Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Joe Bryant

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Says Republicans are running "their little torture project". Agree?

Are Republicans intentionally running a "little torture project"?  

166 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

No, you really aren't.  If someone supports any candidate 100% then they are totally tribal or have serious issues.  

We aren't talking about differences in tax policies. We are talking about real moral issues.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

You are correct and he is wrong. 

Our two party system has worked because it encompasses so many different pluralistic ideas. What people like @NCCommish will never understand is that voting for “the lesser of two evils” is not a bug in the system, it’s a positive. 

That positive got you Trump. And voting for the lesser evil still gives evil power. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NCCommish said:

We aren't talking about differences in tax policies. We are talking about real moral issues.

Everything in politics becomes a moral issue

Share this post


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

That positive got you Trump. And voting for the lesser evil still gives evil power. 

It didn’t in fact. What got me Trump is purists who sat at home. 

But even so Trump is one election. If I look at the results of 100 years or more of elections I’m pretty satisfied. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

It didn’t in fact. What got me Trump is purists who sat at home. 

But even so Trump is one election. If I look at the results of 100 years or more of elections I’m pretty satisfied. 

That talking point has been disproved time and again. And past outcomes are no guarantee of future results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone needs to explain to me how being a bartender automatically disqualifies you from having any knowledge.  I mean when people start their insults with "former bartender" it really shows their disdain for lower to middle class working people.    

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NCCommish said:

When you  vote for someone you are responsible for what they do with the power you gave them. When you continue to support them despite reprehensible actions you now are an accomplice. 

Just to make sure I am understanding this correctly...

Anyone who voted for Nixon is responsible for Watergate? 

Anyone who voted for Clinton is responsible for him perjuring himself? 

Is that your contention? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hammerva said:

Someone needs to explain to me how being a bartender automatically disqualifies you from having any knowledge.  I mean when people start their insults with "former bartender" it really shows their disdain for lower to middle class working people.    

Why should somebody explain that to you? Has anybody said that? Like even one person at all? I will take one link to even a crazy troll on twitter that has said being a bartender automatically disqualifies you from having any knowledge.

But if you want we can discuss how silly the following scenario is...

Person A

Boston University graduate cum laude, economics major

Interned for ted kennedy.

Started publishing company that never published any books with help from city program

Briefly worked for the national hispanic institute helping to acclimate college students to college dorm life

Was a bartender for a taqueria 

Person B

Wharton/Penn cum laude, economics 

Briefly worked as real estate project manager

Started failed jewelry company with help from family.

Cowrote two books.

Worked for Donald Trump.

 

Person A insults Person B's qualifications. Twitter followers jump to Person A's defense when she has her qualifications questioned afterward. 

Share this post


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

Just to make sure I am understanding this correctly...

Anyone who voted for Nixon is responsible for Watergate? 

Anyone who voted for Clinton is responsible for him perjuring himself? 

Is that your contention? 

It's really a bizarre way of thinking. But it fits in well with the base on either side.

I actually admire @NCCommish and his counterparts on the Republican side who also won't support anyone who isn't with them 100%. It's nice to have a clear, black and white view of the world, to see nearly everything as right vs. wrong, good vs. evil. But's also unrealistic, IMO, and I've never been able to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, 2Squirrels1Nut said:

Well that is vile and disturbing.  I am a throwback, a Neanderthal, a sexist and a misogynist who tries to purge such tendencies without complete success, but even among the anachronistic remnants of another age those comments are beyond the pale. Dehumanizing, disrespectful, vile.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

Well that is vile and disturbing.  I am a throwback, a Neanderthal, a sexist and a misogynist who tries to purge such tendencies without complete success, but even among the anachronistic remnants of another age those comments are beyond the pale. Dehumanizing, disrespectful, vile.

You think that was bad, you should see what the NSA does...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, 2Squirrels1Nut said:

Is anyone surprised?  The fact is that this country's best and brightest don't typically become border agents.  I'd bet that at least 80% of that group voted for Trump. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to be completely fair, you could say that Footballguys has 35k users and contains a lot of pro-trump sentiment.

Share this post


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

It's really a bizarre way of thinking. But it fits in well with the base on either side.

