Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
JohnnyU

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, jon_mx said:

I was pointing out actual crap.  To believe that the only possible way anyone could disagree is in bad faith is silly.  I was not projecting evil motives and/or willful ignorance on the entire population who might happen to see the issue differently.  But this forum endorses crappy tactics from the left and will defend them endlessly.  

:mellow:

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jon_mx said:

I have not talked about the two items because they are minor tidbits, but there are real reasons AOC could be seen as being hypocritical.  AOC rhetoric is all about shared resources and equality.  She is the probably the closest thing to a communist we have in DC.  While there are millions of women who have dropped $250 on getting their hair done, there are over a hundred million who haven't.  If she really endorsed economic equality, she would choose to live within the means of the masses and not the elite.  So while you are correct in that there in general there is nothing outrageous about a $250 haircut, it can be viewed as counter to her rhetoric.  

Thanks for this. It had been a minute since I've seen one of these in the wild. Always good for a chuckle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, jon_mx said:

I was pointing out actual crap.  To believe that the only possible way anyone could disagree is in bad faith is silly.  I was not projecting evil motives and/or willful ignorance on the entire population who might happen to see the issue differently.  But this forum endorses crappy tactics from the left and will defend them endlessly.  

I wrote but then deleted two responses to this because I want to keep my posting privileges so I can talk Nationals for the next week. But it wasn't easy.  This is a real piece of work, GB.

Edited by TobiasFunke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2019 at 11:19 AM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Ugh, THIS is my last post in this discussion, I swear.

AOC volunteered for Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign before she ever ran for office or had any interaction with Justice Democrats.  Bernie's policy views are virtually identical to those that AOC espouses now.  She wasn't some blank canvas.  She already believed in the same stuff Justice Democrats believe.  That's why she was a good person for them to support.  

There was an interesting piece back in 2018, after AOC tweeted effusive praise for John McCain.  The instant media superstardom always struck me as a little odd.  The suspicions are not entirely without merit.  

While everyone else was going berserk about a socialist offering high praise for a man who famously bombed the living daylights out of socialist Vietnam, my eye was caught by that middle sentence.

As a lifelong Rhode Islander, I have always had a front-row seat at the political circus known as the Kennedy family. For several terms, one of Teddy’s sons, the ne’er-do-well Patrick, was one of our Congressional representatives.

The Kennedy machine blended backroom compromises, cigars, and premium scotch (a tradition since Grandpa Joe imported it during Prohibition). The family brand is generally seen as progressive – i.e. anti-poverty, pro-choice – but Ted was an avid promoter of neoliberal favorites like deregulating aviation, telecom and trucking.

An internship in Ted’s office was a great career booster in government agencies and/or the Democratic Party. And it would seem from her Tweet about McCain that Ocasio-Cortez was well acquainted with the sausage-making procedurals of Washington lawmaking.

This has all the markers of a Kennedy production.

Ocasio-Cortez worked in Kennedy’s office from early 2008, when she was 19, until his death in the summer of 2009. Prior to that, she was active in the National Hispanic Institute’s Lorenzo de Zalvala Youth Legislative Session.

In the press she’s seen as someone who was radicalized by the Bernie Sanders campaign, but this is the resumé of someone who wanted to run for public office as a teenager. I’d even have to wonder if she joined DSA because she saw a wellspring for free interns and staff for a campaign she has been planning since the Dubya administration.

Certainly the “miracle primary victory” narrative is partly mythological horse ####. AOC had connections within the Democratic Party and would have been able to target a vulnerable but liberal district like Joe Crowley’s. (Yes, no matter what, he’s obviously way worse.) That’s the MO of a Kennedy operation top-to-bottom, I’ve watched them do it forever.

That’s not to say she has been pretending to be a poor bartender this whole time just to co-opt the progressive movement as a trojan horse for the corporate wing of the Dem party.  But it does raise questions about whether she’s more of a political creature than she’s been billed as on the surface.  She has certainly been a disappointment to people that were hoping for an actual leftist.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TobiasFunke said:

I wrote but then deleted two responses to this because I want to keep my posting privileges so I can talk Nationals for the next week. But it wasn't easy.  This is a real piece of work, GB.

And I stand by that post.  You could have simply made your point without some ridiculous gross generalizations about how all people who disagree or ignorant and/or act in bad faith.   Despite your declaration of moral superiority there are reasons to mock AOC's act.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Henry Ford said:

:mellow:

 

I'm persecuted in this cesspool, but here's a generalized criticism of everyone else who doesn't agree with me.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:

Patrick ewing received a lot of criticism. 

We also wouldnt trust his judgment for spending our tax dollars. 

