Tulsi Gabbard Wants You to Know Her Views of the Second Amendment Have Changed

By
Dan Zimmerman
-
146

 

As we see Democratic leaders in Washington continue to push more authoritarian-like policies, who are using law enforcement agencies, weaponizing them to go after political opponents, targeting law-abiding Americans as extremists and domestic terrorists for committing the offense of opposing the agenda of those in power, we realize that our right to bear arms is the deterrent that our Founders intended to push back against this threat of government tyranny. This abuse of power. …

President Biden likes to say that our Second Amendment is not absolute, pretending as though we don’t currently have tens of thousands of laws already on the books. In fact, there are more laws regulating this individual right than any other mentioned in the Constitution. But those laws, those existing laws on the books, frankly are not even being enforced and yet they want to place even more restrictions on us. 

— Tulsi Gabbard

 

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

146 COMMENTS

  1. Watched this video yesterday and have taken the wait and see approach with Tulsi. She, so far, seems to be genuinely honest in her approach and willing to adjust her beliefs when confronted with new information. The only way I see her being able to prove that she’s taken a more conservative outlook is doing something that costs her as there are many who believe she is a Trojan Horse.

      • She retired from congress in 2020, so talk is cheap. We’ll reserve judgement. My guess is that she’s positioning herself to be Trump’s VP, or maybe secretary of defense.

        I’ve heard that she attended the WEF indoctrination classes, so use caution.

        She has pleasantly surprised me with some of her recent endorsements, like pro-2A Tudor Dixon in MI.

    • Agreed, Texican. Let’s see how she goes from here. Even the great Magnus Ronaldus was a Democrat before his eyes were opened.

      • As was Donald Trump. THAT being said Gabbard wanted to ban AR’s a scant 2 years ago. Her “come to Jesus moment” came when the Hildebeast called her a “Russian asset” when she didn’t want another useless Asian war. I am way beyond skeptical. Have some conservative and Pro-gun props for more a few months & I’ll care…we gotta a Dim US Senator named Duckworth bragging about her military service who’s ANTI-2A & pro-baby butchery. Talk is cheap.

        • I can’t imagine it’s even possible to be a successful NYC real estate developer without being a (D) and greasing some palms, uh, donating to certain campaign funds.

        • Exactly. She doesn’t get to be my ‘hero’ just because she now says something that we’ve been saying our entire lives.

          Get to the back of the line, Tulsi.

        • @Gov. W J LE P
          Exactly how Trump worked the New Your System for decades. He has admitted so numerous times. He has often said to win the game you have to play the game.

        • @Darkman, if he hadn’t played their game he’d have been selling knock-off Rolexes in Times Square and we would have never heard of him.

          Also, you can refer to me as just @Gov. Just don’t refer to me as @gov.

        • She seems like a genuine person, however so often we see those without a basis in immovable truth waiver as the wind blows. She wanted to ban AR’s when she perceived it as the popular will, now that she’s running in a different circle her views have changed to align with who she’s speaking to. That’s dangerous even if the newfound views are more like mine, we saw this with Trump and the bump stock ban for example, or McCain casting the deciding vote to save Obamacare from his deathbed in spite of running to repeal it just 1 year prior. The ideal politician you want is someone (Ted or Daddy D for example) who you can go back and look at what they wrote in College, or their first campaigns and see that they were exactly the same person they are now.

      • “His (Reagans) eyes were opened” just long enough to study a new script… he certainly didn’t advance gun rights. Neither have the other actors-turned-politicians such as Trump or Ventura. It’s all a stage for them.

        • Reagan was FAR more than Trump or Ventura. If you read some of the stuff he wrote during his lifetime you would be amazed, particularly with the left portraying him as a brain dead actor working with a Chimp. The “Great Communicator” used that underestimation and crushed them.

      • Refresh my memory, was it Reagan or the Elder Bush who signed the executive order import ban that ended cheap foreign missurps coming in? It was Reagan that signed the FOPA with the Hughes amendment. With friends like these who needs enemas?

      • It is true that the “Great Eagle” Ronaldus Maximus was a Democrat. But remember, Dems back then often had views that would make Republicans of today look like Democrats.

    • “doing something that costs her”

      Tulsi called out Hillary Clinton while she was the Vice-Chair of the DNC and running for the Democrat nomination for president. The result was being completely ostracized from the Left which meant the media was against her. I’ll never forget the news media complaining about there not being any “women of color” in the running after Que Mala dropped out. Tulsi is Polynesian. She was an up and coming rock star in the dem party until she called out Hillary. Her political career was over at that point.

      • WEF young leader as was Dan Crenshaw who is already too friendly with gun control and globalism. She may walk away from that but there are plenty of other potential representatives that have fewer red flags.

    • That was a very well reasoned and well spoken video.
      I hate to say it, but I really like Tulsi Gabbard.

      • She has been speaking out against “the narrative” for quite some time so I’m hoping she is genuine…

    • she wne to SOLGW and shot with the owner. Didn’t get a ton of press but SOLGW put in on their social media. I want to believe she’s genuine but I’m paranoid.

    • I agree. Though she has formally left the Democrat Party, she still leans Left on a lot of issues, and that makes me suspicious.
      proof is in actions, not words.

  2. Russian agent!!!!!!!!
    Putins puppet!!!!!!!!

    She should just be working to grow the plantation and whip those negroes into line with the rest of us good Democrats.

    • fake dacian,

      I actually DO wish the real dacian was one-tenth as funny, satirical, or interesting as you. Unfortunately, that would require an actual brain, of which dacian the demented is completely bereft.

      OTOH, I STILL contend that jacking another poster’s nick to mock them is cheap. May I humbly suggest “dacian’s alter ego; who has at least two actual, functional brain cells”???

  3. No they haven’t. Anyone that believes that is a fool. She just want to stay in the game. That’s all.

  5. She didn’t change her mind, she wants to stay employed. What this should tell you is that she has no strong convictions one way or the other about guns. When she was a democrat, she ran on a platform that she thought appealed to democrat voters. Now the democrats have gone off the deep-end and she can’t follow them, so she’s jumped ship and is trying to run as a republican, which means she has to appeal to republican voters.

    It isn’t necessarily a bad thing. A politician who actually feels compelled to appease their constituents to stay in office can be held accountable. This is what representation in government is all about. But the sword cuts both ways. Again, she has revealed that she holds no personal guiding values on this subject. Watch her like a hawk.

  6. She is a liar, a hypocrite and a piece of garbage who would say anything to retain power. Like most politicians…….

    • Dude, she’s only 41. Sometimes beliefs are updated based on new information or looking at the old info thru a new lens. She also just left the Democrat party and currently holds no office. Give her a minute. Also, Ronald Reagan was a Democrat at one time.

      • here are the facts.
        she was in the military.
        when in the military you take an oath to support the constitution.
        yet, she is anti-second amendment.
        and pushed laws against the 2nd amendment.
        so broke her oath.

      • “Sometimes beliefs are updated based on new information or looking at the old info thru a new lens.”

        I voted for Obama. Enough said.

        • My sin was voting for Carter; my excuse is that I was an 18 year old college student at the time.

          How does that saying go? If you’re not a liberal when you’re young you don’t have a heart; if you’re not conservative after you’ve grown up, you don’t have a brain.

          As for Tulsi, let’s watch and listen, for a while.

        • I too voted for the Peanut farmer (once) AND I fell for the Clinton line of crap on his first run, learned my lesson as soon as I saw the lust for power look in Hidabeasts eyes at his first State of the Union… Voting for Obama is inexcuseable regardless of his feckless, RINO opponents…

        • Not sure what your comment means Prndll. I’m not Texican? You’re not Texican? Or what I said isn’t Texican? I don’t think Tulsi has ever identified as a liberal. I just think that she has had a road to Damascus moment or two and she’s still processing that. If I recall the Apostle Paul after his road to Damascus moment spent about 3 years reprogramming.

        • I voted for Carter also and would again in the same political climate. The problem is he was too clean to be president(which is the reason he won). The inflation was already fully entrenched and headed to the stratosphere(Whip Inflation Now was Ford’s idea).
          Carter did not go in to a sovereign nation to rescue embassy staff because he did not believe the kidnappings were state approved.
          He did the best he could with the shackles he had.
          We know so much more about the Muslim Jihads against the west than we knew then.
          Many of us want to be Kennedy Democrats – that is my belief. If you are looking for a political party to save you, we need to scrap the 2 parties we have and start over. The parties call the shots, it is 2 sides of the same coin. They leave us fighting over issues that do NOT matter to them, one supports the other is against it just to keep us at each others’ throats’.
          Never trust a professional politician.

        • rt66paul:
          I agree with most of what you say, but I part company with you on Kennedy. I voted for him at the time, but I would not do it again (if that were possible) knowing what I know about Kennedy now.
          As for scrapping the existing parties and starting over, I’ve thought that a sea-change political realignment is needed in this country for a very long time.

      • I’m “only” 41 too. I outgrew any socialist leanings when I got my first non-farm paycheck and tried to figure out who was skimming off the top.

        I like Tulsi as a centrist politician, but I’m not trusting her support on 2a. Kamala Harris would have been a republican if she lived in KY and Mitch McConnell would have been the one on his knees if he lived in California. Politics is a dirty business and I don’t believe a sane, rational and moral person holds office at more than a local level, and why would anyone want to?

        • Well said. No sane, rational, and moral person would do what it now takes to get elected beyond a local level.

        • I’m an optimist. In all the almost 600 elected politicians in The U.S. capitol there must be at least one honest politician. He or she will be a first termer and not have been corrupted yet by the demands of the central committees and their henchmen.

          Ms. Gabbard still needs to do more than go shoot an AR with a friend. Remember Jackazz Kerry posing with a shotgun on a supposed duck hunt? Too many “pro gun” pols have proven lacking when push came to shove see D. Trump and bump stocks. Got rave reviews at the NRA dog and pay show and the first time a tough decision came up he folded.

  7. Saying present laws are not being enforced (DUH!) and actually working to do something about it are two very different things and light years apart. I’d check first to see what she’s done for her home state or community.

    Oh, yeah- that’s Hawaii. Uh, er, well…

  8. Can’t believe anybody or anything they say.
    This world is effectively one long war of competing self-interests.

  9. I don’t trust anything she says especially regarding my 2A rights. This younger woman grew up during a time the American Communist Party has openly supported the Democrat Party to the point they openly admitted they’ve become a significant membership of the Democrat Party. She is a life-long Democrat and there’s no way she missed who all comprised the evil and deceptive political party she has belonged to, including Hawaii and elsewhere. We have known, because we have seen, the Democrat Party move further left and extremely deceptive since WWII, to include the use of EXTREME AND DEVASTATING false-flag operations in attempt achieve their totalitarian goals. After you put lipstick on a pig you’re still stuck with a pig. She may be a veteran and a moderate but I will not vote for her to use discretion regarding my Constitutional rights.

  10. She hasn’t renounced her past support for anti-second amendment voting record. So until I see proof, and hear her say she was wrong to support that, I don’t trust her. We had our retired because he won’t get reelected RION Fred Upton vote for every democrat gun control issue.

  11. I was a democrat until it was the murdering bitch v Trump. There’s no Democratic Party anymore. When the 2020 election was stolen, I determined that we are at war. The dems are communist traitors, traitor Joe is the traitor in charge. The whole gun control agenda is about pulling the dog’s teeth. I will proudly give my life fighting these mother fuckers, don’t reckon I’ll be the only one taking the dirt nap. My oath to defend the constitution didn’t end with my enlistment.

    • Keep in mind that when the left hears that the election was stolen, many of them are thinking about things like ballot stuffing and such that many have judged as nonsense. Very few people seem to understand that the biggest issue with the 2020 election is that it was illegally manipulated by judges, mayors, and others that had no authority.

      The issue centers around the fact that state legislators were bypassed. In some cases, with state legislature consent. THAT is what made the election ‘stolen’. THAT is why Trump says what he does.

      This truly needs to be understood by more people.

      • The steal was a multifaceted approach that we aren’t allowed to discuss while the commies are allowed to gloat over it.

