Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

14 hours ago, Atx71 said:

Maybe she was offering silent thoughts and prayers. Same effect on cancer as standing and cheering. 

 

You take stoopid, inane, ignorant and just plain dumb ass to a whole 'other level.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

9 hours ago, Hank Scorpio said:

One just a non sentient, hot hunk, of glowing iron or ice, the other with a brain pan the size of a walnut.  What's your point ?

[Atx71 146]

50 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

You take stoopid, inane, ignorant and just plain dumb ass to a whole 'other level.

Just trying to be best, Melania.  

[Pescado_Rojo 19,416]

9 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

There’s a difference between “hot” and “a burning sensation.”

Hot...like a pile of dog shit on asphalt. 

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

7 minutes ago, Atx71 said:

Just trying to be best, Melania.  

Well, you succeed as sucking the best every day.  You're a sock, that's the lowest of the low here. At least be a funny sock, you can't even muster that.

[GSU&UT 1,798]

I'm sure the usual misogynists on here will claim she's being stupid and has no idea how government works.

 

 

 

[Atx71 146]

32 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Well, you succeed as sucking the best every day.  You're a sock, that's the lowest of the low here. At least be a funny sock, you can't even muster that.

Hahaha... Trumpkin lecturing anyone on style or behavior. Tell it again.

[zork 629]

40 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

I'm sure the usual misogynists on here will claim she's being stupid and has no idea how government works.

 

 

 

 

[wildcat09 29,354]

14 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

That top of that list includes 2 city-states and the rest of the top 5 are countries with a population smaller than Texas. You can fall into the trap of citing OECD stats. I’d love to live in a country as well run as Singapore. I gladly trade our “democracy” for a country as transparent and well run as Singapore. Let’s get back to the real world and the examples of how badly inefficient and terrible the government in THIS COUNTRY is actually run. I gave the example of the building I bought with the government tenant I have. Tell me why government run universal care is better for me with good private insurance. The indigent have Ben Taub and community health clinics. That’s good enough and not worth ruining the health care for the rest of us. We have a concrete example of how our own government runs health care for a small segment of the population with the VA. That’s a disaster. Why would anyone want that for the rest of us.

You're free to get the fuck out and go live in your little authoritarian utopia any time now.

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

46 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

I'm sure the usual misogynists on here will claim she's being stupid and has no idea how government works.

 

 

 

This should be required watching for all Americans.  She's laying bare the corruption.

[jimmyjazz 45,961]

34 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

This should be required watching for all Americans.  She's laying bare the corruption.

Yeah, she has a really good instinct for revealing the hypocrisy and rot in our government.  It's a good thing this isn't Russia.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

12 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yeah, she has a really good instinct for revealing the hypocrisy and rot in our government.  It's a good thing this isn't Russia.

The almond taste of arsenic would be undetectable in that Millennial harlot's avocado toast.

[Hank Kingsley 20,955]

AOC is publicly exposing the corruption in government, and Republican voters have a problem with her????

[GSU&UT 1,798]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

AOC is publicly exposing the corruption in government, and Republican voters have a problem with her????

It's almost as if they're hypocrites and everything they stand for suddenly changes when the other side agrees.

[Brian Fantana 6,689]

Don't you idiots understand?  She didn't clap for cancer kid Trump at this solemn occasion.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

You're free to get the fuck out and go live in your little authoritarian utopia any time now.

Why leave when the GOP is refashioning the country as it is.

[staboner 4,974]

12 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Don't you idiots understand?  She didn't clap for cancer kid Trump at this solemn occasion.

Rs are Rs, Ds are Ds. not other words are needed

many of us are waiting for someone, anyone, to run on a platform entirely focused on reform. bernie, warren, here in Texas, i don't give a shit. everything else is hot air and "news" fodder

happy thursday my Gs

[RomaVicta 29,909]

18 hours ago, Cajun said:

Really really.

Walk me through your logic here 71.

She's cold shouldering the kid just to spite Trump's desire for applause?  Pretty small if that's the motivation.

 

I'm sure the kid is shattered that she refuses to be manipulated by a tired bit of political schmaltz to applaud the small and despicable man making the speech. She politely listens. She tolerates. She meets her social duty while making the larger point. 

Trump is a cancer that lives on praise. I will not praise him. Even if he gets the trains to run on time, his totality deserves nothing but scorn.

[RomaVicta 29,909]

I've posted several times that I would like a reform party and reform candidate. Her attack on corruption and clear way of doing it have now given her political substance. I've gone from liking to supporting her.

[Bat Guano 359]

3 hours ago, GSU&UT said:

I'm sure the usual misogynists on here will claim she's being stupid and has no idea how government works.

 

 

 

That's some good shit. It's only part of the corruption, but it's as good a place as any to start.

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

19 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

I do like her rustling feathers in Congress instead of just being a go along to get along slug like most of them.   Someone does need to call bullshit on the corruption.

However, if her Green New Deal resolution released today is any indication, she’s completely unserious on actual policy.  It calls for the following to all occur in the next 10 years:

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/07/691997301/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-releases-green-new-deal-outline

Yeah, parts of that are ridiculous, especially with that timeline, but it's time to start pushing ideas.

[jimmyjazz 45,961]

5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yeah, parts of that are ridiculous, especially with that timeline, but it's time to start pushing ideas.

History tells us this was possible, but at the time it was considered absurd:  in May 1961, roughly 6 weeks after the first human flew into near space, JFK announced a program to put an American on the moon before the end of the decade.

No, I'm not equating AOC with JFK.

No, I'm not saying the scope of the proposed projects are the same.

Sometimes it's good just to have people thinking big.

[hpslugga 4,062]

21 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

That “unwilling” part is quite problematic for me, though.  

I don't disagree with that, but let's not pretend that tidbits like that completely nullify the broader scope of her propositions. She's rough around the edges, to be sure, but I wouldn't allow that to obscure the larger picture.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,872]

damn, AOC owning fools

[bad_teammate 13,196]

11 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Oh, and apparently it also mentions “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.”

I was with you on the unable to work.  That “unwilling” part is quite problematic for me, though.  

While punishing the lazy feels good, it is a bad idea as far as organizing and maintaining a health, low-crime society.

Beyond that, "unable" and "unwilling" aren't necessarily all that different, especially in the type of gig/work economy we have. Think about the humans you know who you would consider "unwilling" to work. If you don't know any, then that's instructive, as well.

There are people who are physically capable of whatever menial, low-paying labor we could shove them into, but they are constitutionally incapable of being a "good employee" in terms of our current gig/work economy (showing up on time, maintaining emotional control in the face of being stressed and actively demeaned, staying focused on repetitive or pointless tasks, etc...). Something in their brains makes it difficult-to-impossible for them, and we can call them "unwilling" because their physical bodies are sufficient.

Here's the thing: Those people exist.

And another thing: In a better gig/work economy, they might become more active.

Hillbilly Elegy was referenced here recently, and it's actually apt because, in that book, JD Vance completely ignores how the work economy itself changed for the hillbillies and how that influenced the strength of their families and culture. Instead, he ascribes the failures of the white poor in the Rust Belt to some vague "cultural" rot, which is what we do when we talk about the "unwilling" to work.

[Asithappens 974]

AOC is coming through!

Good for her. 

Hey, dipshit Republicans, you feel that sting? That's AOC owning you.

And, imo, Adam Schiff will soon deliver as well.

 

[F250 28,777]

2 hours ago, Skinny Tie said:

She’s draining the swamp

I wouldn't call that draining the swamp but just pointing out the swamp. Others have highlighted corruption before but the swamp remains. The challenge is getting her associates in Congress to vote against their own interests for actual reform.

 

[wildcat09 29,354]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yeah, parts of that are ridiculous, especially with that timeline, but it's time to start pushing ideas.

This. The overton window needs to be pushed pretty far back the other way and "let's talk about possibly thinking about analyzing the possibility of 12 new types of tax-exempt accounts for childcare expenses" (ahem Klobuchar) isn't going to do it.

Paul Ryan wasn't one bit more "serious" with any of his policy proposals, and he was hailed as a genius policy wonk. 

[wildcat09 29,354]

3 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

Why leave when the GOP is refashioning the country as it is.

Some of us actually like a government that is of the people, by the people, and for the people. If you prefer murderous jackboots running things you should get the fuck out. 

[Asithappens 974]

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Some of us actually like a government that is of the people, by the people, and for the people. If you prefer murderous jackboots running things you should get the fuck out. 

Careful there. 

The "people" elected Trump.

But again, the "people" can be very dumb.

[Hank Kingsley 20,955]

The people did not elect Trump. The electoral college did. 

 

 

[wildcat09 29,354]

1 minute ago, Asithappens said:

 Careful there. 

The "people" elected Trump.

But again, the "people" can be very dumb.

And i'd rather them continue to vote, and every other citizen in America vote, in every election, than us switch to an authoritarian system even if I thought it was helmed by a benevolent dictator.

[Asithappens 974]

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

The people did not elect Trump. The electoral college did. 

 

 

I didn't say a majority did (or a plurality). 

The people did. 

[hayden_horn 11,362]

1 minute ago, Skinny Tie said:

3 million less ppl

[Dahobbs 17,543]

2 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

Oh, and apparently it also mentions “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.”

