Tulsi Gabbard doesn't want to arm terrorists, and Dems hate her for it

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and Sen. Rand Paul introduced the Stop Arming Terrorists Act on Friday.

The bipartisan legislation (H.R.608 and S.532) aims to prohibit any federal agency from using taxpayer dollars to provide weapons, cash, intelligence, or any support to al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other terrorist groups. It would also prohibit the government from funneling money and weapons through other countries that are directly or indirectly supporting terrorists.

Huh. Don't give weapons and financing to blood-thirsty terrorists that want to kill us. That sounds like a pretty good idea to me.
You would think that progressives might get behind Gabbard and her sound moral, common sense platform.

But you would be wrong.

How Much Can You Trust Tulsi Gabbard?
Though ostensibly progressive, Gabbard opposes the removal of Al-Assad from Syria and has been endorsed by a former KKK grand wizard.

The Curious Islamophobic Politics of Dem Congressmember Tulsi Gabbard

The GOP’s Favorite Democrat Goes to Syria
Tulsi Gabbard, a Hawaii congresswoman, has a worldview that aligns closely with President-elect Trump’s.

And then there is, of course, TOP
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has turned into a stooge for Syria's dictator. Who will primary her?
BREAKING: Tulsi Gabbard May Join Trump Administration

You see, it's OK to be "pragmatic" with your values, but not with Republicans.
So if the Dems are arming al-Qaeda terrorists, and Republicans oppose arming al-Qaeda terrorists, then this is a value you are supposed to sacrifice to be a good Democrat.

Or more to the point, Dems support regime change in Syria, eventhough the only armed opposition are terrorists. Therefore, we must support terrorists because Dems support regime change in Syria.
Not doing so make you racist, islamophobic, a Trump-lover, and an all-around traitor.
Traitor against whom?

There's something disturbing about Tulsi Gabbard.

Gabbard has something of a dissident stance within the Democratic party. She resigned from the DNC during the primaries over claims of bias against Bernie Sanders. She very conspicuously met with President-elect Trump a couple weeks ago. She's very critical of President Obama's foreign policy which she calls a "neo-con" foreign policy.

Oh yeah. Traitor to the DNC, which is the worst sort of traitor.

up
58 users have voted.

Comments

dkmich's picture

The Time for Single Payer Has Come (So Why is Bernie Sanders Still Hawking ObamaCare?)

Now it is their turn to throw us under the bus for Obama.

The least Bernie could do is STFU.

up
16 users have voted.

If you are on FB, please invite your friends to like and follow caucus99percent. I post c99 front-paged articles to c99's FB page. Come look.

dkmich's picture

Somehow I don't feel even.

up
17 users have voted.

If you are on FB, please invite your friends to like and follow caucus99percent. I post c99 front-paged articles to c99's FB page. Come look.

Amanda Matthews's picture

@dkmich
of loss. Something that we thought we were a part of has been hijacked by a bunch of whack jobs and moral bankrupts. There are a bunch of crazies who have made it very plain and clear that if you do not now openly support everything that you once were against, i.e., eternal war and war crimes, revolving-door politics, crony capitalism, and politicians who think they were sent to Washington to rule not represent then they want you to get out. You're not a true 'Democrat' if you don't now become everything you've always thought was wrong. And it doesn't feel right because it isn't right. We're all pissed and upset and rightfully so.

But let me just point out one big plus in your favor, in my favor, in all of our favor. No one here (to my knowledge) would ever stoop to the level of crawling down into the political equivalent of a septic tank and smear themselves with the stench of George W. Bush**. No one here would ever use him as a paragon of decency and human values capable of criticizing anyone else for what they are doing wrong. No one here is that damn amoral or dumb. They are.

up
19 users have voted.

@dkmich

If you're a multi-millionaire or a billionaire with gobs of power and influence, you're just about the same as they are.

up
4 users have voted.
travelerxxx's picture

When I sit around with my Trump-voting co-workers, I'm amazed how often our beliefs intertwine. I think they're sometimes amazed, too.

I hate corruption in politics; they hate corruption in politics.
I hate the rule of corporations; they hate the rule of corporations.
I want the TBTF banks broken up; they want the TBTF banks broken.
I don't want 800 U.S. military bases throughout the world; neither do they.
They know the DNC is crooked; and now-a-days, so do I.