        The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election
        https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

        See? It isn’t stealing. It’s saving!

        “…the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.”

        “They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time.”

        “They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation…”

        But it wasn’t rigged to favor the senile puppet who can barely mutter a coherent thought without his performance enhancing drugs. In other news, I have a bridge to sell you.

        • And lets not forget the Feds SITTING on the Hunter laptop for a month before the election which protected the “Big Guy” from losing key battleground states…which cost Trump the election.

  12. “Tulsi Gabbard Wants You to Know Her Views of the Second Amendment Have Changed”
    so what is she doing to prove it ?
    talk is cheap.
    actions speak louder than words.

    • Look at how Cornyn gets an A+ rating from the NSSF. And this was after the 🤡 played a key role in the last round of 2A restrictions.
      He got his marching orders from head RINO Mitch McConnell.

      In these times, words/ratings < zero.
      The weatherman are NOT telling everyone which way the wind is blowing.

      • That’s why those A+ ratings are meaningless. They might use that system just like the NRA does but for the general population, it means nothing.

      • The NSSF is also bullhorning support for things like “Fix NICS”. As if you can “fix” an unconstitutional process that, at its very core, assumes you’re guilty and requires you to prove innocence, and via a procedure controlled by someone else.

  13. I’m a simple man. I’ll always love Tulsi for the simple fact that she wiped the floor with Que Mala on the debate stage.

  14. Because the republicans have never used government agencies to go after political opponents. Yeah right.

  15. Did Gabbard migrate from far left Demon to moderate Republican? Who knows? She’s saying the right things, and I’d rather have her inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.

  17. I know this won’t be popular, but I don’t think we give politicians enough credit some times. Sure, 99% are narcissistic assholes with no convictions, other than saying/doing what is needed to get elected. But every once in a while, you get somebody with a brain. Eventually, they may just have an epiphany. For her, being betrayed by the democrats gave her a fresh perspective. I heard her on the Joe Rogan’s podcast recently, and she discussed just how bad the military industrial complex is amongst many other topics. I would urge you to go listen to it, and then make up your mind. I agree, trust comes with time and track record, but we too should have an open mind. Occasionally.

  19. Well Beto said he didn’t want to take Texan’s guns after he said that he did and then changed his mind again to say he wants to take them again.

    I don’t trust Tulsi. Joe Biden says he supports the Second Amendment too.

  21. Just remember she is one of Schwabs Young Global Leaders. But that being said I’d love to go surfing with her,she’s pretty good.

  22. For those of you demanding that she do something to prove it, she’s endorsed at least ten Republicans running, all of whom back the Second Amendment.

    Joe Kent
    Don Buldoc
    Kari Lake
    Darren Bailey
    JD Vance
    Tom Barrett
    Tudor Dixon
    Blake Masters
    Mike Lee
    John Gibbs

    • Add Kristi Noem to the list of repubs she is endorsing for reelection… I certainly hope she’s
      genuinely changed her stripes but I’m not yet ready to buy the one act play

    • she’s endorsed at least ten Republicans running,

      AND? Endorsing a few Republicans over a couple of weeks does NOT make up for YEARS of anti-gun rhetoric and endorsing Democrat candidates. All she’s done is ensure that she will not be readily accepted back into the folds of the Blue team. I’ve always liked Tulsi, seems like a sensible moderate Democrat on most issues but she will have to do a lot more than a few endorsements and a Podcast to gain my trust. IF Hildabeast had not started that “Russian Agent” bullshit would Tulsi be doing what she’s doing?

      • @MADDMAXX; Agree with you 100%. The P.O.S. liz cheney is doing the same thing endorsing democ_Rat candidates now that she’s ousted out of the GOP. As far as I’m concerned, it’s all cheap, worthless talk, an old tactic used by all swamp politicians. I will only start taking her serious when she shows us the proof, by taking actions and appealing all the gun control laws she helped pass and supported over her tenure. Until then, remember this and never forget, that when dealing with swamp politiciains, talk is cheap, and only actions will speak louder than words!

        • You do realize she’s not a congresswoman anymore so can’t repeal the legislation she previously supported, right? The candidates she’s supporting would do that. At the very least, they won’t vote for more gun-control.

    • @Cubbie

      “For those of you demanding that she do something to prove it, she’s endorsed at least ten Republicans running, all of whom back the Second Amendment.”

      Endorsing Republicans running doesn’t prove anything.

      She also dropped out of the race for president to endorse Joe Biden.

      She needs to do something more and consistently. She needs to demonstrate this is a true fundamental change and not just another moment in her historical variable (but always leaning anti-gun historically) stance on the 2A.

      Everything pro 2A I see from her in her twitter feed since she ‘changed’ and left the democrat party to become (her words) an “Independent Democrat but a Democrat none the less’ in October 2022 – are the same things she says in her videos.

      It seems like a script for twitter and the videos. Not saying that scripting for a video presentation is bad but to only say the same things in the video and on her personal twitter feed in public makes it seem as if its not ‘genuine’ but rather to create a narrative as there is nothing from her other than that same ‘script’ in any interview or in her ‘personal’ twitter or publicly else where.

      Her ‘script’ seems to be a mixture of things designed to hit the emotional and talking points to combine the two, designed to endear her to the pro-2A audience with a hint of humility in a ‘I was wrong about guns, I see now what you see, I’m one of you so you can trust me.” way – there seems to be a certain amount of creative planning that creates a sort of ‘packaged in plastic’ feel to her.

      She still has not renounced her anti-2A anti-gun stance for firearm and magazine bans, a position she held while in office and supported and even introduce a bill for such a ban on the MSR that she still refers to (on occasion) in talking points as ‘assault weapon’ without distancing this made up false term ‘assault weapon’ as being made up and false.

