Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter JohnnyU
- Start date
timschochet
Footballguy
I never made a claim as to what your position was. You’ve been pretty vague about that so I have no idea. Even what you wrote here is carefully couched to avoid a real position.
What I wrote is that almost every time someone here has presented evidence of man made climate change, you have rushed in to challenge that evidence. That’s pretty accurate, don’t you think?
You are 100 percent full of crap. I do not challenge the science which shows man's impact to climate change. What I do challenge is the fear-mongering which you mistakenly believe is science. But you never wish to engage because you don't comprehend the difference.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
No, you all can read just fine. Many chose to misrepresent issues to 'win' and mock. Pretty pitiful.
the moops
Footballguy
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Why can’t we all get along?
Dickies
Footballguy
the moops
Footballguy
Disagreement is perfectly fine, I welcome it. Lying about the other's position is a crappy tactic. You might as well call yourself Trump supporters if you are going to condone lying so readily.
Because our economy is already at near full capacity. Her plans would require require at least a 50 percent increase in output starting next year. That is an impossible task even ignoring the retooling and training required to pull it off. Just the effort to produce the batteries necessary to store the energy produced by wind and solar power so it is usable would be an insurmountable task and do great damage to our environment. There has been zero thought on what is involved and how to implement such craziness. The idea to eliminate nuclear plants is absolute stupidity. If we want net zero emissions, nuclear is the only path to get there and it is off the table.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sri Lanka Easter terrorist attacks by radical Islamics killed 359 people but did not merit a single tweet from AOC, instead she Tweeted promoting her movie. But now like all the other attacks domestic and abroad which fits her political narrative she tweets about it and politicises it.
AOC Tweeter: "Heartbroken to hear of the San Diego synagogue shooting, particularly so on this final day of Passover.
We have a responsibility to love + protect our neighbors.
The longer the Senate delays holding a vote on #HR8, the more we put Americans at risk."
https://t.co/ef9FURMFQ5
AOC Tweeter: "Heartbroken to hear of the San Diego synagogue shooting, particularly so on this final day of Passover.
We have a responsibility to love + protect our neighbors.
The longer the Senate delays holding a vote on #HR8, the more we put Americans at risk."
https://t.co/ef9FURMFQ5
Newsweek:
PASTOR ACCUSES ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ OF NOT TWEETING ABOUT SRI LANKA ATTACKS BECAUSE SHE CAN'T WEAPONIZE THEM AGAINST TRUMP
Pastor Darrell Scott said the reason Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had not tweeted about the Sri Lanka bombings was because she could not use them “as a weapon against the Trump administration.”
Scott, a board member for the National Diversity Coalition for Donald Trump, made the remarks after former CNN host Piers Morgan made similar comments.
“Twitter-obsessed @AOC posted 14 times about the terror attack on Muslims in New Zealand, but has posted nothing about the terror attack on Christians by Muslim extremists in Sri Lanka. Very odd,” Morgan tweeted.
PASTOR ACCUSES ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ OF NOT TWEETING ABOUT SRI LANKA ATTACKS BECAUSE SHE CAN'T WEAPONIZE THEM AGAINST TRUMP
Pastor Darrell Scott said the reason Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had not tweeted about the Sri Lanka bombings was because she could not use them “as a weapon against the Trump administration.”
Scott, a board member for the National Diversity Coalition for Donald Trump, made the remarks after former CNN host Piers Morgan made similar comments.
“Twitter-obsessed @AOC posted 14 times about the terror attack on Muslims in New Zealand, but has posted nothing about the terror attack on Christians by Muslim extremists in Sri Lanka. Very odd,” Morgan tweeted.
sho nuff
Footballguy
the moops
Footballguy
You really should take a break from following AOC on twitter. She seems to set you off whether she tweets about something or refuses to tweet about something
Can't defend her can you? I like following her, it does not set me off at all. It simply reminds me of how the far-left thinks.
Good thing I don't support Trump or defend his idiotic tweeting. But it does expose the hypocrisy of the Trump-haters who like AOC. They are essentially the same person.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
She should have tweeted about Sri Lanka.
timschochet
Footballguy
She’s not the President. Why can’t she be selective?
I suspect that if a church had been bombed in San Diego she would have tweeted about it. Just my guess.
timschochet
Footballguy
Though I’m not one to criticize hypocrisy, in this case it doesn’t.
The key to the criticism of Trump in terms of his selective tweeting is that he is the President of the United States. As such he is supposed to represent all of us, speak in our name, with certain responsibilities in times of tragedy. Trump doesn’t do so, preferring at all times only to represent those that support him politically, and that’s why he justifiably gets ripped.
AOC has no such responsibility, nor does any member of Congress. They can speak out about whatever interests them and there is no double standard.
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
She is a national political figure with a substantial social media following. I think that should carry the responsibility of consistency. A tweet about condolences, terrorism and hate is certainly appropriate. Just my opinion.
Just the one who tweet daily and preach to us daily and are huge hypocrites but yet are adored by the media and given an abnormal amount of coverage. Limits it down to a handful, maybe one or two people. YW.
