Advertisements

Tag Archives: Tulsi Gabbard

We shouldn’t be surprised the mainstream left is ‘NeverTulsi’, by Tobias Hoonhout

The mainstream of both political parties is fully committed to American empire,  which Tulsi Gabbard questions. That gets her no friends within her party, the Democrats. From Tobias Hoonhout at spectator.us:

MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes tweeted in July what, at surface level, seems an obvious point: ‘If I were the DNC, I would be spending a lot of money learning basically everything I could about 2012 Obama voters who didn’t vote in 2016.’

Considering how much Hayes and others on the mainstream left have invested into debunking the current administration, there’s no surprise that, when the rubber meets the road, the Democrats let their collective hatred of Trump cloud their political judgement.

Look no further than their treatment of Tulsi Gabbard.

While only 10 candidates made the cut for the Thursday’s third Democratic debate, Gabbard, who is currently polling nationallyabove the debate cutoff — and qualified participants Julián Castro and Amy Klobuchar — remains left out in the cold by the DNC.

Why? On the surface, it’s not entirely clear. Gabbard was the most-searched candidate after both the first and the second debates; and has drawn support from popular figures ranging from podcaster Joe Rogan to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey. Once upon a time, Gabbard was a rising star in the Democratic party and a darling of the progressive movement. A glowing Vogue profile in 2013 labeled her ‘an embodiment of the Obama era, with its shattering of political stereotypes and explosion of cultural diversity.’

Continue reading

Advertisements

We’re Listening to the Wrong Voices on Syria, by Danny Sjursen

Tulsi Gabbard’s views on Syria are controversial but they’ve been far more correct than those of any of her critics. From Danny Sjursen at antiwar.com:

Once upon a time, Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard traveled to Syria and met with the strongman President Bashar Assad. She considered her willingness to engage all sides of the country’s bloody civil war to be an important step toward peace. For this bold action, she was widely pilloried at the time and considered by some an authoritarian apologist or outright traitor. The claim was repeated again recently by the ever-so-mainstream California Sen. Kamala Harris, a fellow Democratic presidential hopeful. The attacks on Gabbard’s Syria record have been quite regular among Washington insiders, who considered the congresswoman foolish. But was she? More than two years later, given events in Syria, one must conclude that she certainly was not. Indeed, Gabbard was right all along.

Recently, Assad’s Syrian Arab Army (SAA) has squeezed the anti-regime rebels in their last major stronghold of Idlib, in the country’s northwest. Thus, the latest phase of Syria’s civil war is nearly over. And Assad, along with his Russian and Iranian backers, have won. Perhaps that’s not such a bad thing. Un-American blasphemy, right? Hardly.

For years, the West and its Gulf State theocratic partners decried the admittedly brutal Assad and sold their populations the fantasy that there were “moderate,” non-Islamist rebels. The reality is that the rebels were infused with, and quickly dominated by, various jihadist fighters from the very start. Yes, Assad is a veritable monster; but what of the Nusra Front (an al-Qaida franchise) and the even more extreme Islamic State—are they not equally deplorable, and, frankly, more of a transnational threat to the U.S.? Of course they are. Assad, at least, posed no serious threat to the United States (neither did his neighbor, Saddam Hussein, by the way) and both suppressed Sunni jihadism and protected Syria’s plethora of Christian, Allawi, and other minority populations.

Continue reading

Gabbard Victimized by DNC’s Dubious Debate Criteria, by Michael Tracey

The Democrats are handling the Gabbard insurgency even more repressively than they handled the Sanders insurgency in 2016. They are taking no chances at all, denying her access to their debate forum. From Michael Tracey at realclearpolitics.com:

Tulsi Gabbard is on the verge of being excluded from the next Democratic presidential debate on the basis of criteria that appear increasingly absurd.