      So maybe she will renounce that stance, but picking up an MSR and showing videos of her shooting does not renounce that. She needs to come out and renounce that stance publicly, shes not in office now so can’t introduce bills so it would be unfair to expect her to do that. But it would be fair to ask her to publicly work with and drive politicians to introduce pro-gun pro-2A bills that do not ban or curtail or restrict or remove in respect to guns and the 2A. It would be fair to ask her to come out publicly and oppose the anti-gun groups and their false narratives and use of ‘creative data’ and expose how the democrats have used these false narratives to deceive. She could be the honest counter to that deceptive and disingenuous dumpster fire called ‘Shannon Watts’, I’m sure some people would like that, but its not necessary if she runs a true public stance pro-gun pro-2A course.

      Lots of things she could do to demonstrate a true change. But so far she sticks to a script and that’s not really demonstrating a true change.

      But the point is, in context with what you wrote, she needs to do more than endorse republicans running for office.

      If she is truly changed and is pro-gun pro 2A as she wants us to believe, she needs to do something more than basically reading from a script.

      • To add to my above:

        She needs to demonstrate that she has the moral fiber, the conviction, the integrity, the willingness to put herself on the line as a person, that a person has that backs up their claims factually to show that she is genuinely that person she claims to be for her pro-gun pro-2A claims and not just another talking head.

        This is something the democrats have failed to do, instead they rely on political rhetoric, and being an anarcho-tyranny like the U.K. and other countries.

        (note: anarcho-tyranny is a term (one of a few others) for the modern day form of feudal tyranny. For example, the U.K. and all European (and most all Asian) countries and governments are all modern day forms of feudal tyranny or in other words anarcho-tyranny countries and governments.

        Anarcho-tyranny is a concept, where the state is more interested in controlling citizens so they do not or can not oppose the ruling elite (tyranny) rather than controlling real criminals (causing anarchy). Laws are enforced selectively (for example, a felony theft is no longer prosecuted or police forces are prevented by the ruling elite in some way from being able to enforce the law against certain classes of people e.g. de-funding police), depending on what is perceived to be beneficial for the ruling elite (the democrat party in this case).

        In an anarcho-tyranny the ruling elite takes advantage of the citizens ’emotional reactions’ and liberalism and ignorance to drive a wave of popularity for ‘policies’ put forth by the ruling elite with such ‘policy’ usually relying on a facade of ‘facts’ which when exposed and examined are not really facts, or political rhetoric that is slanted to give an impression that isn’t true. For example, the key democrat false logic point that correlation=causation, e.g. “More law abiding people with gun carry permits means more murders.” (or similar) and the more recent false claim by Biden that he is responsible for the COLA adjustment to social security.

        The anarcho-tyranny ruling elite also relies on creating ‘divisions’ in society by racializing or polarizing issues so that another ‘society or political group’ is portrayed as the ‘enemy’ while the ruling elite work to undermine all rights and freedoms of the populace to seize control of them by laws they create and relegate them (eventually) to a ‘privilege status’ controlled by their government (the ruling elite) that is touted as rights and freedoms, and they downplay faith & spirituality & moral constraints in favor of their ‘laws’ to control the populace touted by the ruling class as for (basically) ‘security or safety’. The goal of these is to ‘train’ the populace that, overall, freedom and what the government says and provides are the same thing. The goal is that eventually the populace accepts it as inevitable and becomes comfortable with it and then its touted to be a ‘civilized democracy’ when in reality its a tyranny in which the populace has been deceived and controlled and conquered.)

        • Clarification for …

          “The goal is that eventually the populace accepts it as inevitable and becomes comfortable with it and then its touted to be a ‘civilized democracy’ when in reality its a tyranny in which the populace has been deceived and controlled and conquered.”

          This is the end stage goal of anacro-tyranny. The the U.K. and all European (and most all Asian) countries and governments are at this stage today. Their ruling elite were successful in conquering their populace. It varies from place to place, but for a small example, this the reason the U.K. loves having a monarch – because it was ‘trained’ into the populace to accept this is how it is, when in reality the people are still ‘subjects’ of the crown where the word ‘subject’ in their laws was changed to ‘citizen’ (to appease the populace – another form of control). This is different from the U.S. as our ‘citizen’ was a result of becoming ‘natural citizens’ of our country based upon gaining our independence from tyranny and establishing as a God given right such in our declaration and constitution and not as a result of word tricks in laws to appease the populace.

        • If an anacro-tyranny is not stopped and defeated (if allowed to continue long enough), eventually any remaining collective democracy/republic freedoms and rights are removed and the country devolves into totalitarianism.

        • An anacro-tyranny is what the Democrat party is striving to put in place today. There is already Joe Biden who seeks to ‘legislate law’ by executive order.

          This is usually the first step in establishing an anacro-tyranny, that a head leader of a country ruling elite begins to ‘dictate by their word’ (executive orders in this case for Biden) for some cause or condition they want to bring about to fulfill a plan that affects rights and freedoms, in other words, in this case, Biden has circumvented the law making body of the country in an attempt to put in place his agenda plan that affects rights and freedoms. If the democrats had control of both houses today, they already have the president, our 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 14th amendment rights would become controlled by them in short order through laws they enact. They have already said they wanted to and tried to do it but so far have not been overall successful (e.g. changes to section 230, red flag laws without due process enacted simply ’cause someone said so, trying to apply entry and seizure without warrant in the name of ‘public health and safety emergency, etc…) because they do not have control of both houses. This would leave the only recourse, eventually, as SCOTUS (if they even listened to SCOTUS, today they are trying to discredit SCOTUS and have even deliberately disobeyed the law of the land e.g. New York and the governors reaction to Bruin) and if they managed to stack SCOTUS with their own justices (if the democrats gain control of both houses, they will try to stack SCOTUS) eventually that would leave us with only one recourse which is armed force to overthrow a tyrannical government. So now you know why they are attacking the Second Amendment and seek to disarm the American populace.

  23. She’ll never hold public office again unless she puts an (R) by her name so she might as well go full redneck.

  24. In response to Tulsi Gabbard’s recent “change of heart” response, for all I care, she’s just a (2A) wolf in sheep’s clothing, and her words about “supporting” the 2nd Amendment means absolutely nothing to us real 2A supporters. IF SHE IS SERIOUS about supporting our 2A, aka our God given right, then I challege her to go ahead and LET HER ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS, starting with HER APPEALING the very same gun control bills that she helped/supported passing into law. Doing so will prove to us if she’s really committed in supporting the 2A. Until then, she’s just a wolf in sheep’s clothing, aka just another pro-gun-control politician with cheap words and promises trying to convince us patriots to vote for her!!!

