If Taibbi wants to see a crackdown on simple-minded epithets, it seems to me that calling the anti-Assad forces "terrorists" (as Gabbard did) is at least as good a target as calling the anti-anti-Assad politicians "Russian dupes."
By the way, I think you misread Taibbi's "her ideas fit perfectly in the intellectual mainstream": "her" refers to HRC, not to Gabbard. He's not praising Gabbard for having mainstream views, so why are the Democrats picking on her, he's shaking his head at how Clinton's supposedly laughable, hysterical talk about Russia is all too "mainstream." (Or maybe you were aware of that, and it's me who's misreading you.)
I admit Gabbard hasn't made her case or been properly vetted. It's time we do that. The establishment media can't ignore her any longer. I'd love to know more about her and Modi, the cult she grew up in, her current beliefs. She's certainly earned at least half an hour on Sixty Minutes, assuming CBS can find time to ask legit questions and not thrice-removed pearl clutching interrobanged speeches over improper manipulation of our manipulations in Ukraine.
I have NOT seen a smoking gun. Everytime she's pronounced guilty, I look closer and see instead very carefully chosen words that others then misrepresent (Israel sure as hell doesn't see her as a friend). And the other statements that rankle fall under the heading of 'politics.' She clearly understands the importance of talking with your enemies but her embraces include no Frankenesque touching or warm hugs. She would make an excellent Norwegian, imho.
I see great potential in Gabbard. IF she survived her cult upbringing, she's potentially saner than most of us (so many examples of great leaders coming out of unlikely circumstances). IF she talks with Modi because someone should, well, I'm not sure what a Congresswoman can give India that they don't already have and I don't know why only moderates get to be friendly with bad foreign leaders.
I'd like to know more about her but either the present media lacks investigative skills (other than transcribing leaks) or Gabbard is a world-class paranoid recluse because the information about her is incomplete and the gaps have been filled in with speculation.
She could be another John Edwards. If so, I'd rather find out now rather than halfway through the primaries. I don't think she's a threat to Bernie. She is a good asset for his camp and, assuming she vets well, belongs in his cabinet (Secy of Defense sounds good).
I just want to know more and the best way to learn would be for major media to give her a platform. Question her, analyze her responses, do follow up investigative reporting as necessary.
I’ll keep it real fucking simple: having over a dozen candidates was fine last summer but the primaries start in less than 3 months. We’ve already had 5 Democratic debates, and I’m tired of seeing the debate stage so jam packed it looks like A Chorus Line with podiums. We all know one of the top half dozen candidates will be the nominee, not Gabbard or Steyer or Yang.
Also, going on Fox is disqualifying, full stop. If you’re not bright enough to have figured out their game by now, you’re not bright enough to be president; if you have figured out their game and go on anyway, your motives are suspect.
Tulsi and Williamson are hot AF and if they appeared at every debate, maybe I’d pay attention. I like their messages — national security is fucked up and air headed positivity, respectively.
But while Tulsa’s the best on foreign policy, she still falls far short. And she’s wrong — in actions, not in website campaign BS — so the disrespecting and stuff, well, I have no problem.
I read one of Taibbi’s last books, on the bifurcated justice system, and it was good. But, Bernie broke him. The book I read, like Griftopia before it, took on the ground and fact checking. Where has that gone?
Now, I get that he used Gabbard as an excuse to go after the mainstream of the Dem party, but you’d think he could get the facts straight. The New York Times, for example, corrected their reporting on Clinton's remarks, you’d imagine a journalist read that.
Like I said, I get that Gabbard/Russia is just an excuse to once gain fuck that chicken of “Dems are so anti-Russia,” but get the reporting right.
I'd like to say she has no chance, but I said that about a certain Canard a l'Orange in 2016 and look what happened.
And if anything what Taibbi wrote confirms him and his ilk as a certain kind of quasi-Democrat and the real estate Bill and (especially) Hillary Clinton occupy in their heads, over the last thirty or so years.
Somewhat off-topic, but has anyone caught this clip of the short-fingered vulgarian explaining, with a lack of self-awareness so complete as to rival the vacuum of interstellar space, why Ambassador Yovanovich was unfit for duty? The pained looks on the Blonde and Two Boobs are something to behold.
Being a pagan and therefore (according to Xtians) a Satanist, I got ahold of the Red Guy and he says no, go ahead and call McConnell whatever because He's got a special place for him when he gets to Hell.
"Joe Rogan independents" Ugh. By which he means a sleaze ball grab bag of Gamergaters, white supremacist Randians, Jordan Peterson fanboys, and nerds who think that Elon Musk is the second coming of Steve Jobs.
If Taibbi wants to see a crackdown on simple-minded epithets, it seems to me that calling the anti-Assad forces "terrorists" (as Gabbard did) is at least as good a target as calling the anti-anti-Assad politicians "Russian dupes."
