|
QuoProQuid posted:finally, we can move on from warren and discuss the merits of a literal assad apologist I’m not aware of her being pro-Assad, but Gabbard does loving suck. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 13:10 |
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:"She's a bloodthirsty ghoul who wants Muslim babies ground up for canned chili, but" That is literally the base standard for politicians in this country. Her foreign policy, with the exception of her support for the Lion of Syria, is terrible. But Biden, Booker, Harris, they are all also in favor of endless pointless war and death. The difference is, those three also want people to die because they can't afford healthcare and people to be homeless even if they have a job. Gabbard is unarguably better than them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:That is literally the base standard for politicians in this country. Her foreign policy, with the exception of her support for the Lion of Syria, is terrible. But Biden, Booker, Harris, they are all also in favor of endless pointless war and death. The difference is, those three also want people to die because they can't afford healthcare and people to be homeless even if they have a job. Gabbard is unarguably better than them. Sure. I'd grudgingly and with great sadness vote for her over Biden and Booker and, possibly, Harris. It is my sincere hope that we have other good choices (and I still think "Bernie Or Bust" shows a lack of imagination and/or willingness to rationally evaluate other options, although as we get closer to the primaries that'll go down). Like, I could not at this time make a list I was even remotely confident in of possible candidates, never mind properly order them without hearing more of their platforms / reading deeper dives into their history. ...That's sort of a big part of why this thread exists, isn't it? also even if I conclude that Gabbard is an acceptable option I'll still be signal boosting her bad characteristics because it's my moral slash religious duty re: her in specific seriously it's difficult to overstate my disgust with a particular segment of Modi's base, which happens to overlap with a small but influential portion of Gabbard's Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
I like we can talk for pages about the racial insensitivity of Liz Warren but LOL Tulsi Gabbard we're being too harsh on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I like we can talk for pages about the racial insensitivity of Liz Warren but LOL Tulsi Gabbard we're being too harsh on. Considering that someone was trying to portray her support for the Lion of Syria as a negative, yeah, you're being too harsh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Considering that someone was trying to portray her support for the Lion of Syria as a negative, yeah, you're being too harsh. What? lol are you pro-Assad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Considering that someone was trying to portray her support for the Lion of Syria as a negative, yeah, you're being too harsh. wait what Guy Goodbody posted:I don't know much about Syria, just that a whole lot of sensible politicians and media types think we should be bombing them, Hillary Clinton wanted to go to war with Russia over Syria, and Assad defeated ISIS. okay somebody else handle this while I just stick to being livid about the blood-gargling psychopathic theocratic dickbags in India she supports Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
I don't know much about Syria, just that a whole lot of sensible politicians and media types think we should be bombing them, Hillary Clinton wanted to go to war with Russia over Syria, and Assad defeated ISIS. So people pointing to the time Gabbard said we shouldn't bomb Syria, I'm like, Is that really bad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:I don't know much about Syria, just that a whole lot of sensible politicians and media types think we should be bombing them, Hillary Clinton wanted to go to war with Russia over Syria, and Assad defeated ISIS. This is a bad take. A) We shouldn’t intervene in Syria B) Not wanting to intervene in Syria isn’t the same as being pro-Assad C) Not intervening doesn’t mean Assad isn’t bad. D) Assad “defeating ISIS” wouldn’t cancel out that he’s a shitter who has done terrible things to his own people. He’s certainly not a Lion or whatever bullshit lol he’s a loving dentist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:I don't know much about Syria, just that a whole lot of sensible politicians and media types think we should be bombing them, Hillary Clinton wanted to go to war with Russia over Syria, and Assad defeated ISIS. I like how you just changed "Trump" to "Gabbard" and this still works.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:
Opthamologist.  He'd have been much happier if he stayed one, I think. Syria might not have been, though, by all accounts his brother who died in the stupid car accident was somehow even more horrible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
We shouldn't bomb Syria but also Assad is a mass murdering creep. Tulsi sucks in a lot of ways but is mostly non interventionist, supports M4A and is basically better than a Biden.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:He’s certainly not a Lion or whatever bullshit lol he’s a loving dentist. assad translates as "lion" also new rule, if you're picking a new name for your dictatorship family you can't be a loser and pick something an 8 year old thinks is cool
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:21
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:This is a bad take. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/04/11/what-is-tulsi-gabbard-thinking-on-syria/?utm_term=.dcd840215535 Tulsi strikes me as a peacenik more than anything else. Not wanting to hit someone with a shovel in the balls isn't the same as wanting to kiss them for their efforts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:21
