, that people at least on the center-left would be demanding some different alternatives be considered. I guess that I'm just too hopeful to believe such a fantasy....

[Classical_Liberal]

54. I didn't hire Will Marshall. Kerry did. n/t

[seabeyond]

13. oaitw, i agree

who is to know what iraq is going to look like in 8 months. i dont think kerry can or should put a lot on the table at this time. the place is so volatile it could go in any direction, it doesnt make any sense to be coming up with what to do when who is to know what is going to need to be done

[LWolf]

23. Heads up:

There are way more than 12 democrats "bugged" by Kerry.

I started out with Kerry ranked # 3 among the large pack of primary candidates. I liked his lifetime record in the senate.

As long as I didn't look at the last few years.

I started noticing things that concerned me during the debates.

So far, I haven't met a single democrat in person that "likes" John Kerry enough to be excited about him. For the most part, they have accepted his nomination, and are planning, somewhat grimly, to support him. I count myself in that camp. I'll be voting for him. I will campaign for him after the convention and formal selection.

The most recent quote, from a lifetime "yellow dog" democrat: "I guess we're stuck with Kerry."

I agree that Kerry needs to win big in November; I think he will. I'll be thrilled to evict * even if I'm not comfortable with his replacement. But I won't pretend that something is ok when it is not; I hope that people uncomfortable with Kerry's viewpoints on issues continue to make themselves heard.

[On the Road]

9. I Think What You're Seeing is Traditional Democratic Views

National democrats have often -- no, usually -- been hawks. Just because a minority are pacifists doesn't mean the whole party is.

LBJ escalated Vietnam. Kennedy flogged Nixon over the supposed "missile gap," and almost invaded Cuba. Even Jimmy Carter practiced quite a bit of saber-rattling and began the escalation in military spending that continued under Reagan.

You could come up with countless examples of military adventurism by Democratic presidents. I don't particularly like it, but I don't think Kerry is particularly bad.

[Cleita]

10. If Kerry were part of them, he should be mentioned on their website.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

I couldn't find his name anywhere, but I didn't look that thoroughly.

[Classical_Liberal]

12. Look up Will Marshall

He is Kerry's foreign policy speech writer.

[Old and In the Way]

15. Is this going to be a weekly thread?

Will Marshall is a very bad man, we know, because you've told us. I'm quite comfortable with Kerry getting counsel from all parts of the political spectrum. A wise President does that. Perhaps if Bush had sought counsel from some progressives and people that hold opposing points of view, he'd have avoided this disaster in Iraq.

[rman]

20. CL didn't tell you Will Marshall is a bad man, he suggested

you look it up.

[Classical_Liberal]

44. He seems to be taking council exculsively from them when it

comes to foreign policy. I don't see any progressive initiatives. It looks like Kerry is taking advise from the same numbnuts that Bush took advise from. People who screwed up as bad as the neocons shouldn't touch foreign policy.

[JHBowden]

17. "Speech writer?"

You're kidding me. You want to jump ship because Kerry's SPEECH WRITER isn't ideologically pure? :dunce:

[rman]

21. not because he's ideologically unpure, but because PNAC is immoral

-

[WoodrowFan]

28. it's more than that!

I hear they even had lunch together! (faints away from the horror)

[Classical_Liberal]

45. The PNAC are Bush advisors

This guy is a slut!

[radwriter0555]

26. I don't see anything wrong with Will Marshall, in FACT he's written as

Will Marshall is president and founder of the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), a center for policy innovation in Washington, D.C. Established in 1989, PPI's mission is to modernize progressive politics and government for the Information Age.

..."Called "Bill Clinton's idea mill," the Institute's research and proposals were the source for many of the "New Democrat" themes that figured prominently in national politics during the 1990s. PPI also has been integral to the spread of "Third Way" thinking to center-left parties around the world."

Gosh, for this I shouldn't vote kerry? This is his link to the PNAC?

I don't THINK so.

[AntiCoup2K4]

32. Will Marshall is a traitorous neocon shitbag

PPI is nothing but PNAC in a shiny new wrapper. And in 1995, Marshall and the other traitorous shitbag Al From wrote in article in which they referred to the 1994 election as a "liberation". Or in other words, they thought the loss of Democratic power in the government was a GOOD thing.

[radwriter0555]

38. What on earth are you talking about? This string of sentences makes

NO sense.

Please clarify.

[Classical_Liberal]

50. The PNAC

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=110&topic_id=80

[paulk]

55. speech writer?

Speech writer's define policy???



???????

[rman]

16. doesn't have to be a *member* of PNAC,

if Kerry is affiliated with members or supporters of PNAC, it'd be bad enough.

[GeronimoSkull]

18. PNAC is good now.

Deal with it.

[rman]

19. why is PNAC good now?

-

[radwriter0555]

25. how is PNAC good now? they still want to take over the world and destroy

everything that gets in the way of their plan.

[AntiCoup2K4]

30. Is Hitler good now as well?

Shit, if were gonna justify fascism, might as well be honest about it. SIEG HEIL!!

[GeronimoSkull]

34. Sorry

I was being sarcastic. It's hard for me to stomach the apologists' spinning points. I agree with your sentiments completely.

[sangh0]

39. TYpical name-calling in response to a request for proof

They have no proof or even evidence that Kerry is pNAC. All they can do is to repeat "Kerry is PNAC, KERRY is PNAC" and call other posters "apologists"

Name calling and sloganeering is all they have

[GeronimoSkull]

41. Not really

People have pointed out that he's working with a PNAC guy.

"A speechwriter??? Oh please!!!"

Yeah, a guy he's paying to put words in his mouth.

Words, that to some of us, sound pretty creepy.