Bottom line is Cortez can afford to spend $500.00 on a haircut. I really don`t care for her views but it is her money and she can spend it as she sees fit.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2019 at 5:58 PM, Bucky86 said:

AOC handles the Zuck pretty well. This guy is dangerous.

https://twitter.com/brookeonair/status/1187100670911864832?s=21

Sure if you believe in talking over people and not allowing them to answer and throwing white supremist in every sentence is 'pretty well'.  She was rude and arrogant and showed no interest what so ever in listening to him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She does a great job. 

Why now would anyone pick on "talks over" a person being in congress as if this isnt something that happens every day. They would have to ignore history and standard procedure therein. And this "talks over" is barely happening. She simply talks the very moment he answers the question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BigSteelThrill said:

She does a great job. 

Why now would anyone pick on "talks over" a person being in congress as if this isnt something that happens every day. They would have to ignore history and standard procedure therein. And this "talks over" is barely happening. She simply talks the very moment he answers the question. 

The reason to bring someone to Congress is to extract information from them to understand their viewpoint and workings and so perhaps you can formulate intelligent policies and maybe laws.  We can hear diaherra from AOC everyday.  But to gain understanding how a social media giant operates would have been far more interesting and useful.  But if people prefer listening to spun up rhetoric, so be it.  Completely worthless though, but great job.  Yeah. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the video. Made me laugh thinking of how the woman that got bent out of shape about fact checking was questioning a social platform guy about fact checking.

If i was zuck i would have asked if she wanted morally correct fact checking technology or factually accurate technology.

Edited by parasaurolophus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this where we come to ignore impeachment so we can rip on a freshman congresswoman instead?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Is this where we come to ignore impeachment so we can rip on a freshman congresswoman instead?

Weird.  There are plenty of threads to discuss impeachment.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Is this where we come to ignore impeachment so we can rip on a freshman congresswoman instead?

Are you saying that impeachment is all everybody should talk about? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Weird.  There are plenty of threads to discuss impeachment.  

Yes there are!

I just find it funny that those who spend their time ripping a freshman congresswoman don't seem to have any interest in discussing the biggest story in US politics by far.

More fun to attack than defend, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Skoo said:

Yes there are!

I just find it funny that those who spend their time ripping a freshman congresswoman don't seem to have any interest in discussing the biggest story in US politics by far.

More fun to attack than defend, I suppose.

I find it weird people like Vanilla ice cream and not chocolate.   But to each their own, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, parasaurolophus said:

Are you saying that impeachment is all everybody should talk about? 

Nope, I'm just noticing those that are in here ripping AOC on a daily basis are conspicuously missing from the impeachment topic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Nope, I'm just noticing those that are in here ripping AOC on a daily basis are conspicuously missing from the impeachment topic.

Thats interesting. No posts since october 16th before bucky bumped the thread to praise her. 

Eta: quick look back over the last few pages shows this thread often has gaps in posting. October 11-15. September 16-28, sept 28-october 3, october 4-8. 

Edited by parasaurolophus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Nope, I'm just noticing those that are in here ripping AOC on a daily basis are conspicuously missing from the impeachment topic.

Posts like this are probably why @Joe 8ryant is thinking about shutting this sub forum down, since you are more interested in calling out posters rather than discussing the actual topic. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread was started as basically "look at the crazy lib puppet" and since then it's been a haven for men to to regularly announce that they're totally NOT scared of AOC in any way. Somehow it's never convincing.

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Chicago Hooligan said:

This thread was started as basically "look at the crazy lib puppet" and since then it's been a haven for men to to regularly announce that they're totally NOT scared of AOC in any way. Somehow it's never convincing.

Care to unpack this a little more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:

Are you saying that impeachment is all everybody should talk about? 

No, I think we should be talking about how Trump's lawyer said the POTUS can murder Americans at will and there isn't anything legally we can do about it.  Kind of a big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

No, I think we should be talking about how Trump's lawyer said the POTUS can murder Americans at will and there isn't anything legally we can do about it.  Kind of a big deal.

Nobody is stopping you. Just don't spam every thread with it.

I am happy to see somebody else that wants to hold attorneys accountable for what they argue in a courtroom though. This world would be a better place if lawyers weren't free to say and do reprehensible things under the guise of just doing their job or that the jury or judge is who is supposed to decide the veracity of things, not them. Seems maybe AOC is right and more fact checking would be a good thing.

Turns out your post is quite applicable to the fact checking discussion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

No, I think we should be talking about how Trump's lawyer said the POTUS can murder Americans at will and there isn't anything legally we can do about it.  Kind of a big deal.

Great.  Do you think the AOC thread is the best place for that discussion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Skoo said:

Nope, I'm just noticing those that are in here ripping AOC on a daily basis are conspicuously missing from the impeachment topic.

