Image 01 Image 03

Dem Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is running for president, and that’s important (really, it is)

Dem Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is running for president, and that’s important (really, it is)

Bring on the crowded debate stage, with a disrupter thrown like a hand grenade into the mix.

Tulsi Gabbard, Democrat Representative from Hawaii, is a strange political bird.

A November 2017 profile of Gabbard in The New Yorker described her as follows:

Gabbard has served, since 2003, in the Army National Guard, in which capacity she completed a tour of duty in Iraq. …

She is thirty-six, and has a knack for projecting both youthful joy and grownup gravitas. Her political profile is similarly hybrid. She is a fervent Bernie Sanders supporter with equally fervent bipartisan tendencies—known, roughly equally, for her concern for the treatment of veterans and her opposition to U.S. intervention abroad. She is also a vegetarian and a practicing Hindu—the first Hindu ever elected to Congress—as well as a lifelong surfer and an accomplished athlete. On Capitol Hill, she is often regarded as a glamorous anomaly: a Hawaiian action figure, fabulously out of place among her besuited colleagues.

Gabbard, however, carries the baggage of being viewed as Bashar Assad’s Favorite Democrat and Assad’s Mouthpiece in Washington, after an unauthorized trip to Syria sponsored by a shady group.

Gabbard has shown a willingness to buck the liberal line, such as her recent criticism of Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono for questioning a judicial nominees membership in the Knights of Columbus, comparing it to “fomenting religious bigotry.”

The socialist Jacobin magazine hates her:

So what is the cause of terrorism, according to Gabbard? Islam, of course.

Before she became a progressive darling for endorsing Sanders, Gabbard became a conservative darling for relentlessly hawking the idea — later popularized by Trump — that Obama’s foreign policy was failing because he refused to use the term “Islamic extremism,” or some variation of it.

From 2014 onward, Gabbard appeared regularly on Fox News to lambast the Obama administration for avoiding the phrase. In one interview, she told the host that “the vast majority of terrorist attacks conducted around the world for over the last decade have been conducted by groups who are fueled by this radical Islamic ideology,” a statement that may be technically true due to the violence and instability plaguing Middle Eastern countries, but is wildly misleading considering that non-Muslims make up the vast, vast majority of terrorist perpetrators in both Europe and the United States.

In the wake of the Charlie Hebdo shootings in January 2015, Gabbard complained on Fox News that by “not using this term ‘Islamic extremism’ and clearly identifying our enemies,” the administration couldn’t “come up with a very effective strategy to defeat that enemy.” She told Neil Cavuto that “this isn’t about one specific group,” but about “this radical Islamic ideology that is fueling this,” and that it needed to be defeated “militarily and ideologically.” She characterized Obama’s refusal to “recognize” the enemy as “mind-boggling” and “troubling.”

And it wasn’t just on Fox. Gabbard took her message to any network or outlet that would have her. On CNN, she called Kerry’s refusal to use the term “unfortunate and disturbing.” In an interview with the Hill, she stressed that radical Islam was at the heart of the problem, necessitating “a simultaneous ideological strategy” to defeat terrorists.

Interestingly, in 2014 Gabbard signed a congressional letter against the academic boycott of Israel. If she still holds that view, she’s out of step with the radical energized base of the Democrat party.

On CNN today, Gabbard announced she’s running for President.

Gabbard running is important.

Not because she’s going to win.

But because she is yet another Democrat throwing her hat into the ring. Within months we could have dozens of Democrats running.

The debates, which start in June, have the potential to be a three-ring circus, making the large 2016 Republican field seem quaint by comparison.

If Democrats prevent lesser-known candidates from participating in the debates, it will harken back to Hillary’s friends at the DNC rigging the primaries against Bernie. If all Democrats participate, it’s going to be mayhem on stage, and will take away from top tier candidates.

Add Gabbard to the mix, and it will be great theater. She’s not afraid to go against liberal orthodoxy — not always in good ways — and to attack other Democrats.

So Gabbard getting into the race is important because she will be a disrupter on a stage filled with Democrats before a national TV audience.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Let the Democratic presidential primary gladiator games begin. Those who are about to lie salute you.

She is pretty. That is not such a common thing among loons, moonbats and socialist liberals.

CaliforniaJimbo | January 11, 2019 at 9:28 pm

May the odds ever be in your favour. LOL

We cheer their crowded primary as our advantage, but remember the last large crowd produced Trump. If the youth-trending Bernie bros unite around a single candidate while the old folks bicker we could be in for some interesting times.

Run Tulsi run! The more the merrier! When the crowd of nutjobs collects on stage for the American people to see and hear, Trump will have four more years! SNL could not lump all of her peccadillos into one character because they would believe that no one would believe it! A veteran, Hindu, vegan who is a friend of Israel and Catholics who believes Assad is a nice guy yet hates radical muslims
who believes that obama and Kerry were wrong for not calling out radical muslims will never fly in the cesspool of the left.

buckeyeminuteman | January 11, 2019 at 10:39 pm

If she were to ever win, she’d have to resign her commission. Can’t be both the Commander-in-Chief and a lowly Major at the same time.

There standard set by Trump is so high – what president will there ever be again that has Trump’s dedication to the Constitution coupled with his genius for negotiation, his incredible business acumen and his preternatural fortitude.

Let’s add the fact of having a mate who is model-gorgeous and as tough as he is, and as classy as any First Lady ever to occupy the White House. (American hater and Fashion Armpit Michelle obama, aside, of course.)

