Former Democratic United States House of Representatives member and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard released Thursday a shortvideo monologuein which she presented a dumb defense of Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) — the Republican vice president nominee — as well as a dumb criticism of Vice President Kamala Harris, against whom Vance is running.
Responding to anassertionby Harris that Vance will be loyal to Republican president nominee Donald Trump instead of the country of America, Gabbard said in her video commentary that this assertion is wrong because Vance “enlisted in the Marine Corps after the terrorist attack on 9/11” and “deployed to Iraq in 2005” to take part in the United States war on that country. In contrast, Gabbard says regarding Harris that Harris has not been “willing to put her own life on the line in service to our country.” Harris, Gabbard continued, is “driven by her own political ambition” and is “a self-serving politician who should not be in office.”
Of course, there are plenty of people who have chosen not to join the military and not to fight in any US wars who are also seeking to work for the best interest of America. Indeed, a good portion of these people have chosen to avoid joining the military and fighting in US wars because they realized that much of what the US military does, such as taking part in wars including the one in Iraq that Gabbard mentions in her video monologue, harms America instead of helps America.
Also, the ranks of people who are pursuing goals against the best interest of America include plenty of individuals who chose to join the military and fight in US wars. Among them even are, as Gabbard described Harris, self-serving politicians driven by their own political ambition who should not be in office.
Back in 2020, Gabbard was putting forwardthe same sort of nonsense rhetoricto promote herself as a superior presidential candidate because she, like Vance, had joined the military and fought in the Iraq War. Then and now, Gabbard’s faux argument does not survive minimal rational scrutiny.