Sorry, I will try and post more in here to expose AOC as the danger that she is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Don't Noonan said:

Sorry, I will try and post more in here to expose AOC as the danger that she is.

Who is she a danger to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Nobody is stopping you. Just don't spam every thread with it.

I am happy to see somebody else that wants to hold attorneys accountable for what they argue in a courtroom though. This world would be a better place if lawyers weren't free to say and do reprehensible things under the guise of just doing their job or that the jury or judge is who is supposed to decide the veracity of things, not them. Seems maybe AOC is right and more fact checking would be a good thing.

Turns out your post is quite applicable to the fact checking discussion!

I'm not. 

It's amazing this argument was made, along with Barr also stating Trump is above the law which is why there weren't any charges as the result of the Mueller investigation.  This before Trump this would have been the biggest story in the history or the country.  The founders were very clear on what the POTUS was to be as they just broke away from the very type of person that the AG and his attorney are claiming he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:
31 minutes ago, Sheriff Bart said:

No, I think we should be talking about how Trump's lawyer said the POTUS can murder Americans at will and there isn't anything legally we can do about it.  Kind of a big deal.

Great.  Do you think the AOC thread is the best place for that discussion?

He asked if impeachment was all we should talk about.  I replied.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.theblaze.com/news/aoc-claims-white-companies-helped-hurricanes-kill-off-black-and-brown-lives

 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) blasted what she called "predominantly white" companies and corporations for their purported roles in exacerbating climate change.

Ocasio-Cortez slammed corporations for reportedly causing amped up storms that took the lives of "predominantly black and brown lives" in places such as Puerto Rico and Louisiana.

----------------

Fortunately most of her fireball racial rhetoric is religated to more fringe sources like the Blaze and the Hill these days.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jon_mx said:

https://www.theblaze.com/news/aoc-claims-white-companies-helped-hurricanes-kill-off-black-and-brown-lives

 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) blasted what she called "predominantly white" companies and corporations for their purported roles in exacerbating climate change.

Ocasio-Cortez slammed corporations for reportedly causing amped up storms that took the lives of "predominantly black and brown lives" in places such as Puerto Rico and Louisiana.

----------------

Fortunately most of her fireball racial rhetoric is religated to more fringe sources like the Blaze and the Hill these days.  

Do you disagree that most corporations are owned and operated primarily by white people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Do you disagree that most corporations are owned and operated primarily by white people?

I find it particularly wrong to only focus on American-based corporations as the root of all evil responsible for global warming.  China has passed us years ago on CO2 emmissions and India probably will too.  Plus, the users bear a large share of responsibility.  We all consume electricity, heat our homes, drive our cars, mow our yards, etc.  So whether most companies in the US are 'owned' by white people is a pointless discussion.  We all have shared responsibilities for greenhouse gases.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Do you disagree that most corporations are owned and operated primarily by white people?

Does it matter in this discussion at all?

Climate change is not a white conspiracy to keep brown people down.  It is the result of a society focused more on short term benefits than long term viability.  Making it a race issue is a horrible idea and counterproductive, unless her only aim is to pick fights to gain political clout with her target demographics.

White people dominating corporations is a result of our shameful history of slavery but it has nothing to do with our climate change issues.

Edited by Jayrod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 2:59 PM, jon_mx said:

https://www.theblaze.com/news/aoc-claims-white-companies-helped-hurricanes-kill-off-black-and-brown-lives

 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) blasted what she called "predominantly white" companies and corporations for their purported roles in exacerbating climate change.

Ocasio-Cortez slammed corporations for reportedly causing amped up storms that took the lives of "predominantly black and brown lives" in places such as Puerto Rico and Louisiana.

----------------

Fortunately most of her fireball racial rhetoric is religated to more fringe sources like the Blaze and the Hill these days.  

This is where Cortez loses me and probably most moderate Dems.  Cortez is very divisive, not sure if it is done on purpose  or she does not think much before she speaks.  I mean she talks like a left congress version of Trump. 

Edited by Summer Wheat
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

White people broke the planet, white people gotta fix it.

white people gonna whitewash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

White people broke the planet, white people gotta fix it.

The Lord loves a working man.  Don't trust whitey.  See a doctor and get rid of it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jon_mx said:

I find it particularly wrong to only focus on American-based corporations as the root of all evil responsible for global warming.  China has passed us years ago on CO2 emmissions and India probably will too.  Plus, the users bear a large share of responsibility.  We all consume electricity, heat our homes, drive our cars, mow our yards, etc.  So whether most companies in the US are 'owned' by white people is a pointless discussion.  We all have shared responsibilities for greenhouse gases.

