Tulsi Gabbard’s presidential fantasy: “A remarkably bad launch”
Posted on January 15, 2019 by Ian Lind | 7 Comments
That was the comment of a friend in Hawaii following Gabbard’s announcement of a presidential run.
He pointed to just some of the reporting prompted by Gabbard’s move.
“Not a great start for Tulsi,” he observed. That seems a fair conclusion.
Rolling Stone: “Tulsi Gabbard’s 2020 Campaign May Be Over Before It Starts”
Roll Call: “Tulsi Gabbard ‘regrets’ past anti-gay activism as she prepares for presidential race”
CNN: “Tulsi Gabbard once touted working for anti-gay group that backed conversion therapy”
I suppose we’re supposed to feel warm and fuzzy now that another Hawaii figure is making a bid for the White House. But Gabbard is widely viewed warily, and with reason.
Gabbard’s new prominence will undoubtedly prompt more reporting on her background with and continuing ties to the cult known as the Science of Identity.
When Gabbard first ran for a seat in Congress, Hawaii voters who were aware of Gabbard’s past had to decide whether she had actually rejected her former beliefs or whether she was masking them in order to pursue an ambitious political agenda.
She says her views on LGBTQ issues have made a 180 degree turnaround.
But the reality isn’t clear. Gabbard’s aunt, in a letter published by the New Yorker Magazine in November 2017, made public her own concerns about Gabbard’s real political agenda, the status of her ties to the Science of Identity Foundation, and her praise of political strongmen here and abroad.
It has been noted that Gabbard’s Congressional staff and her campaign have included a number of individuals with ties to Science of Identity.
And, as others have reported, Gabbard’s campaign has gone to great lengths to insulate her from questions about her past and present ties to the group, stifling questions at campaign events and allegedly hounding reporters who have attempted to pursue the issue.
Christine Gralow, a Hawaii-based investigative reporter, is one of those who has done extensive digging into Gabbard’s past and present, and says she has suffered as a result.
Her reporting can be found at her website, “Meanwhile in Hawaii“. It is essential reading.
A piece published today in the Washington Monthly raises again the question of Gabbard’s cult background, and asks, “Can Democrats trust Tusi Gabbard?”
The answer is, well, questionable.
By Ian Lind
- - - - - - - - - - - -
This entry was posted in Campaigns, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.
8 RESPONSES TO “TULSI GABBARD’S PRESIDENTIAL FANTASY: “A REMARKABLY BAD LAUNCH””
Stanford Masui | January 15, 2019 at 11:39 am | Reply
Ian: Tulsi also has the issue of support from Hindu nationalists which likewise alienate most progressives, her only base of support, and it is only a sliver of that base which will be shared with Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders (if he runs). The Rolling Stone comment is probably accurate.
Tim | January 15, 2019 at 11:52 am | Reply
in face of questions from the darn gotcha media, Gabbard likely would follow the Trump model: ‘say anything and your base will believe it.
Fortunately, Gabbard has no base. thank god. wouldn’t surprise me at all if she championed herself as the voice of the #metoo movement and as a Rambo war hero at the same time. she really needs to get into acting, like Reagan.
Bill | January 15, 2019 at 6:11 pm | Reply
Ian, you are a grumpy old man that has forgotten your anti-establishment roots.
Lighten up brother. Tulsi is not the enemy. She is a breath of fresh air.
[i]Tim | January 16, 2019 at 1:13 pm | Reply
this is a breath of fresh air???? lmfao
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard in the early 2000s touted working for her father’s anti-gay organization, which mobilized to pass a measure against same-sex marriage in Hawaii and promoted controversial conversion therapy.
Gabbard, a Democrat from Hawaii, said Friday in an interview with CNN’s Van Jones that she will seek her party’s nomination for president in 2020. Her past views and activism in opposition to LGBT rights in the late 90s and early 2000s, which put her out of step with most of the Democratic Party at the time, have come under more intense scrutiny since her announcement.
Although Gabbard’s positions on LGBT rights have shifted dramatically in more recent years (she signed a 2013 amicus brief supporting Edith Windsor’s challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act), the extent of Gabbard’s past anti-gay activism has already drawn criticism from prominent Democrats and will likely be a major issue for her as she seeks the party’s nomination.
And before you make excuses for her, please keep in mind that politicians lie whenever they need to. that’s how they get elected. Gabbard will say ANYTHING to grasp at votes. this is no breath of ‘fresh air’.[/i]
Christine Gralow | January 15, 2019 at 6:33 pm | Reply
Thanks Ian. I was, in fact, targeted in many bizarre ways by people deeply involved with Gabbard and the Science of Identity sect, aka Butler followers. It was traumatic. I feel better now that the whole truth will likely come out. They’d have to track and target hundreds of journalists now to try to stop the truth from surfacing. The surveillance of me started after I asked good questions at a Gabbard town hall. I think I was the first one to start to really get to the bottom of the Science of Identity-connected money laundering charges in India. Can’t wait for that to get more deeply explored. Healthy, benign religious organizations don’t stalk journalists and critical constituents. Members of healthy, benign religious groups also don’t deny they’re even involved in the group. And responsible U.S. Reps don’t pay D.C. public relations fixers to try to personally discredit journalist.
Sprezz | January 16, 2019 at 8:14 am | Reply
To paraphrase Clint Eastwood: “Tulsi’s got to know her limitations.”
Zigzaguant | January 16, 2019 at 10:08 am | Reply
Like Will Rogers said to crowds that showed up for his performances, “Well, what shall I talk about? I ain’t got anything funny to say. All I know is what I read in the papers.”
And just what of operation is this presidential run?. Who are the people involved in it–the thinkers, planners, operatives, money people…?