I actually admire @NCCommish and his counterparts on the Republican side who also won't support anyone who isn't with them 100%. It's nice to have a clear, black and white view of the world, to see nearly everything as right vs. wrong, good vs. evil. But's also unrealistic, IMO, and I've never been able to do it.

What exactly is bizarre about pointing out one's culpability in voting for one who does bad things and continues to vote for one who does bad things?  Our votes are our voice in the democratic process. If I vote for someone who is hell bent on overturning RvW and then RvW is overturned, I had a part in that just like if I vote for someone who wants term limits in Congress and they are instrumental in getting term limits in Congress.  

It's completely irresponsible for us to walk away from our actions when things go wrong yet claim "I helped do that" when things go correctly.  You might not want to look in the mirror that @NCCommish is holding up, but he's right.  Whatever legislation, good or bad, that is passed by the people we vote for, we have a hand in.  We don't get to walk away using the "Hey, don't look at me, how was I supposed to know he'd do that" shtick when things go wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, 2Squirrels1Nut said:

Disgusting. As I’ve said before, these awful human beings need to be rooted out and fired. What kind of person can tear apart families, and throw them into inhumane conditions? These kinds of people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

Is anyone surprised?  The fact is that this country's best and brightest don't typically become border agents.  I'd bet that at least 80% of that group voted for Trump. 

I understand they aren’t our best and brightest, but this is a far cry from simple ineptitude or laziness. This is some sick ####.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2019 at 5:22 PM, timschochet said:

The problem with almost all of these comments is the same as AOC- they assume that it’s all deliberate. I get that some people think this but it’s hard to prove and unless and until somebody proves it, I don’t accept it.

As for Trump supporters, @John BlutarskyIs absolutely right. If you’re going to charge them with being for torture, you’d better offer proof. 

Trump administration lawyers were arguing last week that they shouldn't have to provide basic needs under the Flores Settlement.   They were arguing that they don't need to provide soap, toothpaste and beds.   They argued that sleep deprivation and making kids sleep on concrete floors was consistent with the government's obligation.  That's deliberate.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The Commish said:

What exactly is bizarre about pointing out one's culpability in voting for one who does bad things and continues to vote for one who does bad things?  Our votes are our voice in the democratic process. If I vote for someone who is hell bent on overturning RvW and then RvW is overturned, I had a part in that just like if I vote for someone who wants term limits in Congress and they are instrumental in getting term limits in Congress.  

It's completely irresponsible for us to walk away from our actions when things go wrong yet claim "I helped do that" when things go correctly.  You might not want to look in the mirror that @NCCommish is holding up, but he's right.  Whatever legislation, good or bad, that is passed by the people we vote for, we have a hand in.  We don't get to walk away using the "Hey, don't look at me, how was I supposed to know he'd do that" shtick when things go wrong.

Here's the problem with this line of thinking: most bad actions are not deliberate.

You're correct that I bear a bit of responsibility for all deliberate activity by any politician I support or vote for. And obviously that would include all legislation. But am I responsible when my candidate screws up? I don't think I am. Am I responsible for when my candidate takes a deliberate action, but the result is something he did not intend? I say no to that one too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, -fish- said:

Trump administration lawyers were arguing last week that they shouldn't have to provide basic needs under the Flores Settlement.   They were arguing that they don't need to provide soap, toothpaste and beds.   They argued that sleep deprivation and making kids sleep on concrete floors was consistent with the government's obligation.  That's deliberate.   

It is, thank you for posting it, and I've meant to come in here and acknowledge that this appears to have been deliberate. Which is awful.

But you're responding to my post about @John Blutarsky. I don't agree with John at all on most issues, and I find many of his posts to be disingenuous, sometimes dishonest, and always self-serving (particularly his use of links.) But I don't believe he supports torture.  And I don't believe he really knew what the Trump people were doing.

Share this post


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

Someone needs to explain to me how being a bartender automatically disqualifies you from having any knowledge.  I mean when people start their insults with "former bartender" it really shows their disdain for lower to middle class working people.    