There are other issues on which we are not so in agreement, but it seems surprising how often we do mesh.

It's almost as if a coalition could be formed...

up
46 users have voted.

@travelerxxx
I'm tellin'.

up
23 users have voted.

@travelerxxx

prosecute (without damaging the economy). Thus said Eric Holder. And, they're bigger now than they were in 2008. Also the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000, the one that left crap mortgage derivatives unregulated, is still on the books, as is repeal of Glass Steagall.

Thanks, Bubba. Thanks, Bush the Lesser. Thanks, Obama.

up
11 users have voted.

@travelerxxx

Looks as though you and I have been thinking along similar lines, though.

http://caucus99percent.com/comment/248709#comment-248709 (Whether you read the beginning or not, skip the middle and go to the last paragraph.)

up
3 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

@travelerxxx for a long time both here and before that, at the other place. I learned this from talking to self described conservatives during my years with the Peace vigil. It was very surprising how much we found to agree upon once we started talking. The key is communication which involves not just talking but listening.

Obviously, we are not going to agree on a lot of things, but surprisingly, we will agree on many of the big things. This is exactly why both parties use identity politics and social issues to divide us. It is tribalism. And over the years both parties have successfully divided us into smaller and more tribes so that we can continue to argue with each other while the oligarchs bleed us to death. No where will you see tribalism more that at the other place. It thrives on tribalism because it is basically empty of any real values.

up
9 users have voted.

"I don't want to run the empire, I want to bring it down!" ~Dr. Cornel West "...isn't the problem here that the government takes on, arbitrarily and without justification, an adversarial attitude towards its citizenry?" ~CantStopthe Signal

@travelerxxx At least in my life, I still can't break people past the Republican tribalism and encourage them to look for answers outside of Fox News even if we agree on all these other points. It's like all the Democrats and a few bad apple Republicans are the problems but they still think they're the exceptions. Sigh. But crazy enough, my father, who I won't talk politics with anymore, told me he intended to vote for Bernie back when it looked like he had a shot at winning the nomination. For this Rush/Beck/Fox junkie who has always been straight ticket Republican to come out and say that on his own has to be worth something, maybe?

up
7 users have voted.
travelerxxx's picture

@Dr. John Carpenter

One of the things about this recent election that really blew my mind was being approached by known hard-core right-wingers and being asked questions about Bernie Sanders. This was something I simply did not see coming. The first time it happened, I was so speechless that I couldn't really answer. This was a co-worker whom I knew well, yet I was so shocked that he was genuinely interested in Sanders and his platform that I pretty well locked up. The second time it happened, I'd had a little time to consider what had happened with the first fellow and was at least mentally prepared.

I continued to be asked questions about Sanders by friends and co-workers up until Sanders folded and went to bat for the evil one. As you might imagine, there were no more questions asked after that.

So, your Dad's behavior doesn't surprise me one bit. Considering what I've personally witnessed from right-wingers, the Democrats blew a once-in-a-lifetime chance to split the GOP straight down the middle.

up
7 users have voted.

@travelerxxx I'd add, my father has been conditioned through years of Rush Limbaugh to reflexively detest the very idea of the Clintons. Not for anything specific really, as the politicans he supports are just as bad, though he won't admit it. But he was Exibit A for why I knew the Democrat's insistence on forcing Hillary on us was suicidal as the Republicans they were counting on to vote for her would never flip in a million years.

up
3 users have voted.

@travelerxxx
the D Party made an existential choice. It chose expediency, power, and money over principle, integrity, and honesty. The latter qualities, being so rare in American politics, were attractive to a great many people of both parties. The former, much less so.

2016 was a real fork in the road for the Dems. They chose the wrong path, and now they're finding it nearly impossible to reverse course.

up
4 users have voted.

native

@native

... 2016 was a real fork in the road for the Dems. They chose the wrong path, and now they're finding it nearly impossible to reverse course.

But the American people don't want a change in course! (Hint: Those Americans Who Matter certainly don't, and American voters no longer enter the equation at all.)

