Leading Washington Neo Con Endorses Hillary:

[amborin]

Exclusive: Hillary Clinton’s cozy ties to Washington’s powerful neocons have paid off with the endorsement of Robert Kagan, one of the most influential neocons. But it also should raise questions among Democrats about what kind of foreign policy a President Hillary Clinton would pursue, writes Robert Parr

https://consortiumnews.com/

[FreakinDJ]

1. No Shit - its all about the Third Way

[Wilms]

2. Victoria Nuland's husband, BTW.

[amborin]

8. didn't know that! wow:

“After three visits to Ukraine in five weeks, Victoria Nuland explains that in the past two decades, the United States has spent five Billion dollars ($5,000,000,000) to subvert Ukraine, and assures her listeners that there are prominent businessmen and government officials who support the US project to tear Ukraine away from its historic relationship with Russia and into the US sphere of interest (via “Europe”).

Victoria Nuland is the wife of Robert Kagan, leader of the younger generation of “neo-cons”. After serving as Hillary Clinton’s spokesperson, she is now undersecretary of state for Europe and Eurasia.”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/american-conquest-by-subversion-victoria-nulands-admits-washington-has-spent-5-billion-to-subvert-ukraine/5367782

[Wilms]

11. That's the one.

Amazing that we're re-entering the Cold War and rarely hear her name.

[BainsBane]

3. No, he didn't

as should be clear by the fact you don't link to an actual article with his endorsing her.

What he says is that Trump is a monster of the GOP's creation and that he would vote for Clinton over Trump.
To cast that as an endorsement is deliberately misleading. Now, some may well prefer a right-wing, racist billionaire to Hillary, even if their prefered candidate is not a Republican. Should we consider that to amount to an endorsement of Trump? I'd vote for just about anyone over Trump. That doesn't mean I endorse just about anyone.

But Robert Kagan’s anti-Trump column today differs from those others in two important respects. First, he connects the rise of Trump to the Republican Party’s generalized anti-Obama hysteria. He calls Trump “the party’s creation, its Frankenstein monster,” attributing his rise to “the party’s wild obstructionism,” its “accommodation to and exploitation of the bigotry in its ranks,” and — most daringly — its “Obama hatred, a racially tinged derangement syndrome that made any charge plausible and any opposition justified.” Republicans have challenged the party’s failure to develop legislative alternatives, but none of them have attacked its strategy of massive uncompromising opposition to the entire Obama agenda. (Except David Frum, who was quickly fired from his think-tank post.)

More daringly, Kagan does not merely denounce Trump, or even swear he will never support him (as other conservatives have done). He states plainly he would vote for Hillary Clinton over Trump. And that, of course, is the only real statement that has force in this context. It is one thing to staunchly oppose a candidate in the primary, but however fierce your opposition, there is always room to come home to the party if you lose the primary. Kagan is connecting Trump to the GOP’s extremism and saying that a Trump-led party is unsupportable. That is the sort of opposition that could turn a Trump defeat into an opportunity for internal reform.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/02/first-republican-for-clinton-over-trump-emerges.html

This article contains the link to the original column in the Washington Post, which I can't access since I've used up my free articles for the months.

[SidDithers]

14. Shocked. Shocked that Parry would get it wrong...

Wait. No I'm not.

Sid

[Avalux]

4. Yep. One of the FOUNDERS of PNAC along with Bill Kristol. Pay attention folks!

For those not familiar with the neocon's penchant for warmongering, here's a statement from PNAC member Reuel Marc Gerecht:

"We have no choice but to re-instill in our foes and friends the fear that attaches to any great power.... Only a war against Saddam Hussein will decisively restore the awe that protects American interests abroad and citizens at home".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

Even though PNAC went extinct (supposedly), its members had and still have close ties to the American Enterprise Institute.
The neocon dream will never die, and apparently Robert Kagan thinks Hillary will continue their efforts to "spread democracy" through fear and domination.

In thinking back to Hillary's IWR vote, was she really mistaken, or was she playing along the whole time?

[BainsBane]

5. Yes, do pay attention

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1344693

[Avalux]

6. Oh please. Trump won't do their bidding, Hillary will.

Kagan voting for a DEMOCRAT?

[MaggieD]

7. No he didn't

You need a better news source. That's the nicest thing I can say without getting a hide.

[OKNancy]

9. I see what you did there, rather the author, Robert Parry

There was no endorsement. Unless saying "I'd vote for Clinton over Trump" is considered an endorsement.
Sounds like a slam on Trump to me.

---------

I hope you will vote for Hillary over the Republican too.

[riversedge]

10. So outright lies in the OP are allowed to stand on DU!!

[olddots]

12. what's good for the goose

is good for the pander .

[NCTraveler]

13. From Lewis to Boxer to PP.

A truly amazing coalition Clinton has.

It's going to be great when that list of names includes Sanders.

Interesting the need to lie about this "endorsement."

[SidDithers]

15. Parry. LOL...nt

Sid