Take, for instance, her poll standing in New Hampshire, which currently places Gabbard at 3.3% support, according to the RealClearPolitics average as of Aug. 20. One might suspect that such a figure would merit inclusion in the upcoming debates — especially considering she’s ahead of several candidates who have already been granted entry, including Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Beto O’Rourke, and Andrew Yang. But the Democratic National Committee has decreed that the polls constituting this average are not sufficiently “qualifying.”

What makes a poll “qualifying” in the eyes of the DNC? The answer is conspicuously inscrutable. Months ago, party chieftains issued a list of “approved sponsoring organizations/institutions” for polls that satisfy their criteria for debate admittance. Not appearing on that list is the Boston Globe, which sponsored a Suffolk University poll published Aug. 6 that placed Gabbard at 3%. The DNC had proclaimed that for admittance to the September and October debates, candidates must secure polling results of 2% or more in four separate “approved” polls — but a poll sponsored by the newspaper with the largest circulation in New Hampshire (the Globe recently surpassed the New Hampshire Union Leader there) does not count, per this cockamamie criteria. There has not been an officially qualifying poll in New Hampshire, Gabbard’s best state, in over a month.

Continue reading

Tulsi Gabbard Gets Some Vindication, by Scott Ritter

Tulsi Gabbard’s skepticism about alleged chemical attacks by the Syrian government is certainly warranted. From Scott Ritter at truthdig.com:

Tulsi Gabbard Gets Some Vindication
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard speaks in Detroit on July 31, 2019 during the second of two Democratic presidential primary debates hosted by CNN. (Paul Sancya / AP Photo)

In the aftermath of the second Democratic primary debate on July 31, Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard emerged as the most Googled of all candidates, an indication that her performance (which included a stunning takedown of California Sen. Kamala Harris over her criminal justice record) attracted the attention of many viewers. This heightened level of attention produced blowback, both from Harris, who dismissed Gabbard as “an Assad apologist” (a reference to Syrian President Bashar Assad), and from the mainstream media, typified by CNN’s Chris Cuomo, who alleged that Gabbard—a major in the Hawaiian National Guard, with two tours of duty in the Middle East under her belt—is taking the side of Assad over the U.S. intelligence community and U.N. inspectors when it comes to assigning blame for chemical weapons attacks against Syrian civilians.

“What you are referring to are [sic] cynicism as skepticism that I have expressed, because I’ve served in a war that was caused by people who lied to us, who lied to the American people, who presented false evidence that members of Congress and U.S. senators believed and voted for a war that resulted in the loss of lives of over 4,000 of my brothers and sisters in uniform,” Gabbard replied to Cuomo. “It’s our responsibility as lawmakers and as leaders in this country to make sure that our U.S. military is not being activated and deployed to go to war unless we are certain a) that it serves the best interests of the American people; and b) that that action will actually have a positive impact. The questions I’m raising are based on this experience that I’ve had.”

Continue reading

Tulsi Gabbard Remains Low in ‘Approved’ DNC Polls Despite Popularity, by David Howman

The DNC will do everything it can to keep Tulsi Gabbard out of the next debate. From David Howman at thelibertarianrepublic.com:

Tulsi Gabbard Remains Low in ‘Approved’ DNC Polls Despite Popularity

The Democratic party has a candidate problem. Twenty-four candidates are currently in the race, and after two rounds of primary debates, the field still feels crowded.

The DNC is hoping that their stricter qualification rules for the September and October debates will significantly thin the pack. For these debates, candidates must get 130,000 unique donors and reach 2% or higher in four different DNC-approved polls.

As of this article’s publication, only nine candidates have qualified: Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Beto O’Rourke, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, and Andrew Yang. Julian Castro, the former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, is one qualifying poll away from meeting the criteria as well.

The only other candidate that is close to doing so is Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard, who saw a massive uptick in donors after her debate performance in which she roasted Harris.

