The problem is that the grifters, in this case, have a very large propaganda apparatus dwarfing Fox News.Sure, I believe that. But there are grifters around any cause.
The problem is that the grifters, in this case, have a very large propaganda apparatus dwarfing Fox News.Sure, I believe that. But there are grifters around any cause.
Yeah, don't pay too much attention to what the TYT crowd says these days.
For good measure, there's also a Medium post from 2017 by someone who says they left the Science of Identity cult:
An Insiders Perspective on Tulsi Gabbard and her Guru
I was recently asked a question about US politics that is related to an issue very close to my heart. In the US there is a state…medium.com
Well...This explains a lot, but even as a victim of abuse and manipulation, Tulsi a liability to the party and the American people in general. She needs to go.
She's not anti-interventionist, she's anti-regime change. Which is to say she's very much pro bomb the muslims.Her modi ties are fucking atrocious, and her being anti gay in the past aint news.
I wish her anti interventionist ties were tied to a politician without so many clear issues.
No, criticisms of her are not just "smears".
"Fondly" is definitely one way to describe it.anyone else fondly remembering the people who championed her here
I, too, fondly remember the time I had painful hemorrhoids a few years ago.
She's not anti-interventionist, she's anti-regime change. Which is to say she's very much pro bomb the muslims.
But but but saying Tulsi is in a homophobic cult is slander!
This shit. Why is she even being brought up lol
"The discussion has run its course."looking forward to this thread being locked from a mod power trip
Why were the previous threads locked?looking forward to this thread being locked from a mod power trip
Being raised in a cult does that to you
She's still in the cult.All that I'm saying is her record for voting for LGBT rights in Congress is literally 100% and she came out in support of gay marriage in 2011 when at the time, only 15 senators supported it.
Her previous views were awful but trying to claim that she's still that way via shadowy connections while ignoring her actual voting record is...something.
All that I'm saying is her record for voting for LGBT rights in Congress is literally 100% and she came out in support of gay marriage in 2011 when at the time, only 15 senators supported it.
Her previous views were awful but trying to claim that she's still that way via shadowy connections while ignoring her actual voting record is...something.
From the OP."About 10 years ago, Gabbard violated some of the tenets that now make her so popular as a Democrat with an EMILY's List endorsement to boot–she was neither pro-choice nor pro-gay-marriage, and in fact fell in line with her erstwhile Republican father [Hawaii state Senator Mike Gabbard]," states the article. "After repeated follow-ups, the congresswoman replies with a note about her sponsorship of the Equality Act (adding sexual orientation to categories of prohibited discrimination) and of her support for equal treatment of gay service members' spouses."
So far, so good, right? Except right after that Ozy drops this bombshell:
"Fittingly for her narrative, though, the explanation for her changed ideology feints us back onto familiar territory–the military," states the article. "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.)"
So after all this time, Gabbard still personally opposes same-sex marriage, but won't say or do anything politically about it? This puts her campaign statement on same-sex marriage that we cited above in an entirely different light.
Her campaign ads are running on Breitbart.So she's just playing the long game? Gonna be perfect on LGBT rights as a representative to fool everyone, wait until she takes the presidency and then unleash her latent homophobia on the world?
Or what are you suggesting? I'm honestly curious.
She's literally been taped taking part in the cult as of last year. She's full of shit.So she's just playing the long game? Gonna be perfect on LGBT rights as a representative to fool everyone, wait until she takes the presidency and then unleash her latent homophobia on the world?
Or what are you suggesting? I'm honestly curious.
I'm not getting into her head.So she's just playing the long game? Gonna be perfect on LGBT rights as a representative to fool everyone, wait until she takes the presidency and then unleash her latent homophobia on the world?
Or what are you suggesting? I'm honestly curious.
She's literally been taped taking part in the cult as of last year. She's full of shit.
I don't know what's so difficult to understand about this...So you think her appearing at a function with this insane cult leader is more indicative of how she'll vote on LGBT issues in the future than her entire historical voting record in Congress?
So you think her appearing at a function with this insane cult leader is more indicative of how she'll vote on LGBT issues in the future than her entire historical voting record in Congress?
I just want someone to explain why they think she has maintained a perfect LGBT record so far if she's actually a card carrying member of this cult. Because I'm actively trying to keep an open mind and come up with an explanation that makes sense and isn't a full on Manchurian Candidate level conspiracy.
"You think a politician would do something like that? Lie about their position on an issue until they gain more political power"So you think her appearing at a function with this insane cult leader is more indicative of how she'll vote on LGBT issues in the future than her entire historical voting record in Congress?
I just want someone to explain why they think she has maintained a perfect LGBT record so far if she's actually a card carrying member of this cult. Because I'm actively trying to keep an open mind and come up with an explanation that makes sense and isn't a full on Manchurian Candidate level conspiracy.
So you think her appearing at a function with this insane cult leader is more indicative of how she'll vote on LGBT issues in the future than her entire historical voting record in Congress?
I just want someone to explain why they think she has maintained a perfect LGBT record so far if she's actually a card carrying member of this cult. Because I'm actively trying to keep an open mind and come up with an explanation that makes sense and isn't a full on Manchurian Candidate level conspiracy.
This thread got bumped before, but tonight I think it is worth bumping again:
Gabbard did not vote in favor of impeachment.
Reminder: This is her challenger in her primary next year: