HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Tulsi Gabbard & family in...

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 01:18 AM

Tulsi Gabbard & family informing everyone they can't marry each other...or a dog


116 replies, 3419 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 116 replies Author Time Post
Reply Tulsi Gabbard & family informing everyone they can't marry each other...or a dog (Original post)
RandySF Saturday OP
irresistable Saturday #1
BannonsLiver Saturday #2
irresistable Saturday #13
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #33
irresistable Sunday #41
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #42
irresistable Sunday #44
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #45
irresistable Sunday #46
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #47
irresistable Sunday #48
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #49
irresistable Sunday #50
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #51
irresistable Sunday #53
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #56
irresistable Sunday #73
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #75
irresistable Sunday #80
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #81
irresistable Sunday #86
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #88
irresistable Sunday #92
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #94
irresistable Sunday #95
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #96
irresistable Sunday #97
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #99
irresistable Sunday #100
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #101
irresistable Sunday #102
backabby-blue Sunday #65
irresistable Sunday #68
backabby-blue Sunday #70
yardwork Sunday #57
irresistable Sunday #64
yardwork Sunday #71
karynnj Monday #115
druidity33 Saturday #18
irresistable Saturday #19
druidity33 Saturday #22
irresistable Saturday #23
druidity33 Saturday #24
InAbLuEsTaTe Sunday #30
irisblue Sunday #26
FreeState Sunday #35
irisblue Sunday #37
yardwork Sunday #55
irresistable Sunday #62
yardwork Sunday #72
irresistable Sunday #74
yardwork Sunday #84
irresistable Sunday #90
Laffy Kat Saturday #3
still_one Saturday #4
Cha Saturday #6
still_one Saturday #7
Cha Saturday #10
still_one Saturday #11
Cha Saturday #12
misanthrope Sunday #25
still_one Sunday #43
OnDoutside Sunday #31
Cha Sunday #32
OnDoutside Sunday #38
Cha Sunday #39
OnDoutside Monday #107
Cha Monday #112
OnDoutside Monday #113
dawg day Sunday #82
OnDoutside Monday #106
FreeState Sunday #36
Laffy Kat Sunday #40
moriah Sunday #63
Cha Saturday #5
Laffy Kat Saturday #8
irresistable Saturday #14
Cha Saturday #15
irresistable Saturday #16
KitSileya Saturday #9
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #34
KG Saturday #17
PDittie Saturday #20
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #61
BannonsLiver Saturday #21
NurseJackie Sunday #28
shenmue Sunday #27
Downtown Hound Sunday #29
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #52
Polybius Sunday #54
LongtimeAZDem Sunday #58
Polybius Sunday #59
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #60
Polybius Sunday #76
yardwork Sunday #78
Polybius Sunday #83
yardwork Sunday #85
Polybius Sunday #89
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #98
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #79
Polybius Sunday #87
moriah Sunday #103
LongtimeAZDem Sunday #104
tenderfoot Sunday #67
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #69
tenderfoot Sunday #93
Polybius Sunday #77
tenderfoot Sunday #91
Kingofalldems Monday #108
Polybius Monday #109
tenderfoot Monday #110
Polybius Monday #111
tenderfoot Monday #114
Polybius Monday #116
DemocratSinceBirth Sunday #66
LongtimeAZDem Monday #105

Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 01:44 AM

1. She was a kid with a right wing father.

She grew up when she went to Iraq. She has supported same-sex marriage for the entire time that she has been in the house of representatives.

Obama and Gabbard announced that they now supported same-sex marriage in 2012
Hillary in 2013.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 02:15 AM

2. Thanks for tonight's edition of meaningless whataboutism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BannonsLiver (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 04:42 AM

13. The only thing meaningless is the effort to demean Tulsi Gabbard for making the same transition....

that other Democrats have made.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:16 PM

33. I knew as a teenager marrying a person of your own gender wasn't like marrying your dog,

BTW she was 23 and a state representative when she called gay folks asking for the same rights as everybody else "homosexual extremists." :

“As Democrats, we should be representing the views of the people, not a small number of homosexual extremists..."

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #33)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 07:46 PM

41. Since I know that you supported President Obama before he came out in favor of gay marriage...

I also know that you understand that people learn and grow.

It can be hard getting past the beliefs embedded in your religion.