I've been told Marshall is the "left-wing of PNAC".

Do you really not understand why people are bothered by this?

No one here is suggesting to not vote for Kerry... do you not want people to express their concerns about where this country is going???

[Classical_Liberal]

46. After Falluja? You have to be shitting me?

?

[Gore1FL]

22. Kerry is also the Lindbergh Baby

n/t

[radwriter0555]

27. Didn't he personally manage and oversee the my lai massacre?

that's what I heard.... him and colin powell were war buddies and and

[Classical_Liberal]

51. Colon Powell. Had the my lai job

Kerry was far too young.

[radwriter0555]

24. who's been saying this? I haven't seen it; heck hardly anyone knows

what PNAC is..

who's the 'they'?

[AntiCoup2K4]

29. Who's the "they"??

Here's the most recent list....

Gordon Adams Ron Asmus Max Boot

Frank Carlucci Eliot Cohen Ivo H. Daalder

James Dobbins Thomas Donnelly Lee Feinstein

Peter Galbraith Jeffrey Gedmin Robert S. Gelbard

Reuel Marc Gerecht Philip Gordon Charles Hill

Martin S. Indyk Bruce P. Jackson Robert Kagan

Craig Kennedy William Kristol Tod Lindberg

James Lindsay Will Marshall Christopher Makins

Joshua Muravchik Michael O'Hanlon Danielle Pletka

Dennis Ross Randy Scheunemann Gary Schmitt

Helmut Sonnenfeldt James B. Steinberg

[Classical_Liberal]

49. The PNAC links archive

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=110&topic_id=80

[revcarol]

31. He's not PNAC, he's PPI !!

A kindlier, gentler form of PNAC.

The U. S. would go SLOWER to reach its imperial goals.

[kiahzero]

33. Stopping genocide == PNAC now?

"Waaah! Waaah! Kerry won't be an isolationist!"

[IrateCitizen]

36. It's not about stopping genocide -- it's garrisoning of the planet

PPI advocates a "softer, gentler" brand of imperialism -- something more in line with the practices of the Clinton years.

In the words of Chalmers Johnson, author of Blowback and The Sorrows of Empire, Bill Clinton was actually a much better imperialist than George W. Bush. He was better because he wasn't so overt about it, and because he couched that imperialism in humanitarian rhetoric. However, when you insist on maintaining military presence in over 120 nations around the globe -- even in areas where that presence is not particularly liked by the populace, as in Okinawa and South Korea -- there is no other way to refer to it except as imperialism.

While it is a typical Ameri-centric attitude to excuse such a military presence as "enhancing stability", in the eyes of people in the rest of the world, it is largely seen for what it is -- protection of American economic and geopolitical objectives for the purposes of maintaining hegemony. They also, unlike many of us here in the states, see the cost in global relations at maintaining this hegemony. Just look at how we've managed to fuck things up between South and North Korea for the purposes of maintaining our military presence in Korea. After all, if peace ever broke out between the North and South (as it was on the verge of doing from Kim Dae-Jung's sunshine policy), then the overwhelming majority of Koreans would suddenly turn to our troops and ask, "So what in the hell ARE you doing here now?"

PPI is imperialism with a happy face. That happy face matters very little if you're on the receiving end of that imperialism.

[Tinoire]

56. An Imperialism that still dislikes Chiraq for his "foolish rebellion"

"I hope by the time you read this book that the UN has been usefully employed as a partner in the reconstruction of Iraq and that Jacques Chirac has ceased his foolish rebellion against the very idea of the Atlantic Alliance. America, which has always shown magnanimity in victory, should in turn meet repentant Europeans halfway, not ratchet up the badgering unilateralism that fed European fears in the first place."

John Kerry,
A Call to Service: My Vision for a Better America
page 51

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0670032603/pressaction-20/102-6862672-4981722

[IrateCitizen]

57. Chalmers Johnson's predictions coming to prophecy...

In his book The Sorrows of Empire, Chalmers Johnson says that the Iraq debacle has not really created, but instead merely revealed rifts that have been developing between the US and Western Europe for quite some time. These rifts have become quite deep and significant, and although the US and EU are not adversaries, they will never really be "allies" anywhere close to what they were during the Cold War. Simply put, the European nations (particularly France and Germany) have come to realize the havoc that US hegemony is wreaking in the world, and they have decided that they really don't want to be part of it.

If this quote sums up Kerry's position accurately, then it is indicative of how screwed up things really are. IMHO, the nations of Europe (namely France and Germany, again) have nothing to apologize for in the least -- they predicted this thing would be a disaster, they said that the US was breaking international law, and their assessments have proven quite true. What Kerry seems to be suggesting would be like the Enron workers bilked out of their retirement savings meeting Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling "halfway". :eyes:

BTW -- Johnson sees a similar rift between the US and East Asia. A lot of eyes were opened along the Pacific Rim during the 1997 financial crisis and its aftermath.

[GeronimoSkull]

58. America and Europe in the New World Order

PNAC advertises this book by PNAC member Robert Kagan on their website:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1400040930/qid=1044310361/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-9346967-7861707?v=glance&s=books">Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order

[radwriter0555]

40. how on earth is PPI related to the PNAC? I'm DOING the research, and

I see no link of any sort.

Please clarify.

[GeronimoSkull]

42. My understanding

is that Will Marshall, director of PPI, is a member of PNAC

Is this all a misunderstanding?

[Classical_Liberal]

48. He is both PNAC and PPI.

.

[Earth_First]

35. Kerry is a "Progressive Internationalist"

n/t

[GeronimoSkull]

37. LOL

laughing/crying

[Selwynn]

47. Gimme a fucking break. n/t