Originally Posted by Peace Piper
Last edited by Krugminator2; 09-13-2018 at 01:24 PM.
I stand corrected, forgot it was stuttering John actually.
MAGA Allies: 'Bully Israel with undeclared nukes steals land'
Dangerous conspiracy theories on Right claim MAGA fake frontgroup
Poll: Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 80s?
Obama-Clinton Years: A Violent Chapter in World History
Trump: If (Neocon) Adelson Backs Rubio "He'll Have Total Control" Over Him
Delta variant, death of 9 Chinese engineers in terror attack led to airport chaos & quick Kabul fall?
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Condemns Trump Administration's Protection of Al-Qaeda in Syria:
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard: End the Unconstitutional War in Yemen Now:
A Paul/Gabbard ticket would be amazing.
"Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration is minding my own business."
Calvin Coolidge
That would be one hell of a ticket.
It would be an open invitation for Rand's assassination.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
I may disagree with her on a number of things, but I respect her integrity. I can disagree with someone, but respect them. A snake like Lindsey Graham simply can't be trusted, period.
...
I don't trust Graham or her.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
I don't think a Paul/Gabbard ticket would work, but I would love to see a debate between Paul vs Gabbard on role of government. In a McCain vs Obama debate it was one type of corporatism mislabeled as capitalism vs a similar type of corporatism mislabeled as socialism. In 2016 I was hoping for Rand and Bernie going head to head in the general. Think of the honest debate. Instead we got the fricking soap opera.
...
So, we must not directly confront evil because someone might get killed.
"The Patriarch"
I would actually vote again.
"The Patriarch"
No, we must pick a conservative/libertarian running mate so that the deepstate doesn't get a Demoncrat president whose actual commitment to ending wars is questionable for the price of a bullet.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
I'm going to agree with this for different reasons. I retract what I said because she could conceivably get elected after Rand served out his term and she's horrible on too many other issues. But why do you say her commitment to ending wars is questionable?
"The Patriarch"
She is a vet, she probably ultimately votes for the spending to protect the troops or something. She did try to add an amendment to the last spending bill that nixed out a section that allowed us to go to war with Iran. It got like 70 or 80 votes.
Some people have posted some things that make it appear that there are some issues with her voting record on other issues like civil liberties as well, but her rhetoric on all these things including the wars are on point. Wouldn't be a bad idea if somebody asked her about those things to see what her rational was on those.
Last edited by dannno; 09-13-2018 at 09:18 PM.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
H RES 397: NATO Vote Date: June 27, 2017 Vote: AYE Bad Vote. This legislation (H. Res. 397) “solemnly reaffirms the commitment of the United States to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s principle of collective defense as enumerated in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.” Under Article 5, the member nations of the NATO military alliance “agree that an armed attack against one or more of them ... shall be considered an attack against them all.”
The House passed H. Res. 397 on June 27, 2017 by a lopsided vote of 423 to 4 (Roll Call 328). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because the United States should stay clear of entangling alliances such as NATO, but also because the NATO provision that obligates the United States to go to war if any member of NATO is attacked undermines the provision in the U.S. Constitution that assigns to Congress the power to declare war. Moreover, the number of nations that the United States has pledged to defend under NATO has grown from 11 to 28 over the years, as the alliance itself has grown from 12 member nations (including the United States) when NATO was created in 1949 to 29 today. Although NATO was ostensibly formed to counter the threat from the Soviet bloc of nations, some of the nations the United States is now pledged to defend under NATO were once part of that bloc, including Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic (as part of Czechoslovakia), Hungary, Poland, and Romania.
H R 5293: Authorization for Use of Military Force Vote Date: June 16, 2016 Vote: NAY Bad Vote. During consideration of the Defense Appropriations bill (H.R. 5293), Representative Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment to prohibit the use of funds in the bill for the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Act. Enacted in the wake of 9/11, the AUMF authorized the president to “use all necessary and appropriate force” against the terrorists involved, as well as those who aided or harbored them. It was used as the authorization for U.S. military entry into Afghanistan in 2001, and over the years has also been invoked on other occasions by the executive branch to justify U.S. military intervention abroad.