But intelligent people change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #41)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 08:25 PM

42. I don't believe President Obama worked for an anti-gay group that backed conversion therapy

(CNN)Rep. Tulsi Gabbard in the early 2000s touted working for her father's anti-gay organization, which mobilized to pass a measure against same-sex marriage in Hawaii and promoted controversial conversion therapy.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/13/politics/kfile-tulsi-gabbard-lgbt/index.html


I wonder if folks would be so forgiving if African Americans, Jews, or some other groups were targets of her bigotry,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #42)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 08:49 PM

44. She was a kid, raised by a father who believed in that stuff.

I do not accept the double standard of those who forgave Democrats who were against gay marriage until they were in their 50's and 60's, but cannot forgive someone for actions in their early 20's who was raised by a homophobic father in the context of religion.

Tulsi came out in favor of gay marriage the same year as Obama, and one year before Hillary did.

It was serving in Iraq that woke Tulsi up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #44)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 08:55 PM

45. If she held that

If she held a bigoted attitude about African Americans, Jews, Muslims, Hispanics, et cetera in her early twenties would you be so forgiving, just because her parents held those views, or do you think it's okay because it was only gay people who were the target of her animus?

Discriminating against one group is like discriminating against all of them.

She only changed her views because homophobia is poison in the Democratic party , as it should be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #45)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:00 PM

46. From your article.

n 2012, when running for Congress, Gabbard apologized to LGBT activists in Hawaii for her past comments.
"I want to apologize for statements that I have made in the past that have been very divisive and even disrespectful to those within the LGBT community," Gabbard said. "I know that those comments have been hurtful and I sincerely offer my apology to you and hope that you will accept it."
Since joining Congress in 2013, Gabbard has supported efforts to promote LGBT equality, including co-sponsoring pro-LGBT legislation like The Equality Act, a bill to amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to protect LGBT individuals.
"I grew up in a very kind of conservative household. A multi-ethnic, multi-racial, multi-faith home," Gabbard said in New Hampshire in December, speaking to her shift. "Diverse in our makeup and diverse in our views. And I held views growing up that I no longer hold."
Citing her time deployed overseas, Gabbard said she saw "the destructive effect of having governments who act as moral arbiters for their people."
"That caused me to really deeply reflect and be introspective on the values and beliefs that I had grown up with what I was experiencing there," she said. "And then coming back and eventually running for office again. And the conflict that I saw there, in standing for, believing strongly in, and fighting for these ideals of freedom and liberty that we hold dear in this country. It means that equality, that our laws, our government must apply that respect for every single individual. For people who choose to love or marry someone -- whether they be of the same gender or not, that respect, and that freedom for every woman to be able to make her own choice about her body and her family and her future. So it was a process that I went through that changed my views in many ways and in many big ways to the views that I hold today."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #46)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:04 PM

47. She called gay people asking for their right to marry "a small group of homosexual activists"

Would you be as forgiving if a politician called folks favoring interracial marriage a "small group of black activists" ?


She is running in the wrong party. She would have been better off had she remained true to herself and become a Republican rather than change her position on a matter of great moral importance for partisan gain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #47)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:11 PM

48. Your mind is closed.

You don't believe that people can evolve, unless their names are Barack and Hillary.

By the way, why did Hillary and Barack change their view on gay marriage?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #48)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:18 PM

49. If

If you believe opposing marriage equality in the early aughts is akin to calling gay people asking for their right to marry a "small group of homosexual activists" and favoring therapy to convert them to heterosexuality there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.

Let me dispense with the highfalutin language and use some colloquialisms. She just didn't oppose marriage equality. She crapped all over gay people.


There is no room for bigotry in the Democratic party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #49)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:27 PM

50. If you believe that people brought up to believe hurtful things can't learn and change..

then why did Hillary and Barack change their view on gay marriage.
Also, did either of them ever apologize for their previous positions.

Do you believe that gay people thought that their position against gay marriage was bigotry?

I don't know. I'm not gay, so I can't answer that question.

I would like you to answer my question, though. Why did Hillary and Barack change their view on gay marriage?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #50)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:31 PM

51. We're being disingenuous. She just didn't oppose gay marriage

She just didn't oppose gay marriage. She called gay people asking for their right to marry "a small group of homosexual activists" and favored conversion therapy.


If you can cite an example of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton favoring conversion therapy and calling gay people asking for the right to marry a "small group of homosexual activists" you might have an argument but you don't.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #51)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:46 PM

53. Why do those additional things matter when Tulsi disavowed all of it and apologized?

You still haven't explained to me why Barack and Hillary changed their minds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #53)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:53 PM

56. She changed her mind to remain in the Democratic party

What part of there is a difference between opposing marriage equality and calling people who supported it a "small group of homosexual activists" and favoring conversion therapy don't you understand? It's the difference between some yahoo who doesn't want his daughter to marry a Jew and some virulent anti-semite who applauds the Holocaust.

Why did Clinton and Obama change their minds? Because times changed but they never showed such blatant hostility to the gay community by favoring conversion therapy and calling gay folks asking for their rights '"a small group of homosexual activists".


If she is going to enter a primary she should enter the Republican one. Then she can be herself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #56)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:24 PM

73. How did their beliefs change because "times changed"?



Tulsi gave actual reasons for her change of heart and apologized for her previous views.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #73)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:29 PM

75. Robert Byrd apologized for joining the Klan.

Robert Byrd apologized for joining the Klan but the Democrats wisely never made him their presidential nominee. We forgive. We don't forget.

If she said what she said about any other minority group as late as 2004 she would have been crucified. I am getting the sickening feeling that some are defending her because it was only the gays she maligned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #75)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:36 PM

80. I am getting the sickening feeling....

that some only defend those who accept gay marriage when "times change" because it was only the gays who were denied their rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #80)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:41 PM

81. There is a difference

There is a difference between revisiting a tradition that endured since time immemorial and as late as 2004 comparing marrying your lover to marrying a dog, calling those who argue for the right to marry a "small group of homosexual activists" and favoring conversion therapy. She's Rick Santorum in a dress.

I can imagine what Tulsi would have called Mildred and Richard Loving had she lived in that era.

There is no room for bigots in our party.

Oh, as far as same sex marriage. I favored it as early as the seventies, when I was in junior college.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #81)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:47 PM

86. There is a difference between apologizing and asking forgiveness....

for the beliefs that were drummed into your head growing up and explaining how going into a war zone woke you up from that nonsense....

and waiting until "times change".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #86)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:49 PM

88. It's not her opposition to same sex marriage that was so offensive.

It was the harmful words she said about gay people. When I asked you to cite examples of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton favoring conversion therapy or calling gays "a small group of homosexual activists" you had no reply.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #88)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:57 PM

92. No need, as you explained...they didn't support gay marriage....

merely because "times hadn't changed". Lucky for gay people that "times changed" huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #92)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:02 PM

94. We're lucky that Tulsi stopped

We're lucky that Tulsi stopped comparing Joe loving John and wanting to marry him to Lee Duncan loving Rin Tin-Tin and wanting to marry him, am I right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #94)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:04 PM

95. We're lucky that Tulsi went to Iraq and the seriousness of that experience...

of her childhood cult programming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #95)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:06 PM

96. Joining the military turned her from a homophobe to a believer in full rights for glbtq people?

That requires the willing suspension of disbelief.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #96)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:10 PM

97. It showed her that not only that views were wrong.

The next step was to try to make amends.

Apparently you have never experienced a life changing event of that type.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #97)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:17 PM

99. I have had epiphanies but none for personal gain.

It's just a coincidence that her epiphany coincided with her quest for higher office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #99)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:30 PM

100. You forgot about that other thing that coincided with Tulsi's "epiphany"

multiple tours in Iraq.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #100)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:34 PM

101. Yes. It's common knowledge that joining the military turns one from bigotry to open mindedness

I am sure that's the first thing recruiters tell recruitees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #101)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:40 PM

102. Well, you have a good rest of the evening, DSB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #48)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:08 PM

65. It's easier to forgive ...

It's easier to forgive a Politian who evolved on the gay marriage issues but has been known in the gay community as an ally than it is to forgive someone that had animus towards gays.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backabby-blue (Reply #65)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:16 PM

68. I do understand that on one level.

but Tulsi's decision to repudiate her father and apologize for the beliefs that he drilled into her is something to consider.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #68)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:21 PM

70. I suppose it is for some

Some may want to consider it and some may not want to consider it any further. I think it makes her a weak candidate. It just adds one more think to her many weaknesses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #41)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:54 PM

57. It's not the same. Obama never referred to me personally in hateful terms.

Gabbard's statements about gay people are venomous, hateful, bigoted.

That's a whole different level from policy differences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #57)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:08 PM

64. she was very young and had been programmed by her dad.

Iraq broke the spell and she woke up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #64)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:21 PM

71. Her recent statements aren't much better.

She makes it clear that her personal beliefs remain the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #41)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 07:58 PM

115. Obama and most Democrats were in support of civil unions

in some cases because they did not think there would be enough support for marriage. They often proposed making the needed changes to give civil unions the FEDERAl rights of marriage. This was a case where support rose very quickly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 07:37 AM

18. She has problems

with Muslims and gay people still. She has made some undignified comments in the recent past.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to druidity33 (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 08:33 AM

19. Can you point me to any examples?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to druidity33 (Reply #22)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 01:54 PM

23. very little actual substance in those articles....more of a cobbling together of assertions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #23)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 03:47 PM

24. Well, it's out there...

and she'll be asked about it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to druidity33 (Reply #24)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 05:35 PM

30. As she should be... we've learned not to treat candidates with kid gloves, haven't we?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 05:08 PM

26. I did look but found no LGBTQ laws that she suggested

Could you point me in the direction of her legislative achievements in LGBTQ Issues. Thanks in advance I await your well educated and i formative reply. 🌈

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irisblue (Reply #26)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:19 PM

35. This

She appears to be protecting her own ass and has done nothing but vote for bills that others put forward for LGBT rights. In my opinion until she puts in actual work with LGBT people and orgs she hasn’t changed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeState (Reply #35)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:29 PM

37. I found these statements...

Source~~2017 policy position


Gabbard-Backed Equality Act Introduced in Congress
May 3, 2017 Press Release
Bipartisan bill prohibits discrimination against LGBT Americans
Washington, DC—Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02) joined more than 190 cosponsors in introducing the Equality Act of 2017—legislation that would extend comprehensive anti-discrimination protections to LGBT Americans. The bill amends existing federal civil rights laws to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in education, employment, housing, credit, Federal jury service, public accommodations, and the use of Federal funds.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard said, “LGBT Americans in many states still face discrimination in their everyday lives. This is wrong, and defies our American principles of equality, justice, and individual freedom. The Equality Act will ensure that all Americans—regardless of race, sexual orientation, gender, religion, disability, or national origin—receive equal treatment under law.”

Background: Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has cosponsored and supported anti-discrimination legislation like the Fair Housing Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Equality for All Resolution, the Respect for Marriage Act, Healthy Families Act, and the Paycheck Fairness Act. For more on the congresswoman’s work to fight for civil rights and equality, click here.



From her wikipage. "In June 2015, she issued a statement supporting Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court ruling that same-sex marriage bans are unconstitutional, arguing that the United States was not a theocracy."



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:52 PM

55. She has an "F" rating on LGBTQ issues.

She has made numerous hateful, bigoted comments about gay people. She describes us as "homosexual extremists" who don't deserve any rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #55)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:03 PM

62. Actually no, she has a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign.

https://medium.com/@MPMagayon/tulsi-gabbard-remains-a-committed-ally-of-the-lgbt-community-as-america-celebrates-national-coming-4fa8bece8c97


"Tulsi Gabbard has been an ally of the LGBT community for years. From signing the Supreme Court Amicus On Marriage Equality, to supporting the repeal of DOMA in 2013 (the Defense of Marriage Act), to co-sponsoring The Equality Act, which amends the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include “sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation,” Tulsi has been there for us every step of the way."

"Similarly, Tulsi Gabbard expands on her support for LGBT issues by co-sponsoring Fair Housing and Credit legislation, as well as advocating for an end to the bullying of LGBT children in our schools. Tulsi has also cosponsored legislation like the Equality for All Resolution, the Respect for Marriage Act, the Healthy Families Act, and the Paycheck Fairness Act."

Iraq woke her up, and she has disavowed the garbage that she was taught by her family and supported years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #62)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:23 PM

72. The LGBT Caucus in Hawaii declined to support her.

I'm snickering to see HRC cited here as a progressive group. They're as establishment as establishment can be. I know. I'm gay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #72)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:27 PM

74. The LGBT caucus in Hawaii remembers young Tulsi and her dad.

I get it.

Also, if your can't forgive her or believe that she has changed, I understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #74)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:45 PM

84. I dislike Gabbard for numerous reasons.

She holds right-wing authoritarian positions on women's rights and foreign policy. She constantly attacks Democrats. Her position on Syria aligns with Putin's agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #84)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:51 PM

90. I disagree with your characterization.

Give me an example of her "right-wing authoritarian positions on women's rights".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 02:23 AM

3. When I was a teenager I didn't understand what is now marriage equality.

My views have since matured and evolved on everything. Let's not hold this against her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laffy Kat (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 02:39 AM

4. I agree. Going on fox news periodically and bashing President Obama periodically is enough for me

In addition, her opposition of allowing refuges into the U.S. from the middle east seeking asylum from war torn areas where we were complicit, indicate that in spite of her denials that she is not Islamic phobic "anymore", tells me she still harbors those same feelings.


She won't get my support in the primaries


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 02:44 AM

6. Thanks, still_one..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #6)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 02:51 AM

7. .................................................................................

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 03:10 AM

10. Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard accuses fellow Democrats of 'religious bigotry' in questioning judicial

nominee

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a potential 2020 White House contender, is accusing some of her fellow Democrats of “religious bigotry” in their questioning of one of President Trump’s judicial nominees.

Gabbard’s claim, made in an op-ed in the Hill newspaper, drew a rebuke Wednesday from another Hawaii Democrat, Sen. Mazie Hirono.
I
n the op-ed, Gabbard did not name any names. But she argued that some lawmakers had gone too far in their questioning of Brian Buescher, whom Trump nominated in October to serve as a district judge.

“While I oppose the nomination of Brian Buescher to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, I stand strongly against those who are fomenting religious bigotry, citing as disqualifiers Buescher’s Catholicism and his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus,” Gabbard said in the op-ed.


Hirono’s office responded Wednesday that Gabbard was mischaracterizing her questioning of Buescher, and that the senator was voicing her concerns about the nominee’s past public statements rather than his religion.

“It is unfortunate that Congresswoman Gabbard based her misguided opinion on the far-right wing manipulation of these straightforward questions,” Hirono spokesman Will Dempster said in a statement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hawaii-rep-tulsi-gabbard-accuses-fellow-democrats-of-religious-bigotry-in-questioning-judicial-nominee/2019/01/09/2c17ecdc-1467-11e9-90a8-136fa44b80ba_story.html?utm_term=.97039859a6e2

The latest from Gabbard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #10)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 03:22 AM

11. Thanks Cha. That is a huge difference from the initial story that Gabbard was pushing. I fell

for Gabbard's crap that Harris was attacking his religion.

This only confirms that she a right wing tool, and I don't give a damn whether she is doing it with that intent, or just to get attention in the media where she thinks it will further her political ambitions, either way she is not qualified to be the Democratic nominee


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #11)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 03:30 AM

12. Here's some more from that article if you

didn't see it.

He added that over the past two years, Hirono “has been attacked by right wing ideologues for her examination of Donald Trump’s ideologically-driven nominees to the courts.”

“Senator Hirono asks all judicial nominees — particularly those who have expressed very strong personal ideological views in conflict with Supreme Court precedent — if they can be fair,” Dempster said. “She asked Mr. Buescher, who has a clear record of anti-choice activism, whether he could separate his personal beliefs from decisions he would make if confirmed for a lifetime appointment on the federal bench.”

So she's bogusly attacking Mazie and Kamala(who is also going to run for POTUS).

That's going to make her so popular with Mazie's and Kamala's friends!

You don't mess with either one of them, AFAIC!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 04:59 PM

25. IIRC, she wasn't nearly as protective when it came to Al Franken

She was ready to run him out of the Senate at the first hint of impropriety.

Her friendliness with merkin-headed Rand Paul curls my lip as well.

EDIT: Sorry, I was confusing Gillibrand's public opinions on Franken with Gabbard's. That said, her refusal to understand the Knights of Columbus' hard-right turn and involvement with the Federalist Society as a factor in associated nominees' judgement is worrisome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to misanthrope (Reply #25)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 08:45 PM

43. I know, it is easy to get that confused, and understandable

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 05:43 PM

31. Indeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnDoutside (Reply #31)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:10 PM

32. I saw a Tweet where RT

promoted her run.

I don't think that's far fetched at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #32)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:33 PM

38. One must always be vigilant. There's no doubt that Putin's only hope is to try and turn a Dem, other

wise he is going to get an awful hammering after 2020.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnDoutside (Reply #38)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:42 PM

39. Vigilance is Key.

No stone unturned.. especially after trump getting rigged in by Russia their enablers.

Shine the Light.. Twitter is aflutter with exposing Gabbard's history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #32)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 07:11 AM

107. I guess we should be wary of going all "McCarthy", but when people say genuinely odd stuff,

you can't ignore it without looking for further information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnDoutside (Reply #107)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 03:14 PM

112. The evidence is out there..

she's never been vetted before.

Her work on behalf of Assad is not the only foreign connection that could get in the way of Gabbard’s higher political ambitions. Gabbard is the first Hindu member of Congress, and she has ties to American Hindus who support nationalist causes in India.

The fault lines between Gabbard and most of her party began to emerge years ago. In 2015, she was among a minority contingent of Democrats who joined a Republican bill to restrict refugees coming to the United States from Syria and Iraq. She embraced the term “radical Islam” and, alongside Republicans, attacked President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for not using it, even though many see it way to demonize Muslims.

After the 2016 election, Gabbard met with President-elect Trump, who was reportedly considering her for several administration posts. The two aligned on some key foreign policy goals. Gabbard said at the time that she used the meeting to discuss her legislation to end what she described as “our country’s illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government.” Her name was missing from a letter from 169 House Democrats around that time condemning Steve Bannon’s White House appointment.

Now that she’s running for president, it will be impossible for Gabbard to avoid questions about her foreign policy record, in interviews and on debate stages later this year—a forum she has avoided for the past four years by declining to debate primary challengers running against her in Hawaii who wanted to confront her over her foreign policy agenda.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/01/tulsi-gabbard-is-running-for-president-can-she-shake-her-ties-to-dictators-and-nationalists/

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211666552

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #112)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 03:43 PM

113. That's pretty rough alright.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnDoutside (Reply #31)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:43 PM

82. WE have plenty of candidates-- no reason to settle for this one-

who really does have a connection to Russia that will muddy the Democratic Party's anti-Trump message.

"How can you diss Trump for being close to Putin, when you've got a candidate who gets defended by Russian Times?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg day (Reply #82)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 07:09 AM

106. Exactly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laffy Kat (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:21 PM

36. Gay man here - nope

She has done nothing to counter her past actions - signing on as a co-sponsor to bills is simply not enough to right here past wrongs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeState (Reply #36)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:46 PM

40. I understand. I have a bi son.

And believe me, it is an issue that is of utmost importance to me. Too, it's so early in the process, I doubt she is going to get very far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laffy Kat (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:05 PM

63. I did.

Or rather, I didn't understand why my dad's friends, who I called "Uncle Billy and Uncle Glenn", weren't able to get married. They'd stayed together when my own parents split.

They're still together, and married now.

I'm older than Tulsi, by a little over a year, and raised by my very conservative grandparents after the divorce. She was still arguing against gay marriage at the same age I was when I was protesting the Iraq war invasion (was living in New York the winter of 2002-2003, was late for the A7 protest so didn't get arrested but did spent the rest of the day outside 1PP handing out stuff from the NLG to people as they got released).

Obviously it's not impossible to form opinions of your own and have critical thinking just because you were raised in a conservative environment. I was luckier perhaps than most to be exposed to gay people from as far as I could remember, but that doesn't mean I didn't hear my grandparent's opinions. I just saw with my own mind they were wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 02:43 AM

5. Since she's running..it will be good for people to review her record

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 02:52 AM

8. Well this is certainly enlightening. Thanks for posting.

Of course, it's way too early to get worked up about any candidate right now but information is always welcomed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 04:59 AM

14. When do your campaigns against Al Green, Marcy Kaptur and Steny Hoyer begin....with their F rating?

How are these monsters allowed to remain in the Democratic Party?



Lieu and Schiff warrant a D rating, FFS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irresistable (Reply #14)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 05:06 AM

15. Are they running for potus?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #15)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 05:13 AM

16. Do you know what that F rating actually means?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 02:54 AM

9. WHat she did when she was a teenager still living at home should be off limits.

When it comes to politics. As too many women know too well, many must strike terrible bargains in order to stay safe. Not saying that Gabbard had to do that, but when we're teenagers we don't have the right to make tons of decisions for ourselves precisely because we're teenagers and don't have the same discernment as adults.

HOWEVER, we can rightfully castigate her for being against gay marriage when she was a Honolulu Councilmember, and while her public stance has changed, her personal one hasn't, as she's still against gay marriage in private. We can abhor her pandering to genocidal dictators like Assad. And we can soundly reject her for being the first Democrat to give Trump cover by meeting with him.

In other words, her record as an adult politician is horrible enough that we don't have to dig through her teenage years for bad things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KitSileya (Reply #9)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 06:19 PM

34. Would

Would we suspend criticism of a teenager who made racist comments because his or her parents were racists?


