Dan Herman

Hallelujah! I rejoice. The New York Times had the guts to tell: Tulsi Gabbard is an outright cultist. That white pants suit she wore in November’s debate proves it. Yes, yes, I know, the same NYT writer said three years ago that Hillary Clinton’s white pants suit showed she’s ready for glory, but let’s be honest. White pants suits have different meanings depending on drape, seam, and fabric.

OK, OK, the NYT also tells us that criticizing women candidates’ clothing is sexist. But since when is the paper of record not allowed to break the rules? Don’t try to make this some absurd lesson about journalistic hypocrisy. The NYT makes decisions for the good of the country. Just like telling us there were WMDs in Iraq.

Wait, OK, I hear you. You say Tulsi takes standard Democratic positions on almost every issue, from choice to guns. The one area where she stakes out a position to the fringy left is her opposition to regime change. You know, those noble American experiments that turned Iraq into chaos; empowered ISIS and Iran; created open slave markets in the capital of Libya; and did it all without loss of life except for 5,000 U.S. troops and several hundred thousand civilians. Look, if you’re against regime change, fine, but you’re only doing Putin’s bidding.

Yes, Putin. He’s grooming Tulsi for the presidency. We know because Hillary Clinton tweeted it. Oh, sure, she took it back two seconds later, saying she meant “Republicans.” Or on the other hand maybe she didn’t. “If the doll fits,” winks one of her surrogates.

Please, let’s be honest. Tulsi proved she’s Putin’s puppet when she met with Assad. OK, sure, she called him a “brutal dictator,” but what patriot would talk to a murderous tyrant? Certainly not anyone qualified for the presidency.

When a reporter asked Obama in 2008 whether he’d meet “without precondition … in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea,” he spat on the ground. Wait, that’s false. He said “I would.… The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment … is ridiculous.”

Whatever Obama said doesn’t exonerate Comrade Gabbard. I mean, she’s served four terms in the House, where she sits on the Foreign Affairs, Armed Services, and Homeland Security Committees. Clearly she’s there as a Russian agent; her security clearance is strictly farce.

That’s right, farce. No less an authority than Clint Watts of Hamilton 68 has proven that Russian bots are behind Tulsi’s candidacy. Yes, yes, I know: Hamilton 68 is a neocon creation that refuses to share its methodology and admits uncertainty that the bots it tracks are Russian. But look: MSNBC has Watts on regularly which obviously proves he’s right.

It’s a free country, Tulsi. Say what you want. We don’t have to listen. Not when all but one of the other candidates say you’re wrong. Those coups in Honduras and Bolivia, and that attempted one in Venezuela? Wins for democracy. Syrian intervention? Solely about human rights. Trump’s missile attacks on Damascus? That’s the one thing he’s gotten right.

Tulsi can cry all she wants about how our Syrian proxies were al-Qaeda head choppers, and how Assad is no threat to the U.S., and how two whistleblowers and multiple leaked documents show that OPCW’s “impartial” investigation of the Douma chemical attack was faked. Respectable liberal outlets are in agreement; they’re not going to report her Russian disinformation.

And did I mention that Tulsi’s a traitor to impeachment? Sure, she finally boarded the train reluctantly, but she’d already tweeted that impeachment would “tear our country apart.” Putin must have forgotten to remind her that he wants Americans to hate one another. At least he’s got Adam Schiff at his back.

Hey, Tulsi, big Aloha! Just FYI, BTW, you’re not running to be nominee of Putin’s Republican Party. You’re running to be nominee of the Democrat Party of G.W. Bush. You know, bottomless bipartisan defense budgets; endless bipartisan surveillance; ceaseless bipartisan CIA interventions; eternal bipartisan coups in the Global South; unwavering bipartisan persecution of Ms. Manning and Mr. Assange.

Your double-headed eagle bots don’t stand a chance.

Daniel Herman is a Central Washington University history professor. Left and Right is a column provided by CWU professors to represent a variety of political viewpoints.

Comments

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.