By the way, I think you misread Taibbi's "her ideas fit perfectly in the intellectual mainstream": "her" refers to HRC, not to Gabbard. He's not praising Gabbard for having mainstream views, so why are the Democrats picking on her, he's shaking his head at how Clinton's supposedly laughable, hysterical talk about Russia is all too "mainstream." (Or maybe you were aware of that, and it's me who's misreading you.)
I admit Gabbard hasn't made her case or been properly vetted. It's time we do that. The establishment media can't ignore her any longer. I'd love to know more about her and Modi, the cult she grew up in, her current beliefs. She's certainly earned at least half an hour on Sixty Minutes, assuming CBS can find time to ask legit questions and not thrice-removed pearl clutching interrobanged speeches over improper manipulation of our manipulations in Ukraine.
I have NOT seen a smoking gun. Everytime she's pronounced guilty, I look closer and see instead very carefully chosen words that others then misrepresent (Israel sure as hell doesn't see her as a friend). And the other statements that rankle fall under the heading of 'politics.' She clearly understands the importance of talking with your enemies but her embraces include no Frankenesque touching or warm hugs. She would make an excellent Norwegian, imho.
I see great potential in Gabbard. IF she survived her cult upbringing, she's potentially saner than most of us (so many examples of great leaders coming out of unlikely circumstances). IF she talks with Modi because someone should, well, I'm not sure what a Congresswoman can give India that they don't already have and I don't know why only moderates get to be friendly with bad foreign leaders.
I'd like to know more about her but either the present media lacks investigative skills (other than transcribing leaks) or Gabbard is a world-class paranoid recluse because the information about her is incomplete and the gaps have been filled in with speculation.
She could be another John Edwards. If so, I'd rather find out now rather than halfway through the primaries. I don't think she's a threat to Bernie. She is a good asset for his camp and, assuming she vets well, belongs in his cabinet (Secy of Defense sounds good).
I just want to know more and the best way to learn would be for major media to give her a platform. Question her, analyze her responses, do follow up investigative reporting as necessary.
I’ll keep it real fucking simple: having over a dozen candidates was fine last summer but the primaries start in less than 3 months. We’ve already had 5 Democratic debates, and I’m tired of seeing the debate stage so jam packed it looks like A Chorus Line with podiums. We all know one of the top half dozen candidates will be the nominee, not Gabbard or Steyer or Yang.
Also, going on Fox is disqualifying, full stop. If you’re not bright enough to have figured out their game by now, you’re not bright enough to be president; if you have figured out their game and go on anyway, your motives are suspect.
Tulsi and Williamson are hot AF and if they appeared at every debate, maybe I’d pay attention. I like their messages — national security is fucked up and air headed positivity, respectively.
But while Tulsa’s the best on foreign policy, she still falls far short. And she’s wrong — in actions, not in website campaign BS — so the disrespecting and stuff, well, I have no problem.
Posting videos of yourself working out is creepy as fuck, unless you’re pulling a tugboat across a harbor with your teeth.
I read one of Taibbi’s last books, on the bifurcated justice system, and it was good. But, Bernie broke him. The book I read, like Griftopia before it, took on the ground and fact checking. Where has that gone?
Now, I get that he used Gabbard as an excuse to go after the mainstream of the Dem party, but you’d think he could get the facts straight. The New York Times, for example, corrected their reporting on Clinton's remarks, you’d imagine a journalist read that.
Like I said, I get that Gabbard/Russia is just an excuse to once gain fuck that chicken of “Dems are so anti-Russia,” but get the reporting right.
I'd like to say she has no chance, but I said that about a certain Canard a l'Orange in 2016 and look what happened.
And if anything what Taibbi wrote confirms him and his ilk as a certain kind of quasi-Democrat and the real estate Bill and (especially) Hillary Clinton occupy in their heads, over the last thirty or so years.
Where have you gone Joseph Lieberman? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you...
Somewhat off-topic, but has anyone caught this clip of the short-fingered vulgarian explaining, with a lack of self-awareness so complete as to rival the vacuum of interstellar space, why Ambassador Yovanovich was unfit for duty? The pained looks on the Blonde and Two Boobs are something to behold.
https://twitter.com/TrueFactsStated/status/1197881751294631937
Being a pagan and therefore (according to Xtians) a Satanist, I got ahold of the Red Guy and he says no, go ahead and call McConnell whatever because He's got a special place for him when he gets to Hell.
Lovely. Thanks especially for Mike Taibbi and clarification of what kind of privilege Matt is a child of.
Hear hear!
"Joe Rogan independents" Ugh. By which he means a sleaze ball grab bag of Gamergaters, white supremacist Randians, Jordan Peterson fanboys, and nerds who think that Elon Musk is the second coming of Steve Jobs.