Sure...but a US congressperson is likey to be much more worried about the US than abroad...especially not being on any committees that would deal with such things.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sho nuff said:

Sure...but a US congressperson is likey to be much more worried about the US than abroad...especially not being on any committees that would deal with such things.

She is blaming US corporations for killing Brown and black people.  She is spewing hate not expressing concern. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

She is blaming US corporations for killing Brown and black people.  She is spewing hate not expressing concern. 

She seems to be blaming them for Climate Change (or their role in Climate Change)...and attributing that to strengthened storms that did kill a large amount of brown and black people.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

She seems to be blaming them for Climate Change (or their role in Climate Change)...and attributing that to strengthened storms that did kill a large amount of brown and black people.

 

So if I accuse a drunk driver of causing an accident.  And three people died in that accident, I would not be blaming the drunk driver for the deaths?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

So if I accuse a drunk driver of causing an accident.  And three people died in that accident, I would not be blaming the drunk driver for the deaths?  

I don't care for what she said, frankly.  However, using your analogy, perhaps this is like saying not only do a blame the drunk driver, I also blame the bartender who kept serving him after it was obvious he was wasted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that AOC comment is reckless and shows her immaturity IMO.  Fight the fight.  But leave that bs rhetoric out of it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, zoonation said:

that AOC comment is reckless and shows her immaturity IMO.  Fight the fight.  But leave that bs rhetoric out of it. 

It's also counter-productive.  Nothing is going to happen on climate change until you win over centrists and reasonable conservatives.  (For example, McCain at one time made an issue out of climate change).  Taking the case for fighting climate change and infusing it with racial rhetoric makes that basically impossible to achieve.  

It's not that she's entirely wrong.  The industrialized west (mostly white) along with China and India (not white) are the ones most responsible for climate change.  The people who are going to be hit hardest by climate change are the people in the global south (mostly brown, and ironically including a bunch of people in India too).  But this is yet another example of her being needless inflammatory in a way that undermines what she's hoping to achieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IvanKaramazov said:

It's also counter-productive.  Nothing is going to happen on climate change until you win over centrists and reasonable conservatives.  (For example, McCain at one time made an issue out of climate change).  Taking the case for fighting climate change and infusing it with racial rhetoric makes that basically impossible to achieve.  

It's not that she's entirely wrong.  The industrialized west (mostly white) along with China and India (not white) are the ones most responsible for climate change.  The people who are going to be hit hardest by climate change are the people in the global south (mostly brown, and ironically including a bunch of people in India too).  But this is yet another example of her being needless inflammatory in a way that undermines what she's hoping to achieve.

Agreed, and the bolded is my problem with her (and others as well): she seems to have no interest in winning over conservatives and centrists.  Most of the time I get the impression that she has no use or time for anyone who doesn't agree with whatever she is talking about that particular day, and that includes moderate Democrats. 

Edited by Ghost Rider
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ghost Rider said:

Most of the time I get the impression that she has no use or time for anyone who doesn't agree with whatever she is talking about that particular day, and that includes moderate Democrats. 

I agree with this perspective, and in my opinion it shows a great deal of immaturity that she often seems only interested in her own viewpoint.  At first I found her refreshing, but the bloom is off the rose a bit.  She's still young, and I haven't given up on her - god knows I was more of an immature jerk at that age, too, though I also wasn't responsible for representing a constituency in the public eye.  As a couple of people have pointed out, she might sometimes be counter-productive to her causes at this point.

ETA:  Mr krista and I have argued these points a few time, as he's still a big supporter.  Could be because she's still hot, though.

Edited by krista4
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, krista4 said:

I agree with this perspective, and in my opinion it shows a great deal of immaturity that she often seems only interested in her own viewpoint.  At first I found her refreshing, but the bloom is off the rose a bit.  She's still young, and I haven't given up on her - god knows I was more of an immature jerk at that age, too, though I also wasn't responsible for representing a constituency in the public eye.  As a couple of people have pointed out, she might sometimes be counter-productive to her causes at this point.

ETA:  Mr krista and I have argued these points a few time, as he's still a big supporter.  Could be because she's still hot, though.

This captures how I feel about her.  I loved her at first, and found her refreshingly genuine.  She caught some wind in the sail and has decided to get a bigger sail without really knowing how to operate it.  She reminds me a bit of myself in that she has a tendency to use antagonistic language to drive a point across, and it just detracts from the conversation.  Someday I will learn.  She is smarter than me and in a position where she gets immediate blow-back from her statements, so I'm hopeful she will learn faster.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Far less stupid than the freshman conservatives we’ve  had to deal with. Climate change is real. It’s effects In our lifetimes will be felt mostly by the poor. Profits being taken by ignoring these facts are mostly white folks.

Her delivery may need massaging but she isn’t wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.