The House rejected Lee’s amendment on June 16, 2016 by a vote of 146 to 274 (Roll Call 330). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because presidents have been able to claim broad authority to go to war whenever or wherever they choose under the AUMF, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers never intended for one man to make this decision, and under the Constitution only Congress may “declare war.”
H R 4909: Use of Military Force Vote Date: May 18, 2016 Vote: NAY Bad Vote. During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 4909), Representative Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that was enacted in 2001 for the purpose of authorizing U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks. Since then, however, the AUMF has been invoked numerous times by the executive branch for U.S. military intervention not only in Afghanistan but elsewhere.
The House rejected Lee’s amendment on May 18, 2016 by a vote of 138 to 285 (Roll Call 210). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because presidents have been able to claim broad authority to go to war whenever or wherever they choose under the AUMF, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers never intended for one man to make this decision, and under the Constitution only Congress may “declare war.”
H RES 162: Calling on the President to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Vote Date: March 23, 2015 Vote: AYE Bad Vote. Ukraine Military Aid.
House Resolution 162, which calls on the president "to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity," allows President Obama to provide Ukraine with defensive weapons to defend against aggression from Russia.
The House adopted H. Res. 162 on March 23, 2015 by a vote of 348 to 48 (Roll Call 131). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because foreign aid is unconstitutional but also because this bill would further interject the United States into a foreign conflict. Allowing the U.S. president to provide lethal arms to Ukraine in order to fight Russia is tantamount to waging a proxy war on Russia without the constitutionally required congressional declaration of war. The House, by giving such power to the president, is relinquishing one of its constitutional responsibilities.
H R 4870: On Agreeing to the Amendment 51 to H R 4870 Vote Date: June 19, 2014 Vote: NAY Bad Vote. Weapons to Syrian Rebels.
During consideration of the Defense Appropriations bill, Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) introduced an amendment that would have prohibited any funding in the bill from being used to provide weapons to Syrian rebels. Fortenberry noted on the House floor that "the rebel movement is a battleground of shifting alliances and bloody conflicts between groups that now include multinational terrorist organizations," that "sending our weapons into this chaotic war zone could inadvertently help these extremists," and that "it has already happened." He added: "The naive notion that we can deliver weapons to vetted, moderate opposition groups at war with other rebel militias gives no guarantee that our weaponry won't be seized or diverted."
The House rejected Fortenberry's amendment on June 19, 2014 by a vote of 167 to 244 (Roll Call 328). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because arming "moderate" rebels in a foreign country is tantamount to going to war, which would require a declaration of war by Congress. Also, the United States should follow the Founders' advice not to become involved in foreign quarrels
H R 4152: To provide for the costs of loan guarantees for Ukraine Vote Date: April 1, 2014 Vote: AYE Bad Vote. Ukraine Aid.
This bill (H.R. 4152), as amended by the Senate (see Senate vote below), would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine.
[ The Senate version of this legislation - offered in the form of a substitute amendment to the House version, H.R. 4152 - would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that the U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine. ]
The House voted for this legislation on April 1, 2014 by a vote of 378 to 34 (Roll Call 149). We have assigned pluses to the nays because foreign aid is unconstitutional. The rationale for providing U.S. aid to Ukraine is that the country needs our assistance to resist Russian hegemony and build "democracy." Yet the oligarchs wielding power in Ukraine are hardly "democrats," and (because money is fungible) U.S. assistance could effectively be funneled to Russia in the form of Ukrainian energy and debt payments.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
There are lots of progressives in the military, I would just like to know why he thinks her anti-war stance is phony. I've seen plenty that were, hers might be just another one, but I would like to see some evidence.
"The Patriarch"
Thanks. I'm in agreement.
