• RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Every President has called on Kissinger at some point. Even Obama. It’s no surprise at all that HRC would have a professional relationship and even a friendship with the man considering his presence in the administration during her tenure. He never let himself drift far from the seats of power. Ever.

    Kissinger was perfectly happy to make himself useful in some way to perpetuate his view of the geopolitical world.

    E: Don’t believe me?

    Kissinger visited the White House to advise President Barack Obama more than once. And in 2016, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter presented Kissinger with a distinguished public service award from the Defense Department.

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/henry-kissinger-dead-leaders_n_5d10ef86e4b0aa375f50baf0/amp

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Every President has called on Kissinger at some point. Even Obama

      You say this like people didn’t realize Obama lied about being progressive a decade ago…

      Dude was neoliberal thru and they. It’s just he was so (relatively) young no one knew his first election, and the second there wasn’t a primary so the only other option in the general was R

      • frizop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Obama campaigned on single payer. That’s VERY progressive. He just copped out on it once he was seated.

        • TipRing@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          He didn’t cop out, he had to deal with Lieberman who said Single Payer was a non-starter.

        • Prophet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Obama’s presidency was the first presidency with a truly contrarian congress. Dems should have done more when they controlled both houses, because once they lost the senate, Republicans blocked Obama’s agenda in every conceivable way, and that has been their modus operandi ever since.

          Just for reference, Obamacare was supposed to be fairly close to single-payer insurance, with both public and private options (which would force private insurance to compete with the government). What we got in the end was a neutered, emaciated shell of what the original bill was supposed to be, but at least insurance companies couldn’t deny you based on preexisting conditions anymore. This was considered a huge win at the time. It’s laughable though, because this was when everyone was pointing at Canada and claiming they had death panels because universal healthcare couldn’t handle all the patients (complete bullshit/propaganda), as if our own insurance companies weren’t doing exactly this.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol…

          Campaigning to do something and then immediately refusing to try doesn’t make anyone progressive…

          As I kid I told people I wanted to be an astronaut and they acted happy for me because I was a kid.

          I never became an astronaut, so why are we calling Obama a progressive?

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Campaigning to do something and then immediately refusing to try doesn’t make anyone progressive…

            It does to the people who keep insisting that Biden is the Most Progressive Progressive who ever Progressed a Progress.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not meant to be. It’s an inference that the Cold War anti-commie imperialist way of thinking never stopped. As much as we’d like to think that there is dynamic change with each new president, there really isn’t that much other than the surface diplomacy. The US has been conducting geopolitical business very much the same as it has been for multiple decades. That should be pretty obvious when you view our involvement in world events.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          As much as we’d like to think that there is dynamic change with each new president, there really isn’t that much other than the surface diplomacy.

          So both sides do it.

          And therefore Clinton being friends with him is NBD.

          If this isn’t using “both sides” as a defense, it sure looks like it.

          • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Again, reinterpreting what I said in a limited context to hyperbole.

            No, both sides are not the same.

            Clinton being friends with him is indicative of what her foreign policy was/would have been. Have you forgotten her work?

            Exercise some nuance, man.

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I see how it is.

              “Both sides” is like “vote blue no matter who” in that it’s only meant to be used to dismiss criticism from the left.