AOC Quotes

sharpy wrote:Sanders and Warren are sure losers - they will be billed as socialists who are going to take the money out of the pockets of every working white person in the country and give it the poor people of color, who they will allow to do nothing. And, they will take more money from the working class white people so that the colored people will have free college - Enough people will believe this crap and run from the democrats.  


It's nice that your son is connected Blondy, but he's getting to be an adult and he has to realize how this country works - and nominating someone who will be billed a socialists - and with evidence to back that up - will move the middle to the right even tho there is, in my mind, no doubt the current GOP leaders are working with Putin to make this country a dictatorship that looks like a democracy - like Russia 

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

That's ludicrous.  She calls Trump out as much as any candidate.  Pro Medicare for all, anti-MIC, anti Saudi Arabia, against Jerusalem as Israel capital, against Israeli annexation of Golan Heights, anti-interventionist in Iran and Venezuela, anti-PAC and stricter regulation of campaign funding, pro net neutrality, recognizes global warming/environmentalist, pro civil liberties/LGBTQ, pro gun control with F rating from the NRA, etc, etc.


What rhetoric is pro-Trump?  Please read more about her before deciding you don't like her.  You seem to be making a judgment before knowing the facts.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:I favored Sanders over Clinton in 2016, so I at least can identify with Gabbard in that realm.  Will need to follow her more closely from now on.  My only take so far is she comes across a bit strangely, and a little prickly.  I feel uncomfortable and itchy while watching her answer questions and am usually looking forward to the end of the interview.  Not sure why.  It's just a feeling I get.

jaywit wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:I favored Sanders over Clinton in 2016, so I at least can identify with Gabbard in that realm.  Will need to follow her more closely from now on.  My only take so far is she comes across a bit strangely, and a little prickly.  I feel uncomfortable and itchy while watching her answer questions and am usually looking forward to the end of the interview.  Not sure why.  It's just a feeling I get.

Well, style is a very subjective thing that you either like or don't.  To me, Gabbard's delivery and speech rhythm is very reminiscent of Obama, even down to the occasional "uh" in mid-sentence.  Very deliberate and monotone.  Works better for men, I suppose.  For the most part I can put up with awkward style as long as words and actions speak to the points of order with few exceptions, e.g. Warren.

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

That's ludicrous.  She calls Trump out as much as any candidate.  Pro Medicare for all, anti-MIC, anti Saudi Arabia, against Jerusalem as Israel capital, against Israeli annexation of Golan Heights, anti-interventionist in Iran and Venezuela, anti-PAC and stricter regulation of campaign funding, pro net neutrality, recognizes global warming/environmentalist, pro civil liberties/LGBTQ, pro gun control with F rating from the NRA, etc, etc.


What rhetoric is pro-Trump?  Please read more about her before deciding you don't like her.  You seem to be making a judgment before knowing the facts.

I have made no judgment about her.  I just posted what I've seen others say about her on Twitter.

blondy28 wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

That's ludicrous.  She calls Trump out as much as any candidate.  Pro Medicare for all, anti-MIC, anti Saudi Arabia, against Jerusalem as Israel capital, against Israeli annexation of Golan Heights, anti-interventionist in Iran and Venezuela, anti-PAC and stricter regulation of campaign funding, pro net neutrality, recognizes global warming/environmentalist, pro civil liberties/LGBTQ, pro gun control with F rating from the NRA, etc, etc.


What rhetoric is pro-Trump?  Please read more about her before deciding you don't like her.  You seem to be making a judgment before knowing the facts.

I have made no judgment about her.  I just posted what I've seen others say about her on Twitter.

Her comment/assessment of the arrest of Julian Assange is among the most absurd I've heard.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:I favored Sanders over Clinton in 2016, so I at least can identify with Gabbard in that realm.  Will need to follow her more closely from now on.  My only take so far is she comes across a bit strangely, and a little prickly.  I feel uncomfortable and itchy while watching her answer questions and am usually looking forward to the end of the interview.  Not sure why.  It's just a feeling I get.

Well, style is a very subjective thing that you either like or don't.  To me, Gabbard's delivery and speech rhythm is very reminiscent of Obama, even down to the occasional "uh" in mid-sentence.  Very deliberate and monotone.  Works better for men, I suppose.  For the most part I can put up with awkward style as long as words and actions speak to the points of order with few exceptions, e.g. Warren.

Warren...eek.  It's a shame, too, because I find myself enjoying that she attacks policy head on and actually offers ideas and policy.  You know, the boring shit that most voters ignore, because they are busy voting on the tone of someone's voice.  Warren's tone is very tough to bear and will likely be her undoing.

jaywit wrote:

For the most part I agree with her stances.  She seems genuine and with great integrity and that goes a long way with me even if it's to the left of my preferences.  I didn't follow the native American heritage thing very closely but it seems that could have been dropped more readily.

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

That's ludicrous.  She calls Trump out as much as any candidate.  Pro Medicare for all, anti-MIC, anti Saudi Arabia, against Jerusalem as Israel capital, against Israeli annexation of Golan Heights, anti-interventionist in Iran and Venezuela, anti-PAC and stricter regulation of campaign funding, pro net neutrality, recognizes global warming/environmentalist, pro civil liberties/LGBTQ, pro gun control with F rating from the NRA, etc, etc.


What rhetoric is pro-Trump?  Please read more about her before deciding you don't like her.  You seem to be making a judgment before knowing the facts.

I have made no judgment about her.  I just posted what I've seen others say about her on Twitter.

Her comment/assessment of the arrest of Julian Assange is among the most absurd I've heard.

Her comment was a verbalization of the 2012/13 conclusion of Obama's DOJ on what should and shouldn't be done about Assange and I agreed with their conclusion.  I agree with it now.  I suspect Trump's DOJ has employed a maneuver to bring in a trump upped charge in order to pursue prosecution.



Again, what rhetoric is pro-Trump?  You still seem to be making a judgment and then are looking for examples to back up your judgment.  Exactly what stance does she have that you so abhor?

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

That's ludicrous.  She calls Trump out as much as any candidate.  Pro Medicare for all, anti-MIC, anti Saudi Arabia, against Jerusalem as Israel capital, against Israeli annexation of Golan Heights, anti-interventionist in Iran and Venezuela, anti-PAC and stricter regulation of campaign funding, pro net neutrality, recognizes global warming/environmentalist, pro civil liberties/LGBTQ, pro gun control with F rating from the NRA, etc, etc.


What rhetoric is pro-Trump?  Please read more about her before deciding you don't like her.  You seem to be making a judgment before knowing the facts.

I have made no judgment about her.  I just posted what I've seen others say about her on Twitter.

Her comment/assessment of the arrest of Julian Assange is among the most absurd I've heard.

Her comment was a verbalization of the 2012/13 conclusion of Obama's DOJ on what should and shouldn't be done about Assange and I agreed with their conclusion.  I agree with it now.  I suspect Trump's DOJ has employed a maneuver to bring in a trump upped charge in order to pursue prosecution.



Again, what rhetoric is pro-Trump?  You still seem to be making a judgment and then are looking for examples to back up your judgment.  Exactly what stance does she have that you so abhor?

Once again, I have made no judgment about her, I was reporting about the tweets that I've seen.   The only thing I said that I found absurd was her tweet, which I didn't even specifically quote, so I'm not sure how you can even defend it when I haven't specifically referenced what it was.

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

That's ludicrous.  She calls Trump out as much as any candidate.  Pro Medicare for all, anti-MIC, anti Saudi Arabia, against Jerusalem as Israel capital, against Israeli annexation of Golan Heights, anti-interventionist in Iran and Venezuela, anti-PAC and stricter regulation of campaign funding, pro net neutrality, recognizes global warming/environmentalist, pro civil liberties/LGBTQ, pro gun control with F rating from the NRA, etc, etc.


What rhetoric is pro-Trump?  Please read more about her before deciding you don't like her.  You seem to be making a judgment before knowing the facts.

I have made no judgment about her.  I just posted what I've seen others say about her on Twitter.

