When will the Clinton's join the Carlyle Group?

[medeak]

Neocons in the Democratic Party



Like Kennedy and Truman, Democratic neocons want to beef up the military and won't run from a fight.

By Jacob Heilbrunn (Jacob Heilbrunn, a former LA Times editorial writer, is writing a book on neoconservatism.)

May 28, 2006

DON'T LOOK now, but neoconservatism is making a comeback — and not among the Republicans who have made it famous but in the Democratic Party.

(snip)

The fledgling neocons of the left are based at places such as the Progressive Policy Institute, whose president, Will Marshall ((John Kerry's foreign policy adviser)), has just released a volume of doctrine called "With All Our Might: A Progressive Strategy for Defeating Jihadism and Defending Liberty." Beinart's book is subtitled "Why Liberals — and Only Liberals — Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again." ((That reptile Peter Beinart, neolib and editor of "The New Republic" is a PNAC signatory))Their political champions include Connecticut Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman and such likely presidential candidates as former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, who is chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council.

This new crop of liberal hawks calls for expanding the existing war against terrorism, beefing up the military and promoting democracy around the globe while avoiding the anti-civil liberties excesses of the Bush administration. They support a U.S. government that would seek multilateral consensus before acting abroad, but one that is not scared to use force when necessary.

(snip)

***************

Note: DU Respects Copyright usage and requests people cite no more than 3-4 paragraphs and provide a link to the original article. This article has been edited to conform to this policy. You can find the original article at:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-heilbrunn28may28,0,6411415.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

Lithos
DU Moderator

[medeak]

1. am sickened ....just sickened

replying to self...hate Lieberman..hate Hillary...

all sell outs.

[Jigarotta]

12. one party system... now let's

make a pinaté of Nadar.

fire the lot of them.

[medeak]

2. PNAC endorses dems in 2008

this is a dupe from DU...wake up people!

PNAC Co-Founder Endorses Dems in ‘08
by BooMan
Sun May 28th, 2006 at 08:31:22 PM EST

Robert Kagan is the co-founder with William Kristol of the Project for the New American Century and he thinks it will be better for America if the Democrats win the 2008 contest for the Presidency. If that surprises you, you haven’t been paying attention. As far as the PNAC crew goes, power isn’t about being a Republican or a Democrat, it’s about owning both parties. And, fortunately for us, Kagan is spectacularly upfront about this. To understand his mindset it’s important to understand that he doesn’t divide the world up into left and right, but into interventionist and isolationist. Kagan has representatives in the Democratic Party. They can loosely be described as the members of the Democratic Leadership Council and the writers at The New Republic. These opinion leaders consider America to be the ‘indispensable nation’ and they consider it vital to world peace and security that America maintain its role in the world. For example, it’s critical that we maintain military bases from Okinawa, to Tashkent, to Kandahar, to Baku, to Turkey, Baghdad, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Dubai, to Eritrea. From the outside, it looks like they benefit from their association or investments in the companies that do business in those countries, or the companies that arm our military to defend themselves in foreign lands and equip our home defenses to protect against the resentment our occupations cause. But, from the inside, it’s more complicated. It’s about the evils of communism, or fascism, or Islamo-fascism, or whatever is required as a rhetorical tool next week.The way Kagan sees it is actually quite interesting to read. He thinks it is natural for a party too long out of power to become accustomed to opposing our foreign policy and therefore drift into a dangerous isolationism. Of course, it isn’t entirely clear for whom this drift presents a danger. It’s certainly not a threat to the American taxpayer, just for one example. But, it is definitely a threat to those that make their living hawking military and homeland security equipment...

[bridgit]

3. prolly like candid camera...when you least expect it...

x(

[medeak]

4. DU saved my sanity before invading Iraq

however this is making me soooo disallusioned.

apologies to everyone...just have to vent.

Who is clean and not in the "club" anymore?

[bridgit]

5. naw, you're doing just fine imo...

:hi:

[medeak]

6. holy heck...check this out

* William Kennard, Chairman of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under President Bill Clinton, Carlyle's Managing Director in the Telecommunications & Media Group

* Arthur Levitt, Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under President Bill Clinton, Carlyle Senior Advisor

* Mack McLarty, White House Chief of Staff under President Bill Clinton, President of Kissinger McLarty Associates, Carlyle Senior Advisor

[Terran1212]

7. 2 Party system will forever defeat peace

Progressives who want peace will be afraid to vote for independents or third parties because then they think the even more hawkish republicans will win, making the best case scenario that a hawk dem will win.

We can always hope that we have some kind of grassroots revolt and maybe a peace candidate would make it.

One can ALWAYS hope.

[medeak]

8. am so disallusioned

what candidate can defeat these guys and big $$$?

[Terran1212]

9. There are a few shining stars

The democratic socialist Independent Bernie Sanders of the House of Representatives is running for the Senate this year. He'll probably win, and be a strong voice of opposition (Michael Moore once called him "the only voice of opposition" in Congress)

If the Dems do take back Congress, then John Conyers (a strong progressive who has endorsed the antiwar community well!) will be head of the House Judiciary Committee, where he'll have plenty of strength to do good.

And what's more, even if we are outside of the established political parties and legislature, the activist community I feel has been doing a lot of good. We can work outside of government for good things (while slowly creeping inside).

If we give up, they win instantly.

[PaDem]

10. It's hopeless............

and it will always be this way. At the end of the day, there really isn't all that much of a difference between the parties with regard to foreign policy.

[medeak]

11. am sad that I agree n/t

[Raster]

13. Haven't they already?

[oasis]

14. Hillary knows a wee bit more about national security than Heilbrunn.

And tons more than anyone on this thread so far.

[sendero]

15. I laugh in the face....

... of ANYONE who thinks that "terrorism" can be stopped PERIOD. Hillary is going to save us? That's a HOOT!

[oasis]

18. You'd laugh a lot less if elected officials did nothing to stop terrorism.

So have yourself a ball.I'll join you. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[sendero]

19. They might as well be doing nothing..

...nothing they are doing is making any difference.

[oasis]

20. I don't know about you, but I go about my daily routine with no fear of

attacks because I know somebody's doing something.

Don't look now but, there are still a lot of nut cases out there who want to kill Americans in America.

[sendero]

21. Ignorance is bliss..

... and you have a lot more faith in people who demonstrate every day that they are idiots, than I do.

[Terran1212]

22. So much, in fact,

That she supports a war that every intelligence agency on earth (correctly) predicted would increase terrorism many times over.

[idgiehkt]

16. a "comeback"????

where has this writer been? LOL.

[UTUSN]

17. Carlyle was started by a Flunky from CARTER's admin.

so the point of this thread is? AND the ex-CARTER-flunky has benefitted the B.F.E.E. more than anybody---------so your point IS???????????

[Ilsa]

23. Hamilton Jordan and a Repuglican were on The News Hour tonight

talking about a plan to run an internet candidate, either Dem or GOP, to capture the 60% in the middle because there is 20% extreme on each side. The only good things I heard them say was that they want to lure voters that recognize that gay marriage and abortion etc are fringe issues. They sounded like reformed Bushites and the Clintons. This isn't the reformed party I was hoping for.