The Republicans had no problems with her gender, her race, not her position. They voted for her almost unanimously. Not sure why you said the best defense is what she said aren’t illegal. Have you even heard why Republican senators voted for her?
Your best defense is, “She is free to speak on the point of view that you don’t like,” which is another way of saying, “The things she’s said aren’t illegal.” That, and, “If you don’t like her you’re a racist and sexist.” Absolutely pathetic, lazy, and stupid arguments.
Democrats had no problem with Hillary Clinton’s gender when she was overwhelmingly confirmed by them as Secretary of State. I assume you called anyone who criticized her sexist, right? How about anyone who criticized Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, also overwhelmingly confirmed by Demcocrats. So you are definitely a sexist, racist person if you were against her becoming a SCOTUS justice.
Hillary Clinton and Judge Jackson thank you for your support of them.
Nope. She got 52 out of 53 Republican votes. If you only listen to left wing media, you probably won’t figure out why the Republicans don’t have issues with her gender and race.
What does the number of votes have to do with her support of a ruthless dictator like Bashar Assad? All that proves is that Republicans are fine with her supporting a horrible ruthless dictator that tortured and murdered countless people. You can make this about her race and gender all you like, but all you’re doing is ignoring the quotes of her saying literal things and support of both him and Russia in that article. Not that I’m surprised that you’re ignoring her actual words that she said. It makes it much easier to defend her if you ignore them. Not honest, but easier.
That stupid claim started with Hillary making the accusation without providing evidence.
Lol no it’s not, she’s did that to herself basically believing russian propaganda and aligning with it.
She gave her honest opinion.
No she spews out russian propaganda…
She is free to speak on the point of view that you don’t like.
And everyone else is free to criticize her, even if that’s a point of view you don’t like.
If your best defense of her is, “The things she’s said aren’t illegal,” that’s not exactly a high bar.
The Republicans had no problems with her gender, her race, not her position. They voted for her almost unanimously. Not sure why you said the best defense is what she said aren’t illegal. Have you even heard why Republican senators voted for her?
Your best defense is, “She is free to speak on the point of view that you don’t like,” which is another way of saying, “The things she’s said aren’t illegal.” That, and, “If you don’t like her you’re a racist and sexist.” Absolutely pathetic, lazy, and stupid arguments.
Nope that was not what I meant. I like her positions and what she said.
Democrats had no problem with Hillary Clinton’s gender when she was overwhelmingly confirmed by them as Secretary of State. I assume you called anyone who criticized her sexist, right? How about anyone who criticized Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, also overwhelmingly confirmed by Demcocrats. So you are definitely a sexist, racist person if you were against her becoming a SCOTUS justice.
Hillary Clinton and Judge Jackson thank you for your support of them.
Ok. That’s fine. Using Hilary, Jackson, and Tulsi as examples, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are racist or sexist.
Cool. How about the fact that she was very pro-Assad and praising Russia for backing him?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/tulsi-gabbard-russian-connection-dni-trump-syria-b2692244.html
You can read the literal words she says in that article, but something tells me you won’t.
So if you say something positive about let say Pelosi, then you have ties with Pelosi? What kind of logic is that?
Do you think that maybe being pro-Assad and praising Russia for backing him might make her a poor choice for the role she’s been handed?
Nope. She got 52 out of 53 Republican votes. If you only listen to left wing media, you probably won’t figure out why the Republicans don’t have issues with her gender and race.
What does the number of votes have to do with her support of a ruthless dictator like Bashar Assad? All that proves is that Republicans are fine with her supporting a horrible ruthless dictator that tortured and murdered countless people. You can make this about her race and gender all you like, but all you’re doing is ignoring the quotes of her saying literal things and support of both him and Russia in that article. Not that I’m surprised that you’re ignoring her actual words that she said. It makes it much easier to defend her if you ignore them. Not honest, but easier.
It shows that Republicans are willing to try something new after many decades of failed foreign policies.
The something new being support for ruthless dictators? Is that the sort of new thing you think is good?
The something new being stopping the forever wars.