Her comment/assessment of the arrest of Julian Assange is among the most absurd I've heard.

Her comment was a verbalization of the 2012/13 conclusion of Obama's DOJ on what should and shouldn't be done about Assange and I agreed with their conclusion.  I agree with it now.  I suspect Trump's DOJ has employed a maneuver to bring in a trump upped charge in order to pursue prosecution.



Again, what rhetoric is pro-Trump?  You still seem to be making a judgment and then are looking for examples to back up your judgment.  Exactly what stance does she have that you so abhor?

Once again, I have made no judgment about her, I was reporting about the tweets that I've seen.   The only thing I said that I found absurd was her tweet, which I didn't even specifically quote, so I'm not sure how you can even defend it when I haven't specifically referenced what it was.

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

That's ludicrous.  She calls Trump out as much as any candidate.  Pro Medicare for all, anti-MIC, anti Saudi Arabia, against Jerusalem as Israel capital, against Israeli annexation of Golan Heights, anti-interventionist in Iran and Venezuela, anti-PAC and stricter regulation of campaign funding, pro net neutrality, recognizes global warming/environmentalist, pro civil liberties/LGBTQ, pro gun control with F rating from the NRA, etc, etc.


What rhetoric is pro-Trump?  Please read more about her before deciding you don't like her.  You seem to be making a judgment before knowing the facts.

I have made no judgment about her.  I just posted what I've seen others say about her on Twitter.

Her comment/assessment of the arrest of Julian Assange is among the most absurd I've heard.

Her comment was a verbalization of the 2012/13 conclusion of Obama's DOJ on what should and shouldn't be done about Assange and I agreed with their conclusion.  I agree with it now.  I suspect Trump's DOJ has employed a maneuver to bring in a trump upped charge in order to pursue prosecution.



Again, what rhetoric is pro-Trump?  You still seem to be making a judgment and then are looking for examples to back up your judgment.  Exactly what stance does she have that you so abhor?

Once again, I have made no judgment about her, I was reporting about the tweets that I've seen.   The only thing I said that I found absurd was her tweet, which I didn't even specifically quote, so I'm not sure how you can even defend it when I haven't specifically referenced what it was.

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

For the most part I agree with her stances.  She seems genuine and with great integrity and that goes a long way with me even if it's to the left of my preferences.  I didn't follow the native American heritage thing very closely but it seems that could have been dropped more readily.

I don't really understand why the native American thing is even a "thing."  I really just don't give a shit if she claims to be part Cherokee or part Eskimo or part astronaut.  Like, who really gives AF?  I also don't understand why she gave it oxygen, rather than just explain it one time and then drop it.  "Um, I was raised to believe I was part Cherokee.  I've believed it to be true all my life because I trust the stories my family told me.  That's all I have to say on it."  Seems simple.  No DNA test needed.  No Tweets.

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

SoxIlliniRob wrote:

jaywit wrote:

sharpy wrote:There are a lot of people who think Sanders would have beaten Trump,


Unfortunately, I am not one of them. You think Obama couldn't get anything thru congress?  Good luck with Sanders or Warren

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/tulsi-gabbard-julian-assange-cnntv/index.html


I love this woman's courage to speak her mind and when she speaks I'm finding I agree over 90% of the time.  I love her tenacity when challenged.  The above link is just another example.


Here is a candidate who is a veteran and speaking against the military/industrial complex, something I've not yet heard from the other candidates.  To push the progressive platform, especially universal health care, the money is going to have to come from somewhere.  The overblown budget for the Pentagon is in her cross-hairs.  I'm hoping her views become adopted by some of the other candidates with a better chance at gaining the nomination.

Other candidates adopting her views is probably your only hope, because for whatever reason, liberals absolutely hate Gabbard.  She hasn't been on my radar enough to say exactly why they hate her, but damn dude, they hate her.  I can't keep up on all of these candidates and their platforms, but when she's on MSNBC for ten mins and the hosts interviewing her are practically vomiting on her, it probably doesn't bode well for her.  I did hear her speaking, as you note, against the military industrial complex today, and agreed with her fully.