H RES 397: NATO Vote Date: June 27, 2017 Vote: AYE Bad Vote. This legislation (H. Res. 397) “solemnly reaffirms the commitment of the United States to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s principle of collective defense as enumerated in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.” Under Article 5, the member nations of the NATO military alliance “agree that an armed attack against one or more of them ... shall be considered an attack against them all.”
The House passed H. Res. 397 on June 27, 2017 by a lopsided vote of 423 to 4 (Roll Call 328). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because the United States should stay clear of entangling alliances such as NATO, but also because the NATO provision that obligates the United States to go to war if any member of NATO is attacked undermines the provision in the U.S. Constitution that assigns to Congress the power to declare war. Moreover, the number of nations that the United States has pledged to defend under NATO has grown from 11 to 28 over the years, as the alliance itself has grown from 12 member nations (including the United States) when NATO was created in 1949 to 29 today. Although NATO was ostensibly formed to counter the threat from the Soviet bloc of nations, some of the nations the United States is now pledged to defend under NATO were once part of that bloc, including Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic (as part of Czechoslovakia), Hungary, Poland, and Romania.
H R 5293: Authorization for Use of Military Force Vote Date: June 16, 2016 Vote: NAY Bad Vote. During consideration of the Defense Appropriations bill (H.R. 5293), Representative Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment to prohibit the use of funds in the bill for the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Act. Enacted in the wake of 9/11, the AUMF authorized the president to “use all necessary and appropriate force” against the terrorists involved, as well as those who aided or harbored them. It was used as the authorization for U.S. military entry into Afghanistan in 2001, and over the years has also been invoked on other occasions by the executive branch to justify U.S. military intervention abroad.
The House rejected Lee’s amendment on June 16, 2016 by a vote of 146 to 274 (Roll Call 330). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because presidents have been able to claim broad authority to go to war whenever or wherever they choose under the AUMF, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers never intended for one man to make this decision, and under the Constitution only Congress may “declare war.”
H R 4909: Use of Military Force Vote Date: May 18, 2016 Vote: NAY Bad Vote. During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 4909), Representative Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that was enacted in 2001 for the purpose of authorizing U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks. Since then, however, the AUMF has been invoked numerous times by the executive branch for U.S. military intervention not only in Afghanistan but elsewhere.
The House rejected Lee’s amendment on May 18, 2016 by a vote of 138 to 285 (Roll Call 210). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because presidents have been able to claim broad authority to go to war whenever or wherever they choose under the AUMF, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers never intended for one man to make this decision, and under the Constitution only Congress may “declare war.”
H RES 162: Calling on the President to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Vote Date: March 23, 2015 Vote: AYE Bad Vote. Ukraine Military Aid.
House Resolution 162, which calls on the president "to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity," allows President Obama to provide Ukraine with defensive weapons to defend against aggression from Russia.
The House adopted H. Res. 162 on March 23, 2015 by a vote of 348 to 48 (Roll Call 131). We have assigned pluses to the nays not only because foreign aid is unconstitutional but also because this bill would further interject the United States into a foreign conflict. Allowing the U.S. president to provide lethal arms to Ukraine in order to fight Russia is tantamount to waging a proxy war on Russia without the constitutionally required congressional declaration of war. The House, by giving such power to the president, is relinquishing one of its constitutional responsibilities.
H R 4870: On Agreeing to the Amendment 51 to H R 4870 Vote Date: June 19, 2014 Vote: NAY Bad Vote. Weapons to Syrian Rebels.
During consideration of the Defense Appropriations bill, Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) introduced an amendment that would have prohibited any funding in the bill from being used to provide weapons to Syrian rebels. Fortenberry noted on the House floor that "the rebel movement is a battleground of shifting alliances and bloody conflicts between groups that now include multinational terrorist organizations," that "sending our weapons into this chaotic war zone could inadvertently help these extremists," and that "it has already happened." He added: "The naive notion that we can deliver weapons to vetted, moderate opposition groups at war with other rebel militias gives no guarantee that our weaponry won't be seized or diverted."