    To everyone else out there, stay vigilant of the “wolfs in sheep’s clothing” swamp politicians trying to get our votes with false promises!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziM4y6iUVMo&t=612s

  25. Everyone has a right to change their mind. If she’s being truthful, she’s more supportive of gun rights than Hughes Amendment Reagan or Ban the imports Bush.

  26. TALK IS CHEAP, and never has this been more true than those who would trash Tulsi but have NO IDEA on what it is to live in Hawaii.

    As a former resident of Hawaii for many years I can honestly tell you that Hawaii is unlike any other state in the Union. It is in fact an experiment in globalized rule in the middle of the Pacific ocean.
    They have their own interpretations of federal law and they are NOT governed by THE PEOPLE. Hawaii is “governed” by the military – which is represented by all 4 branches – and the Asian Corporate structure, consisting primarily of Sony Corp, Toyota, JTB, and a myriad of other large Asian corporations – many from South Korea, China, and Indonesia. There is NO VOICE in government for the prols.
    You cannot fart without some branch of the military not noticing. You cannot wipe your ass without some corporate spy smelling your shit. In 2016 75% of the populace voted for Obama. Much of the signage in the city of Honolulu is in Japanese. In short, the military, Asian Corporations, and California radicals dominate the social and economic structure thus ensuring a Leftist/Communist agenda for much the populace. This is what Tulsi faces on a daily basis. For those who would criticize her behavior I ask that they try to survive as a common citizen for a week in “paradise”. You’ll know what it is to be live in a slave state.

  28. Leaving the Democratic Party – The Tulsi Gabbard Show > Published October 12, 2022 > https://rumble.com/v1nok8g-leaving-the-democratic-party-the-tulsi-gabbard-show.html

    (YouTube link if you prefer that > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4Z1x8Ou8VU)

    In the video she says she is an “Independent Democrat but a Democrat none the less” but she tells why she left the Democrat Party.

    The synopsis for the video

    “I believe in a government that is of the people, by the people, and for the people. Unfortunately, today’s Democratic Party does not. Instead, it stands for a government of, by, and for the powerful elite. If you can no longer stomach the direction that so-called woke Democratic Party ideologues are taking our country, I invite you to join me.”

    In the video she says (summarized, not transcribed directly from video but from her twitter feed at > https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1579788950696185859)…

    “I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, hostile to people of faith & spirituality, demonize the police & protect criminals at the expense of law-abiding Americans, believe in open borders, weaponize the national security state to go after political opponents, and above all, dragging us ever closer to nuclear war. …”

  29. Let’s start seeing her fight tooth and nail again Biden and certain states with regard to gun bans.

  30. Ask her if 2A covers the private individual possession of laser weaponry and armed robots. That should give us an idea if she’s just another “Hey, I’m posing with a carbine” types or not.

  31. then she should run for office again in her state and work to defend the second amendment.
    the proof is in actions, nor words.

  33. Almost all of our ideological giants in the conservative movement today started out as liberals. Then they started thinking.

    If we have ANY faith at all in our positions, we can’t be surprised when others start to see things our way. I spend much more time trying to figure out why those on the other side DON’T see things our way.

    I think this is a perfect example of “Trust but Verify.” She’s not in office now, but she has definitely been helping fellow conservatives on the campaign trail. She deserves time to show us what she’s planning to do. She’s not in a position to betray at this point, so there’s really little risk.

  34. My girl.
    I know the direction she comes from. I saw the writing on the wall with Bill Clinton (having never voted red). In 20 years she’ll be as anarcho-capitalist as myself.

    LP – time to go watch spike cohen ratio the ATF. While mocking the NRA/GOP marriage.

  35. I was leery of liberal figures “seeing the light” long before Kanye snuck into our camp and set off a J-bomb to get us all tarred as Antisemitic. Tulsi doesn’t seem nearly that stupid or malicious, but it doesn’t mean we don’t have to be careful about who we trust.

  36. She was always anti-gun; ask any Hawai’ian. This just seems like part and parcel of her public mea culpae preparatory to some political move. Wouldn’t be surprised if she’s the first to run for President as a Dem and as a Trunk.

  37. Tulsi may have bigger ambitions, possibly going to run as a democrat candidate again while waiting to see if the party totally self destruct and then be the the sensible centrist choice. As of now their list of 2024 possibilities are all far left progressives.

    Has she come out strongly stating that law abiding Americans have a right to own AR-15s without magazine limits?

    Is she for constitutional carry?

    Has she come out for abolishment of the ATF?

    Has she made any large contributions to Second Amendment Rights organizations and which ones has she been members of and for how long?

    Has the been on the attack of the Giffords, Bloomberg, etc for their radical anti gun agenda?

    Did she come out and hail Breun as a great landmark ruling?

    Was she supportive of President Trumps pick for the Supreme Court when they were announced?

    Has she come out blasting red flag laws as wrong and unconstitutional?

    Does she support arming qualified and willing teachers and staff in public schools?

    Is she against “gun free safe zones”?

    Has she come out against the gun bans instituted by Canada and New Zealand put in place by her old friends from the WEF?

    Endorsing some republican candidates does not mean she is suddenly pro Second Amendment as in “shall not infringe.”

    • No

      voted against a measure that would effectively broaden the right to carry a concealed weapon

      No

      No/none… Got a $400 donation from Hawaii Rifle Association but had F rating from NRA

      No

      No

      No

      No

      No

      No

      No

      Exactly

    • On Bruin, she had this to say… > https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1540280653890981890 > and she repeats that in the video linked in this article

      However, everything pro 2A I see from her in her twitter feed since she ‘changed’ and left the democrat party to become (her words) an “Independent Democrat but a Democrat none the less’ in October 2022 – are the same things she says in her videos.

      It seems like a script for twitter and the videos. Not saying that scripting for a video presentation is bad but to only say the same things in the video and on her personal twitter feed in public makes it seem as if its not ‘genuine’ but rather to create a narrative as there is nothing from her other than that same ‘script’ in any interview or in her ‘personal’ twitter or publicly else where.

