Tulsi is committed to having REPUBLICANS in her administration.

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | General Discussion | Tulsi is committed to having REPUBLICANS in her administration.

Viewing 15 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #248274
      incognito
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 4,574

      OMFG.

      Independents were included in this question and of course Independents should be in her administration, but fucking ass corrupt evil REPUBLUCANS? I don’t think so!

      Sooooo disappointed in her right now. After everything those vile SOBs have done to this country the last 7 years? They stole a SCOTUS appointment from Obama. Massive tax cuts for the wealthy. ICE throwing babies in concentration camps. War after war after war. And so much more.

      Bipartisanship IS OVER! REPUBLICANS ended it. Hello!

      Here’s Kyle Kulinski’s episode with her video clip:

    • #248278
      Jan Boehmerman
      Moderator
      • Total Posts: 4,390

      I have NO problem with what Tulsi said.  Service to the country vs. the party or self-interests.  I’m all for that.

      I played the clip several times and I’ll be damned if I ever heard Tulsi say she was COMMITTED to having REPULICANS in her administration.

    • #248299
      Black LeBaron
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 84

      I don’t know if that’s what she’s saying.  At 0:22, she says “I would make that commitment” but goes on to say that the most important thing is the person’s abilities, etc.  Later, at 1:02, she is asked “to clarify” if she would commit to having a Republican in her administration.  This time, she does not commit, but says instead, “I will commit to having no partisan requirement for those I choose. . .”  I suspect that that’s her real view.

      I can see why one might object to this, and I understand Kyle’s points too, but there are decent Republicans who, if supervised, could be useful.  (A Republican Vice Pres would operate without direct supervision if the President died, and so is another story.)  I know nothing about him, but evidently Charlie Baker, Republican gov. of Mass. has 73% approval in that state.  He perhaps was not involved in any of the Washington Dem-Rep shows and might be useful.  And on the other hand, there are war-criminal Democrats who I wouldn’t want anywhere near power.  Given how anti-Tulsi most of the establishment Democrats have been, she would need to be very careful in hiring any Dems. or Reps. and it might not be wise to rule out any large groups yet.

      Great men are almost always bad men.
      --Lord Acton

      • #248328
        incognito
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 4,574

        There are no sane Republicans. Anyone in the Republican Party represents and supports abhorrent policies. They voted for TRUMP for crying out loud.

        And none of them have any business in a Democrat’s administration.  I don’t care who they are. None of them are to be trusted – ever – especially in a president’s administration. Good grief, the damage they could do is endless. It’s the same old problem of Democrats playing nice with those despicable people, when THEY would NEVER EVEN CONSIDER having a Liberal in their administration. It’s Obama redux. He played so “nice” with the Republicans he put SS and Medicare on the bargaining table to be used as a bargaining chip to balance the budget! And where did Obama’s playing nice with Republicans get him? A stolen SCOTUS appointment and very few lower court judge appointments. And so much more.

        No Republican should ever be in a Democrat’s administration or even considered for it. That’s just beyond ridiculous.

    • #248318
      bazukhov
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 2,996

      The only snags in her plans are getting a) nominated and b) elected in 2020.

      Not to mention the difficulty of sorting out the Republicans from the crazy/really stupid people who voted for and support the insane imbecile now heading the party.

       

      Tell me, great captain, how do the angels sleep when the devil leaves his porch light on? Tom Waites

    • #248342
      a little weird
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 708
    • #248348
      HassleCat
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 7,252

      There is nothing wrong with what she said. It is possible she might find a decent Republican somewhere in our solar system. Sure, odds are against it, but it could happen. So she says what pretty much all candidates say in response to such a question. “Never say never.” “Can’t categorically rule it out.” “It’s possible.” And so on. I don’t know why such questions even arise. A president may have one or two appointees from the other party, but nobody really expects them to do that.

    • #248361
      Snort McDork
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 5,008

      I wouldn’t touch a Repuke with a mile long pole, or 5280 feet multiplied by 5.

      I'm Snort McDork and I approved this message.

      "I like Birdy Num-Nums"

      If you come for Nina Turner, Your ish better be airtight like Tupperware" -Rashida Talib

    • #248364
      Satan
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 5,195

      I certainly like Tulsi better than Biden most of the time. But this particular kind of talk doesn’t make any more sense coming from her than it does from him.

      About the only Republican I would consider putting in any administration right now would be Ron Paul (he ain’t here in Hell, so I assume he’s still alive).

      And I would only hire him to run the “Federal Reserve” because I know that he knows it’s actually neither “Federal” nor “Reserve”.

      "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable". - John F. Kennedy

    • #248378
      Pam2
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 8,882

      She should work with whoever she wants to work with. Remember who called her a “Russian asset”- a Democrat. Same with the ones calling her an “Assad apologist” etc.

      There are Republicans against regime change wars and if she needs to work with them to make that happen, she should.

       

       

    • #248384
      djean111
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 6,439

      Most Democrats in any sort of power or whatever, seem to be fucking evil, too.  Just wear a different jersey.  I don’t even think about Gabbard, just support Bernie, but calling Republicans evil, sure – but it would be hard to find decent Democrats, too. And Hillary and the DNC have reviled Gabbard.   IMO a lot of them would work to undermine her.  They are quite good at that, undermining folks that are not Vichy Dems.

      Finding decent people to work with in Washington –  to paraphrase something from Supernatural (I think)  – like looking for a real needle in a stack of fake needles.