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:assad translates as "lion" I mean ok but he’s still a shithead. KickerOfMice posted:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/04/11/what-is-tulsi-gabbard-thinking-on-syria/?utm_term=.dcd840215535 I posted an article but she’s anti intervention because “it’s bad for the troops,” not because she has an empathy for foreigners. She certainly doesn’t like Muslims lol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
KickerOfMice posted:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/04/11/what-is-tulsi-gabbard-thinking-on-syria/?utm_term=.dcd840215535 Yeah probably this person who has said racist anti-islam stuff in the past, is super duper mad about islamic terrorism, and who parrots Assad positions/propaganda and has met with him without telling anybody, probably just a peacenik. I mean, who's more pro-peace than Assad? Just takes a few eggs to make that peace omelette!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:assad translates as "lion" *sadly scratches out "Laserdragon" as his future dictator surname*
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
well, I wasn't aware of that!Jaxyon posted:I mean, who's more pro-peace than Assad? Just takes a few eggs to make that peace omelette! C'mon, you know I didn't mean that. I'll just keep staying out of the Dems thread. Carry on, I'm a good lurker. EE- Obviously I need to read/learn more before trying in here. I'll be the first to admit self-own. KickerOfMice fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
Whenever there's a chemical attack in Syria, Gabbard does the same song and dance of expressing her great concern, demanding that "whoever is responsible be held accountable," and then doing the rounds on cable news to argue that "there's not enough evidence to implicate Assad." Every so often, she'll write an op-ed to decry rebels as "terrorists" and claim that "there is no difference between ‘moderate’ rebels and al-Qaeda (al-Nusra) or Isis." Back in 2016, she was one of the only Democrats pushing that "make Obama say 'radical Islamist terror'" campaign. As others have said, there's a difference between being anti-interventionist and trying to whitewash a dictator's campaign of mass murder. E: Reading her Wikipedia page, I forgot she was one of three members of Congress to vote against a non-binding resolution to condemn Assad for war crimes which would be pretty lol if the situation wasn't so completely depressing. QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:assad translates as "lion" The reign of the fortnight flex tape family will be eternal
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:18
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:"She's a bloodthirsty ghoul who wants Muslim babies ground up for canned chili, but" That's every Democrat tho, just about
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 02:41
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That's every Democrat tho, just about I think Gabbard in particular is insulting because she has claimed this mantle of being a good progressive Dem when she’s actually a lovely reactionary who is playing the role for praise. It means she’s sucking up all the oxygen in the room instead of somebody who isn’t rear end. We also have conveniently memory holed her opposition to the Iran deal and her being one of the Democrats that rode the “make Obama say RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM” train. Edit: also don’t forget that she still opposes gay marriage and abortion, she just doesn’t want to make legislation to oppose them because its unpopular. We pilloried Tim Kaine for that poo poo too. Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Oct 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
^^^^^ If Gabbard starts to rise up as some sort of "Bernie successor" figure and be treated that way by the media (some people treat her that way now, but it's not really a major thing yet), I think she'll warrant far more negative attention. I don't remotely trust her as any kind of left-wing figure due to the Modi stuff, and she will quickly rise on my internal "threat meter" if things reach that point. But as things stand right now, she's just another lovely Democratic politician.GreyjoyBastard posted:Sure. I'd grudgingly and with great sadness vote for her over Biden and Booker and, possibly, Harris. The point I was trying to make is that it's actually a very big problem how people either ignore or dramatically understate (or at least use far less aggressive rhetoric towards) the problems with more mainstream/influential political figures, and the difference is extremely obvious. For example, people might say "well yeah, I disagree with (insert more mainstream/"establishment" politician) and don't exactly like them" about that sort of politician (like you in this post!), but a less mainstream one, for similar or (usually) lesser crimes will be treated like some laughably absurd figure who deserves only belittling derision (see: Jaxyon's post a few posts below yours). This attitude would be totally fine if it were dished out to all politicians with similar policy/ideology, but it isn't; the more prominent/mainstream figures are treated as inherently deserving of being taken more seriously, even if you end up disagreeing with them. The people who are/were hawkish on Syria may be shown disagreement, but they don't receive the same display of moral repulsion as something like Gabbard's stupid-but-inconsequential opinions, despite matter far, far more (and their opinions having a history of leading to immensely destructive and harmful decisions). A big reason this is a problem is that it's actually far more useful to be more harsh and critical towards people who are more mainstream and represent those with more power/influence (this is a big reason the more "radical left" posters on this forum primarily focus their ire at major figures). And perhaps more importantly, there's a big cost to normalizing the sort of ideas/policy that are standard in the contemporary Democratic Party. It would be great if the same attitude being levied at Gabbard here were also directed towards almost all Democratic politicians for the crimes of supporting or being complicit in our various crimes abroad (with particular major figures, like Obama, being even more deserving of this), but it just isn't. Instead these comparatively fringe figures receive this focus, which creates an inaccurate perception that these problems are unique to them. So basically the main point here is that the issue isn't one of "criticizing Gabbard being bad" or whatever; it's that there's a distinct lack of similar attacks being levied at the people who actually matter and are often guilty of far worse things than her (and its absence is also often accompanied by irritation aimed at the people who do levy such attacks - see: attitudes towards leftists on these forums). This same logic applies to the bizarre hatred people have for Glenn Greenwald (though I'd argue that the Greenwald situation makes even less sense than the Gabbard one); a similar attitude is virtually never directed towards media organizations and individuals who actually have far more power and influence. (Regarding "Bernie or Bust," in this situation it's mostly just because there simply isn't anyone else who has given even the slightest indication of running who is remotely as good.) Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Oct 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:02
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I like we can talk for pages about the racial insensitivity of Liz Warren but LOL Tulsi Gabbard we're being too harsh on. If there were 20 people piling on to praise Gabbard for her shrewd pro-Modi gambit we'd probably talk about her for pages too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:07
|
|
|
How many other 2020 contenders opposed gay marriage *and* civil unions in 2004? Because that should be an easy way to winnow the field. quote:As a Hawaii state legislator in 2004, she argued against civil unions, saying, "To try to act as if there is a difference between 'civil unions' and same-sex marriage is dishonest, cowardly and extremely disrespectful to the people of Hawaii who have already made overwhelmingly clear our position on this issue... As Democrats we should be representing the views of the people, not a small number of homosexual extremists."[23] Gabbard opposed Hawaii House Bill 1024, which would have established legal parity between same-sex couples in civil unions and married straight couples, and led a protest against the bill outside the room where the House Judiciary Committee held the hearing.[152] In the same year, she expressed her opposition to Hawaii undertaking research on LGBT students, arguing that it would be a violation of their privacy and that "many parents would see the study as an indirect attempt by government to encourage young people to question their sexual orientation".[153] She also disputed that Hawaii schools were rampant with anti-gay discrimination.[153] Or really any of them that said “homosexual extremists” in public should be disqualified.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:08
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I think Gabbard in particular is insulting because she has claimed this mantle of being a good progressive Dem when she’s actually a lovely reactionary who is playing the role for praise. It means she’s sucking up all the oxygen in the room instead of somebody who isn’t rear end. She sucks big time yeah, but like you said her bad positions aren't any worse than Tim Kaine, her foreign policy is significantly better than anyone who voted for the war, so like at worst she's a better version of what the Democratic party already served up except she doesn't want people to die without healthcare. Is she good compared to Bernie, no, is she better than Hillary gently caress yeah, are all the hillbots pretending to care about Arab death when it's convenient to attack a pro-M4A candidate silly-rear end hypocrites: yes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:12
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:She sucks big time yeah, but like you said her bad positions aren't any worse than Tim Kaine, her foreign policy is significantly better than anyone who voted for the war, so like at worst she's a better version of what the Democratic party already served up except she doesn't want people to die without healthcare. Oh don’t get me wrong, I think she’s basically par with Booker or Harris, she’s willing to do the faux progressive song and dance but I’m sure a hypothetical Gabbard Administration would loving suck. She’s a wolf in the hen house, the same as the rest. Also I forgot but Trab, you quoted me on Ellison and I agree that the accusations have put a damper on his career. It’s pretty sad he’s still one of the best (former) House reps on balance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Oh don’t get me wrong, I think she’s basically par with Booker or Harris, she’s willing to do the faux progressive song and dance but I’m sure a hypothetical Gabbard Administration would loving suck. She’s a wolf in the hen house, the same as the rest. The thing is, Gabbard supported 15 dollar minimum wage and Medicare for all before Hillary lost. That is to say, when it was actually politically risky to support those things. And she went to Standing Rock when most other Democrats steadfastly ignored it. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Gabbard, but she's not a spineless political windsock like Booker or a loving vampire like Harris
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:33
