So Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who is an alleged Democrat, is running for Congress.
And she begins her campaign by criticizing other Democrats who call Trump nominees out for using their religious biases as a basis of discrimination. She claims that if a person discriminates against people on the basis of religion, and they are called out for it, they’re being discriminated against. She didn’t name names, but it was implied that she was referring to her fellow Hawaiian, Senator Maizie Hirono.
I’m having a hard time unraveling that… Does she mean that people should be allowed to discriminate, just because they claim that their religion requires it?
If that’s what she means, then that’s enough of a deal-breaker for me.
I’m slightly amused that she is a convert to Hinduism and not of Indian descent, while the most prominent Indian-Americans in politics are Bobby Jindal (born Hindu but a Catholic convert) and Nikki Haley (born Sikh but a Methodist convert).
And I agree that too many people will be put off by her religion. I wish it wouldn’t matter, but it does. And I want the Democratic Party to win this time.
Individual 1 has nominated candidates for the executive branch who have anti-gay and anti-minority beliefs. When questioned about it, they say they believe those things because their religion says they have to. When people like Senator Hirono call them on it, saying their views disqualify them from the positions they are nominated for, Tulsi Gabbard says such people as Senator Hirono are prejudiced against religious people.
She’s criticized Israel, so she won’t be allowed the nomination.
I like her and the fact she’s Hindu is a positive for me because the Abrahamic religions are the cause of all the world’s problems. I would consider voting for her over Trump.
I might be willing to vote for her, but as I said to one of my Republican friends lately, I think the country is at least another generation away from electing a non-Christian(professing). Even with a big liberal political swing, I can’t see it being enough to win a general election.
The cult she belongs to isn’t exactly regular Hinduism. It splintered off of ISKCON. Now ISKCON denies that their religion is Hinduism, and Chris Butler, the guru who splintered and formed the cult the Gabbards belong to, also says he isn’t Hindu. Tulsi’s extremely homophobic father Mike Gabbard claims to be Catholic, but then he has been participating in the ISKCON splinter cult from the start.
Tulsi was raised in this tightly-knit cult, attended its schools, and began her political career following her father’s example in opposition to LGBT rights. She has married a husband who is also involved in it. Yet she avoids ever mentioning it or telling the truth about her and her family’s participation in it. Once she becomes more nationally prominent and gets looked at more closely, she will either have to own up to her cult connections or look like she’s trying to hide something.
I just don’t trust her at all. Not when that disgusting lump Steve Bannon loves her and is full of praise for her. What bothers me the most about her is her enthusiastic fandom of Hindutva extremist Narendra Modi, which is connected with her opposition to the resolution for religious freedom in India.
Its influence is hard to over emphasize. I’m barely being hyperbolic.
She’s talking too much about peace & doesn’t seem to go along with the mainstream narrative of “Assad is le ebil villian we must go to war!~!!!” You have to be pro war to be considered a viable Democrat. Which is also the reason the TV tells everyone to hate Trump.
Hillary was supposed to have been elected and the military industrial complex was supposed to have gotten their war with Assad, Russia and Iran, but things didn’t turn out that way. Trump was ostentatious enough to deflect the media at every turn. I don’t have confidence that Tulsi will be capable of the same.
Frankly I think she has enough charisma to play all of that off. Unlike almost all the rest of the Democratic field, she actually has a very marketable image. If she really goes on the warpath with her campaign, being extremely proactive and not just reactive, it could build up enough momentum that all that potential baggage gets rolled over.
I’m looking at the candidates of this election the way Don Draper would look at them. To win this election - not other elections, not past elections or hypothetical elections but this election - the successful candidate will have to become a brand, a human meme. Nothing less than “iconic” will do.
What’s the nature of your objection here? I gather that Modi is a supporter of Hindu identity for India. What’s the problem with that? Are you worried about Sikh genocide?
Do you similarly object to the fact that Israeli & American governmental leaders (Chuck Schumer being one for example) support Israel strongly as a jewish nation? There are a lot of Congressmen on both sides of the isle who are enthusiastically Zionist.
Here is what her peace talk looks like: “Bad enough US has not been bombing al-Qaeda/al-Nusra in Syria. But it’s mind-boggling that we protest Russia’s bombing of these terrorists.”
Social media influencers and mainstream media are going all out against her right now.
In the must pass defense authorization bill that was ushered through congress last year there was a provision that authorized war with Iran. It was quietly slipped in by the industrial military complex. Tulsi was a critic of and asked for debate on the subject.
The idea that Gabbard is a sexist racist homophobic bigot is patently absurd. She’s being shilled against so hard because she’s a critic of the military industrial complex.