Why the Vilest Republicans Have Come to Love Hillary Clinton

Eric Zuesse

The 1964 “Goldwater Girl” Hillary Rodham (Clinton) is now viewed as a possible savior by the same Republicans that loathed her husband: she’s enough of a “neo-conservative” to make lots of them want her to become the next U.S. President.

After Bill Krystol’s friend, Robert Kagan (both men were the “Project for a New American Century” top propagandists for the U.S. to invade Iraq in 2003) praised Hillary Clinton in a Washington Post op-ed, the journalist Robert Parry noted that this endorsement was based on her solid neo-conservative record, especially because “she has backed coups, such as in Honduras (2009) and Ukraine (2014); invasions, such as Iraq (2003) and Libya (2011); and subversions such as Syria (from 2011 to the present) all with various degrees of disastrous results,” and therefore she carries on superbly the neo-conservative tradition, which they represent.

Then, on 23 February 2016, the Republican CIA’s (including Richard Mellon Scaife’s) NewsMax headlined, “Rupert Murdoch Attending $2,700-a-Plate Fundraiser for Hillary Clinton.” But this event wasn’t really something new; on 9 May 2006, CBS News had bannered, “Rupert Murdoch Loves Hillary Clinton.”

And, on 22 February 2016, I had headlined “Hillary Clinton Is Backed by Major Republican Donors,” and I noted that in terms of the Republican Party’s top donors, she was above 11 of the 17 Republican Presidential candidates (which 11 included such people as Trump, Chrystie, Perry, and Huckabee), and below 6, in receiving their campaign-donations, even though she’s nominally not a Republican, but a ‘Democrat’.  

Then, on March 29th, I headlined “Hillary Clinton’s Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy” and provided (and explained) there a key email from her private server, so that readers can see for themselves just how she formulates her foreign policies — the behind-the-scenes of her coups and invasions. (Incidentally, the person referred-to there as “Victoria Nuland” is Robert Kagan’s wife: she had organized the 2014 coup in Ukraine.)

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in General and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Brockland A.T.

    Says a lot more about the Democrats and progressives, though, than Republicans, that Hillary is a lock for the Presidential ticket. Hillary has to be the most anti-charismatic candidate ever, which
    means, partican Democrats only love her for her neoconservative policies, which are hardly endearing to any thinking conscience.

    The vilest Republicans were never really Republicans, they were outlier leftist Democrats who in the 1960s found they were better at harnessing their perceived intellectual inferiors, outlier GOPs. They then displaced the paleoconservatives and returned to harness the Democrats.

    http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lind1.html

    The neocon focus was always seizing power for Zionism, and who better to harness than fellow outliers already sympathetic to or at least accommodating of Anglo-Zionism. Single issue fanatics who would dedicate their single-minded fanaticism (often to a single not overtly Zionist issue, like immigration control) to Anglo-Zionism in return for the slightest taste of power and lip-service to their own core issues.

    David Brin noted the ‘inclusivism’ of the neocon big tent. Ironically, inclusivism is supposedly a Democrat trait.

    http://www.davidbrin.com/mutantgop1.html

    So, while you can certainly define powerful strains of Republicanism, they were divided among themselves such that the single-minded outliers, deferring to neoconservatism, could pound their way through for a time.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/7/12/750245/-

    It couldn’t last forever without natural challenge; Trump may or may not close the break between the GOP and neocons freeloaders forever. The Donald is the natural Conservative ‘Chosen One’, that implausibly real natural leader whose time and circumstance has come.

    http://www.behindthename.com/name/donald

    The neocons will certainly try everything they can to co-opt Trump, to place themselves between Trump and the outlier GOPs they once led, and at all costs, prevent the paleos from re-connecting with the outliers through Trump and becoming an unstoppable force that by necessity and nature precludes neoconservatism. At all costs, the neocons must not capture the The Donald.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/president-trump-whos-who-in-trumps-foreign-policy-inner-circle-us-war-machine-rolls-on/5517364

    Neoconservatism is the middleman game; the neocons are pretenders to what Trump naturally is, master of the deal, the ultimate middleman. The neocons must have him, or kill him.

    The One True Trump is, apparently, the one true Conservative reuniting establishment conservatism and outlier conservatism, perhaps beyond arbitrary lines of Republican and Democrat.

    http://buchanan.org/blog/124610-124610

  • April 28, 2014 Wall Street Republicans’ dark secret: Hillary Clinton 2016

    The biggest parlor game on Wall Street and in corporate boardrooms these days is guessing whether former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush will run for president and save the GOP’s old establishment base from its rising populist wing. The second most popular game is guessing what happens if Jeb says no. Two dozen interviews about the 2016 race with unaligned GOP donors, financial executives and their Washington lobbyists turned up a consistent — and unusual — consolation candidate if Bush demurs, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie doesn’t recover politically and no other establishment favorite gets nominated: Hillary Clinton.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/wall-street-republicans-hillary-clinton-2016-106070