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:The thing is, Gabbard supported 15 dollar minimum wage and Medicare for all before Hillary lost. That is to say, when it was actually politically risky to support those things. And she went to Standing Rock when most other Democrats steadfastly ignored it. Did Medicare for All even exist as a specific brand before Hillary lost? I thought that was something they started pushing in early 2017. And she’s a political windsock, just not on the same issues. Again, she was on the RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM train against Obama and opposed the Iran deal. She’s as much of a snake as the rest, she just is smart enough to support popular domestic policy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:39
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Did Medicare for All even exist as a specific brand before Hillary lost? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020500731.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:47
|
|
|
twodot posted:Kucinich was backing Medicare for All back in 2007. Huh. I see why people respect him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:The thing is, Gabbard supported 15 dollar minimum wage and Medicare for all before Hillary lost. That is to say, when it was actually politically risky to support those things. And she went to Standing Rock when most other Democrats steadfastly ignored it. Hating on “homosexual extremists” in 2004 then being pro-lgbt rights in 2012 seems like a great example of being a spineless political windsock.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Hating on “homosexual extremists” in 2004 then being pro-lgbt rights in 2012 seems like a great example of being a spineless political windsock. Obama and Hillary campaigned against our civil rights until 2012 too, they just put a nicer-sounding veneer over the same old bigotry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 04:53
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I posted an article but she’s anti intervention because “it’s bad for the troops,” not because she has an empathy for foreigners. So what. GreyjoyBastard posted:It is my sincere hope that we have other good choices (and I still think "Bernie Or Bust" shows a lack of imagination and/or willingness to rationally evaluate other options, although as we get closer to the primaries that'll go down). NOT "Bernie or Bust"ing shows a lack of willingness to rationally evaluate the circumstances. Bernie managed to acquire national prominence effectively because there was no one else to talk about. In this crowded field there's no way anyone else even half as good will be permitted the air time to have anything approaching a shot reignonyourparade fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Oct 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Huh. I see why people respect him. also he brought a pie chart to a radio debate, what's not to like
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Obama and Hillary campaigned against our civil rights until 2012 too, they just put a nicer-sounding veneer over the same old bigotry. Opposing civil unions was something even they didn't do. But agreed, they're all bad 2020 candidates.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 05:16
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:So what. quote:But Gabbard’s almost singular focus on the damage these wars inflict domestically, and her comparative lack of focus on the carnage they wreak in the countries under attack, is troubling. It is nationalism in antiwar garb, reinforcing instead of undercutting the toxic rhetoric that treats foreigners as less deserving of dignity than Americans. (Gabbard’s brand of anti-interventionism has even received praise from former KKK grand wizard David Duke, who called for her to be named secretary of state.) If the assertion is that Gabbard is better than people like Booker and Harris or somehow more trustworthy, I think she’s demonstrably not. If she was, she wouldn’t be hanging out with Booker and the people responsible for Iraq. This in a context where Bernie has been going out of his way to up his foreign policy game. Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 05:31 on Oct 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 05:27
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:also he brought a pie chart to a radio debate, what's not to like 2) In favor of providing for the basic needs of people domestically 3) Did a dumb thing on radio one time, maybe "Leftist purity tests are bad, we need to unite behind pro-war, anti-healthcare Democrats because the most important thing is the party affiliation of politicians (edit: and/or ability to be good at radio I guess)" twodot fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Oct 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 05:51
|
|
|
twodot posted:1) Opposed to wars if kucinich ever runs for a thing or is otherwise relevant again I'll dig back up his record and figure out how I feel about him, until then I'll just feel vaguely fond of a doofy but iirc decent dude, but you'll pry my jests from my cold dead hands
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 06:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 13:10 |
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:if kucinich ever runs for a thing or is otherwise relevant again I'll dig back up his record and figure out how I feel about him, until then I'll just feel vaguely fond of a doofy but iirc decent dude, but you'll pry my jests from my cold dead hands Like if your thing is thinking jokes are more important then policy then go for it, just don't be surprised when people say you are a horrible monster for prioritizing jokes about a radio show over 1 million Iraqi lives. twodot fucked around with this message at 06:14 on Oct 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 06:11
|
|