[www.ilind.net]
Posted on January 15, 2019 by Ian Lind | 7 Comments
That was the comment of a friend in Hawaii following Gabbard’s announcement of a presidential run.
He pointed to just some of the reporting prompted by Gabbard’s move.
“Not a great start for Tulsi,” he observed. That seems a fair conclusion.
Rolling Stone: “Tulsi Gabbard’s 2020 Campaign May Be Over Before It Starts”
Roll Call: “Tulsi Gabbard ‘regrets’ past anti-gay activism as she prepares for presidential race”
CNN: “Tulsi Gabbard once touted working for anti-gay group that backed conversion therapy”
I suppose we’re supposed to feel warm and fuzzy now that another Hawaii figure is making a bid for the White House. But Gabbard is widely viewed warily, and with reason.
Gabbard’s new prominence will undoubtedly prompt more reporting on her background with and continuing ties to the cult known as the Science of Identity.
When Gabbard first ran for a seat in Congress, Hawaii voters who were aware of Gabbard’s past had to decide whether she had actually rejected her former beliefs or whether she was masking them in order to pursue an ambitious political agenda.
She says her views on LGBTQ issues have made a 180 degree turnaround.
But the reality isn’t clear. Gabbard’s aunt, in a letter published by the New Yorker Magazine in November 2017, made public her own concerns about Gabbard’s real political agenda, the status of her ties to the Science of Identity Foundation, and her praise of political strongmen here and abroad.
It has been noted that Gabbard’s Congressional staff and her campaign have included a number of individuals with ties to Science of Identity.
And, as others have reported, Gabbard’s campaign has gone to great lengths to insulate her from questions about her past and present ties to the group, stifling questions at campaign events and allegedly hounding reporters who have attempted to pursue the issue.
Christine Gralow, a Hawaii-based investigative reporter, is one of those who has done extensive digging into Gabbard’s past and present, and says she has suffered as a result.
Her reporting can be found at her website, “Meanwhile in Hawaii“. It is essential reading.
A piece published today in the Washington Monthly raises again the question of Gabbard’s cult background, and asks, “Can Democrats trust Tusi Gabbard?”
The answer is, well, questionable.
By Ian Lind
- - - - - - - - - - - -
This entry was posted in Campaigns, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.
8 RESPONSES TO “TULSI GABBARD’S PRESIDENTIAL FANTASY: “A REMARKABLY BAD LAUNCH””
Stanford Masui | January 15, 2019 at 11:39 am | Reply
Ian: Tulsi also has the issue of support from Hindu nationalists which likewise alienate most progressives, her only base of support, and it is only a sliver of that base which will be shared with Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders (if he runs). The Rolling Stone comment is probably accurate.
Tim | January 15, 2019 at 11:52 am | Reply
in face of questions from the darn gotcha media, Gabbard likely would follow the Trump model: ‘say anything and your base will believe it.
Fortunately, Gabbard has no base. thank god. wouldn’t surprise me at all if she championed herself as the voice of the #metoo movement and as a Rambo war hero at the same time. she really needs to get into acting, like Reagan.
Bill | January 15, 2019 at 6:11 pm | Reply
Ian, you are a grumpy old man that has forgotten your anti-establishment roots.
Lighten up brother. Tulsi is not the enemy. She is a breath of fresh air.
[i]Tim | January 16, 2019 at 1:13 pm | Reply
this is a breath of fresh air???? lmfao
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard in the early 2000s touted working for her father’s anti-gay organization, which mobilized to pass a measure against same-sex marriage in Hawaii and promoted controversial conversion therapy.
Gabbard, a Democrat from Hawaii, said Friday in an interview with CNN’s Van Jones that she will seek her party’s nomination for president in 2020. Her past views and activism in opposition to LGBT rights in the late 90s and early 2000s, which put her out of step with most of the Democratic Party at the time, have come under more intense scrutiny since her announcement.
Although Gabbard’s positions on LGBT rights have shifted dramatically in more recent years (she signed a 2013 amicus brief supporting Edith Windsor’s challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act), the extent of Gabbard’s past anti-gay activism has already drawn criticism from prominent Democrats and will likely be a major issue for her as she seeks the party’s nomination.
And before you make excuses for her, please keep in mind that politicians lie whenever they need to. that’s how they get elected. Gabbard will say ANYTHING to grasp at votes. this is no breath of ‘fresh air’.[/i]
Christine Gralow | January 15, 2019 at 6:33 pm | Reply
Thanks Ian. I was, in fact, targeted in many bizarre ways by people deeply involved with Gabbard and the Science of Identity sect, aka Butler followers. It was traumatic. I feel better now that the whole truth will likely come out. They’d have to track and target hundreds of journalists now to try to stop the truth from surfacing. The surveillance of me started after I asked good questions at a Gabbard town hall. I think I was the first one to start to really get to the bottom of the Science of Identity-connected money laundering charges in India. Can’t wait for that to get more deeply explored. Healthy, benign religious organizations don’t stalk journalists and critical constituents. Members of healthy, benign religious groups also don’t deny they’re even involved in the group. And responsible U.S. Reps don’t pay D.C. public relations fixers to try to personally discredit journalist.
Sprezz | January 16, 2019 at 8:14 am | Reply
To paraphrase Clint Eastwood: “Tulsi’s got to know her limitations.”
Zigzaguant | January 16, 2019 at 10:08 am | Reply
Like Will Rogers said to crowds that showed up for his performances, “Well, what shall I talk about? I ain’t got anything funny to say. All I know is what I read in the papers.”
And just what of operation is this presidential run?. Who are the people involved in it–the thinkers, planners, operatives, money people…?
[www.ilind.net]