      Her ‘script’ seems to be a mixture of things designed to hit the emotional and talking points to combine the two, designed to endear her to the pro-2A audience with a hint of humility in a ‘I was wrong about guns, I see now what you see, I’m one of you so you can trust me.” way – there seems to be a certain amount of creative planning that creates a sort of ‘packaged in plastic’ feel to her.

      She still has not renounced her anti-2A anti-gun stance on firearm and magazine bans, a position she held while in office and supported and even introduce a bill for such a ban on the MSR that she still refers to (on occasion) in talking points as ‘assault weapon’ without distancing this made up false term ‘assault weapon’ as being made up and false.

      So maybe she will renounce that stance, but picking up an MSR and showing videos of her shooting does not renounce that. She needs to come out and renounce that stance publicly, shes not in office now so can’t introduce bills so it would be unfair to expect her to do that but it would be fair to ask her to publicly work with and drive politicians to introduce pro-gun pro-2A bills that do not ban or curtail or restrict or remove in respect to guns and the 2A. Since she is no longer in office it would be fair to ask her to come out publicly and oppose the anti-gun groups and their false narratives and use of ‘creative data’. She could be the honest counter to that deceptive and disingenuous dumpster fire called ‘Shannon Watts’, I’m sure some people would like that, but its not necessary if she runs a true public stance pro-gun pro-2A course.

      If she is truly changed and is pro-gun pro 2A as she wants us to believe, she needs to do something more than basically reading from a script.

      However, to be fair, all that said, there is also sincerity in her reasoning to leave the democratic party and so far in her personal ‘public’ life from what I can find she seems to live that sincerity by distancing herself as far as possible from the democrat party and wanting nothing to do with them and the democrat party leadership and other democrats all basically hate her. I tend to think they hate her because she revealed their nature as only an insider could and that nature revealed verifies everything conservatives and republicans have been highlighting for years about the democratic party so its no longer just political rhetoric but now rather an exposure of an agenda based in fact exposed by an insider.

      • History abounds with opportunists looking for the best deal. I doubt that Tulsi’s endorsements have a profound effect on any race she’s engaged in (that’s ALL Brandon). I seem to recall a “plot” within the Democrat party to have Democrats “pretend” to be Republicans in red states to get elected. I don’t trust anyone who claims to just change their ENTIRE ideology just like that… She praised Biden and now she’s a MAGA whatever? Does the term Trojan Horse spark a memory or two?

        • @MADDMAXX; Again, you’re 100% right on that. That was part of an undercover investigation by Project Veritas, where some dirty democ-Rat politicians were caught on tape plotting to “implant” candidates as trojan horse Republicans.

          That’s why I keep saying to everyone, to stay villilant and NOT BELIEVE HER WORDS. Only actions can vindicate her from her past. She might not be in congress at the moment, but that doesnt stop her from pushing hard to try to undo the damage she did when she helped/supported gun-control bills that were eventually passed into law. Instead of just “supporting” Pro-2A GOP candidates, she should also be taking action by going and speak at those rallies and publicly call out the swamp politicians/former party allies, pushing them to write up, or support new Pro-2A bills to stop and abolish all the unconstitutional gun-control laws.

    • .40 cal- Amen. I hear that, and time will tell- she could do a lot to help the 2nd Amendment Constitutionalists. We shall see….

      • she could do a lot to help the 2nd Amendment Constitutionalists.

        I think she is much more interested in helping herself…

    • For all we know she may be endorsing Republicans for reasons other than 2A issues. I agree with .40 cal Booger completely. And to quote Debbie W., “I do not know who she is but talk is cheap and time will tell.”

  38. Oh and is she against universal background checks and believes law abiding citizens must be allowed to do private transactions for firearms and ammo between them?

  39. I ain’t buyin’ it. Nuthin but parrot talking points; no original thought, no photos of her AR collection in gunsafes at home, no heartfelt mea culpa for her revelation. Just a telltale fluttering in the trending breeze.

  40. Nope. Nu-uh. No way. Not buying it. It’s total B.S. She was clear the first time she made her thoughts public on guns. Don’t fall for it guys. This is a trap. She’s another lying, phony politician.

  42. Gun owners have been screwed over so many times by supposed “A-rated” politicians that we no longer believe anyone who claims to have changed opinions in the pro-RKBA direction.

    This is somewhat akin to the situation many young men find themselves in today: they’ve had so many women cheat on them, that they assume all women are going to cheat on them. As more than one young man has said to me “It’s no longer a situation where ‘she’s yours’ – it’s just your turn.” It’s a pretty sad state of affairs, but in listening to some young men, it’s a situation very similar to what gun owners face: you can’t trust anyone, and Ronald Reagan’s credo of “Trust, but verify” doesn’t quite cut it any more, so they don’t trust anyone.

    Well, obviously, this creates a level of cynicism that is utterly insurmountable for someone who isn’t a back-stabbing POS to try to convince gun owners that they’ve changed their position. It is the mathematical problem of “proving a negative” – ie, “prove you’re not ABC to me” where “not ABC” is proving an absence of some attribute. It’s basically impossible – on par with correctly answering the question “when did you stop beating your wife?”

    Politicians did this to themselves.

    What this country needs is the ability for voters to torture politicians and potential politicians on par with what was done during the Spanish Inquisition to arrive at the truth of their intent. The upside of this approach is that the ones who lied the longest time before confessing are easy to identify in public thereafter from their physical deformities.

    • What this country needs is the ability for voters to torture politicians and potential politicians on par with what was done during the Spanish Inquisition

      I’d settle for 30 minutes of waterboarding and hanging them by their ankles from a Blackhawk at 2500 feet.

      • Only if they let you cut the wire/rope/strap they are danging from while still at 2,500 feet, when that 30 minutes are up.

        😁

  43. I’ll believe it when I see her actively campaigning against anti-gun legislation and groups like GOA. Until that it is nothing but empty lip service.

