Jump to content

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

markstanco

By markstanco
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

gmr548

gmr548 16462

Posted
Posted
She's a gaffe a minute nutjob hellbent on destroying the country with socialist policies, and she's getting broad support from a large portion of the population. Just like you clowns here, she's trying to defend the indefensible. That's got nothing to do with ethnicity or hate, it's reasoned analysis of her proposals.
If you don't understand the media (both sides) is a perpetual outrage machine, and doesn't not represent "society at large" I don't know what to tell you. I don't think Anthony Weiner represents most liberals, nor does AOC. Mike Pence may be a huge moron, Trump certainly is, I still want them there because they largely support the policies I support.
It's not that complicated.

I said, word for word, that FOX is trying to drum up anger and hate - common synonyms for outrage - by playing AOC so much. You haven't refuted anything I said, which it seems like you might be trying to?

Further, your rhetoric is in line with everything I said riles said base up. You are making my point for me.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 13k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

oh, and to add, let's offer up a 'comparable' analogy reversal and see how it fits.  who's the aoc of the right?  jim jordan?  matt gaetz? this is basically like if there was a huge earthquake he

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

some people see 99% and consider that absolutism.  i am one of those people. this is not your wife grabbing your cell phone that you left in the other room.  this is not a quick favor.  this is a

RomaVicta
RomaVicta

Yes, of course. She is the only woman or woman of color the left right (edit) focuses their ire on. There are no other examples. Great point. It's really all intellectual and rational. And usually ver

Posted Images

Bullneck

Bullneck 18976

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

That thread started dying off a while ago. It served its purpose. 

AOC is nothing like Hillary. Hillary isn't liberal, Hillary is just a fucking crook. AOC seems to sincerely be interested in something other than her own bank account. That she doesn't know much of anything about most of the things she rails against and for is beside the point.

 

But hey thanks for playing.....

What purpose was that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thetexashammer

Thetexashammer 1062

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, gmr548 said:


I said, word for word, that FOX is trying to drum up anger and hate - common synonyms for outrage - by playing AOC so much. You haven't refuted anything I said, which it seems like you might be trying to?

Further, your rhetoric is in line with everything I said riles said base up. You are making my point for me.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 

Your words:

Quote

Its obvious why they highlight her. She is the living, breathing, embodiment of everything the GOP and FOX News have trained their horde to hate. Democrat, educated coastal liberal, young, openly espouses socialist politics, brown, woman in power, etc. Nothing motivates in politics like anger and hate. They want to rile up the base.

You think it's racism and sexism. I've explained repeatedly - she's a loon because she cannot confine herself to reality.

Do you understand the "the media" isn't "the people"? The media will always serve as the Merchants of Outrage. There is no evidence of any widespread movement of outraged MAGA people. Maybe ANTIFA , are they pro-Trump? Who are these haters you refer to? The guys who beat up Smollett? 

I don't hate AOC and I don't think anyone here hates her. I'm not the least bit angry, I expect AOC is doing everything she can to ruin Democrat electoral chances. Dems are the ones threatening to primary her, do you not understand why?

By the way, what is the etc. meant to be?

Edited by Thetexashammer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18601

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

Your words:

You think it's racism and sexism. I've explained repeatedly - she's a loon because she cannot confine herself to reality.

Do you understand the "the media" isn't "the people"? The media will always serve as the Merchants of Outrage. There is no evidence of any widespread movement of outraged MAGA people. Maybe ANTIFA , are they pro-Trump? Who are these haters you refer to? The guys who beat up Smollett? 

I don't hate AOC and I don't think anyone here hates her. I'm not the least bit angry, I expect AOC is doing everything she can to ruin Democrat electoral chances. Dems are the ones threatening to primary her, do you not understand why?

By the way, what is the etc. meant to be?

Lolwut?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16462

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

Your words:

You think it's racism and sexism. I've explained repeatedly - she's a loon because she cannot confine herself to reality.

Do you understand the "the media" isn't "the people"? The media will always serve as the Merchants of Outrage. There is no evidence of any widespread movement of outraged MAGA people. Maybe ANTIFA , are they pro-Trump? Who are these haters you refer to? The guys who beat up Smollett? 

I don't hate AOC and I don't think anyone here hates her. I'm not the least bit angry, I expect AOC is doing everything she can to ruin Democrat electoral chances. Dems are the ones threatening to primary her, do you not understand why?

By the way, what is the etc. meant to be?

I think what is racism and sexism? What is "it"?

I am not sure what it is you are missing or latching onto. I responded to a comment about the GOP apparatus zeroing on AOC by saying it was because she is a really effective tool to rile up the base, because she embodies pretty much everything that riles up that base in one package. Merchant of Outrage would be a good term to describe that. Racially charged and sexist elements are a part of that when you're talking about the particular outlet and audience in question. Remove them and you still have a laundry list. My point was that she is an easy and natural target for Fox News, which at this point is the propaganda arm of the Republican Party, to hit when it comes to generating anger among their core constituency/audience. 

Also, uh, maybe there is no widespread movement of outraged MAGA people because that would be redundant. The MAGA crowd is an outraged movement. The GOP/Fox News Apparatus wants to milk that for all it is worth, and from that standpoint, keeping AOC in the rotation is a no-brainer.

Etc. was used as a catch all because I'd listed a bunch of Fox News crowd trigger issues and figured she hit on more that I was not about to sit there and list.

I am done talking about this now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9797

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, tjhooker said:

A certain level of pay is a right now.  mmK

Or she could move from one of the highest cost of living cities in America. There are plenty of cities she could go to make a living wage as a bar tender. She chooses to live in NYC as an hourly service employee.

