> Hillary Clinton thinks Henry Kissinger is a great man.

Kiss of death for her campaign.

if that makes it right. How many of those presidents VACATION WITH HIM!? Pathetic

The image of the two of them chilling out poolside in their bathing suits sipping foo foo drinks has burned itself into my retinas and it ain't a pretty sight.

If you are to support Hillary. The lies and the hypocracy are out of this world.

We can welcome Kissinger back into the White House.

Happy Days!

Thanks for the thread, 99th_Monkey.

If you admire A you must reject B.

Simplifying to the point of absurdity.

Bullshit, to put it simply.

A blunder that not only "calls into question" her cred as any kind of "progressive" leader,
but it also destroys her foreign policy credibility, i.e. the capstone of her entire campaign.

You can try to put lipstick on that pig, but it's still butt-ugly.

and geopolitics. Hillary Clinton's perspective aligns very well with Kissinger's and I reject hers as well.

Those are disagreements we have over foreign policy, America's role in the world, diplomacy, the use of military force, etc. -- major disagreements. I have my view and Hillary Clinton has hers.

That said, the OP remains a false choice.

Hillary Clinton believes (mistakenly, in my opinion) that America has an obligation to intervene in the affairs of other countries for their own good. It doesn't follow from that that she can't admire MLK or embrace his message of unity.

it strains my imagination to see how both can be true at the same time.

I suspect that if cornered, Kissinger himself would mouth kind platitudes
about MLK, but that too would not ring true to my ears.

good. They cannot occupy the same space because everything that Kissinger is and all he believes cancels out MLK. Clinton is a fraud.

I can admire Fidel Castro's egalitarianism without agreeing with his illiberal views on freedom of expression.

I can admire Thomas Jefferson's free-thinking philosophy without agreeing with his acceptance of slavery.

Hillary Clinton's perspective on US foreign policy doesn't disqualify her from admiring MLK's message of equality.

I think it would disqualify her from invoking MLK to justify her history of military intervention.

from being able to genuinely admire MLK's message"

I'm saying that the Clintons & Kissinger "regularly spending holidays together at a
beachfront villa." should raise serious questions about how committed Hillary is to
King's uncompromising commitment to an expansive dream of justice, non-violence
& world peace.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/02/hillary-clinton-kissinger-vacation-dominican-republic-de-la-renta

I'm starting to lose sight of what we're talking about.

Like Henry Kissinger, Hillary Clinton believes that America has a moral obligation to intervene in the affairs of other countries for their own good. She has something of an evangelical zeal for imposing American-style capitalism and values on "less developed" countries. MLK would surely oppose her in this regard, as do I.

so I'm happy with simply "agreeing to disagree" about the rest.

I would introduce you to some of my friends who might argue that point, but they are dead, killed in Viet Nam.

And we have the right to intervene in other nations "for their own good?"

Madness.

from my post #36 in reply to 99th_Monkey:

Don't forget that! Just look how well Iraq went...



War criminals go free and whistleblowers get this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-shammas/to-hillary-clinton-snowde_b_8291044.html

“’If he wishes to return knowing he would be held accountable and also able to present a defense, that is his decision to make,’ the former secretary of state said in an interview with the Guardian. Clinton has called Snowden an ‘imperfect messenger’ who could have gone about his whistleblowing in a way that would have been less damaging to national security.”

Plus the Kissinger they have created is like the Hillary they created - exaggerated to monster like proportions.

Well, except for a few million brown and yellow dead children, and thousands of dead American soldiers. A war criminal vs a man who died for his people. Yeah, nothing to see there, folks. Move on along the equivalency express.

Politics aside, accepting his support and praise, even speaking to him like he was a human being, is a real deal-breaker for me.

I once met Mikhail Gorbachev walking up Fifth Avenue in Manhattan. I stopped him and thanked him for what he had done in Russia. He was surprised that I even recognised him.

I'd recognise Kissinger anywhere.

her demeanor and her body language in the video when she was meeting with the BLM leader (the one where she famously exclaimed "If that's the way you feel I'll only talk to white people) and in the pics of her with Kissinger.

I know it's anecdotal but she's so tense and uncomfortable with the former and genial and respectful in the latter.

But getting back to the point made in the OP, that's correct. By their fruits you shall know them. Kissinger is a sociopath of the highest order. MLK Jr. was a humanitarian who put the needs of others ahead of his own and ultimately gave his life for others.

Thank you.

If its YOUR TURN .

I think you're right. A strong sense of entitlement can have a certain blinding effect, that distorts
reality.

And he wasn't a war criminal.

It's a false equivalence.

And Hillary has noted that Kissinger accomplished good, too, so she's not going to completely discount him but you all think the good could never overcome the bad and therefore you accuse her of being in bed with a war criminal.

But the sins of the man who escalated and extended a war that led to 52,000 Anerican and exponentially more Vietnamese, Cambodian and Laotian deaths are washed clean by the good HE did?

Interesting ...

Yes, LBJ fucked up by ramping up the war, but a lot of those deaths in Cambodia and Laos took place after Nixon was elected and Kissinger was SoS. And if LBJ was so bad, why did MLK "respect" him?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/crimes-against-humanity-why-is-henry-kissinger-walking-around-free/5358322

judge them on a piecemeal basis - he was also pragmatic enough to know that people aren't perfect but there is value in finding common ground from which to connect. The "I don't like something you did so you're dead to me" may be the approach of Sanders and his supporters, but that's not how MLK operated.

I certainly have respect for King, but I would be very unhappy if my daughter's husband acted like he did.

He only became a saint after he died.

That is exactly their approach. And since no one is perfect, Bernie will get his one day too.

Hillary said her IWR vote was a mistake. People learn from their mistakes. It is part of their experience.

And it's funny the same people would claim to be liberal, and that people should get second chances if they committed minor crimes, etc.

Low information voters.

and in doing so, she's vastly underestimating how much of a game-changer social media
has become in the 8 short years since she was running for POTUS; especially with younger
foks, but also with the general population.

this
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1225187

F Scott Fitzgerald's famous aphorism:

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/90.html

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function".

F. Scott Fitzgerald, "The Crack-Up" (1936)
US novelist (1896 - 1940

I actually think it's an important function of the intellect -- I don't know if it's "higher" or lower what, but that's beside the point; it's sometimes a highly useful function.

For example, in the context of this OP, I can "hold space" in my consciousness for your (and Fitzgerald's) point(s) of view, AND at the same time hold space for the point of view of the author (who wrote the article the OP).

I can agree with you, yet at the same time also totally "get" the author's point of view, i.e. believing that the Clintons & Kissinger "regularly spending holidays together at a beachfront villa." should raise serious questions about how committed Hillary is to King's uncompromising commitment to an expansive dream of racial & economic justice, non-violence & world peace. These are MY words, how i personally "hold" space that's in agreement with the article posted.

One reason it's useful is that it defuses otherwise highly charged "disagreements".. not always, but often enough to be highly useful, maybe even like now.

If she is just cherry picking from MLK, then that's just self serving wallpaper. She wouldn't be the first.

not HRC.

I got a kick out of the I of Chicago photo tempest in a teapot at DU the past few days. It shows SBS doing basically what he's doing time after time this year--bloviating in front of a group of rapt, likely naive, well-off 18 - 35 year olds. You don't need a mentor for that if you are a gifted orator, as SBS obviously is.

So once again SBS can violate the Golden Rule with no blowback. If you are a loud-mouth nobody from nowhere who's never really gotten beyond spewing hot air, you can criticize someone who has accomplished what only a few hundred people have done in the history of the world--run, very successfully, the foreign policy of a superpower. To accomplish what Hillary has accomplished, you have very few options for mentorship. See
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511222636
See

to ask that you please tell Hillary how much he appreciates her glowing adoration,
as it feeds our collective amnesia about his war crimes * crimes against humanity.

For Hillary, it's ordinary folk like Donald Trump and Henry Kissinger.