And this is good - why would anyone want the voters being suckered into voting for evil again, even if their vote may not matter except so far as plausibility of the corporate/billionaire choice 'winning'.

up
2 users have voted.
detroitmechworks's picture

The entire direction of the party towards someone can be spun in the complete opposite direction in the space of, if not a dime, at least a silver dollar. (Are they paid in Silver Dollars? Inquiring minds want to know!)

Well, for every thing... turn, turn turn...

up
13 users have voted.

I don't Blame Christians. I Blame Stupid. Which Sadly, is a much more popular religion these days.

Bisbonian's picture

@detroitmechworks

up
8 users have voted.

"I see a time of seven generations, when all the colors of mankind will gather under the sacred tree of life and the whole earth will become one circle again." Crazy Horse.

I'd be fascinated to read their emails. Fascinated.

up
13 users have voted.
Oldest Son Of A Sailor's picture

@Cassandrus You should be able to read the author's e-mails...
The DNC is making enemies faster than the Clinton's can kill them...

The question I wonder about with those articles...
Who "Plagiarized" Who?
I say it was the same "Talking Parrot" that each of authors purchased, and returned to the pet store...

up
1 user has voted.
"Do you realize the responsibility I carry?
I'm the only person standing between Richard Nixon and the White House."

~John F. Kennedy~
Economic: -9.13, Social: -7.28,
eyo's picture

so AG Sessions probably hates her too. I tend to like people that both the Ds and the Rs hate. She takes big money, that's what I don't like. It's also a totally different subject, but everything's connected.

The Humanist Report (video): Tulsi Gabbard Introduces Bill to End Federal Marijuana Prohibition

Thanks

up
27 users have voted.

On a blog.

@eyo

I tend to like people that both the Ds and the Rs hate.

She's doing something right if she's pissing everyone off.

up
21 users have voted.
earthling1's picture

@gjohnsit Trump too is pissing everybody off. Whether you like him or hate him, he's kicking the shit out of the Establishment of both sides. Gotta love that.

up
9 users have voted.
CB's picture

@earthling1
establishment has finally got a ring firmly attached to his snout. He'll calm down and become more compliant once he begins to feel the pain when they give a smart tug on the ring to show him he is headed in the wrong direction. He will eventually fit in with the rest of the swine in Washington.

up
9 users have voted.

@CB

been brought fully up to speed on impeachment and removal. Perhaps by Ryan and McConnell, or by someone doing their bidding, like the head of RNC, ala Poppy Bush and Nixon.

up
4 users have voted.

@earthling1

up
4 users have voted.
Alligator Ed's picture

up
2 users have voted.
earthling1's picture

@eyo Really had not heard of this. Got links? Would like to know, transparency and all that.

up
7 users have voted.
eyo's picture

@earthling1 thanks for asking, sorry I didn't provide the link earlier, I have in other comments. There are rabbit-holes galore. I only went down a couple myself.

Career Fundraising
2011 - 2016 Total Receipts: $5,557,227
2011 - 2016 Total Spent: $3,509,727
Debts: $0
Last Report: Saturday, December 31, 2016

Note "Career Fundraising" is 2 years, that trajectory looks like a nicely lined D career to me. Hope I'm wrong.

When I say "Big Money OUT of Politics", I mean all of it. Burn K Street to the ground, figuratively speaking.

Thanks

up
13 users have voted.

On a blog.

Big Al's picture

war OF terror, I'll give that to her.

up
1 user has voted.

@Big Al

up
6 users have voted.
Big Al's picture

@gjohnsit @gjohnsit or not, she does toe the company line on 9/11, that Al Qaeda attacked America. She's a big anti-radical islamist, and there are indications she's anti-muslim in general. So ya, she supports the war of terror, just not the tactics being used in Syria. She's definitely anti-Iran, she's spoken strongly about the Iranian nuke deal and sanctions. I think she's an imperialist along the line of Bernie.

up
5 users have voted.
CB's picture

@Big Al
alone who engineered and implemented 9/11 she could kiss any future in the government goodbye. She would be labelled a CT (and not in the sexy bikini way).

Tulsi is a bit of a paranoid war hawk when it comes to Iran developing a nuclear device. She was the only Dem to sign the letter urging more funding for directed energy programs (Star Wars).
http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Ltr-to-Trump-missile-de...