Same on Twitter.  She seems to be pro-Trump with her rhetoric.  She is not well liked.

That's ludicrous.  She calls Trump out as much as any candidate.  Pro Medicare for all, anti-MIC, anti Saudi Arabia, against Jerusalem as Israel capital, against Israeli annexation of Golan Heights, anti-interventionist in Iran and Venezuela, anti-PAC and stricter regulation of campaign funding, pro net neutrality, recognizes global warming/environmentalist, pro civil liberties/LGBTQ, pro gun control with F rating from the NRA, etc, etc.


What rhetoric is pro-Trump?  Please read more about her before deciding you don't like her.  You seem to be making a judgment before knowing the facts.

I have made no judgment about her.  I just posted what I've seen others say about her on Twitter.

Her comment/assessment of the arrest of Julian Assange is among the most absurd I've heard.

Her comment was a verbalization of the 2012/13 conclusion of Obama's DOJ on what should and shouldn't be done about Assange and I agreed with their conclusion.  I agree with it now.  I suspect Trump's DOJ has employed a maneuver to bring in a trump upped charge in order to pursue prosecution.



Again, what rhetoric is pro-Trump?  You still seem to be making a judgment and then are looking for examples to back up your judgment.  Exactly what stance does she have that you so abhor?

Once again, I have made no judgment about her, I was reporting about the tweets that I've seen.   The only thing I said that I found absurd was her tweet, which I didn't even specifically quote, so I'm not sure how you can even defend it when I haven't specifically referenced what it was.

Fair enough.  Knowing you these past several years I'm sure your concerns have merit.

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

Fair enough.  Knowing you these past several years I'm sure your concerns have merit.

I have never heard her speak (and after Rob's assessment, I'm thinking I'm better off not hearing her).  I thought her tweet about Assange was ridiculous, in large part because she speaks of Assange as though he was a legitimate journalist, which I don't buy.  At the least, he has accepted/published documents that were obtained through illegal means like hacking.  At most, he's encouraged/conspired to hack computers to get information.  So I take issue to him being grouped with journalists.  Beyond that, I don't think Assange's arrest is meant to send a message to Americans and journalists to "toe the line".  I think that stripping Acosta of his press credentials or inciting violence against journalists during his rallies is more indicative of Trump sending a message to journalists than the Assange arrest.  If anything, the message that the Assange arrest is meant to send is "Obama didn't get him, but I did" given that Trumps DOJ has made comments about getting him being a "priority".  Mind you, I'm not saying that Trump isn't pissing on the constitution and the first amendment at every turn, but I don't think Assange's arrest is evidence of that.  As a non-U.S. citizen, he's not even afforded our constitutional protections, is he?  Perhaps that's a question for our friendly board history teacher.

jaywit wrote:

blondy28 wrote:

jaywit wrote:

Fair enough.  Knowing you these past several years I'm sure your concerns have merit.

I have never heard her speak (and after Rob's assessment, I'm thinking I'm better off not hearing her).  I thought her tweet about Assange was ridiculous, in large part because she speaks of Assange as though he was a legitimate journalist, which I don't buy.  At the least, he has accepted/published documents that were obtained through illegal means like hacking.  At most, he's encouraged/conspired to hack computers to get information.  So I take issue to him being grouped with journalists.  Beyond that, I don't think Assange's arrest is meant to send a message to Americans and journalists to "toe the line".  I think that stripping Acosta of his press credentials or inciting violence against journalists during his rallies is more indicative of Trump sending a message to journalists than the Assange arrest.  If anything, the message that the Assange arrest is meant to send is "Obama didn't get him, but I did" given that Trumps DOJ has made comments about getting him being a "priority".  Mind you, I'm not saying that Trump isn't pissing on the constitution and the first amendment at every turn, but I don't think Assange's arrest is evidence of that.  As a non-U.S. citizen, he's not even afforded our constitutional protections, is he?  Perhaps that's a question for our friendly board history teacher.

Don't listen to Rob.  His ears were harmed by decades of Zeppelin cranked to 11.