BTW she was 23 and a state representative when she called gay folks asking for the same rights as everybody else "homosexual extremists." :

“As Democrats, we should be representing the views of the people, not a small number of homosexual extremists..."

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 07:00 AM

17. I lulz'd

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 09:05 AM

20. 1998

Maybe move into the 21st century next time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PDittie (Reply #20)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:01 PM

61. Is 2004 late enough?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 01:07 PM

21. Kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BannonsLiver (Reply #21)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 05:27 PM

28. Likewise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 05:11 PM

27. Brave progressives

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 05:35 PM

29. She was never someone I was going to throw my weight behind

But people's opinions do change over time, especially from when they were teenagers. I wouldn't hold this against her. Now her support for Trump and his extreme vetting policy? That I will hold against her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downtown Hound (Reply #29)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:37 PM

52. She held those views to well into her twenties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:50 PM

54. 1998!

Come on, she was 16 or 17.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #54)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:55 PM

58. And in 2004, when she was the Hawaii State Legislature:

“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,” she said. “As Democrats, we should be representing the views of the people, not a small number of homosexual extremists.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongtimeAZDem (Reply #58)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 09:58 PM

59. Anything from the past 10 years?

If she said something homophobic recently, I'd be the first to call her out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #59)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:00 PM

60. What if a candidate made racist comments as late as 2004?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #60)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:32 PM

76. I have to be honest with you

I don't think I could ever forgive anyone who said the "N word" after the age of 18, even if it was 30 years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #76)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:34 PM

78. But it's ok to refer to gay people the way she did when she was 22?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #78)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:45 PM

83. Unfortunately, many of us were opposed to marriage equality in 2004

Disgusting slogans like "don't be gay" or "that's gay" were common in 2004. Thankfully, they no longer are said by the mainstream. In 2004, saying the "N word" still meant you were a horrible racist.

I did a lot of stupid things at 22 (not racist or anti-gay, just other stupid things). I had the mentally of a 16 year old. What she said was disgusting, but I do forgive her, unless something else surfaces.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #83)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:46 PM

85. Are you gay? If not, by what right do you forgive?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #85)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:50 PM

89. No

Perhaps I'm too forgiving. I will reevaluate my standing on her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #85)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:14 PM

98. By 2004 or so most of DU was for marriage equality.

But that's a red herring. People of good will could have disagreed on the issue. I was for whatever could pass. Thank God for SCOTUS. Gabbard didn't just oppose marriage equality. She called those arguing in its favor "a small group of homosexual activists" and supported conversion therapy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #76)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:34 PM

79. She made these remarks as late as 2004.

Maybe she had a sincere change of heart. Who knows? Nobody is saying she should be banished from the public square but her remarks disqualify her from being our nominee for president, all the apologies in the world notwithstanding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #79)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:48 PM

87. At what point is the statute of limitations on horrible statements from 2004?

Forever? How about if she runs 2048 (she'll still only be 67)? I don't know, maybe I'm too forgiving. I will look into her record and voting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #87)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:55 PM

103. How about the recent statements objecting....

... to asking people who are known to hold anti-choice or anti-LGBT views personally if they can set them aside on the bench?

Especially when this was her statement about why she suddenly "came around" on both issues?

https://www.votetulsi.com/updates/2011-12/reflections-role-government-our-personal-lives

My experiences in the Middle East eventually led me to reevaluate my view regarding government's role in our personal lives and decisions. Slowly, I began to realize that the positions I had held previously regarding the issues of choice and gay marriage were rooted in the same premise held by those in power in the oppressive Middle East regimes I saw--that it is government's role to define and enforce our personal morality.


If that's truly how she feels about how people in government should operate, why on earth would she object to that same test being applied to others, especially people being confirmed to lifetime judicial appointments?

We are a diverse nation, and people can believe and practice what they want about their own personal lives.