  44. In 2019 – Tulsi Gabbard on Gun Control: “I support our Second Amendment rights.” (“Meet the Candidates” (NY Times.com) , Jun 18, 2019 )

    But in Congress, Gabbard co-sponsored bills that would ban ‘assault weapons’ (AKA a semi-auto MSR which is not an assault rifle by actual real world definition) and require background checks for all gun purchases (AKA Universal Background Checks), including closing what is by false logic known as the “gun-show loophole.”.

    She also sponsored H.R. 226: Keeping Guns from High Risk Individuals Act (AKA a red flag law – without due process included, instant take just because someone said so.).

    She called for reinstating a federal ban on military-style ‘assault weapons’ and high capacity magazines.

    In 2020 Gabbard stopped her campaign for president and endorsed ‘gun control’ Joe Biden. Thus signaling to her followers to throw their votes Joe’s way. She’s partially responsible for Joe getting elected, she should really apologize for that at a minimum.

    But also, she has been drawing flak from the far left (which twitter primarily is in users) and democrats for a long time prior to 2020, and she seems to have not been real hard core dedicated to the Democrat party trying to implement their anarcho-tyranny agenda (https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/tulsi-gabbard-wants-you-to-know-her-views-of-the-second-amendment-have-changed/#comment-6219169):

    There were some things anti-gun she did not join in…for example, in Feb 2018 Amber Tamblyn on Twitter accused..

    (https://twitter.com/ambertamblyn/status/968921383601401858?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

    “Out of the 160+ Dems calling for bans on assault weapons (HR5087), Rep. Tulsi Gabbard from Hawaii, who is running for re-election, did not.

    Seems like that $500 she took from the @NRA went a long way.”

    Well, its false that Gabbard got $500.00 from the NRA. But we already know how the left lies anyway.. But her Honolulu campaign did accept $400 from the Hawaii Rifle Association’s political arm in 2010 when she ran for the City Council. And that’s it.

    and another twitter user

    “pplswar
    @pplswar
    ·
    Feb 28, 2018
    Replying to
    @ambertamblyn

    @NRA
    and
    @SherryForHawaii
    Did you know Tulsi Gabbard voted with the GOP for H.R. 1181 to let mentally ill veterans buy guns?”

    (his tweet is further down the page from Tamblyn’s tweet)

    (his full post here > https://pplswar.medium.com/tulsi-gabbard-voted-to-let-mentally-ill-veterans-buy-guns-10ee33dddde6)

    But in his full post he writes: “…she votes with the oh-so-progressive House GOP, the National Rifle Association, and the mentally ill gun-nut lobby.”

    Well, that’s just not true.

    But then again, this is on twitter where the far left twits tweet and you know how ‘mentally unstable’ the far left twits appear to be.

    And if we look at > https://www.civilbeat.org/2018/03/tulsi-gabbards-record-on-gun-control-is-a-moving-target/ > we see her getting blasted by twitter far left and democrats.

    But suddenly in 2022 she ‘comes all the way out of the pro-gun pro-2A closet’ and sent twitter into a little bit of a frenzy over it > https://www.bizpacreview.com/2022/10/04/tulsi-gabbard-raises-eyebrows-with-piping-hot-firearm-video-sends-twitter-into-frenzy-1292413/

    But one twitter post outlined at that link immediately above makes an interesting observation – it says:

    “Genuine question here, not meant to be a gotcha: You’ve seemed to evolve on a lot of views in the past several years.

    As you tweet this video showing your firearms talent, do you believe today law-abiding citizens should generally be able to own weapons like this,”

    But on twitter Gabbard never replies to it. That represents her omission which I think also does not go towards showing a pro-gun pro-2A stance – not that she did not reply on twitter, but that she never clarifies that the rifle she had in the twitter post or anywhere else, that these rifles are not ‘assault rifles’ and are rifles in common use and its a second amendment right to have them.

    Now I’m not saying that Gabbard should reply to every idiot on twitter. But if she is going to claim to be pro-gun and pro 2A she is going to need to make some firm public commitments personally to be pro-gun and pro-2A, and then especially if she is planning to run for office during her campaign.

    No more of this ‘sensible’ stuff in relation to guns and the 2A you still hang on to Tulsi. Especially since you claim (in your words) to be “Independent Democrat but a Democrat none the less” and we have learned that every time a democrat politician and left uses the word ‘sensible’ in relation to guns and the 2A it only means one thing and that thing is “ban firearms and implement rights infringement’.

  45. I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt. She claims her views have changed, her actions should follow. People can and do change their minds when they seek out more complete information. Unions, nationalization of healthcare, education, and broadband internet, are just some topics that I have changed my mind on, among other non-political topics, and various moral dilemmas.

    Never stop learning and growing.

    • “People can and do change their minds when they seek out more complete information.”

      Tulsi has had all the complete information in front of her for her whole political career. She knows what the information is, she has referenced it herself many times. The Constitution as well has been there this whole time, its only 27 words in the Second Amendment so she can’t read and at least ask ‘what does that mean?” ?. Legal scholars had opined and written tons of stuff, she has had SCOTUS ruling in Heller and McDonald before Bruin which very clearly laid out its also an individual right not connected to service in a militia.

      So basically, you are saying she never had more complete information before her change? How more complete can it have possibly been?

      You think she only changed this year to pro-gun pro-2A because she suddenly got information?

      I think people are mistaking this for her changing her mind on everything. What she changed on is the democrat party, she changed her mind on her political alliances and she even says so with this …

      “I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, hostile to people of faith & spirituality, demonize the police & protect criminals at the expense of law-abiding Americans, believe in open borders, weaponize the national security state to go after political opponents, and above all, dragging us ever closer to nuclear war. …”

      But she also says she is an “Independent Democrat but a Democrat none the less”. She can’t go back to the democrat party (at least not for now) because they hate her and she doesn’t switch to conservative/republican so shes not fully committed that way either and she is still (her words) “…none the less a Democrat”. So basically she takes a middle of the road stance with “Independent Democrat” and not just “Independent” and is her own little democrat party looking for a home and has allied herself with conservatives and republicans and some on the pro-gun pro-2A side and says without really saying (so strongly implies) she is pro-gun and pro-2A and being allied with these it leads a ring of legitimacy to her for pro-gun and pro-2A. The question still remains, is it a legitimate change or simply bet hedging and maneuvering for votes from more sectors of the population if she runs for office because she appeals to something they want.

