9 Likes
A moderate, notorious homophobe.
I see.
2 Likes
SCNR:
Your not looking for a candidate who is willing to reduce their chances to a bare minimum of pacifists, are you? In the US?
I would understand if Dorothy Dix asked if, say, Popa was aware of any alternative candidates. But you asking Mindy-san is a bit unfair. Anyone in their right mind might try to grab their knees and rock forwards and backwards thinking in depth about US foreign policies. And you are both long enough on the BBS to know each others views on US policies and politics… I think. Specifically on war and extrajudical state-sponsored murder.
That said, this topic is already a bonfire. I probably shouldn’t spill my beans into the dumpster, but there it is:
whatever the next US election brings will be unsatisfactory. But I really would appreciate if the US voted someone less likely to drive us into a new cold war into office.
1 Like
Let’s not pretend that Jill Stein’s foreign policy positions aren’t insane. Or that Gabbard’s pro-Assad, pro-Putin attitude is any good for anyone.
2 Likes
There is a large spectrum of ideology between “pacifist” and Tulsi Gabbard’s “maybe we shouldn’t be invading and occupying an ever-growing list of countries”.
Also:
&
As with so much else, the views of the Washington elite are not representative of the broader population.
There are plenty of reasons to drag Gabbard, but foreign policy is not prominent amongst them. Her flaws on that subject are virtually universal in American politics, and she is one of the only prominent voices willing to raise any objection at all to catastrophic and expanding militarism and imperialism.
I intended no offence to the good Doctor @anon61221983, and hope that I did not provide any. My apologies if I erred.
So do I.
While I do not think that Gabbard is a serious threat to take the Presidency (problematic past, poor campaigner, near-universal bipartisan hostility from the establishment), I do value her ability to make war and peace into an issue during the campaign.
The empire is bipartisan; Obama dropped more bombs than Bush, JFK and LBJ bear the bulk of the responsibility for Vietnam, Carter was responsible for arming the Mujahideen.
If we wish to avoid war, more is required than just “vote blue no matter who”. The candidates, Bernie included, need to be pushed to the left on foreign policy.
5 Likes
It’s more than just a troubling connection. This is a seriously crazy cult, in which her whole family was deeply imbedded for years. To my knowledge, they still are. The rabid homophobia is only one aspect of the looniness of the self proclaimed guru.
7 Likes
Thanks for explaining why you find her stance on foreign policies valuable.
Just FTR, the spectrum you mentioned seems not to exist from my POV, but I would be glad to be worng about that. From here, through the various filters of old and new media, it seems political suicide in the US to be less belligerent as Gabbard - while “bring our troops home” and “let’s get out of Afghanistan” is something many (if not even the majority, indeed) people would happily agree on, too.
Anyway, I didn’t want to accuse you of causing offence. I just thought you were maybe preaching to the choir, in a way.
ETA: hope I got all that language right. Idioms, and the like.
1 Like
Read up on her congressional record, you may be surprised.
This was specifically about ending US support for the proxy war in Yemen (which includes bombing weddings):
https://gabbard.house.gov/news/StopArmingTerrorists
3 Likes
This entire comment thread aside, the headline for this post is at best misleading, and I expected better from Boing Boing.
1 Like
I think it’s too early to truly know who I’d support. However, I will say again that establishment democrats do little of substance to address the problem in our country that do not discriminate by gender, sexuality, race, or belief system. They act on some social issues, but ultimately serve the same masters as the R party–Wall Street and the moneyed class. Gabbard? NBC–hardly a voice for the informed–did a hit piece on her that’s already been discredited. She’s getting the Bernie 2016 treatment from the MSM and her own party.
Endless war takes our taxes and gives the money to defense contractors (does everyone not dislike Cheney?) instead of our poor, our infrastructure, our health care system. Drones and weapons kill everyone equally in countries we attack for profit. The money could be spent on the items listed above, improving the lives of LBGTQ and all Americans. Gabbard appears to be the only candidate speaking against endless war so her past actions and words mean less to me than following the crowd and condemning her. Obama was much loved, but bombed and spent to the warmonger’s delight. I appreciate the ACA, but he promised us single payer. I’m tired of being misled and disappointed. Who would anyone suggest will be better among the throng of potential D candidates?
