Tucker Carlson explains Tulsi Gabbard's departure from the Democrat party
I found Tucker Carlson's 10-minute explanation of Tulsi Gabbard's decision to leave the Democrat party quite enlightening last night.
His review of her dramatic entrance to the national stage as a 31-year-old congresswoman from the nation's most liberal state was invaluable, particularly the ecstatic reception she got from the media once the elders of the party had decided that her combination of military background, sex, race, intelligence, and articulateness made her an instant star. The lesson in the way the media function as a claque for whatever the Democrat leadership wants — and is capable of turning on a dime — alone made the segment a classic.
But this was all background to his main point, which was that Gabbard committed the unpardonable sin of opposing the bipartisan consensus on an interventionist foreign policy. Her initial step was opposing U.S. support for the rebels in Syria (including ISIS) seeking the overthrow of the Assad regime. Carlson stated that this was when she noticed that there are a lot of Christians in Syria. As Tucker put it, this opposition "instantly" changed her from golden girl to pariah. From there, he went on to denounce the "war machine" and its powerful hold on both parties.
YouTube screen grab.
It's clear that Gabbard and Carlson are friends and that they agree on what one might fairly call a neo-isolationist or non-interventionist foreign policy as their primary focus on changing America. Certainly, the context of potential nuclear Armageddon over a long-running territorial dispute between Ukraine and Russia — far from a core national interest of the United States — makes this position appealing, even urgent. Its longer-term implications for the U.S. in Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East are less clear. Can we be completely indifferent and unwilling to act when the fate of Taiwan, Israel, or Latin America is at stake?
I infer from what Tulsi Gabbard gas said so far, and her launch of an internet show, that she is aiming at either a third party or an organization aimed at influencing U.S. foreign policy away from military intervention. With Tucker Carlson avidly supporting that, and with U.S. fears rising of nuclear confrontation on behalf of a corrupt state that has shut down its opposition, there may well be a future ahead for this movement.