      • Liberals(and everyone else – on various subjects) have the complete info in a lot of cases as well. They just willingly refuse to believe it.

  46. Also, notice how she says this…

    “I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party that is now under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness, who divide us by racializing every issue & stoke anti-white racism, actively work to undermine our God-given freedoms, hostile to people of faith & spirituality, demonize the police & protect criminals at the expense of law-abiding Americans, believe in open borders, weaponize the national security state to go after political opponents, and above all, dragging us ever closer to nuclear war. …”

    Its every point the conservatives, republicans, and right has been making about the democrat party, the truth. Its fits too well though, its almost like its intentionally created to touch on those points so everyone gets a little piece of what they have been saying about the democrats. Shes been a part of what she claims her reasons are for leaving the democrat party this whole time, part of it doing it and making it happen, and yet suddenly she is only “realizing” this now?

    Maybe she does suddenly get it, I would like her to be genuine. But too many questions right now and Pro-gun Pro 2A ya gotta show us… we’ve been down this road before with politicians that say “I support and believe in the second amendment” then vote for an anti-gun bill that is clearly unconstitutional and does nothing but take take take more more more.

    • This story of Gabbard and the WEF…

      In 2015 the WEF put a picture of her and profile on their web site without her permission or knowledge, as one of their Young Global Leaders.

      How the WEF selects their Young Global Leaders (YGL) is by selection ‘message’. They sent her such a message telling her she had been selected as a YGL. She thanked them for the selection on twitter saying she was honored to be a YGL and posted a graphic about their membership. Pretty much a ‘politicians’ reply. People began to take this as her joining WEF and being a member. This thought is based in ignorance, that’s not how it works for WEF.

      The WEF doing this was pretty common for them. Then it started to be said that she was somehow a member of WEF or had joined WEF. Well, being selected as a YGL by WEF does not bestow WEF membership and you can’t ‘join’ to be a YGL.

      The WEF is known for doing as she claimed without permission or knowledge of the selected YGL person. One doesn’t join or apply to join the WEF YGL thing, that’s not how it works. The WEF selects a person AS a Young Global Leader to showcase what the WEF thinks as them being representative of contemporary leadership in society “and representing all stakeholders in society”. It is not a membership or joining. In other words, they simply select people and call them ‘Young Global Leaders’ and put their pic and profile on their web site to showcase them even without their permission. The YGL can then choose to participate or not with the WEF in WEF activity.

      So the tales of Gabbard ‘joining’ the WEF or being a member are false and there is no documented evidence showing she ever had anything to do with them for participation.

      So from 2015 when WEF touted her as a YGL by putting that on their web site there has been this thing where she is referred to as a former or current ‘member’ of WEF and that is unsubstantiated rumor and conspiracy theory – its factually not true.

      Those selected to be WEF’s ‘Young Global Leaders’ are not ‘members’, they are YGL’s that can choose to participate or not participate. They are people the WEF has selected to be called YGL because the WEF chooses to do that, one can not join to be a YGL. Corporations are members and join, not YGL’s.

      The limit on YGL is 800 people. After five years of participation they are considered ‘alumni’ YGL. There is no evidence that Gabbard ever participated.

      It wasn’t until March 2022 that the WEF took her picture and profile off their web site. Now that in its self has become a conspiracy theory. But the reason it was removed is because the limit for participation time had been reached and she had never participated and not a participant for if she had been a participant they would have kept her pic and profile on the web site. The WEF tries to get their YGL selects to participate either financially or in other areas, or both, after a while with no participation they are removed from the YGL showcasing. There is no evidence that Gabbard ever participated financially or other wise.

      This is what was on the WEF web site (from the wayback archive)> https://web.archive.org/web/20210519051638/https://www.younggloballeaders.org/community?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=Gabbard&x=0&y=0&status=&class_year=&sector=&region=#results

      Gabbard is not the only one this has happened to, its happened to others and is a common thing for the WEF to do.

      Gabbard has since denied many times she was a member of WEF, and that is true because selected YGL are not ‘members’. Even into 2022 > Tulsi Gabbard disavows WEF and CFR > https://netroots.substack.com/p/tulsi-gabbard-disavows-wef-and-cfr

      So make up your own mind I guess.

      • Additonally, Gabbard is not listed as a ‘Young Group Leader Forum’ member or alumni of YGL. This indicates that she never participated and was removed from the YGL lists. Those who never participated are removed from the list.

        https://www.younggloballeaders.org/community?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=Gabbard&x=17&y=13&status=&class_year=&sector=&region=#results

        YGL are referred to by WEF as ‘members’, this does not mean members of WEF. It means ‘members’ of what WEF calls the ‘Young Group Leader Forum’, not members of WEF. For example, if you are in a grocery store shopping for groceries it can be said that you are a ‘member’ of the grocery shopping populace, not that you are a ‘member’ of the grocery store. Its the same concept here, these are ‘members’ of the ”Young Group Leader Forum’ and not WEF members.

        • note: I screwed up, fat fingers and spell check and word press. I tried to edit to correct while typing and after but my browser spell check kept putting it in and word press didn’t keep the edits and would not let me change it for some reason after. Its actually called “Young Global Leaders’ and not “Young Group Leaders’.

          sorry bout that

  48. if you beleive that social security is a good policy

    you are on the left

    give everyone their OWN MONEY BACK

    LET THOSE WHO SAY THEY ARE THE GOOD PEOPLE and want to help others

    then go ahead and help them

    social fdr security is just another good sounding scheme that is paying people who never or their spouse never paid intot he system

  50. Tulsi is OK, but I will let her views age a little. What I want to address is Joe’s claim that the Second Amendment is not absolute. It seems that between Bruin and West Virginia v EPA that eventually all gun control except the steady handed variant will eventually fall including the NFA. This, if I am correct, will pretty much make the Second Amendment absolute and Joe wrong again!

Comments are closed.