As a person who actually worked for tips & hourly wages in my life, instead of having to learn about it 2nd-hand, I can tell you that most people want to be paid enough to live. A living wage isn’t a gift, it’s a right. Workers are often paid far less than the value they create.

She simply wants others to pay for her poor decisions. Living in the most expensive cities is not a fundamental right. 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9797

Posted
Posted

This is actually a house representative ...I don’t care what side you are on.....dumb Is dumb

 

In an Instagram Live video, she warned, “Our planet is going to face disaster if we don’t turn this ship around. And so it’s basically like, there is a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult and it does lead, I think young people, to have a legitimate question. You know, should – is it ok to still have children?”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18601

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, ChickenSandwich said:

This is actually a house representative ...I don’t care what side you are on.....dumb Is dumb

 

In an Instagram Live video, she warned, “Our planet is going to face disaster if we don’t turn this ship around. And so it’s basically like, there is a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult and it does lead, I think young people, to have a legitimate question. You know, should – is it ok to still have children?”

What's dumb about it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2959

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Coors yellow belly said:

But what stupid thing did your rep say this week?

 

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but my Senator quoted a fascist, Mussolini, to prove how dangerous socialists are.  To the unfamiliar, he's the dude who murdered a bunch of socialist opponents.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What's dumb about it? 

Yeah I'm struggling to find what is dumb in that quote. Sounds like she was rambling a bit, but there is absolutely nothing dumb to listen to what the vast majority of climate and atmospheric researchers are screaming at us.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Js1 said:

SoOoOo ExTrEmE

 

They support it when they are asked the question without mentioning what such things would cost.   The results change when actual pertinent information such as that is also given the respondents.  It's like the Campus Reform video on the New Green Deal.  They love it when all they are told is it's goals.  They thought it was completely whack when they were told the methods it would take to reach those goals.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17420

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

If no one has any children then what's the point of giving a fuck what the planet is like a century from now?  There also is no such thing as a scientific consensus that the planet is headed for a disaster.  

Yes, there is. Even the oil companies agree. It is literally a national security matter. Not only is there a consensus, it is pretty much unanimous. I've yet to see anyone who denies climate change identify a bonafide climate scientist or study that supports their position. Instead it is politicians and "thinkers" all the way down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17420

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, EMAWesome said:

No there isn't.  Even if there is a scientific consensus that global warming is real they do not agree on how much of an effect it is going to have on the planet.  You would be right at home with those moronic kids that got in Feinstein's face last week.

Who says this other than your favorite politicians? Can you actually point to something that resembles science? If by not agreeing on the effect, you mean some think it will be bad and others think it will be super bad, then I agree with you.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9797

Posted
Posted (edited)

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/data-scientist-warns-against-trusting-ai-scientific-discoveries

the posters above are correct (Not you DD - sorry comrade). It’s happening. To what extent, pace and consequence is far from any sort of a consensus. 

I doubt many scientists on either side would back AOC’s claim that the world will end in 12 years. Just starting a conversation, not fear mongering of course. 

Edited by ChickenSandwich
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16462

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

This is actually a house representative ...I don’t care what side you are on.....dumb Is dumb

 

In an Instagram Live video, she warned, “Our planet is going to face disaster if we don’t turn this ship around. And so it’s basically like, there is a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult and it does lead, I think young people, to have a legitimate question. You know, should – is it ok to still have children?”

 

24 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

No there isn't.  Even if there is a scientific consensus that global warming is real they do not agree on how much of an effect it is going to have on the planet.  You would be right at home with those moronic kids that got in Feinstein's face last week.

 

Stop. There is scientific consensus on climate change. You people are already laughed at and are going to be laughed at like anti-vaxxers in 20 years. The only debate on the impact is whether it is going to be bad or whether it is going to be hellish, which is mostly dependent on what kind of action we do or don't take.

It is well documented that, by far, the most damaging thing you can do as an individual in terms of carbon emissions, pollutants, etc. is having a kid or kids. Not having children is orders of magnitude more impact than living car free or going vegan. It is a question myself and plenty of people my age have thought about. It isn't like she is telling people to not have kids. I obviously agree that wouldn't be a Congressperson's place. But she is correct that it is a dilemma young people face.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChickenSandwich

ChickenSandwich 9797

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

If no one has any children then what's the point of giving a fuck what the planet is like a century from now?  There also is no such thing as a scientific consensus that the planet is headed for a disaster.  

She must be beefing up foreign relations game as the US is #158 in birth rate and # 143 in fertility rate. Might be a hard sell, but Americans can make up the slack!

https://www.cia.gov/LIBRARY/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2054rank.html

 

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TDunk

TDunk 590

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

She must be beefing up foreign relations game as the US is #158 in birth rate and # 143 in fertility rate. Might be a hard sell, but Americans can make up the slack!

https://www.cia.gov/LIBRARY/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2054rank.html

 

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html

 

 

Sure, but do those killed right after birth count?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elfenix

elfenix 34167

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Tom said:

 

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but my Senator quoted a fascist, Mussolini, to prove how dangerous socialists are.  To the unfamiliar, he's the dude who murdered a bunch of socialist opponents.

 

also, republicans are voting to allow the president to suspend the constitution and wield emergency powers. 

Mussolini’s first act as prime minister was to demand special emergency powers allowing him to rig elections in the Fascists’ favor.

https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/benito-mussolini

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45512

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

No there isn't.  Even if there is a scientific consensus that global warming is real they do not agree on how much of an effect it is going to have on the planet.  You would be right at home with those moronic kids that got in Feinstein's face last week.

Honest question:  are you just an idiot, or worse, are you a fool?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...