What I find odd is yeah, the bartender comment is inappropriate.  But then AOC comes back and complains about Ivanka being unqualified as being only a daughter.  :lmao:

Share this post


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

What I find odd is yeah, the bartender comment is inappropriate.  But then AOC comes back and complains about Ivanka being unqualified as being only a daughter.  :lmao:

Ivanka is unqualified as a foreign emissary who is replacing State Department experts. That's slightly different from offering one's opinion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you have two crappy candidates as in last election, the only option is not to vote or be responsible for all the corruption that is bound to happen. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Ivanka is unqualified as a foreign emissary who is replacing State Department experts. That's slightly different from offering one's opinion.

There are no specific qualifications for being a Congressperson or a diplomat.   Both comments are demeaning 

Share this post


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

Here's the problem with this line of thinking: most bad actions are not deliberate.

You're correct that I bear a bit of responsibility for all deliberate activity by any politician I support or vote for. And obviously that would include all legislation. But am I responsible when my candidate screws up? I don't think I am. Am I responsible for when my candidate takes a deliberate action, but the result is something he did not intend? I say no to that one too.

Sorry, I don't know what sorts of things you're talking about here.  I think it's fair to say that what they do in their personal lives, outside of representing us, isn't what I am talking about.  I am struggling to come up with votes that can be categorized as anything other than deliberate.  It's a pretty straight forward process.  Might help if you give examples of legit reasons they'd use the "damn, didn't see that coming" defense of a vote.

Share this post


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

Sorry, I don't know what sorts of things you're talking about here.  I think it's fair to say that what they do in their personal lives, outside of representing us, isn't what I am talking about.  I am struggling to come up with votes that can be categorized as anything other than deliberate.  It's a pretty straight forward process.  Might help if you give examples of legit reasons they'd use the "damn, didn't see that coming" defense of a vote.

Well for example: Donald Trump and most of his supporters believe that the Iran deal was bad for the United States. So as President, he pulled out of it, and they cheered. His intent, and their intent, was to force Iran into making a better deal than the one we had. But suppose, as many of opponents of Trump has warned, that is not what happens? Suppose the result is instead of a better deal, we get a nuclear Iran? Or suppose we end up in a war with Iran? Are the people who voted for Donald Trump responsible for these calamities? Not to me, because they didn't intend for that to happen. They guessed wrong. Well, people guess wrong all the time. It doesn't always make you culpable.

Share this post


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

Ivanka may actually be the best diplomat of the bunch. 

Only because Rodman didn't come this time?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Not a chance.

She does far less damage than Donald.  :shrug:

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Ivanka may actually be the best diplomat of the bunch. 

jon - Honest question, do you really believe this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Well for example: Donald Trump and most of his supporters believe that the Iran deal was bad for the United States. So as President, he pulled out of it, and they cheered. His intent, and their intent, was to force Iran into making a better deal than the one we had. But suppose, as many of opponents of Trump has warned, that is not what happens? Suppose the result is instead of a better deal, we get a nuclear Iran? Or suppose we end up in a war with Iran? Are the people who voted for Donald Trump responsible for these calamities? Not to me, because they didn't intend for that to happen. They guessed wrong. Well, people guess wrong all the time. It doesn't always make you culpable.

If one doesn't believe there is a better chance of all these things happening outside a deal than inside, I don't know what to tell them.  This is a brutally terrible example for you to choose as it's rather obvious what the outcomes are going to be outside the deal vs inside.  

It took every bit of my being to continue with this example in good faith, now that I have done that above, I need to speak to this whole scenario.  Do you really believe this was about "better deal" for Trump?  Do you remember ANY of his staff or his supporters listing the specific things they'd want to see in a deal to make it better?  No, you didn't.  Why?  Because "better deal" here means "Obama bad!"  That's as deep as this has gone.  You know it and I know it.  Given the circumstances of the time, we all know delaying progress was the best we were going to get.  It's probably the best we'll ever get without going to war.

Ok...back on topic.  In  the above scenario the people who voted for him are absolutely responsible for helping enable an environment where the deal would be revoked.  They are partly responsible for enabling the word of the US to be weakened.  They are responsible for enabling all the possibilities that come from bailing on the deal.  They don't get to walk away from their part in this.  "Hey, don't blame me, I voted for the guy" sounds pretty dumb doesn't it?