By increasing funding to our resource-starved directed energy programs, the Trump Administration has the opportunity to complete what the Reagan Administration began and allow the United States to “leapfrog” the missile threat. By deploying multi-mission space sensors, we will be able to accurately identify and target the newest and most advanced missile defense architecture and further protect our homeland from the Iranian missile threat. This is also a great opportunity to accelerate the Multi-Object Kill Vehicle (MOKV) program, which will ensure we are able to protect against the most advanced enemy warheads which are capable of deploying extremely effective decoys, and the new Ground-Based Interceptors with Configuration 3 (C3) booster which will be required to adequately counter the newest missiles.

up
6 users have voted.

@CB you'd think the Dems would like her.

up
10 users have voted.
CB's picture

@gjohnsit
of war and would be considerably less prone to start one.

“Armchair generals don’t understand that while we have the power to decide when to start a war, we don’t have the power to decide when it ends, as we should have learned from our experience in Iraq and Libya. Once a war starts, it takes on a life of its own–usually far more difficult and more costly than anyone imagined it would be.”

up
12 users have voted.

@CB

term "conspiracy theory." http://caucus99percent.com/content/theory-conspiracy-theory-or-healthy-c...

Any theory is plausible and well reasoned, or it isn't. I know of no significant difference between a theory and conspiracy theory, except that one has a pejorative connotation and is almost always used against the left and in support of an establishment position. It's use is intended to automatically and simultaneously discredit and dismiss a theory without all the pesky stuff usually required of someone seeking to discredit another's theory.

The only real difference is that a theory can involve only one person or no persons, while a conspiracy theory has to involve two or more persons. But people are so knee jerk when they want to discredit a theory that I've seen it used even when no one is alleging that more than one person was involved.

up
5 users have voted.

@Big Al
in her interviews her anti-radical-Islamic view is about women's issues as well as terrorism issues. She illustrates her position with descriptions of her experiences as a woman soldier training Middle Eastern soldiers who are unfamiliar with women in uniform or in positions of authority. But in the interview in which I saw her describe this, she was very positive about those men and happy that they came to befriend and respect her. So she was advocating being an example of the positive experience of getting to know a woman in a position of leadership.

I don't know about her views on Iran. I should look them up. But she and Rand Paul are about the only sane voices I hear at this point on Syria. She gives me hope.

up
15 users have voted.
Dhyerwolf's picture

@Linda Wood Down to an article that include obviously fake quotes. Meanwhile, she's giving speeches at events like Muslims4Peace (https://gabbard.house.gov/news/press-releases/rep-tulsi-gabbard-calls-pe...) that certainly don't sound like anything an Islamophobe would say.

up
10 users have voted.
CB's picture

@Linda Wood @Linda Wood
than negatives. If there's one thing I can say about her, she is considerably more rational than 90% of the goofs in Washington. I'll even give 20-1 odds she knows how to shop for groceries all by herself. This alone gives her a 50% lead.

Think what the world would be like with Tulsi Gabbard as president of the US and Maria Zakharova as president of Russia.

Edit: Make sure you scroll down to see Zakharova's responses to the media.

Question: It was recently announced that the United States is about to deploy Marine Corps artillery in Syria, which is a clear departure from the previous administration's vow that there will be no boots on the ground. How will Moscow react to this?

Maria Zakharova: What previous administration? What are you talking about? It didn’t have a consistent Syrian strategy in entire eight years: one day we bomb it, the next day we don’t, one day we pull out of Syria, the next day we go in, one day we overthrow the government, the next day we establish cooperation with it. Such fluctuations occurred on a monthly basis. One branch of government did not understand what the other branch was doing. The position which had to be implemented on the international arena as a consolidated US approach (the international community was supposed to understand this policy, because the issue is about the actions on the international arena), simply was not there. First, there was one concept, then it changed. In the last six months before the elections, we witnessed agony of Washington’s Syrian policy. On the one hand, there was increased activity in the foreign policy area, and, on the other hand, there was activity which was absolutely not supported by the on-the-ground actions of the US military. Do you remember the gap between the position of certain forces in the State Department and the US military?