The House rejected Fortenberry's amendment on June 19, 2014 by a vote of 167 to 244 (Roll Call 328). We have assigned pluses to the yeas because arming "moderate" rebels in a foreign country is tantamount to going to war, which would require a declaration of war by Congress. Also, the United States should follow the Founders' advice not to become involved in foreign quarrels
H R 4152: To provide for the costs of loan guarantees for Ukraine Vote Date: April 1, 2014 Vote: AYE Bad Vote. Ukraine Aid.
This bill (H.R. 4152), as amended by the Senate (see Senate vote below), would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine.
[ The Senate version of this legislation - offered in the form of a substitute amendment to the House version, H.R. 4152 - would provide $150 million for direct aid to Ukraine. It would also provide for loan guarantees (meaning that the U.S. taxpayers would be stuck holding the bag if the loans are not paid). And it would impose sanctions on Russian and ex-Ukrainian officials deemed responsible for the crisis in the Ukraine. ]
The House voted for this legislation on April 1, 2014 by a vote of 378 to 34 (Roll Call 149). We have assigned pluses to the nays because foreign aid is unconstitutional. The rationale for providing U.S. aid to Ukraine is that the country needs our assistance to resist Russian hegemony and build "democracy." Yet the oligarchs wielding power in Ukraine are hardly "democrats," and (because money is fungible) U.S. assistance could effectively be funneled to Russia in the form of Ukrainian energy and debt payments.
"The Patriarch"
I'm not the least bit concerned with your thinking on this or any other matter. Along with your silly little insignificant neg, you told me to "join the Democrats". Par for the course, from the likes of you. I won't be joining the Democrats or the Republicans today, tomorrow or any time in the future. The parties are nothing more than well dressed criminal gangs that should be outlawed and the gang leaders tried for conspiracy to ruin the nation and treason. Hope that clarifies things.
I've seen your "purity" act before pal. Look around- the US is going into the 18th year of war, and that doesn't count the illegal and immoral bombing of Kosovo.
I'll be helping Tulsi get her message out. I looked at Rand's pages, looks like he's busy campaigning for other republicans. Too busy to bother helping Tulsi, something I'd like to think Ron would have done before 2012. You can have the last word as I've much better things to do than argue with a fake purist.
If you want to campaign for a CFR Demoncrat who votes to destroy most of your liberty and votes for the wars she speaks against then be my guest, I will continue to pursue real liberty and peace without you.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
So just looked at Rand's page. He has a townhall with Freedomworks. You know the kind of group people here support. He has a post about getting out of NATO. Something Ron Paul people like. A post about Yemen and and an op-ed promoting Ron Paul's foreign policy. https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-b...to-return-to-a And it is worth noting those evil Republicans Rand is promoting are Andy Sanborn, one of Ron's earliest supporters in New Hampshire, and Eric Brakey, a Ron Paul guy running for Senate in Maine.
Yeah. so just looked at Tulsi's page. She does have foreign policy posts. She also has posts railing against corporations, looking for more regulations, and promoting green energy. Because that's what we need. More regulations and more subsidies. And someone who is anti-business. Oh yeah, she also has an anti-First Amendment screed about ending PAC money. Great. What a winner.
Last edited by Krugminator2; 09-18-2018 at 07:45 PM.
That's ONE HUNDRED PERCENT false, but that isn't the first time you've assumed something that you've made up, is it. Probably makes you feel good though.
Congratulations, Einstein.
You've completely missed the entire point of hydrogen fuel cells.
H2 fuel cells mean COMPLETE AND TOTAL ENERGY INDEPENDENCE. You understand those words, right?
COMPLETE AND TOTAL ENERGY INDEPENDENCE.
At no time have I ever advocated for corporate welfare for the hydrogen industry. In fact, the opposite. Who thinks the existing Oil and Gas industries need handouts? A bunch of idiot "republicans" sitting on their asses in Washington, District of Criminals. If they didn't think oil and gas need handouts they would repeal them. But the Jackass-In-Chief wants to give handouts to COAL ffs. Try paying attention and ditch the labels. I know it's hard.