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Well that is vile and disturbing.  I am a throwback, a Neanderthal, a sexist and a misogynist who tries to purge such tendencies without complete success, but even among the anachronistic remnants of another age those comments are beyond the pale. Dehumanizing, disrespectful, vile.

It is.  AOC and a very few people in this thread were spot on.  

Now, what is going to be done about it........ :(

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

What exactly is bizarre about pointing out one's culpability in voting for one who does bad things and continues to vote for one who does bad things?  Our votes are our voice in the democratic process. If I vote for someone who is hell bent on overturning RvW and then RvW is overturned, I had a part in that just like if I vote for someone who wants term limits in Congress and they are instrumental in getting term limits in Congress.  

It's completely irresponsible for us to walk away from our actions when things go wrong yet claim "I helped do that" when things go correctly.  You might not want to look in the mirror that @NCCommish is holding up, but he's right.  Whatever legislation, good or bad, that is passed by the people we vote for, we have a hand in.  We don't get to walk away using the "Hey, don't look at me, how was I supposed to know he'd do that" shtick when things go wrong.

This.  Trump is exactly what his critics said he was before the election; incompetent, immoral, and corrupt.  Voters who pulled the lever for Trump were well aware of that, and they either decided they were okay with it, or that all that baggage was worth it.  Make no mistake, voters got what they voted for.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

jon - Honest question, do you really believe this?

She is probably the only one who can talk back to Donald and keep him in some kind of check.   So yes, she may be the best diplomat we have.  Absolutely.  

Share this post


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

She is probably the only one who can talk back to Donald and keep him in some kind of check.   So yes, she may be the best diplomat we have.  Absolutely.  

Here's the thing, no matter what you think about HRC, you never had to worry about competence, expertise, and America putting it's best people forward.  

Now, we're at a point in which you are arguing that our country's' top diplomat (only there based 100% on nepotism), who is absolutely unqualified to advance America's interests, is the most effective diplomat we have, despite the fact that she's never studied this stuff, has no experience, expertise, etc. 

How have we fallen this far?  Come on dude - even though we disagree politically, you can count on me to never support this kind of nonsense on my side.  I really wish I could trust you guys to do the same.   

Edited by tommyGunZ

Share this post


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

Ivanka may actually be the best diplomat of the bunch. 

I heard she was also valedictorian at reform school.  

Share this post


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

What exactly is bizarre about pointing out one's culpability in voting for one who does bad things and continues to vote for one who does bad things?  Our votes are our voice in the democratic process. If I vote for someone who is hell bent on overturning RvW and then RvW is overturned, I had a part in that just like if I vote for someone who wants term limits in Congress and they are instrumental in getting term limits in Congress.  

It's completely irresponsible for us to walk away from our actions when things go wrong yet claim "I helped do that" when things go correctly.  You might not want to look in the mirror that @NCCommish is holding up, but he's right.  Whatever legislation, good or bad, that is passed by the people we vote for, we have a hand in.  We don't get to walk away using the "Hey, don't look at me, how was I supposed to know he'd do that" shtick when things go wrong.

If "Do you wish to overturn Roe vs Wade?" ends up on my ballot then I have a hand in dictating it's outcome.  But if a politician runs on 10 issues and I support 8 of them, then it's not my fault if he overturns roe vs wade as one of the other two.   That's the problem with tribal politics and parties in general.  It is what it is and you guys can try to vote shame people all you want but I promise you it never works and turns people against your side.

Share this post


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

She is probably the only one who can talk back to Donald and keep him in some kind of check.   So yes, she may be the best diplomat we have.  Absolutely.  

Sorry jon....these aren't traits of a "good diplomat" as much as they are good traits of a baby sitter :shrug: 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Commish said:

If one doesn't believe there is a better chance of all these things happening outside a deal than inside, I don't know what to tell them.  This is a brutally terrible example for you to choose as it's rather obvious what the outcomes are going to be outside the deal vs inside.  