Then there came an even more mysterious event: they just went ahead and dropped all Syrian politics without seeing it to its logical end. Then they focused on Aleppo, but not on resolving this situation, but solely on building up hysteria and an information campaign geared exclusively to the elections. What can we talk about if we analyse the previous administration’s approach?
I suggest that we leave all that to historians and political scientists and refrain from discussing this seriously, because we can remember perfectly these endless changes and under-the-carpet fighting between US departments. It was just a political battle. Unfortunately, this political battle of the elites clearly continues. Anything goes in this fight.

up
14 users have voted.
CB's picture

@CB
https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/841684751417253888

up
1 user has voted.

@CB
and what Tulsi Gabbard is trying to point out, is that the CIA and our political leadership are supporting Saudi Arabia and the ISIS Al Qaeda forces after having misled the American people into thinking we were going to oppose the ISIS Al Qaeda threat.

The American military is there under an understanding that they are expected to oppose both ISIS and Assad, but they find themselves empowering Al Qaeda. That's how it looks to me. We were nailed again.

up
10 users have voted.
orlbucfan's picture

That's news to me.

up
8 users have voted.

“If you don’t have the guts to face your constituents, then you shouldn’t be in the United States Congress,” Sanders said. “That’s what you’re elected to do.”

Ravensword's picture

@orlbucfan Apparently, not believing in 9-11 conspiracy theories makes you an imperialist.

up
7 users have voted.
Big Al's picture

@Ravensword George Bush and Dick Cheney's? Or the ones that don't believe George Bush and Dick Cheney?

up
3 users have voted.
Big Al's picture

@orlbucfan

up
2 users have voted.
dkmich's picture

@Big Al

Depends on what you happen to pick and how much you weight it.

up
4 users have voted.

If you are on FB, please invite your friends to like and follow caucus99percent. I post c99 front-paged articles to c99's FB page. Come look.

Alligator Ed's picture

Speaking about Generals in government

The real kicker in my mind comes at the end when Gabbard says that these men are "far more deeply personally committed to upholding and protecting our democracy than their critics."

The author of that hit piece seems to be okay with non-military CIA spooks controlling foreign policy. They may send their mercenaries in to fight their lethal battles but few of these Langley Warriors have seen actual combat. They don't give a damn about life and death as long as it is not their own.

Tulsi is absolutely correct. She knows the military. She knows war. She knows that speaking to adversaries is preferable to killing them. She has seen death on the battlefield and didn't like it.
Trump doesn't know military from depilatory. So what if Tusli has got a nice archest for her future campaigns? What matters are her policies.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Tulsi and Turner for 2020.

up
8 users have voted.

@Alligator Ed

First, we're a republic with fairly widespread suffrage, not a democracy. Second, we don't trust election results and it seems as though you get the benefit of the bill of rights until one branch or another of state or federal government chooses to take one or more of your rights way from you. For example, I have no idea what, if anything, the Fourth Amendment means this days. That we're safe from unreasonable searches until some technology is invented?

They may be dong their best to protect us from conquered and occupied by a foreign power. But, if they're protecting our democracy, they should be taking into custody the people who voted for and have been enforcing the Patriot Act, perhaps starting with the faithless FISA judges. Even that isn't our democracy, but our constitutional rights. However, if someone can protect our Constitutional rights, I will be so grateful that I won't quibble about definitions.

up
5 users have voted.
orlbucfan's picture

I worked the guy's campaign as an unpaid campaign volunteer. He's no imperialist. @Big al

up
3 users have voted.

“If you don’t have the guts to face your constituents, then you shouldn’t be in the United States Congress,” Sanders said. “That’s what you’re elected to do.”

simply analyzing the issue. Whether it's our fellow poster or a politician or a religious leader (Pope Frankie Two Sticks comes to mind), we're either in love or brandishing pitchforks. Very little in life is that clear cut.

up
6 users have voted.

I love Tulsi, we need more like her. From what I've seen she does what she believes is right regardless of the politics. And of course, that's why she's hated. Very few of those people in congress are there to do what's best for the people they are there to serve. They're in it for their own wealth and glory. I do not understand why we give the federal government so much power. They clearly are unfit to wield it.

up
5 users have voted.