Jump to content
The Education Forum

I told you Tulsi's the one!

Recommended Posts

By now, certainly not likely. Jim.

She's not the only cut defense candidate, there's Bernie, Warren, Yang and Harris. So she has to get another message out.  She's very pro Kurd, down on the Trump removal. That doesn't set her apart from anybody.  She  seems to attract ideologues, so she can suffer from association. It's tough because she's somewhat inward and private for a politician.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

What took you so long Kirk?  Been on vacation?

BTW, I did talk about Tulsi a long time ago.  I liked what she said about Syria.  Because I kind of figured out that the CIA was behind Al Nusra.

I did an article for garrison, the Zine, about this subject.  That is, how horrendous American intervention in the Middle East has become. In that article, I said its almost as if the USA is tilting the playing field in favor of the extremes.  That is, both in Israel and with the fundamentalists.  Syria is not a fundamentalist state, its a secular state.  Why would we want to see it turn into a fundamentalist state?  DId we not learn from what HRC did with Libya?

But this is what the neocons, like HRC, seemed to favor. To the point of falsifying evidence to blame Assad for a gas attack. (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/douma-syria-opcw-chemical-weapons-chlorine-gas-video-conspiracy-theory-russia-a8927116.html)

See, the more you play to the extremes, the less possibility you have for a gestalt settlement.  One that would include a separate state for Palestine.  By radicalizing the rest of the Middle East, it helps keep Likud in power.

And she is not a one issue candidate.  That is what the MSM wants you to think: https://www.tulsi2020.com/record


      I agree with your take on the two apparent false flag chemical attacks in Syria that were blamed on the Syrian Army, and used by Trump (and NATO) as a pretext to bomb Syrian government positions.  The detailed analyses of these two false flag attacks by MIT Emeritus Professor Theodore Postol were, unfortunately, blacklisted by the U.S. mainstream media.

      Two related questions for you and the forum.

1)   Do you believe that ISIS, itself, is a Sunni proxy militia funded and supported by the CIA/NATO/Saudi/Mossad coalition in Anbar Province and Syria?

2)   What accurate, reliable sources of information do we have about CIA ops in Syria during the past decade?   There is so much disinformazia out there that it's difficult to parse reality from the ubiquitous propaganda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Sandy - I take it you can afford better than the Bronze Plan level?



Silver plans are subsidized and the subsidy amount is designed to make Silver plans affordable to everybody, regardless of income. The lower your income, the the greater the subsidy will be, and therefore the lower your share of the premium will be... all the way down to zero. (In which case you will be put on Medicaid.) So yes, by design we can afford a Silver Plan.

There are no subsidies at all for Bronze plans. So any low-income person who signs up for one is getting a really awful deal. For a little higher premium he could be enjoying a much better Silver plan.




Even Michael Moore mentions it as a sore point of the Democratic Party in his presentation.


Michael Moore complains because we didn't get a single payer system like most developed countries have. Most knowledgeable Democrats (including myself) agree that a single payer system is the way to go and that the current system is stupid. But to say it is Obama's fault that we didn't get the ideal system makes no sense. Because, first, Congress didn't have the votes to pass single payer, and 2) the ACA that was passed is far better than not passing any plan at all. As stupid as it is, it can always be improved upon by future Democratic presidents.


Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Moore complains because we didn't get a single payer system like most developed countries have.

I complain likewise.  In our lifetime, we will not see an improvement of the ACA by a Democratic admin.  Trump's best riposte was to cancel the penalty for not affording a plan in the 2018 tax year.

Affordability depends on income, regardless of our needs in spending that income on things we cannot afford to lose or neglect.  So an "affordable" plan was mooted in the case of many Americans, myself included.  My net income is entirely expended on pre-existing necessities, and has been for years.  It is a choice of healthcare or insupportable loss, followed by lawsuits and bankruptcy.

We are too large and too ill-paid a country to go without single payer healthcare.  To say otherwise is to say that every taxpayer is expendable.

I'm going to set up a gofundme.com page.  Perhaps supporters of the ACA will care to donate.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/28/2019 at 12:01 PM, Kirk Gallaway said:

With Gabbard's  candidacy you can see how the one- issue- MIC conspiracy crowd rates in the greater scheme, about 1%

That 1% is not a reflection of how many people like Tulsi's ideas, it is much more a reflection of how our media controls who is allowed to proceed to the presidency. Most people didn't know who she was until Hilary disgraced herself with the Russian stuff. Tulsi is not a favored choice by the DNC which controls the party.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

With the power of the MSM, the Neocon cabal that controls Washington and the press, plus the really bizarre way the DNC controls the primaries, its a miracle she  is  still around.


      Wouldn't you agree that Rupert Murdoch's U.S. media empire (Fox News, WSJ, NY Post, Washington Times, et.al.) has always been a major propaganda mouthpiece for the Neocon/Wolfowitz agenda-- since 9/11?

     I'll never forget watching Bill O'Reilly ridicule Gary Hart on Fox News during Operation Shock & Awe in March of 2003.  The jingoistic Bush-Cheney war drums were beating loudly that night, and Gary Hart was being ridiculed by O'Reilly for arguing that our invasion of Iraq could destabilize the Persian Gulf and lead to a costly, protracted U.S. occupation of Iraq.

    Meanwhile, Rumsfeld and his chief deputy Paul Wolfowitz were insisting that we could overthrow Saddam Hussein and liberate Iraq quickly and cheaply.

    But something very odd is happening right before our eyes this week-- a remarkable sleight of hand by Trump's Minister of Propaganda.

    The wily old Neocon war monger, Sir Rupert Murdoch, is suddenly promoting Tulsi Gabbard to re-label the Wolfowitz/Bush Doctrine the "Clinton Doctrine," and to blame the Democrats for Bush & Cheney's disastrous Neocon wars in the Middle East!

    How did Murdoch suddenly become such a champion of ending our Neocon wars-- including Operation Timber Sycamore?

   And how has Murdoch succeeded in using Tulsi Gabbard to undermine opposition to Donald Trump, Sheldon Adelson's "Neocon mule?"

   Let's not forget that Donald Trump withdrew from the Iranian nuclear disarmament deal and also bombed Syrian government positions TWICE in response to false flag chemical attacks that were blamed on the Assad regime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎10‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 8:44 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks Anthony.

But, you can wager that the MSM will now go after her as a Conspiracy freak.


No they won't Jim because then they would have to acknowledge Douglass' book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Kathy Beckett changed the title to I told you Tulsi's the one!

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now

  • Create New...