Tulsi Gabbard: I’m leaving the Democratic Party

[hollodero]

(10-19-2022, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I have two friends from San Diego that now live in Berlin.  I'm sincerely worried about them and they're considering coming back to CA for the winter.  I'm pulling for you, brother.

Thanks. I'll be fine. I'd say most people here see the situation as bad, but not quite as catastrophic as some outside observers make it out to be. For sure, heating is going to be expensive, many people like me will have to restrict themselves on many fronts, but most of our countries are still rich and can afford financial support for most people that are in danger of freezing. Not for all of them, apparently, there will be suffering and there's no making light of that. But there might be a positive within the negative as well, at least for us in the west. The long overdue switch to renewables is accelerated greatly, and the end of these Nordstream pipelines and our dependence on Russian gas actually is to be welcomed. I think in the long run we sure need to be concerned, but not overly afraid.

I understand your concern about your friends, but I'd be cautiously optimistic they will get by. Maybe not while in party mode, but still.

(10-19-2022, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Oh, I have no doubt that Trump injected personal reasons into that decision.  But the stated reason was due to corruption.

On that I have a different perception. All the witnesses in the impeachment hearing, namely ambassador Taylor, Gordon Sundland and a Mr. Holmes (maybe I forgot some), testified as much. That the already approved military aid was dependent on Ukraine announcing investigations into Biden. That was officially known (everyone was in the loop, said Sundland) and the one known condition, not a secret motive.

(10-19-2022, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It also does not negate my point about the left being more than concerned about Ukraine's fascism and corruption and now act like neither ever existed.

I can understand why questions about corruption take a backseat given the current situation. Why would anyone slam Selenski with Ukraine's corrupt past right now? I'd say there's a bigger fish to fry currently and going after Selenski about that right now would look quite weird.
Selenski himself might be corrupt or not, but right now that really is of no concern, I'm with the left on that one. And fascism was an issue right after the ill-advised Klitschko revolution, but that was just a certain period of time. Selenski and his staff are distinctly not fascists.

(10-19-2022, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I believe her stated reasons for meeting with Assad were to better understand the situation in Syria.  She is also a consistent opponent of US sponsored regime change, something I would think most posters here would be right on board with.  Finally, thinking of Assad as preferable to an ISIS regime is hardly a radical position.  They both suck, a lot, but one is demonstrably worse

It is not. Raising doubts whether Assad really ever used chemical agents, however, is dubious. At one point she seemed to support him staying in power. Well, imho a weird position.
I also have to say that I personally get very angry at folks that blame NATO, the west and Biden's warmongering for the war in Ukraine. Or imply that the US is running secret biolabs in Ukraine, things that Russia TV gladly picks up. Same thing goes for her claiming the restrictions of free speech in Russia are not so different from those in the US. She also called Adam Schiff a "domestic enemy" of the US, which just takes it a thousand steps too far for me, especially when adding that him and Brennan are a bigger threat than the Jan 6 insurrectionists. Oh and she claimed that the Mar-a-Lago search warrant has the hallmarks of dictatorship.

But hey, you apparently like her and I'm not inclined to convince you otherwise. It's just difficult to make this an objectifiable appreciation. Eg. I for one don't think Gabbard single-handedly sunk Harris' campaign that possibly started on the bottom of the ocean to begin with. I saw the clip of her takedown and don't really see the brilliance, but sure I don't need to.

(10-19-2022, 12:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, you're misunderstanding.  I'm comparing their policy positions.  AOC is, by her own definition, a radical.  She was part of a group that advocates the seizing of the means of production.  For the US this is an insanely radical position.

I guess one can see it that way. And yeah the proposal you linked is radical, not just by US standards, but I did not really see AOC coming up there? As far as I know she's not a member of the socialist party. She's affiliated with the democratic socialists, which might be radical enough for you, but I can't quite connect her to the pamphlet you linked.