You're asleep and mired in your misconceptions. But you're far from alone. You're a proud member of a gang of 300+ million.
If you think typing thousands and thousands of divisive posts on a somewhat obscure political internet forum is "pursuing real liberty and peace" you're delusional.
I'll continue to pursue an end to these illegal and immoral wars that have ruined the nation in any way possible.
Thank goodness for Tulsi Gabbard, she's picked up Ron Paul's old message. Too bad Rand is too busy trying to get more republicans into office.
I do what I can on and offline.
Helping Gabbard doesn't do that.
Thank goodness for hypocrites.
Rand has done more to actually end the wars than Gabbard ever will and if you think she won't work to get more Demoncrats into office or that they will end the wars you are truly dissociated from reality.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
Libertarians aren't for energy independence. It isn't a good goal anymore than iPhone independence or automoble independence or any other anti-trade idea. Secondly, I am quite certain you have advocated for government putting the thumbs on the scales of green energy. Gabbard certainly supports green welfare.
The people Rand has endorsed (Eric Brakey, Andy Sanborn, and Gary Johnson) are a helluva lot better on everything including foreign policy than Gabbard.
Was Ron Paul a Bernie Sanders supporter? Are these part of Ron's old message? http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Tulsi_Gabbard.htm
Supported the stimulus package
Supports the Export-Import Bank
Supports Obamacare
Wants to hike the minimum wage
Supports tax hikes on higher income earners
Supports wage discrimination laws
Has a 100% rating from a group that wants to increase senior entitlements, strongly opposes privatization
Voted to eliminate the work requirement for welfare recipients
I missed Ron's rants against PAC money.
Last edited by Krugminator2; 09-22-2018 at 01:46 PM.
To be fair, the Republicans are more anti-war than Democrats now.
Tulsi Gabbard is the only person on the left even saying anything, and she is voting incorrectly.
We have quite a few Republicans who are railing against the wars and also voting correctly.
Change my mind.
I have a friend who is a leftist and really into politics, I asked him a week or so ago who on the left was still championing the anti-war position. He said Cindy Sheehan.. Wow, what a dinosaur.. and he couldn't even name Tulsi Gabbard!! Why? Cause apparently I'm the only reason he even knows about her.
I still think it is beneficial for Tulsi Gabbard to be there and have a national stage to voice her views in a state that is going to be blue anyway.. If somebody in Hawaii wants to step up and run for her seat and voice her same views and actually vote that way too then they would be better, but at least somebody on the left is out there saying what needs to be said. But she is far from perfect. I don't thinks she is voting for the wars because she is a hypocrite, I think she is just trying to make sure the troops are taken care of because she cares about them. But it would be better if she set an example and voted against the wars.. and became less of a socialist.
Last edited by dannno; 09-22-2018 at 03:19 PM.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
She can be and maybe will be an ally to Rand in Congress down the road if we can start making a push to get out of these foreign quagmires. The same way Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney and a few others were sometimes allies with Ron.
Did they have massive disagreements on a whole host of issues, primarily economics? Of course, but they always seemed to come together on some of the important issues regarding foreign policy. In fact Kucinich still serves on the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity advisory board and has been apart of it since day 1.
There are next to zero politicians that are worthy of a citizens trust, especially at the cost of giving up personal liberty by force through investment into a "representative", but Gabbard is one of the better ones. Still, would never vote for her or 99.9% of the crap candidates we see all the time, but it is not unreasonable for Rand, Massie, or Amash, to align with her on foreign policy topics since she is already there and we are severely short on representatives and senators that advocate peace.
People on here used to praise Gabbard for her foreign policy positions.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-Tulsi-Gabbard
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...o-Saudi-Arabia
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ad-and-CIA-ops
Here's another:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-Tulsi-Gabbard
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Joe had her on again:
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Not to mention her support of an assault weapons ban and universal background checks.
Just awful.
“The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell
Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us