      America is not a country, it's just a business. (Brad Pitt, Killing Them Softly)

      Everything I post is just my opinion, and, honestly, I would love to be wrong.

      • #248394
        incognito
        Participant
        • Total Posts: 4,574

        @djean111

        “Finding decent people to work with in Washington –  to paraphrase something from Supernatural (I think)  – like looking for a real needle in a stack of fake needles.”

        And that’s why Bernie will have an Adminstration made up of Progressives and working class people. Working class people being *not politicians* like RoseAnn DeMoro.

        No DC non Progressive should be in Bernie’s administration. I can’t think of ONE Democrat or Republican that is worthy of a WH position when he is President. Of course that excludes AOC, Ro Khanna, Tlaib and other Progressives who are forced to be in the Dem party.

         

         

         

        • #248397
          djean111
          Participant
          • Total Posts: 6,439

          @incognito

          Bernie knows that to get things to go through Congress he has to work with everybody.  That is the cold hard truth.  And, IMO, Pelosi and Schumer will be against Bernie, too.   Bernie cannot pass everything with executive powers.    I feel sure, though, that Bernie will choose the best people for the jobs, not just have the people given to him by Wall Street, like Obama did.  We do not have years to wait, until enough progressives are elected.

          America is not a country, it's just a business. (Brad Pitt, Killing Them Softly)

          Everything I post is just my opinion, and, honestly, I would love to be wrong.

          • #248400
            incognito
            Participant
            • Total Posts: 4,574

            @@djean111

            Right, but working with them in Congress, which is an unfortunate necessity, is quite different from inviting them into your administration.

            I have a real problem with these Dems who continue to believe Republicans, of any flavor, are not bad actors. Every fucking one of them. After everything they have done to this country (with Vichy Dems willingly helping them), it’s unfathomable any Democrat or Progressive would even consider them for an appointment in their WH (or any Vichy Dem). Yet, here we are.  Biden, Buttigieg and now Tulsi are actually considering it.

            It’s really bizarre.

            Either we want change in this country or we don’t. You don’t get change by having the very people who destroyed this country in your administration. IMCPO

             

    • #248385
      yourout
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 470
    • #248398
      MizzGrizz
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 3,526

      If Tulsi can stand up to the Queen Herself and throw all the lies back in that bovine face,you can bet she wouldn’t be picking any Sarah Palin Republican types for her hypothetical administration.

      She could choose a guy like Ron Paul,and put him where he’d do some good—the State Department or the Pentagon.

    • #248405
      peacecorps
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 2,225

      I wouldn’t be surprised if Biden said the same. I would be surprised if Bernie said it. Finding a progressive, republican is highly unlikely.

      The Big Lie: "Make the lie big, Make it simple, Keep saying it, And eventually they will believe it." AH.

      "Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect." JG

      National issues (slavery/racism, income inequality, pandemics and pathetic health care, weak unions) are not solved with more states' rights. Global problems (climate change, migration, trade, war, pandemics) are not solved with more nationalism.

    • #248414
      game meat
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,525

      I don’t think this really means anything. She has some crossover appeal, and is just trying to appear fair and reasonable, so as not to alienate anyone.

      As far as what she would actually do, we’re unlikely to find that out anytime soon. And definitely not in 2020.

    • #248426
      ravensong
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 2,222

      I avoid all contact with Republicans to the best of my ability.  A person has to be morally and ethically challenged in order to make the choice to be a Republican.

      The Republican party has done little else but deliberately spread hate, cause all manner of harm to human beings, and deliberately destroy the environment since Eisenhower was POTUS.

      Ask yourself, what nice things have Republicans ever done for you?

      They haven’t done any nice things for me since Nixon created the EPA because of the intense political pressure on him to do so.  And now, Republicans have totally fucked up the EPA, too.  Why should I accommodate and appease people who choose to be members of the Republican party, which in reality is nothing short of the most destructive, morally bankrupt, largest hate group on the planet?

      Fascism is a choice

      “A lie doesn't become truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good, just because it's accepted by a majority.” ~ Booker T. Washington

      The truth is, there’s no such thing as being “anti-Fascist.” Either you are a decent human being with a conscience, or you are a fascist.
      ~ Unknown

    • #248427
      xyzse
      Participant
      • Total Posts: 1,789

      I am in agreement with what @gamemeat has said.

      I don’t see this as meaning anything.  As a person, we work with any one who is willing and capable to do a job regardless of what stripe.  As long as someone is setting up the agenda, I don’t care who they hire as long as they do their job well.

      Many would say “Obama” put “Republicans” in his cabinet and in positions of power, that didn’t turn out well.  Of course it didn’t turn out well.  Obama himself put them there for a reason, and was the one who provided the parameters and instructions on that job.  In the end, the reason it didn’t turn out well was because of Obama himself.  They were acting under his orders.

      As for elected positions, as well as positions whose terms have not expired, one does not get much of a choice on that.

      Back in ’08, as much as I disliked Hillary and Obama since they were the bottom of the barrel for me.  They were the ones I didn’t want, but still got, at that time I preferred Hillary to Obama since unlike him, she had enough people to fill her cabinet immediately and force it.  Obama never did.  His cabinet was not immediately filled, which is why Citigroup and others did it for him.

      The idea is, to find people suited for the job.  Some of these things are specialized.

      Why she would say such a thing?  Well, I think she was just telling the truth.  It doesn’t matter who the President is, they will end up with various people on their cabinet.  What matters is, if they do their jobs or not, given the parameters and instructions set.  Obama looks like a failure, because he governed as one.

Viewing 15 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.