12 replies »

  1. OK, want to know what’s up with the Tulster ? Go to Dave Emory’s site, Spitfire and he’s done some great research into her problematic past and love affair with the Fascist Right….

    • I am familiar with those claims about Gabbard but I don’t buy it. I actually consider her to be a moderate that trends leftward on social issues. In fact, she’s too moderate for my tastes, far too moderate. But the idea that she’s a closet fascist is loopy nonsense that neocons, neoliberals, and “anti-anti-imperialist” leftists like Alexander Reid-Ross-Podhoretz-Kristol keep spinning.

  2. PS: The “Z” word to some extent is a Tar Baby, that you don’t want to get stuck on. It is a Biggers Picture that has it’s root’s pre WW11 and the Swiss Connection funding Fascism, Radical Islam, and just about any left/right paradigm. It’s a PhD study to get the whole picture.
    OK Kimmy, just for shits and grins, say Neocon AND Zionism, you’ll feel a lot better, It’s cathartic…

    • Within the rhetorical framework of US electoral politics, it’s good enough to criticize and neocons and AIPAC. That covers all the primary anti-Zionist issues as far as US politics is concerned. Yes, there is J Street and all that but one step at a time.

  3. I don’t think that anyone on this blog fundamentally disagree generally speaking. As for my source on Dave Emory research, he’s definitely far left, but for this purpose the enemy of my enemy is my friend, at least for this topic.
    The terms ” left, right, liberal etc just confuse an already convoluted topic.
    Disregard the left and right, and concentrate on the EVER PRESENT CENTER, it never changes. It’s the nexus..
    I don’t know exactly is in the closet with Gabbard, maybe she is just a Fundamental Particle that can exist in several states at once. She’s a Quantum Politician.
    Check Emory work. He does get fed intel from a known CIA asset…

      • Well, you could make that connection. I would go further than Emory and state that there is a defacto 4th Reich that is in Financial Control worldwide, supporting the left and the right and sit above as a control mechanism.

  4. Is this women implying we should attack Saudi Arabia?

    21:19 “A hawk on the war on terror – which I think all of us need to be.”

    This is the left wing?!?

    I think the issue with Gabbard is she is afraid of appearing weak. It would probably be a lot harder for a president from the left to stand up to the military than a candidate from the right (in theory). Although, I believe Jimmy Carter is the only president to cancel a major weapons project: the B-1 bomber. Which, of course, did absolutely nothing. The Pentagon just re-started the project the second he left office…yay democracy). It is not polite to say this: I do wonder if a female president will have to stack up an even higher body count than usual. (I’ll give Queen Anne a pass in her handling of the bits of the war of Spanish Secession that were fought on American soil, the treaty of the 4 Mohawk kings and all. Of course, she was not a president).

    All of this is academic of course, Gabbard is utterly, completely doomed.

    This pundit seems to think greed for money is what motivates the neo-cons. My view is the neo-cons motivation is more in line with their Trotskyist roots. Changing the world, even if by bullets, makes them important.

    Also, it’s something to do.

    • MONEY fuels the vehicle that these folks need to put forth their agenda.
      In the final analysis, it’s the end result that matter.
      Maybe Tulsi is trying on her Man Pant’s ala Hilary ?

Leave a Reply