Apple Jack
Footballguy
The idiotic tweeting part, the hypocrisy part, or essentially the same person part? If it the later, I did not mean literally (hense 'essentially'). One is kind of a fascist and one is kind of a commie. Both want to implement their version of big government control and both are egotistical narcissistic fools who consistently put out stupid ideas with little or no thought. The left argues that Trump was proped up by Russia and is their puppet, but we know AOC was propped up by the Justice Democrats and is absolutely reading from their script.
Last edited by a moderator:
the moops
Footballguy
I don't feel the need to defend her. She is not my representative, I don't follow her on twitter, and I only know about half the things she tweets/doesnt tweet about becuase of this thread.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Let's say she hires you as an adviser because she's been reading FBGs in her spare time and is a big fan. She asks you if she should consistently tweet something after worldwide major terror attacks or does that not matter. How do you answer?
timschochet
Footballguy
Oh I’d certainly encourage her to do so. Makes her look better for sure.
But there’s a difference between encouraging her to do stuff like this, and arguing as you did that she has a responsibility to do it and that she is somehow a hypocrite if she doesn’t. That I don’t agree with, because I don’t believe she has any such responsibility.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
It’s an interesting question what duties social media puts on politicians, especially those who do use social media frequently. It gets raised here sometimes, ‘Lots Of posts on x, why no posts on z?’
If this is true and she hasn’t commented I agree she deserves to be asked about it. Isis is also a national security issue and she’s on the Oversight committee, so it’s important.
Last edited by a moderator:
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
I am not sure if it is a duty, it just exposes her for what she is. It is not the terrorism and deaths which drive her, but the white nationalists and the guns. If she refused to acknowledge the dangers from radical Islamics and she is in a position which that is critical, we should question the Democratic leadership that out her there.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
It’s also odd for most people in almost every other district who doesn’t have a high profile rep. I don’t expect Cedric Richmond to say anything, but then he rarely says anything that’s noticed nationally. Steve Scalise is different, he’s the Minority Whip, and yet I wonder what he has said on Twitter on this. But even still Scalise is not really an oft-retweeted guy and his tweets are not usually discussed. Which just raises for me why Cortez has this profile she does. She defeated a Democrat not a Republican, in a very blue district. Sometimes it seems like the Republicans promote her as much as Dems.
You want me to bet on something which is opinion? That is funny. Why not try to make a case that her plans/goals are well thought out and realistic? Nobody has attempted that yet.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Well I guess I view public service as a duty and so is her role on Oversight. Trump declared Isis defeated and they’re clearly not. And like I just said above it’s odd how she’s a totem for subjects like this.
Last edited by a moderator:
She is heavily promoted by the far left and everyone on the right. She is the epitome of how whacky the far-left is.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I would argue that, while, no, she does not have a responsibility, it is a bad look to express sadness and outrage when Muslims are killed in a terrorist attack, but to say nothing when Christians are killed in one. It reminds me of the Bill Maher quote from a while back when he said the minute there is a terrorist attack, the far left (or some, IIRC)'s immediate reaction is, "Don't be mean to Muslims." Some of the far left have reached a point where it is a sad day when Muslims are killed, but don't give a crap when Christians are. And to be fair, the far right is often no better when it comes to opposite scenarios.
Last edited by a moderator:
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
I never said she was a hypocrite. Also, for the record, I like the woman and hope she continues to have a positive influence for many years to come on the future direction of America.
Rightly or wrongly she has been thrust into the spotlight and the attention on her is brighter than others. She has crafted a huge social media presence and what she says or doesn’t say has weight. She is a national figure, far from your typical run of the mill congressman. That gives her power and as someone once said “with great power comes great responsibility”. This is the context in which I meant “responsibility”.
Finally, also for the record, I don’t think her not tweeting about it is a huge deal. But it’s something she should remember to do after future attacks.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Good thing I was talking about the guy you quoted who was all bent out of shape about her.
And laughable you always claim it’s the other guys that are hypocritical.
If the 14-0 ratio is true, that’s kind of weird and warrants asking her for an explanation.
Implying that she’s biased in favor or Muslims over Christians, though, seems even weirder. She is Catholic (with some Jewish heritage); she is not now, nor has she ever been, a Muslim.
She is very reluctant to ever imply anything bad about people of color or POC as she likes to say. But she has no issue with saying the most condemning things about white nationals and painting with a broad brush.
I have no issue with calling out Trump's strange positions as idiotic and hypocritical.
the moops
Footballguy
Wait what? Should she, or anyone, not paint white nationalists with a broad brush and condemn them?
Apple Jack
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
Holy Crap....haven't been in here in a while. As I read the thread, I can't help but wonder how things would be if the professed "right" that doesn't support Trump got half as worked up over him as they have this woman. Perhaps we could have a legit conservative run against him and winning the primary. 
Nope. But when one white nationalists killing one person is a big deal and a group of Islamic Terrorists killing 329 people doesn't register, it is quite bizarre.
You just can't bring yourself to criticize your hero.Holy Crap....haven't been in here in a while. As I read the thread, I can't help but wonder how things would be if the professed "right" that doesn't support Trump got half as worked up over him as they have this woman. Perhaps we could have a legit conservative run against him and winning the primary.
Similar threads
