|Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI)|
You made a big splash recently when you cut ties with the DNC to stand in opposition to Hillary Clinton - a very admirable thing! I think it takes a great amount of courage on your part- and you are to be commended greatly for your principled opposition to an interventionist foreign policy. I would ask, are you familiar with the recently established Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity? When I hear you speak of non-interventionism- particularly because these interventions are illegal, you sound as if you are channeling Dr. Paul. As Dr. Paul is a former flight surgeon, I am sure you two would hit it off, and I think you would be an awesome guest for his daily show. Another recommendation would be The Tom Woods Show, as he co-edited a prescient book, We Who Dared to Say No to War.
You always are able to establish credibility in your interviews, when talking about war and reckless intervention, when you say, “In my deployment to Iraq, I worked in a medical unit where every single day I saw and experienced that high human cost...” It is not difficult to understand why you have the perspective that the US government should actually be careful as to where it is intervening- something that both Trump rhetorically and Clinton in actuality have sincerely rejected.
At the risk of pushing my luck, I ask that you consider drawing the same line when it comes to US government intervention domestically. You state correctly, “The…war, to over throw the Syrian government of Assad is illegal because Congress hasn’t authorized a war…to conduct that action. Secondly, it’s counterproductive…” However, even a cursory look reveals that many actions the US government takes are illegal, and most are counterproductive. If we are to apply your fine standards universally, I submit that the following domestic proposals should be nixed:
--Government Assistance to promote travel and tourism
--Government Assistance to develop the energy industry
--Government involvement in marriage
--Government subsidies for agriculture
I suggest that the above domestic policies are illegal and counterproductive, as well. Will you, in these cases follow the Constitution, or will you attempt to have your Constitutional cake and eat it too?