    True, and Trump has shown he can win on the highest level, in business and on the world stage in politics. Gabbard has not shown that, so I’d prefer Trump as President.

    But Gabbard is the only possible Dem candidate I wouldn’t mind too much winning, she’ll actually try to do the right things and she’ll have some success.

She will be toast. She’s the best candidate on the Dems ticket, but toast. It takes a huge machine to run a campaign. Hopefully she throws a lot of grenades along the way.

    Should Donald Trump run for re-election, defeat is a certain possibility, even a probability. A campaign machine will be needed for any candidate. A Democratic campaign machine will coalesce. The important question is will Gabbard generate the enthusiasm needed to prevail against her Republican opponent.

      Run Hillary again HAHAHHAHAHA That would do the trick!! 🙂

      Defeat is a possibility, hence we call it an ELECTION, where people vote. Unless you’re a dem and you think it’s “your turn.”

      90% of campaigns go bankrupt in the primaries, often these are the better candidates. Trump didn’t have the standard machine, but he spent the past decade building a public platform and getting the media to hang on his every word.

Tulsi Gabbard running is important for none of the reasons offered. She is a good candidate because foreign policy is one of the two most important issues. She is a good candidate because her fearless advocacy of what is right will set her ahead of all the other candidates, all of which other than Warren, have no background in ending the US Empire abroad.

    Everyone keeps saying that she would do the right thing BUT no one ever spells out what exactly it is in her past that she has done that would mean she COULD do the right thing…even being a Democrat (which should be a HUGE heads up about her actual ability to do the right thing).

    And by right thing I don’t mean “the right thing” as in doing the right thing by democrats (which is the opposite of doing the right thing…as in doing the wrong thing 100% of the time for America).

It would be good if she gets the Dem nomination. Not because it makes it easier for Trump (it probably makes it harder, and I am a Trump supporter) but because then I would be happy enough no matter who wins in 2020.

President. Uh-huh. I suppose the logical progression of our last few D’rat presidents makes it almost conceivable. We had the ridiculous President Peanut, who may have meant well, but couldn’t deliver anything much. The corrupt President Horn-Dog, who certainly didn’t mean well for anybody but Horn-Dog himself. And finally the sinister President Race-Baiter-in-Chief, who simulated a president although it was never clear exactly which country he really wanted to be president of. So a future President Fruit-Bat isn’t too hard to imagine.

But perhaps the most important thing about this, along with Occasionally-Coherent’s recent antics, is the evidence that the D’rat’s legendary Party lockstep discipline seems to be having some serious hiccups. These goofs should never have seen the light of day. The D’rats are falling apart. Not that there’s anything wrong with that . . . though it would be nice if we had a serious party ready to step into the vacancy. This is the danger point when European or Asian countries go communist, as the Reds always maintain their discipline even when they’re not doing anything more useful, and they’re ready to pop up, hop in, and take over whenever everybody else goes all to hell.

Smaller teeth than Brett Kavanaugh … Should be strike 1 in MSM’s eyes.

I’ve already decided to run as the stealth candidate. You have already seen my but don’t realize it. For now, my identity is Margin O. Error (call me Moe) and I am in the lead.

She’s the anti-Beto. She fills the empty suit he couldn’t.

Yawn. Gabbard is just another creepy socialist back-bencher who has delusions of becoming the next Progressive Führer . The media newsrooms, faculty lounges, and halls of Congress are hip-deep with commie drones like her. I think Gabbard got klonked on the head one too many times with her surfboard if she thinks the Democrat Party’s Kool Kids Klub will let her get even a sniff of presidential power.

She will :

(1) go exactly nowhere, gain no traction, and may not even be allowed to participate in the televised debates with the media-designated Major Candidates (TM) .
(2) enthusiastically endorse what ever commie the Democrat Party satraps pick behind closed doors, and
(3) disrupt nothing whatsoever.

DouglasJBender | January 12, 2019 at 1:02 pm

All right, that does it — I’ve decided to run for President, as an Independent. But I will do no campaigning. It’s all up to you, people. My slogan is, “Why Not?”

I’m going to take a moment to politely quibble. I do not see how you can single out Gabbard as pro-Assad when Nancy Pelosi, current Speaker of the House, famously went to Syria over the W. Bush administration’s objections in 2007. I feel like we are pointing at a boulder and ignoring the mountain looming behind it.

Anyway, Gabbard is at least known for having some personal principles and convictions, like frowning on anti-Catholic agitation in Congress and calling out the underhanded measures against the Bernie Sanders nomination effort within the Democratic Party. But that’s because she was a hardcore Sanders supporter. Her not being a “team player” for Team Hillary means she isn’t likely to get anywhere until Ocasio-Cortez comes of age and can run for the presidency herself.

There are ‘top tier’ Democrat candidates?
Almost spat my coffee…

Yes, this woman is qualified to be CEO of the United States. (That’s sarcasm.)

Warped views and treason aside, Obama set the standard for stupid. No one on the democrat side is any smarter – in particular Beto O’Dork.

Gabbard’s another socialist intent upon lifting every dime you earn just like the rest of the left.

Many of the comments here do not reflect the Tulsi we know. She is by no means a tyrant or socialist. She rejects overseas military ventures with impossible goals. She learned to hate Islam in Iraq and the Emirates.
There is not a more approachable Represenative. Nor one less corrupt. Very much like Ed Case. Both are detested by the Democratic party,yet both share huge approval ratings. In her case,80 percent..