I was with you on the unable to work.  That “unwilling” part is quite problematic for me, though.  

Does it? I've read the whole thing and done a word search. I don't see that anywhere. 

Edit: I see, that phrase isn't in the resolution. It comes from an overview document that was produced at one point. Strangely enough, the only groups reporting this  phrase are a bunch of right wing sources. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by Dahobbs

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

You, like totally, missed the part about where we should give everyone great jobs that pay great amounts of money, and kill all the farting cows.

And if they're unwilling to work, give them a livable wage anyway. They have to have enough money to ride the electric powered bullet train to Europe, after all.

[GSU&UT 1,798]

Y'all do understand that legislators all the time will put forward legislation that isn't completely filled with details to try and start a process. She was interviewed this morning on NPR by Steve Inskeep who asked specifically about this, her reasoning is that this is going to have to go through a ton of committee reviews if it moves forward and putting any teeth in implementation details would almost assuredly get stripped away in various meetings. I do agree that 10 years seems almost unrealistic, but I'm so sick and damn tired of hearing about how we can't pay for things when something like the F-35 program has cost over 1.5 trillion dollars thus far. The majority of Americans feel that climate change will cause harm to the US and the rest of the world.

[Js1 85,348]

We can pay for anything we want to.  But the political will isn't there to do it.

[Dahobbs 17,543]

27 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/aoc-green-new-deal-promises-economic-security-for-those-unable-or-unwilling-to-work/amp/

National Review highlighted that part.  Right wing, but I thought more reliable than Gatewaypundit or Breitbart.  At least at one time they were.

I know it does.  But the bill doesn't say that. You can read it here:

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5729033-Green-New-Deal-FINAL

Go ahead, find that passage. 

[bad_teammate 13,196]

Right-wingers lying about AOC not clapping for the little girl.

Right-wingers lying about AOC calling for a living wage for those "unwilling" to work.

It's almost like... they're lying liars who lie.

[Dahobbs 17,543]

6 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Y'all do understand that legislators all the time will put forward legislation that isn't completely filled with details to try and start a process. She was interviewed this morning on NPR by Steve Inskeep who asked specifically about this, her reasoning is that this is going to have to go through a ton of committee reviews if it moves forward and putting any teeth in implementation details would almost assuredly get stripped away in various meetings. I do agree that 10 years seems almost unrealistic, but I'm so sick and damn tired of hearing about how we can't pay for things when something like the F-35 program has cost over 1.5 trillion dollars thus far. The majority of Americans feel that climate change will cause harm to the US and the rest of the world.

Right, it isn't even supposed to be legislation. It is the promise to try and make the legislation. 

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

Why is Sack such an idiot?

[bad_teammate 13,196]

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why is Sack such an idiot?

He's a disingenuous liar more than an idiot.

[Dahobbs 17,543]

15 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

You’re right, the bill says provide “all people” with economic security.  Limiting that to security for those who are unable or unwilling to work was in the overview and FAQ document produced by ACO’s office today to accompany the resolution.  So, if we are parsing, the bill was actually more expansive about providing “economic security”, but just not as in your face about highlighting the “btw, this includes those unwilling to work” part.  

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5729035-Green-New-Deal-FAQ

Both the resolution and the accompanying FAQ are just blueprints of what legislation she wants in the future -  the resolution / bill is only generalities right now and nothing approaching a workable finished product even if everyone agreed with the ideas.  So, sloppy reporting aside,  I’m not sure why we would discount the materials she released today to supplement the resolution. 

It appears she pulled that initial FAQ. It doesn't sound like it was particularly polished. Also, are we really against providing"unprecedented levels of prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States". Like, that seems like a good thing. Taking umbrage that someone who you dislike may also get a benefit is a bit of cutting off your nose to spite your face, don't you think?

[Js1 85,348]

Well right wing twitter is having a FIELD DAY with it.

[elfenix 34,251]

28 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

He's a disingenuous liar more than an idiot.

in his world:

1. democrats get elected
2. government buys medicine and medical care for people
3. ???
4. an authoritarian lootocracy has taken over the country and he's fled

[Biff Tannen 45,691]

I find it interesting how the AOC and Warren threads have swapped.  AOC thread is now actually about something while the Warren thread has turned into screeching nonsense.

[David Dennison 18,860]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

You, like totally, missed the part about where we should give everyone great jobs that pay great amounts of money, and kill all the farting cows.

And if they're unwilling to work, give them a livable wage anyway. They have to have enough money to ride the electric powered bullet train to Europe, after all.

You're going to pay on the front end or the back end. 

Which do you prefer?

[HenryJames 66,077]

History’s greatest monster, imo.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Welp, AOC just blew it out of the park on MTP with douchey Chuck Todd

 

Edited February 7, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz