Gabbard is an unusual sort of candidate in the Democratic primaries, because she takes positions on some foreign policy and domestic issues that seems to be left or antiwar positions. Cillizza comments on a couple of her more notable recent decisions:
1) Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a Democrat, announced she would not seek reelection, choosing instead to focus all her energies on her longshot 2020 presidential bid.But some of her positions look more rightwing than progressive. The political press seems to think of her as being on the left because she endorsed Bernie Sanders for President in 2016.
2) She skipped a Latino candidate forum in Iowa, spending that time instead on Sean Hannity's show on Fox News, running down House Democrats' impeachment inquiry. "I don't know what's going on in those closed doors," Gabbard told Hannity. "We as members of Congress do not have access to the information that's being shared. I think the American people deserve to know exactly what the facts are, what the evidence is being presented as this inquiry goes on." [my emphasis]
But other progressives worry that her "left" positions are more a-stopped-clock-is-right-twice-a-day thing. Or left, as the case may be here.
Branko Marcetic wrote about those issues from a left perspective two and a half years ago in Tulsi Gabbard Is Not Your Friend 05/26/2017 from Jacobin. ("Jacobin is socialist! Venezuela!! Banning hamburgers, aaii-eeeee!!!" Yeah, yeah, git over it! To use a phrase the Trumpists were putting on t-shirts a few days ago.)
Marcetic notes that Gabbard's left profile has a lot to do with her 2016 Bernie endorsement, and adds (Internal links in quotes not included in this post):
Gabbard is also a pretty reliably progressive voice in the House on a host of domestic issues. As far back as 2012, she was calling for restoring Glass-Steagall. She opposed any cuts to Medicare or Social Security under the Obama-backed Simpson-Bowles proposal. She believes Obamacare didn’t go far enough and supports universal health care. She’s against nuclear energy, pushed to curb the NSA’s bulk collection of data, and personally protested the Dakota Access Pipeline.But he also explains other matters, like how she has also sent ambiguous signals at best on LGBTQ issues.
And there is a question about whether her foreign policy positions that sound antiwar may be more reflective of an Old Right nationalist-isolationist outlook:
“In short, when it comes to the war against terrorists, I’m a hawk,” she told the Hawaii Tribune-Herald last year. “When it comes to counterproductive wars of regime change, I’m a dove.”He also uses her position on the Iran nuclear agreement to introduce the problem of her too-friendly attitude toward Islamophobia:
In other words, Gabbard would continue the Obama administration’s foreign policy, which itself was a continuation (and in some ways ramping up) of George W. Bush’s foreign policy. She would keep up the drone bombing of seven Muslim countries in the Middle East and North Africa — perhaps even expand it — while also relying more on special operations forces, which are already raiding, assassinating, and gathering intelligence in 70 percent of the world’s countries. ...
Not surprisingly, Gabbard has received plaudits from conservatives for her foreign policy stances. The National Review published a glowing profile of the congresswoman in April 2015, complete with a quote from American Enterprise Institute (AEI) president Arthur Brooks saying that he “like[s] her thinking a lot.” [my emphasis]
The Obama administration may have continued much of the Bush approach to the “war on terror,” but it at least recognized the value of diplomacy. Not Gabbard, however, who told Fox News she was “cynical” toward the pact, and agreed with host Greta van Susteren that it was akin to Neville Chamberlain’s infamous Munich agreement with Hitler in 1938.Her dogmatic attitude toward Islam is something she shares with another of her dubious political-ideological kinships:
But perhaps Gabbard’s closest friend on the world stage is India’s Hindu nationalist prime minister Narendra Modi. It’s an ideal match in many respects — not because the two happen to share a faith (Gabbard is the first Hindu American in Congress), but because they both harbor noxious attitudes toward Muslims. [my emphasis]Soumya Shankar reported on this aspect of Gabbard's ideology in Tulsi Gabbard is a Rising Progressive Star, Despite her Support for Hindu Nationalists The Intercept 01/05/2019:
[Gabbard's] progressive domestic politics are at odds with her support for authoritarians abroad, including Modi, Sisi, and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. As right-wing nationalism rises across the globe, it is beginning to be recognized as an existential threat to a world order rooted in liberal democratic values, and Gabbard, an Iraq War veteran, is now being pushed to choose sides. (Gabbard did not respond to The Intercept’s multiple requests for comment.)Yes, there are some serious questions about Tulsi Gabbard's political identity. "Despite her past support of Sanders and progressive policies, Gabbard has drawn favor from the right thanks to her criticism of Clinton, opposition to military involvement overseas and support for the Second Amendment," writes Igor Derysh. (Tulsi Gabbard announces she won't seek re-election to Congress amid speculation of a third-party bid Salon 10/25/2019)
Gabbard was embraced early on by pro-Modi elements of the Hindu-American diaspora in the U.S., who have donated generously to her campaigns. But as she flirts with the idea of running for president, she has publicly cut ties with those fervent supporters on at least one occasion, while continuing to court them in private. [my emphasis]
There is a lot of inside-baseball type speculation about Gabbard prepared for a third-party 2020 Presidential run, most notoriously from Hillary Clinton. But as of now, she's still a Democratic Presidential candidate.
No comments:
Post a Comment