It took every bit of my being to continue with this example in good faith, now that I have done that above, I need to speak to this whole scenario.  Do you really believe this was about "better deal" for Trump?  Do you remember ANY of his staff or his supporters listing the specific things they'd want to see in a deal to make it better?  No, you didn't.  Why?  Because "better deal" here means "Obama bad!"  That's as deep as this has gone.  You know it and I know it.  Given the circumstances of the time, we all know delaying progress was the best we were going to get.  It's probably the best we'll ever get without going to war.

Ok...back on topic.  In  the above scenario the people who voted for him are absolutely responsible for helping enable an environment where the deal would be revoked.  They are partly responsible for enabling the word of the US to be weakened.  They are responsible for enabling all the possibilities that come from bailing on the deal.  They don't get to walk away from their part in this.  "Hey, don't blame me, I voted for the guy" sounds pretty dumb doesn't it?

All right. I deliberately chose an example which I disagreed with strongly (I feel exactly the same way about the Iran deal as you do) in order to see if my thinking about this subject was consistent. And it is. I do respect your viewpoint on this but I simply disagree. To me, intent is the key element of responsibility. If you don't intend for something to happen you are less responsible for it happening than if you intended it to happen. Lack of intent doesn't alleviate you of all responsibility  but of most of it, and to me this is more true of the incredibly unpredictable task of trying to choose a political candidate to support than it might be for anyone else.

As a side issue (related but not the same)- do you hold George H. W. Bush responsible for all of the votes that Clarence Thomas has taken or ever will take on the Supreme Court?

Share this post


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

If "Do you wish to overturn Roe vs Wade?" ends up on my ballot then I have a hand in dictating it's outcome.  But if a politician runs on 10 issues and I support 8 of them, then it's not my fault if he overturns roe vs wade as one of the other two.   That's the problem with tribal politics and parties in general.  It is what it is and you guys can try to vote shame people all you want but I promise you it never works and turns people against your side.

This has nothing to do with "tribal politics" and I am not "vote shaming" anyone :shrug:  It's about personal responsibility and taking it when you are voting.  We don't get to pick and choose what our vote means.  The totality of the vote is for the individual.  That doesn't mean you support everything they stand for.  At best, it means the other 8 things were your primary motivation with the last two tolerable should they happen because you got the other things.  Or put another way, "I will take the chance on those 2 things happening if it means I have a good chance of getting the other 8."

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

As a side issue (related but not the same)- do you hold George H. W. Bush responsible for all of the votes that Clarence Thomas has taken or ever will take on the Supreme Court?

He's responsible for helping put him in the situation to take those positions, of course.....him and every person who voted to confirm him.  Then going down the line, the people who voted those politicians into office who voted to confirm him are also part of the equation.

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, none of what I am saying is "you're sexist since you voted for the sexist"....If that's what anyone thinks I am saying, it's not and you aren't being genuine in your view.  Figured I'd get that out of the way before it starts.

Share this post


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

When you vote for someone you are responsible for what they do with the power you gave them.

I’ve seen anarchists make this point in the context of arguing that voting is inherently immoral.

I hadn’t previously seen this point made by anyone who thinks voting is a good idea.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, The Commish said:

This has nothing to do with "tribal politics" and I am not "vote shaming" anyone :shrug:  It's about personal responsibility and taking it when you are voting.  We don't get to pick and choose what our vote means.  The totality of the vote is for the individual.  That doesn't mean you support everything they stand for.  At best, it means the other 8 things were your primary motivation with the last two tolerable should they happen because you got the other things.  Or put another way, "I will take the chance on those 2 things happening if it means I have a good chance of getting the other 8."

When was the last presidential election when this wasn't the situation (i.e., that all voters weren't saying they were voting for x issues either without understanding that y issues would come with it or understanding that and accepting the tradeoff)? I cannot remember an election in my voting lifetime when that wasn't the case.

Edited by Just Win Baby

Share this post


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

I heard she was also valedictorian at reform school.  

Trump University?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to change my vote to, "Absolutely Yes." That Facebook group along with those comments are deplorable.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Football Freak said:

Disgusting. As I’ve said before, these awful human beings need to be rooted out and fired. What kind of person can tear apart families, and throw them into inhumane conditions? These kinds of people. 

Agreed. I posted months ago these are borderline war crimes. I hate that for once I was right about something. 

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.