Oh, come on, this is Boing Boing, not the Frankfurter Rundschau!
Hey! It’s not a GIF, it’s an animated PNG!
5 Likes
You expect the authors to not be snarky and/or hyperbolic?
Prepare to be perpetually disappointed, then.
13 Likes
I’m puzzled by the chorus of support for Gabbard’s foriegn policy. It’s true that she is opposed to wars of regime change and her Stop Arming Terrorism Act would curtail US ability to engage in proxy wars around the world. But she isn’t exactly anti-interventionist; in her own words:
“In short, when it comes to the war against terrorists, I’m a hawk, Gabbard said. "When it comes to counterproductive wars of regime change, I’m a dove.” (https://www.votetulsi.com/node/27796)
When asked about drone warfare, she came out strongly against civilian casualties and targeting of american citizens abroad, but also had this to say:
“I think it’s also important to look at how the use of drones in certain scenarios has saved lives and how, when strategically placed and properly used, [drones] are an asset to national security. I think there is a place for the use of this technology, as well as smaller, quick-strike special force teams versus tens, if not hundreds of thousands of soldiers occupying space within a country.”
(Cost of War: An Interview with Tulsi Gabbard - Institute for Policy Studies)
I’d forgive you if you can’t distinguish that from the stance of the last several US administrations.
Gabbard’s positions on immigration and refugees are strikingly similar to those of the Republican party, and her support for Indian Prime Minister Modi’s Hindu nationalist policies is worrisome. Taken together with her admission in the OZY article posted above that her personal beliefs about LGBTQ issues haven’t changed, they’ve merely been moderated by a conviction that she shouldn’t “force her beliefs on others,” she looks an awful lot like a conservative dressed in the politically convenient rags of liberalism.
You wrote that:
… establishment democrats do little of substance to address the problem in our country that do not discriminate by gender, sexuality, race, or belief system. They act on some social issues, but ultimately serve the same masters as the R party–Wall Street and the moneyed class.
This strikes me as being perilously close to the “pox on both their houses” attitude that is partially responsible for giving us Donald Trump. I don’t entirely trust Tulsi Gabbard and I don’t think her candidacy will go very far, but if I’m wrong, if she turns out to be the Democratic nominee, then I will hold my nose and vote for her. There are differences between the two parties and the country can’t afford another four years of Republican “leadership.”
13 Likes
Allows a Russian harbor and occupation, chemical weapons use, supports Hezbollah and Iran, Anti-Israel, etc… more like an abusive boyfriend then Tulsi?
4 Likes
I’ve truly had enough of the sort of prolonged psychotic episodes that our election cycles have become in this country. I’m so deeply burned out by 2016 still that I honestly refuse outright to form a firm opinion until a later time. Getting invested heavily at this point is for people who have energy to burn on pointless self-defeating efforts and that’s not me.
9 Likes
16 Likes
Like having a favorite character from the first season of The Walking Dead or Game of Thrones. Don’t get too attached…
7 Likes
She seems like an Islamaphobe. Her rhetoric has changed, but only slightly.
And yes, I’m aware this is a general problem with the entire field.
5 Likes
Yes, this.
I exercised restraint since I don’t know that much about Butler’s Science of Identity Foundation, but they look like bad news. SIF was pretty politically active in the 70s and 80s and got a number of candidates elected to state office. If their agenda isn’t theocracy, it’s theocracy adjacent. I don’t know how Gabbard squares those aims with her stated aversion to Middle Eastern theocratic oppression.
6 Likes
Well, I also realize that my views on these issues are far outside of the mainstream thought in the US and that literally only fringe candidates are going to hold similar views. I have friends in or from the region, and I’ve known enough individuals who’ve spent time on the ground there, to know how destructive our policies are.
@Wanderfound generally agree on this stuff anyway (and we’re both outside the mainstream even for here, I’d imagine, for US foreign policy issues).
3 Likes
