These exchanges are pointless for the most part.

>You really cant see the difference between praising someone's
>style, but trashing their policies....and praising their
>actual policies? LOL cmon man.

That's the thing - Bannon wasn't praising Tulsi's policies either. What policy was he praising? Bannon disagrees with Tulsi's entire platform - what he liked was her "independent thinking" just as he likes AOC's "fire".

But that's not even the point. Multiple people here said that just the mere fact that Bannon praised Tulsi was a disqualifier. So, is it a disqualifier for AOC, too?

Of course not. Because that's a silly and petty thing to say.


>I am talking about her carefully worded, reluctant, vailed
>critque of Obama

>Okay. She voted for it. But she played the "I guess this is
>the best Obama can do" card and, to my knowledge, did not
>offer a better option.

She supports the Iran Deal. She blasted Trump for walking away from it. Lots of people thought the Deal could've been better or different - but the deal is the best deal we have (had) to preserve peace - and Tulsi voted for it. So you saying she was "shaming the deal" when the only thing she was shaming was Trump walking out of the deal is just inaccurate.

>https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status/649615636088365058?lang=en

lol this can't be life. This is what you meant by "praising Putin"? Putin was and is bombing ISIS in Syria. That's a simple fact bruh. This is not praise. She's pointing out the absolute hypocrisy in our policy in the Mid East. We are only authorized to be there to fight ISIS & Al-Qaeda (who are opposed to Assad) - yet we are actually *aiding* those groups in their efforts to topple Assad. They are proxies of Saudi Arabia. Iran and Russia are bombing ISIS in Syria. You may want to study up a bit. It's complex

>I just don't think you can be this aloha-all-is-love
>non-interventionist, AND join the right wing in demanding the
>term "radical Islam" is used. Or taking a bunch of money from
>the very industry you claim she is against.

Not sure what all that means. I support precisely because foreign policy is deeply important to me. My partner is a refugee from Baghdad and I've had many people close to my die from war. She is bravely standing up against the forces that have corrupted our foreign policy for decades. What's important to me is not some quasi-academic discussion on the term "radical islamist" - it's about actual policy that destabilizes entire regions and creates vacuums for extremist groups to exploit that results in the massive loss of life.

But this conversation is going nowhere fast. Let's just move on.


-->