I’ve been reading BB since college–mid 90s and haven’t bothered to sign up for comments. I did the same with Greenwald’s UT and later iterations. I signed up today.
I am disheartened to see this. Why?
Establishment democrats have done nothing substantial to stop endless war or truly help the poor, serving at best to slow the other party while still working for Wall Street and other interests in the background. Given that their financial backers are mostly the same, this should be obvious.
The knee-jerk reaction by many when someone who speaks against these so-called liberals–keep in mind that economic oppression affects all races, genders, and religious affiliations–is to side with establishment shills like Pelosi and Schumer. This ultimately impedes any real progress on true equality for things like being able to see a physician without defaulting on rent or skipping meals, or not being killed by drones in Yemen or Afghanistan because our arms companies need profits.
I’m saddened to see this approach in this post with the conflation of David Duke to Tulsi Gabbard.
War, starvation, and poverty kill regardless of gender, political/religious beliefs, or color. John Stuart Mill may have been short sighted, but geez, it’s obvious that her approach would save lives of far more LBGTQ and other repressed folks than this post. Someone like AOC gives me hope. How soon will it be before someone finds an objectionable statement in her past and righteous liberals toss her to the curb?
She still sees not problem with drone bombing brown people at weddings. The Jacobin article upthread lays out her hardline views on the war on terror, which really only changed when it became political expedient for her. It was enough for her to be considered for a position in Trump’s administration for a moment. She’s made more moderate statements recently, but still.
So ironic how casually the ‘comrade’ smear is trotted out these days against anyone not exactly following the party line. We’ll need a new Russian version of Godwin’s law before too long.
Hard part is keeping track of what illicit opinions will raise the flag. In this case, someone with enough sense to read boingboing apparently came to the loony conclusion you’re a Russian sleeper cell planted at boingboing years ago, waiting for the right moment to activate. And finally, here it came, the moment you’ve been waiting for since 2013… to question why a boingboing article is smearing a Democratic Congresswoman. Falls in the category of literally ‘cant make this sh#t up.’
I’m agnostic on Tulsi Gabbard, but she did far more than make “an objectionable statement” on LGBTQ issues; she and her father worked for several years to deny LBTQ rights and protections. She also has a troubling connection to guru Chris Butler whose posture towards LGBTQ folks has historically been pretty hostile.
There’s no question she looks good on paper- her ontheissues.org profile is well left of center, but she has done such a radical turnaround on social policy that its difficult not to question her sincerity.
Are you saying that the things that the article that @jerwin linked to says about her are wrong? If so, it would help if you explained what the incorrect facts were, or at least linked to a rebuttal.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable for vulnerable people to not totally trust that evolution when reading this:
Fittingly for her narrative, though, the explanation for her changed ideology feints us back onto familiar territory — the military. It was, she says, the days in the Middle East that taught her the dangers of a theocratic government “imposing its will” on the people. (She tells me that, no, her personal views haven’t changed, but she doesn’t figure it’s her job to do as the Iraqis did and force her own beliefs on others.)
Yes there is. Human beings are dynamic creatures. Intention is important, as well as honesty. I can honestly say “I’m trying to be a better person,” which is what I hope everybody does. If I say “I am a better person,” that’s just a nonsense statement, and evidence of magical thinking. But, in this case, I am an ally. And I’m trying to be a better one. I think Tulsi is, too. But I respect why you’re wary of her.
But that’s not how it works in situations like this. Like racism, one can claim to be trying, but until they no longer benefit from the way things are, they’re still supporting racism – self-awareness or not. Either you benefit, or you don’t.
ETA: This is also the logic behind criticism of TERFs and White Feminism.
It depends a lot on who you ask. Anything from LGBT to LGBTQIAA+ is not uncommon. And in case you’re curious, that last one is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, Allies, and anyone else who feels they belong in the tent but uses a different label. Eventually, this will include everyone on the planet and we can just use “human”. But we’re not there yet.
Tulsi is the only politician in 20 years with a sane foreign policy position. Both the mainstream right and mainstream left are fully invested in endless war, and will go to any length to continue promulgating it.
Covering Duke’s supposed endorsement without mentioning Gabbard’s multiple responses to him denouncing his endorsements now and in the past, rejecting his endorsement and calling out his racist past is disingenuous in the extreme.
Claiming she’s a ‘notorious homophobe’ without mentioning at all her video apology and her score of 100 from the Human Rights Campaign is, in fact, an insult to the word ‘smear’.
You’re a lazy hack working against the American people. You’re an insult to journalism and your motivations are not only suspect, but distinctly malign. If it took me five minutes to debunk your nonsense, I can only wonder how long you spent fabricating this supposed story.
Sources:
· The Hill- ‘Tulsi Gabbard denounces David Duke, rejects his endorsement’ by Tal Axelrod 2/5/19
· Human Rights Campaign Congressional Scorecard
I didn’t write this post, and I don’t work for boing boing.
Bitch and moan all you like;
It aint gonna make Rob or the other authors (no uppercase pretension!) do anything different, and it sure as hell won’t get your girl the party nomination.
We can do better than someone who hated gay people for a living until a sudden evolution that coincided perfectly with mainstream political aspirations. You don’t need conspiracy theories to understand why queer people (or anyone at all) have no time at all for this person