Some people carry those over to their political life, though -- see most of the Republican party, and the nominee in question in the recent controversy's statements that pro-life people should chip away at Roe "bit by bit" when running for AG. It's not off the table to ask such a person if they can be impartial despite holding strong personal views when we put them in the position of federal jurist, let alone "religious bigotry" to ask the question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #59)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:57 PM

104. Other than being the Assad thing, the Trump "common ground" thing, the Steve Bannon thing,

the David Duke endorsement thing, protection of State Department employees thing, the quit the DNC for Bernie thing, and the attack fellow democrats for questioning biblical supremacist judicial appointments thing,

not really, no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #54)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:15 PM

67. Cute avatar featuring a Native American genocider

LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tenderfoot (Reply #67)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:19 PM

69. Good catch.

By the way she held those views until at least 2004 which would have made her 23 years old. Not. A. Kid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #69)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:57 PM

93. She still holds those views...

but has been keeping them to herself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tenderfoot (Reply #67)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:33 PM

77. Yet it's on DU for all to pick if they choose

I chose it because he basically founded the Democratic Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #77)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:53 PM

91. Trump likes him a lot too.

Last edited Sun Jan 13, 2019, 11:32 PM - Edit history (1)



LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tenderfoot (Reply #91)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 08:15 AM

108. Whoa!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tenderfoot (Reply #91)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 09:43 AM

109. If there's a problem with him, he shouldn't be on the list of avatars to choose from

I liked him long before Trump even heard of him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #109)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 09:46 AM

110. What's not to like...

When Jackson was inaugurated, he held a party in the White House to which anyone was invited. People trashed the place, even snipping bits out of the curtains as souvenirs. This story confirmed all the worst fears of Jackson’s critics. His predecessor, John Quincy Adams, who Jackson had defeated in a horrifically bad-tempered election, was so horrified by Jackson’s triumph that he refused to attend the inauguration – the last outgoing president in history to have boycotted his successor’s big day. Men like Adams – who came from a Massachusetts family that had fought for Independence and feared for the survival of the republic (particularly his father, John Adams) – saw Jackson as a profane, unprincipled demagogue; a would-be tyrant in the Napoleonic mode; a man with no respect for the checks and balances of the Constitution or the rule of law.

The first president to have risen from lowly origins, Jackson became famous as the general who had defeated the British at the battle of New Orleans in 1815. Previously known for buying a slave plantation in Tennessee (in 1803) and for taking part in a high-profile duel (with Charles Dickinson in 1806), after the battle of New Orleans he went on to win more fame fighting the Seminole Indians.

In office, Jackson was an aggressive wielder of the president’s hitherto unused veto power. He stopped Congress from spending money on new roads or canals, and he prevented the re-charter of the Bank of the United States, which had attempted to regulate the money supply and served as a lender of last resort. And whatever political challenge he faced, his language was hyperbolic. “You are a den of vipers and thieves,” he wrote to the directors of the Bank of the US, “I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out”. When he left office, the country was plunged into the deepest recession anyone could remember.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tenderfoot (Reply #110)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 02:43 PM

111. Once again, he's on the official list of avatars provided by DU

Skinner or the other administrators put him there for members to choose from. Blame the seller, never the user.

I like him because he basically founded the Democratic Party, not to mention the symbol.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #111)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 05:59 PM

114. LOL! I'm sure he would have bolted had he lived long enough for the civil rights movement

Within days of Trump's inauguration, a portrait of Jackson was placed in the Oval Office. Trump ostentatiously showed visiting journalists a biography of Jackson sitting on his desk (it was less clear whether he had read it). Trump's predecessor, former President Barack Obama, had ordered that Jackson, a slaveholder, be removed from the face of the $20 bill and replaced by an image of black abolitionist leader Harriet Tubman. Trump, by contrast, will journey to Jackson's home, the Hermitage, and grandstand over Old Hickory's grave.

Have a nice day!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/03/15/what-the-white-houses-obsession-with-andrew-jackson-means-for-the-world/?utm_term=.f61b494f4bff

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tenderfoot (Reply #114)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 09:58 PM

116. Thanks, same to you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2019, 10:14 PM

66. Some of these responses depress me.

If it was any other group no one here would deign to defend her. It seems since it was only the gays some feel it wasn't as bad. If she said what she said about Jews, Muslims, African Americans, Hispanic et cetera their would be a collective outcry.

She held those views as late as 2004. Maybe she changed as Robert Byrd changed. Most of us accepted him , most of us forgave him, but we we never forgot. And we never thought he was presidential timber.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #66)

Mon Jan 14, 2019, 12:06 AM

105. As I said a month ago, her public positions now appear to be in line with the Party,

but she seems to do a lot of damage control, holding almost republican positions until called on it, and then backpedaling. Her strategy seems to be far more opportunistic than heartfelt.

So, as a Senator, as long as she is voting with us, I'm fine with her; but I do not trust her motives at all, and I do not want her as a candidate for President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread