HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Should Hillary repudiate ...

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 08:59 AM

 

Should Hillary repudiate Richard Kagan's endorrsement?

Last edited Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:49 PM - Edit history (2)

Trump was (rightly) forced to repudiate David Duke's endorsement. Why not repudiate Kagan's endorsement?) PNAC was an integral piece of the pro war propaganda puzzle, and I think its fair to argue that this organiation has much blood on its hands.

Hillary would go a long way toward winning my vote if she did this.

21 replies, 1822 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply Should Hillary repudiate Richard Kagan's endorrsement? (Original post)
jack_krass Jun 2016 OP
Renew Deal Jun 2016 #1
HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #2
Renew Deal Jun 2016 #3
HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #4
BootinUp Jun 2016 #9
SheilaT Jun 2016 #5
jack_krass Jun 2016 #6
Agschmid Jun 2016 #17
jack_krass Jun 2016 #19
Agschmid Jun 2016 #21
MariaThinks Jun 2016 #7
Tarc Jun 2016 #8
jack_krass Jun 2016 #10
Tarc Jun 2016 #11
jack_krass Jun 2016 #12
Tarc Jun 2016 #13
jack_krass Jun 2016 #14
Tarc Jun 2016 #15
jack_krass Jun 2016 #20
Agschmid Jun 2016 #18
Agschmid Jun 2016 #16

Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 09:04 AM

1. The best way to do it is to say that she can't control who supports her and

Kagan will have no place in her administration, but people that care about American security should support her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #1)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 09:10 AM

2. interesting non answer.. answer...

 

When did DEM folks embrace war hawk positions with such zeal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HumanityExperiment (Reply #2)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 09:12 AM

3. Democrats won WW1, WW2, captured Bin Laden

The Democratic Party is not a party of pacifism and isolation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #3)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 09:27 AM

4. ...not war hawk...

 

DEM party is not war hawk, but please continue with showing us how RW of a position you're willing to take with these continued war hawk replies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HumanityExperiment (Reply #2)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 10:26 AM

9. How is that a non-answer? Explain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 09:30 AM

5. I think you mean repudiate.

 

Rebuke means to scold.

Repudiate means to refuse to accept, or deny the validity of.

You can't really scold an endorsement, but you can refuse to accept it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #5)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 09:54 AM

6. Thanks, uodated

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #6)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:43 PM

17. *updated

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #17)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:44 PM

19. Do'h widh I xould spell

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #19)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:51 PM

21. Me too.

It always makes an argument more convincing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 10:13 AM

7. I think Hillary should focus on defeating trump and stop letting the public harrass and bully her

for things all the other politicians have done

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 10:24 AM

8. A neoconservative and a white supremacist are not in the same ballpark

Hell, they're different fucking sports entirely.

Seriously, get a grip.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #8)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 10:45 AM

10. I know, I know ITS HER TURN. And I feel so bad for interrupting your euphoric rapture, I really do..

 

But Neocons and PNACers are really, really bad, and have caused incalculable misery and death this decade. The fact that they are hovering around HRC, salavating at the prospect of spilling more blood sort of bothers me, just a little.

Note to the counters: the above is intended as constructive criticism. So please dont count at me.

ITS HER TURN

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #10)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 11:13 AM

11. I didn't bring any notion of "turn" into the discussion

We're not a warmongering nation, but we're not a pacifist/isolationist one either. Neocons may have been wrong, and stupid, sometimes blindingly so. But I reserve a special place in hell for racists...not just garden-variety racists but supporters and organizers of race wars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #11)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 11:35 AM

12. PNACers are racists, and if you think what they're doing to/have done/will do

 

to the middle east is NOT RACIST, then theres no need for us to be talking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #12)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 11:50 AM

13. PNACs are not racists. This is where the word loses its effect, when you use it for...

...straight-up political disagreement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #13)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:36 PM

14. LOL, you're a riot. Guess it's just a coincidence that they blow up countties full of brown

 

and black people then.

Yes, they are racists, every bit as much as David Duke, except they actually kill millions of people. They are the first order of Hell.

Not in name. Not ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #14)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:40 PM

15. Yea...

I can't even take you seriously anymore.

/adds to Ignore List.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #15)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:47 PM

20. Surrender accepted, next?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #14)

Fri Jun 3, 2016, 12:43 PM

18. *you're

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #10)

Reply to this thread