Democrats' dark family secret

[SeattleUte]

Neocons many of whom were former democrats even Marxists were the policy wonks behind the Iraq war. Many democrats are of like mind, even though they have not formally defected from the democratic party. Hence Hillary supported the Iraq war (she was doing her constituets' bidding as a good senator should), and has been winning by landslides in heavily urban states. This is why, as UtahDan has noted, Hillary sometimes shows her true hawkish colors. I don't see much change in what will happen in Iraq if Hillary gets elected president.

Much of this is driven by support for Israel. (Israel is the reason for much of my ambivalence about the war.) Unlike Vietnam, Iraq is not far off the beaten path of national interests. Israel is the proverbial elephant in the room. Will these powerful interests in the democratic party allow Obama to win if the race stays tight (this type of ultimate control by powers that be is the purpose of super delegates)? Will many democrats defect to McCain as they did to Bush in the face of Kerry's pacificsm? Can Obama possibly keep his campaign promise re ending the war?

[Mormon Red Death]

Sweet! a "protocol of the Elders of Zion" post. I love it!

all kidding aside there is a large Jewish contingent with a lot of money in the Democratic party.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death

Sweet! a "protocol of the Elders of Zion" post. I love it!

all kidding aside there is a large Jewish contingent with a lot of money in the Democratic party.

Actually, Israel is a big reason for my ambivalence about the war because I'm a big Israel supporter. Israel is a free, democratic country. Israel and oil are what distinguish Iraq from Vietnam in terms of national interests, aside from our prestige and honor being at stake.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Israel is a free, democratic country.

Unless of course, you live in the West Bank and you don't happen to be a "settler". Then you get to pay taxes, but you can't vote.

Your main point is fine, I am just nitpicking a little.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Neocons many of whom were former democrats even Marxists were the policy wonks behind the Iraq war. Many democrats are of like mind, even though they have not formally defected from the democratic party. Hence Hillary supported the Iraq war (she was doing her constituets' bidding as a good senator should), and has been winning by landslides in heavily urban states. This is why, as UtahDan has noted, Hillary sometimes shows her true hawkish colors. I don't see much change in what will happen in Iraq if Hillary gets elected president.

Much of this is driven by support for Israel. (Israel is the reason for much of my ambivalence about the war.) Unlike Vietnam, Iraq is not far off the beaten path of national interests. Israel is the proverbial elephant in the room. Will these powerful interests in the democratic party allow Obama to win if the race stays tight (this type of ultimate control by powers that be is the purpose of super delegates)? Will many democrats defect to McCain as they did to Bush in the face of Kerry's pacificsm? Can Obama possibly keep his campaign promise re ending the war?

Obama is either very cunning or very naive. Many people are naive as to how much clout the Jews have. Let's not make this a biggotted charge against me for saying that. The blacks have clout, the mormons have clout in Utah, the evangelists have clout and I could go on and on and on.

I personally am in favor of doing everything we can for Israel, however on occasion they tick me off, like when they spy on us.

You look at the very highest offices and board rooms in our financial institutions and you will find jews. Very powerful and rich democrats come from there. Rubin, Corzine, (sp), Sandy Weil (sp). It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Those folks tend to be very liberal and yet the thing in the middle east could create a conflict for them, as in Joe Lieberman.

[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by BYU71

Obama is either very cunning or very naive. Many people are naive as to how much clout the Jews have. Let's not make this a biggotted charge against me for saying that. The blacks have clout, the mormons have clout in Utah, the evangelists have clout and I could go on and on and on.

I personally am in favor of doing everything we can for Israel, however on occasion they tick me off, like when they spy on us.

You look at the very highest offices and board rooms in our financial institutions and you will find jews. Very powerful and rich democrats come from there. Rubin, Corzine, (sp), Sandy Weil (sp). It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Those folks tend to be very liberal and yet the thing in the middle east could create a conflict for them, as in Joe Lieberman.

I hadn't thought of this before but now I see why Lieberman is supporting Mccain

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Neocons many of whom were former democrats even Marxists were the policy wonks behind the Iraq war. Many democrats are of like mind, even though they have not formally defected from the democratic party. Hence Hillary supported the Iraq war (she was doing her constituets' bidding as a good senator should), and has been winning by landslides in heavily urban states. This is why, as UtahDan has noted, Hillary sometimes shows her true hawkish colors. I don't see much change in what will happen in Iraq if Hillary gets elected president.

Much of this is driven by support for Israel. (Israel is the reason for much of my ambivalence about the war.) Unlike Vietnam, Iraq is not far off the beaten path of national interests. Israel is the proverbial elephant in the room. Will these powerful interests in the democratic party allow Obama to win if the race stays tight (this type of ultimate control by powers that be is the purpose of super delegates)? Will many democrats defect to McCain as they did to Bush in the face of Kerry's pacificsm? Can Obama possibly keep his campaign promise re ending the war?

Very well said SU. The "end the war now" crowd is naïve and misinformed if they think Obama would keep his promise to do just that. Last night when asked if he would pull out, "regardless of the situation? Even if there's serious sectarian violence?", Obama responded:

"No, I always reserve as commander in chief, the right to assess the situation," Obama replied.

Well, at least he's acting like an adult now.

There are just too many interests out there to pull out before there is reasonable expectation that the internal security situation has been pacified. To do so too early would be disasterous.

The other thing Dems need to consider is the image of being the party that surrenders in Iraq. They tried to get Bush to do their bidding, but ending up being paper tigers.

[SeattleUte]

Cali's not wading into this tall grass, I see.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Cali's not wading into this tall grass, I see.

He's too busy rolling around the grassy knoll.

[Detroitdad]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Neocons many of whom were former democrats even Marxists were the policy wonks behind the Iraq war. Many democrats are of like mind, even though they have not formally defected from the democratic party. Hence Hillary supported the Iraq war (she was doing her constituets' bidding as a good senator should), and has been winning by landslides in heavily urban states. This is why, as UtahDan has noted, Hillary sometimes shows her true hawkish colors. I don't see much change in what will happen in Iraq if Hillary gets elected president.

Much of this is driven by support for Israel. (Israel is the reason for much of my ambivalence about the war.) Unlike Vietnam, Iraq is not far off the beaten path of national interests. Israel is the proverbial elephant in the room. Will these powerful interests in the democratic party allow Obama to win if the race stays tight (this type of ultimate control by powers that be is the purpose of super delegates)? Will many democrats defect to McCain as they did to Bush in the face of Kerry's pacificsm? Can Obama possibly keep his campaign promise re ending the war?

Your deep, dark secret is so late 2002.