Continue reading→

Tulsi Gabbard’s Road to Damascus, by Scott Ritter

Unlike any of the other presidential candidates, Tulsi Gabbard has actually served in the military. And unlike any of the presidential candidates, Gabbard has met Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad. There is a connection between those two facts. From Scott Ritter at theamericanconservative.com:

Tulsi Gabbard speaks to CNN’s Jake Tapper about her 2017 visit with Syrian President Bashar Assad back in January. (CNN/Screenshot)
There’s a good reason the presidential hopeful met with Assad, but the media doesn’t want to talk about it.

It was eight minutes of hell for Kamala Harris. Onstage at the second Democratic debate in Michigan, Harris was subjected to a blistering assault on her record as a California prosecutor at the hands of Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard.

Afterwards, Harris was asked about Gabbard’s attack by CNN’s Anderson Cooper. “Listen,” she replied, “I think that this coming from someone who has been an apologist for an individual, [Syrian President Bashar al] Assad, who has murdered the people of his country like cockroaches. She has embraced and been an apologist for him in the way she refuses to call him a war criminal. I can only take what she says and her opinion so seriously, so I’m prepared to move on.”

Harris was referring to a controversial four-day visit by Gabbard to Syria in early January 2017, during which she met with Assad. While Gabbard’s performance during the debate was stellar (her name was the most searched of all the Democratic candidates), Harris’s jab regarding Assad seemed like all the mainstream media wanted to talk about.

“When sitting down with someone like Bashar al-Assad in Syria,” MSNBC’s Yasmin Vossoughian asked Gabbard, “do you confront him directly and say why do you order chemical attacks on your own people? Why do you cause the killings of over half a million people in your country?”

Continue reading

Who’s Afraid of Tulsi Gabbard? by Matt Taibbi

Tulsi Gabbard is being viciously attacked, mostly by fellow Democrats and the liberal press, for some positions that don’t square with Deep State orthodoxy. From Matt Taibbi at rollingstonc.com:

Presidential hopeful U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, smiles during a campaign stop at a brewery in Peterborough, N.H on March 22nd, 2019.

Presidential hopeful U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, smiles during a campaign stop at a brewery in Peterborough, N.H on March 22nd, 2019.

Charles Krupa/AP/Shutterstock

“It just shows,” says Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, “that launching a smear campaign is the only response to the truth.”

Gabbard, 38, burst into headlines after a July 31 Democratic Party presidential debate, when she went after California Senator Kamala Harris’s record as Attorney General of the State of California. The “smear campaign” refers to the bizarre avalanche of negative press that ensued, as reporters seemed to circle wagons around a Harris, a party favorite.

The Gabbard-Harris exchange was brief but revealing, as a window into a schism in the Democratic Party. Harris was elected Attorney General of California in 2010. She frequently sought moderate or even conservative positions on issues like criminal sentencing, drug enforcement, and prison labor. These stances were standard among Democrats back when being “tough on crime” was considered an essential component of the “electability” argument.

The Democratic electorate has changed, becoming especially concerned about mass incarceration. However, the party has not quite caught up. Gabbard exposed these divisions in the July 31 event, when she said:

“She put over 1500 people in jail for marijuana, and then laughed about it when asked if she ever smoked marijuana.”

The Detroit crowd cheered all the way through Gabbard’s next point, about Harris’ blocking the introduction of DNA evidence in a murder case. The applause unnerved Harris, who looked like someone dented her car. She’d been at 20 points in a July 2 Quinnipiac poll; after a multi-week slide that culminated with Gabbard’s attack, Harris was at 7 percent, a “distant fourth” behind Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders.

Having wounded a presumptive frontrunner backed by nearly $25 million in campaign funds, Gabbard instantly became the subject of a slew of negative leaks, tweets, and press reports. Many of these continued the appalling recent Democratic Party tradition of denouncing anything it doesn’t like as treasonous aid to foreign enemies.

Harris national press chair Ian Sams tweeted, “Yo, you love Assad!”, a reference to Gabbard’s controversial visit with Syrian president Bashar al-Assad in 2017. He then tweeted a link to an insidious February 2 NBC News story, which asserted that Gabbard’s campaign was the beneficiary of Russian bots.

Continue reading→

 

%d bloggers like this: